Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Scottrf
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1146
Joined: 30 Nov 2010, 05:43

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Scottrf »

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Can't see that. What's the alternative? Don't fight and get f**k all? I believe McCloskey was guaranteed 200k. But, granted, that might have been off the back of PPV. In saying that, I do think tickets should sell well and this will generate significant revenue.
Maybe I'm being cynical but injuries seem to be contagious atm. Smaller purse with the same risk, McCloskey didn't seem to want to risk his 0 for a small amount originally. That said, I don't know what was finally decided on in terms of guarantees and splits.

Still think it will happen, but not like it would be without precedent if it didn't.
boxingchat
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1934
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 05:26

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by boxingchat »

Amir will get a twinge on his long suffering back any time soon.
earsjohn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1691
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 14:34

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by earsjohn »

Front cover of this weeks Boxing News....

Amir Khan "Why I'm a Box-Office Star"

Oops
King Tubby
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6306
Joined: 16 Nov 2007, 06:52

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by King Tubby »

Would people have been booking it already, or do most buys happen in the last few days?
freddydoesdallas
Cruiserweight
Posts: 9436
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 13:48

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by freddydoesdallas »

King Tubby wrote:Would people have been booking it already, or do most buys happen in the last few days?
You would hope that most people would buy on the day. I'm guessing a credit will appear on your account if you've already paid rather than a full refund
dondada
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8872
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 10:55

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by dondada »

MachoMan09 wrote:They had no alternative but to ditch the PPV. It wasn't going to sell. .
Not true though, is it? They could have pushed ahead with it and taken what revenue it brought in.
Asterix
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7128
Joined: 02 Nov 2007, 10:42

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Asterix »

They did this because they couldn't manage to get an attractive undercard together, right? I'm thinking of the Macklin and Fury fights not coming to fruition. I don't think that necessarily warrants praise for Sky or Adam Smith.
Poncey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7525
Joined: 21 May 2007, 07:48

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Poncey »

Asterix wrote:They did this because they couldn't manage to get an attractive undercard together, right? I'm thinking of the Macklin and Fury fights not coming to fruition. I don't think that necessarily warrants praise for Sky or Adam Smith.
They could've easily still kept it PPV as this isn't the first time a Promoter has had to change the second and third fights. But this is the first time I can remember Sky changing it to a non-PPV event.
King Tubby
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6306
Joined: 16 Nov 2007, 06:52

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by King Tubby »

freddydoesdallas wrote:
King Tubby wrote:Would people have been booking it already, or do most buys happen in the last few days?
You would hope that most people would buy on the day. I'm guessing a credit will appear on your account if you've already paid rather than a full refund
So it's too early for Sky to judge how the sales were going?
Josh1111
Cruiserweight
Posts: 874
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 05:50

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Josh1111 »

Asterix wrote:They did this because they couldn't manage to get an attractive undercard together, right? I'm thinking of the Macklin and Fury fights not coming to fruition. I don't think that necessarily warrants praise for Sky or Adam Smith.
Dont be so miserable, Sky still had to make the final decision
JonRobo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 53
Joined: 14 Nov 2009, 05:40

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by JonRobo »

just an idea for ppv evernts in future this is wha id like to see before sky go live with the fights how abour 30 min follow of both fighters training to fight for the main event ? like a mini hbo 24/7? but only do these on ppv events as i think everyone would be intrested to see them train,

1 X world tittle fight
2 x british or comentwealth fights
a fight or 2 between fights as floaters

id pay 14.99 for the event then but untill then im using the tinternet
slapbangwhallop
Cruiserweight
Posts: 2031
Joined: 13 Dec 2010, 08:27

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by slapbangwhallop »

King Tubby wrote:
freddydoesdallas wrote:
King Tubby wrote:Would people have been booking it already, or do most buys happen in the last few days?
You would hope that most people would buy on the day. I'm guessing a credit will appear on your account if you've already paid rather than a full refund
So it's too early for Sky to judge how the sales were going?
They would be able to measure it against the sales they had done at this point for other PPVs
orbtastic
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 12549
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 11:22

