BoxRec

You int seen me, right!

Terry D wrote:

DavidPayne wrote:Nowt wrong with Doncaster.

My job takes me to the most deprived areas of Liverpool, Manchester, Leicester, London, Newcastle, Nottingham etc.

Doncaster is no worse than any of those.

David Payne, boxing writer, doorman and armed blagger

Debt collector by the sounds of it.

Which reminds me James, you got the money for that gold chain with sentimental genuine gold plated heart shape pendent?

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:However, Witter has now been a champion for 12 months and still cannot sell a ticket for toffee - when is it time to cut his losses?

Its all very admirable, and I don't want to sound like a prick - but surely its time to say business is business its time to let him go.

You're quite right. You never said "time to ditch Witter, Mick."

An excerpt of what you said is above.

For that second paragraph I appologise, I certainly didn't mean for it to sound how you and now I have read it as..... I honestly meant for it to mean as an "if I was in Micks shoes" type thing.

The first excerpt is a question "when" that I mentioned previously.

Hope that clears it up. Read my post previous to this... that is what I meant and I would appreciate your views on it.

Albert wrote:Mick signed Witter as probably most promoters would have done and I suspect probably still would. I don't slag off Hennessy for doing so. I also suspect Hennessy knew exactly what he would or would not get from signing Witter.

My own opinion is that the trail of thought was probably Witter being a Hennessy Sports fighter would make the Hennessy stable look a good deal stronger on paper when negoitiating TV deals - TV deals bring a certain amount of revenue and gets that vital foot in the door - whilst Hennessy may not make money probably a loss on Witters fights he will gain much needed exposure as a promoter - it is the other TV shows Hennessy has negoitiated on the back of Witter and Froch is probably where he will make some money.

In addition hanging onto that hope of a big fight with Hatton and an even bigger hope it would be a joint promotion was the key to signing Witter.

Thanks for the insight, instead of just picking holes (admittedly correct ones) in the way I worded a post.

I didn't think of the potential TV deals Witter could assist brining Hennessey..... Good point.

stujones wrote:

Albert wrote:Mick signed Witter as probably most promoters would have done and I suspect probably still would. I don't slag off Hennessy for doing so. I also suspect Hennessy knew exactly what he would or would not get from signing Witter.

My own opinion is that the trail of thought was probably Witter being a Hennessy Sports fighter would make the Hennessy stable look a good deal stronger on paper when negoitiating TV deals - TV deals bring a certain amount of revenue and gets that vital foot in the door - whilst Hennessy may not make money probably a loss on Witters fights he will gain much needed exposure as a promoter - it is the other TV shows Hennessy has negoitiated on the back of Witter and Froch is probably where he will make some money.

In addition hanging onto that hope of a big fight with Hatton and an even bigger hope it would be a joint promotion was the key to signing Witter.

Thanks for the insight, instead of just picking holes (admittedly correct ones) in the way I worded a post.

I didn't think of the potential TV deals Witter could assist brining Hennessey..... Good point.

You really are silly, Stu, trying to turn it round on me 'picking holes', correct or not. I was disagreeing with the point YOU made about Hennessy dropping Witter. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the way you worded it - point, not language. You then denied saying it so I simply reminded you that you did.

End of. (For me, at least.)

I can't imagine circumstances under which any promoter would drop a world champion. Irrespective of his ticket selling ability.

Witter has been active, I'm sure Mick H isn't doing it for the love of it, pragmatic perhaps but philanthropist? I doubt.

And there is always a BIG fight around the corner.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:

Albert wrote:Mick signed Witter as probably most promoters would have done and I suspect probably still would. I don't slag off Hennessy for doing so. I also suspect Hennessy knew exactly what he would or would not get from signing Witter.

My own opinion is that the trail of thought was probably Witter being a Hennessy Sports fighter would make the Hennessy stable look a good deal stronger on paper when negoitiating TV deals - TV deals bring a certain amount of revenue and gets that vital foot in the door - whilst Hennessy may not make money probably a loss on Witters fights he will gain much needed exposure as a promoter - it is the other TV shows Hennessy has negoitiated on the back of Witter and Froch is probably where he will make some money.

In addition hanging onto that hope of a big fight with Hatton and an even bigger hope it would be a joint promotion was the key to signing Witter.

