BoxRec

who are the experts mate ? i am just stating facts this can and does happen on a regular basis now so think of this scenario-- a lot of boxers fans are undecided about buying tickets then decide to go on the night and pay on the door so basically straight into the promotors pocket it is possible for the boxer to only sell 35 or so tickets and end up fighting for nothing but actually have well over 100 of his fans in the crowd

good post. This can and does frequently happen.

martinmrts wrote:I've often wondered why you usually have bills made up of ticket seller vs journeyman rather than ticket seller vs ticket seller. In the latter case the promoter would be spared the expense of 2 journeymen, and would offer an event that would be of interest to the casual boxing fan rather than just mates of the ticket seller. There is probably a good reason for this - anybody ?

It's really quite simple, because most fighters won't take the risk of boxing away from home unless the promoter is paying through the nose. Making such fights is a nightmare for matchmakers.

For small hall promoters with limited budgets, making 50/50 fights is very difficult and they certainly can't stack a card with them because they cost so much more money to make. It's easy to say they'll sell more tickets, but that's far from true and you'll be amazed at how little revenue some well known fighters bring into a show.

Now a poster on here has tried to claim promoters have to "promote the show" and not ask boxers to sell tickets but that view is ridiculous for those that do not have the luxury of TV revenue. Even if the promoter was to spunk tens of thousands of pounds on advertising, video campaigns etc, there is still a limit to the numbers that will be attracted to the show and often it results in a loss being made.

The economics of boxing are flawed because boxers are generally paid much more per fight than they are actually worth commercially. Yes they deserve every penny for the risk they take, but what other type of business would pay someone £2000 to £3000 when they only attract £1000 (often less) in revenue to the show? Yes some boxers bring more revenue in than they are paid and turn a profit for the promoter, but they are very few and far between.

Ticket deals minimises the risk because it puts the onus of covering costs on the fighters themselves. Boxers who have contracts with stipulated minimums can become lazy and think they don't have to bother doing the groundwork to build a fan base because they are getting paid anyway.

I'm no promoter, but working for a promotional company for the past four years has opened my eyes to huge differential between costs and revenue in this sport. We're lucky in the respect that profitability has never been an issue because our business was always run to support the sport rather than make a quick buck and we've always paid over the market rate for fights without having to rely on ticket deals. But for small hall promoters, who are often trainers and managers eager to keep their stables active, things are very different. They don't have personal fortunes to fall back on so they need to minimise their risk and ticket deals are the only viable option.

Quite simply, without ticket deals most promoters would fold, meaning less shows for fans and less work for boxers. What would fighters rather do? Sell tickets or not box at all?

The situation we have in British boxing at present is that there is only one TV channel than pumps significant funds into the sport and they work with only one promoter. That promoter has things much easier than their competition, yet that promoter doesn't even make a profit on every show they do.

Coldwell is probably the promoter who cares most for his fighters. Looking at his cards you can see he uses Yorkshire venues mostly, and promotes Yorkshire fighters who sell tickets.
The only way to make money in this situation is from ticket sales.
I know he promotes a very good fighter not from the area who was struggling selling tickets for shows in Yorkshire so Dave had to pull him from a show quite late on.
But Dave being the caring guy he is manages to use his Eddie Hearn connections to get said unbeaten boxer on undercards for Eddie.

Steve Wood is another one who cares for his fighters and is a top notch guy.

Wake up call wrote:

martinmrts wrote:I've often wondered why you usually have bills made up of ticket seller vs journeyman rather than ticket seller vs ticket seller. In the latter case the promoter would be spared the expense of 2 journeymen, and would offer an event that would be of interest to the casual boxing fan rather than just mates of the ticket seller. There is probably a good reason for this - anybody ?

It's really quite simple, because most fighters won't take the risk of boxing away from home unless the promoter is paying through the nose. Making such fights is a nightmare for matchmakers.

For small hall promoters with limited budgets, making 50/50 fights is very difficult and they certainly can't stack a card with them because they cost so much more money to make. It's easy to say they'll sell more tickets, but that's far from true and you'll be amazed at how little revenue some well known fighters bring into a show.

Now a poster on here has tried to claim promoters have to "promote the show" and not ask boxers to sell tickets but that view is ridiculous for those that do not have the luxury of TV revenue. Even if the promoter was to spunk tens of thousands of pounds on advertising, video campaigns etc, there is still a limit to the numbers that will be attracted to the show and often it results in a loss being made.

