Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

dondada
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8872
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 10:55

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by dondada »

MachoMan09 wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
MachoMan09 wrote: See if you can get a figure from your sources at Sky for how much money they spend promoting a PPV in the last ten days before an event takes place.
How about if they didn't spend much money promoting it and just took what came in anyway? They're still going to have similar overheads, production wise, with it being on 'normal' Sky.
They could do that, but they would surely be faced with severe criticism as a result and an even greater diminishment of Khan's lot as a boxing superstar. And for what? Break even at best, maybe?

Taking the decision to air the fight on Sky Sports 1 will generate an opportunity to re-sell Khan to a wider audience on the cheap (in relative terms) and simultaneously proselytise viewers into subscribing to the PPV church at a later date - assuming Khan and McCloskey put on a good show.
I understand all this. After all, I said as much in the piece. All I'm saying is that you said Sky had no alternative other than to pull the PPV show. That isn't true. They could have taken the flak and taken the extra money.

Anyway, you're right on the latter point - it makes sense.
Hagler2002
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3512
Joined: 28 Dec 2005, 07:04

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Hagler2002 »

McCloskey's camp will be seething!!!! Here's hoping it goes ahead at all.
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by leforge »

MightyWarrior wrote:
leforge wrote:Good decision. Can't see khans working with Hattons again.
Unless Ricky offers himself as Khan's next PPV opponent.
Amir can't complain - he can't just pick a patsy for himself and expect everyone to dish out PPV prices. Who were Hatton ever going to get, to justify PPV with a 20-1 main event at the head of it ? Answer: no one.
They were selected as partners to fill the undercard and they failed to do it sufficiently. Crolla v Rees off then no new opponent could be found. Macklin V gevor off. Watson v Purdy that a weak challenge. Then the likes of Murray for WBA inter title shocking really.
Coco
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 28311
Joined: 08 May 2007, 05:42

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Coco »

BIGMARK wrote:I am happy as a boxing fan that this fight is now not PPV as no only will i be able to watch it on normal Skysports but should also be shown in pubs/bars/clubs up and down the country which is good for the sport. However i hope that this doesnt means McCloskey is getting shafted when it comes to is purse.
I guarantee you McCloskey will get shafted
johnswan1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3348
Joined: 27 Feb 2005, 18:03

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by johnswan1 »

Scottrf wrote:
stujones wrote:
Scottrf wrote: That been announced?
John's post above on this thread implies it at least..... looks like he has copied and pasted the Sky schedule from their website.
Yeah that's what I thought from his post but it wasn't on their schedule.
You can see their TV fixtures here and Berto-Otiz is listed:

http://www.skysports.com/boxing
Last edited by johnswan1 on 07 Apr 2011, 09:50, edited 1 time in total.
Emmseegee
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1400
Joined: 10 Sep 2010, 10:29

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Emmseegee »

Should have paid good £££s to try and move the Simpson v Smith fight onto the undercard!
Scottrf
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1146
Joined: 30 Nov 2010, 05:43

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Scottrf »

johnswan1 wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
stujones wrote: John's post above on this thread implies it at least..... looks like he has copied and pasted the Sky schedule from their website.
Yeah that's what I thought from his post but it wasn't on their schedule.
You can see their TV fixtures here and Berto-Otiz is listed:

http://www.skysports.com/boxing
Na, that's not their TV fixtures, just a fixture list. Doesn't necessarily mean they are showing them. The 'Live on Sky' section is the ones they are showing.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27449
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by stujones »

I don't think it is Amir's fault per se. He needed a well earned easy(ish) one after his last fight - and its not like Paul McKloskey is completely a piss take. He is the reigning EBU champion so should around the the top 10 independently..... okay, I know I know -people are going to say - Well Audley was EBU champion and he was barely top 50 independently.... but McCloskey has made defences of the title and has beaten some good guys before the EBU title fight.

