BoxRec

What will it show? All his shows? Will Sky allow shpows to be shown on simultaneous channels? I doubt it...

Is the channel just an Allegedly plan to pressure SKY?

I love boxing but unless the station cuts deals with Euro and US channels, I can't see it being worth a tenner

Not a chance, FW can shive it. Eddie all the way

I certainly can't see myself paying £10 for it although I may be tempted to go halves with my mate, but there will always be plenty of die hard fans willing to fork out the money for it.

My major doubt however is that are there enough die hard fans to make the channel feasable? I really doubt it.

In theory yes. But it depends on the price and what they show.

I'd want a magazine style show.
Boxing documentaries.
Quality fights.
Quality interviews.
Classics (from around the world not just Benn-Eubank every other week).
International fights.

I only have Sky now for the boxing. Feel like I'm paying for all those premiership morons which bothers me.

Ezzard wrote:I only have Sky now for the boxing. Feel like I'm paying for all those premiership morons which bothers me.

Interesting one that isn't it? I don't have Sky but if I did I'm not sure I'd shell out for Sky Sports as i would only want if for the boxing. From that point of view a dedicated boxing channel is a lot more interesting. On the other hand it might be hard to grow the audience beyond your 'hard core' fans as unlike on Sky Sports there won't be the chance to cross-promote to fans of other sports. I'm sure a lot of people end up watching Friday Fight Night because they have seen the build up on Sky Sports News when they were waiting for some of the endless football news/results.

It would depend on what they offer really.... what I would like to see is something like

This Saurland deal that has been mentioned (would like to know the ins and outs of that).

Delayed full coverage of ESPN friday night fights - hardly will get them live, but maybe delayed coverage as channel 5 had.

Some of these more obscure PPV bills in the states live.... eg. Holyfield, Adamek etc.

Coverage of other UK promoters who might be on good terms with Warren, I was thinking Alex Arthur.

If that could be offered then it would represent better value for money (IMO) than Premier Sports and I would subscribe.

For me personally, more boxing less MMA.

On a side Macho, was I reading correctly that Al Bernstein has a behind the scenes (producer) role on the 24 / 7 series.... the man goes up in my estimation all the time.

Boys - if ever the term 'the devil is in the detail' is applicable then i would venture that this is the case.

Personally, on the face of it, the idea does not appeal UNLESS Dean Powell can continue to match his kids hard - the quality of fight ie RISKY CONTESTS will be absolutely crucial. I wont be drawn in by seemingly attractive touches like the Sauerland deal until it is made CRYSTAL CLEAR exactly what that will mean in practice.

But we need to wait and see before committing. Fair play to the Waren boys for making what Phil Neal would call a 'bold move'. Let's hope this risk pays off and we get a lot of good, competitive fights.

No African road sweepers, please.

stujones wrote:On a side Macho, was I reading correctly that Al Bernstein has a behind the scenes (producer) role on the 24 / 7 series.... the man goes up in my estimation all the time.

This sounded odd to me as Bernstein is Showtime and 24/7 is HBO. I looked it up and the executive producer of 24/7 is called Rick Bernstein so it may be him you are thinking of, not sure if they are related.

Old bones Ian wrote:I don't have Sky, so no chance of me getting it

Same here. It's all overpriced shite.

this COULD work but wether it will is another matter , it will take some seriously hard work .

When i fist read it i though "you can sod off if you think your getting my tenner"
but having thought about it , i paid the tenner for setanta , just for the boxing , and on there it was maybe only 2 shows screened per month , so if w arren gets some foreign bills on and maybe includes a few small hall promotors i think id pay , and my money wouldnt be paying towards any other sport either .

If its Allegedly promotions , Saurland , Don King maybe 1 more bigger name promotor too and then promotors such as carl greaves and steve wood then i would pay it , no doubt about it .
But if its just Fwanks shows then not a chance im paying .

damianhucker1 wrote:this COULD work but wether it will is another matter , it will take some seriously hard work .

