BoxRec

A quick, genuine story on how Mr 'Allegedly tends to work. I used to know this guy, a little guy who was a Childrens Entertainer / Magician (I was selling his house, at the time). Allegedly used to hire him for his kids parties etc. He told me that if he (Allegedly) was not happy with the performance, he simply would not pay. If you did a good job, he'd pay you well.

Funny how its ok for this stance to be applicable when it comes to him parting with his money but strangley, not when someone pays him for something. Told me all I needed to know.

bengulnaci1 wrote:A quick, genuine story on how Mr 'Allegedly tends to work. I used to know this guy, a little guy who was a Childrens Entertainer / Magician (I was selling his house, at the time). Allegedly used to hire him for his kids parties etc. He told me that if he (Allegedly) was not happy with the performance, he simply would not pay. If you did a good job, he'd pay you well.

Funny how its ok for this stance to be applicable when it comes to him parting with his money but strangley, not when someone pays him for something. Told me all I needed to know.

Yes but no ones making you pay for allegedly are they ?

And I don't believe that story, because if the guy didn't get paid just once what the hell did he go back for ?

jessi wrote:And I don't believe that story, because if the guy didn't get paid just once what the hell did he go back for ?

Whatever makes you sleep easier, fella. Believe it or not, up to you. I know it's true.

As for making me pay, I know I don't have to but the audacity to suggest that this guy is now the fans friend and this is a channel for the fans blah blah...its all about making money and having control. Taking his stable and in essence the sport, off Terrestial TV (9-15mill viewers) to SKY (150-350K viewers) to now allegedly (50-100K viewers) is not someone who is working in the interests of the sport or the fans.

If people want to sub, fair enough do it. Don't take some kind moral BS high ground. Quieten down, pay your sub and leave it at that.

bengulnaci1 wrote:

jessi wrote:And I don't believe that story, because if the guy didn't get paid just once what the hell did he go back for ?

Whatever makes you sleep easier, fella. Believe it or not, up to you. I know it's true.

As for making me pay, I know I don't have to but the audacity to suggest that this guy is now the fans friend and this is a channel for the fans blah blah...its all about making money and having control. Taking his stable and in essence the sport, off Terrestial TV (9-15mill viewers) to SKY (150-350K viewers) to now Allegedly channel (50-100K viewers) is not someone who is working in the interests of the sport or the fans.

If people want to sub, fair enough do it. Don't take some kind moral BS high ground. Quieten down, pay your sub and leave it at that.

Good points - I always found it bizarre that some posters would refer to Fwank as some kind of moral crusader because he made a small number of boxers very good sums of money and continually failed to grasp that it wasn't an altruistic step, purely a commercial one, as the more they earned, the more he obviously did as well.
As I said earlier, clearly a superb businessman, but not one who necessarily has the greater interests of the sport at the forefront of his mind ;;-)

I understand terrestrial tv makes Joe public take more notice of boxing, and I hope channel 5 continue there coverage, but fw has great boxers in his camp and what other choice do people have who want to watch them ? Of course I'm pissed it's a £10 instead of free, just like sky costs more then freeview, or a Porsche is more expensive to run then a ford !
Unfortunately its the way the worlds going and has been for decades !

I know there's a few fighters on boxrec who fight under w a r r e n and I understand if they don't want to comment, but are they happy to achieve there goals and get well paid on the new channel or do they wish more people knew of them by boxing on sky or terrestrial tv ?
Surely fame and glory go hand in hand, or do they believe if they keep winning and make it to the big fights in America the Great British Public will become aware of them soon anyway ?

It's not even the fact that people have to sub, for a tenner. I very easily could but I choose not to. Its like Deserter said, making this guy out to be some kind of boxing saviour, as if he is doing us, the fans, a favour. Both he and his team are more than happy to plug this line, 'for the fans....', 'dedicated boxing channel for dedicated fans....'. I'd like to think most of us can see past that. Make no mistake, if, after a few months, the figures don't stack up or worse yet, he is making losses, he will drop it like a stone.

Hence why people are being charged a 6 monthly sub fee. They want it to work, they want it make money quite quickly and then later on, it might snowball, subs fee's will go up, sub numbers might go up and then it can become a self sufficient cash machine. throw in some PPV's and you get the gist.

