BoxRec

tobyh5 wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 15:30

SteveO wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 13:43
Yes, but on the other hand Joshua has 3 titles that Parker wants!

hahahahahaahaha they are not doing a deal with any thought of collecting those

Yes, I know that.
The point I was making was that if it was based on money for belts then Joshua should get 75% and Parker 25%
Nothing wrong with Parker trying to get as much money as possible, but however it turns out I'm sure Parker would pocket enough millions to keep him in comfort for the rest of his life.

SteveO wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 16:00

tobyh5 wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 15:30

SteveO wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 13:43
Yes, but on the other hand Joshua has 3 titles that Parker wants!

hahahahahaahaha they are not doing a deal with any thought of collecting those

Yes, I know that.
The point I was making was that if it was based on money for belts then Joshua should get 75% and Parker 25%
Nothing wrong with Parker trying to get as much money as possible, but however it turns out I'm sure Parker would pocket enough millions to keep him in comfort for the rest of his life.

the IBO Title doesn't count for 25%.
66% to 33% is more accurate by your method...

wesshaw1985 wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 15:49

Taansend wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 15:42True but Joshua can earn 15 million quid no matter who he fights.

going 5 plus rounds with anybody that Hearn cant market as his equal only harms AJs brand imo.
AJ cant afford to have 3 Carlos Takam fights in 2018 or his value goes down...

Is he really earning that much? per fight where's the money generated?

i read josh made about 10m pounds for takam. so about 10x what wilder and parker make

jamamb wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 18:11 i read josh made about 10m pounds for takam. so about 10x what wilder and parker make

Yeah so sure he won't be earning 15m minimum every fight it was a mandatory with IBF so he was guaranteed 75% plus at Wembley so a lot more revenues can't see him getting 15m£ for every fight

25% is plenty and he is only worth that because he is a strap holder, Joshua generates all the money, if he doesn't like it he can go back to fighting on you tube

One thing I didn't mention, and I guess it is relevant; Parker has some quite lucrative sponsorship deals.
So if (when) he loses his belt, it not only affects his purse value, it will likely affect his sponsorship deals as well.
One of his biggest sponsors pulled out this year (Burger King) but he has others.
So the payday for fighting AJ has to be decent.

Anything he'd get for fighting AJ would smash what he's earnt in previous fights

KiwiRider wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 18:51 One thing I didn't mention, and I guess it is relevant; Parker has some quite lucrative sponsorship deals.
So if (when) he loses his belt, it not only affects his purse value, it will likely affect his sponsorship deals as well.
One of his biggest sponsors pulled out this year (Burger King) but he has others.
So the payday for fighting AJ has to be decent.

Parker nearly lost to Hughie Fury and Andy Ruiz. The notion of him racking up defences to build a decent pot of cash are misguided as he will lose sooner or later.

The risk is him going down the route of fighting people like Takam and Breazeale and losing before he gets the Joshua fight. My view is cash in now for his biggest (by miles) payday and then go back to building his career up again.

He's young and the belts will fragment sooner or later. Even if Joshua beats Parker and Wilder next year he'll drop a title or two at some point. It's not game over for Parker if Joshua beats him, but it's a terrible error of judgement if someone else beats him beforehand.

KiwiRider wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 18:51 One thing I didn't mention, and I guess it is relevant; Parker has some quite lucrative sponsorship deals.
So if (when) he loses his belt, it not only affects his purse value, it will likely affect his sponsorship deals as well.
One of his biggest sponsors pulled out this year (Burger King) but he has others.
So the payday for fighting AJ has to be decent.

Joshua has 3 belts (well, say 2 and a half), Parker has one. Joshua brings the money, the fans and the UK and US TV deals. Parker's true value is probably 10-15% but 25% would be a fair compromise.

Let's be honest, even if he loses, provided he puts up a bit of a fight, Parker's profile goes up after fighting Joshua. If he beats Joshua, suddenly he's the main man and his earning potential goes through the roof. It's well worth the risk for 25% of a £20m+ fight.

the_doctor wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 04:47

KiwiRider wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 18:51 One thing I didn't mention, and I guess it is relevant; Parker has some quite lucrative sponsorship deals.
So if (when) he loses his belt, it not only affects his purse value, it will likely affect his sponsorship deals as well.
One of his biggest sponsors pulled out this year (Burger King) but he has others.
So the payday for fighting AJ has to be decent.

Joshua has 3 belts (well, say 2 and a half), Parker has one. Joshua brings the money, the fans and the UK and US TV deals. Parker's true value is probably 10-15% but 25% would be a fair compromise.

Let's be honest, even if he loses, provided he puts up a bit of a fight, Parker's profile goes up after fighting Joshua. If he beats Joshua, suddenly he's the main man and his earning potential goes through the roof. It's well worth the risk for 25% of a £20m+ fight.

What cut would a mandatory be entitled to?

wesshaw1985 wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 05:12

the_doctor wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 04:47

KiwiRider wrote: ↑09 Nov 2017, 18:51 One thing I didn't mention, and I guess it is relevant; Parker has some quite lucrative sponsorship deals.
So if (when) he loses his belt, it not only affects his purse value, it will likely affect his sponsorship deals as well.
One of his biggest sponsors pulled out this year (Burger King) but he has others.
So the payday for fighting AJ has to be decent.

