BoxRec

Isn't it better for a boxer in terms of earning longevity, particularly when they've finished boxing, to get as much exposure on terrestrial TV as possible and cross over into the general public consciousness like Benn, Eubank, McGuigan and even Naz. This would mean not fighting on PPV and preferably not fighting on satellite channels altogether.

Joshua might be an exception in this case as he is an Olympic gold medalist and has probably already crossed over.

I know this might not meet the short term interests of the promoters but wouldn't the boxers prefer this?

brian13 wrote:

mullenman wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:So is this actually confirmed as PPV?

hearn trying to keep it quiet but I know its ppv

the undercard is going to be very good by the sounds of hearn in his last ifl interview

Well DeGale surely has to fight soon anyway. I'd say after Mitchell's recent world title fight, he will be in some sort of eliminator fight, is it too soon for McDonnell to fight?

He has fighters that could do a PPV, wouldn't be a shock.

Rumours on CS today that DeGale has signed to fight Bute.

The problem is as long as people buy them, SKY and Eddie will keep putting them on. Boxing fans are their own worst enemies.

Read what Peter fury has just said..

maybe fury versus klirtus November 28

Brook versus a chav October 24

plus aj versus white december 12 will all be ppv

mullenman wrote:Read what Peter fury has just said..

maybe fury versus klirtus November 28

Brook versus a chav October 24

plus aj versus white december 12 will all be ppv

I would be shocked if we got all that for the standard PPV price, expecting them to charge £25 at least.

Edit: Did you mean all in as 1 PPV?

chad wrote:The problem is as long as people buy them, SKY and Eddie will keep putting them on. Boxing fans are their own worst enemies.

this x 2

chad wrote:The problem is as long as people buy them, SKY and Eddie will keep putting them on. Boxing fans are their own worst enemies.

Every time some poor bastard folds & thinks "Ah well, it's only fifteen squid" then it reinforces the concept & guarantees more shitty fights will be on shitty PPVs.

I agree... But I said the same thing about SKY when they first came around and killed much of the sport's popularity. I held out for about 20 years before finally succumbing.

If there's boxing on I want to watch it. I can't help it.

Datsue wrote:

chad wrote:The problem is as long as people buy them, SKY and Eddie will keep putting them on. Boxing fans are their own worst enemies.

Every time some poor bastard folds & thinks "Ah well, it's only fifteen squid" then it reinforces the concept & guarantees more shitty fights will be on shitty PPVs.

x2. I resisted paying for Bellew v Cleverley II and a couple of others, and while it is difficult to hold out and not buy it, it is quite satisfying if it turns out to be a rubbish event. If there isn't a degree of resistance, we will soon end up paying £30 for PPV for every card with a half decent fighter on it. For that reasons I'm happier with by B0xnatio0n subscription than I am with Sky, even though I get Sky for various other sports too.

digzee wrote:

mullenman wrote:Read what Peter fury has just said..

maybe fury versus klirtus November 28

Brook versus a chav October 24

plus aj versus white december 12 will all be ppv

I would be shocked if we got all that for the standard PPV price, expecting them to charge £25 at least.

Edit: Did you mean all in as 1 PPV?

Obviously not, he means all three will be separate PPV shows.

I've folded in the past but I won't be paying to watching Brook v Chaves and definitely not Joshua v Whyte!

I think PPV should only be for world class events where you are not quite sure about the outcome e.g Tyson-Holyfield, Mayweather-Pacquaio etc

Joshua wlill knock over White in no time at all. I know there is a side story, but Joshua is so far ahead of him now, it will take him next to no time to iron him out. Same with the Brook fight. The only interesting thing about that fight is how will he win.

Fury-Klitschko is an interesting one, because I think Fury could really trouble Wlad.

big lennox wrote:I think PPV should only be for world class events where you are not quite sure about the outcome e.g Tyson-Holyfield, Mayweather-Pacquaio etc

Joshua wlill knock over White in no time at all. I know there is a side story, but Joshua is so far ahead of him now, it will take him next to no time to iron him out. Same with the Brook fight. The only interesting thing about that fight is how will he win.

Fury-Klitschko is an interesting one, because I think Fury could really trouble Wlad.

