Sky Sports Subscribers

[Tommy Gunn13]

This is about Boxing.

Football and darts are essentially free.

This is whats wrong with SKY. Maybe they should drop some of the International Fishing and International Mystic Hunting psychos and concentrate on getting ALL the boxing.

No wonder UFC is growing. Bioxing is handing them the Combat Crown.

How are they FREE there on the same subscription as boxing,Sky Sports..

[THE MESSIAH]

This is about Boxing.

Football and darts are essentially free.

This is whats wrong with SKY. Maybe they should drop some of the International Fishing and International Mystic Hunting psychos and concentrate on getting ALL the boxing.

No wonder UFC is growing. Bioxing is handing them the Combat Crown.

How are they FREE there on the same subscription as boxing,Sky Sports..

Free as in there are no additional PPVs.

[Tommy Gunn13]

I will keep Sky Sports&if a PPV is worthy i shall invest in it

[stujones]

i wasn't aware of boxing on telly then, but were hagler, hearns & leonard fights all on free british tv back then?

sky do a great job for boxing. no other channel would show any of these british title fights. rhodes - alvarez wouldn't have got a look in on another other channel. whereas people in work who don't follow boxing are talking about it today.

am i correct in thinking that there are maybe 2 ppvs every weekend in america? whereas only one a month maybe ( at a stretch) here. barker - martinez, macklin - sturm, froch - johnson fights are all on ordinary sky, well worth it if you ask me. we don't have to pay $55+ for every manny fight, and no doubt mayweather - ortiz will be the same.

and if you want it for less - ring & threaten to leave. they'll give a discount, maybe only a tenner a month but it all adds up.

your damn right hearns leonard and hagler shows were live and free on itv.u didnt have to pay no 15 bucks either.

Back in those days england was a far less populated country with 4 tv channels and the streets were quiet after pub closing time.....but itv didnt advertise it all but they religiously showed entire american bills live on itv 1 in the early hours.

I remember watching gems like the hearns-roldan bill and tyson-spinks bill in the late 80s....the hearns-barkley bill.......leonard-lalonde......i could go on and on

Some of this didn't apply to all networks back in the glory days of regional TV. Wales would often get them on delay.... that was the beauty of it - those that showed them live also showed them after Wackaday on in the morning.

As for advertising, I disagree - ITV used to advertise.... at least as much as Sky do for their non Hearn promoted events. Leonard vs Hagler.... only shown on delay for the most of the UK was actually on the front cover of the TV. ITV also had the World of Sport platform to promote events - and they would have other sporting events.... e.g. More football.... the weekends boxing would regularly get advertised during England weekday internationals and on Midweek sports special.

Sky used to do alot more advertising for boxing.... they used to do things like "February on Sky Sports" and they would always cover the boxing... these have stopped and now its focus is mainly football - and in particularly, managers of football (thats something I've noticed a huge change in marketing strategy - Sky now build it as a battle of the managers... when it used to be all about the players).

[Ezzard]

ITV used to do live British/Euro/Commonwealth fights on Saturday afternoons. You'd see some of the undercard scraps that would include the pormoters up and coming prospects. Then you'd see the main fight. Then you'd see action from US or elsewhere of the World champions at the same weight (usually highlights).

Sometimes the ITV shows would be on a Wednesday night.

BBC would show fights on Sportsnight pretty regularly.

I can't quite believe that the Heavyweight Championship of Britain isn't treated like the FA Cup. The history of the prize going back to bare-knuckle days ougt to make it a special event.

[Pat Butcher]

42% Not happy.

Of the guys who voted NO to cancelling I wonder how many are actually happy?

If you are keeping SKY and voted NO to cancelling is it because you are HAPPY?

Yes. Not thrilled with the price but I'm a tight git and don't like paying for anything.

Sky have apparently over 10 million subscribers (no idea how many subscribe to sky sports) so they must be doing something right

[smcb80]

as someone had corrected me earlier, there has been one ppv this year.

not much to grumble about.

[grannyman]

I don't think people on here will be happy untill there's a Sky Boxing Channel.

There are many sports to show, and I enjoy the coverage of boxing, rugby union, tennis, cricket etc

They show two or three fights a week at the moment, even more if there's something state side in the early hours so I don't think it's that bad.

It is expensive but then these days, unless you watch poor quality streaming, what isn't?

[Dioufy]

It's the PPVs that are pissing boxing fans off.