Joshua has 3 belts (well, say 2 and a half), Parker has one. Joshua brings the money, the fans and the UK and US TV deals. Parker's true value is probably 10-15% but 25% would be a fair compromise.

Let's be honest, even if he loses, provided he puts up a bit of a fight, Parker's profile goes up after fighting Joshua. If he beats Joshua, suddenly he's the main man and his earning potential goes through the roof. It's well worth the risk for 25% of a £20m+ fight.

What cut would a mandatory be entitled to?

The mandatory is entitled to whatever the particular governing body decides, that's not their true value though.

Plus, a mandatory is presumably being "rewarded" for something - winning a final eliminator for example - which Parker would be perfectly welcome to try, although he would probably only be mandatory for one belt at a time.

the_doctor wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 05:52

wesshaw1985 wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 05:12

the_doctor wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 04:47
Joshua has 3 belts (well, say 2 and a half), Parker has one. Joshua brings the money, the fans and the UK and US TV deals. Parker's true value is probably 10-15% but 25% would be a fair compromise.

Let's be honest, even if he loses, provided he puts up a bit of a fight, Parker's profile goes up after fighting Joshua. If he beats Joshua, suddenly he's the main man and his earning potential goes through the roof. It's well worth the risk for 25% of a £20m+ fight.

What cut would a mandatory be entitled to?

The mandatory is entitled to whatever the particular governing body decides, that's not their true value though.

Plus, a mandatory is presumably being "rewarded" for something - winning a final eliminator for example - which Parker would be perfectly welcome to try, although he would probably only be mandatory for one belt at a time.

so a Takam or a Pulev is "rewarded" but a belt holder isn't as deserving?

wesshaw1985 wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 05:57

the_doctor wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 05:52

wesshaw1985 wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 05:12
What cut would a mandatory be entitled to?

The mandatory is entitled to whatever the particular governing body decides, that's not their true value though.

Plus, a mandatory is presumably being "rewarded" for something - winning a final eliminator for example - which Parker would be perfectly welcome to try, although he would probably only be mandatory for one belt at a time.

so a Takam or a Pulev is "rewarded" but a belt holder isn't as deserving?

Yes, because they are mandatories. Being a mandatory guarantees them a certain percentage (I don't know the percentages, I'm sure someone on here will), being a belt holder guarantees Parker nothing. This isn't charity, it's business.

Whatever Takam got or what Puev would have got should be used as the baseline for Parker's negotiations.
If Parker doesn't get 35% i would advise him to pass on the fight.
Fight Fujimoto in Japan on New Years Eve. Then look to face Browne in Aus and Zhang in China in 2018...

wesshaw1985 wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 07:21 Whatever Takam got or what Puev would have got should be used as the baseline for Parker's negotiations.
If Parker doesn't get 35% i would advise him to pass on the fight.
Fight Fujimoto in Japan on New Years Eve. Then look to face Browne in Aus and Zhang in China in 2018...

Or you could take 25% and earn as much as those three fights put together*. And get exposure to the two biggest boxing markets in the world (UK and US). Plus, if he actually beats Joshua, that would do more to his earning potential than fighting Fujimoto, Browne and Zhang. Actually, even if he gets beat, his reputation could go up higher than if he beat those three you mentioned.

Also, according to this article - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/boxing/2017/ ... inner-get/ it was a 90/10 split in favour of Joshua and this article http://www.express.co.uk/sport/boxing/8 ... ulev-clash claims that Pulev was going to make £4m out of a £20m pot, so 20%.

*based on 25% of a £20m fight and earning around £1m for the H. Fury fight

Parker shouldn't be turning his nose up

he should forget about a %

have a figure of what he believes he/the fight is worth to him and go that route

+ maybe NZ TV money

he will lose to some bum soon, and lose out on his highest ever payday

sweetscience wrote: ↑10 Nov 2017, 08:29 he should forget about a %

have a figure of what he believes he/the fight is worth to him and go that route

+ maybe NZ TV money

he will lose to some bum soon, and lose out on his highest ever payday

I agree

So, Parker's promoter has decided that 40% is the lowest he will take to make this fight. This is after starting negotiations at 40% last week. Although that's not really "starting negotiations" it's setting a demand.

Seems quite obvious to me that they have no desire whatsoever to fight Joshua and are going to use this amateurish "negotiation" as an excuse.

Parker issues opening offer (Sky Sports) (9th Nov)

Parker laughs off opening offer (Sky Sports) (13th Nov)

Parkers promoter is a lemon

Good, give Wilder 35 and we get the most compelling heavyweight fight since holyfield/Lewis.

How can parker demand 40% & no less?

If he can get 50% v wilder then good luck.

To me this looks like that they will use this offer as an excuse to duck AJ

all this talk about who gets paid what is exactly why this sport has got so crap

Oiky wrote: ↑13 Nov 2017, 10:22 Parkers promoter is a lemon

I believe that's spelled LeMans