BoxRec

rhino222 wrote:in a day or 2 we need to send a link of this thread to FW promotions.

You don't need to.

i think the channel could of worked but not in these times alot of us are looking at our sky bills and thinking 42 quid for sky with sports, can i cut back as i dont watch half of the channels that sky provide at all.Another tenner on top for allegedly is expensive for most of us- i dont know whether FW factored in that subscribers will always keep their sky sports simply because of the football, it was never a question of choosing between sky and allegedly , just whether people were prepared to add allegedly to their existing package.Meanwhile sky reel out good shows price last week frampton this week allegedly have to do the same to keep up.
For the extra tenner allegedly want id rather go HD which is the same price from Sky.
I hope his promotions arent on the slide as hes promoted some great fights over the years and i dont resent him the success hes had but i dont think allegedly will be with us this time next year.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote: He is by far the best promoter in the UK

Who says? Things have changed. Look at the evidence.

Almost all the biggest events in recent years have been promoted by FW. He is the main guy that has built fighters up to where they can fill football stadium, sell PPV, get the average sports fan interested. Sure his matchmaking isn't likely to please us on here most of the time but as far as pushing the sport into the mainstream in this country, he is without equal.

Being on his own, on a channel with hardly any subscribers, not being able to pay fighters and without a standout star is bad for boxing. As much as I like Eddie Hearn testing his fighters against the best in the states, it isn't winning them much of a fanbase. Froch's fights have been excellent, but wouldn't it have been great for him to have home advantage and people could start talking about a boxrec meetup again?

How do you think the future signing of 2012 Olympic team members will fare after the London event has concluded ?

Obviously former Olympians and current Olympians are all bossom buddies and talk to each other. The fall-out from Degale etc.

I think it's important that the Degale situ is resolved in this respect. A messy, legal situation wouldn't appeal to onlookers.

G0mez wrote:How do you think the future signing of 2012 Olympic team members will fare after the London event has concluded ?

Obviously former Olympians and current Olympians are all bossom buddies and talk to each other. The fall-out from Degale etc.

I think it's important that the Degale situ is resolved in this respect. A messy, legal situation wouldn't appeal to onlookers.

I think most current boxers are aware of the situation which is happening. I think we might see a few more leave.

Lenny wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote: He is by far the best promoter in the UK

Who says? Things have changed. Look at the evidence.

Almost all the biggest events in recent years have been promoted by FW. He is the main guy that has built fighters up to where they can fill football stadium, sell PPV, get the average sports fan interested. Sure his matchmaking isn't likely to please us on here most of the time but as far as pushing the sport into the mainstream in this country, he is without equal.

Being on his own, on a channel with hardly any subscribers, not being able to pay fighters and without a standout star is bad for boxing. As much as I like Eddie Hearn testing his fighters against the best in the states, it isn't winning them much of a fanbase. Froch's fights have been excellent, but wouldn't it have been great for him to have home advantage and people could start talking about a boxrec meetup again?

But all that is in the past. A promoter who happens to become irrelevant isn't 'bad for boxing', it's just survival of the fittest. Only the best matchups will do now for many viewers.

Of course, the flipside to this is it results directly in less money in boxing and possibly less exposure for certain fighters. But that's the way the game seems to be going.

Who promotes Britain's current 2 World Champions?

Samuel Brooks wrote:Who promotes Britain's current 2 World Champions?

That's not the same question as "Who promotes Britains current best two boxers?"

Both Burns and Cleverly have been awarded their titles outside of the ring and regardless of whether they are worthy of holding a "World" title (IMO Burns has proven he belongs at the elite level, Cleverly is yet to do so), they haven't proven it IN THE RING at their current weights. At the end of this month, Nathan Cleverlys World Championship reign will be Aleksey Kuziemski, Tony Bellew and Tommy Karpency. Compare that to the last 3 wrold title fights for our two recently deposed champions and you will see exactly what is wrong with the FW model of promotion and protection - Carl Froch (Arthur Abraham, Glen Johnson, Andre Ward) and Amir Khan (Paul McCloskey, Zab Judah, Lamont Peterson)

Would you be asking who promotes Britains 3 world champions had Derry Matthews beaten Marsili for the IBO? (Forgive me if he's not actually promoted by FW, but you get my point).

