BoxRec

mickey1975 wrote:It's best they don't market Carl. He is very unlikeable.

Didn't you know? He is a 'Massive International Superstar'.

He is a massive something alright!

Jack B wrote:

palooka wrote: I honestly didn't realise that Froch hadn't boxed on channel 5 ; I remember him boxing Damon Haigh, Dodson etc on TV before the SKY days and also remember watching the Taylor bout on television.

Eddie has done well with the hand he has been dealt but to not recognise a very lucky hand is in itself disingenuous, if Brook v Matthew Hatton is the best example of promotional brilliance by team Hearn then I'll not be hoping for a great deal now that the new 2 year SKY deal has been announced.

It wasn't the best example - it was the first example. Froch-Bute better for you? Getting an established champion, who could have made a ton more money fighting in North America, to come to his challenger's backyard, was a great effort. In my opinion, it's the best bit of promotional business at major title level in the UK since Hatton-Tszyu. It is not just luck. As I said, though, he was also fortunate that FW left Sky when he did.

Froch-Hague was aired on BBC - not sure if it was live or next day highlights. Froch-Dodson was on Sky. There was 100% no live UK TV coverage of Froch-Taylor. ITV showed highlights.

Yeah it was internet only PPV - with ITV showing the full fight on a delayed basis.

ITV also showed Dirrel on a delayed basis in full.

Now, I am not sure if we can blame Hennessy or Froch himself, but after he won the title from Pascal - Froch basically went to another level beyond ITV's budget.... now was Hennessy/Froch demanding too much or was it an issue with US TV I am not sure.... but basically Froch's next fight was in the states so was always going to be a hard sell to a commercial TV station.

Then came the super 6 and in essence Froch was no longer a hennessy fighter as he was tided up with showtime.

I guess ITV were stabbed in the back somewhat with Hatton leaving Warren when he did (Hatton was just world champion, and Warren had just signed to ITV).... probably weren't prepared to get stabbed again.

Just changing tack slightly, do you think a commercial free-to-air TV broadcaster, i.e. ITV, could ever set up a PPV model? Would it be allowed? Not saying they would ever have the interest, but hypothetically, it could be a good business model. They sign the top fighters as youngsters (such as Khan), put them on for free when they're developing, then stick 'em on PPV when they reach world-title/big money level.

Currently, terrestrial broadcasters obviously can't compete with pay TV (like all sports), but it must make a station like Channel 5, for example, feel hesitant about investing in a young prospect, such as Fury, just to see him go elsewhere when the really big fights happen.

I think allegedly have to start covering more other promotions.
Hearns let's he's boys box on other promoters shows to get them out but I wonder what obligation he is down to for his contracted fighters to only feature on sky??

Currently, terrestrial broadcasters obviously can't compete with pay TV (like all sports), but it must make a station like Channel 5, for example, feel hesitant about investing in a young prospect, such as Fury, just to see him go elsewhere when the really big fights happen.[/quote]

Fair point, I presume they go into it with their eyes open and try to enjoy it for as long as they can, knowing sooner or later the fighters will be "off". It is, at the end of the day, only Channel 5, they have their level and might be happy enough getting 15 or so fights from somebody like Eubank jnr, up to British / Commonwealth / European level, accepting that they simply don't pay the promoter enough to retain the fighter at world level. I would expect a certain amount of pragmatism on the part of the TV company and they're hopefully happy to get what they get. One Fury has made the jump to Sky/PPV, and another Fury is now part of the TV coverage on C5.

hurlock wrote:I think Allegedly Channel have to start covering more other promotions.
Hearns let's he's boys box on other promoters shows to get them out but I wonder what obligation he is down to for his contracted fighters to only feature on sky??

Well Ryder never the other week.

Jack B wrote:Just changing tack slightly, do you think a commercial free-to-air TV broadcaster, i.e. ITV, could ever set up a PPV model? Would it be allowed? Not saying they would ever have the interest, but hypothetically, it could be a good business model. They sign the top fighters as youngsters (such as Khan), put them on for free when they're developing, then stick 'em on PPV when they reach world-title/big money level.