The economics of boxing are flawed because boxers are generally paid much more per fight than they are actually worth commercially. Yes they deserve every penny for the risk they take, but what other type of business would pay someone £2000 to £3000 when they only attract £1000 (often less) in revenue to the show? Yes some boxers bring more revenue in than they are paid and turn a profit for the promoter, but they are very few and far between.

Ticket deals minimises the risk because it puts the onus of covering costs on the fighters themselves. Boxers who have contracts with stipulated minimums can become lazy and think they don't have to bother doing the groundwork to build a fan base because they are getting paid anyway.

I'm no promoter, but working for a promotional company for the past four years has opened my eyes to huge differential between costs and revenue in this sport. We're lucky in the respect that profitability has never been an issue because our business was always run to support the sport rather than make a quick buck and we've always paid over the market rate for fights without having to rely on ticket deals. But for small hall promoters, who are often trainers and managers eager to keep their stables active, things are very different. They don't have personal fortunes to fall back on so they need to minimise their risk and ticket deals are the only viable option.

Quite simply, without ticket deals most promoters would fold, meaning less shows for fans and less work for boxers. What would fighters rather do? Sell tickets or not box at all?

The situation we have in British boxing at present is that there is only one TV channel than pumps significant funds into the sport and they work with only one promoter. That promoter has things much easier than their competition, yet that promoter doesn't even make a profit on every show they do.

Great post.

Wake up call wrote:

martinmrts wrote:I've often wondered why you usually have bills made up of ticket seller vs journeyman rather than ticket seller vs ticket seller. In the latter case the promoter would be spared the expense of 2 journeymen, and would offer an event that would be of interest to the casual boxing fan rather than just mates of the ticket seller. There is probably a good reason for this - anybody ?

It's really quite simple, because most fighters won't take the risk of boxing away from home unless the promoter is paying through the nose. Making such fights is a nightmare for matchmakers.

For small hall promoters with limited budgets, making 50/50 fights is very difficult and they certainly can't stack a card with them because they cost so much more money to make. It's easy to say they'll sell more tickets, but that's far from true and you'll be amazed at how little revenue some well known fighters bring into a show.

Now a poster on here has tried to claim promoters have to "promote the show" and not ask boxers to sell tickets but that view is ridiculous for those that do not have the luxury of TV revenue. Even if the promoter was to spunk tens of thousands of pounds on advertising, video campaigns etc, there is still a limit to the numbers that will be attracted to the show and often it results in a loss being made.

The economics of boxing are flawed because boxers are generally paid much more per fight than they are actually worth commercially. Yes they deserve every penny for the risk they take, but what other type of business would pay someone £2000 to £3000 when they only attract £1000 (often less) in revenue to the show? Yes some boxers bring more revenue in than they are paid and turn a profit for the promoter, but they are very few and far between.

Ticket deals minimises the risk because it puts the onus of covering costs on the fighters themselves. Boxers who have contracts with stipulated minimums can become lazy and think they don't have to bother doing the groundwork to build a fan base because they are getting paid anyway.

I'm no promoter, but working for a promotional company for the past four years has opened my eyes to huge differential between costs and revenue in this sport. We're lucky in the respect that profitability has never been an issue because our business was always run to support the sport rather than make a quick buck and we've always paid over the market rate for fights without having to rely on ticket deals. But for small hall promoters, who are often trainers and managers eager to keep their stables active, things are very different. They don't have personal fortunes to fall back on so they need to minimise their risk and ticket deals are the only viable option.

Quite simply, without ticket deals most promoters would fold, meaning less shows for fans and less work for boxers. What would fighters rather do? Sell tickets or not box at all?

The situation we have in British boxing at present is that there is only one TV channel than pumps significant funds into the sport and they work with only one promoter. That promoter has things much easier than their competition, yet that promoter doesn't even make a profit on every show they do.

Totally agree mate - people assume that promoters are rolling in cash, and that they are raking it in at their fighters expense show after show, which simply isn't true.

The fact is there are VERY FEW fighters capable of selling big numbers of tickets these days, and yet, as you say, they expect to be well renumerated.

It would be interesting for a current promoter or ex-promoter on here to actually anonymously paste an income and expenditure profile for an event they have managed.

No need to state who they are, which event it was or where, but just list what the final income generated actually was and then all the itemised expenditure costs.

