The Maccarinelli-Haye event programme

[oliverfennell]

That was absolutely shocking, even by Sports Network standards.

When I pay £10 for something, I expect it to be at least half-decent.

I've come to expect SN programmes to be bland and unimaginative, with a sprinkling of typos and mistakes, but this was an absolute shambles.

For a start, the print quality was terrible; badly pixelated graphics on thin paper. The stats were copiously littered with mistakes, and the editing was awful. What on earth happened to the Enzo profile?? Did somebody sit a chimpanzee at a computer and teach it how to press CTRL-C + CTRL-V?

I know this site/board is a bit touchy about Sports Network criticisms, and I have also voiced my own dissatisfaction with the company this week, but this is fair comment, I feel. Warren gets full respect from me for putting the main event together and as a promoter he's done great things recently. So I'm not having an unfair dig just because I've had a bad week.

So, admin, please leave this up, and BoxingChat, I'd like to hear your side of things, if you have any dealings with the programmes. For a tenner, that was incredibly poor value for money. Your live events, TV shows and website are all very polished; how is it that you can't invest in a decent page designer/sub-editor for your programmes?

[jeej]

There is no excuse for that. You have an international event with thousands of people in attendance and a lot of people watching on TV all over the world, then you have to ensure every facet is polished, right?!

Especially for 10 quid, that takes the piss.

[BAMBI]

why didnt u check before purchase?

[Poncey]

[Carbo]

I'd do it for them free of charge. Really, I'm an editor by profession, and I'd do it.

[Spud]

That was absolutely shocking, even by Sports Network standards.

When I pay £10 for something, I expect it to be at least half-decent.

I've come to expect SN programmes to be bland and unimaginative, with a sprinkling of typos and mistakes, but this was an absolute shambles.

For a start, the print quality was terrible; badly pixelated graphics on thin paper. The stats were copiously littered with mistakes, and the editing was awful. What on earth happened to the Enzo profile?? Did somebody sit a chimpanzee at a computer and teach it how to press CTRL-C + CTRL-V?

I know this site/board is a bit touchy about Sports Network criticisms, and I have also voiced my own dissatisfaction with the company this week, but this is fair comment, I feel. Warren gets full respect from me for putting the main event together and as a promoter he's done great things recently. So I'm not having an unfair dig just because I've had a bad week.

So, admin, please leave this up, and BoxingChat, I'd like to hear your side of things, if you have any dealings with the programmes. For a tenner, that was incredibly poor value for money. Your live events, TV shows and website are all very polished; how is it that you can't invest in a decent page designer/sub-editor for your programmes?

Stunned at this.

Regardless of what anyone's thoughts are about certain personalities the one thing I have always thought Fr ank W arren always gets the promotional aspects correct - part of that being top quality programmes and posters.

[nickd]

Regardless of the print quality and content I'm sorry but I wouldn't pay 10 quid for a program. Ripoff!

[WildWaylon]

Hes a good looking chap, is that you?

[oliverfennell]

why didnt u check before purchase?

It's not like a magazine stall in a newsagent; they are sold by people at stands. You can't browse before buying.

[oliverfennell]

That was absolutely shocking, even by Sports Network standards.

When I pay £10 for something, I expect it to be at least half-decent.

I've come to expect SN programmes to be bland and unimaginative, with a sprinkling of typos and mistakes, but this was an absolute shambles.

For a start, the print quality was terrible; badly pixelated graphics on thin paper. The stats were copiously littered with mistakes, and the editing was awful. What on earth happened to the Enzo profile?? Did somebody sit a chimpanzee at a computer and teach it how to press CTRL-C + CTRL-V?

I know this site/board is a bit touchy about Sports Network criticisms, and I have also voiced my own dissatisfaction with the company this week, but this is fair comment, I feel. Warren gets full respect from me for putting the main event together and as a promoter he's done great things recently. So I'm not having an unfair dig just because I've had a bad week.

So, admin, please leave this up, and BoxingChat, I'd like to hear your side of things, if you have any dealings with the programmes. For a tenner, that was incredibly poor value for money. Your live events, TV shows and website are all very polished; how is it that you can't invest in a decent page designer/sub-editor for your programmes?

