PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post Reply

One off payment for all ppv?

Yes.
10
83%
No
2
17%
 
Total votes: 12

KO 2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14
Joined: 27 Mar 2010, 12:24

PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by KO 2 »

We pay a flat fee of a£50.00 and get all ppv boxing.

It's a way forward? I know we should get it for free!
whicker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4550
Joined: 01 Jan 2008, 01:52

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by whicker »

Presumably you mean £50 straight up- so no connection charge, no need to buy Sky sports, and for footage available on the television?

Yeah, I'd pay that.

I'd happily pay a specialist subscription.

I'd much rather not pay my licence and not watch BBC, too. Wish that was an option.


Also, even with Sky they still have adverts. If I'm paying for something, I'd like uninterrupted coverage.
KO 2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14
Joined: 27 Mar 2010, 12:24

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by KO 2 »

Oh yes, just 50.00 in a pot to be fished out to promoters who take part in the scheme. At least 10 ppvs a year including the US fights.
ushnikov
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 17
Joined: 06 Jan 2007, 08:26

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by ushnikov »

I would prefer to pay for each fight on its own merits. No flat fee to any sports channel just pay as you go. This would reward the promoters who put on quality shows. TV companies can keep the production costs down to maximise profits.
KO 2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14
Joined: 27 Mar 2010, 12:24

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.kklkliklitklitsklitscklits

Post by KO 2 »

ushnikov wrote:I would prefer to pay for each fight on its own merits. No flat fee to any sports channel just pay as you go. This would reward the promoters who put on quality shows. TV companies can keep the production costs down to maximise profits.
But what about the recent avalanche of ppv fights coming up? Froch Khan Haye Super acting class,dirrell. Holyfield also,thats some cash outlay
KO 2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14
Joined: 27 Mar 2010, 12:24

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by KO 2 »

And the recent Klitschko fight!
oscar
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 199
Joined: 19 Sep 2005, 13:32

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by oscar »

PROBABLY PPV IS THE WAY FORWARD IMO ON A SHOW BY SHOW BASIS AS NOT ALL SHOWS WOULD BE OF INTEREST
lefthook82
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1837
Joined: 07 Mar 2008, 04:33

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by lefthook82 »

The way forward is justin

I've resisted the urge to wtch fights this way but the time will soon come
KO 2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 14
Joined: 27 Mar 2010, 12:24

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by KO 2 »

oscar wrote:PROBABLY PPV IS THE WAY FORWARD IMO ON A SHOW BY SHOW BASIS AS NOT ALL SHOWS WOULD BE OF INTEREST

But how many PPVs have you bought that were not really worth the money, Khan Vs Barrera/Prescott? Lots of people buy every fight because we like to watch boxing even mediocre PPVs

£50.00 all in is better value, imo.
whicker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4550
Joined: 01 Jan 2008, 01:52

Re: PPV. Is this a better way forward.

Post by whicker »

I'd happily do pay per view.

What I object to is connection charges, obligatory subscriptions to Sky Sports etc.

Is it right that you can't get a boxing PPV on Sky Box Office unless you already have their sports package?
Post Reply