BoxRec

righthook wrote:Even if warren paid the best which is not fact, I think any boxer would rather go with eddie who pays on time/gives good exposure/ gets you out frequently.

Would you rather fight twice a year for £30,000 a fight or fight 6 times a year for £25,000 a fight ???

Good point. And the scenario to be avoided at all costs is to leave promoter A due to lack of activity, move to promoter B who gives you regular fights and pays on time, but you then get sued for two million quid by promoter A. A good manager would be one that steers you clear of these pitfalls, but if promoter A sues the backside off your manager too then quite possibly you're fxxked.

There's no comparison

JimJim2009 wrote:

righthook wrote:Even if warren paid the best which is not fact, I think any boxer would rather go with eddie who pays on time/gives good exposure/ gets you out frequently.

Would you rather fight twice a year for £30,000 a fight or fight 6 times a year for £25,000 a fight ???

Good point. And the scenario to be avoided at all costs is to leave promoter A due to lack of activity, move to promoter B who gives you regular fights and pays on time, but you then get sued for two million quid by promoter A. A good manager would be one that steers you clear of these pitfalls, but if promoter A sues the backside off your manager too then quite possibly you're fxxked.

heh. the importance of a non-moronic manager is generally underestimated

Give boxers to much to early they will become less hungry. Like Audley says " It's hard to get out of bed with silk pyjama's on"

Rexob wrote:Give boxers to much to early they will become less hungry. Like Audley says " It's hard to get out of bed with silk pyjama's on"

Wasn't that Hagler? Surely a different animal to Audley.

Yeah probably, I think Audley did say it though one time if I remember rightly. Even so a very true statement.

billy nelson wrote:There's no comparison

Feel free to enlighten us william DD

billy nelson wrote:There's no comparison

To what?

billy nelson wrote:There's no comparison

Here we go again, another one of the Boxrec cryptic clue brigade.

I am sure you know facts and numbers, so either you have something to say or you don't - so either say something, or don't.

Making up daft comments that don't make sense hardly add to the discussion.

The problem is Bripez that some posters work in the industry and as such are close to the fire. In addition it is simply not right to ask anyone to disclose personal earnings information about a fighter. I wouldn't be happy with anyone discussing my earnings with other people for example.
I've had the pleasure / displeasure of sitting around the table with a few of them and I wouldn't say any of them are easier / harder / more generous / less generous than the rest.
Wake up is right in saying a lot depends on the fighter you are negotiating for.

Fat Git
I've never laced a glove up in my life my friend but I have had to swim with the sharks on behalf of others.

Parson Cross wrote:The problem is Bripez that some posters work in the industry and as such are close to the fire. In addition it is simply not right to ask anyone to disclose personal earnings information about a fighter. I wouldn't be happy with anyone discussing my earnings with other people for example.
I've had the pleasure / displeasure of sitting around the table with a few of them and I wouldn't say any of them are easier / harder / more generous / less generous than the rest.
Wake up is right in saying a lot depends on the fighter you are negotiating for.

I agree with you.

What I am saying is, either say something or don't - I am not bothered either way, but the current trend of making a post that does not actually say anything (or even make sense) whilst potentially inferring something is frustrating.

Tomasino wrote:

billy nelson wrote:There's no comparison

To what?

A mars bar to one deep fried.

Parsons, am i right in thinking that some of the bunny fighters were put on retainer wages to have a regular income? Just the fighters that had the superstar potential like Hatton, Calzaghe and the Olympians when they turn over?

If so, are they given extra when they fight or is there a minimum requirement?

We get to hear about the purses in the big fights eg froch vs groves, Calzaghe vs Kessler and hstton vs mayweather but never on a more domestic level. Total taboo yet we know about all the footballers wages.

I recall Mathew macklin getting 70k for an European title defence under hstton promotions. A lot was made of what a large sum this was for that particular level.

Some of the Olympians had a minimum fight purse on their contracts. However, they could opt to fight for less than the minimum if they chose to do so (i.e. in order to be more active).

One informed me that he was on £50k minimum per fight and another on £75k minimum per fight. I shall not disclose their names in order to protect their privacy.

Fat Git, Parsons knows the craic here, mate.

The Law wrote:Some of the Olympians had a minimum fight purse on their contracts. However, they could opt to fight for less than the minimum if they chose to do so (i.e. in order to be more active).

One informed me that he was on £50k minimum per fight and another on £75k minimum per fight. I shall not disclose their names in order to protect their privacy.

I imagine they are gold medalists.

Freddy,
Regular income is rarely used hence I raised a query in describing this thread as "wages comparison"
The elite got signing on fees, and then contracts with minimum purse figures often at different numbers when it got to titles ie British Commonwealth European World.
Usually contracts would specify a minimum number of fights per season - with the Promoter protected against matters out of his control - such as injury.
I will say this about Wazza though. He never hesitated to help any of his lads if they were in the doldrums and had issues (genuine) outside boxing.
Mitchell is a good example so when he jumped ship I thought that was gutless.

The Law wrote:Some of the Olympians had a minimum fight purse on their contracts. However, they could opt to fight for less than the minimum if they chose to do so (i.e. in order to be more active).

One informed me that he was on £50k minimum per fight and another on £75k minimum per fight. I shall not disclose their names in order to protect their privacy.

Nice! 10 or 15 of them fights until they get put in the deep end, good earner. Then hopefully step up and get the big bucks.

kamicazze wrote:We get to hear about the purses in the big fights eg froch vs groves, Calzaghe vs Kessler and hstton vs mayweather but never on a more domestic level. Total taboo yet we know about all the footballers wages.

I recall Mathew macklin getting 70k for an European title defence under hstton promotions. A lot was made of what a large sum this was for that particular level.

Saunders and Ryder split £102k 60-40 for their fight. That's the only purse I know domestically.

The Law wrote:Some of the Olympians had a minimum fight purse on their contracts. However, they could opt to fight for less than the minimum if they chose to do so (i.e. in order to be more active).

One informed me that he was on £50k minimum per fight and another on £75k minimum per fight. I shall not disclose their names in order to protect their privacy.

Were they 2008 or 2012?

The Law wrote:Some of the Olympians had a minimum fight purse on their contracts. However, they could opt to fight for less than the minimum if they chose to do so (i.e. in order to be more active).

One informed me that he was on £50k minimum per fight and another on £75k minimum per fight. I shall not disclose their names in order to protect their privacy.

I'm gonna take a complete guess and say Joshua and Campbell. Literally just picking names out of a hat though.

Expe,
That's not the scenario we are talking about here.
That fight went to purse bids.
Also the 60/40 split in favour of the Champion are the rules for British title fights.

Frank pays the best by a long way