It's not important that boxing, in this country suffers and gets further alienated from the masses (I really do thank the lord for C5 and big Mick H), its a business, first and foremost. FW continues to do this to Boxing, pushes it further and further away from the masses for years, for his own gain. What happened with JC and the Millenium Stadium payments shows you where the priorities lie. It ain't with us, or the boxers.

That's what I can never support. Some people will strongly disagree (discounting boxingchat, jabandmove and probably Steve B). When I was a kid, I knew who Mike Tyson was, Nigel Benn, Frank Bruno, Chris Eubank, Don Curry, Mike McCallum, James Toney, Edwin Rosario, Hector Camacho, Ray Mancini, Rocky Lockeridge, JC Superstar, Azumah Nelson etc even my family and friends knew. I used to love Saturday's World of Sport with Dickie Davies and Sportsnight, as you used to get world class fighters and fights regularly.

PS I can genuinely respect anyone who wishes to sub to it as I have no axe to grind with anyone on that score. Just please relent from telling me how good this is 'for us'.

Boxing always gets huge terrestial viewing figures, so the market is there, it's always been there. What it takes is a willingness and some foresight on behalf of the TV Execs and the Promoter, as Mick H and C5 are proving. The profits will come in time.

This bastardisation of the sport has sickened me for years and still saddens me, even today.

I'd agree with everything you've written below generally but I think alot of people are a bit kind to Ch5, ITV, etc on what they produce. Lets be honest, the last time that one of the 'main' free to air channels took a real interest in boxing was 15 odd years ago. ITV bunged Froch/Pascal on ITV4 and gave it bollocks publicity. Ch5 have, I suspect, little interest in boxing, more personalities and when Fury gets beat I can see them dropping out pretty sharpish, they have no loyalty to the Sport, just advertsising figures. 456 is run for profit to, don't get me wrong, but if they start putting on a load of mince then subs payers will just cancel and tell them to naff off. That is quality control in itself. I'd love BBC, ITV, Ch5 to show a real long term 'buy'in to boxing but they won't, they hardly even show much Football which is an advertisers dream right now. One off personalities like Harrison, Khan and Fury might get a run on free to air TV for a period but it'll be flavor of the month stuff. A boxing channel can't do this as the consumer is only subbing for boxing. Muck up your boxing and you'll muck up your boxing, as FW will be well aware.

bengulnaci1 wrote:It's not even the fact that people have to sub, for a tenner. I very easily could but I choose not to. Its like Deserter said, making this guy out to be some kind of boxing saviour, as if he is doing us, the fans, a favour. Both he and his team are more than happy to plug this line, 'for the fans....', 'dedicated boxing channel for dedicated fans....'. I'd like to think most of us can see past that. Make no mistake, if, after a few months, the figures don't stack up or worse yet, he is making losses, he will drop it like a stone.

Hence why people are being charged a 6 monthly sub fee. They want it to work, they want it make money quite quickly and then later on, it might snowball, subs fee's will go up, sub numbers might go up and then it can become a self sufficient cash machine. throw in some PPV's and you get the gist.

It's not important that boxing, in this country suffers and gets further alienated from the masses (I really do thank the lord for C5 and big Mick H), its a business, first and foremost. FW continues to do this to Boxing, pushes it further and further away from the masses for years, for his own gain. What happened with JC and the Millenium Stadium payments shows you where the priorities lie. It ain't with us, or the boxers.

That's what I can never support. Some people will strongly disagree (discounting boxingchat, jabandmove and probably Steve B). When I was a kid, I knew who Mike Tyson was, Nigel Benn, Frank Bruno, Chris Eubank, Don Curry, Mike McCallum, James Toney, Edwin Rosario, Hector Camacho, Ray Mancini, Rocky Lockeridge, JC Superstar, Azumah Nelson etc even my family and friends knew. I used to love Saturday's World of Sport with Dickie Davies and Sportsnight, as you used to get world class fighters and fights regularly.

PS I can genuinely respect anyone who wishes to sub to it as I have no axe to grind with anyone on that score. Just please relent from telling me how good this is 'for us'.

