Uppercut magazine

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 23 Mar 2007, 11:38

Anybody remember the very short-lived Uppercut magazine from a couple of years ago?

And does anybody know any of the people who were involved? Do they post here?

states · Post by **states** » 23 Mar 2007, 11:53

I believe James McDonnell and Ian McNeilly, who both post here, were involved. I think they're still quite bitter about the whole thing as well......

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 23 Mar 2007, 11:55

I've still got the first two issues, and the mag wasn't bad. Whatever became of it?

JC · Post by JC » 23 Mar 2007, 12:32

I think I remember James saying they had a problem with the distributor publisher, can't remember which.

What I though was quite good about Uppercut was that as a monthly mag it was based far more around features than fight reports. I think boxing monthly focus way too much on fight reports which makes the magazine out of date pretty fast. If you want fight reports you just buy a weekly mag like boxing news, a monthly publication should more be about features and interviews.

kevo · Post by **kevo** » 23 Mar 2007, 13:20

I bought a copy, think it was the second one (had Danny Williams on the cover). I thought it was a good read, gutted when it was taken off the shelves.

Probably a good thing actually, as it would have just added to my ever growing collection of Ring magazines and Boxing News. I just can't throw them out!!

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 23 Mar 2007, 17:45

That's true

I just can't bring myself to throw a boxing magazine away, or for that matter walk past one in a shop!

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 23 Mar 2007, 21:22

Just back from Notts and did a little piece for the local paper, thought I'd have a look on my favourite forum before I put my head on the pillow...

A shitload of graft went into the copy for that mag and it was good. I don't give a monkey's what anyone says about other aspects of it, but the writing was good.

What we didn't realise at the time (or maybe were too blind to see) was that the 'entrepreneur' behind it was both useless and incredibly unstable. That was the only reason it went wrong.

Not really bitter anymore...but the two grand I'm owed would be nice.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 24 Mar 2007, 07:29

I brought the Danny Williams covered one. It was good and Steve Holdsworth i think wrote an article for it. Shame it went pear shaped

Wales · Post by **Wales** » 24 Mar 2007, 19:25

I bought one at the hatton... errm.. vilches (was it?) fight and tried to subscibe... all went tits up though. Werent Smiths supposed to stock them as I remember contacting James to say I'd been to about 6 WH Smiths and none had them!

Sorry to open old wounds!

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 24 Mar 2007, 19:36

Didn`t BN take the piss out of it when they had Calzaghe on the cover...because sicknote had cancelled....again

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 24 Mar 2007, 20:08

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Just back from Notts and did a little piece for the local paper, thought I'd have a look on my favourite forum before I put my head on the pillow...

A shitload of graft went into the copy for that mag and it was good. I don't give a monkey's what anyone says about other aspects of it, but the writing was good.

What we didn't realise at the time (or maybe were too blind to see) was that the 'entrepreneur' behind it was both useless and incredibly unstable. That was the only reason it went wrong.

Not really bitter anymore...but the two grand I'm owed would be nice.

Tip my hat to you for having a go, I liked the articles in Uppercut, they were in depth and detailed, but after BN and BM was there really a UK market for another boxing Journal? I Dont think so.

Just look at the US. I used to buy KO, Ring, World Boxing, and boxing Illustrated.

There are only one or two of those left, and they publish bi-monthly.

I only buy BN now. Because its weekly its more up to date. And Claudes work is first class. Also guys like Steve and Tony Connolly and Jack Hirsch are excellent. Old timers is good, too.

Apart from that I get all the news from the internet. Mainly this forum

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 25 Mar 2007, 05:55

KO Artist wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Just back from Notts and did a little piece for the local paper, thought I'd have a look on my favourite forum before I put my head on the pillow...

A shitload of graft went into the copy for that mag and it was good. I don't give a monkey's what anyone says about other aspects of it, but the writing was good.

What we didn't realise at the time (or maybe were too blind to see) was that the 'entrepreneur' behind it was both useless and incredibly unstable. That was the only reason it went wrong.

Not really bitter anymore...but the two grand I'm owed would be nice.
Tip my hat to you for having a go, I liked the articles in Uppercut, they were in depth and detailed, but after BN and BM was there really a UK market for another boxing Journal? I Dont think so.

Just look at the US. I used to buy KO, Ring, World Boxing, and boxing Illustrated.

There are only one or two of those left, and they publish bi-monthly.