Stunned at this.

Regardless of what anyone's thoughts are about certain personalities the one thing I have always thought Fr ank W arren always gets the promotional aspects correct - part of that being top quality programmes and posters.

I suspect that they consider programmes very much an afterhought i.e. the ticket sales are done by that stage, so why bother making an effort? The website and TV promos are all geared up to getting bums on seats or tuned in to the broadcast, so they have to be good, but programmes aren't going to affect the bottom line much.

But as someone who enjoys getting programmes as a memento of an occasion - because, let's face it, that's all they are for the knowledgeable fan; they don't usually tell us anything we don't already know - then I think this side of the business should be treated with more respect. Especially when they're asking £10 for it!

Suffice to say I won't be buying a Sports Network programme again until I see evidence of improvement. They are usually quite poor but this one was awful. Taking along a copy of Boxing News will more than suffice.

[Poncey]

Hes a good looking chap, is that you?

Yeah, after my facial.

[Poncey]

Regardless of the print quality and content I'm sorry but I wouldn't pay 10 quid for a program. Ripoff!

I agree.

[Spud]

That was absolutely shocking, even by Sports Network standards.

When I pay £10 for something, I expect it to be at least half-decent.

I've come to expect SN programmes to be bland and unimaginative, with a sprinkling of typos and mistakes, but this was an absolute shambles.

For a start, the print quality was terrible; badly pixelated graphics on thin paper. The stats were copiously littered with mistakes, and the editing was awful. What on earth happened to the Enzo profile?? Did somebody sit a chimpanzee at a computer and teach it how to press CTRL-C + CTRL-V?

I know this site/board is a bit touchy about Sports Network criticisms, and I have also voiced my own dissatisfaction with the company this week, but this is fair comment, I feel. Warren gets full respect from me for putting the main event together and as a promoter he's done great things recently. So I'm not having an unfair dig just because I've had a bad week.

So, admin, please leave this up, and BoxingChat, I'd like to hear your side of things, if you have any dealings with the programmes. For a tenner, that was incredibly poor value for money. Your live events, TV shows and website are all very polished; how is it that you can't invest in a decent page designer/sub-editor for your programmes?

Stunned at this.

Regardless of what anyone's thoughts are about certain personalities the one thing I have always thought Fr ank W arren always gets the promotional aspects correct - part of that being top quality programmes and posters.

I suspect that they consider programmes very much an afterhought i.e. the ticket sales are done by that stage, so why bother making an effort? The website and TV promos are all geared up to getting bums on seats or tuned in to the broadcast, so they have to be good, but programmes aren't going to affect the bottom line much.

But as someone who enjoys getting programmes as a memento of an occasion - because, let's face it, that's all they are for the knowledgeable fan; they don't usually tell us anything we don't already know - then I think this side of the business should be treated with more respect. Especially when they're asking £10 for it!

Suffice to say I won't be buying a Sports Network programme again until I see evidence of improvement. They are usually quite poor but this one was awful. Taking along a copy of Boxing News will more than suffice.

The press officer at Sportsnetwork is a guy called Richard Maynard - in my view knows his job through and through and very good at it - so I am surprised there is any form of editorial inadequacies in the programme.

Even if the programme arrives late - there is little excuse for the editorial stuff to go wrong as the people making the programme will send through a copy by email for someone to proof read - Hennessy Sports and Fight Academy have similar proecedures - although I remember on one particular show having to pick up programmes from the printers very late in the day and arriving at The York Hall, Bethnal Green literally as the punters are going through the door due to very late changes to the bill.

With regards to the quality of the printing, and the paper the programme is printed on - again I have to express my surprise at the lack of quality as you put it - normally a promotional firm will use the same printers if the quality from a previous show is proven and the level of service is very good.

Again, without any sarcasim and I am being serious I am genuinally surprised at your thoughts concerning Saturday - I have always found Richard Maynard at Sportsnetwork thoroughly professional and only wish his colleagues followed his lead.

[bridportboxer]

Who does the printing - anybody know? It normally says in the programme somewhere.
It is possible they were given a special deal if the printer had a load of paper to clear, or that the printer made an error with the paper order if the quality is usually higher for SN programmes.
Either way that do more than nicely on the sale of those because they probably cost 30p - 50p each to print!

