BoxRec

I think the interests of boxer, manager and promoter are broadly aligned: take the route that enables each to make as much money as possible. Sometimes glory and titles etc come into it, but ultimately they want to get paid. And generally, it seems things turn sour when boxers believe they can make more money without the help of the promoter i.e. the guy that helped build them up.

Sometimes a promotor may be trying to build up a fighter and has a manager who is scuppering things at times with bad advice (or the manager may be telling the boxer the correct info and scuppering a promotor making some wedge ) , Either way if the promotor is also the boxers manager he has more control over what the boxer is doing , a promotor cant get a managers license until hes been a license holder for a mimimum of 3 years ,so in theory he should know what hes doing by then and be in a position to give the fighter sound advice .

For me i feel one crucial part of the manager/promotors is small hall promotors can then also look after journeymen to bring in extra income that they couldnt as promotors without a managers license as generally a journeyman goes down that route due to not being a ticket seller more often than not .

I think every relationship is different.

Sometimes it's the promoter, sometimes its the manager who is an ass. Sometimes it's also the boxer who is a dick.

Look at Kelly Pavlik, managed by the best in Cameron Dunkin and promoted by one of the top promoters in the world in Top Rank - yet he treated them all like idiots. Cancelling shows and what not.

Making a profit is not an ugly word, the better the parties involved do, the more money they all earn. It only becomes a problem when one party is clearly raping the other. Then it turns very sour.

But only a fool would sign something or be too distracted to know where they stood financially.

MachoMan09 wrote:Out of interest, why do people think it takes so long to get a manager's licence? I have my theories but would be interested to hear other people's views.

id have thought it was simply because the Board then see your committed to a career in the sport and therfor likely to actually look after the boxers rather than try to use them to make a quick buck .

This is a very interesting point. In the US a boxer having the same manager and promoter is banned. I think it's the Mohammed Ali Act that specifically bans this. Is the US the only country that bans this relationship or are there other countries that do so too?

I would have thought that having seperate manager/promoter relationships would have been more costly. For example, Bob Arum allegedly takes 27% of Pac's purse ( this is the percentage Mayweather keeps saying) on top of that he has his managers and advisors all taking their share as well. If the one person/party does all jobs surely they can negoitate lower percentages?

I understand there is the potential for a conflict of interest. There's the obvious possibility that the promoter /manager pays a much lower purse to his boxer and keeps more for himself if he's doing the same jobs without questions being asked. I believe Don King was partial to this move. When Tim Witherspoon fought Frank Bruno years ago, Frank was paid £900k and Witherspoon after Don's "deductions" got $30k!( This was in boxing news, cant find the issue now, was a couple of years ago I think).

Interesting topic seems there's swings and roundabouts.

MachoMan09 wrote:

damianhucker1 wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:Out of interest, why do people think it takes so long to get a manager's licence? I have my theories but would be interested to hear other people's views.

id have thought it was simply because the Board then see your committed to a career in the sport and therfor likely to actually look after the boxers rather than try to use them to make a quick buck .

What does a person who is working solely as a manager of boxers have to do to make himself as much money as possible - assume he is working ethically?

I would say its to have either good Boxers and get them big fights or to have a large stable of boxers so to ensure a steady stream of income , or alternatively solely manage a group of journeymen and get them as many bouts as possible, either way it would never just happen over night as the manager needs to earn the trust and respect of his first few boxers so others can see they are doing a good job or so that the boxers recommend him to other boxers .

Often Boxers think it's a doddle to manage and as such become self managed.
Then they find out its not as straight forward as they perceive.
The most important role for a Manager is to represent the Boxer when negotiating a Promotion deal in my opinion.
For that reaason, it follows that really the role of Promotor / Manager shouldn't be a joint role.
There are many clauses and sub clauses in contracts these days and if you don't know your way around them then you can sign up only to realise exactly what you've signed up to when it's too late.
The Witherspoon / Bruno / King example quoted earlier is a good example.
If Witherspoon was represented by a good Manager before signing his life away, he wouldn't have signed. Simple as.
I guess what I'm saying is it's horses for courses.
A Manager wouldn't tell a Fighter how to fight.
A fighter shouldn't assume he can manage, or tell a Manager how to manage.
There is however a cost to this.

A lot of DK's fighters were promoted by him and managed by his son.

His favourite trick was just to offer them a suitcase full of cash when they got ansty about money. He figured it was easier to "give" them $100,000 than it was to pay them several million.

I think Holmes is one of the few who would always insist on his cheque.

The end of the day, DK ran the heavyweight scene at that time and was in cahoots with Suilaman.

He could have never even fought, let alone get £30k here and there.

Lennox Lewis was shrewd and patient, it took a long time but he got there and then retired with a HEAP of dough.