did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
-
Samuel Brooks
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 86
- Joined: 27 Jul 2009, 06:52
did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
According to Warren's column on his website, iit says that Froch v Direll only did 15,000 buys on Primetime. Is this correct? Does anyone know any more?
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
must be true ive never known frank to lie ![[icon_knockout.gif] :KO:](./images/smilies/icon_knockout.gif)
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
If it did even that many, I would be extremely surprised. My estimate, as I have said before, would be around 3000.
It wasn't really picked up in the press, didn't feature a household name and was on a marginal channel.
It wasn't really picked up in the press, didn't feature a household name and was on a marginal channel.
-
sweetscience
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2816
- Joined: 22 Sep 2004, 09:09
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
id be shocked if it were that many
if it was on the normal sky box office i would have bought it....but i couldnt be assed faffin about ringing and setting my phone line up etc
if it was on the normal sky box office i would have bought it....but i couldnt be assed faffin about ringing and setting my phone line up etc
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
it wasnt many esspecially with the glitch that people saw it for free so i doubt that it would count them
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
Maelstrom wrote:If it did even that many, I would be extremely surprised. My estimate, as I have said before, would be around 3000.
It wasn't really picked up in the press, didn't feature a household name and was on a marginal channel.
... and at 3am
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
Didnt someone claim Khan only did 14,000 ?
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
3 thousandMaelstrom wrote:If it did even that many, I would be extremely surprised. My estimate, as I have said before, would be around 3000.
It wasn't really picked up in the press, didn't feature a household name and was on a marginal channel.
-
DG.
- Heavyweight

Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
diggler wrote:must be true ive never known frank to lie
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
I thought primetime had some sort of connection with Queensbury or whatever its called that Warren has some sort of investment in does he not ?
So i cant see why there is a criticism.
So i cant see why there is a criticism.
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
plank sporran always mentions everyones viewing figures......apart from his own !!
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
Different company C, the one you are thinking of is spelled Queensberry.G0mez wrote:I thought primetime had some sort of connection with Queensbury or whatever its called that Warren has some sort of investment in does he not ?
So i cant see why there is a criticism.
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
Froch needs to get kessler fight on a proper channel!
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
yeh surely if sky box office make an offer hennessey will go for it. it would do big numbers on box office i thinkleforge wrote:Froch needs to get kessler fight on a proper channel!
-
TerribleTerry
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 12:30
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
There is a really interesting interview regarding the Primetime Froch 'experiment' with the M.D of Primetime over on the Boxrec news site. If you are interested in this subject, check it out:
http://news.boxrec.com/news/2009/only-1 ... imetime-tv
http://news.boxrec.com/news/2009/only-1 ... imetime-tv
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
sounds encouraging.TerribleTerry wrote:There is a really interesting interview regarding the Primetime Froch 'experiment' with the M.D of Primetime over on the Boxrec news site. If you are interested in this subject, check it out:
http://news.boxrec.com/news/2009/only-1 ... imetime-tv
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
A truly unbisased opinion there from Froch's number one fan.gemmell wrote:3 thousandMaelstrom wrote:If it did even that many, I would be extremely surprised. My estimate, as I have said before, would be around 3000.
It wasn't really picked up in the press, didn't feature a household name and was on a marginal channel.![]()
it would have done atleast 10 thousand in nottingham alone!! i heard it did 23 thousand. which is a success for primetime. warren is an idiot.he tried to claim khan vs kotelnik did 50k+
![]()
when in reality it did less then 30k
and that is with it being advertised EVERYWHERE ON SKY
I stick to my estimate, but we will never know. I would like to point out, however, that if Nottingham was so mad for the fight, why didn't they sell 10,000+ tickets?
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
I stick to my estimate, but we will never know. I would like to point out, however, that if Nottingham was so mad for the fight, why didn't they sell 10,000+ tickets?[/quote]
thats probably because the trent doesnt hold that many
thats probably because the trent doesnt hold that many
-
hitman_hatton1
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 6150
- Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
tilt.Ant Evans wrote:Because the arena cannot hold that many....
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
what a knob sack trent fm arena holds 8 thousand. your estimate is based on what? if wazza says it did 15 thousand that means it did moreMaelstrom wrote:A truly unbisased opinion there from Froch's number one fan.gemmell wrote:3 thousandMaelstrom wrote:If it did even that many, I would be extremely surprised. My estimate, as I have said before, would be around 3000.
It wasn't really picked up in the press, didn't feature a household name and was on a marginal channel.![]()
it would have done atleast 10 thousand in nottingham alone!! i heard it did 23 thousand. which is a success for primetime. warren is an idiot.he tried to claim khan vs kotelnik did 50k+
![]()
when in reality it did less then 30k
and that is with it being advertised EVERYWHERE ON SKY
I stick to my estimate, but we will never know. I would like to point out, however, that if Nottingham was so mad for the fight, why didn't they sell 10,000+ tickets?