Thanks for the insight, instead of just picking holes (admittedly correct ones) in the way I worded a post.

I didn't think of the potential TV deals Witter could assist brining Hennessey..... Good point.

You really are silly, Stu, trying to turn it round on me 'picking holes', correct or not. I was disagreeing with the point YOU made about Hennessy dropping Witter. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the way you worded it - point, not language. You then denied saying it so I simply reminded you that you did.

End of. (For me, at least.)

My original POINT was WORDED wrong and I would have appreciated your views on my following post which I have doubled checked (except for spelling etc) and says what I wanted to say first time around. Its not the first and won't be the last time I have made a mistake in how I have worded things... and what I wanted to say didn't come accross on the keyboard. Which I hope I have clarified enough now.

Yes, you were right to have said that you "did" say this.... but I would have liked for maybe you to offer your views on the follow up as opposed to just proving a point.

Anyway, Boxingchat is not backwards in coming forwards in slating forum members views (rightly or wrongly)... So maybe he read my POINT as I originally intended it. I'm sure he wouldn't just be "shaking his head in disbelief" without putting something down on the forum... it would be very unlike him.

DavidPayne wrote:I can't imagine circumstances under which any promoter would drop a world champion. Irrespective of his ticket selling ability.

Witter has been active, I'm sure Mick H isn't doing it for the love of it, pragmatic perhaps but philanthropist? I doubt.

And there is always a BIG fight around the corner.

So do you think, in your own opinion, Mick will be in the black when he balances the books for this card? And if so, care to have a stap at how much?

If he is in the black, then for me at least it goes back to the original question.... why is the undercard quite so dire?

All my views regarding being the promoter of Witter have been based on the assumption that with sanctioning fees, and reletively little in the way of ticket sales and TV revenue... Witter's fights are not making money.

Terry D wrote:

If he did his wig would fall off so that is probably a fair assumption.

Do you know for certain who BC is then? I'm still inclined to believe the theory that it is Warren himself.

stujones wrote:

DavidPayne wrote:I can't imagine circumstances under which any promoter would drop a world champion. Irrespective of his ticket selling ability.

Witter has been active, I'm sure Mick H isn't doing it for the love of it, pragmatic perhaps but philanthropist? I doubt.

And there is always a BIG fight around the corner.

So do you think, in your own opinion, Mick will be in the black when he balances the books for this card? And if so, care to have a stap at how much?

If he is in the black, then for me at least it goes back to the original question.... why is the undercard quite so dire?

All my views regarding being the promoter of Witter have been based on the assumption that with sanctioning fees, and reletively little in the way of ticket sales and TV revenue... Witter's fights are not making money.

Why wouldn't he be in the black though? As for dropping Witter that doesn't make sense because Henessey can have his cake and eat it. He could keep Witter and let Witters mando win the purse bids and make Witter be the travelling champ until a sellable fight can be made.

It all depends on how much they get from sky and how many tickets they sell. Does anyone know how much sky would likely be paying?

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

stujones wrote:

DavidPayne wrote:I can't imagine circumstances under which any promoter would drop a world champion. Irrespective of his ticket selling ability.

Witter has been active, I'm sure Mick H isn't doing it for the love of it, pragmatic perhaps but philanthropist? I doubt.

And there is always a BIG fight around the corner.

So do you think, in your own opinion, Mick will be in the black when he balances the books for this card? And if so, care to have a stap at how much?

If he is in the black, then for me at least it goes back to the original question.... why is the undercard quite so dire?

All my views regarding being the promoter of Witter have been based on the assumption that with sanctioning fees, and reletively little in the way of ticket sales and TV revenue... Witter's fights are not making money.

Why wouldn't he be in the black though? As for dropping Witter that doesn't make sense because Henessey can have his cake and eat it. He could keep Witter and let Witters mando win the purse bids and make Witter be the travelling champ until a sellable fight can be made.

It all depends on how much they get from sky and how many tickets they sell. Does anyone know how much sky would likely be paying?

To answer your first question... its a simple I don't know. The incisive posts here by Boxingchat certainly IMPLY the one of the reasons for a poor undercard tonight is cost this bill is a lot.