Please rank the following four fights in terms of attractiveness:

Lamont Peterson v (Non World champion) Amir Khan II
Lucien Bute v (Non World champion) Carl Froch
(World Champion) Nathan Cleverly v Tommy Karpency
(World Champion) Ricky Burns v Paulus Moses

FW promotes over 60 fighters at present and has 16 reigning champions in his stable. Not the stats of a failing promoter by any means.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Lenny wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote: Who says? Things have changed. Look at the evidence.

Almost all the biggest events in recent years have been promoted by FW. He is the main guy that has built fighters up to where they can fill football stadium, sell PPV, get the average sports fan interested. Sure his matchmaking isn't likely to please us on here most of the time but as far as pushing the sport into the mainstream in this country, he is without equal.

Being on his own, on a channel with hardly any subscribers, not being able to pay fighters and without a standout star is bad for boxing. As much as I like Eddie Hearn testing his fighters against the best in the states, it isn't winning them much of a fanbase. Froch's fights have been excellent, but wouldn't it have been great for him to have home advantage and people could start talking about a boxrec meetup again?

But all that is in the past. A promoter who happens to become irrelevant isn't 'bad for boxing', it's just survival of the fittest. Only the best matchups will do now for many viewers.

.

Utter horseshit, the public dont care about matchups, people want to see stars.

Stars are people like Hatton, Khan, Hamed, Benn, Eubank etc

Carl Frotch, on the other hand, is not a star.

Well said khaosai,

If promoters weren't allowed the chance to build stars you wouldn't have the legacy of aforemenioned names, instead you would have the Eddie Hearn philosophy of boxing where we have no world champs, no stars, just British boxers falling short in high profile contests...

However earsjohn, leforge riddick etc who spend their 90% of their awake life on here thinking they 'know so much more' than people who are actually involved in boxing would be delighted as they would get 'only the best matchups'....

It's also worth noting it's not difficult call up a US promoter and offer lambs to the slaughter/ get a world title fight in the US.

It doesn't take a masterstroke to achieve this.

Samuel Brooks wrote:FW promotes over 60 fighters at present and has 16 reigning champions in his stable. Not the stats of a failing promoter by any means.

Northern Rock had thousands of customers and masses of assets but if you're business model is fucked then you are failing.

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

Utter horseshit, the public dont care about matchups, people want to see stars.

Stars are people like Hatton, Khan, Hamed, Benn, Eubank etc

Carl Frotch, on the other hand, is not a star.

Cool! Let's see the 'stars' flock to FW now...

Froch is not a star

Really? While FW's best chance of a star currently is Nathan friggen Cleverley. Although to give FW his due, he does seem to have fooled a lot of people on this board.

You clearly get a hard-on watching Hatton rack up 30 meaningless defences against bums. I, however, am a boxing fan.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

Utter horseshit, the public dont care about matchups, people want to see stars.

Stars are people like Hatton, Khan, Hamed, Benn, Eubank etc

Carl Frotch, on the other hand, is not a star.

Cool! Let's see the 'stars' flock to FW now...

Froch is not a star

Really? While FW's best chance of a star currently is Nathan friggen Cleverley. Although to give FW his due, he does seem to have fooled a lot of people on this board.

You clearly get a hard-on watching Hatton rack up 30 meaningless defences against bums. I, however, am a boxing fan.

We need more people like you in the world.

As a manager he still looks to be in a relatively strong position.

As a promoter I'd say he is struggling a bit. The lack of a superstar in his stable is a killer for his own profile and his ability to attract the next generation of stars. His TV exposure is minimal. His blockbusting shows are non-existent.

As a broadcasting partner he is way out of his depth on a bad strategic move. allegedly is just a recipe for all concerned to lose money both long and short term.

Of course Frank has plenty experience of companies going bust.

jabnmove wrote:Well said khaosai,

If promoters weren't allowed the chance to build stars you wouldn't have the legacy of aforemenioned names, instead you would have the Eddie Hearn philosophy of boxing where we have no world champs, no stars, just British boxers falling short in high profile contests...

