Is boxing still the most lucrative sport?

Cannibal · Post by **Cannibal** » 13 Dec 2007, 15:58

With Hatton reportedly clearing 40 million as the LOSING fighter last weekend, does that still underline boxing as the most lucrative sport around despite lack of exposure?

I mean, on top of that Mayweather probably took about 50 or 60 million, HBO, Sky Box Office, MGM and Golden Boy would of had their cut as well as anyone else with a finger in the pie.

Of course this is a rare example but even lower level fighters with a good following and a title belt can make millions knocking over bums in front of home crowds.

Is there any other sport that can match boxing for pay days?

And with such big money in boxing if done right, why aren't the Roman Abramovich's of the world looking to boxing rather than football? And why hasn't there been a push to organize the sport better to help the flow of money? With so much money involved, I am honestly puzzled.

STP · Post by **STP** » 13 Dec 2007, 16:03

De La Hoya-Mayweather and Hatton-Mayweather were just absolutely ridiculous. And it's all down to De La Hoya's 17 years of gaining massive Hispanic following.

But using casinos takes the fun out of it. Getting 50,000 at Millenium Stadium was maybe a greater achievement.

STP · Post by **STP** » 13 Dec 2007, 16:04

STP wrote:Getting 50,000 at Millenium Stadium was maybe a greater achievement.

Considering two or three years previous Calzaghe was fighting in front of 2,000 people at Cardiff Ice Rink.

n1ebf · Post by **n1ebf** » 13 Dec 2007, 16:05

the only sports more lucrative than boxing that I can think of really.......to be honest........are football, basketball, golf, Formula One, American Football and Tennis but after that I'm struggling.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 13 Dec 2007, 17:09

I think it could well be still the most lucrative sport.... Look at when TV companies try and entice new costumers - its usually football, then Boxing.... Boxing was heavily involved in the Sky Sports revolution and now with Setanta.

Terrestial TV might argue that the likes of Rugby Union draw in more ratings - but you won't see people in the street going - "Oh I've got to get Sky now, the Heineken Cup is on there".

ArtOfWar · Post by **ArtOfWar** » 13 Dec 2007, 17:16

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:the only sports more lucrative than boxing that I can think of really.......to be honest........are football, basketball, golf, Formula One, American Football and Tennis but after that I'm struggling.

That's what I was thinking. Boxing might be the most lucrative sport in terms of what you can earn in one night, but it's takes months of promotion to make these big boxing events happen and boxers don't fight that often. There are tonnes of sports where with better paid athlete's.

rod riddle · Post by **rod riddle** » 13 Dec 2007, 17:42

Cannibal wrote: Of course this is a rare example but even lower level fighters with a good following and a title belt can make millions knocking over bums in front of home crowds.

Name a low level boxer knocking over bums and tell me how much they are earning - minus expenses and tax - and factor into that they are not going to be doing it for very long. Say 5-10 years MAX and tell me that boxing is the most lucrative sport. It's not.

Hatton is not Joe Soap in terms of promotion and career earnings, you are misguided by the 0.001% demographic of pro boxers that hatton makes up.

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 14 Dec 2007, 09:39

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:the only sports more lucrative than boxing that I can think of really.......to be honest........are football, basketball, golf, Formula One, American Football and Tennis but after that I'm struggling.

Formula One?

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 14 Dec 2007, 09:42

Oh the libels just keep coming.

Spare a thought for poor old John Shepherd, he can't afford these payouts for long and he hasn't got the Hameds to call on anymore.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 14 Dec 2007, 09:42

If your talking purely financial then I would agree that Formula one is even more of a business than a sport than Boxing is.

Tennis though? Disagree with that. Think I'd rather the bank details of Oscar De La Hoya than Roger Federer.

and I would certainly rather the bank details of a journeyman British boxing than someone ranked 7 in Britain at tennis.

boxingchat · Post by **boxingchat** » 14 Dec 2007, 09:47

stujones wrote:If your talking purely financial then I would agree that Formula one is even more of a business than a sport than Boxing is.

Tennis though? Disagree with that. Think I'd rather the bank details of Oscar De La Hoya than Roger Federer.

and I would certainly rather the bank details of a journeyman British boxing than someone ranked 7 in Britain at tennis.

Tennis endorsements are very good when copuled with annual prize/appearance money in Tennis.

De La Hoya is a tiny fraction of the populas of professional Boxers.

Never met a skint pro tennis player or driver.

