BoxRec

Bomber 1 wrote:This is a bad move!! If he appears on that channel then he's gonna get let go by sky and he needs sky more than sky need him!! Bad move and bad management!!

Very true. The whole team just seem so short-sighted in general. Everything they do just smacks of stupidity

[quote="Bomber 1"]This is a bad move!! If he appears on that channel then he's gonna get let go by sky and he needs sky more than sky need him!! Bad move and bad management!![/quote

khan going to get under 50000 buys for this! His career being mismanaged!

Team khan have a history of bad decision remember how they treated Oliver Harrison! Sacking alex ariza save money to name a few!

Lets not forget that Khan is still by far the most marketable boxer we have at the moment. Haye doesn't appear to be making any progress (I'll eat my words if he fights klit), and Froch never really hit the headlines (for whatever reason.)

Then there is... Burns? Erm, yeah.

Finch wrote:Can you imagine if Haye v a Klit still hadn't been agreed, because of this farce?????

Afterall, it was the initial reason a deal couldn't be reached.

No it was the initial reason given. It wasn't the truth as Adam Smith later said that they would have been willing to do 2 Box Office shows in a month.

Bomber 1 wrote:This is a bad move!! If he appears on that channel then he's gonna get let go by sky and he needs sky more than sky need him!! Bad move and bad management!!

Sky didn't want Khan last year when they were offered his fight v Malignaggi for virtually no money, why should he dance to their tune. Sky will jump on board when they think they can make enough money. People are far too deferential to them.

gobbles wrote:

Bomber 1 wrote:This is a bad move!! If he appears on that channel then he's gonna get let go by sky and he needs sky more than sky need him!! Bad move and bad management!!

Sky didn't want Khan last year when they were offered his fight v Malignaggi for virtually no money, why should he dance to their tune. Sky will jump on board when they think they can make enough money. People are far too deferential to them.

The point is if he goes with Sky he builds a relationship he gets built up. Sky will invest in him because he has the potential to be a ppv star but you have to play by Skys rules to do this. Of course team Khan want to look out for themselves but do they really think they are going to widen their appeal in the long run by putting themselves on PPV on a remote channel that few people know about. At least Froch had legitimate opponents when he did this Khan has literally nothing its just looks spiteful and amateurish

wrimc wrote:

gobbles wrote:

Bomber 1 wrote:This is a bad move!! If he appears on that channel then he's gonna get let go by sky and he needs sky more than sky need him!! Bad move and bad management!!

Sky didn't want Khan last year when they were offered his fight v Malignaggi for virtually no money, why should he dance to their tune. Sky will jump on board when they think they can make enough money. People are far too deferential to them.

The point is if he goes with Sky he builds a relationship he gets built up. Sky will invest in him because he has the potential to be a ppv star but you have to play by Skys rules to do this. Of course team Khan want to look out for themselves but do they really think they are going to widen their appeal in the long run by putting themselves on PPV on a remote channel that few people know about. At least Froch had legitimate opponents when he did this Khan has literally nothing its just looks spiteful and amateurish

Sky didn't build Khan.
ITV did and he was a superstar when he signed with ITV.

Do Sky build stars? Most Saturday night boxing is just cheap fights on long-term contracts with promoters. The only fighters they get behind are ones they already do Box Office shows with.
Sky haven't built a fighter since Hatton. Khan was ITV, Haye was Setanta and the BBC, Froch was BBC and ITV. Sky are only interested in pushing a fighter if they can cash in.

gobbles wrote:

wrimc wrote:

gobbles wrote:
Sky didn't want Khan last year when they were offered his fight v Malignaggi for virtually no money, why should he dance to their tune. Sky will jump on board when they think they can make enough money. People are far too deferential to them.

The point is if he goes with Sky he builds a relationship he gets built up. Sky will invest in him because he has the potential to be a ppv star but you have to play by Skys rules to do this. Of course team Khan want to look out for themselves but do they really think they are going to widen their appeal in the long run by putting themselves on PPV on a remote channel that few people know about. At least Froch had legitimate opponents when he did this Khan has literally nothing its just looks spiteful and amateurish

Sky didn't build Khan.
ITV did and he was a superstar when he signed with ITV.

Do Sky build stars? Most Saturday night boxing is just cheap fights on long-term contracts with promoters. The only fighters they get behind are ones they already do Box Office shows with.
Sky haven't built a fighter since Hatton. Khan was ITV, Haye was Setanta and the BBC, Froch was BBC and ITV. Sky are only interested in pushing a fighter if they can cash in.