I only buy BN now. Because its weekly its more up to date. And Claudes work is first class. Also guys like Steve and Tony Connolly and Jack Hirsch are excellent. Old timers is good, too.

Apart from that I get all the news from the internet. Mainly this forum

It's fair comment, KOA.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 25 Mar 2007, 06:23

On the subject of Boxng magazines, has Boxing Monthly lost it's way a touch of late? I only ask because this month 7 pages were dedicated to the Khan report and about 4 or 5 to a story on a UFC fighter called Michael Bisping who has minimal connections to Boxing. Don't get me wrong the article was as always well written and i throughly enjoyed the other recent pieces on Boxing/UFC against one another in previous Bm's and Bn's! but a couple of lengthy articles last month maybe smacked a little of desperation. I suppose the cancellation of Briggs-Ibragimov after a big preview didn't help their cause either.

I would prefer Boxing Monthly to explore the oft neglected European and Asian Boxing scene before it delves into UFC. Any thoughts?

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 25 Mar 2007, 08:15

I have noticed that BM seems to be focusing much more on the British scene more than they used to. This is not a knock on the likes of Ian, whose work is as always top draw and must be delighted with the decision. However, I would like to read articles on some US/European prospect who I am not familiar with as opposed to British fighters who I am familiar with.

I wonder if US sales have tumbled in recent months?

I have to say I was a bit surprised to see the likes of Matt Skelton and Jamie Moore (not disrespect to them or Ian who wrote the piece) on the front cover.

On a similar, if a slighty differing route - I have noticed that Sky TV seems to be focusing on showing bits of more of the undercard, as opposed to showing the chief support in full. I have to say, I was dissapointed that they cut rounds of Pickering vs Callaghan - especially as they had been advertising it as a "joint main event" for a few weeks. Similarly, with the Froch quick finish - it was plenty of opportunity to show Elwell vs O Donnell in full. But again, decided on focusing on other fights (in this case though it was a good one between Gethin and Booth).

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 25 Mar 2007, 15:02

stujones wrote:I have noticed that BM seems to be focusing much more on the British scene more than they used to. This is not a knock on the likes of Ian, whose work is as always top draw and must be delighted with the decision. However, I would like to read articles on some US/European prospect who I am not familiar with as opposed to British fighters who I am familiar with.

I wonder if US sales have tumbled in recent months?

I have to say I was a bit surprised to see the likes of Matt Skelton and Jamie Moore (not disrespect to them or Ian who wrote the piece) on the front cover.

Understandable points, Stu, but the magazine is for a wider audience than the likes of me and thee.

It has to attract punters who don't follow the scene that much as well as those who are anoraks.

The article about the British boxers who might break into world class in 2007 was exactly for international fans and Brits who just dip in occasionally.

You've got the likes of Graham Houston giving you the low down on US fighters we might not have seen much of.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 25 Mar 2007, 20:29

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
stujones wrote:I have noticed that BM seems to be focusing much more on the British scene more than they used to. This is not a knock on the likes of Ian, whose work is as always top draw and must be delighted with the decision. However, I would like to read articles on some US/European prospect who I am not familiar with as opposed to British fighters who I am familiar with.

I wonder if US sales have tumbled in recent months?

I have to say I was a bit surprised to see the likes of Matt Skelton and Jamie Moore (not disrespect to them or Ian who wrote the piece) on the front cover.
Understandable points, Stu, but the magazine is for a wider audience than the likes of me and thee.

It has to attract punters who don't follow the scene that much as well as those who are anoraks.

The article about the British boxers who might break into world class in 2007 was exactly for international fans and Brits who just dip in occasionally.

You've got the likes of Graham Houston giving you the low down on US fighters we might not have seen much of.

Oh yeah, fair points - it wasn't intended to be a knock.

I do disagree a little about the magazine being for a much wider audience than the hardcore that are on here. I mean, I have an interest in most sports do I subscribe to any other magazine - nope. My mates have a passing interest in boxing and watch (or tape when they are out) all the "free" boxing on ITV 1/4 - a bet you they couldn't even name one boxing magazine (or even think one exists).

Likewise, my mate runs for Wales and hopefully will make the next Commonwealth games squad- I have a fairly big interest in athletics and often socialise with his mates - do I subscribe to Athletics weekly? No.

