Whyte v Parker PPV numbers. 400k+?

Because people have happily shelled out on weak events in the past WHAT PART DO YOU NOT GET?????

 

yeah so they will sell well and hundreds n thousands of casuals will watch, therefore they are ppv

 

He clearly is PPV now though, that’s the OPs point.

Most people in here didn’t think he was, but these numbers prove he is.

Not saying that’s a good or bad thing, but it’s a fact.

Massive numbers.

 

Whyte vs Chisora isn't a PPV fight priced at 20 pounds. We've already seen it once and there is literally nothing on the line.

Even Brook vs Khan isn't PPV imo. They're both past it and want one last pay day. No titles on the line or anything. They even fight at different weights nowadays.

 

what fights are ppv then?

 

I didn't think it was PPV and still don't, the thing I find odd are all these Hearn marks who are like "only see big fights on PPV" and other odd nonsense, as though the cash is going in their pocket. Fair play to Hearn is a massive salesman but I don't the oddballs sort of proud of it, paying PPV for bang average fight

 

Its relative mate, I don't think he's worth paying for and i didnt buy it.
Eddies done a good job of making people believe otherwise. That's the point I made in my post earlier.
You are right, dillian is now a ppv star, I never said he wasn't. What I said was he shouldn't be imo and it's a testament to Eddies snake oil salesmanship that this card did so well.

 

The fact people are writing Dillian Whyte is a PPV star is proof enough that PPV has gone too far. a man who hasn't really got much skill, isn't a banger and is in boring fights, but because he has a loud mouth, he's PPV...madness

 

Fights that literally can't be made without the money of PPV - Wilder v Joshua, for example. Or going back over the past few years, Joshua v Klitschko; Brook v Spence & Froch v Groves 2.

PPV should be solely for fights which have such demand from the public that they need to be made, and that will cost a fortune to put on. Using the excuse of PPV being needed to make Whyte v Parker is plain bollocks. If they are 'demanding' so much money they need PPV money then Eddie is paying them too much and/or they have ideas above their station.

PPV shouldn't be a monthly thing IMO.

 

PPV can be on every night for all I care, its the ultimate example of a free market in action. I get to CHOOSE which PPVs I think are worthy of parting money over.

 

By the way this notion that "this fight simply can't be made without ppv koogs" is pure fan conditioning once again.

If PPV wasn't a thing then every fight would get made without PPV.

 

That's part of the problem though, isn't it? I completely agree with you on choosing if you think it's worth it, while I enjoyed the show last week, I didn't pay for it as it wasn't worth £20 of my money on top of a Sky subscription, however, there comes a point when it's a bit of a **** take putting nothing more than decent fights on, and charging people who already pay £50+ per month for Sky Sports an extra score, just to watch it, don't you think?

 

With respect this is absolute bollocks. If you can't see why, then we really shouldn't be having this conversation.

 

with no respect, no it isn't.

 

You don't think different fights cost different money to make?