Wlad/Haye yes.

Groves/Horse no effing way.

[earsjohn]

It's the PPVs that are pissing boxing fans off.

Wlad/Haye yes.

Groves/Horse no effing way.

But it's not pissing them off enough to stop them buying them though, is it? The numbers must be doing good otherwise they wouldn't be going to PPV. Remember the Amir Khan debacle which still resulted in (according to varying reports) 60-70k buys. That's 60-70k different people (or groups of people) who were prepared to pay £15 for a weak headline supported by a weak undercard on an obscure channel with no HD. Boxing fans have a funny way of showing their anger!

[THE MESSIAH]

AS HAS BEEN SAID. ITS THE PPV! Mitchell vs Murray better not be ppv.


We are being ripped off. We could watch Tyson holyfield Lewis for Free. Now we pay for domestic. It's wrong. We are over a barrell.By free I meant no additional cost.

[grannyman]

AS HAS BEEN SAID. ITS THE PPV! Mitchell vs Murray better not be ppv.


We are being ripped off. We could watch Tyson holyfield Lewis for Free. Now we pay for domestic. It's wrong. We are over a barrell.By free I meant no additional cost.

Actually I remember watching Tyson fights on PPV, staying up untill silly o'clock in the morning only for it to be over in 40 seconds.

This is not a new situation.

[Dioufy]

It's the PPVs that are pissing boxing fans off.

Wlad/Haye yes.

Groves/Horse no effing way.

But it's not pissing them off enough to stop them buying them though, is it? The numbers must be doing good otherwise they wouldn't be going to PPV. Remember the Amir Khan debacle which still resulted in (according to varying reports) 60-70k buys. That's 60-70k different people (or groups of people) who were prepared to pay £15 for a weak headline supported by a weak undercard on an obscure channel with no HD. Boxing fans have a funny way of showing their anger!

The only PPV's I have ever paid for it Hatton/Mayweather and Hatton/Pacquiao. Add Haye/Wlad to that soon. I don't buy what I don't believe is worthy, and IMO, 90% of PPV's aren't worthy of paying an extra £15 on top of my subsciptions to watch. Sorry, but no way, Pedro.

[earsjohn]

It's the PPVs that are pissing boxing fans off.

Wlad/Haye yes.

Groves/Horse no effing way.

But it's not pissing them off enough to stop them buying them though, is it? The numbers must be doing good otherwise they wouldn't be going to PPV. Remember the Amir Khan debacle which still resulted in (according to varying reports) 60-70k buys. That's 60-70k different people (or groups of people) who were prepared to pay £15 for a weak headline supported by a weak undercard on an obscure channel with no HD. Boxing fans have a funny way of showing their anger!

The only PPV's I have ever paid for it Hatton/Mayweather and Hatton/Pacquiao. Add Haye/Wlad to that soon. I don't buy what I don't believe is worthy, and IMO, 90% of PPV's aren't worthy of paying an extra £15 on top of my subsciptions to watch. Sorry, but no way, Pedro.

And if more people acted like that, then you can guarantee that Sky would reconsider. Instead we have this contradictory situation whereby everyone complains about having to pay and then pays anyway.

If you go to a restaurant and ask for some bread with your meal and it costs £15, you would likely not ask for bread again or probably even visit the restaurant. Boxing fans insist on buying the bread each time they visit the restaurant if only to complain about the poor value of the bread once they've purchased it. If you think it's poor value, don't buy it. If you buy it, then you have justified its value simply by virtue of conceding to pay for it.

Don't buy and complain OR buy and shut up. Do not buy and then complain - you have no-one to blame but yourself.

[THE MESSIAH]

AS HAS BEEN SAID. ITS THE PPV! Mitchell vs Murray better not be ppv.


We are being ripped off. We could watch Tyson holyfield Lewis for Free. Now we pay for domestic. It's wrong. We are over a barrell.By free I meant no additional cost.

Lewis-Tyson was PPV. Lewis-Holyfield was PPV. Tyson-Holyfield was PPV.

I meant we saw those guys in other fights for free. Now we pay for del boy and sexton.

[Tommy Gunn13]

It's the PPVs that are pissing boxing fans off.

Wlad/Haye yes.

Groves/Horse no effing way.

Spot on Dioufy

[Tommy Gunn13]

AS HAS BEEN SAID. ITS THE PPV! Mitchell vs Murray better not be ppv.