Loftgroov · Post by **Loftgroov** » 14 Dec 2007, 09:50

Golf must be up there. There is huge prize and sponsorship money around the PGA Tour.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 14 Dec 2007, 09:56

boxingchat wrote:
stujones wrote:If your talking purely financial then I would agree that Formula one is even more of a business than a sport than Boxing is.

Tennis though? Disagree with that. Think I'd rather the bank details of Oscar De La Hoya than Roger Federer.

and I would certainly rather the bank details of a journeyman British boxing than someone ranked 7 in Britain at tennis.
Tennis endorsements are very good when copuled with annual prize/appearance money in Tennis.

De La Hoya is a tiny fraction of the populas of professional Boxers.

Never met a skint pro tennis player or driver.

Well, didn't Andy Murray's brother retire for a few seasons cause he couldn't afford it? Untill he found his niche in the doubles circuit.

There is a bit of a difference, because Journeymen boxers are labelled pro's (even though alot of their income is from other jobs) but Journeymen tennis players (like ranked 5 or lower in the UK) are not pro's.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 14 Dec 2007, 10:02

I suppose it depends how good and marketable you are.

These fights are few and far between.

Average Premiership footballers can earn 50k a week sitting on the bench - and that's without endorsements.

Similar in basketball and baseball.

jammidodger · Post by **jammidodger** » 15 Dec 2007, 02:22

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:the only sports more lucrative than boxing that I can think of really.......to be honest........are football, basketball, golf, Formula One, American Football and Tennis but after that I'm struggling.

baseball?? they earn on average more than footballers..

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 15 Dec 2007, 17:45

trouble with boxing, unlike pretty much every other sport, the wages dont necessarily reflect the talent.

I know one boxer in particular who was one of the most talented to fight in the country in recent years but because he didnt have the right promoter, found himself struggling to get a four figure purse in most of his fights despite being ranked in euro top 15.

Boxing in terms of effort, pain and risk must be one of the least lucrative sports.

check this out:
2007 NBA SALARIES INFO

TOP NBA PLAYER SALAries | By InsideHoops.com

1) Kevin Garnett $22,000,000
2) Shaquille O'Neal $20,000,000
3tie) Jermaine O'Neal $19,728,000
3tie) Jason Kidd $19,728,000
5) Kobe Bryant $19,490,625
6tie) Allen Iverson $19,195,312
6tie) Stephon Marbury $19,195,312
8) Tim Duncan $19,014,188
9) Tracy McGrady $19,014,187
10tie) Baron Davis $16,440,000
10tie) Shawn Marion $16,440,000

thats before endorsements, look to double that when you get your shoe deal...... a good NBA player typically has a 10-15 year career.

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 15 Dec 2007, 18:09

MLB 2006

1. Jason Giambi, NYY $23,428,571
2. Alex Rodriguez, NYY $22,708,525
3. Derek Jeter, NYY $21,600,000
4. Manny Ramirez, BOS $17,016,381
5. Todd Helton, COL $16,600,000
6. Andy Pettitte, NYY $16,000,000
7. Bartolo Colon, ANA $16,000,000
8. Jason Schmidt, LA $15,703,946
9. Barry Bonds, SF $15,533,970

yiddo14 · Post by **yiddo14** » 16 Dec 2007, 05:08

ArtOfWar wrote:
NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:the only sports more lucrative than boxing that I can think of really.......to be honest........are football, basketball, golf, Formula One, American Football and Tennis but after that I'm struggling.

That's what I was thinking. Boxing might be the most lucrative sport in terms of what you can earn in one night, but it's takes months of promotion to make these big boxing events happen and boxers don't fight that often. There are tonnes of sports where with better paid athlete's.

Imagine how much a young Mike Tsyon would earn in todays heavyweight division?

He was pulling in $25 million a fight back in the late 80s.

If he were 20/21 years old today, he would be earning more than Tiger Woods and David Beckham.

The Heavyweight Championship can still be the richest prize in sport.
Just needs the right man to come along and explode onto the scene(which will happen eventually, it always does)

WildWaylon · Post by **WildWaylon** » 16 Dec 2007, 09:24

When I was a boy pro footballers earned approx twice that of the average working man and now look at the situation - Funny thing is people complained they earned too much in those days - Now they can earn more in a week than most ordinary people can earn in a year!!! - Teenage millionairs like Rooney, its silly money for doing what you enjoy.

Is boxing still the most lucrative sport?

Is boxing still the most lucrative sport?

Re: Is boxing still the most lucrative sport?