BoxRec

I wouldn't even be surprised if Martin takes a little break, just wait for 8 months or so and then take the fight, 14 months ago Wilder wouldn't have been ready for Szpilka either.

the_doctor wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:It's no wonder why they charge so much when there are so many people willing to hand over there hard earned. This was a fight where Joshua was something like 1/10 to win. Whyte put up a decent showing and we saw a few flaws in Joshua but it was by no means ppv worthy (i watched it in a pub).

But you've just made my point for me - 400,000+ people thought it was worth it. Plus the thousands more (including yourself) who decided to watch it or show it in pubs/bars/clubs.

This is the problem with the PPV argument - it's subjective. I thought it was worth the money, you didn't. Neither of us is right or wrong, it's opinion.

As a result, Joshua should be developed in just the same way Lewis was, Fury was, Wlad was etc. If the population deem the fight PPV worthy then it will be PPV. If the population feel they are being defrauded then nobody will pay and the PPV model won't work.

Just out of interest, who would you be willing to pay £16/17 to watch fight Joshua in April?

I agree with Chris newly, people buy it because they think they have no other choice and might miss out. They cave in for crap such as bellow v clever on ppv.

People who are happy to pay £16/17 for Joshua whyte, do you expect to pay that as he ups the antenna? Say we get to the point in 2 years where fury is king and Joshua is also a belt holder, will you be shocked to pay £35/£45/£50? It's going to get daft soon and until we make a move like the Liverpool fans, we'll get shafted. You greedy bastards, enough is enough.

Personally, big world title fights are what we should ppv. Fights that cannot be made without it. On that basis I would go with any belt holder, Haye & wlad or vitali.

This is special dispensation for Joshua and not other weights

freddydoesdallas wrote:

the_doctor wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:It's no wonder why they charge so much when there are so many people willing to hand over there hard earned. This was a fight where Joshua was something like 1/10 to win. Whyte put up a decent showing and we saw a few flaws in Joshua but it was by no means ppv worthy (i watched it in a pub).

But you've just made my point for me - 400,000+ people thought it was worth it. Plus the thousands more (including yourself) who decided to watch it or show it in pubs/bars/clubs.

This is the problem with the PPV argument - it's subjective. I thought it was worth the money, you didn't. Neither of us is right or wrong, it's opinion.

As a result, Joshua should be developed in just the same way Lewis was, Fury was, Wlad was etc. If the population deem the fight PPV worthy then it will be PPV. If the population feel they are being defrauded then nobody will pay and the PPV model won't work.

Just out of interest, who would you be willing to pay £16/17 to watch fight Joshua in April?

I agree with Chris newly, people buy it because they think they have no other choice and might miss out. They cave in for crap such as bellow v clever on ppv.

People who are happy to pay £16/17 for Joshua whyte, do you expect to pay that as he ups the antenna? Say we get to the point in 2 years where fury is king and Joshua is also a belt holder, will you be shocked to pay £35/£45/£50? It's going to get daft soon and until we make a move like the Liverpool fans, we'll get shafted. You greedy bastards, enough is enough.

Personally, big world title fights are what we should ppv. Fights that cannot be made without it. On that basis I would go with any belt holder, Haye & wlad or vitali.

This is special dispensation for Joshua and not other weights

But most world title fights people wouldn't pay for. You got two world title fights in Glazkov/Martin and Szpilka/Wilder for free (well Sky subscription obviously), which I thought the latter was a really good fight.

They're not PPV because of the prestige, they're PPV because it's Anthony Joshua. You know there was world and domestic title fights on the undercard of that fight? He headlines on PPV because that's who people want to see.

The suggestion that Sky would charge £50 for a super fight is ludicrous. Even Sky aren't that stupid. I think maybe I've seen maybe £24 PPV before, but not anything more. It's expensive, and I myself would think twice before spending that much, but many would not be put off by it.

Rob3_142 wrote:
But most world title fights people wouldn't pay for. You got two world title fights in Glazkov/Martin and Szpilka/Wilder for free (well Sky subscription obviously), which I thought the latter was a really good fight.

They're not PPV because of the prestige, they're PPV because it's Anthony Joshua. You know there was world and domestic title fights on the undercard of that fight? He headlines on PPV because that's who people want to see.

The suggestion that Sky would charge £50 for a super fight is ludicrous. Even Sky aren't that stupid. I think maybe I've seen maybe £24 PPV before, but not anything more. It's expensive, and I myself would think twice before spending that much, but many would not be put off by it.

They're not British fighters though. The only fight I can remember being ppv in this country that didn't involve a British fighter is mayweather v pacquiao.

Why is it ridiculous? Both fighters will want huge fees. Joshua is getting big money for ppv already and fury will want bigger money. No American ppv markets so the fee will need to be increased. Hearn will note that people have paid for lesser opponents and will try to justify it on the basis of 'it can't happen without the price'. You may think that's daft but it was said for cleverly v bellew

Freddy - Sky have put on loads over the years - PPV's that did not involve British fighters.

