BoxRec

called it

http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 5#p4504265

jameswilson wrote:If I'v worked this out right this is £200,000 a show (20 shows a year,) which is obviously more than the rumoured £100,000 a show that I think was bandied around as the figure for the last Sky deal with Eddie. I think Hearn seemed to alude that this new deal he has allows him to focus more money within the deal into certain shows.

I think it'll be more than that. The deal is reported to be £100,000,000 over the next 2 years (£4,166,666 per month). Interestingly Jeff Powell at the Daily Mail included this figure in his initial report of the story but updated the article to remove any mention of figures and contract length. Other websites are still reporting this as a 2 year deal worth £100,000,000.

chad wrote:

jameswilson wrote:If I'v worked this out right this is £200,000 a show (20 shows a year,) which is obviously more than the rumoured £100,000 a show that I think was bandied around as the figure for the last Sky deal with Eddie. I think Hearn seemed to alude that this new deal he has allows him to focus more money within the deal into certain shows.

I think it'll be more than that. The deal is reported to be £100,000,000 over the next 2 years (£4,166,666 per month). Interestingly Jeff Powell at the Daily Mail included this figure in his initial report of the story but updated the article to remove any mention of figures and contract length. Other websites are still reporting this as a 2 year deal worth £100,000,000.

Yeah scratch that. 100mill over 40 shows would be like 2.5million per show which pretty much means he can put shows on in an empty arena.

Whether the deal is broken down in the way I'v outlined remains to be seen tho. I'm no expert on how these deals work so they might not break down as simply as dividing the deal amount by the number of shows.

My guesz is that b.t will offer the fights for free to increase their subscription base, and with that kind of money warren will be able to make the promotions pay without ppv.

Big figure, debatable if correct. Bit too nice and round a figure to be bang on IMO

One thing with Boxing, no other fans or another sport pay £12 a month on top of their sky subscription for a channel dedicated to their sport AND on top of all that pay £20 every now and again for a single fight card!

We've been quite lucky on PPV front. Sky could easily charge for Ward Kovalev . In US big fights are often $49.99

I'm assuming in time allegedly as an individual "stand alone" channel won't exist..in reality BT will have bought them out. Which is a great outcome for all concerned from what I can see. I'm not sure in time it will be a dedicated boxing channel, which lets face it isn't warranted. But hey if they commit to 4hrs a week of quality coverage I personally think it's brilliant. allegedly has done really well but has always needed a bigger platform, greater exposure and marketing. I think this works for everyone.

BT Sport have been throwing money at sport like nobodies business lately. The wad of cash they threw at securing sole rights of European were preposterous and not even power crazy Sky could compete with that. Throw in the recent acquisition of down under cricket and WTA tennis, BT are slowly pushing Sky off their own pedestal.

How the arrangement between allegedly and BT goes is anyone's guess. Their recent poor showing with the likes of Fury and co. has not put them in good stead. Can they get enough fighters which are going to attract the casual viewer? Although we may all consider Hearn to put on 'bad cards', or be a 'crook' in general, but I suspect his numbers are decent. Can Fwank raise his game to that level?

Finally Virgin Media customers will get to watch fights in HD!!!

who will be the first Matchroom fighter to jump back to Warren?

maninthemiddle wrote:I'm assuming in time allegedly as an individual "stand alone" channel won't exist..in reality BT will have bought them out. Which is a great outcome for all concerned from what I can see. I'm not sure in time it will be a dedicated boxing channel, which lets face it isn't warranted. But hey if they commit to 4hrs a week of quality coverage I personally think it's brilliant. allegedly has done really well but has always needed a bigger platform, greater exposure and marketing. I think this works for everyone.

By keeping it as a stand alone channel it works well for BT, just like their ESPN channel and Sky have their F1 channel.
It also means they can offer another channel to all their big advertisers as most advertising is just agencies buying airtime according to how many viewers it can potentially reach.

Good bye Sky, Adam Smith et al... we won't miss your self promoted rip off boxing shows.

thatllbeme wrote:Finally Virgin Media customers will get to watch fights in HD!!!

who will be the first Matchroom fighter to jump back to Warren?

I reckon if any are prepared to move it'll be James DeGale, Lee Selby and possibly Nathan Cleverly.

chad wrote:

thatllbeme wrote:Finally Virgin Media customers will get to watch fights in HD!!!

who will be the first Matchroom fighter to jump back to Warren?

I reckon if any are prepared to move it'll be James DeGale, Lee Selby and possibly Nathan Cleverly.

I think we'll see Selby there soon, wouldn't surprise me if there was an outdoor show in Cardiff next summer if they can get Williams a world title fight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpRb99J9teE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLCI7idhBDU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysN3mbb6Ov8

I do find the figure of £100 million a bit...unbelievable tbh. But no doubt whatever the actual number was, it will have been a good deal for both parties.

I just hope it doesn't end up accidentally affecting the international shows they buy - this deal could encourage Sky to start taking an interest in boxing again. I was happy to have binned Sky Sports completely and maintained a B0xnati0n subscription only, so won't be pleased to see Sky start to buy international cards again.

If this happens I'll subscribe to BT sport, wanted it for a while but couldn't justify it on top of existing package but would get it if they plough money into boxing

I've always liked the way George and Francis come across . They seem pretty down to earth guys for two chaps that both come from monied backgrounds.

Ned Stark wrote:If this happens I'll subscribe to BT sport, wanted it for a while but couldn't justify it on top of existing package but would get it if they plough money into boxing

If you're a SKY customer and are prepared to switch your broadband to BT your going to save money!

