Who has been made to look like a mug over the PPV claims on Sky

It's criminal that Eddie gets a fee from other promoters wishing to use Sky for their shows. How is that right? Way too much power for a "promoter".

Can't believe that if you are not with him, you have to go through him to get on Sky, and that you have NO CHANCE of getting on Sky without him for the next SIX YEARS!

Eddie has been a saviour for British Boxing, but he has too much power and influence now. He's literally got the UK side of things sewn up. He's used his old mans model that he had with Eubank (fighting lower-tier opponents for big money). Except now you'll have to pay PPV MONEY to see Groves/Smith.

If you want to get paid, go with Eddie. If you want a legacy, don't go with Eddie.

 

At the end of the day they are probably both right and wrong.

Didn't EH say no promoter could get on Sky Sports Box Office apart from matchroom , which is still the case ?

FW must have taken this and run with it and proved that a TV broadcaster (not a promoter) CAN get a boxing PPV on sky (although not actually Sky Sports Box Office).

Both have been proved slightly right and slightly wrong IMO, you set out to prove something but what you are actually proving is slightly different.

EH has made himself look a bit silly by banging on about it but alas it's not impossible to run a PPV boxing event on sky if you are not Matchroom.

But on the flip side unless Boxnation run a barn storming card that does serious serious numbers on PPV then FW will also look a bit stupid too.

Don't particularly like EH or FW but they are in the business of promoting ie selling something and they will sometimes try and talk up their products as such.

Probably not the best idea Sky ever had by signing exclusively with Matchroom but no doubt the fact they supply them with Darts etc has some sway that particular deal , but Sky agreed to it nonetheless.

Matchroom getting paid when other fights are on Saturday Fight Night or Sky Sports Box Office is only natural with their exclusive agreement, happens every day in all walks of life I'm afraid.

 

Think Eddie has been made to look bad in ways as he has said Sky not Sky sports, however Frank has intentions to make PPV shows now after criticising Hearn over ripping off the customer by making PPV's, something he is going to do now. Also the fact that Frank couldn't speak for himself shows, despite the years he has had in the game, he knows very little about the situation which is laughable. Overall neither is right and neither is wrong in my opinion.

 

Any other promoter in the UK offered the same exclusivity from sky which Matchtroom have would take it. None of them would give a damn about there competitors and why should they?

Eddie Hearn may have flaws but why people seem to to think he tells sky what to do and the mammoth company which sky is had no say in this deal amazes me. Nobody forced sky into an exclusive deal. The truth is the other promoters had sky coverage and they blew it by producing poor shows too many times. Can you blame sky for cutting there cloth and deciding to go with the promoter they felt would produce the goods more often than not?

Let's not forget there was a time when FW was the dominant player in British boxing. He had the most talent, had the most TV time and wasn't complaining then. I don't remember him telling the world how sky need to stay supporting his competitors.

If Matchroom do not deliver then come renegotians sky may decide to go another route.

FW can't claim hearn is ripping off the customers. FW had his own share of BS ppv's.

The whole sky/sky sports is just semantics. Anyone can put a ppv on the sky platform but without a sky sports box office ppv you won't get all the marketing and promotion sky sports provides so in that sense Hearn is correct.

 

I think the problem was the impression some people were getting, it was cleverly worded by Hearn at times and it did give the impression that you couldn't have PPV boxing event on Sky without him and Matchroom.

I know it was meant as Sky SPORTS box office but it wasn't always stated that way. There were tweets saying you couldn't have PPV event on Sky without Matchroom which isn't correct.

Now Boxnation will have Sky Box Office functionality (red button purchase) it opens everything up.

I watched the interviews on IFL TV and they were very interesting, the Ricky Burns comments were clever, using Burns as an example and also saying to Team Fury "come and do a deal with us for PPV on our platform" was superb

Now I am not a PPV fan but if Boxnation start under cutting Sky Sports Boxing for example making a PPV event £9.99 and free for Boxnation subcribers then I'm all for it.

