BxNtion viewing figures?

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

I was speaking generally, not just about this. This is just an interesting trade story. The ones you mention are much more worthy.

It is a bit odd that there is a massive "underground" trade newsletter scene for Pro Wrestling, but sod all for boxing.

Maybe its just too murky?

[chad]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing ... ds-newsxml

Warren has confirmed subscription figures for allegedly:

"‘No exaggeration – unlike the reports of my demise – we peaked at 240,000 for the Haye-Chisora fight last summer. Then, during the quiet period for boxing in December, January and early February we dropped to 120,000 . But it’s rising again and we will climb back above 200,000 fairly shortly."

Of course no proof, and some on here don’t believe a word Warren says however I certainly think 200,000 subscribers is very plausible.

"He admits his disappointment at not securing Ricky Hatton’s one-and-only comeback fight but is turning that to his advantage: ‘Ricky hoped for a big pay-per-view audience on Primetime but they fell short of 100,000 buys. I feel sorry for him. He lost money because our guarantee was more than he got."

[leforge]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing ... ds-newsxml

Warren has confirmed subscription figures for allegedly:

"‘No exaggeration – unlike the reports of my demise – we peaked at 240,000 for the Haye-Chisora fight last summer. Then, during the quiet period for boxing in December, January and early February we dropped to 120,000 . But it’s rising again and we will climb back above 200,000 fairly shortly."

Of course no proof, and some on here don’t believe a word Warren says however I certainly think 200,000 subscribers is very plausible.

"He admits his disappointment at not securing Ricky Hatton’s one-and-only comeback fight but is turning that to his advantage: ‘Ricky hoped for a big pay-per-view audience on Primetime but they fell short of 100,000 buys. I feel sorry for him. He lost money because our guarantee was more than he got."

They have more subcribers than watch boxing on sky, which will include casual fans. Wow that impressive!

[chad]

They have more subcribers than watch boxing on sky, which will include casual fans. Wow that impressive!

I agree, if the figures are accurate.

They need to get the channel on BT, Freeview, Freesat and Top-Up TV to reach their full potential.

[Boxing Prospect]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing ... ds-newsxml

Warren has confirmed subscription figures for allegedly:

"‘No exaggeration – unlike the reports of my demise – we peaked at 240,000 for the Haye-Chisora fight last summer. Then, during the quiet period for boxing in December, January and early February we dropped to 120,000 . But it’s rising again and we will climb back above 200,000 fairly shortly."

Of course no proof, and some on here don’t believe a word Warren says however I certainly think 200,000 subscribers is very plausible.

"He admits his disappointment at not securing Ricky Hatton’s one-and-only comeback fight but is turning that to his advantage: ‘Ricky hoped for a big pay-per-view audience on Primetime but they fell short of 100,000 buys. I feel sorry for him. He lost money because our guarantee was more than he got."

They have more subcribers than watch boxing on sky, which will include casual fans. Wow that impressive!

Are they still calling each pub "200 viewers" or has that stupidity stopped now?

[chad]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing ... ds-newsxml

Warren has confirmed subscription figures for allegedly:

"‘No exaggeration – unlike the reports of my demise – we peaked at 240,000 for the Haye-Chisora fight last summer. Then, during the quiet period for boxing in December, January and early February we dropped to 120,000 . But it’s rising again and we will climb back above 200,000 fairly shortly."

Of course no proof, and some on here don’t believe a word Warren says however I certainly think 200,000 subscribers is very plausible.

"He admits his disappointment at not securing Ricky Hatton’s one-and-only comeback fight but is turning that to his advantage: ‘Ricky hoped for a big pay-per-view audience on Primetime but they fell short of 100,000 buys. I feel sorry for him. He lost money because our guarantee was more than he got."

They have more subcribers than watch boxing on sky, which will include casual fans. Wow that impressive!

Are they still calling each pub "200 viewers" or has that stupidity stopped now?

I don’t know. The article is referring specifically to subscribers to the channel and not viewers.

[whiskey]

Froch vs Bute drew 668,000 viewers on the other 'paid' channel.

It drew the highest of any boxing event on sky to date.

It would not surprise me if Froch vs Kessler did 400,000+ on the night.

I'm hearing the card could be a belter if it comes together.

[stujones]

Froch vs Bute drew 668,000 viewers on the other 'paid' channel.

It drew the highest of any boxing event on sky to date.

It would not surprise me if Froch vs Kessler did 400,000+ on the night.

I'm hearing the card could be a belter if it comes together.

Ever?

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

Froch vs Bute drew 668,000 viewers on the other 'paid' channel.

It drew the highest of any boxing event on sky to date.

It would not surprise me if Froch vs Kessler did 400,000+ on the night.

I'm hearing the card could be a belter if it comes together.

400K buys on PPV?

[Final round]

Froch vs Bute drew 668,000 viewers on the other 'paid' channel.

It drew the highest of any boxing event on sky to date.

It would not surprise me if Froch vs Kessler did 400,000+ on the night.

I'm hearing the card could be a belter if it comes together.

Woa there Gomez, Froch v Bute was not PPV, a major factor in the figures

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

Froch vs Bute drew 668,000 viewers on the other 'paid' channel.

It drew the highest of any boxing event on sky to date.

It would not surprise me if Froch vs Kessler did 400,000+ on the night.

