BoxRec

Enlightened-One wrote:

davie wrote:What happened to percentages of the money earned?

$20m for Pac and $7m for Crawford.
If the fight does $20m the 2 get a free pass and we spend the next year arguing about who ducked who.


Set a percentage, promote the fight right, get it on and what you "deserve" to be paid will be dictated by what you can draw

Fighters have very little influence on the commercial success of the fight cards that they’re involved in, which is why many boxers insist on guaranteed paydays instead of percentages.

Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid, because it was only the blood, sweat and tears of the pugilists themselves that earned their position at the very pinnacle of the sport.

I've never read such a consistent stream of contradiction in all my life.

What the fornicate are you on about?

davie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

davie wrote:What happened to percentages of the money earned?

$20m for Pac and $7m for Crawford.
If the fight does $20m the 2 get a free pass and we spend the next year arguing about who ducked who.


Set a percentage, promote the fight right, get it on and what you "deserve" to be paid will be dictated by what you can draw

Fighters have very little influence on the commercial success of the fight cards that they’re involved in, which is why many boxers insist on guaranteed paydays instead of percentages.

Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid, because it was only the blood, sweat and tears of the pugilists themselves that earned their position at the very pinnacle of the sport.

I've never read such a consistent stream of contradiction in all my life.

What the eff are you on about?

OK, I’ll keep it simple.

Fighters are entitled to negotiate terms that satisfy their expectations… and the best way to do this is to request guaranteed sums not percentages.

Fight fans should be concerned about the paydays fighters are receiving. We should only care about the fights that are being made.

Enlightened-One wrote:

davie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Fighters have very little influence on the commercial success of the fight cards that they’re involved in, which is why many boxers insist on guaranteed paydays instead of percentages.

Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid, because it was only the blood, sweat and tears of the pugilists themselves that earned their position at the very pinnacle of the sport.

I've never read such a consistent stream of contradiction in all my life.

What the eff are you on about?

OK, I’ll keep it simple.

Fighters are entitled to negotiate terms that satisfy their expectations… and the best way to do this is to request guaranteed sums not percentages.

Fight fans should be concerned about the paydays fighters are receiving. We should only care about the fights that are being made.

I'm not concerned with what they are being paid.
They can ask for what they want.
But if what they ask for in prohibitive to getting the fight made, that's when the fans are entitled to be critical.
And this looks very much like fighters pricing themselves out of a big fight.
A fight they'll tell the world they really want.

If they ask for a combined $27m and the fight doesn't make that much in ticket sales, tv revenue, advertising and merchendice, then they are asking too much.
Those things tell you exactly what their economic worth is.

"Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid"

See that is exactly what the fans do. Andre Ward can tell the world he's p4p no1 and wants $30m per fight. He wont get it because the fans dictate a fighters popularity and revenue generating ability. If they don't pay for it a fighter doesn't get paid.

That's why they should get a percentage.
A fight is worth what the paying public are willing to pay for it. A fighter can demand he gets 60% or whatever but it has to be in respect of what the fight is actually able to raise. Otherwise they might just be making the fight unmakeable

Enlightened-One wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:Danny Garcia and Adrien Broner both got heavily abused and criticised by this forum for rejecting a $4m offer to face Pacquiao, but no one is bothered about Crawford asking for $7m!

Why?

Crawford is better than Garcia and Broner.

Talent doesn't always translate to commercial popularity or revenue generating ability.

Spot on; Andre Ward would tell you that.

davie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

davie wrote:
I've never read such a consistent stream of contradiction in all my life.

What the eff are you on about?

OK, I’ll keep it simple.

Fighters are entitled to negotiate terms that satisfy their expectations… and the best way to do this is to request guaranteed sums not percentages.

Fight fans should be concerned about the paydays fighters are receiving. We should only care about the fights that are being made.

I'm not concerned with what they are being paid.
They can ask for what they want.
But if what they ask for in prohibitive to getting the fight made, that's when the fans are entitled to be critical.
And this looks very much like fighters pricing themselves out of a big fight.
A fight they'll tell the world they really want.

If they ask for a combined $27m and the fight doesn't make that much in ticket sales, tv revenue, advertising and merchendice, then they are asking too much.
Those things tell you exactly what their economic worth is.

"Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid"

See that is exactly what the fans do. Andre Ward can tell the world he's p4p no1 and wants $30m per fight. He wont get it because the fans dictate a fighters popularity and revenue generating ability. If they don't pay for it a fighter doesn't get paid.