For me it should be for fights that can only be made by having them on PPV, Mayweather-Pacquiao as an example, the only way to pay both what they wanted was PPV, then it's down to demand. Fights like Brook-Chaves, Fury-Klitschko, Joshua-Whyte and the 'stacked' shows that have been put on PPV don't need PPV to make. The cards packed with 7-8 big fights do but that's only because the promoter has decided to throw 3 shows into one to try and make it PPV, but when split up over several weeks, those fights could all be made without the need for it.

expe wrote:

big lennox wrote:I think PPV should only be for world class events where you are not quite sure about the outcome e.g Tyson-Holyfield, Mayweather-Pacquaio etc

Joshua wlill knock over White in no time at all. I know there is a side story, but Joshua is so far ahead of him now, it will take him next to no time to iron him out. Same with the Brook fight. The only interesting thing about that fight is how will he win.

Fury-Klitschko is an interesting one, because I think Fury could really trouble Wlad.

For me it should be for fights that can only be made by having them on PPV, Mayweather-Pacquiao as an example, the only way to pay both what they wanted was PPV, then it's down to demand. Fights like Brook-Chaves, Fury-Klitschko, Joshua-Whyte and the 'stacked' shows that have been put on PPV don't need PPV to make. The cards packed with 7-8 big fights do but that's only because the promoter has decided to throw 3 shows into one to try and make it PPV, but when split up over several weeks, those fights could all be made without the need for it.

Good points.

expe wrote:

big lennox wrote:I think PPV should only be for world class events where you are not quite sure about the outcome e.g Tyson-Holyfield, Mayweather-Pacquaio etc

Joshua wlill knock over White in no time at all. I know there is a side story, but Joshua is so far ahead of him now, it will take him next to no time to iron him out. Same with the Brook fight. The only interesting thing about that fight is how will he win.

Fury-Klitschko is an interesting one, because I think Fury could really trouble Wlad.

For me it should be for fights that can only be made by having them on PPV, Mayweather-Pacquiao as an example, the only way to pay both what they wanted was PPV, then it's down to demand. Fights like Brook-Chaves, Fury-Klitschko, Joshua-Whyte and the 'stacked' shows that have been put on PPV don't need PPV to make. The cards packed with 7-8 big fights do but that's only because the promoter has decided to throw 3 shows into one to try and make it PPV, but when split up over several weeks, those fights could all be made without the need for it.

Good points.

I think PPV for a British title fight headlining is ridiculous.

For me the 'stacked' undercard would have to include 3 world title fights and I mean genuine title fights e .g not Eubank against a Latvian Plumber.

it will be ppv as Joshua is a crossover star and appeals to the wider audience...boxing is a minority sport so the anything which is an easy sell, joshua, to casuals will be ppv.

Kell Brook on the other hand...no way that should be close to being ppv

digzee wrote:

mullenman wrote:Read what Peter fury has just said..

maybe fury versus klirtus November 28

Brook versus a chav October 24

plus aj versus white december 12 will all be ppv

I would be shocked if we got all that for the standard PPV price, expecting them to charge £25 at least.

Edit: Did you mean all in as 1 PPV?

On 3 different dates, in 3 different months?

gazza8 wrote:it will be ppv as Joshua is a crossover star and appeals to the wider audience...boxing is a minority sport so the anything which is an easy sell, joshua, to casuals will be ppv.

Kell Brook on the other hand...no way that should be close to being ppv

did I just read that right?
Did you just try to justify AJ vs Whyte as a ppv then say a Brook world title fight (against his strongest challenger to date) shouldn't be?

IMO neither should be but your logic is seriously skewed

davie wrote:

digzee wrote:

mullenman wrote:Read what Peter fury has just said..

maybe fury versus klirtus November 28

Brook versus a chav October 24

plus aj versus white december 12 will all be ppv

I would be shocked if we got all that for the standard PPV price, expecting them to charge £25 at least.

Edit: Did you mean all in as 1 PPV?

On 3 different dates, in 3 different months?

I read the original post wrong, I read it as all will be 1 ppv instead of all ppv.

digzee wrote:
I read the original post wrong, I read it as all will be 1 ppv instead of all ppv.

No worries, I just couldn't resist the temptation to be a smart arse