However earsjohn, leforge riddick etc who spend their 90% of their awake life on here thinking they 'know so much more' than people who are actually involved in boxing would be delighted as they would get 'only the best matchups'....

It's also worth noting it's not difficult call up a US promoter and offer lambs to the slaughter/ get a world title fight in the US.

It doesn't take a masterstroke to achieve this.

Explain. Please point out where I have claimed to "know so much more" than anyone directly involved in boxing.

My posts are written entirely from the point of view of my own personal involvement - that of a paying punter. If I criticise the actions of a promoter, manager, TV company, boxer, trainer or anyone else it is because I disagree with their actions. Likewise if I praise the same people, it is bacause I applaud their actions. I'm not claiming to be some guru, simply someone who is interested enough in boxing to post regularly on a boxing forum.

I'll admit that I have an inherently negative view of Mr Warren but this is driven by what I, personally, consider to be pretty low behaviour - the Calzaghe incident, constant sniping in his Sun column, defending Tommy Karpency while attacking Matthew Hatton as opponents, the attitude of allegedly towards its subscriber base in general and me personally and the public slamming of Frankie Gavin and Kevin Mitchell. I've also praised Warren in the past for things like the Magnificant 7 and the Katsidis v Mitchell card.

I do not believe that I should shut up and see how things pan out over the next few months, on the basis that what was provided in October and November was great for boxing fans. Promises made appear to have been broken and I find it hard work out how allegedly has considerably imrpoved the service for boxing fans compared to this time last year. Particularly not at a £10 per month premium.

I fully understand the need for balance between building a fighter and providing competitive matches for the purposes of entertaining the public - I've never been critical of his approach with James Degale, for instance, as 12 fights into his career, Degale has progressed to a higher level than any 2008 medallist (Look at Deontay Wilders record as a comparison). What I don't like, and I think is particularly damaging for boxing, is the mutton dressed up as lamb approach to World Champions. We've heard a lot in recent days about Britains only 2 world champions, while we also hear that Cleverly needs to be protected as he's still developing. That contradiction doesn't sit right with me - either you are the best in the world (as proven by your belt) and you want to prove it or you are a developing youngster building towards the top. Team Cleverly seem to want to claim both.

rhino222 wrote:FW has got greedy, £10 a month is expensive for the product on offer, i guarantee that for £5 a month he would get at least 2 times the amount of subscribers for TV. Or he should at least offer the product via internet for maybe 3 or 4 quid a month, as people will watch it via pc anyway......without paying a penny.

who else on here, who is not a subscriber at present, would buy the internet/smart phone variation of the product for £3 per month??

I would. As a Brit living outside the UK, I would welcome a moderately priced, reliable internet broadcaster. But there isn't one, or at least not a legal one. allegedly isn't available online at any price yet, Primetime is only available in the UK and Ireland, which is pointless because surely the only people who'd take the web service over the TV one would be outside of those countries, and others who offer good streams do it live only, without the choice to watch on demand later, which again would suit people in different time zones.

Cleverly and his team have made it very clear that they want to fight Froch and have tried to make it happen.... think that's protecting? You and many others talk about Froch like he's the second coming, stop contradicting yourself.

Oh yeah, get back to work you corporate high flyer you!

Wake up call wrote:Eddie Hearn is Britain's biggest boxing promoter now.

he has done absolutley ZERO so far ???

if he is the biggest boxing in the UK is fucked

jabnmove wrote:Cleverly and his team have made it very clear that they want to fight Froch and have tried to make it happen.... think that's protecting? You and many others talk about Froch like he's the second coming, stop contradicting yourself.

Oh yeah, get back to work you corporate high flyer you!

Why not chase one of the actual champions at his weight rather than blithely calling out someone who has spent the last 3 years building the best run of opponents in boxing at a lower weight. Froch should have no interest in fighting Cleverly as the only thing he brings to the table is a phony world title that was awarded outside the ring and has not been defended against a single top 15 opponent.