Now, I have been pretty much obsessed with the boxing since the McGuigan, Bruno days - what attracted me to my first purchase of Boxing Monthly. A picture of Tyson on the cover when he was about to launch his comeback. Indeed, I can remember in the old readers corner a reading asking Glyn Leach why does the magazine focus on using the likes of Bowe, Lewis, Tyson as their cover stars - and Leach's response was the likes of Oyebola, Welch and even geniune up and comers (at the time) like Hamed wouldn't attract the wider audience - the "who is he, I'm not interested" arguement. Leach also stated that while us Brits would probably still pick up the mag in similar numbers if the likes of Eubank was on the cover, the American market would significantly lessen - thats why it is usually the Heavyweight or usually the fighters the American public is familiar with.

So when I saw that cover, I immediately thought of Leach's old viewpoint and did wonder why it had changed. No disrespect, but I cannot see many Americans picking up the mag - maybe I'm wrong, I'm sure you'll have access to the numbers.

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 26 Mar 2007, 08:57

Of course the vast majority of the readership each month (and week, for BN) is the loyal, knowledgeable reader. They will buy the mag regardless of what is on the cover. Those sales can be banked. So the mag must then try to increase "impulse" purchases. There may not be so many, but there will be some. For example, the casual fan who's decided to get Ricky Hatton in on PPV, or is going to a Calzaghe fight at the weekend. Not because he's a hardcore fan, but because he watched the big fights, just as a casual football fan will watch the World Cup and not much else. It's these types of buyers that the cover must attract.

Let's say he's just browsing WH Smith to kill time. He's ordered the Hatton fight and got the beers in and the lads are coming over. BN or BM has Ivan Calderon or Chris John or even Mikkel Kessler on the front, he's gonna walk straight past it without so much as a glace. But they put Hatton on the cover, he might just decide to get the mag as a "supplement" to his viewing. And who knows, if he likes what he sees, he might just buy it again in future.

So that's how covers work. Obviously there are any more important things than Big Brother or Britney Spears shaving her head, but newspapers put them on their front covers because they know these stories will generate more sales. Same principle in magazines.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 26 Mar 2007, 09:21

Absolutely Oliver, I worked in a newsagents part time and I know the type of cover that sells the papers - thats why I was a little bit surprised that the prospects made the front cover.

Floyd · Post by **Floyd** » 26 Mar 2007, 14:53

[quote="stujones"]I have noticed that BM seems to be focusing much more on the British scene more than they used to. This is not a knock on the likes of Ian, whose work is as always top draw and must be delighted with the decision. However, I would like to read articles on some US/European prospect who I am not familiar with as opposed to British fighters who I am familiar with.

I wonder if US sales have tumbled in recent months?

I'm a bit surprised to hear you think it is focusing more on the British scene. I myself the past few years have felt the opposite. Ever since Farhood came onboard on felt they have gone less British. Because of this I don't buy it religiously like I used to.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 27 Mar 2007, 05:01

Just got back from Egypt to find this little nugget waiting for me.....two words sum up the experience 'The horror'

As Ian said, there was one hell of a lot of graft went into an enterprise which unbeknownst to us was doomed to failure.

It is doubtful whether there was room for another boxing magazine in the marketplace. It's a niche market anyway, and magazine publishing operates on the tightest of margins to stay afloat.

However, we had a bloody good do at it, and as Ian says, I'm proud of the content, if not other aspects of the handling of the magazine. There's nowt wrong with having a go, and that's all we did.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 27 Mar 2007, 05:03

tonyevs wrote:Didn`t BN take the piss out of it when they had Calzaghe on the cover...because sicknote had cancelled....again

Yes they did as I recall. However, as ours was a monthly magazine there was little we could have done as the pull out came after our deadline, which as I recall, was not that far in advance of publication anyway.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 27 Mar 2007, 06:05

i remember ian sent me a copy after everyone got rich after my admittedly god like tip.

good read! i do remember thinking how on earth it was going to make money though.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 27 Mar 2007, 06:33

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Just got back from Egypt to find this little nugget waiting for me.....

Did they show the Carl Froch fight in Egypt James? I hear he's huge over there...

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 27 Mar 2007, 07:18

Doubt it somehow mate.....I was actually back the night of the Froch fight, but me Freeview box has packed in, like every other bit of electrical equipment I get my hands on. Managed to blow the motherboard on my new PC, and two of the four channels on my amp have gone kaput too.