[DavidPayne]

20,000 programmes at a £10 a piece probably pays for the undercard wages.

[REAL_DEAL]

Not everyone bought one . I guess the ratio is 1 in 4/5 people.

Vegas do the best programs. FA ones in the past have been poor mostly advertising.

[SuperSedgy]

The programme was pretty shoddy, I normally expect them to be pretty poor but considering the scale of the show its a shame a little more effort wasnt put in. For starters just get the pictures right! They really were bad quality.

[yiddo14]

Easily the worst programme I have ever purchased at any sporting event.

I was bit dubious about paying a tenner for it to start with.
After reading through it a quid would have probably been too much to charge for it!

[KO Artist]

That was absolutely shocking, even by Sports Network standards.

When I pay £10 for something, I expect it to be at least half-decent.

I've come to expect SN programmes to be bland and unimaginative, with a sprinkling of typos and mistakes, but this was an absolute shambles.

For a start, the print quality was terrible; badly pixelated graphics on thin paper. The stats were copiously littered with mistakes, and the editing was awful. What on earth happened to the Enzo profile?? Did somebody sit a chimpanzee at a computer and teach it how to press CTRL-C + CTRL-V?

I know this site/board is a bit touchy about Sports Network criticisms, and I have also voiced my own dissatisfaction with the company this week, but this is fair comment, I feel. Warren gets full respect from me for putting the main event together and as a promoter he's done great things recently. So I'm not having an unfair dig just because I've had a bad week.

So, admin, please leave this up, and BoxingChat, I'd like to hear your side of things, if you have any dealings with the programmes. For a tenner, that was incredibly poor value for money. Your live events, TV shows and website are all very polished; how is it that you can't invest in a decent page designer/sub-editor for your programmes?

I never buy a programme at any event I go to. Just a waste of money.

[whicker]

Firstly, I didn't buy a programme on "general principal" that its a waste of rogg. And it looks like I was right.

Thing is, though, programmes are meant to be light entertainment for between fights, a souviner and also INFORMATIVE.

Firstly, fair enough they did have a bit of background information etc about the fighters, a good bit of light reading for those who arn't in the know.

Souviner, fair enough, whatever.

Informative? No. Hows about a running order, or perhaps ( and I know this is stretching it a little ) the names of the opponents on the undercard?

Typically the programme contains a section for you to score your own fights, probably really helpful to the one fan in 1000 who has thought to bring a pen.

[Goz]

I never buy a programme at any event I go to. Just a waste of money.

It's a must at the opera though don't you find darling?

[whatashambles]

Typically the programme contains a section for you to score your own fights, probably really helpful to the one fan in 1000 who has thought to bring a pen.

Did the programme have the correct opponent for each fight? The running order printed in Boxing News didn't have an opponent for Vinny Mitchell I don't think.

[oliverfennell]

It's fair enough to have TBA opponents or even wrong opponents listed, because we all know things can go wrong at the last minute in this sport, and journeymen often come in at 24-72 hours' notice. It's the ham-fisted errors that get me. Take the Walsh brothers, for example. They were all listed as having the same date of birth (I never knew they were triplets), all three were listed as light-welterweights (Michael in particular had seriously boiled down by fight night!) and they all listed as being from Isleworth, Middlesex. The last point was particularly shabby considering the Walshes brought a huge band of travelling support with them, who cheered heartily at the mention of their home town (Cromer, Norfolk) in the introductions. How would you feel if you and the lads had forked out good money to proudly support your hometown boy and then the promoter doesn't even get the hometown right in the programme?

And again, what on earth happened to the Enzo profile??

Quite clearly this programme had not even been given the most rudimentary once-over by even a novice English learner, let alone a professional editor and/or knowledgeable boxing source.

[dondada]

Quite clearly this programme had not even been given the most rudimentary once-over by even a novice English learner, let alone a professional editor and/or knowledgeable boxing source.

Is it possible that this reflects a 'we don't give a feck' attitude to the purchaser? Perish the thought!

[thepocketrocket]

My girlfriend bought me the hatton-Mayweather programme..very good, shes a top girl