When Frank came on the scene he was a breath of fresh air, breaking up the cartel.
Somewhere down the line he became truly unpopular with the fans, and in many cases the fans go over the top. If Eddie Hearn has a fighter pull out there is national mourning that something bad could happen to such a wonderful man. If Frank has a guy pull out it is a big conspiracy to get your money...total overkill.
At what point did Frank lose his popularity?
BTW, monopolies are never good. There is no incentive for Hearn to put on great shows going forward, as we are a captive audience.
I am not slating Hearn BTW before you all fire bomb my house
I have no problem with Eddie having a monopoly on British boxing IF Sky return to weekly shows 2 arena 2 small hall and all the best boxers are under contract to 1 promoter but thats never gonna happen
I couldn't comment on Allegedly's business but I would suspect his lack of popularity with the fans is his attitude.
He comes across as an unpleasant character who is always looking for a legal fight with someone. His columns in the Sun smack of nastiness at times and his constant slagging off of boxing fans and journalists isn't going to endear him to many people within the game.
If this is to be his downfall, I suspect there are a lot of people who will enjoy waving to him as he falls to earth with a big hard bump.
@markmcgee87 wrote:I have no problem with Eddie having a monopoly on British boxing IF Sky return to weekly shows 2 arena 2 small hall and all the best boxers are under contract to 1 promoter but thats never gonna happen
You will get loads of Prizefighter...isn't that enough?
@markmcgee87 wrote:I have no problem with Eddie having a monopoly on British boxing IF Sky return to weekly shows 2 arena 2 small hall and all the best boxers are under contract to 1 promoter but thats never gonna happen
You will get loads of Prizefighter...isn't that enough?
I love Prizefighter I wish they where on more. Said no one ever.
@markmcgee87 wrote:I have no problem with Eddie having a monopoly on British boxing IF Sky return to weekly shows 2 arena 2 small hall and all the best boxers are under contract to 1 promoter but thats never gonna happen
You will get loads of Prizefighter...isn't that enough?
I love Prizefighter I wish they where on more. Said no one ever.
thepocketrocket wrote:When Frank came on the scene he was a breath of fresh air, breaking up the cartel.
Somewhere down the line he became truly unpopular with the fans, and in many cases the fans go over the top. If Eddie Hearn has a fighter pull out there is national mourning that something bad could happen to such a wonderful man. If Frank has a guy pull out it is a big conspiracy to get your money...total overkill.
At what point did Frank lose his popularity?
BTW, monopolies are never good. There is no incentive for Hearn to put on great shows going forward, as we are a captive audience.
I am not slating Hearn BTW before you all fire bomb my house
Have to disagree on the so-called monopoly Eddie has with Sky - if Eddie puts on consistent dross, viewing figures will suffer. In 2 years time (or however long his contract is), if unhappy with the performance Sky will say thank you and goodbye. Problems with single source suppliers occur when there is a long term deal in place (there isn't) and there are no other suppliers on the market (there are). If Matchroom over perform then they will be in a position to demand a higher fee when negotiation time comes round. I can't see any way in which it benefits Hearn to serve up 2 years of turds.
thepocketrocket wrote:When Frank came on the scene he was a breath of fresh air, breaking up the cartel.
Somewhere down the line he became truly unpopular with the fans, and in many cases the fans go over the top. If Eddie Hearn has a fighter pull out there is national mourning that something bad could happen to such a wonderful man. If Frank has a guy pull out it is a big conspiracy to get your money...total overkill.
At what point did Frank lose his popularity?
BTW, monopolies are never good. There is no incentive for Hearn to put on great shows going forward, as we are a captive audience.
I am not slating Hearn BTW before you all fire bomb my house
Have to disagree on the so-called monopoly Eddie has with Sky - if Eddie puts on consistent dross, viewing figures will suffer. In 2 years time (or however long his contract is), if unhappy with the performance Sky will say thank you and goodbye. Problems with single source suppliers occur when there is a long term deal in place (there isn't) and there are no other suppliers on the market (there are). If Matchroom over perform then they will be in a position to demand a higher fee when negotiation time comes round. I can't see any way in which it benefits Hearn to serve up 2 years of turds.
On the flipside, Hearn can pull the 'I take the darts with me' card...a big stick to beat SKY with.
Not saying this is going to happen, but just expressing concern
thepocketrocket wrote:When Frank came on the scene he was a breath of fresh air, breaking up the cartel.
Somewhere down the line he became truly unpopular with the fans, and in many cases the fans go over the top. If Eddie Hearn has a fighter pull out there is national mourning that something bad could happen to such a wonderful man. If Frank has a guy pull out it is a big conspiracy to get your money...total overkill.
At what point did Frank lose his popularity?
BTW, monopolies are never good. There is no incentive for Hearn to put on great shows going forward, as we are a captive audience.