Boxing always gets huge terrestial viewing figures, so the market is there, it's always been there. What it takes is a willingness and some foresight on behalf of the TV Execs and the Promoter, as Mick H and C5 are proving. The profits will come in time.

This bastardisation of the sport has sickened me for years and still saddens me, even today.

I bet this would be a lot less of a concern for the promoter and his fighters if Fury (now being followed by Eubank Jnr) wasn't getting several million viewers on terrestrial TV right now. Its hard to say that sort of thing is a thing of the past when its happening in 2011 and C5 seem to be getting behind Fury for the foreseeable future. What's several thousand or several tens of thousand, compared to 3.5m ? One year from now, Eubank Jnr could be more well known and recognisable than the entire allegedly stable put together. The counter argument would be purses/earning power, but will a dedicated boxing channel produce several millionnaires over the next few years, when the obscurity factor really does start to kick in ?

That said muck up your PR with your target market and muck up your business and Frankie W often seems to fail to grasp the nettle here. Who else could put on the best 3/4 shows in the UK in the last 15 months yet still be the most hated promoter in the UK???

So often he gets the boxing right and his own image painfully wrong, I've always felt he'd be better with a front man (one of the sons maybe?) for the public and doing what he does best behind the scenes. I.e. drop his spitful column would be a good start........

bengulnaci1 wrote:

jessi wrote:And I don't believe that story, because if the guy didn't get paid just once what the hell did he go back for ?

Whatever makes you sleep easier, fella. Believe it or not, up to you. I know it's true.

As for making me pay, I know I don't have to but the audacity to suggest that this guy is now the fans friend and this is a channel for the fans blah blah...its all about making money and having control. Taking his stable and in essence the sport, off Terrestial TV (9-15mill viewers) to SKY (150-350K viewers) to now Allegedly channel (50-100K viewers) is not someone who is working in the interests of the sport or the fans.

If people want to sub, fair enough do it. Don't take some kind moral BS high ground. Quieten down, pay your sub and leave it at that.

I think they be very happy with 50-100k in subscribers numbers!

JimJim2009 wrote:I bet this would be a lot less of a concern for the promoter and his fighters if Fury (now being followed by Eubank Jnr) wasn't getting several million viewers on terrestrial TV right now. Its hard to say that sort of thing is a thing of the past when its happening in 2011 and C5 seem to be getting behind Fury for the foreseeable future. What's several thousand or several tens of thousand, compared to 3.5m ? One year from now, Eubank Jnr could be more well known and recognisable than the entire Allegedly Channel stable put together. The counter argument would be purses/earning power, but will a dedicated boxing channel produce several millionnaires over the next few years, when the obscurity factor really does start to kick in ?

Obscurity Factor, is that the show that all the past X Factor winners will be appearing on?

leforge wrote:

bengulnaci1 wrote:

jessi wrote:And I don't believe that story, because if the guy didn't get paid just once what the hell did he go back for ?

Whatever makes you sleep easier, fella. Believe it or not, up to you. I know it's true.

As for making me pay, I know I don't have to but the audacity to suggest that this guy is now the fans friend and this is a channel for the fans blah blah...its all about making money and having control. Taking his stable and in essence the sport, off Terrestial TV (9-15mill viewers) to SKY (150-350K viewers) to now Allegedly channel (50-100K viewers) is not someone who is working in the interests of the sport or the fans.

If people want to sub, fair enough do it. Don't take some kind moral BS high ground. Quieten down, pay your sub and leave it at that.

I think they be very happy with 50-100k in subscribers numbers!

It's likely to be much closer to 50 than 50k!!

I accept that some of you won't pay for allegedly on principal, either due to it being a form of PPV (ish) or because of allegedly's involvement - and I've got no issue with this, it's a free country and I can see where your coming from to an extent on both issues.

However barring the above, what do people think the channel should be doing to make it work for both the punter and the businessmen behind it who want to make a profit (which is to be expected)? I.e. they want our £10 a month, realistically what do we want/demand in return?

