Page 1 of 2
Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:06
by Counter-puncher
was thinking about this last night, Warren has Khan, and the Olympians, and then:
isn't he a bit plagued by oldish fighters, who have had a certain level of success, but who can't justify world -level money for ensuing fights but whose eyes will deservedly or not still be on making it at world level?
I'm thinking of Cook and Arthur as the two main examples, how the eff do you promote them, when basically neither are good enough to beat the elite at 130 / 135 but both (i assume) will want to be matched and paid as though they were..? and its not as though eiither of them will guarantee to bring 5000 fans out of the woodwork every time they fight so where is the incentive for Warren to put them on shows? Enzo i suppose is another example.
what does warren do, in the strange phony war period between Khan 'making it big' lol and the oLympians being ready to follow him?
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:11
by Adamj1987
Counter-puncher wrote:was thinking about this last night, Warren has Khan, and the Olympians, and then:
isn't he a bit plagued by oldish fighters, who have had a certain level of success, but who can't justify world -level money for ensuing fights but whose eyes will deservedly or not still be on making it at world level?
I'm thinking of Cook and Arthur as the two main examples, how the eff do you promote them, when basically neither are good enough to beat the elite at 130 / 135 but both (i assume) will want to be matched and paid as though they were..? and its not as though eiither of them will guarantee to bring 5000 fans out of the woodwork every time they fight so where is the incentive for Warren to put them on shows? Enzo i suppose is another example.
what does warren do, in the strange phony war period between Khan 'making it big' lol and the oLympians being ready to follow him?
he does what he already does, over hype fighters thats people have partly heard of
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:13
by Counter-puncher
go on then, he's got a 15000 seater arena to fill, assuming khan sells about 500 who does he sel the rest on, and how? :??
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:17
by Carbo
Adamj1987 wrote:Counter-puncher wrote:was thinking about this last night, Warren has Khan, and the Olympians, and then:
isn't he a bit plagued by oldish fighters, who have had a certain level of success, but who can't justify world -level money for ensuing fights but whose eyes will deservedly or not still be on making it at world level?
I'm thinking of Cook and Arthur as the two main examples, how the eff do you promote them, when basically neither are good enough to beat the elite at 130 / 135 but both (i assume) will want to be matched and paid as though they were..? and its not as though eiither of them will guarantee to bring 5000 fans out of the woodwork every time they fight so where is the incentive for Warren to put them on shows? Enzo i suppose is another example.
what does warren do, in the strange phony war period between Khan 'making it big' lol and the oLympians being ready to follow him?
he does what he already does, over hype fighters thats people have partly heard of
What a scum bag, eh?
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:29
by Adamj1987
Counter-puncher wrote:go on then, he's got a 15000 seater arena to fill, assuming khan sells about 500 who does he sel the rest on, and how? :??
wrong khan sells more than that. rogan would be on there he would get enzo an easy win then it would be the 4th coming of enzo. why not stick on audley ve skelton or something
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:31
by Counter-puncher
haha sorry mate i meant to write khan sells 5000 not 5oo

Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:32
by Adamj1987
Counter-puncher wrote:haha sorry mate i meant to write khan sells 5000 not 5oo

lol thats fine but i still say he could fill it with has beens like audley, skelton, williams
or up and comers like kell brook and cleverly
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:34
by Counter-puncher
I'm still not seeing 15000 fans there. khan-prescott, with a world title haha on the line, and the MEN was maybe 2/3 full with the top level closed off.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:36
by Adamj1987
Counter-puncher wrote:I'm still not seeing 15000 fans there. khan-prescott, with a world title haha on the line, and the MEN was maybe 2/3 full with the top level closed off.
frank bruno doing stand up would rake in the rest
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 09:37
by Counter-puncher
haha. or maybe Alex Arthur leading a religious revival southern tent-style 'can i get a witness?' type evangelist deal. maybe.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 10:11
by twenty six
Don't know why you're using the 15k figure.
A boxer bringing 5k is a feat right now - if that's what Khan does in ticket sales.
When was the last time there were 15k at a UK show, not involving Hatton ?
I'm struggling - but maybe someone will enlighten me.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 10:15
by Counter-puncher
26 whatever mate, 12000 15000 whatever it is that the O2/MEN takes, my question is what fighters has warren got that he could get anywhere near filling somewhere like that?
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 10:16
by whiteboy
twenty six wrote:Don't know why you're using the 15k figure.
A boxer bringing 5k is a feat right now - if that's what Khan does in ticket sales.
When was the last time there were 15k at a UK show, not involving Hatton ?
I'm struggling - but maybe someone will enlighten me.
Khan-Barrera
if not
Haye-Enzo
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 11:32
by hitman_hatton1
whiteboy wrote:twenty six wrote:Don't know why you're using the 15k figure.
A boxer bringing 5k is a feat right now - if that's what Khan does in ticket sales.
When was the last time there were 15k at a UK show, not involving Hatton ?
I'm struggling - but maybe someone will enlighten me.