I'm hearing the card could be a belter if it comes together.

Woa there Gomez, Froch v Bute was not PPV, a major factor in the figures

And if anyone believes Froch - Bute was the most viewed boxing match in the history of SKY then they should be taken into care.

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

Froch vs Bute drew 668,000 viewers on the other 'paid' channel.

It drew the highest of any boxing event on sky to date.

Didn't Hatton Mayweather get more than that on PPV?

It did some quite ridiculous number, so much so that some US media outlets assumed there must have been an extra 0 on the number by mistake.

Wasn't it something like 1.2 million?

[Finn]

i think it was 1.2 mill, haye v valuev did something like 620,000 ppv buys from what i recall.

[chinny]

Froch vs Bute drew 668,000 viewers on the other 'paid' channel.

It drew the highest of any boxing event on sky to date.

Didn't Hatton Mayweather get more than that on PPV?

It did some quite ridiculous number, so much so that some US media outlets assumed there must have been an extra 0 on the number by mistake.

Wasn't it something like 1.2 million?

Exactly like 1.2 million

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

i think it was 1.2 mill, haye v valuev did something like 620,000 ppv buys from what i recall.

Proof that PPVs are killing boxing, then.

No, wait.

[Finn]

i think it was 1.2 mill, haye v valuev did something like 620,000 ppv buys from what i recall.

Proof that PPVs are killing boxing, then.

No, wait.

PPV doesnt kill boxing, poor quality main events with little or no undercard on PPV kills boxing. If an event cant get over say 300,000 buys it shouldnt be ppv imo. Khan v Duddey was an example where i just thought what a crock that is by no means a super fight (gets 50,000 buys) that should have been on my sky subscription as a normal fight. Froch v Kessler II i have no issue with being PPV, id rather it wasnt but it has a genuine claim. Hatton v senchenko fair enough.

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

i think it was 1.2 mill, haye v valuev did something like 620,000 ppv buys from what i recall.

Proof that PPVs are killing boxing, then.

No, wait.

PPV doesnt kill boxing, poor quality main events with little or no undercard on PPV kills boxing. If an event cant get over say 300,000 buys it shouldnt be ppv imo. Khan v Duddey was an example where i just thought what a crock that is by no means a super fight (gets 50,000 buys) that should have been on my sky subscription as a normal fight. Froch v Kessler II i have no issue with being PPV, id rather it wasnt but it has a genuine claim. Hatton v senchenko fair enough.

Oh dear, oh dear. Where did you pull that 300,000 number from? Your arse?

300,000 is a great number for a PPV event in the USA, never mind UK.

300,000 X £15 = £4.5 million.

That's very, very nice money which cannot be made elsewhere and only a mug would turn it down.

Also, and some of you will never understand this, the general public is not even alightly interested
About the undercard, it's the main event that sells

[Finn]

PPV doesnt kill boxing, poor quality main events with little or no undercard on PPV kills boxing. If an event cant get over say 300,000 buys it shouldnt be ppv imo. Khan v Duddey was an example where i just thought what a crock that is by no means a super fight (gets 50,000 buys) that should have been on my sky subscription as a normal fight. Froch v Kessler II i have no issue with being PPV, id rather it wasnt but it has a genuine claim. Hatton v senchenko fair enough.

Oh dear, oh dear. Where did you pull that 300,000 number from? Your arse?

300,000 is a great number for a PPV event in the USA, never mind UK.

300,000 X £15 = £4.5 million.

That's very, very nice money which cannot be made elsewhere and only a mug would turn it down.

Also, and some of you will never understand this, the general public is not even alightly interested
About the undercard, it's the main event that sells

Of course i agree i plucked the number out of thin air but im talking from a viewer standpoint rather than a business one, if its not a superfight that everyones dying to see i should be getting on my normal sky sports subscription other wise what am i paying for, ppv should be reserved for big big fights not a world champ having a keep warm fight (ultimately this is the reason PPV was withdrawn). Thats the reason i ditched sky and went to virgin and got allegedly. Also sky dont even get the decent US stuff anymore anything i want to watch allegedly gets or sky dont bother with.

The Undercard may not be the thing people are interested in but it doesnt help boxing when boxing isnt showcased on a big outlet and the main event is a flop.

[leforge]

Of course i agree i plucked the number out of thin air but im talking from a viewer standpoint rather than a business one, if its not a superfight that everyones dying to see i should be getting on my normal sky sports subscription other wise what am i paying for, ppv should be reserved for big big fights not a world champ having a keep warm fight (ultimately this is the reason PPV was withdrawn). Thats the reason i ditched sky and went to virgin and got allegedly. Also sky dont even get the decent US stuff anymore anything i want to watch Allegedly channel gets or sky dont bother with.

The Undercard may not be the thing people are interested in but it doesnt help boxing when boxing isnt showcased on a big outlet and the main event is a flop.[/quote]
Do you know the reason they do not get USA shows as no one watches them the viewing figures were very poor. They dont cost much to buy but boxing not a main priority for them.

[stujones]

Regarding the Haye vs Chisora figures - how many figures are counted for the empty seats in the cinema at £12 a pop.... are they going on individual sales of cinema tickets or saying cinema = 100 people.

With it being sold to many UK cinema's nationwide then if the later then 250,000 is low.