Would be very interesting to see what operating margin there is.

spudder56 wrote:

bripez wrote:

spudder56 wrote:I have on a few occasions seen the following variation of a ticket deal contract a fight is announced on a show the promotor then goes round to the home fighters manager and collects £500 or in some cases £800 off the manager and in return gives him 100 £30 or in some cases £40 tickets the manager then has to guarantee to pay the away fighter his purse of say £1100 and then whatever he and the boxer sells is his to split between them so basically the promotor carnt lose money as he has been paid up front to cover his expenses etc and as an added bonus he has any walk up revenue for himself I have seen quite a few show run along these lines say with 8 fights on the bill the promotor doesn't actually pay one boxer so he carnt lose I have seen boxers fight for nothing and still owe money to the opponent coz he is guaranteed his purse all because he hasn't sold the tickets beleive me this does and has happened

I didn't reply to this yesterday as I was awaiting the response from the experts - not sure where they have gone ?

who are the experts mate ? i am just stating facts this can and does happen on a regular basis now so think of this scenario-- a lot of boxers fans are undecided about buying tickets then decide to go on the night and pay on the door so basically straight into the promotors pocket it is possible for the boxer to only sell 35 or so tickets and end up fighting for nothing but actually have well over 100 of his fans in the crowd

That sounds a very shoddy system and is bound to sap the enthusiasm of any boxer treated that way.

I agree palooka it is a very shoddy system but beleive me it takes place on a regular basis you have to wonder to as to what the manager is thinking ofby agreeing to such a deal for his fighter he has obviously not thought the implications of the deal through

spudder56 wrote:I agree palooka it is a very shoddy system but beleive me it takes place on a regular basis you have to wonder to as to what the manager is thinking ofby agreeing to such a deal for his fighter he has obviously not thought the implications of the deal through

Again, can you really blame the manager ?

If it is a small time manager with little pulling power what option does he have ? - it is either take it or leave it.


Ps - good post Wake Up Call

bripez wrote:

spudder56 wrote:I agree palooka it is a very shoddy system but beleive me it takes place on a regular basis you have to wonder to as to what the manager is thinking ofby agreeing to such a deal for his fighter he has obviously not thought the implications of the deal through

Again, can you really blame the manager ?

If it is a small time manager with little pulling power what option does he have ? - it is either take it or leave it.


Ps - good post Wake Up Call

Who do you blame then mate ?

Why is there a blame culture ?
Financial realities are just that.
Even on a ticket deal fighters get paid.
Managers and Trainers take their cut.
Promoters make a profit.
Fans pay for tickets.

It's a harsh reality but there you go.

Junker wrote:

who are the experts mate ? i am just stating facts this can and does happen on a regular basis now so think of this scenario-- a lot of boxers fans are undecided about buying tickets then decide to go on the night and pay on the door so basically straight into the promotors pocket it is possible for the boxer to only sell 35 or so tickets and end up fighting for nothing but actually have well over 100 of his fans in the crowd

good post. This can and does frequently happen.

I used to play in a band and on the local music venues it was exactly the same scenario. You'd try and sell tickets, but if someone came along to see you without your ticket, then that would just go straight to the promoter and you miss out on any credit or money for that sale.

True mate and that's life.
Most boxers I know on ticket deals have their mates and true supporters well boxed off before fight night.
The other thing is I rarely hear any moans as well.
Walk up trade at the door is rarely to see one fighter in particular.

spudder56 wrote:

bripez wrote:

spudder56 wrote:I agree palooka it is a very shoddy system but beleive me it takes place on a regular basis you have to wonder to as to what the manager is thinking ofby agreeing to such a deal for his fighter he has obviously not thought the implications of the deal through

Again, can you really blame the manager ?

If it is a small time manager with little pulling power what option does he have ? - it is either take it or leave it.


Ps - good post Wake Up Call

Who do you blame then mate ?

I don't know to be honest! It is like some kind of chicken and egg type situation.

There does seem to be some kind of downward spiral though, I don't remember this situation say 10 years Ago (maybe it was the same then, it is just that I didn't know).

To be honest, if I had a son /nephew who was looking to turn pro (and didn't have an Olympic medal!) I would look to follow the same model as the Furys are doing with Hughie.

Deserter wrote:

Wake up call wrote:

martinmrts wrote:I've often wondered why you usually have bills made up of ticket seller vs journeyman rather than ticket seller vs ticket seller. In the latter case the promoter would be spared the expense of 2 journeymen, and would offer an event that would be of interest to the casual boxing fan rather than just mates of the ticket seller. There is probably a good reason for this - anybody ?

It's really quite simple, because most fighters won't take the risk of boxing away from home unless the promoter is paying through the nose. Making such fights is a nightmare for matchmakers.