Currently, terrestrial broadcasters obviously can't compete with pay TV (like all sports), but it must make a station like Channel 5, for example, feel hesitant about investing in a young prospect, such as Fury, just to see him go elsewhere when the really big fights happen.

This in theory was supposed to be the beauty of the Channel 5 contract. Primetime essentially comes under the same umbrella as channel 5 and I assume in the long term it was expected that if Fury somehow did become PPV in his own right they actually have the platform to promote him as such.

Time will tell if the pursue this option. I could imagine a free to air undercard of Degale and Eubank and a hypothetical Fury as world heavyweight champion on Primetime PPV.

People slating Hennessey are being harsh on him. He was pushed out by Sky and ITV. He had potentially the best stable in the country at one time with Froch, Murray, Barker, Fury, Purdy. 80% of the run of fights Froch is on is due to Hennessey Murray and Barker were on the verge of world titles in mandatory position with the WBC.

mickey1975 wrote:

hurlock wrote:I think Allegedly Channel have to start covering more other promotions.
Hearns let's he's boys box on other promoters shows to get them out but I wonder what obligation he is down to for his contracted fighters to only feature on sky??

Well Ryder never the other week.

True I wonder if the same goes for there champions??

Eddie gets his man. Again.

Final round wrote:Eddie gets his man. Again.

Eddie 'The Mounty' Hearn

hurlock wrote:I think Allegedly Channel have to start covering more other promotions.
Hearns let's he's boys box on other promoters shows to get them out but I wonder what obligation he is down to for his contracted fighters to only feature on sky??

Well he has said in his latest Q and A on iFilm that his marquee fighters (so lets call it Froch, Burns, Barker and Quigg) would not fight on a rival British promoters show. It is going to be the same with other British promoters too. I am sure they are all willing to let certain fighters box on their biggest rivals bill/tv broadcaster but it's obviously not going to be the case with their best names.

This has got to be a kick in the guts to FW haha .... Ps all rights to this pic go to BS and all that good stuff.

palooka wrote:

Final round wrote:Eddie gets his man. Again.

Eddie 'The Mounty' Hearn

Yes, he's the Mr Benn of boxing.

columbo wrote: This has got to be a kick in the guts to FW haha .... Ps all rights to this pic go to BS and all that good stuff.

Good pic and you opnly put the 'ha ha' in there because people were calling you pro Warren. I imagine that if things don't go entirely Mr Hearns way he'll wear a different look.

Earn with Hearn !!

Get declined from the bank with frank ha!!

He may well be better with Eddie but I can guarantee that contract won't be that easy to get put of.. From what I have heard the fight v Sykes is approved by the BBofBC for December on Warrens show so looks like he won't be able to hold onto the British Title. In Saying that he took Bucklands place very high on the World Ranking so the title will probably mean nothing!! I think he will be stripped and it will be Sykes v someone else..

palooka wrote:

columbo wrote: This has got to be a kick in the guts to FW haha .... Ps all rights to this pic go to BS and all that good stuff.

Good pic and you opnly put the 'ha ha' in there because people were calling you pro Warren. I imagine that if things don't go entirely Mr Hearns way he'll wear a different look.

Damn, you saw through my elaborate plan to conceal my deep love for FW that noone had noticed on here before... ..... I think I should retire the Columbo moniker and you take it over.

It was the 'haha' that gave it away; you'll have plenty of time to think about it - just one more thing ....

columbo wrote: This has got to be a kick in the guts to FW haha .... Ps all rights to this pic go to BS and all that good stuff.

Why is hearns wearing police boots???

& swifty seems to have retro boxing gloves on his feet?

hurlock wrote:

columbo wrote: This has got to be a kick in the guts to FW haha .... Ps all rights to this pic go to BS and all that good stuff.

Why is hearns wearing police boots???

& swifty seems to have retro boxing gloves on his feet?

His pants don't fit.

Eddy everet !!
In the best possible taste!! Ol