For me they have got a number of things right so far namely:
1 - Bring Bunce's hour back. Like him or not it is good to have another boxing interview based programme alongside Ringside.
2 - Length of Cards. Good proportion of undercard shown, nice to see prosepcts given air time.
3 - International fights. Lots of cards we'd never have seen on TV over here otherwise, I do feel Sky have been lacking here for a while.
4 - Number of cards. Two or more per week. I think 8 cards is the minimum for a tenner a month and their exceeding this (at present)
5 - Team. Woodhall and Lillis are excellent, Bunce marmite but I'm a big fan. Rosenthal in is a good move and Andy Kerr has a decent background in boxing from Setanta. We haven't been subjected to a Sky news type 'talking head' figure thank the lord!

However there are a number of things they could improve on, many at minimal cost.
1 - Other promotors small hall shows. What's stopping them picking up Dave Coldwell's excellent bill this weekend? They have nothing else scheduled and it would not be overly costly. Cherry pick the good quality small hall shows.
2 - Cheap, interesting boxing events. Why not try to nab the Mainevent show from Premier. It's costs must be pennies and it would add to what they have. Even do it on a delayed basis is it clashes with shows. Queensbury boxing league. Again pennies and would be of mild interest.
3 - Make sure you have the minimum two shows a week promised. Only one scheduled this week and a potential superstar fighting in the States in Broner. If fights like this don't get shown on a boxing channel when nothing else is being shown at the time it would be concerning.
4 - Interaction with target audience. Why am I adding this thread and not one of Frank's employees. It's a specialist channel, therefore do not under any circumstances piss off your specialist market! Treat them like gods, have Bunce draw a couple of free tickets per show per week. Have a couple of fans (not pissed) comment on how they are seeing the main event going. Tie into a round scoring app and show how viewers are scoring a live broadcast. Have polls asking what fights viewers want to see (I.e. next for Burns? a) Murray, b) Mitchell, c) Marquez, d)Cook II ). Show cards of all the panalists for main events, etc
5 - Main event fights on UK cards must be 70/30 at least. 50/50 fights are fantasy stuff, but 70/30 fights happen all them time and often the 30% guy wins (Burns/Martinez, Webb/Arron, etc). Do not let main events become 90/10, 95/5 garbage.

Any other suggestions? What should they be doing to make undecided guys subscribe?

bengulnaci1 wrote:It's not even the fact that people have to sub, for a tenner. I very easily could but I choose not to. Its like Deserter said, making this guy out to be some kind of boxing saviour, as if he is doing us, the fans, a favour. Both he and his team are more than happy to plug this line, 'for the fans....', 'dedicated boxing channel for dedicated fans....'. I'd like to think most of us can see past that. Make no mistake, if, after a few months, the figures don't stack up or worse yet, he is making losses, he will drop it like a stone.

Hence why people are being charged a 6 monthly sub fee. They want it to work, they want it make money quite quickly and then later on, it might snowball, subs fee's will go up, sub numbers might go up and then it can become a self sufficient cash machine. throw in some PPV's and you get the gist.

It's not important that boxing, in this country suffers and gets further alienated from the masses (I really do thank the lord for C5 and big Mick H), its a business, first and foremost. FW continues to do this to Boxing, pushes it further and further away from the masses for years, for his own gain. What happened with JC and the Millenium Stadium payments shows you where the priorities lie. It ain't with us, or the boxers.

That's what I can never support. Some people will strongly disagree (discounting boxingchat, jabandmove and probably Steve B). When I was a kid, I knew who Mike Tyson was, Nigel Benn, Frank Bruno, Chris Eubank, Don Curry, Mike McCallum, James Toney, Edwin Rosario, Hector Camacho, Ray Mancini, Rocky Lockeridge, JC Superstar, Azumah Nelson etc even my family and friends knew. I used to love Saturday's World of Sport with Dickie Davies and Sportsnight, as you used to get world class fighters and fights regularly.

PS I can genuinely respect anyone who wishes to sub to it as I have no axe to grind with anyone on that score. Just please relent from telling me how good this is 'for us'.

Boxing always gets huge terrestial viewing figures, so the market is there, it's always been there. What it takes is a willingness and some foresight on behalf of the TV Execs and the Promoter, as Mick H and C5 are proving. The profits will come in time.

This bastardisation of the sport has sickened me for years and still saddens me, even today.

Very good points.

