BoxRec

I won't be buying any of those. I'll get the GGG fight for no extra charge as I subscribe to BN. The rest are a joke as PPV.

SteveDow wrote:I won't be buying any of those. I'll get the GGG fight for no extra charge as I subscribe to BN. The rest are a joke as PPV.

luck you pal good fight !

kbackup408 wrote:

SteveDow wrote:I won't be buying any of those. I'll get the GGG fight for no extra charge as I subscribe to BN. The rest are a joke as PPV.

luck you pal good fight !

BN is well worth the 12 quid a month fee.

What channel is Parker v Fury on ?

Nobody's heard of either of them, how can that be PPV ?

Groves v Cox - the mind boggles. Cox on his results probably falls short of British level.

Eubank v who - the mind explodes.

How can it be viable to put these on PPV. Will they even sell 10k ?

CaptainSpacerod wrote:What channel is Parker v Fury on ?

Nobody's heard of either of them, how can that be PPV ?

Groves v Cox - the mind boggles. Cox on his results probably falls short of British level.

Eubank v who - the mind explodes.

How can it be viable to put these on PPV. Will they even sell 10k ?

Parker v Fury is farcically on youtube for a tenner!

CaptainSpacerod wrote:What channel is Parker v Fury on ?

Nobody's heard of either of them, how can that be PPV ?

Groves v Cox - the mind boggles. Cox on his results probably falls short of British level.

Eubank v who - the mind explodes.

How can it be viable to put these on PPV. Will they even sell 10k ?

Parker/ Fury is apparently going to be a Youtube PPV. WTF, a Heavyweight Title match featuring a British challenger with the Fury surname & that's the best they can do? Surely they'll be so many streams of that it will be ridiculous, not that I'm condoning that sort of thing obviously.

As for Groves/ Cox & the Eubanks fight, the recent PPV success seem to back up that casuals will buy an event for a name they recognise regardless of the quality of the opposition.

SteveDow wrote: Parker v Fury is farcically on youtube for a tenner!

Amazing. Which fkn genius came up with that idea. Mick Hennessey probably

moogie101 wrote: As for Groves/ Cox & the Eubanks fight, the recent PPV success seem to back up that casuals will buy an event for a name they recognise regardless of the quality of the opposition.

What PPV success. If you mean Floyd Conor I think that had a lot of angles from which to draw punters.

The Groves and Eubank fights are only of interest to "serious" fans for want of a better phrase

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

moogie101 wrote: As for Groves/ Cox & the Eubanks fight, the recent PPV success seem to back up that casuals will buy an event for a name they recognise regardless of the quality of the opposition.

What PPV success. If you mean Floyd Conor I think that had a lot of angles from which to draw punters.

The Groves and Eubank fights are only of interest to "serious" fans for want of a better phrase

I didn't mean Conor/ Mayweather, I was referring to some of the shite that has been put on PPV over the last few years that has made money & now every fighter expects to be a PPV Star.

moogie101 wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:What channel is Parker v Fury on ?

Nobody's heard of either of them, how can that be PPV ?

Groves v Cox - the mind boggles. Cox on his results probably falls short of British level.

Eubank v who - the mind explodes.

How can it be viable to put these on PPV. Will they even sell 10k ?

Parker/ Fury is apparently going to be a Youtube PPV. WTF, a Heavyweight Title match featuring a British challenger with the Fury surname & that's the best they can do? Surely they'll be so many streams of that it will be ridiculous, not that I'm condoning that sort of thing obviously.

As for Groves/ Cox & the Eubanks fight, the recent PPV success seem to back up that casuals will buy an event for a name they recognise regardless of the quality of the opposition.

Lets face it hughie is virtually unknown in the uk.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

moogie101 wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:What channel is Parker v Fury on ?

Nobody's heard of either of them, how can that be PPV ?

Groves v Cox - the mind boggles. Cox on his results probably falls short of British level.

Eubank v who - the mind explodes.

How can it be viable to put these on PPV. Will they even sell 10k ?

Parker/ Fury is apparently going to be a Youtube PPV. WTF, a Heavyweight Title match featuring a British challenger with the Fury surname & that's the best they can do? Surely they'll be so many streams of that it will be ridiculous, not that I'm condoning that sort of thing obviously.