We all said Amir should have an easy one this time, now we are being critical..... Its Team Khan's fault trying to force the PPV issue and also Sky's fault for originally accepting McCloskey (without ANY mention of a undercard). Not the boxer, who just is having a well earned rest from the big fights.
Final round
Cruiserweight
Posts: 4911
Joined: 20 Oct 2010, 17:02

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Final round »

Now that is fair play, well done to the Sky team, an excellent decision. :bag:
Last edited by Final round on 07 Apr 2011, 10:05, edited 1 time in total.
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by freddydoesdallas »

stujones wrote:I don't think it is Amir's fault per se. He needed a well earned easy(ish) one after his last fight - and its not like Paul McKloskey is completely a piss take. He is the reigning EBU champion so should around the the top 10 independently..... okay, I know I know -people are going to say - Well Audley was EBU champion and he was barely top 50 independently.... but McCloskey has made defences of the title and has beaten some good guys before the EBU title fight.

We all said Amir should have an easy one this time, now we are being critical..... Its Team Khan's fault trying to force the PPV issue and also Sky's fault for originally accepting McCloskey (without ANY mention of a undercard). Not the boxer, who just is having a well earned rest from the big fights.
He doesn't deserve a rest, he's a champ and he definitely hasn't earned an easy fight. He's been handpicking opponents for the whole of his career.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27449
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by stujones »

umm he had a big say about Prescott and off course he waited untill Maidana was passed it when he fought him.

He has fought what Frank put up for him, since leaving Frank he has fought Malignaggi a credible world title challenger and the dangerous Maidana. Didn't you see the state of his face 4 months ago - that was an aging fight he might not even be the same fighter after that.
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by freddydoesdallas »

I'm not really sure what you're getting at with that last comment but i stand by what i said. He's had an easy time of it in the paid ranks so to say he deserves a rest is ludicrous. You can't believe he should fight a couple of patsies after taking on his first legitimate contender.
danfoster
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 651
Joined: 02 Feb 2009, 05:07

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by danfoster »

Think this is an excellent move by Adam SMith and he deserves credit - that bill simply was not worth PPV status.

However, i am sure this move will cause frantic negotiations behind the scenes re contracts and payments. I have to say i can see the whole thing collapsing now.
slapbangwhallop
Cruiserweight
Posts: 2031
Joined: 13 Dec 2010, 08:27

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by slapbangwhallop »

As my mother used to say - "that guy is penny wise but pound stupid"

They, if they took a swally, couldn't organise a pizz-up in a brewery. Penny pinching seems to have turned around and taken a great big bite out of their arses.

If I was Amir I would be asking serious questions of my advisors and how they let this happen.

The guy has lost out on a £1m now and McCloskey lost out on many £1,000's in top-up. If you heard the shenanigans in the background you would say that these guys weren't capable of running a corner-shop let alone steering the goose the lays the golden egg, which has fortuitously landed on their lap.

Burn-bridges-burn-disco-inferno!

Well done to SKY for standing up and being counted. In truth the only people that can clean up boxing as the TV stations. This is a positive step forward and I welcome it.
jtourettes
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 819
Joined: 20 Feb 2009, 07:24

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by jtourettes »

Shit fight that shouldn't ever have been made, let alone put on PPV. Having to wait an extra two months for Haye Wlad as well because of this shite.

I'll be watching it now it's on normal Sky.
dondada
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8872
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 10:55

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by dondada »

slapbangwhallop wrote:these guys weren't capable of running a corner-shop
Well, this is one accusation which certainly can't be laid at the feet of McCloskey:

http://www.spar.co.uk/AboutUs/Press/EUR ... title.aspx
:lol:
slapbangwhallop
Cruiserweight
Posts: 2031
Joined: 13 Dec 2010, 08:27

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by slapbangwhallop »

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
slapbangwhallop wrote:these guys weren't capable of running a corner-shop
Well, this is one accusation which certainly can't be laid at the feet of McCloskey:

http://www.spar.co.uk/AboutUs/Press/EUR ... title.aspx
:lol:
After 20 odd years of running a successful business I am sure these guys cant get their heads around the way these people are working.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by palooka »

The bout between Paul and Khan is well worth watching as a fan but not so much to cost £15. This is good news for fans. Thank you to whoever made the decision :TU:
ScottDetonator
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1073
Joined: 15 Mar 2011, 04:33

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by ScottDetonator »

Great news this! :TU:

The card is defo not worth the PPV status and I for one, was not going to pay even if they managed to get Fury v Rahman on the card. It shouldn't have been a PPV event in the first place.