The thing that is really holding me back is the future output. I can not argue with the quality since inception. In October there were 8 Broadcasts - 4 domestic (Walsh-Appleby, Cleverly-Bellew, Norton-Williams, Byrne-Horta), 2 European (Huck and Hernandez) and 2 US (Hopkins-Dawson and Donaire-Narvaez). Worth £10? Definitely, no question in my mind.

In November there will be 7 broadcasts - 4 domestic (Burns-Katsidis, McKenzie, Maccarinelli, Crolla-Limond), 1 European (Toney-Lebedev) and 2 US (Bute, Chavez Jnr). More of a struggle to justify being worth £10 as if asked to PPV any of these cards I'd only stump up for one.

In December, the schedule looks reasonable, although there are a number of uncertainties. Cotto-Margarito and Rios Murray is a fine card, if overnight, however there remains doubt over whether the fight will be sanctioned. There is Helenius-Chisora and Povetkin-US Tomato Can which is of some interest to me and the Echo card on 9th december feturing Groves, Degale and Saunders against unknown (at this time) or unheard of opponents. There is also Ormond v Johanneson. All told, £10 is justifiable if the Echo card is competitive and the NY card holds up.

But then what? There is likely to be no live action over xmas and into early January with the only card of interest currently scheduled during that period being the Cloud-Erdei, Ramos-Rigondeaux fights. I can't see any of Warrens big names (Burns, Cleverly, Degale, Groves, Chisora) being out before mid february at the earliest and the international scene looks pretty unexciting in the early part of 2012.

There remains uncertainty over how one goes about subscribing - will we be able to do it on a month by month basis, paying £10 a time or are we required to stump up for 6 months in advance? My concern with the latter is that the cash provided by those subscriptions won't be used to fund bills over the next 6 months but to pay for the fights that have already been broadcast and the ones to be broadcast in December. There have been a number of comments from FWP/BN employees along the lines of "look at what we've already broadcast, surely that's worth the money we deserve to be given". I'm able to chop and change my ESPN subscription to match the content that I want to watch - if there is no football of interest and the boxing is off season, I save £10 a month. If I could choose to buy BN for December but then opt out in January as I, the consumer, don't feel the content provides value at the time I am being asked to pay, then that would suit me. But to keep on insisting that we should pay ahead on the basis of what has already been provided fills me with doubt over the broadcasters and promoters confidence in the whole scheme.

earsjohn wrote:

leforge wrote:

bengulnaci1 wrote:Whatever makes you sleep easier, fella. Believe it or not, up to you. I know it's true.

As for making me pay, I know I don't have to but the audacity to suggest that this guy is now the fans friend and this is a channel for the fans blah blah...its all about making money and having control. Taking his stable and in essence the sport, off Terrestial TV (9-15mill viewers) to SKY (150-350K viewers) to now Allegedly channel (50-100K viewers) is not someone who is working in the interests of the sport or the fans.

If people want to sub, fair enough do it. Don't take some kind moral BS high ground. Quieten down, pay your sub and leave it at that.

I think they be very happy with 50-100k in subscribers numbers!

It's likely to be much closer to 50 than 50k!!

Where next after this if this doesn't work? Private parties at the warren household?

Very good post and I agree with most of that.

The main thing is a consistency of competitive fight cards - this is what Sky failed to do pre-Smith. But last year the quality of domestic boxing on Sky was first class. This is the highest priority for allegedly - a good consistency of fight cards each week.

I think FW or Queensbury should be running more shows around the country too - so that the channel is representing a good geographical spread of their target market. Belfast is screaming out for more shows - there has been a few shows cancelled this year, plus I would expect Burns to be building his support headlining Scottish shows and the same with Cleverley with shows in Wales.

It is a boxing channel so you would expect more content during the week even on a Sunday morning - such as a Sunday Supplement Show. I would love to watch on a Sunday morning, after a weekend of good boxing and tune into a few seasoned writers, trainers, ex-fighters discussing the weekends fights or if the fights were not particularly interesting talking points - mix up the theme with topical discussions like scoring fights, making weight, matchmaking, building a prospect etc....

Other programme content could be a mix of top boxing writers i.e. Don McRae, Graham Houston, Colin Hart, Bob Mee et al dissecting and reviewing new and classic boxing books or debating their lists of 'top fights over the past twenty years', top British and Irish fighters over the past decade, top ten current prospects, anecdotes/gym stories - views on the top trainers etc... This type of content would be great during the week.