When i fist read it i though "you can sod off if you think your getting my tenner"
but having thought about it , i paid the tenner for setanta , just for the boxing , and on there it was maybe only 2 shows screened per month , so if w arren gets some foreign bills on and maybe includes a few small hall promotors i think id pay , and my money wouldnt be paying towards any other sport either .

If its Allegedly promotions , Saurland , Don King maybe 1 more bigger name promotor too and then promotors such as carl greaves and steve wood then i would pay it , no doubt about it .
But if its just Fwanks shows then not a chance im paying .

Upcoming: Clev/Bellew, Hopkins/Dawson, Huck, Kessler/Stieglitz, world amateur champs

damianhucker1 wrote:this COULD work but wether it will is another matter , it will take some seriously hard work .

When i fist read it i though "you can sod off if you think your getting my tenner"
but having thought about it , i paid the tenner for setanta , just for the boxing , and on there it was maybe only 2 shows screened per month , so if w arren gets some foreign bills on and maybe includes a few small hall promotors i think id pay , and my money wouldnt be paying towards any other sport either .

Only die-hard boxing fans will think that way though, any casual fans (and a lot of die-hards) will think they would rather pay if they get some football, rugby etc. etc. thrown in so they can justify the cost.

A tenner a month, or a pint a week if you look at it like that, is not exactly going to break the bank but with SKY, SKY HD, SKY Sports etc. I have reached my maximum I am prepared to pay for TV a month, so I would have to drop Sports to get this channel. If I did that I would lose, some boxing, all the football, the F1 for next year and everything else they show.... it's just not worth it unfortunately. I don't think I could cope without the SKY Sports News girls giving me the scores ;;-)

Everyone who takes time to join an internet boxing forum must be considered somewhat die-hard fans and when (judging by this poll) 3/4 of them say they won't subscribe to the channel before they have even heard exactly what it entails, it is not the best of signs.

MachoMan09 wrote:

Ezzard wrote:In theory yes. But it depends on the price and what they show.

I'd want a magazine style show.
Boxing documentaries.
Quality fights.
Quality interviews.
Classics (from around the world not just Benn-Eubank every other week).
International fights.

How much do you think it costs HBO to produce each episode of 24/7? That is the sort of quality we should be getting in 2011. One of my reservations about a UK based boxing/MMA niche channel is that the quality of production will be a serious regression on what organisations with more financial clout can serve up. I don't think that would be a show-stopper for all, though. I want to watch and would consider buying quality and progressive output but many people are content with dross, I suppose. How many million people watch Eastenders and Corrie? Two shows that look like they were produced by first year media studies students with a £100 budget.

Not so bothered by that.

Put some knowledgeable ex-pros on with some decent interviewers in front of a cardbaord set.

I'd like to see an hour with Alan Minter, Conteh, McGuigan, Eubank, Honeyghan, Christie, Andries...

Maybe bring together old foes like Bruno and Bugner... That would not cost a lot of money and would be great TV for boxing fans.

In terms of documentaries I don't care about 24/7. I meant films like those made about Emile Griffith (Ring of Fire, I think), Robinson.

There must be a lot of old boxing content in the archives. Surely it wouldn't cost much for them to put it on.

hang on. will Virgin customers be able to get it?

To be honest it doesnt matter how good the fights they put on the channel are going to be, i still will not pay an extra £10 on top of my already very high priced sky subscription. Enough is enough!

And regardless of what is said if the big fights end up coming together sky will put ppv back on - Haye v Vitali would that be on allegedly? i doubt it, it will end up being on sky ppv.

MachoMan09 wrote:Ezzard, pretty much every boxing documentary and feature that has ever been made is already available online for free.