So what do you suggest Khan does do you think putting this as PPV on primetime is a preferable option to SS3 on a Sat?

wrimc wrote:
So what do you suggest Khan does do you think putting this as PPV on primetime is a preferable option to SS3 on a Sat?

No, but that doesn't make him the villain so many on here are suggesting

gobbles wrote:

wrimc wrote:
So what do you suggest Khan does do you think putting this as PPV on primetime is a preferable option to SS3 on a Sat?

No, but that doesn't make him the villain so many on here are suggesting

No it doesnt but the point is its smacks of greed from the Khan camp.

The reason he is being villified is because he genuinely believes urged on by his family that he is PPV material. He thinks that people will buy the fight regardless they will buy him. That is not the case it is the quality of opponent and quality of the undercard that are so obviously important but Khan seems to think his name is good enough for PPV alone when it clearly isn't.

wrimc wrote:

gobbles wrote:

wrimc wrote:
So what do you suggest Khan does do you think putting this as PPV on primetime is a preferable option to SS3 on a Sat?

No, but that doesn't make him the villain so many on here are suggesting

No it doesnt but the point is its smacks of greed from the Khan camp.

The reason he is being villified is because he genuinely believes urged on by his family that he is PPV material. He thinks that people will buy the fight regardless they will buy him. That is not the case it is the quality of opponent and quality of the undercard that are so obviously important but Khan seems to think his name is good enough for PPV alone when it clearly isn't.

He was offered a figure for a fight. A week before the fight, the person withdraws the offer and makes a paultry offer in its place. What would you do?

What was Sky's actual offer? What if they offered £50,000, which is there usual figure for a Saturday night, with the Watson fight to come from that too? What if they offered £30,000?
You are calling him greedy when you know absolutely no facts about the offer he was made at all.
Sky don't pay £200-£300,000 for fights any more. Maybe you think he should have boxed for free?
The figures quoted in the press last week are all pie in the sky.

Khan is a muppet and not as good as he thinks he is (look how morales almost beat miadana ) can u imagine if he
fought someone like morales in his prime ...he would be hammered..he needs all the fans he can get and this is the worst
decision ever ! what about the Mccloskey fans ,hope mcCloskey shuts this greed train down

whicker wrote:Lets not forget that Khan is still by far the most marketable boxer we have at the moment. Haye doesn't appear to be making any progress (I'll eat my words if he fights klit), and Froch never really hit the headlines (for whatever reason.)

Then there is... Burns? Erm, yeah.

Haye is the most marketable fighter we have,by a mile.Haye-Klitschko will blow all Khan's previous PPV's combined out of the water.It will be on a sale of Hatton-Mayweather.Khan seems to have lost most of his popularity since he turned pro.He was a national hero in 2004.

gobbles wrote:

wrimc wrote:

gobbles wrote: No, but that doesn't make him the villain so many on here are suggesting

No it doesnt but the point is its smacks of greed from the Khan camp.

The reason he is being villified is because he genuinely believes urged on by his family that he is PPV material. He thinks that people will buy the fight regardless they will buy him. That is not the case it is the quality of opponent and quality of the undercard that are so obviously important but Khan seems to think his name is good enough for PPV alone when it clearly isn't.

He was offered a figure for a fight. A week before the fight, the person withdraws the offer and makes a paultry offer in its place. What would you do?

What was Sky's actual offer? What if they offered £50,000, which is there usual figure for a Saturday night, with the Watson fight to come from that too? What if they offered £30,000?
You are calling him greedy when you know absolutely no facts about the offer he was made at all.
Sky don't pay £200-£300,000 for fights any more. Maybe you think he should have boxed for free?
The figures quoted in the press last week are all pie in the sky.

I read sky offered about 150,000 t0 200,000 for the fight.

http://www.facebook.com/PrimetimeTv

primetime have confirmed it on there facebook page

It's fine to be slagging the Khan's here for what appears to be their penny-pinching and greed, but this problem stemmed from the undercard not being good enough for PPV on Sky. Haye V Harrison is to blame here and Sky don't want an other black-eye after that debacle when the undercard was a few divsions lower than even the exisiting undercard for Khan.

For me (and they will not admit it) but they seem to be placing so much emphasis on the undercard because they think McCloskey is a weak opponent and, if this is the case, why did they go with it in the first place?