Corporate high flyer? You have me confused with someone else.

oliverfennell wrote:

rhino222 wrote:FW has got greedy, £10 a month is expensive for the product on offer, i guarantee that for £5 a month he would get at least 2 times the amount of subscribers for TV. Or he should at least offer the product via internet for maybe 3 or 4 quid a month, as people will watch it via pc anyway......without paying a penny.

who else on here, who is not a subscriber at present, would buy the internet/smart phone variation of the product for £3 per month??

I would. As a Brit living outside the UK, I would welcome a moderately priced, reliable internet broadcaster. But there isn't one, or at least not a legal one. Allegedly channel isn't available online at any price yet, Primetime is only available in the UK and Ireland, which is pointless because surely the only people who'd take the web service over the TV one would be outside of those countries, and others who offer good streams do it live only, without the choice to watch on demand later, which again would suit people in different time zones.

10 quid? 5 quid? Whatever.

There are some very very strange characters on boxing forums. There are people who are such big fans of boxing that they have 10's of thousands of posts on boxing forums, but when a dedicated boxing channel comes along, what do they do?


Act like its the end of civilization as we know it, because it costs 10 quid a month.

who cares who the biggest promoter is? the best is Mick Hennessey at the moment, for the simple truth that he has got boxing on free tv. The only boxers who are going to become stars are the ones who will be shown on terrestrial, or the olympians, although warren has managed to make a hames of degale's start so far

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:

rhino222 wrote:FW has got greedy, £10 a month is expensive for the product on offer, i guarantee that for £5 a month he would get at least 2 times the amount of subscribers for TV. Or he should at least offer the product via internet for maybe 3 or 4 quid a month, as people will watch it via pc anyway......without paying a penny.

who else on here, who is not a subscriber at present, would buy the internet/smart phone variation of the product for £3 per month??

I would. As a Brit living outside the UK, I would welcome a moderately priced, reliable internet broadcaster. But there isn't one, or at least not a legal one. Allegedly channel isn't available online at any price yet, Primetime is only available in the UK and Ireland, which is pointless because surely the only people who'd take the web service over the TV one would be outside of those countries, and others who offer good streams do it live only, without the choice to watch on demand later, which again would suit people in different time zones.

10 quid? 5 quid? Whatever.

There are some very very strange characters on boxing forums. There are people who are such big fans of boxing that they have 10's of thousands of posts on boxing forums, but when a dedicated boxing channel comes along, what do they do?


Act like its the end of civilization as we know it, because it costs 10 quid a month.

Not sure if that post was directed at me, but the main part of my point was that whether ot costs 10 quid or 10 pence, there is no internet broadcast of the channel anyway, thus any potential subscribers who do not live in Britain can't subscribe even if they'd want to.

smcb80 wrote:who cares who the biggest promoter is? the best is Mick Hennessey at the moment, for the simple truth that he has got boxing on free tv. The only boxers who are going to become stars are the ones who will be shown on terrestrial, or the olympians, although warren has managed to make a hames of degale's start so far

Hennessey is a dreadful promoter, how many stars has he made?


Boxing on free TV?


Meh, its 2012 now, everyone pays for TV these days.

oliverfennell wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

oliverfennell wrote: I would. As a Brit living outside the UK, I would welcome a moderately priced, reliable internet broadcaster. But there isn't one, or at least not a legal one. Allegedly channel isn't available online at any price yet, Primetime is only available in the UK and Ireland, which is pointless because surely the only people who'd take the web service over the TV one would be outside of those countries, and others who offer good streams do it live only, without the choice to watch on demand later, which again would suit people in different time zones.

10 quid? 5 quid? Whatever.

There are some very very strange characters on boxing forums. There are people who are such big fans of boxing that they have 10's of thousands of posts on boxing forums, but when a dedicated boxing channel comes along, what do they do?


Act like its the end of civilization as we know it, because it costs 10 quid a month.

Not sure if that post was directed at me, but the main part of my point was that whether ot costs 10 quid or 10 pence, there is no internet broadcast of the channel anyway, thus any potential subscribers who do not live in Britain can't subscribe even if they'd want to.

Oops no sorry, that was suposed to be directed at Rhino.

I agree, it would be great to have it online.

Have you got a slingbox, btw?