That's why they should get a percentage.
A fight is worth what the paying public are willing to pay for it. A fighter can demand he gets 60% or whatever but it has to be in respect of what the fight is actually able to raise. Otherwise they might just be making the fight unmakeable

Nothing can stop fight fans from being critical and nothing can prevent certain fighters from demanding excessively large purses that occasionally prevents bouts from being made.

When fighters make unreasonable demands, it usually results in the removal of a payday opportunity, which is a form of self-inflicted punishment that is more painful than the widespread criticism expressed by fight fans.

Even though there's a risk of greedy fighters rendering certain bouts as commercially unviable, they are entitled to be paid their economic worth, regardless of the criticism expressed by casual uneducated fans.

The problem with many casual fight fans, relates to the fact they usually express criticism without bothering to educate themselves with the facts or considering what they would do themselves if they were wearing the shoes of the people their hatred is targeted towards.

For example: Manny got accused of ducking by demanding a $20m guarantee to face Crawford, but the Filipino has earned that amount for just about every contest he's competed in since 2010.

That's the reason why fight fans shouldn't concern themselves about paydays, because they're not in possession of all the facts, but this doesn't deter many of them from being needlessly critical, often unfairly.

Crawford denied asking for $7m via his twitter. He has every right to imo. This is the fight that will make him a bigger star.

TooEasy12 wrote:I don't think that price is unreasonable at all. Crawford is a bigger draw than Vargas and probably Bradley as well (Especially at this stage in Bradley's career).

Again, a Pac VS Crawford PPV would generate a lot of revenue. I think his purse plus the PPV revenue should cover the 7 million.

Also, I wouldn't put too much stock into what Roach says. He has a bad habit of talking trash lol.

Not even close to that kind of money in that fight. 7 million would be too much for Manny. It would do an absolute max of 500k and I'd bet much less than that.

Enlightened-One wrote:

davie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: OK, I’ll keep it simple.

Fighters are entitled to negotiate terms that satisfy their expectations… and the best way to do this is to request guaranteed sums not percentages.

Fight fans should be concerned about the paydays fighters are receiving. We should only care about the fights that are being made.

I'm not concerned with what they are being paid.
They can ask for what they want.
But if what they ask for in prohibitive to getting the fight made, that's when the fans are entitled to be critical.
And this looks very much like fighters pricing themselves out of a big fight.
A fight they'll tell the world they really want.

If they ask for a combined $27m and the fight doesn't make that much in ticket sales, tv revenue, advertising and merchendice, then they are asking too much.
Those things tell you exactly what their economic worth is.

"Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid"

See that is exactly what the fans do. Andre Ward can tell the world he's p4p no1 and wants $30m per fight. He wont get it because the fans dictate a fighters popularity and revenue generating ability. If they don't pay for it a fighter doesn't get paid.

That's why they should get a percentage.
A fight is worth what the paying public are willing to pay for it. A fighter can demand he gets 60% or whatever but it has to be in respect of what the fight is actually able to raise. Otherwise they might just be making the fight unmakeable

Nothing can stop fight fans from being critical and nothing can prevent certain fighters from demanding excessively large purses that occasionally prevents bouts from being made.

When fighters make unreasonable demands, it usually results in the removal of a payday opportunity, which is a form of self-inflicted punishment that is more painful than the widespread criticism expressed by fight fans.

Even though there's a risk of greedy fighters rendering certain bouts as commercially unviable, they are entitled to be paid their economic worth, regardless of the criticism expressed by casual uneducated fans.

The problem with many casual fight fans, relates to the fact they usually express criticism without bothering to educate themselves with the facts or considering what they would do themselves if they were wearing the shoes of the people their hatred is targeted towards.

For example: Manny got accused of ducking by demanding a $20m guarantee to face Crawford, but the Filipino has earned that amount for just about every contest he's competed in since 2010.

That's the reason why fight fans shouldn't concern themselves about paydays, because they're not in possession of all the facts, but this doesn't deter many of them from being needlessly critical, often unfairly.

Manny's guarantee for Bradley 3 was $7 million. His purse was on a percentage for Vargas, so i doubt he made anywhere near $20 million. Whether he ends up making $20 million depends on PPV sales. His demand for a $20 million guarantee for Crawford was in fact 3 times higher than his recent fights. He stands to make much more than $20 million. Not sure why that is so hard for you to understand.

I think Vargas was 3 million.

Badhusker wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

davie wrote:
I'm not concerned with what they are being paid.
They can ask for what they want.
But if what they ask for in prohibitive to getting the fight made, that's when the fans are entitled to be critical.
And this looks very much like fighters pricing themselves out of a big fight.
A fight they'll tell the world they really want.