What I cannot understand is that where are Golden Boy in all this? They made a big noise about signing Khan yet appear to have retreated into the shadows here leaving Amir to take a massive pay-cut and for his wholly inexperience team to take all the flak on their behalf - THEY are his Promoters so how can they have let this happen? They don't have one name that could have bolstered the undercard to any acceptable level?

No one involved in this show has rung any other UK Promoter to enquire as to which of their fighters may be available to fight on the undercard so did they really have any intention of putting a decent undercard together or just grabbing all the PPV cash for Amir. If Fury was supposedly on the card, why wasn't Chisora enquired about? It's a mandated fight and out for purse offers so surely a deal could have ben done. Surely if you stand to lose over £1M then to spend a few quid to protect that would be sensible wouldn't it.

The thing all the aforementiond parties have in common? De La Hoya, Haye, Harrison, Khan and Hatton are all ex fighters, all are self Promoted and all want to grab as much as they can by doing things on the cheap.

Ricky Hatton is the Promoter of his event isn't he, with Golden Boy? So these two entities cannot put together an undercard with all their resourses?

Too many Cooks springs to mind and all the greedy ones are in the same kitchen on this occasion.

boxingchat wrote:It's fine to be slagging the Khan's here for what appears to be their penny-pinching and greed, but this problem stemmed from the undercard not being good enough for PPV on Sky. Haye V Harrison is to blame here and Sky don't want an other black-eye after that debacle when the undercard was a few divsions lower than even the exisiting undercard for Khan.

For me (and they will not admit it) but they seem to be placing so much emphasis on the undercard because they think McCloskey is a weak opponent and, if this is the case, why did they go with it in the first place?

What I cannot understand is that where are Golden Boy in all this? They made a big noise about signing Khan yet appear to have retreated into the shadows here leaving Amir to take a massive pay-cut and for his wholly inexperience team to take all the flak on their behalf - THEY are his Promoters so how can they have let this happen? They don't have one name that could have bolstered the undercard to any acceptable level?

No one involved in this show has rung any other UK Promoter to enquire as to which of their fighters may be available to fight on the undercard so did they really have any intention of putting a decent undercard together or just grabbing all the PPV cash for Amir. If Fury was supposedly on the card, why wasn't Chisora enquired about? It's a mandated fight and out for purse offers so surely a deal could have ben done. Surely if you stand to lose over £1M then to spend a few quid to protect that would be sensible wouldn't it.

The thing all the aforementiond parties have in common? De La Hoya, Haye, Harrison, Khan and Hatton are all ex fighters, all are self Promoted and all want to grab as much as they can by doing things on the cheap.

Ricky Hatton is the Promoter of his event isn't he, with Golden Boy? So these two entities cannot put together an undercard with all their resourses?

Too many Cooks springs to mind and all the greedy ones are in the same kitchen on this occasion.

I do largely agree with this, particularly the part I've bolded. Very unproffesional from Sky - they should have waited untill a concrete undercard before agreeing the PPV or stated McCloskey didn't cut it from the word go. It was a tough one for the promotion team to handle though - they obviously wanted a tune up for Bradley and who else was available - this isn't a barely top 50 fighter being rejected - this is a top 15 fighter - and the #2 ranked Brit (I don't want to go there about Nationalities - I hope you know what I mean) - Problem is, Khan isn't in the hotbed of big names - hardly anyone has heard of the Unified (twice) champ. If McCloskey got rejected without a cracking undercard - then who would get accepted.

There are 2 parts I do disagree with.

1) -Hasn't rung any UK promoter..... okay, well we know your contacts so I am sure you are correct here but does it have to be a Uk promoter? They certainly rang other promoters - Macklin vs Gevor was a good fight.... and they clearly asked if Hennessy if Tyson Fury would be available - so they must have called them.

2) Tarnishing DLH or GBP in the same brush as Haye, Hatton, Harrison and Khan - did you see the bill this weekend? I think GBP involvement in this fight has been minimal. Just there as Khan's representative.

boxingchat wrote: If Fury was supposedly on the card, why wasn't Chisora enquired about? It's a mandated fight and out for purse offers so surely a deal could have ben done.

What, like Darren Barker v Matthew Macklin? Who scuppered that?

You do make a lot of good points about GBP though. Maybe the Khans haven't asked them either?

