BoxRec

Coco wrote:Taking Quigg for 1.5m makes a lot more sense

Taking A 50/50 share deal with Quigg would make even more sense.

He's signed with Haymon.

He could make some serious money over the next two years now.

I agree. A fight v Santa Cruz maybe?

Crease wrote:

Coco wrote:Taking Quigg for 1.5m makes a lot more sense

Taking A 50/50 share deal with Quigg would make even more sense.

He will get less than 1.5m for a 50/50 deal

just seems more people eating pieces of Framptons pie

thatllbeme wrote:just seems more people eating pieces of Framptons pie

Will that matter if the pie is much bigger?

I don't think the pie is that big in that weight division in America

Crease wrote:

Coco wrote:Taking Quigg for 1.5m makes a lot more sense

Taking A 50/50 share deal with Quigg would make even more sense.

Serious??? Makes exactly zero sense now.

Coco wrote:He will get less than 1.5m for a 50/50 deal

No he wouldn't. He would make at least twice that - that's why he turned it down. As he said on the Cyclone Promotions website, it was a "flat rate" offer, he wouldn't make any more money that what was offered.

Eddie Hearn estimated in an interview with The Irish News (a couple of months back) that the fight could easily do 500k subscriptions and that Sky would price it at £16.99.
500,000 x 16.99 = £8,495,000

So that's nearly £8.5 million, and thus over £4.2 million each.

Now, as I understand it - Barry McGuigan receives 25% of Team Frampton's income, so he would be getting a million, but the other £3 million Frampton gets to keep.

And all this income doesn't include the sponsorship each fighter will receive and the gate receipts (if it is a stadium fight).

Crease wrote:

Coco wrote:He will get less than 1.5m for a 50/50 deal

No he wouldn't. He would make at least twice that - that's why he turned it down. As he said on the Cyclone Promotions website, it was a "flat rate" offer, he wouldn't make any more money that what was offered.

Eddie Hearn estimated in an interview with The Irish News (a couple of months back) that the fight could easily do 500k subscriptions and that Sky would price it at £16.99.
500,000 x 16.99 = £8,495,000

So that's nearly £8.5 million, and thus over £4.2 million each.

Now, as I understand it - Barry McGuigan receives 25% of Team Frampton's income, so he would be getting a million, but the other £3 million Frampton gets to keep.

And all this income doesn't include the sponsorship each fighter will receive and the gate receipts (if it is a stadium fight).

Your maths is wrong. You've missed out the promoter's cut and television company cut.

black panther wrote:Your maths is wrong.

It's not my maths. Those figures came from Eddie Hearn himself in an interview he did with Paddy Heaney. I think I might still have it in the house somewhere.

black panther wrote:You've missed out the promoter's cut

Eddie's cut would come out of Team Quigg's money surely? Otherwise what's the point of managing Quigg?

black panther wrote:and television company cut.

They make their money through the subscriptions, the public gave them the money.

Was thinking that myself. Pretty certain there would be a lot more deductions & not sure Hearn would be doing it for free.

He won't be getting £1.5 million in America, not unless he gets the Mayweather fight! And even then Barry won't take it unless it was a co promotion!
I see Frampton having an Eastwood situation in retirement!

Crease wrote:

black panther wrote:Your maths is wrong.

It's not my maths. Those figures came from Eddie Hearn himself in an interview he did with Paddy Heaney. I think I might still have it in the house somewhere.

black panther wrote:You've missed out the promoter's cut

Eddie's cut would come out of Team Quigg's money surely? Otherwise what's the point of managing Quigg?

black panther wrote:and television company cut.

They make their money through the subscriptions, the public gave them the money.

You're right about the numbers Eddie quoted but (and I'm not a promoter, but you aren't either) I'm very sure you are drastically miscalculating the deductions associated with the PPV money. I would be amazed if Sky just say 'oh take all the subscription revenue' I think they would take a percentage of it. They get the money from their regular subscriptions but when a PPV card is put together additional costs crop up.

Also Hearn is Quigg's promoter, Quigg will have someone else managing him (I'm guessing Joe Gallagher.)

