BoxRec

JimJim2009 wrote:It will be interesting to see how this does work out. I do think a big problem for BN is its obscurity, the average sports fan will not have a clue it exists. At least with the BT platform, awareness can be spread massively. There is probably a finite volume of boxing fans in the UK willing to pay for BN, and they'll all know about it. £12 a month is honestly fxxk all in the big scheme of things. Yes Fwank may lose dedicated subscribers who may as well just pay for BT sport, but through wider awareness he'll pick up new subscribers, plus if Fwank can launch his PPV aspirations in 2017 off the back of this, there is serious money to be made there.

The risk to Eddie is the harm done to Sky viewing figures if BT and Sky go head to head. Eddie needs those viewing figures, he does have a long term contract but BN wouldn't dent those figures, BT might, if they go head to head.

BT and Sky going head to head would not really include boxing as a serious concern. Football is way and beyond everything else in terms of sports coverage, and Sky has more of it. Add grand slam tennis, England test matches, golf majors and rugby internationals, (probably the four biggest sports after football) and there is little serious competition. The audience who would genuinely choose between one and the other based on boxing coverage are a drop in the ocean.

The move to BT has to be a positive for BN fighters; we have comparable fighters in the shape of Flanagan and Crolla for example, but nobody has heard of the former. BJ Saunders fighting in a 300 seater leisure centre is an absolute disgrace. He's an unbeaten world champion for crying out loud. Boxing isn't dead, but for all the promotion these fighters receive they might as well be.

I'm just not sure BN will pick up enough new subscribers though. What will they be subscribing for if the big fights are all on BT (and Sky) anyway? I'd say your average person in the UK who is a broad sports fan will have Sky or BT, they will often pay for PPV fights involving the likes of Joshua, and if they get an extra few free fights thrown in then great, but they sure as hell aren't going to spend £144 a year to watch the likes of Walsh and Skeete.

BT have got the rights to 2017 Ashes series and are targeting cricket coverage generally as a priority .

samwbr wrote:BT have got the rights to 2017 Ashes series and are targeting cricket coverage generally as a priority .

True enough but Sky have the rights for the 2019 Ashes and the World Cup. Obviously they would want the 2017 series but it's in Australia, hence middle of the night viewing over here.

The contract BT have won was for domestic and home Australia internationals. The ECB contract is up after the 2019 Ashes and if Sky win that, (and there's no reason to think they won't), they will be the channel for anyone who wants to watch England playing cricket.

As I said in the Tyron Nurse thread, Josh's dad was sat next to Frank ringside at Cardiff. Not a shock at all after seeing that. Matchroom have clearly lost him but too proud to admit that.

Eddie already starting to make comments about Warrington not wanting tough fights

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Eddie already starting to make comments about Warrington not wanting tough fights

Where did he say that?

lefty wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Eddie already starting to make comments about Warrington not wanting tough fights

Where did he say that?

http://talkingboxing.co.uk/eddie-hearn- ... -departure

mentions proposing a couple of fights that Warrington didn't want, then goes on to say the Leeds numbers starting to dwindle due to the lack of big fight

Marlo Stanfield wrote:

lefty wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Eddie already starting to make comments about Warrington not wanting tough fights

Where did he say that?

http://talkingboxing.co.uk/eddie-hearn- ... -departure

mentions proposing a couple of fights that Warrington didn't want, then goes on to say the Leeds numbers starting to dwindle due to the lack of big fight

Lol the old positive spin haha.

Josh Warrington under W@rren down the WBO FW Title route?
Oscar Valdez is the current WBO champ.
Warrington vs. Valdez, anybody know how Warrington would fare?

lefty wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:

lefty wrote: Where did he say that?

http://talkingboxing.co.uk/eddie-hearn- ... -departure

mentions proposing a couple of fights that Warrington didn't want, then goes on to say the Leeds numbers starting to dwindle due to the lack of big fight

Lol the old positive spin haha.

haha yeah certainly does look that way. Warrington did duck Selby in August though tbf maybe his team want a few more gimmes before stepping to world level

wesshaw1985 wrote:Josh Warrington under W@rren down the WBO FW Title route?
Oscar Valdez is the current WBO champ.
Warrington vs. Valdez, anybody know how Warrington would fare?

Josh gets splattered

Marlo Stanfield wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:Josh Warrington under W@rren down the WBO FW Title route?
Oscar Valdez is the current WBO champ.
Warrington vs. Valdez, anybody know how Warrington would fare?

Josh gets splattered

best swerve that route then...

May sound rather farfetched but my mates work are having their Christmas do today, they've got Terry Flanagan, Martin Murray & Josh Warrington doing guest appearances and speeches. Warrington was doing his speech on stage and reckons he's fighting Selby next.

Not sure how that fight happens and personally think he's talking nonsense but take it as you will..