If they ask for a combined $27m and the fight doesn't make that much in ticket sales, tv revenue, advertising and merchendice, then they are asking too much.
Those things tell you exactly what their economic worth is.

"Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid"

See that is exactly what the fans do. Andre Ward can tell the world he's p4p no1 and wants $30m per fight. He wont get it because the fans dictate a fighters popularity and revenue generating ability. If they don't pay for it a fighter doesn't get paid.

That's why they should get a percentage.
A fight is worth what the paying public are willing to pay for it. A fighter can demand he gets 60% or whatever but it has to be in respect of what the fight is actually able to raise. Otherwise they might just be making the fight unmakeable

Nothing can stop fight fans from being critical and nothing can prevent certain fighters from demanding excessively large purses that occasionally prevents bouts from being made.

When fighters make unreasonable demands, it usually results in the removal of a payday opportunity, which is a form of self-inflicted punishment that is more painful than the widespread criticism expressed by fight fans.

Even though there's a risk of greedy fighters rendering certain bouts as commercially unviable, they are entitled to be paid their economic worth, regardless of the criticism expressed by casual uneducated fans.

The problem with many casual fight fans, relates to the fact they usually express criticism without bothering to educate themselves with the facts or considering what they would do themselves if they were wearing the shoes of the people their hatred is targeted towards.

For example: Manny got accused of ducking by demanding a $20m guarantee to face Crawford, but the Filipino has earned that amount for just about every contest he's competed in since 2010.

That's the reason why fight fans shouldn't concern themselves about paydays, because they're not in possession of all the facts, but this doesn't deter many of them from being needlessly critical, often unfairly.

Manny's guarantee for Bradley 3 was $7 million. His purse was on a percentage for Vargas, so i doubt he made anywhere near $20 million. Whether he ends up making $20 million depends on PPV sales. His demand for a $20 million guarantee for Crawford was in fact 3 times higher than his recent fights. He stands to make much more than $20 million. Not sure why that is so hard for you to understand.

Please review the evidence that I posted earlier in this thread and then let me know if you're willing to revise your thoughts in light of receiving information that should clearly eradicate any of your doubts.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Badhusker wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Nothing can stop fight fans from being critical and nothing can prevent certain fighters from demanding excessively large purses that occasionally prevents bouts from being made.

When fighters make unreasonable demands, it usually results in the removal of a payday opportunity, which is a form of self-inflicted punishment that is more painful than the widespread criticism expressed by fight fans.

Even though there's a risk of greedy fighters rendering certain bouts as commercially unviable, they are entitled to be paid their economic worth, regardless of the criticism expressed by casual uneducated fans.

The problem with many casual fight fans, relates to the fact they usually express criticism without bothering to educate themselves with the facts or considering what they would do themselves if they were wearing the shoes of the people their hatred is targeted towards.

For example: Manny got accused of ducking by demanding a $20m guarantee to face Crawford, but the Filipino has earned that amount for just about every contest he's competed in since 2010.

That's the reason why fight fans shouldn't concern themselves about paydays, because they're not in possession of all the facts, but this doesn't deter many of them from being needlessly critical, often unfairly.

Manny's guarantee for Bradley 3 was $7 million. His purse was on a percentage for Vargas, so i doubt he made anywhere near $20 million. Whether he ends up making $20 million depends on PPV sales. His demand for a $20 million guarantee for Crawford was in fact 3 times higher than his recent fights. He stands to make much more than $20 million. Not sure why that is so hard for you to understand.

Please review the evidence that I posted earlier in this thread and then let me know if you're willing to revise your thoughts in light of receiving information that should clearly eradicate any of your doubts.

I have reviewed the evidence, and it solidifies my stance that you have no idea what the fornicate you are talking about.

Badhusker wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Badhusker wrote:

Manny's guarantee for Bradley 3 was $7 million. His purse was on a percentage for Vargas, so i doubt he made anywhere near $20 million. Whether he ends up making $20 million depends on PPV sales. His demand for a $20 million guarantee for Crawford was in fact 3 times higher than his recent fights. He stands to make much more than $20 million. Not sure why that is so hard for you to understand.

Please review the evidence that I posted earlier in this thread and then let me know if you're willing to revise your thoughts in light of receiving information that should clearly eradicate any of your doubts.

I have reviewed the evidence, and it solidifies my stance that you have no idea what the f*** you are talking about.