For small hall promoters with limited budgets, making 50/50 fights is very difficult and they certainly can't stack a card with them because they cost so much more money to make. It's easy to say they'll sell more tickets, but that's far from true and you'll be amazed at how little revenue some well known fighters bring into a show.

Now a poster on here has tried to claim promoters have to "promote the show" and not ask boxers to sell tickets but that view is ridiculous for those that do not have the luxury of TV revenue. Even if the promoter was to spunk tens of thousands of pounds on advertising, video campaigns etc, there is still a limit to the numbers that will be attracted to the show and often it results in a loss being made.

The economics of boxing are flawed because boxers are generally paid much more per fight than they are actually worth commercially. Yes they deserve every penny for the risk they take, but what other type of business would pay someone £2000 to £3000 when they only attract £1000 (often less) in revenue to the show? Yes some boxers bring more revenue in than they are paid and turn a profit for the promoter, but they are very few and far between.

Ticket deals minimises the risk because it puts the onus of covering costs on the fighters themselves. Boxers who have contracts with stipulated minimums can become lazy and think they don't have to bother doing the groundwork to build a fan base because they are getting paid anyway.

I'm no promoter, but working for a promotional company for the past four years has opened my eyes to huge differential between costs and revenue in this sport. We're lucky in the respect that profitability has never been an issue because our business was always run to support the sport rather than make a quick buck and we've always paid over the market rate for fights without having to rely on ticket deals. But for small hall promoters, who are often trainers and managers eager to keep their stables active, things are very different. They don't have personal fortunes to fall back on so they need to minimise their risk and ticket deals are the only viable option.

Quite simply, without ticket deals most promoters would fold, meaning less shows for fans and less work for boxers. What would fighters rather do? Sell tickets or not box at all?

The situation we have in British boxing at present is that there is only one TV channel than pumps significant funds into the sport and they work with only one promoter. That promoter has things much easier than their competition, yet that promoter doesn't even make a profit on every show they do.

Great post.

x2

Wake up call wrote:

martinmrts wrote:I've often wondered why you usually have bills made up of ticket seller vs journeyman rather than ticket seller vs ticket seller. In the latter case the promoter would be spared the expense of 2 journeymen, and would offer an event that would be of interest to the casual boxing fan rather than just mates of the ticket seller. There is probably a good reason for this - anybody ?

It's really quite simple, because most fighters won't take the risk of boxing away from home unless the promoter is paying through the nose. Making such fights is a nightmare for matchmakers.

For small hall promoters with limited budgets, making 50/50 fights is very difficult and they certainly can't stack a card with them because they cost so much more money to make. It's easy to say they'll sell more tickets, but that's far from true and you'll be amazed at how little revenue some well known fighters bring into a show.

Now a poster on here has tried to claim promoters have to "promote the show" and not ask boxers to sell tickets but that view is ridiculous for those that do not have the luxury of TV revenue. Even if the promoter was to spunk tens of thousands of pounds on advertising, video campaigns etc, there is still a limit to the numbers that will be attracted to the show and often it results in a loss being made.

The economics of boxing are flawed because boxers are generally paid much more per fight than they are actually worth commercially. Yes they deserve every penny for the risk they take, but what other type of business would pay someone £2000 to £3000 when they only attract £1000 (often less) in revenue to the show? Yes some boxers bring more revenue in than they are paid and turn a profit for the promoter, but they are very few and far between.

Ticket deals minimises the risk because it puts the onus of covering costs on the fighters themselves. Boxers who have contracts with stipulated minimums can become lazy and think they don't have to bother doing the groundwork to build a fan base because they are getting paid anyway.

I'm no promoter, but working for a promotional company for the past four years has opened my eyes to huge differential between costs and revenue in this sport. We're lucky in the respect that profitability has never been an issue because our business was always run to support the sport rather than make a quick buck and we've always paid over the market rate for fights without having to rely on ticket deals. But for small hall promoters, who are often trainers and managers eager to keep their stables active, things are very different. They don't have personal fortunes to fall back on so they need to minimise their risk and ticket deals are the only viable option.

Quite simply, without ticket deals most promoters would fold, meaning less shows for fans and less work for boxers. What would fighters rather do? Sell tickets or not box at all?

The situation we have in British boxing at present is that there is only one TV channel than pumps significant funds into the sport and they work with only one promoter. That promoter has things much easier than their competition, yet that promoter doesn't even make a profit on every show they do.

That's pretty much the situation down to a T. Excellent post. Small hall promoters do and have took enormous personal financial risks to make their promotions go ahead. It's a huge gamble and a huge shame when they still put the show on knowing that they are onto a loser (even when everyone else is getting paid).