As for Groves/ Cox & the Eubanks fight, the recent PPV success seem to back up that casuals will buy an event for a name they recognise regardless of the quality of the opposition.

Lets face it hughie is virtually unknown in the uk.

Yeah I agree he's not a big name, but as I said if they can't drum up some TV interest with a World Heavyweight title fight, and a British Challenger who is related to Tyson Fury then everyone involved in promoting this fight needs to think of changing careers.

CaptainSpacerod wrote:What channel is Parker v Fury on ?

Nobody's heard of either of them, how can that be PPV ?

Groves v Cox - the mind boggles. Cox on his results probably falls short of British level.

Eubank v who - the mind explodes.

How can it be viable to put these on PPV. Will they even sell 10k ?

i've had the hump all evening pal once I found out ITV box office is showing the WBSS makes me so frustrated because I actually liked the tournament and its format

kbackup408 wrote:
i've had the hump all evening pal once I found out ITV box office is showing the WBSS makes me so frustrated because I actually liked the tournament and its format

It's unbelievable the sh1te that gets put on PPV these days.

I think the tournament itself, while a decent idea, is a bit 2nd division with regard to the 168 boys. I don't know that much about the cruisers but apparently their tourn has a more stellar line up. Is that PPV as well ?

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

kbackup408 wrote:
i've had the hump all evening pal once I found out ITV box office is showing the WBSS makes me so frustrated because I actually liked the tournament and its format

It's unbelievable the sh1te that gets put on PPV these days.

I think the tournament itself, while a decent idea, is a bit 2nd division with regard to the 168 boys. I don't know that much about the cruisers but apparently their tourn has a more stellar line up. Is that PPV as well ?

yes pal the Groves fight is on PPV and i've heard the Smith fight will be on PPV. Honestly things like this make you fall outta love with a sport, having to dish out an extra £20/30/40 quid on fights along side SKY and Virgin is daylight robbery !

Surely the cruiserweight tournament won't be PPV. None of the fighters are British and whilst it'll be great to watch, there are no household names involved either.

PPV and the question of what fights are 'worth' it is based entirely on how many people are willing to pay for it. It's just basic economics. If you make cars and people will pay a hundred grand for one, that's what they're worth.

Joshua is obviously 'worth' PPV because he keeps getting put on them, doing good figures and making everyone involved loads of money. But someone like Anthony Crolla or Luke Campbell wouldn't, hence they're not.

Which is why I find the Hughie thing so odd. You're not a PPV fighter by virtue of your ability, or record, or anything else beyond your ability to sell, and he just doesn't. I'd be surprised if he makes any real money from the fight whatsoever.

dirk2686 wrote:PPV and the question of what fights are 'worth' it is based entirely on how many people are willing to pay for it. It's just basic economics. If you make cars and people will pay a hundred grand for one, that's what they're worth.

Joshua is obviously 'worth' PPV because he keeps getting put on them, doing good figures and making everyone involved loads of money. But someone like Anthony Crolla or Luke Campbell wouldn't, hence they're not.

Which is why I find the Hughie thing so odd. You're not a PPV fighter by virtue of your ability, or record, or anything else beyond your ability to sell, and he just doesn't. I'd be surprised if he makes any real money from the fight whatsoever.

They figure they're going to lose money anyway, nobody would pay them for the fight, so any number of buys helps the bottom line.

kbackup408 wrote:Evening lads, I don't mind occasionally paying for a fight but you really are pushing the boundaries when you put so many PPV's one after the another.

I was under the impression the WBSS would be on free to air TV but this is taking the mick!

What do you guys feel or am I just over reacting and this is the norm in boxing now?

Callum smith is on ITV4

Meh.
Buying a PPV is £20 or less and allows a person to watch a show with a better view for significantly less than buying tickets, fuel, taking time out to travel etc.
Of course everyone would prefer more free to view boxing but I'm not onboard with the idea that stealing PPVs by watching streams and using boxes etc is ok. If you want £16 more than you want to see a show, don't watch it.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

dirk2686 wrote:PPV and the question of what fights are 'worth' it is based entirely on how many people are willing to pay for it. It's just basic economics. If you make cars and people will pay a hundred grand for one, that's what they're worth.