The financials of Manny's paydays that I've articulated in my posts in this thread were sourced by information supplied by ESPN, Bob Arum and the NSAC, but if you choose to refute these statistics based on nothing but your gut instinct, then that's fine by me.

It seems that you feel it's more important to try and win an argument through the use of aggression and insults than to gain knowledge about the objective truths of reality, which can be acquired by researching the actual facts of the situation.

If you're capable of providing evidence to prove me wrong, then please do, as it'll help me to acquire new knowledge, which is a good thing.

However, ignoring my evidence (whilst refusing to provide your own), failing to address every single one of my claims directly and also being aggressive and resorting to using insults as your only means to undermine me, is simply an admission of defeat on your part.

As a gentle reminder, here's an extract of the information that I have previously supplied to the forum, which contains hyperlinks to the third-party sources:

Pacquiao’s guarantee for his first fight against Timothy Bradley was $26m. The Filipino legend received a $20m guarantee for the 2014 rematch and then Top Rank guaranteed another $20m for last year’s third bout of the trilogy.

According to Forbes, when Pacquiao faced Timothy Bradley for the third time (last year), it was the tenth straight fight Pacquiao earned at least $20m, which would have dated back to his 2010 contest against Antonio Margarito.

In terms of our debate, I expect one of four scenarios to play out:

* you apologise for your insults and concede my points
* you refute my evidence by providing your own, which is my preferred outcome
* you fail to respond, which means you've admitted to being wrong
* you insult me again, which means you've admitted to being wrong

If what you say is true, about me having "no idea what the f***" I'm talking about and that I find things hard to understand, then it should be easy for you to undermine my response with evidence?

Lets put this another way then.

If the Enlightened-one is so confident a Pacquiao v Crawford bout can raise enough to cover both guys demands, why don't they just agree to somewhere close to a 75/25 or 70/30 type split.

If there's $27m in the pot for the fighters, they're happy.
If the fight grosses more they will be even happier and the percentage idea was actually better for them than a fixed fee.


If the fight doesn't do the figures (and I'm not saying it won't) then as I said earlier, their demands are unjustified

I can't see a circumstance where a fixed fee is the right option.

davie wrote:If the Enlightened-one is so confident a Pacquiao v Crawford bout can raise enough to cover both guys demands, why don't they just agree to somewhere close to a 75/25 or 70/30 type split.

I’m not confident about the Crawford-Pacquiao fight being commercially big enough to warrant the Filipino’s demand of a $20m payday or the Hunter’s alleged $7m, but that isn’t a claim that I’ve ever made. So I won’t comment on this matter any further.

The original argument was related to several forum members accusing Pacquiao of being a “duck” by “overpricing” himself with his so-called “excessive” $20m guarantee to face Crawford.

So I tried to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Manny’s request was entirely reasonable based on the fact that he’s been commanding $20m+ paydays per bout for almost every single fight he’s competed in since 2010. The information is easily accessible to validate the accuracy of my claim.

If you were Manny Pacquiao, would you personally be willing to take a huge pay cut to fight a top six pound-for-pounder like Crawford?

Would you allow peer pressure from others to compel you to agree to take a significant pay cut to perform your day job?

Will Manny Pacquiao’s career be adversely affected by a significant degree with the absence of Crawford’s name on his resume?

I can’t see any reason why Manny Pacquiao “needs” to face Terence Crawford… and the absence of this motivation makes me believe that the Filipino would rather face second-tier opponents than a fellow pound-for-pounder if he is being compensated similar sums.

Well maybe there comes a time when a top fighter has to ask why did I make $20m+ to fight Tim Bradley yet I can't draw in that kind of money to fight a p4p ranked star.
Is my star value fading in line with my ability and physical attributes?

If a fighter prices himself out of a fight, fans have the right to question whehter they really want the big fights and big challenges.

davie wrote:If a fighter prices himself out of a fight, fans have the right to question whehter they really want the big fights and big challenges.

Last year, Manny Pacquiao received a $20m guarantee to face Timothy Bradley Jr., a fight that he won by a wide margin. He looked moderately impressive against Jessie Vargas seven months later.

Therefore, why are you assuming that Pacquiao is “pricing himself out of a fight” against Crawford? Where has the money gone? What has happened over the last nine months that compels you to believe that he must accept a huge pay cut to engage in a “big fight” against Terence Crawford?

Fighters aren’t obliged to adhere to unreasonable and whimsical demands of fight fans, especially if their reasoning is not based on the analysis of facts.

golden oldie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

davie wrote:What happened to percentages of the money earned?

