PPV - A failed venture?
Re: PPV - A failed venture?
Agree. Whoever decided that McDonnell should be chief support got it badly wrong
Re: PPV - A failed venture?
pyenest77 wrote:Agree. Whoever decided that McDonnell should be chief support got it badly wrong
this is true, the guy is a guaranteed bore. i thought burton v shinkin was going to be the main support as that looked highly likely to be a great fight (it was) but then they stuck it on first on tv on the freeview bit just to draw punters in - superb business tactic i suppose, but wish they had spared us mcdonnell. i paid for a ticket to watch kell brook last time and ended up watching mcdonell boring everyone to death and then eubank blasting some hapless tool out. i cant take any more of him.
-
Boxerbeetle
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 32968
- Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 10:59
Re: PPV - A failed venture?
At least the next Brook fight is being advertised as Sky Sports 1 rather than Sky Box Office. Although it would have been pretty hilarious if they tried to sell us that one.
Re: PPV - A failed venture?
I've not paid for a PPV in years. If everyone stops buying the PPVs. Then they would cease to exist. Simply really.
Re: PPV - A failed venture?
Never realised the Burton v shinkwin fight was freeview to up the buy rate.veriton wrote:pyenest77 wrote:Agree. Whoever decided that McDonnell should be chief support got it badly wrong
this is true, the guy is a guaranteed bore. i thought burton v shinkin was going to be the main support as that looked highly likely to be a great fight (it was) but then they stuck it on first on tv on the freeview bit just to draw punters in - superb business tactic i suppose, but wish they had spared us mcdonnell. i paid for a ticket to watch kell brook last time and ended up watching mcdonell boring everyone to death and then eubank blasting some hapless tool out. i cant take any more of him.