I agree with your second part of your opening paragraph completely. Nowt wrong at all with doing that.... especially if the promoter has faith in his fighters ability. Indeed, as I have said - I think it would have been better in both the short and long term if Team Harris would have won the purse bids. I believe this fight would have got US coverage (of some sort) ASWELL as British coverage. Certainly would have been my decision had I'd been in Micks shoes (although obviously with very little knowledge of the figures just going by the posts on here)

However, it seems like Mick isn't doing that with Witter. Perhaps Sky are paying well, perhaps Witter is selling well and he is making money. But then, why the crap undercard?

I'm not saying Mick is paying his bakers bill with the takings on this bout but he will make money and it is the last hurdle before a bigger unification or profile bout.

The undercard is shallow because there isn't enough money for more.

Which merely shows Mick is protecting financial viability of the show.

In other words, he'll be in the black.

Big crowds don't necessarily mean big reward for the promoter.

How much do you think FA made on Hatton v Maussa when anecdotal evidence suggested the arena wasn't full and high prices tickets were slashed at the gate?

DavidPayne wrote:The undercard is shallow because there isn't enough money for more.

Which merely shows Mick is protecting financial viability of the show.

In other words, he'll be in the black.

Big crowds don't necessarily mean big reward for the promoter.

How much do you think FA made on Hatton v Maussa when anecdotal evidence suggested the arena wasn't full and high prices tickets were slashed at the gate?

Very little, if anything at all judging by the snipets I read and the digs made about it via some forum members.

Wouldn't a better undercard though at least potentially , in theory, equal to a bigger turnout (maybe at a bigger venue), possibly bigger Sky revenue and overall more publicity for his fighters... and then because everything is "bigger" still be in a similar financial situation as he will be when does his maths on Saturday.

I know Paul Boyce claimed he was some £30,000 in the RED for Gammer vs Krence.... thats why it stunned me show much that he didn't accept the Audley Harrison offer.

stujones wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

stujones wrote: So do you think, in your own opinion, Mick will be in the black when he balances the books for this card? And if so, care to have a stap at how much?

If he is in the black, then for me at least it goes back to the original question.... why is the undercard quite so dire?

All my views regarding being the promoter of Witter have been based on the assumption that with sanctioning fees, and reletively little in the way of ticket sales and TV revenue... Witter's fights are not making money.

Why wouldn't he be in the black though? As for dropping Witter that doesn't make sense because Henessey can have his cake and eat it. He could keep Witter and let Witters mando win the purse bids and make Witter be the travelling champ until a sellable fight can be made.

It all depends on how much they get from sky and how many tickets they sell. Does anyone know how much sky would likely be paying?

To answer your first question... its a simple I don't know. The incisive posts here by Boxingchat certainly IMPLY the one of the reasons for a poor undercard tonight is cost this bill is a lot.

I agree with your second part of your opening paragraph completely. Nowt wrong at all with doing that.... especially if the promoter has faith in his fighters ability. Indeed, as I have said - I think it would have been better in both the short and long term if Team Harris would have won the purse bids. I believe this fight would have got US coverage (of some sort) ASWELL as British coverage. Certainly would have been my decision had I'd been in Micks shoes (although obviously with very little knowledge of the figures just going by the posts on here)

However, it seems like Mick isn't doing that with Witter. Perhaps Sky are paying well, perhaps Witter is selling well and he is making money. But then, why the crap undercard?

Witter-Harris isn't the first world title fight with a crap undercard - Hatton-Tyszu had a crap 1 and they could have afforded something decent. Simply put the TV money will likely be the same for a world title fight with or without the undercard fights. So from a business perspective - whether your aking big bucks or not why pay for something that won't increase revenue?

I don't think Henessey would be promoting this if he wasn't making some money from it. Like you say he could let Witter goto America. But if Sky TV say paid out 200k for the TV rights then all the costs should be covered plus a few quid in the back pocket. Anything above that and the profit is larger.

Making money from boxing is far larger than how many fans show up - TV money is 1 of the biggest revenues.

BC probably is probably the only 1 who has an idea of how much money is involved and it doesnt look like he wants to shed any light on it for us

stujones wrote:

Terry D wrote:

If he did his wig would fall off so that is probably a fair assumption.

Do you know for certain who BC is then? I'm still inclined to believe the theory that it is Warren himself.

Wouldnt be suprised, he knows allot and has been at big fights all over the world ringside