I am not slating Hearn BTW before you all fire bomb my house
Have to disagree on the so-called monopoly Eddie has with Sky - if Eddie puts on consistent dross, viewing figures will suffer. In 2 years time (or however long his contract is), if unhappy with the performance Sky will say thank you and goodbye. Problems with single source suppliers occur when there is a long term deal in place (there isn't) and there are no other suppliers on the market (there are). If Matchroom over perform then they will be in a position to demand a higher fee when negotiation time comes round. I can't see any way in which it benefits Hearn to serve up 2 years of turds.
On the flipside, Hearn can pull the 'I take the darts with me' card...a big stick to beat SKY with.
Not saying this is going to happen, but just expressing concern
Sky would call his bluff - where would Darts go? Who would pay the amount Sky do? And hasn't Matchroom just secured a 5 year deal?
Think plenty of channels would love the Darts...I think it is crap but I'm in the minority. No idea on the contract...but contracts can be broken...ask Warren
I refuse to believe that Hearn having complete sway gives us a form of boxing utopia...time will tell.
thepocketrocket wrote:Think plenty of channels would love the Darts...I think it is crap but I'm in the minority. No idea on the contract...but contracts can be broken...ask Warren
I refuse to believe that Hearn having complete sway gives us a form of boxing utopia...time will tell.
Fair do's. I refuse to believe that Sky having a contract with Matchroom gives us some form of boxing purgatory. The truth is likely to be somewhere in between.
Bob & Weave wrote:I can't see how Matchroom having a monopoly would be such a bad thing, at least they would be able to make the domestic fights we all want to see...
Matchroom are in the promotions game for the long haul. It would severely be short sighted to serve up a load of weak cards.
Dana white seems to be doing ok with the UFC, always competitive fights and he has no real competition...
Business is about maximising revenues. Competitiveness is about making your product better than your opposition. Without competition that model is blown out of the water
Hearn is, IMO unlikely to put his boys in numerous 50/50 fights, shortening careers if he doesn't have to. It has never happened in the history, and isn't likely to start now
Bob & Weave wrote:I can't see how Matchroom having a monopoly would be such a bad thing, at least they would be able to make the domestic fights we all want to see...
Matchroom are in the promotions game for the long haul. It would severely be short sighted to serve up a load of weak cards.
Dana white seems to be doing ok with the UFC, always competitive fights and he has no real competition...
Bob & Weave wrote:I can't see how Matchroom having a monopoly would be such a bad thing, at least they would be able to make the domestic fights we all want to see...
Matchroom are in the promotions game for the long haul. It would severely be short sighted to serve up a load of weak cards.
Dana white seems to be doing ok with the UFC, always competitive fights and he has no real competition...
Bob & Weave wrote:I can't see how Matchroom having a monopoly would be such a bad thing, at least they would be able to make the domestic fights we all want to see...
Matchroom are in the promotions game for the long haul. It would severely be short sighted to serve up a load of weak cards.
Dana white seems to be doing ok with the UFC, always competitive fights and he has no real competition...
I guess his competition is boxing
I suppose you're right, but it's not quite the same really...
I'm sure he is more competitive with belator k1 etc...
UFC are putting on like 2 ppv events a month and selling out huge arenas 3 or 4 times a month, has a much bigger global audience too.
I don't see a competition between boxing and MMA like there is between rival boxing promoters.
Last edited by Bob & Weave on 07 Mar 2013, 12:26, edited 1 time in total.
Hearn won't always have Darren Barker, Tony Bellew, Kell Brook and George Groves on the verge of world title fights. Other promoters developed these fighters a long, long way before Eddie came along and signed them up now. If there was ever a time to sign a fighter, if there was ever a time when the grass looks greener on the other side, its when a fighter is established but hasn't yet become world champ. At that point, you need a good promoter with a good TV deal, which Eddie has. Right now, maybe Darren, Tony, Kell and George all think the sun shines out of Eddie's arse, they either have world title bouts lined up, or are on the verge of them. The world is their oyster right now. It will be interesting to see how the relationships work in a less prosperous time for them, respectively. If any of us had these four boxers, we may think it is a fair gamble to put all four in with "proper" world champs, on the basis that a 50% success rate would yield two "proper" British world champs, and even if three lose, providing the other guy wins you've still got a "proper" British world champ. Even if all four lose, it is less of a problem if you're Eddie Hearn because somebody else put in the time, money and effort to develop these fighters from their debuts, into world title contenders.
Good, solid, sometimes dangerous match making, for me, is what helps fighters get better, progress and, in the long term, solid bets for more success (in general).
W@rren has always failed at this abysmally. Bar Calzaghe, who anyone with decent connections could have promoted, W@rren's priority has always been safe 95-5% odd fights. To think, I used to get excited when there was a 80-20% fight on. We can argue the toss about 'its for TV' and 'its abut money' but seriously do I care? I care about good, competitive fights. Putting more of those on we garner more viewers, less negativity and probably higher viewing figures, if people know that's what you deliver ie Dana White and UFC.
W@rren is last of this 'milk the public and don't give a fvck about the next one because they are daft and will fall for all the hype and bs and pay again' brigade.