 

The only problem with FW crying over all this is that it doesn't matter who has PPV but as long as you have the boxer to sell PPV. At the moment all 3 world champs FW has can't sell a normal big venue let alone a PPV apart from BJS v Eub 2.

If we turn the clock back though I wonder what FW would be saying if he was the one with the Sky contract? The ****e FW produced in the terrestrial TV days ruined it for terrestrial viewers anyway so he can't waffle on about anyone else and what they can and can't do with PPV

 

time will tell if i was a box nation customer id be concerned about the lack of detail on the "compensation" for having to buy the PPV on sky box office. if Boxnation moves its best British content into the PPV market then why subscribe? just buy the PPV.

 

The numbers generated by Matchroom sky sports box office ppv's suggest the price isn't the issue. People will pay for a product they want to see and the numbers tell a story that the price charged isn't a deterrent. Sky sports box office had two pay per view events within a couple of weeks of each other and they both produced 400k+ buys. Bellew v Cleverly did good numbers. Brook v Gavin did 100k.

A box nation ppv could be priced at £9.99 and while it's undercutting sky sports box office it won't really mean anything if people don't care about the fighters on the ppv.

Andy Lee v BJS on ppv for example would of been a huge flop at £9.99

Tyson fury just did impressive numbers on sky sports box office. Why would he now and fight on a ppv platform which cannot generate the amount of promotion a sky box office ppv can?

 

Nothing will change until promoters are willing to enter into a free and competitive market.

Eddie got this 6 year contract because every other promoter in the country is nothing short of a disgrace. Let's not forget the ****e that Maloney served us. Randoms from Eastern Europe that his promotion hadn't even seen.

Eddie started relatively well with his match making. He threw some of his names into big fights. We've been sold ****e with others. Now he's venturing into the PPV market and here is where everything may be undone.

I don't see how it's acceptable for him to say every fighter wants the PPV chance. He's saying every fighter wants the money on a smaller platform. It's his job along with Sky to improve the brand, improve their profile, improve the demand and pay them less. For this to happen a few PPV's will need to bomb hard. This can only happen if the fans vote with their wallets.

 

Very much doubt box nation could price a PPV at £9.99. They won't have the final say on price just like WWE doesn't.

Will be £14.95 at a minimum.

thing is fury and mick hennesey will now want PPV for every fight going foward.

fans scream FTA coverage etc etc but go and ask team fury if they want their next fight on channel 5/ITV etc etc

they have had a taste of PPV money and they now want more. Eddie is right when he says that every promoter/fighter wants to be on PPV.

anyone who says they dont is lying.

the only reason promoters go FTA is because they cannot get on sky sports.

also people need realise that this matchroom/Sky exclusive agreement is a mutual decision. Sky wanted this deal, its laughable to think that sky were forced into this decision.

every other promoter would have agreed to this if it was offered to them!

 

Apart from Tyson Fury Hennessy's fighters are contracted to fight on Channel 5 apparently (usual caveats apply). I don't see Mick changing his promoting style soon, with the emphasis on lower level competitive fights on FTA TV. He has no where else to go pay TV wise when you think about it.

As for the PPV price for Boxnation I'd say it'll be £16.95, same as Sky. The WWE PPVs vary in price from £14.95 to £19.95 and legitimately draw less than 50k buys now, only slightly more when the WWE Network wasn't around.

Although it's good that Hearn is being challenged on PPV I don't see much changing TV wise unless Frank gets an injection of major money to promote his shows aggressively. Interesting times however.

 

I think Hearn's exclusive deal including "all British-based boxers fighting abroad" is an interesting arrangement considering he's admitted that two foreign based fighters could be put on SKY Box Office without him.

I'm no expert but I believe it could probably be challenged in court on some grounds, because it discriminates against "British based" boxers.
If not beatable in the courts, surely it could be circumvented some way.