Khan-Barrera
if not
Haye-Enzo
was khan-barrera a sell out?
it looked damn close to it.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 14:56
by The_Don1
Warren has one of the hottest talents in UK boxing at the moment with Kell Brook...why doesn't he put him on headline shows in Sheffield? The easiest way to build someone up is using their home town support, I'm baffled as to why Kell hasn't fought in Sheffield since winning the British.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 15:01
by jBacca
It's all about getting the home support involved (as the above poster said).
Get the Scouse lads on in Manchester like Bomber, Swifty and Smigga, they'll do an undercard proudly with the support the local lads would bring.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 12 May 2009, 16:57
by gobbles
That O2 show is a pretty packed bill.
If Khan's name alone sells 5,000.
Three Olympians - 500 each (first appearance for DeGale and Saunders in home city)
Macklin sells well - maybe 1,000
The Walsh brothers - maybe 800
Cleverly - maybe 300
Chisora - maybe 200
Plus whoever is on the card and it's pretty near a full house.
That's how it's always been done, even on Hatton shows. If you want to move on up the undercard, sell tickets.
If Haye does well the week before, boxing will be buzzing in the papers and there will be a huge demand.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 07:55
by twenty six
Counter,
Don't misunderstand me mate, I know the point you're making.
Fact is though, I don't think Wazza is any different to any other UK based Promotor.
We don't have fighters putting enough bums on seats.
The arenas you mention both have "flexible" capacities.
They can be adapted to fit the audience, and sometimes that can create an illusion on TV that the place is stacked out.
In 1993 there were 136,274 at a fight at the Aztec Stadium.
Bet the view was great from the cheap seats !
Just made some enquiries and Im told the official attendance for Ricky v Pacaman was 16,262.
Appreciate the venue can dictate at times - but I bet many non boxing fans thought there were far more there.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 10:22
by Wake up call
twenty six wrote:Counter,
Don't misunderstand me mate, I know the point you're making.
Fact is though, I don't think Wazza is any different to any other UK based Promotor.
We don't have fighters putting enough bums on seats.
The arenas you mention both have "flexible" capacities.
They can be adapted to fit the audience, and sometimes that can create an illusion on TV that the place is stacked out.
In 1993 there were 136,274 at a fight at the Aztec Stadium.
Bet the view was great from the cheap seats !
Just made some enquiries and Im told the official attendance for Ricky v Pacaman was 16,262.
Appreciate the venue can dictate at times - but I bet many non boxing fans thought there were far more there.
I was at both the Khan - Barrera and Haye - Maccarinelli fights and believe me they were sell outs. Your right in what you say about them moving people forward and closing off sections with curtains at some shows so it looks busy on tv but it didn't happen at those shows.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 11:58
by twenty six
I wasn't saying they had mate.
Do you know the attendance figures for these two shows ?
I'll see if I can find out.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 12:01
by steve689
He's got plenty of local interest involved on the Belfast card anyway.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 12:14
by Autobarn
The_Don1 wrote:Warren has one of the hottest talents in UK boxing at the moment with Kell Brook...why doesn't he put him on headline shows in Sheffield? The easiest way to build someone up is using their home town support, I'm baffled as to why Kell hasn't fought in Sheffield since winning the British.
sheffield's not his bailiwick
hobson would run the bastit out of town!
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 12:26
by Spud
Autobarn wrote:The_Don1 wrote:Warren has one of the hottest talents in UK boxing at the moment with Kell Brook...why doesn't he put him on headline shows in Sheffield? The easiest way to build someone up is using their home town support, I'm baffled as to why Kell hasn't fought in Sheffield since winning the British.
sheffield's not his bailiwick
hobson would run the bastit out of town!
Dennis does not operate in that way!!!
Sheffield by the way is bloody hard work whoever you have there boxing.
I remember years ago on the Full Monty 2 show they had Calzaghe, Ingle etc etc etc and the place was nowhere near sold out!!!
Hatton/Maussa was hard work selling that out.
And Clinton Woods whilst he has had about 5,000 ish not sure exactly how much he certainly hasn't sold out Sheffield Arena.
Don't know why but Sheffield is very hard to sell boxing too.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 12:32
by Spud
With regards to the O2 - I honestly believe its a fantastic venue for whoever is promoting a show!!!
The O2 normally also help out the promoter by selling tickets and promoting the actual show in that I mean regards the advertising the show.
W arren has to put Khan on any of the big shows - he in my opinion is heavily reliant on the "asian" population of whatever city turning up as well as an increasing number of other Khan supporters. Its a very sensible move.
With regards to other ticket sellers - there are not many BIG ticket sellers in the country - to use a pop chart phrase "Jeffries has gone in straight to number 2" in my view behind Khan if you discount Ricky Hatton - you will note I have left out David Haye - I really am unsure how many tickets he can sell and what in fact his popularity is at this stage - I will find it staggering if its not significant now - but even with someone like him on the bill its certainly not significant enough to sell out an Arena at this stage.
Re: Warren's dilemma?
Posted: 13 May 2009, 12:35
by Autobarn
this is yorkshire
things are done differently over here
we do what we want