Well done to Sky for back-tracking and making the event accessible to a much wider audience. Let's just hope it goes ahead.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27449
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by stujones »

freddydoesdallas wrote:I'm not really sure what you're getting at with that last comment but i stand by what i said. He's had an easy time of it in the paid ranks so to say he deserves a rest is ludicrous. You can't believe he should fight a couple of patsies after taking on his first legitimate contender.
Will agree to disagree

1) I never said a couple of pasties - not that I think a reigning EBU champion is a pasty as such - the devision isn't exactly a hotbed of talent, how much worst is McCloskey to the likes of Holt or even Judah (the latter looks shot to be honest yet is a world champion). I said he is entitled to one easy one, if you see McCloskey as easy. Personally I do, but thats not saying McCloskey would be easy for other fighters in the top 5. Just like people thought Woods was a soft touch for Roy Jones - no-one thought Woods would be a soft touch for the average world champion.

2) I would classify a former World champion, not yet 30, just off a career best win as pretty legitimate - even if he couldn't crack an egg, still too skilled for the likes of Diaz and Ndou. So I wouldn't call Maidana his only legitimate fighter. Barrera was one year removed from giving Pacquiao and JMM toughies, Kotelnik was a world champion (but now apparently not a legitimate fighter) and still probably in the top 5 in the devision following his display against Alexander.

3) As I said earlier on.... who is really out there - Alexander just stunk the place out with his negativity, Holt has been so hit and miss and Judah was considered an easy fight by many on year. Yeah, McCloskey doesn't have the name pedigree - but is he so much worst. This is one warm up fight before a summer showdown with Bradley - I was expecting someone worst than McCloskey to be honest.

4) What I meant was Rendell Munroe gets applauded for his attidude of - "I'll just fight whoever they put in front of me" - why do you think Khan doesn't have the same attitude? I think he does, just his ex promoter didn't have that much confidence..... look at FW's reaction post Prescott - it was clear that Amir Khan the boxer had very little imput, yes "TEAM" Khan did, but not Khan per se.... if Rendell Munroe or whoever says "I'll just fight whoever they put in front of me" and then we get a bum - we would be cursing the promoter, but with Khan he is the one who is cursed. I don't think we need to be criticising Khan's balls now. He did what many people never thought he would do, and even when it was rumoured to be on - many posters said "oh it will be over here, cause Khan will no Argies don't travel to Europe well"... wrong... he did it in a place Maidana was confortable with. Then, on the back of the win he got condemmed for turning his back on the UK! So next fight is in the UK, and he gets condemmed for the opponent. Fact is - HBO will not accept a PPV worthy opponent for Khan to fight over here - and Sky are not ITV and allow a British fight to take place at 3 am.
Camcas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 881
Joined: 12 Sep 2010, 14:18

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Camcas »

Great news and well done sky, this will encourage me and i think many other people to buy future PPV's
Josh1111
Cruiserweight
Posts: 874
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 05:50

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Josh1111 »

Asterix wrote:
Josh1111 wrote:
Asterix wrote:They did this because they couldn't manage to get an attractive undercard together, right? I'm thinking of the Macklin and Fury fights not coming to fruition. I don't think that necessarily warrants praise for Sky or Adam Smith.
Dont be so miserable, Sky still had to make the final decision
Miserable? :confused: Did you quote the wrong person?
Not that i'm aware :OhYes: . We;re quick enough to jump on Adam Smith when we dont like things. We've been calling for this to be none PPV for weeks and he has delivered whethere he has been forced into it or not. Give the guy some credit
Hagler2002
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3512
Joined: 28 Dec 2005, 07:04

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Hagler2002 »

I'd be amazed if Smith had any input into making the decision to pull the PPV on it.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by palooka »

I agree; Smith gets slated for things he can control and things he can't control. This is a good call IMO; Adam Smith will have made the decision for the benefit of SKY but he has also benefited the fans.
Josh1111
Cruiserweight
Posts: 874
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 05:50

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Josh1111 »

McCloskey is still fighting for a world title and will still get his best payday, i cant see how any of this means he will be shafted.
Ok, he might not get as much money as he likes but win the fight and he is the world light welterweight champion
Post Reply