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
I am afraid you are all wrong here. If set out for max capacity It can hold 11,000. Do not believe everything you read.
And do you all believe that every ticket that went on sale got sold? Did any of you go to the fight?
Besides, if they could have sold more, they would have gone to a bigger venue. After all, they have been banging on about the footy ground for long enough.
And do you all believe that every ticket that went on sale got sold? Did any of you go to the fight?
Besides, if they could have sold more, they would have gone to a bigger venue. After all, they have been banging on about the footy ground for long enough.
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
Im afraid your wrong.Maelstrom wrote:I am afraid you are all wrong here. If set out for max capacity It can hold 11,000. Do not believe everything you read.
And do you all believe that every ticket that went on sale got sold? Did any of you go to the fight?
Besides, if they could have sold more, they would have gone to a bigger venue. After all, they have been banging on about the footy ground for long enough.
The 11,000 mark is for concerts, not boxing, where a third of the floor is taken by the ring and associated TV coverage teams.
Somehow i dont think a freezing cold october night at 3am in a drafty football ground would have done very well.
Fact is, the full house at the arena was a good result given the fact that Dirrell only brought his immeadiate family with him. Everyone else was there for Froch, as the undercard was a bit of a filler.
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
From what I understand, (another promoter has been to the Arena don't forget), that actually isn't so.... but either way I am NOT saying the attendance wasnt impressive. I think it was.G0mez wrote:Im afraid your wrong.Maelstrom wrote:I am afraid you are all wrong here. If set out for max capacity It can hold 11,000. Do not believe everything you read.
And do you all believe that every ticket that went on sale got sold? Did any of you go to the fight?
Besides, if they could have sold more, they would have gone to a bigger venue. After all, they have been banging on about the footy ground for long enough.
The 11,000 mark is for concerts, not boxing, where a third of the floor is taken by the ring and associated TV coverage teams.
Somehow i dont think a freezing cold october night at 3am in a drafty football ground would have done very well.
Fact is, the full house at the arena was a good result given the fact that Dirrell only brought his immeadiate family with him. Everyone else was there for Froch, as the undercard was a bit of a filler.
What I am saying is that Gemmels original statement that the fight would have done 10,000 PPV's buy just in Nottingham is wrong - (along with Ant and Hitman Hattons comments) - when you could still by tickets on the door on the night of the fight. There could have been more tickets sold.
Anyway Gomez, being close to the camp, you must know the number of buys?
-
mickey1975
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 23095
- Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
A ring is an awful lot smaller than a stage.I have been to concerts and fights at various arenas and the fights have much more space.For instance,all the blocks behind the stage are unusable.That means,at somewhere like the M.E.N,there must be thousands of seats that cant be sold.Hatton-Tsyu did 20,000plus,i would be amazed if any gig has beat that.Surely Ant Evans can clear this up,he generally knows the facts on things like this.G0mez wrote:Im afraid your wrong.Maelstrom wrote:I am afraid you are all wrong here. If set out for max capacity It can hold 11,000. Do not believe everything you read.
And do you all believe that every ticket that went on sale got sold? Did any of you go to the fight?
Besides, if they could have sold more, they would have gone to a bigger venue. After all, they have been banging on about the footy ground for long enough.
The 11,000 mark is for concerts, not boxing, where a third of the floor is taken by the ring and associated TV coverage teams.
Somehow i dont think a freezing cold october night at 3am in a drafty football ground would have done very well.
Fact is, the full house at the arena was a good result given the fact that Dirrell only brought his immeadiate family with him. Everyone else was there for Froch, as the undercard was a bit of a filler.
Re: did froch v direll only do 15,000 on primetime?
I think that post is about spot on. As I understand it, a floor plan has been produced in the past by the Arena for boxing that holds more than their advertised 10,000 capacity. I am not saying it was used.mickey1975 wrote:A ring is an awful lot smaller than a stage.I have been to concerts and fights at various arenas and the fights have much more space.For instance,all the blocks behind the stage are unusable.That means,at somewhere like the M.E.N,there must be thousands of seats that cant be sold.Hatton-Tsyu did 20,000plus,i would be amazed if any gig has beat that.Surely Ant Evans can clear this up,he generally knows the facts on things like this.G0mez wrote:Im afraid your wrong.Maelstrom wrote:I am afraid you are all wrong here. If set out for max capacity It can hold 11,000. Do not believe everything you read.
And do you all believe that every ticket that went on sale got sold? Did any of you go to the fight?
Besides, if they could have sold more, they would have gone to a bigger venue. After all, they have been banging on about the footy ground for long enough.
The 11,000 mark is for concerts, not boxing, where a third of the floor is taken by the ring and associated TV coverage teams.
Somehow i dont think a freezing cold october night at 3am in a drafty football ground would have done very well.
Fact is, the full house at the arena was a good result given the fact that Dirrell only brought his immeadiate family with him. Everyone else was there for Froch, as the undercard was a bit of a filler.