We are being ripped off. We could watch Tyson holyfield Lewis for Free. Now we pay for domestic. It's wrong. We are over a barrell.By free I meant no additional cost.

Actually I remember watching Tyson fights on PPV, staying up untill silly o'clock in the morning only for it to be over in 40 seconds.

This is not a new situation.

I remember Tyson-Bruno2 clearly,i was a 18yr old lad bang on the rave scene&my Mother&Father had gone on there yearly travels 3weeks in Goa,Silly mistake&left me in charge of there house..Well me in my induced state got half the club back to my parents house to watch the boxing,you can imagine my horror when i woke in the morning&even worse my parents when they got home....GOOD TIMES

[THE MESSIAH]

Sky can not rest on theor laurels, and we can not sit back and routinely pay for below par 'PPV' in fact we should only pay for the really big fights with proven fighters.

Even the UFC put their 2nd tier fighters on SPIKE for free, I think?


BOXING IN THE STATES IS A JOKE RE: PPV, BUT WE CAN NOT FOLOW SUIT AND PAY FOR MORE FOR MEDIOCRE FIGHTS.. IF WE DO THEN IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN AND AGAIN.

[Dioufy]

But it's not pissing them off enough to stop them buying them though, is it? The numbers must be doing good otherwise they wouldn't be going to PPV. Remember the Amir Khan debacle which still resulted in (according to varying reports) 60-70k buys. That's 60-70k different people (or groups of people) who were prepared to pay £15 for a weak headline supported by a weak undercard on an obscure channel with no HD. Boxing fans have a funny way of showing their anger!

The only PPV's I have ever paid for it Hatton/Mayweather and Hatton/Pacquiao. Add Haye/Wlad to that soon. I don't buy what I don't believe is worthy, and IMO, 90% of PPV's aren't worthy of paying an extra £15 on top of my subsciptions to watch. Sorry, but no way, Pedro.

And if more people acted like that, then you can guarantee that Sky would reconsider. Instead we have this contradictory situation whereby everyone complains about having to pay and then pays anyway.

If you go to a restaurant and ask for some bread with your meal and it costs £15, you would likely not ask for bread again or probably even visit the restaurant. Boxing fans insist on buying the bread each time they visit the restaurant if only to complain about the poor value of the bread once they've purchased it. If you think it's poor value, don't buy it. If you buy it, then you have justified its value simply by virtue of conceding to pay for it.

Don't buy and complain OR buy and shut up. Do not buy and then complain - you have no-one to blame but yourself.

Spot on, dude. People that MOAN about PPVs then buy them are 95% of the problem.

[Jon Saxon]

There should be midweek us action rather than live crap british stuff, most of it isnt worth watching.

I remember watching Morrison V Hipp on sky on a tuesday night and it was great.

This is where they fall down.

[funso banjo baby]

ITV used to do live British/Euro/Commonwealth fights on Saturday afternoons. You'd see some of the undercard scraps that would include the pormoters up and coming prospects. Then you'd see the main fight. Then you'd see action from US or elsewhere of the World champions at the same weight (usually highlights).

Sometimes the ITV shows would be on a Wednesday night.

BBC would show fights on Sportsnight pretty regularly.

I can't quite believe that the Heavyweight Championship of Britain isn't treated like the FA Cup. The history of the prize going back to bare-knuckle days ougt to make it a special event.

Ezzard is spot on 100%

[THE MESSIAH]

43% not over the moon, SKY please take note.

[Matt W]

I have refused to pay for a number of PPV bills as they should only be for real marquee fights that have cross-over appeal like Haye vs Klitschko. PPV for the likes of Khan vs McCloskey is mugging boxing fans off in my opinion. I consider myself a huge fan of the sport and if PPV turns the likes of me off watching boxing I don't see how it can be good for the long-term health of the sport.

[gasman]

There is no doubt that the boxing coverage has improved since Adam Smith has taken over. I have enjoyed the domestic scene a lot better than last year, Ringside has been excellent and they have listened to feedback to improve it as they go along. Behind the ropes docs are great too. Also, leaving aside one or two blips with PPVs I think they are sending messages out to promoters about the quality of the under cards and main events. That has to be welcomed.

[Matt W]

On the plus-side they've had some very good fights this year, Ringside is excellent and they've got a very good range of experts involved.

And Dan 'Raaaayfeeeel' still makes me smile