Joshua is obviously 'worth' PPV because he keeps getting put on them, doing good figures and making everyone involved loads of money. But someone like Anthony Crolla or Luke Campbell wouldn't, hence they're not.

Which is why I find the Hughie thing so odd. You're not a PPV fighter by virtue of your ability, or record, or anything else beyond your ability to sell, and he just doesn't. I'd be surprised if he makes any real money from the fight whatsoever.

They figure they're going to lose money anyway, nobody would pay them for the fight, so any number of buys helps the bottom line.

Someone would pay for the fight if they had a sensible price surely? It seems odd that I can watch Parker Cojanu, Parker Ruiz and Parker Takam on UK television across Sky/BN yet when Parker is actually fighting in the UK, against a British opponent, I have to watch it on YouTube.

I don't understand what Hennessy must be doing. In Britain we have a dedicated boxing channel, Sky pick up a fair amount of boxing, Channel 5 show boxing as do channels like Dave. The market is booming thanks to the Joshua effect; yet we're back in Froch territory where he can't seem to cut a deal.

Are we really saying a channel like 5 or Dave would rather show a repeat of Americas Dumbest Rednecks than a live, domestic title fight? Of course not. The reason they will is because Hennessy has presumably got his product valuation absolutely all over the place.

Boxerbeetle wrote:It's ridiculous, but we've allowed it to happen.

This.

If people didn't buy them, nothing would be PPV.

dirk2686 wrote:PPV and the question of what fights are 'worth' it is based entirely on how many people are willing to pay for it. It's just basic economics. If you make cars and people will pay a hundred grand for one, that's what they're worth.

Joshua is obviously 'worth' PPV because he keeps getting put on them, doing good figures and making everyone involved loads of money. But someone like Anthony Crolla or Luke Campbell wouldn't, hence they're not.

Which is why I find the Hughie thing so odd. You're not a PPV fighter by virtue of your ability, or record, or anything else beyond your ability to sell, and he just doesn't. I'd be surprised if he makes any real money from the fight whatsoever.

probably one of the most educated answers i've heard on this forum, I agree the Fury situation has totally gone over my head !

ILikeBeer wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:It's ridiculous, but we've allowed it to happen.

This.

If people didn't buy them, nothing would be PPV.

this

kbackup408 wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

kbackup408 wrote:
i've had the hump all evening pal once I found out ITV box office is showing the WBSS makes me so frustrated because I actually liked the tournament and its format

It's unbelievable the sh1te that gets put on PPV these days.

I think the tournament itself, while a decent idea, is a bit 2nd division with regard to the 168 boys. I don't know that much about the cruisers but apparently their tourn has a more stellar line up. Is that PPV as well ?

yes pal the Groves fight is on PPV and i've heard the Smith fight will be on PPV. Honestly things like this make you fall outta love with a sport, having to dish out an extra £20/30/40 quid on fights along side SKY and Virgin is daylight robbery !

Smith fight is definitely free to view. Listed as ITV4. ITV has a article on their newspage confirming which are free and which are on box office. Glad ITV's getting involved and that some are free but definitely there making a mistake with the groves v cox fight being ppv, and eubank v the Turkish lad. Build it up, let everyone watch the earlier fights, build an interest and then the later rounds can be ppv (Groves v smith, eubank v groves, smith v eubank, you get the picture). I honestly think groves will see cox off in about 4-5 rounds.

kbackup408 wrote:

ILikeBeer wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:It's ridiculous, but we've allowed it to happen.

This.

If people didn't buy them, nothing would be PPV.

this

If people didn't pay for boxing then boxing would ultimately end.

Look, I'm like anyone else; I'd rather it was all free to air, with tickets a couple of quid on the door for shows I want to go to. But it won't be. I accept PPV 'works' as a business model now and it's not going to change.

But, there are still legitimate questions to be asked. Joshua has just done 1.5m+ buys. Of course he's going to be PPV. Hughie? That's simply ridiculous.