$20m for Pac and $7m for Crawford.
If the fight does $20m the 2 get a free pass and we spend the next year arguing about who ducked who.


Set a percentage, promote the fight right, get it on and what you "deserve" to be paid will be dictated by what you can draw

Fighters have very little influence on the commercial success of the fight cards that they’re involved in, which is why many boxers insist on guaranteed paydays instead of percentages.

Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid, because it was only the blood, sweat and tears of the pugilists themselves that earned their position at the very pinnacle of the sport.

Of course they do, because ultimately they are the ones that pay.

There was a time when Roy Jones was considered by just about everyone in the game, boxing publications, and indeed fans to be the best fighter in the world. Unfortunately for him not enough of them were willing to PAY the amount required to satisfy his demands, according to his HBO paymasters.

Fighters have every right to demand a payday that meets their expectations, that matches their economic worth... and if the promoters and TV networks are happy to meet those demands, then any complaints about the size of paydays uttered by fight fans should be ignored.

Genuine fans of the sport of boxing will never flatly refuse to watch a contest solely based on their belief that one or both of the pugilists involved in the fight are being overpaid.

When you were recruited during your current or previous employment, did your prospective employer ignore your salary demands and instead poll the general public walking down the street to ascertain your worth?

golden oldie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Of course they do, because ultimately they are the ones that pay.

There was a time when Roy Jones was considered by just about everyone in the game, boxing publications, and indeed fans to be the best fighter in the world. Unfortunately for him not enough of them were willing to PAY the amount required to satisfy his demands, according to his HBO paymasters.

Fighters have every right to demand a payday that meets their expectations, that matches their economic worth... and if the promoters and TV networks are happy to meet those demands, then any complaints about the size of paydays uttered by fight fans should be ignored.

Genuine fans of the sport of boxing will never flatly refuse to watch a contest solely based on their belief that one or both of the pugilists involved in the fight are being overpaid.

When you were recruited during your current or previous employment, did your prospective employer ignore your salary demands and instead poll the general public walking down the street to ascertain your worth?

Nice speech, but completely irrelevant. I gave you an example of fans dictating the worth of a fighter by NOT paying the fees for Jones Jr's PPV fights. Hence he and his paymasters HBO ( and ultimately the PAYING public ) had to make other arrangements.

You can try to complicate the matter all you like, it makes no difference. If the fans won't pay, then THEY are telling the fighter he isn't worth it.

You need to realise that any “Smart Aleck” comments, such as “Nice speech, but completely irrelevant”, will inevitably backfire on yourself and make you look foolish when you insist on dishonestly attacking only an extract of an opinion instead of someone’s true perception based on the entirety of the thoughts they articulated.

So please read my entire sentences that you quoted and address my actual thoughts, not a carefully selected misrepresented extract:

Enlightened-One wrote:Fighters deserve to be paid their economic worth, depending on their level of popularity and revenue generating ability… and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they should be paid...

Enlightened-One wrote:Fighters have every right to demand a payday that meets their expectations, that matches their economic worth... and if the promoters and TV networks are happy to meet those demands, then any complaints about the size of paydays uttered by fight fans should be ignored.

You actually quoted these sentences verbatim, but somehow you preferred to attack a misrepresented version of my opinion, which dishonestly excluded my explanation about economics!

I look forward to reading your apology!

golden oldie wrote:You are right about things back firing on you to make you look stupid, and it must be said in your case it works perfectly.

You also wrote.

" and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they ( fighters ) should be paid "

History shows, both that they have EVERY right, and indeed that they sometimes execute that right through their wallets.

I will look forward to your apology.

I think it’s futile to argue with someone, like you, who insists on attacking a misrepresented version of my thoughts.

If you choose to ignore my entire explanations, by attacking a false account of my comments, then I am not obliged to defend a stance that does not represent my actual opinion.

This is the third time you’ve refused to acknowledge my explanation about economics, whilst dishonestly attacking a small extract of a sentence that I have written.

I think I will disengage from our discussion, because I don’t want to continue feeding the troll.

golden oldie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

golden oldie wrote:You are right about things back firing on you to make you look stupid, and it must be said in your case it works perfectly.

You also wrote.

" and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they ( fighters ) should be paid "

History shows, both that they have EVERY right, and indeed that they sometimes execute that right through their wallets.

I will look forward to your apology.

I think it’s futile to argue with someone, like you, who insists on attacking a misrepresented version of my thoughts.