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by orbtastic »

Good news. Sense prevailed.
dondada
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8872
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 10:55

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by dondada »

MachoMan09 wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
MachoMan09 wrote:They had no alternative but to ditch the PPV. It wasn't going to sell. .
Not true though, is it? They could have pushed ahead with it and taken what revenue it brought in.
See if you can get a figure from your sources at Sky for how much money they spend promoting a PPV in the last ten days before an event takes place.
How about if they didn't spend much money promoting it and just took what came in anyway? They're still going to have similar overheads, production wise, with it being on 'normal' Sky.
Chambers2
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6499
Joined: 24 Feb 2004, 07:24

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Chambers2 »

JonRobo wrote:a fight or 2 between fights as floaters
I'll see if Mr Hankey is available
lefthook82
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1836
Joined: 07 Mar 2008, 04:33

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by lefthook82 »

Dioufy wrote:Oi, listen, chaps. I bet one of these fighters gets a bad back.

:shame:
Spinal :TU:
UpperCrust
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 82
Joined: 03 Apr 2010, 06:34

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by UpperCrust »

Great decision, with the undercard falling apart this was the sensible route.

However, as a general rule, I do think a lot of people on Boxrec complain about PPV's that are actually PPV worthy (although we all pay our normal sky subscriptions- PPV is a large part of the sport which we just have to accept)

Next 3 PPV's I envisage I am more than happy to part with my hard earned cash for:

Groves Degale, Cleverly Braehmar
Haye Klitschko
Khan Bradley
Asterix
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7128
Joined: 02 Nov 2007, 10:42

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Asterix »

Josh1111 wrote:
Asterix wrote:They did this because they couldn't manage to get an attractive undercard together, right? I'm thinking of the Macklin and Fury fights not coming to fruition. I don't think that necessarily warrants praise for Sky or Adam Smith.
Dont be so miserable, Sky still had to make the final decision
Miserable? :confused: Did you quote the wrong person?
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27449
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by stujones »

WOW - never thought I would see the day. Sky always seemed to have the philosophy of once on Sky Box Office always on Sky Box Office, irrespective of opponent or undercard (Hatton vs Lazscano, Hamed vs Calvo, Khan vs Fagin or Salita being prime examples) - I'm really pleased but also really surprised at this.

and Berto vs Ortiz on "normal" sky also the same night? Fab.
Scottrf
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1146
Joined: 30 Nov 2010, 05:43

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Scottrf »

stujones wrote:and Berto vs Ortiz on "normal" sky also the same night? Fab.
That been announced?
Scottrf
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1146
Joined: 30 Nov 2010, 05:43

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Scottrf »

Any truth to Rahman being offered an improved purse by Khan? Sky have taken Khan from their 'live on Sky' section.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27449
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by stujones »

Scottrf wrote:
stujones wrote:and Berto vs Ortiz on "normal" sky also the same night? Fab.
That been announced?
John's post above on this thread implies it at least..... looks like he has copied and pasted the Sky schedule from their website.
Scottrf
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1146
Joined: 30 Nov 2010, 05:43

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by Scottrf »

stujones wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
stujones wrote:and Berto vs Ortiz on "normal" sky also the same night? Fab.
That been announced?
John's post above on this thread implies it at least..... looks like he has copied and pasted the Sky schedule from their website.
Yeah that's what I thought from his post but it wasn't on their schedule.
leforge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7790
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 12:44

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by leforge »

Good decision. Can't see khans working with Hattons again.
MightyWarrior
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13249
Joined: 23 Jan 2003, 14:01

Re: Exclusive - Khan v McCloskey will NOT be PPV

Post by MightyWarrior »

leforge wrote:Good decision. Can't see khans working with Hattons again.
Unless Ricky offers himself as Khan's next PPV opponent.
Amir can't complain - he can't just pick a patsy for himself and expect everyone to dish out PPV prices. Who were Hatton ever going to get, to justify PPV with a 20-1 main event at the head of it ? Answer: no one.
Post Reply