A rise in non-televised shows?

Post Reply
whicker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4550
Joined: 01 Jan 2008, 01:52

A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by whicker »

Given the end of Setanta, and the upcoming end of ITV's deal, where does that leave live boxing?

Surely there must be some way of preserving the sport without TV money? Otherwise, it's going to be in real trouble, with boxers struggling to find work.


But could we see a rise in non-televised shows? It's just a question of making it economical for the promotors to put on , and having a format/fighters that will appeal to the ticket buying public. Prizefighter was a good idea (although that in itself seems to have fizzled a bit).
dazzer
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 280
Joined: 11 Apr 2009, 17:07

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by dazzer »

it might work out to be a good thing, more 50/50 fights, do not mind paying good money to watch 50/50 fights.

tv will not decide who fights who for a silly wbu,wbf just to say its a title fight
ERIC GUY
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1656
Joined: 30 Jan 2009, 21:13

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by ERIC GUY »

non televised shows keep me happy
saturday_kid
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 847
Joined: 14 May 2009, 04:05

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by saturday_kid »

The trouble with non-televised shows is theyre unlikely to pull in new or casual fans, dont get me wrong I'm a massive fan of non televised small hall shows and get to most round this area, but I'm already a big boxing fan, your casual fan is a lot less likely to pay £30 to go and watch boxing (in fact I'd say he's very unlikely to even contemplate it unless he knows someone fighting on the card) with fighters who he has probably never heard of, than he is to tune in to the telly on a friday night or even pay £15 to watch Hatton/Khan etc.

With the credit crunch a lot of people are cutting out leisure activites like going to the theatre, football matches, boxing. This is also why Sky's subscriptions are up, people are staying in a lot more.

Small hall shows are great for hardcore fans, but boxing needs maximum TV exposure.
charlieb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1014
Joined: 01 May 2005, 10:58

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by charlieb »

You'd think there would have to be a rise without the TV in place anymore.

Money's the big problem though, there's now not enough TV slots to feature fighters who a few years back would have commanded decent TV coverage as a given. No TV means less money, young prospects aren't going to want to be kept sitting on the shelf, waiting for a slot to open. Hennsessey and Hayemaker are still without a deal, so that might not even be an option in the first place, until an inevitable deal is struck. I wonder if UK promoters will have to start getting their best fighters without high profiles, shots abroad on US or possibly german TV.

It looks as though it's going to be hard financial times ahead for every fighter out there who doesn't have an existing world class profile or an olympic medal pedigree.

I could see a rise in both PPV and non-televised shows. I dont think the PPVs will do huge numbers outside of Hatton, Khan and Haye and non-televised shows surely couldn't recoup the cost of not having TV money without the fighters involved agreeing to peanuts.

It's looking grim.
Last edited by charlieb on 25 Jun 2009, 10:13, edited 1 time in total.
Counter-puncher
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 39141
Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by Counter-puncher »

saturday_kid wrote:The trouble with non-televised shows is theyre unlikely to pull in new or casual fans,

Small hall shows are great for hardcore fans, but boxing needs maximum TV exposure.
basically almost noone, bar fans of the fighter or 'serious' fans like us, goes to live boxing at small hall shows any more.
whicker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4550
Joined: 01 Jan 2008, 01:52

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by whicker »

Counter-puncher wrote: basically almost noone, bar fans of the fighter or 'serious' fans like us, goes to live boxing at small hall shows any more.
Yeah- the thing is most boxing match are, well- just fights for the sake of it. This is unlike most of live sport where the indivudal is competeing as part of a league, cup, tournament or for a prize for winning. This isn't a criticism, of course- but most boxing bouts are in effect "stand alone" fights.

Thats why I'm saying they need to do something- anything- just to change the format around and get more members of the public through the doors.

Dinner shows, for example, are an alternative - they seem to do quite well sometimes.

Something like the "prizefighter" style could, maybe, be the way forward- given the whole show a theme/style or make the whole show a tournament might help get people interested.

See what I mean? The current format of simply putting on a show with several fights, possibly a very minor title fight as the main event, obviously just isn't "cutting it" with the general public.

One idea might be "War of the Roses" 6 boxers from Lancashire V 6 boxers from Yorkshire- if it could get some local press coverage, it might draw people in.
s9s
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 190
Joined: 09 Jan 2005, 04:47

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by s9s »

One could say boxing got itself into this mess? If it was attractive enough then ITV would have kept it, but we've fed mainly rubbish over the last few years, world title belts awared not won, poor defences, the WBU fiasco, harldy an decent British/European title fights.

Boxing needs a kick up the arse, while I feel sorry for some of the decent boxers out there, this is hard knock sport and by diluting each title and poor match ups they did nothing to earn a ITV contract IMO.

So they had the tv, they had the money and took the pi*s, lets see what they do without the money and tv.
Counter-puncher
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 39141
Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by Counter-puncher »

whicker wrote:
Counter-puncher wrote: basically almost noone, bar fans of the fighter or 'serious' fans like us, goes to live boxing at small hall shows any more.
Yeah- the thing is most boxing match are, well- just fights for the sake of it. This is unlike most of live sport where the indivudal is competeing as part of a league, cup, tournament or for a prize for winning. This isn't a criticism, of course- but most boxing bouts are in effect "stand alone" fights.

Thats why I'm saying they need to do something- anything- just to change the format around and get more members of the public through the doors.

Dinner shows, for example, are an alternative - they seem to do quite well sometimes.

Something like the "prizefighter" style could, maybe, be the way forward- given the whole show a theme/style or make the whole show a tournament might help get people interested.

See what I mean? The current format of simply putting on a show with several fights, possibly a very minor title fight as the main event, obviously just isn't "cutting it" with the general public.

One idea might be "War of the Roses" 6 boxers from Lancashire V 6 boxers from Yorkshire- if it could get some local press coverage, it might draw people in.
good post mate, there is a lot boxing needs to think about and i like the war of the roses idea
ERIC GUY
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1656
Joined: 30 Jan 2009, 21:13

Re: A rise in non-televised shows?

Post by ERIC GUY »

I have filmed 2 non televised shows this week!!
Post Reply