I've got 17mb broadband from SKY plus line rental which costs £25.00 per month. B0xnati0n is £12.00 per month so total monthly cost is £37.00 (£444.00 over the year).

BT's 17mb broadband and line rental is currently £24.99 (usually £32.99 per month but is currently on offer). To add BT Sports on SKY it's £6.00 per month then a further £5.00 per month for HD so total monthly cost is £35.99 per month (£431.88 over the year).

The £6.00 for BT Sport and £5.00 for HD is free for the first 3 months. There's a £9.99 up front fee to pay but you get a £75.00 pre-paid Mastercard from BT for signing up. Taking all the overall freebies and costs into account the BT deal over 12 months works out at £27.82 per month (£333.84 over the year). Not bad for broadband, line rental, BT Sports and B0xnati0n in HD.

Makes the £33.50 per month SKY charge for SKY Sports in HD on its own look ridiculous.

BT Sport is great.

BT Broadband is a complete and utter fornicate up. If you're very lucky you'll get the kind of broadband you'd expect in today's marketplace.

If not you'll regret the decision to switch to BT for a long time.

Virgin broadband is the best broadband I've ever experienced. However, if there's better broadband out there I'd be interested to hear about it.

lefty wrote:Virgin broadband is the best broadband I've ever experienced. However, if there's better broadband out there I'd be interested to hear about it.

I agree Virgin is the best. A bit costly if it's not taken as part of a TV bundle. The 17mb from SKY does me well. Works fine for Netflix and Amazon Instant video, e-mails, internet browsing and PornHub

chad wrote:

lefty wrote:Virgin broadband is the best broadband I've ever experienced. However, if there's better broadband out there I'd be interested to hear about it.

I agree Virgin is the best. A bit costly if it's not taken as part of a TV bundle. The 17mb from SKY does me well. Works fine for Netflix and Amazon Instant video, e-mails, internet browsing and PornHub

....
Saying that though- even the supposed super fast package with Virgin can seem a little slow at times.

thatllbeme wrote:Finally Virgin Media customers will get to watch fights in HD!!!

who will be the first Matchroom fighter to jump back to Warren?

@paulo1927 The deal currently doesn’t include Virgin Media customers. For info about BN on Virgin please visit: allegedly.com/subscribe/virg…

Just got this tweet from bocksnation.. bastard typical..
Seriously thinking of switching if a deal can't be made..

CaptainSpacerod wrote:BT Sport is great.

BT Broadband is a complete and utter eff up. If you're very lucky you'll get the kind of broadband you'd expect in today's marketplace.

If not you'll regret the decision to switch to BT for a long time.

This

Never dealt with a company as incompetent as they are. I'd heard stories before I switched and though nah, won't happen to me, they're overreacting. I've had an absolute nightmare with them, disgusting company!

So we will see better fights for Saunders and Flanagan, maybe a couple of defections. Who's not happy in Hearn contract - Degale? ... Frampton would be a great catch if possible. Seriously people see Haye going over to Warren with their history?

Competition for Sky and Hearn is healthy, crucial and what is missing. Chance for everyone to up their game. However we won't see their top fighters vs each other unless one is coming off a defeat and desperate and in no position to negotiate. Boxing 101. But do we trust FW to put great, risky fights on with regularity? Outside Benn and Naz when did an FW fighter take consistent risks?

Suddenly is FW going to put his fighters in away from home risks like Brook v Porter, McDonnell v Kameda (twice!), Degale v Dirrell like your despised Eddie did?

Question, does Warren have any stars he's building towards a world title? Curious to know. Because now they'll have a better chance.

And, are Boxrec posters going to just ignore the really good fights that Matchroom put on (Smith-Sosa, McDonnell-Solis, Burns-Relikh, Crolla-Linares, Warrington-Amagasa all outstanding international fights from this year alone) and give Warren credit if he can come even close to putting that caliber of fights on?

Seems some are just looking for a paradigm shift. For someone else to control boxing. Then in a year or two "ol' fish eyes" will receive the bile, abuse and personal insults that others receive now.

Autobarn wrote:So we will see better fights for Saunders and Flanagan, maybe a couple of defections. Who's not happy in Hearn contract - Degale? ... Frampton would be a great catch if possible. Seriously people see Haye going over to Warren with their history?

Competition for Sky and Hearn is healthy, crucial and what is missing. Chance for everyone to up their game. However we won't see their top fighters vs each other unless one is coming off a defeat and desperate and in no position to negotiate. Boxing 101. But do we trust FW to put great, risky fights on with regularity? Outside Benn and Naz when did an FW fighter take consistent risks?

Suddenly is FW going to put his fighters in away from home risks like Brook v Porter, McDonnell v Kameda (twice!), Degale v Dirrell like your despised Eddie did?

Question, does Warren have any stars he's building towards a world title? Curious to know. Because now they'll have a better chance.

And, are Boxrec posters going to just ignore the really good fights that Matchroom put on (Smith-Sosa, McDonnell-Solis, Burns-Relikh, Crolla-Linares, Warrington-Amagasa all outstanding international fights from this year alone) and give Warren credit if he can come even close to putting that caliber of fights on?

Seems some are just looking for a paradigm shift. For someone else to control boxing. Then in a year or two "ol' fish eyes" will receive the bile, abuse and personal insults that others receive now.

What is undoubted, is that this deal will bring Warren fighters to greater public prominence, due to exposure to a wider viewing public, the money will help bankroll big fights, and this will increase pressure on Hearn to offer quality product.

People can buy BT sport as a separate package I hope, otherwise Sky customers will be unaware of what is going on unless it is a PPV fight.

Overall, I don't see how this can be anything but a good thing for the sport.