If you choose to ignore my entire explanations, by attacking a false account of my comments, then I am not obliged to defend a stance that does not represent my actual opinion.

This is the third time you’ve refused to acknowledge my explanation about economics, whilst dishonestly attacking a small extract of a sentence that I have written.

I think I will disengage from our discussion, because I don’t want to continue feeding the troll.

I think that might be best you pompous fool. If you really want to try to rewrite the laws of economics try the LSE, they would laugh someone like you into anonymity.

You might try to start by desisting from writing such moronic categorical statements like

and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they ( fighters ) should be paid

when they simply DO have that right and frequently exercise it. ANY form of entertainment is dictated by what the public will pay to either watch or listen to it, fighting is no different. It is called supply, and demand.

I'll give an example so simple even someone as pompous as you might grasp it.

In any field of expertise within the fight game the Jones Jr / Ruiz fight was a more desirable fight than the Lewis / Tyson fight that preceded it by 9 months. However the public by using their wallets made the lesser fight the highest grossing boxing event EVER at that time. Supply and Demand son, Supply and Demand.

That’s a great story! It doesn’t actually relate to my actual sentiments though.

You can continue to lie, in the desperate hope that raw repetition will eventually displace the truth for others following our argument, but you’re pretending to argue against a stance that I have never articulated.

golden oldie wrote:This is really quite simple.

Did you write the following words?

" and fight fans have no right to dictate how much they ( fighters ) should be paid "

A simple yes or no will do.

Then go look in a mirror, and you will discover a LIAR.

The following has nothing to do with economics, but as a general life rule, it might serve you well.

" When you are in a hole, stop ferking digging "

Have you ever seen this diagram? It’s a great analogy for our discussion!


You insist on quoting only a small extract of a sentence I wrote, which takes the explanation of my thoughts out of context.

So whilst my actual stance may be accurately reflected by the first row in the above diagram, you’ve decided to misrepresent my actual words by pretending that I actually stated the fourth sentence, whilst conveniently ignoring my full explanation.

Simply put: you’re lying and you are also demanding that I defend a position that I do not hold!

golden oldie wrote:No, what you are actually doing is wriggling and squirming away from what you arrogantly wrote. Don't worry it is a trait a of all gutless liars like you. The context is irrelevant, almost as irrelevant as your thoughts, which are totally worthless.

You wrote that fans have no right to decide what fighters are worth because you are an arrogant little twit.

You wriggling about being caught just makes your arrogance even more pathetic.

No run along, like a good little boy.

It's rather nice of you to concede defeat.

golden oldie wrote:Delusional as well as arrogantly stupid I see. Go away and learn about a subject before you engage with people who actually know about what they are discussing.

None of your posts have directly addressed any of my actual sentiments.

golden oldie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

golden oldie wrote:No, what you are actually doing is wriggling and squirming away from what you arrogantly wrote. Don't worry it is a trait a of all gutless liars like you. The context is irrelevant, almost as irrelevant as your thoughts, which are totally worthless.

You wrote that fans have no right to decide what fighters are worth because you are an arrogant little twit.

You wriggling about being caught just makes your arrogance even more pathetic.

No run along, like a good little boy.

It's rather nice of you to concede defeat.

Delusional as well as arrogantly stupid I see. Go away and learn about a subject before you engage with people who actually know about what they are discussing.

I don't believe I have ever read anything as moronic as your statement about fans having no right to decide the worth of an entertainer, and make no mistake that is ALL fighters are. You should go into business as a promoter, your first show would be your last, with your cretinous outlook.

Not even someone as arrogant as you could force the public to buy tickets or PPV's, so how do you expect to fill the pot to pay the performer / s without them?

You are without doubt, an idiot, and a Walter Mitty style liar.

Well said !

Badhusker wrote:

golden oldie wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: It's rather nice of you to concede defeat.

Delusional as well as arrogantly stupid I see. Go away and learn about a subject before you engage with people who actually know about what they are discussing.

I don't believe I have ever read anything as moronic as your statement about fans having no right to decide the worth of an entertainer, and make no mistake that is ALL fighters are. You should go into business as a promoter, your first show would be your last, with your cretinous outlook.

Not even someone as arrogant as you could force the public to buy tickets or PPV's, so how do you expect to fill the pot to pay the performer / s without them?

You are without doubt, an idiot, and a Walter Mitty style liar.

Well said !

Like that fellow you’re supporting, you also attacked my claims in this thread and then decided to duck me when I supported them with evidence. You cannot defend your own stance and this annoys you.