Just spoken to Primetime, At this time we have no comment to make on the conjecture that we are broadcasting the Amir Khan fight on Saturday night"

Still a few things to be sorted presumably

Nothing on there website either

yep they have taken down the post i saw earlier this morning

stujones wrote:

boxingchat wrote:It's fine to be slagging the Khan's here for what appears to be their penny-pinching and greed, but this problem stemmed from the undercard not being good enough for PPV on Sky. Haye V Harrison is to blame here and Sky don't want an other black-eye after that debacle when the undercard was a few divsions lower than even the exisiting undercard for Khan.

For me (and they will not admit it) but they seem to be placing so much emphasis on the undercard because they think McCloskey is a weak opponent and, if this is the case, why did they go with it in the first place?

What I cannot understand is that where are Golden Boy in all this? They made a big noise about signing Khan yet appear to have retreated into the shadows here leaving Amir to take a massive pay-cut and for his wholly inexperience team to take all the flak on their behalf - THEY are his Promoters so how can they have let this happen? They don't have one name that could have bolstered the undercard to any acceptable level?

No one involved in this show has rung any other UK Promoter to enquire as to which of their fighters may be available to fight on the undercard so did they really have any intention of putting a decent undercard together or just grabbing all the PPV cash for Amir. If Fury was supposedly on the card, why wasn't Chisora enquired about? It's a mandated fight and out for purse offers so surely a deal could have ben done. Surely if you stand to lose over £1M then to spend a few quid to protect that would be sensible wouldn't it.

The thing all the aforementiond parties have in common? De La Hoya, Haye, Harrison, Khan and Hatton are all ex fighters, all are self Promoted and all want to grab as much as they can by doing things on the cheap.

Ricky Hatton is the Promoter of his event isn't he, with Golden Boy? So these two entities cannot put together an undercard with all their resourses?

Too many Cooks springs to mind and all the greedy ones are in the same kitchen on this occasion.

I do largely agree with this, particularly the part I've bolded. Very unproffesional from Sky - they should have waited untill a concrete undercard before agreeing the PPV or stated McCloskey didn't cut it from the word go. It was a tough one for the promotion team to handle though - they obviously wanted a tune up for Bradley and who else was available - this isn't a barely top 50 fighter being rejected - this is a top 15 fighter - and the #2 ranked Brit (I don't want to go there about Nationalities - I hope you know what I mean) - Problem is, Khan isn't in the hotbed of big names - hardly anyone has heard of the Unified (twice) champ. If McCloskey got rejected without a cracking undercard - then who would get accepted.

There are 2 parts I do disagree with.

1) -Hasn't rung any UK promoter..... okay, well we know your contacts so I am sure you are correct here but does it have to be a Uk promoter? They certainly rang other promoters - Macklin vs Gevor was a good fight.... and they clearly asked if Hennessy if Tyson Fury would be available - so they must have called them.

2) Tarnishing DLH or GBP in the same brush as Haye, Hatton, Harrison and Khan - did you see the bill this weekend? I think GBP involvement in this fight has been minimal. Just there as Khan's representative.

They havent rung anyone. Hennessy for Tyson Fury maybe, or the other way around probably, The world is a big place and with a £1m loss on the cards a little bit of expense could have prevented this mess. Golden Boy are his Promoters, they have let him down in my opinion.

boxingchat wrote:They havent rung anyone. Hennessy for Tyson Fury maybe, or the other way around probably, The world is a big place and with a £1m loss on the cards a little bit of expense could have prevented this mess. Golden Boy are his Promoters, they have let him down in my opinion.

Would Chisora take the fight two weeks out?

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

boxingchat wrote: If Fury was supposedly on the card, why wasn't Chisora enquired about? It's a mandated fight and out for purse offers so surely a deal could have ben done.

What, like Darren Barker v Matthew Macklin? Who scuppered that?

You do make a lot of good points about GBP though. Maybe the Khans haven't asked them either?

The Khan's haven't asked them? They are supposed to be HIS Promoters! Golden Boy scuppered the Macklin V Barker fight by signing Macklin to fight Winky Wright and making him vacate the EBU title. Macklin V Gevor was never on, no terms agreed or contracts ever signed.

Scottrf wrote:

boxingchat wrote:They havent rung anyone. Hennessy for Tyson Fury maybe, or the other way around probably, The world is a big place and with a £1m loss on the cards a little bit of expense could have prevented this mess. Golden Boy are his Promoters, they have let him down in my opinion.

Would Chisora take the fight two weeks out?

Probably, but he wasn't asked or offered the opportunity.