Was it worth £26.95?

stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27504
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Was it worth £26.95?

Post by stujones »

Spud wrote: 23 Aug 2022, 14:35
tony1234 wrote: 23 Aug 2022, 14:25 It was £27.95 for HD, I paid and enjoyed it but it wasn't worth 28 quid but they have you by the bollocks
Unexpectedly I thoroughly enjoyed the main event and was astonished at AJs behaviour afterwards.

I didn’t pay for the show … instead went round my son’s house.

I worry what cost Usyk v Fury will be
Usyk vs Fury cost should be around the same as this one - Its not the "Battle of Britain" that Fury vs Joshua was going to be - until Usyk messed it up. I would say Fury and AJ are on the same level in terms of British fame, so cannot see why people are saying £40 or £50 for it. It will be less that £30, if it is more then it only shows how much Warren et al have overspent on Fury.

Anything above £30 it is just a pure gamble PPV much like putting Parker and Joyce as a PPV fight.

I'm getting fed up though of the "cost a rounds of drinks" line that supporters of the price hike now use. We already do the "round of drinks" with regular Sky Sports / BT / Dazn.
peter barlow
Middleweight
Posts: 1397
Joined: 05 Aug 2014, 13:10

Re: Was it worth £26.95?

Post by peter barlow »

Considering how it all played out yes it was. Although the coverage from Sky was the worst I recall for a PPV, really low effort and quality stuff.

Will I pay for Eubank Benn or Parker Joyce? Absolutely not. It will likely be firestick or pub for me. Not sure if Canelo GGG is free here but even if it was I wouldn't stay up. Will probably watch a repeat of it.

Undercards on PPVs are very poor now too.
cormack
Super Featherweight
Posts: 2965
Joined: 30 May 2019, 07:13

Re: Was it worth £26.95?

Post by cormack »

I didnt buy it but watched it live via another option .
Had i paid that much I would have been left thinking if it was money well spent .
add to that aj`s pathetic behaviour and the answer would be no .
Post Reply