V Klitchsko vs Sanders.
Hopkins vs DLH
Sturm vs DLH
DLH vs Mayweather.

And many others I am sure.

stujones wrote:Freddy - Sky have put on loads over the years - PPV's that did not involve British fighters.

V Klitchsko vs Sanders.
Hopkins vs DLH
Sturm vs DLH
DLH vs Mayweather.

And many others I am sure.

I don't remember any of those being PPV on Sky.

Happy Slapper wrote:

stujones wrote:Freddy - Sky have put on loads over the years - PPV's that did not involve British fighters.

V Klitchsko vs Sanders.
Hopkins vs DLH
Sturm vs DLH
DLH vs Mayweather.

And many others I am sure.

I don't remember any of those being PPV on Sky.

I definitely remember watching DLH vs Mayweather on PPV, but these were all a fair while ago.

I didn't buy Joshua's last fight & have no intention of buying his next one (in fact, I think Quigg vs Frampton will probably be my last PPV ever), but Hearn would be mad not to keep AJ on PPV everytime he fights for as long as he keeps winning. People obviously don't care about his opposition & will buy his PPVs regardless, so it would be crazy not to keep milking it.

Rob3_142 wrote:

Happy Slapper wrote:

stujones wrote:Freddy - Sky have put on loads over the years - PPV's that did not involve British fighters.

V Klitchsko vs Sanders.
Hopkins vs DLH
Sturm vs DLH
DLH vs Mayweather.

And many others I am sure.

I don't remember any of those being PPV on Sky.

I definitely remember watching DLH vs Mayweather on PPV, but these were all a fair while ago.

That one wasn't on PPV I'm sure. I watched it the Sunday morning and there is no way me dad would have paid for it and then not got up and watched it with me (I was living at home at the time).

http://www.marcobarrera.com/forum/index ... 08.15;wap2

All I can find that says where it was shown. I'm positive it was not PPV.

Sky weren't as bad back in those days.

Happy Slapper wrote:

stujones wrote:Freddy - Sky have put on loads over the years - PPV's that did not involve British fighters.

V Klitchsko vs Sanders.
Hopkins vs DLH
Sturm vs DLH
DLH vs Mayweather.

And many others I am sure.

I don't remember any of those being PPV on Sky.

I don't think they were either, almost certain DLH v Floud wasn't. Back then Floyd was not particularly popular and it was Oscar who pulled the most of that audience in. The whole Floyd being so popular thing really is quite strange actually.

stujones wrote:Freddy - Sky have put on loads over the years - PPV's that did not involve British fighters.

V Klitchsko vs Sanders.
Hopkins vs DLH
Sturm vs DLH
DLH vs Mayweather.

And many others I am sure.

All these fights were not ppv

lillywhite14 wrote:

Happy Slapper wrote:

stujones wrote:Freddy - Sky have put on loads over the years - PPV's that did not involve British fighters.

V Klitchsko vs Sanders.
Hopkins vs DLH
Sturm vs DLH
DLH vs Mayweather.

And many others I am sure.

I don't remember any of those being PPV on Sky.

I don't think they were either, almost certain DLH v Floud wasn't. Back then Floyd was not particularly popular and it was Oscar who pulled the most of that audience in. The whole Floyd being so popular thing really is quite strange actually.
Ye i remember DLH was always the ppv king an,like u,i dont know why mayweather became this ppv star when he always stunk the place out,great defensive fighter and a boxing great but a crowd pleaser he isnt

thechump wrote:

lillywhite14 wrote:

Happy Slapper wrote:
I don't remember any of those being PPV on Sky.

I don't think they were either, almost certain DLH v Floud wasn't. Back then Floyd was not particularly popular and it was Oscar who pulled the most of that audience in. The whole Floyd being so popular thing really is quite strange actually.
Ye i remember DLH was always the ppv king an,like u,i dont know why mayweather became this ppv star when he always stunk the place out,great defensive fighter and a boxing great but a crowd pleaser he isnt

The HBO 24/7 series is what made him a star. He talked so much trash that you either loved the guy and his antics or you wanted to see him get knocked the hell out, but you wanted to see his fight.

The Revival wrote:

thechump wrote:

lillywhite14 wrote:

I don't think they were either, almost certain DLH v Floud wasn't. Back then Floyd was not particularly popular and it was Oscar who pulled the most of that audience in. The whole Floyd being so popular thing really is quite strange actually.
Ye i remember DLH was always the ppv king an,like u,i dont know why mayweather became this ppv star when he always stunk the place out,great defensive fighter and a boxing great but a crowd pleaser he isnt

The HBO 24/7 series is what made him a star. He talked so much trash that you either loved the guy and his antics or you wanted to see him get knocked the hell out, but you wanted to see his fight.

Some of his antics in that 24/7 series were laugh out loud funny. He was definitely playing up to the villain role. Few of the quotes were good too. I'll need to watch it again. The 'you ain't nuttin but a pussy' quote was gold and 'Floyd Mayweather, steak and potatoes for life'

Btw he ain't really my cup of tea usually but I enjoyed that series.