Saying that I think allegedly have made a great start, most of the cards have been very good, the Bunces Hour is great and I have been impressed with all of their pundits and commentators - so plenty to build on.

Transparency - A good idea of what is planned over the next 6-8 weeks. Pull outs and injuries happen - that's not a problem, but I want to know what you are planning to give me for my money.

HD - I paid a lot of money for a spangly TV. Everything I watch now is on a HD channel. It hurts my eyes to watch in SD. Your FAQs say you have no plans to introduce the service. Surely you can upgrade this to "we're looking into it" even if you aren't.

Customer Relations - Treat me like an intelligent adult who has the ability to make my own decisions. Don't tell me that because Walsh-Appleby was a great fight that you deserve £10 a month from me.

Less Warren - He does great things for his promotional group and has put on some great fights over many years, but seeing his gurning mug ringside for every broadcast really distracts me.

Don't balls up the ending - Twice big overnight fights have had their recordings chopped at crucial points. A huge part of your USP is the provision of overseas content so don't negate the goodwill this creates by arsing it up. It's a simple technical solution. Once can be treated as teething problems, twice as a forgivable error. Three times is not a charm.

Rein in Bunce - Steves enthusiasm has to be nurtured but it also needs to be controlled. Make the Bunce show more professional and bring in Sideshow Kerr. The show has a lot of good content, but I'm distracted by the plasticcy feel of the production.

Quality Control - Just lumping on every undercard fight does not always make good TV. Could the broadcast not be rejigged so that you have the most interesting fights live with the filler undercard fights shown, as live, after the broadcast? There needs to be a balance, and occasionally less is more.

Richard Keys - Give the man a seat. He seems strangely proportioned, with a giant head and squat body and for me he simply doesn't look right standing up. Give him a seat, and maybe a coffee table. That would also help with number 6 above as arm flapping will be reduced.

Good points, many things I think the company could do at minimal cost. Most points so far seem to either come under sprucing things they currently do up a bit (give Bunce an Andy Kerr, etc for his boxing hour, get scheduling a bit clearer, polish sets, etc) and low budget additions - the idea of a Sunday supplement on the weekends actions/hot topics is excellent. Maybe Sunday tea time when the dust has settled? That leaves the Bunce boxing hour for what it does best, interviews and Steve's general take on things.

I'm pretty happy with the channel for it being less than two months old but I want to see it progressing. The xmas period which Sky traditionally take off for 4/5 weeks will be a huge challange - they must keep showing live shows during this period, not just repeats. I can live with it being international stuff. I'd love to see an hour long programme in the style of Boxing Monthly's new article where they get three writers to give their views on an issue (Pacman/Marquez fight this month). Steve Bunce, Glyn Leach and Tris Dixon debating a major topic - Ref's bad decisions, bad scoring, next years British world title hopefuls, etc.

One thing I hope they do is give Bunce free reign to talk to Sky, Premier, Ch5 fighters. He's always up for talking to everyone so don't tie his hands behind his back. To the knowledgeable fan it's obvious and will make it look like everything on 456 is a allegedly PR stunt - likely to half viewers!!!!

How bout Bunce interviewing Frank Maloney on his life in boxing for an hour - there is loads of cheap to make, interesting stuff they can do

I'm sure a rival Promotor would love to appear on his channel and give a one hour interview

MachoMan09 wrote:he's now reached the point where nobody is interested other than a few dirty perverts who'll pick her up down a back alley from a pimp content to squeeze the last few pennies she can bring in before she's literally had the life fucked out of her.

You must have nicked that one off KG, surely.

Jeff Thomas wrote:Where next after this if this doesn't work? Private parties at the warren household?

Back to Sky with his tail between his legs??

Tris has just tweeted that Virgin viewers will be able to get 456 from 1 December, that's a big boost to subscriber base potential

I reckon allegedly will get good subcribers but has to be the main hardcore boxing fans

Boxers will recognise allegedly will never get the viewing figs that SKY or C5 get ever, period

I reckon allegedly will be around for a year or so like setanta then go