Rather than re-hashing old shit, high-quality contemporary productions should be made to capture and retain a new, younger audience. There are only so many people who are content to sit watching grainy black & white footage interspersed with Bert Sugar drooling as he tries to smoke a cigar and talk about the good old days at the same time.

Here you go: Emile Griffith - Ring of Fire. I'll provide the link for free. No subscription required.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5OEBbzINOA

You should be setting up your own channel, mate.

No,i'm struggling to pay bills at the moments,so paying for fights is right out of the window i'm afraid

Sky Sports, ESPN, Primetime, Premier Sports and now allegedly. There's way too much to subscribe there already and for me that's a bad move from Warren.

At the moment I am a no, but in all honesty I am totally unsure, but there is no option for that.

iwz678 wrote:Sky Sports, ESPN, Primetime, Premier Sports and now allegedly. There's way too much to subscribe there already and for me that's a bad move from Warren.

You pick and chose, though. I've never paid ESPN because they don't do boxing and I will not bother with Premier now.

Very interesting gamble from those concerned. My initial reaction is that it's going to dilute the sport even more so. Casual fans will probably be interested in viewing one-off fights, Groves-DeGale 2 springs to mind, but are likely to stall at the £10 a month commitment. I understand though why allegedly is reluctant to operate on a pay-per-view model.

I've been supporting boxing for years. I have rarely, if ever, missed a boxing pay-per-view. I've been a SKY Sports subscriber since 1999 (or since 1990 through my parents). I've purchased some obscure pay-per-views from Tyson-Nielsen, Graham Earl-Kevin Bennett, and have also subscribed to Setanta Sports, Premier Sports and purchased Primetime ppvs (Froch, Khan etc). I drew the line at ESPN and decided against buying Mayweather-Ortitz on Primetime

With a wife and 3 kids to support, in a recession, I'm struggling to justify shelling out EVEN MORE MONEY to watch Boxing - that's not to mention the shows that I also pay to attend throughout the year. My SKY bill for all channels as part of the HD package, including 3 multi-rooms, plus Premier Sports, is just shy of £100 a month. I can't sustain this going forward.

It's not sour grapes against Uncle Frank, I'd feel the same way if Frank Maloney, Hennessy or Matchroom were throwing their weight behind allegedly. It will be good to see Paul Dempsey and Jim Rosenthal on our screens but realistically it's going to be difficult for them not to be pro-Frank. I'm just sick to death of having to put my hand in my pocket yet again.

JimJim2009 wrote:I'd pay a tenner a month just for the return of a weekly Steve Bunce boxing hour. That was an incredible show, it really was.

Agreed Steve..

I voted 'no'

His "marquee" names are not worth it

Was all set for "big boxing news" on the radio before, something that "all boxing fans will be happy about"

...and this was it

Needless to say I was flicking through the channels and it was TalkSport (or TalkEnglandFootballAndNothingElse as it should be called)

I cannot see anyone outside die-hard boxing fans, shelling out a regular sub fee for a boxing-only (and MMA that is not UFC) channel. Even as a die-hard fan, I don't want my subscription to increase anymore and I don't want to give up SKY Sports. Setanta was a viable alternative to SKY sports for me as they showed football and a number of other sports alongside their strong boxing line-up, so I could drop SKY Sports and go with Setanta instead.

With SKY Sports, fans get HD quality football, cricket, rugby union and league, golf, tennis, F1, darts, NFL, WWE etc. as well as boxing. So, realistically no sports fan will drop Sports to sign up for allegedly, meaning sports fans need to fork out another tenner a month. I understand why people think, "what the hell, it's only a tenner and you get to see Bunce back on the box" but I am sure most people with family, bills, cars, holidays etc. to pay for every year already look at their SKY bill as an excessive luxury without adding even more to it.

I am worried this will only serve to marginalise the sport even more - I love watching loads of sports that I wouldn't pay a specific subscription for and most people will look at boxing just like that. All this will do, will increase people searching for illegal streams so they can continue following the sport.