Lets not forget we are pretty sure that Carl Froch made 8 million and Groves 2 million from the Wembley card. The gate from that card is multiple times more than would be generated by a Frampton v Quigg fight, and the PPV subscriptions would be a fair bit more as well. So how on Earth do you calculate that for a complete 50-50 split the total purse for Quigg v Frampton would be 80% of Froch v Groves (if we assume the total purse for Froch v Groves is 10mill and you saying Frampton v Quigg would be 8mill.)

I don't want you to think I'm having a huge dig, I'm just saying, you and me aren't promoters and thus probably don't understand 100% of the deductions that are involved or how the tv money and ppv money is ACTUALLY divided up.

jameswilson wrote:

Crease wrote:

black panther wrote:Your maths is wrong.

It's not my maths. Those figures came from Eddie Hearn himself in an interview he did with Paddy Heaney. I think I might still have it in the house somewhere.

black panther wrote:You've missed out the promoter's cut

Eddie's cut would come out of Team Quigg's money surely? Otherwise what's the point of managing Quigg?

black panther wrote:and television company cut.

They make their money through the subscriptions, the public gave them the money.

You're right about the numbers Eddie quoted but (and I'm not a promoter, but you aren't either) I'm very sure you are drastically miscalculating the deductions associated with the PPV money. I would be amazed if Sky just say 'oh take all the subscription revenue' I think they would take a percentage of it. They get the money from their regular subscriptions but when a PPV card is put together additional costs crop up.

Also Hearn is Quigg's promoter, Quigg will have someone else managing him (I'm guessing Joe Gallagher.)

Lets not forget we are pretty sure that Carl Froch made 8 million and Groves 2 million from the Wembley card. The gate from that card is multiple times more than would be generated by a Frampton v Quigg fight, and the PPV subscriptions would be a fair bit more as well. So how on Earth do you calculate that for a complete 50-50 split the total purse for Quigg v Frampton would be 80% of Froch v Groves (if we assume the total purse for Froch v Groves is 10mill and you saying Frampton v Quigg would be 8mill.)

I don't want you to think I'm having a huge dig, I'm just saying, you and me aren't promoters and thus probably don't understand 100% of the deductions that are involved or how the tv money and ppv money is ACTUALLY divided up.

Yeah what he said!

I echo his comments that I'm not having a dig or anything (damned good poster is our Crease) but no way is their £8.5 million available for Quigg-Frampton fight purse.

There is no way that Sky don't take a significant commission out of PPV sales.

jameswilson wrote:You're right about the numbers Eddie quoted but (and I'm not a promoter, but you aren't either) I'm very sure you are drastically miscalculating the deductions associated with the PPV money. I would be amazed if Sky just say 'oh take all the subscription revenue' I think they would take a percentage of it. They get the money from their regular subscriptions but when a PPV card is put together additional costs crop up.

Also Hearn is Quigg's promoter, Quigg will have someone else managing him (I'm guessing Joe Gallagher.)

Lets not forget we are pretty sure that Carl Froch made 8 million and Groves 2 million from the Wembley card. The gate from that card is multiple times more than would be generated by a Frampton v Quigg fight, and the PPV subscriptions would be a fair bit more as well. So how on Earth do you calculate that for a complete 50-50 split the total purse for Quigg v Frampton would be 80% of Froch v Groves (if we assume the total purse for Froch v Groves is 10mill and you saying Frampton v Quigg would be 8mill.)

I don't want you to think I'm having a huge dig, I'm just saying, you and me aren't promoters and thus probably don't understand 100% of the deductions that are involved or how the tv money and ppv money is ACTUALLY divided up.

black panther wrote:Yeah what he said!

I echo his comments that I'm not having a dig or anything (damned good poster is our Crease) but no way is their £8.5 million available for Quigg-Frampton fight purse.

Then gentlemen, your issue is with Eddie Hearn. I am only relaying on what I have read. And I daresay that Eddie wouldn't have been talking about that publicly if he wasn't confident of getting the numbers up.

Boxerbeetle wrote:There is no way that Sky don't take a significant commission out of PPV sales.

Take half of the PPV money apparently.