His fans have cost him here. He'd have been an asset if they could be trusted to travel. Manchester and Sheffield were off limits to them.

lefty wrote: Most people are just going to cancel their allegedly subscription and get BT sports instead.

Thats what Francis (or George) Warren recommended people who ALREADY have both to do. If you already have the full BT Sports Pack, whether that is through Sky or BT vision (or whatever it is called) - you are going to get allegedly bundled with it.... so essentially if you are only interested in Champions League football and have bought BT Sports - you will not ONLY get the BT Sport boxing (simultaneously shown on allegedly) but also you get the 10 or so fights that are "exclusive" on allegedly in the price cos the CHANNEL is coming well and will be free (for those with BT sport).

As someone with both allegedly and BT Sport I am seeking confirmation that once the deal is through, will I miss ANY allegedly boxing if I cancel my allegedly subscription - cos how I understand it.... if I already pay for BT Sport, then from when the deal kicks in.... I am essentially paying for allegedly twice (because it will be part of my BT Subscription).

From a boxing fans' point of few, what I am also wondering is what this means to BT Sports current showcasing to PBC (not frequent I know). Are we actually going to end up with less boxing than currently.

It will be interesting to see how Eddie reacts to his fighters getting poached for a change.bwonder if he'll find it as funny when the shoes on the other foot.

stujones wrote:

lefty wrote: Most people are just going to cancel their allegedly subscription and get BT sports instead.

Thats what Francis (or George) Warren recommended people who ALREADY have both to do. If you already have the full BT Sports Pack, whether that is through Sky or BT vision (or whatever it is called) - you are going to get allegedly bundled with it.... so essentially if you are only interested in Champions League football and have bought BT Sports - you will not ONLY get the BT Sport boxing (simultaneously shown on allegedly) but also you get the 10 or so fights that are "exclusive" on allegedly in the price cos the CHANNEL is coming well and will be free (for those with BT sport).

As someone with both allegedly and BT Sport I am seeking confirmation that once the deal is through, will I miss ANY allegedly boxing if I cancel my allegedly subscription - cos how I understand it.... if I already pay for BT Sport, then from when the deal kicks in.... I am essentially paying for allegedly twice (because it will be part of my BT Subscription).

From a boxing fans' point of few, what I am also wondering is what this means to BT Sports current showcasing to PBC (not frequent I know). Are we actually going to end up with less boxing than currently.

I don't have BT but might get it then cancel allegedly but waiting to see what they do about ppv if they remain free to subscribers through allegedly direct I won't bother getting BT

stujones wrote:

lefty wrote: Most people are just going to cancel their allegedly subscription and get BT sports instead.

Thats what Francis (or George) Warren recommended people who ALREADY have both to do. If you already have the full BT Sports Pack, whether that is through Sky or BT vision (or whatever it is called) - you are going to get allegedly bundled with it.... so essentially if you are only interested in Champions League football and have bought BT Sports - you will not ONLY get the BT Sport boxing (simultaneously shown on allegedly) but also you get the 10 or so fights that are "exclusive" on allegedly in the price cos the CHANNEL is coming well and will be free (for those with BT sport).

As someone with both allegedly and BT Sport I am seeking confirmation that once the deal is through, will I miss ANY allegedly boxing if I cancel my allegedly subscription - cos how I understand it.... if I already pay for BT Sport, then from when the deal kicks in.... I am essentially paying for allegedly twice (because it will be part of my BT Subscription).

From a boxing fans' point of few, what I am also wondering is what this means to BT Sports current showcasing to PBC (not frequent I know). Are we actually going to end up with less boxing than currently.

I don't have BT but might get it then cancel allegedly but waiting to see what they do about ppv if they remain free to subscribers through allegedly direct I won't bother getting BT

I found a lot of Warrington's fights to be tedious entertainment to be honest.

Amagasa fight was good, though.

His fans are definitely tedious.

wesshaw1985 wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:Josh Warrington under W@rren down the WBO FW Title route?
Oscar Valdez is the current WBO champ.
Warrington vs. Valdez, anybody know how Warrington would fare?

Josh gets splattered

best swerve that route then...

I don't see what the hype is with Valdez tbh the guy he fought for the WBO belt was dire.

And Gradovich went life and death with a journeyman in the fight before.

That said featherweight isn't that deep below the belt holders there's not that much.

Disappointed he never went for the Selby fight. Amagasa was clearly positioned as an slim type fight to get him ready.

Autobarn wrote:Disappointed he never went for the Selby fight. Amagasa was clearly positioned as an slim type fight to get him ready.

Agreed he was an ideal opponent to prepare him for that. Gave a Josh something to think about.

Me and my friends were gutted and didn't bother attending the fight that followed, vs the guy who didn't even make weight.


Lot of JW fans are hooligans or boxing ignorant.

Fitzy901 wrote:Mitchell "The Mouth" Smith calling him out already lol.

Him and Jonjo Carroll.

Mitchell smith weighed 142lbs in his last fight 16lbs heavier over featherweight.