What are the purses for Mayweather and Cotto

Check my post history...Posted them 3143435423 times.:deal More like his last 5...Using the numbers before Oscar is irrelevant..both fighters had their revenue power change with the Oscar fight. Oscar and beyond that is ok...before that is pointless as they weren't in the league they are in now.:deal

 

*****s logic.:rofl So, you're admitting that the Oscar fight is all about Oscar?

 

That was then, this is now.

 

nope...never said that *******...u just assume **** and it's always wrong.:deal

So why dont you post the numbers?:think Scared little ***** aren't you?:nut

 

No one is allowed to use BN24 to feed their agenda, if anything it disproves everything you just said.

No one knows what the last three fight fights actually sold due to Arum not releasing the figures, and if you believe anything out of his mouth apart from something official you're a fool.

Mayweather Mosley was also sold out, tried to get tickets and failed, so that point is bull too.

 

Floyd/Shane sold 15,117 seats while Pac/Shane did 16,412.

 

who said floyd is doing a percentage cut with cotto? it may work out to 65%/35%, but i sincerely doubt that cotto got a percentage

 

Ugh - Yes, I know the difference, ******, and yes, a $40 million flat fee is what Floyd offered and is obviously based on what he thinks the fight will bring in money wise. Exactly what percentage that works out to be, we just don't know because the fight hasn't happened yet, but it will work out to a percentage of the total combined purse.

That's the most comparable fight there is, and looking at the numbers from the Mayweather-Ortiz fight, the fighters came away with roughly the same percentage of the total gross. What evidence do you have that this fight will be significantly different? :think

Which doesn't change the fact that he's willing to do a $40 million guarantee for "Pac" and not for Cotto, does it? :nut

 

Boxinginsider

says


$ may is geting 35 mil gar in tea d + 65% gate + 80% ppv + 30% mic rev.

Cotto to recive 15 mil gar in tea d + 10% of n e ppv rev over 100 mil

 

And it is still a flat fee.
Obviously in PBF's mind a percentage cut is something more important than a flat fee, if it was not then he would have offered it to Pac.
And PBF's unwilling to even consider 65/35 with Pac illustrates that $40mil flat fee even based on a percentage of the total revenue is not the same a percentage cut.

Let me see PBF contract with venue and promotions company is totally different from OLDH back then or even PBF back then.
We don't know if broadcaster's fees have risen or not, likely it has since the pattern for the entire cable/ppv industry for the past decade.
Taxes, labor and inflation is never the same compared to 5 years ago, let alone 7 years ago.

Good job, you finally got to this point.

Now why PBF is not willing to to a percentage cut to some one can get a bigger sales than Cotto is the question, yet he says in Costa he will "never share" seems contradictory.



Dude you keep playing semantics in trying to get yourself out addressing the obivious PBF contradiction regarding percentage cuts.

Bottom line is he said he is not willing to share revenue with Pac but is willing with Cotto.

Let me bet that you will now repeat that a flat fee is technically a percentage cut.

 

I cant believe all you sad pathetic *******s are even arguing over who deserves more, you are jokes, how much of the money are you going to see you idiots.

You should be pressing for the fight to be made not arguing over who should be getting more.

You are not proper boxing fans

 

It is a share of the revenue. Percentage or guarantee, it's still a share of the revenue.

"Trying to get myself out addressing the obivious PBF contradiction regarding percentage cuts"? I've already acknowledged the fact that Floyd offered a flat $40 million to "Pac" and is reportedly giving Cotto 35% of the purse. What else do you want me to do? Get angry about it like you are? I don't really give a ****.

Deal with it.

 

"B-b-but WHY is he offering that to Cotto and not Pacquiao?" :dead

 

What was the split with hatton?, i think this one will be based on the same line.

 

Obviously it is a share. That is self explanatory and was never debated. Your constant semantic arguing is the only one who keep driving this point, which no one is arguing against.

How did you surmise I was angry? I mean you seem to be quick to ad hominem (not even clever) attacks so if any one is angry one would assume it would be you.