Mr Wilson just loves it when people play at Armchair Promoters

Crease wrote:

jameswilson wrote:You're right about the numbers Eddie quoted but (and I'm not a promoter, but you aren't either) I'm very sure you are drastically miscalculating the deductions associated with the PPV money. I would be amazed if Sky just say 'oh take all the subscription revenue' I think they would take a percentage of it. They get the money from their regular subscriptions but when a PPV card is put together additional costs crop up.

Also Hearn is Quigg's promoter, Quigg will have someone else managing him (I'm guessing Joe Gallagher.)

Lets not forget we are pretty sure that Carl Froch made 8 million and Groves 2 million from the Wembley card. The gate from that card is multiple times more than would be generated by a Frampton v Quigg fight, and the PPV subscriptions would be a fair bit more as well. So how on Earth do you calculate that for a complete 50-50 split the total purse for Quigg v Frampton would be 80% of Froch v Groves (if we assume the total purse for Froch v Groves is 10mill and you saying Frampton v Quigg would be 8mill.)

I don't want you to think I'm having a huge dig, I'm just saying, you and me aren't promoters and thus probably don't understand 100% of the deductions that are involved or how the tv money and ppv money is ACTUALLY divided up.

black panther wrote:Yeah what he said!

I echo his comments that I'm not having a dig or anything (damned good poster is our Crease) but no way is their £8.5 million available for Quigg-Frampton fight purse.

Then gentlemen, your issue is with Eddie Hearn. I am only relaying on what I have read. And I daresay that Eddie wouldn't have been talking about that publicly if he wasn't confident of getting the numbers up.

No you're misunderstanding what I wrote. I don't doubt what Eddie says about the numbers of subscriptions for PPV that would be made from this fight.

What I am doubting is you taking those numbers of subscriptions and going 'oh so times that by 16.95 and Frampton and Quigg get half each.'

Counter-puncher wrote:Mr Wilson just loves it when people play at Armchair Promoters

I'm gonna look a right mug when Al Haymon rocks up to his next promotion wearing a Preston North End shirt aren't I.

he got offered £1.5m with Haymon your talking $ and if McGuigan is wanting 25% then what will Haymon want 15-20% then how much will he be getting? santa Cruz got $750k so cant see they getting much more than this?

jameswilson wrote:No you're misunderstanding what I wrote. I don't doubt what Eddie says about the numbers of subscriptions for PPV that would be made from this fight.

What I am doubting is you taking those numbers of subscriptions and going 'oh so times that by 16.95 and Frampton and Quigg get half each.'

I think that you are also misunderstanding me. Hearn actually said that himself when he was talking to Paddy Heaney. That's where I am getting those numbers from. I haven't just dreamt them up, otherwise there would be no point in talking about them.

Crease wrote:

jameswilson wrote:No you're misunderstanding what I wrote. I don't doubt what Eddie says about the numbers of subscriptions for PPV that would be made from this fight.

What I am doubting is you taking those numbers of subscriptions and going 'oh so times that by 16.95 and Frampton and Quigg get half each.'

I think that you are also misunderstanding me. Hearn actually said that himself when he was talking to Paddy Heaney. That's where I am getting those numbers from. I haven't just dreamt them up, otherwise there would be no point in talking about them.

Eddie actually said that a PPV priced at £16 would see £8 each go to the fighters? I highly doubt it.

He may well have said it would be priced at £16, and he may well have said it does 500k buys, but he definitely did not say that all £16 is split between the two headliners. If Sky take 50% of PPV cost, which is widely quoted and seems believable, that leaves £8 per buy, so £4m left over. There will be deductions on that for various things such as venue costs, and undercard purses, so it's not inconceivable that a 50/50 offer ends up with each man getting not much more than £1.5m.

MarkMcBurney wrote:Eddie actually said that a PPV priced at £16 would see £8 each go to the fighters? I highly doubt it.
What about venue costs, and undercard purses?

No, He mentioned the numbers. He didn't exactly go in to the specifics of things. In the same interview he said that is was a complicated business and all that.

But still, the fact remains that Carl would've made much, much more fighting Quigg than what he would have fighting in Belfast again.