BoxRec

Anyone know what kind of viewing figures the BX shows pull in, for the bigger domestic/world fights they do? And also how many subscribers they have (roughly)?

Cheers.

Mensa07 wrote:Anyone know what kind of viewing figures the BX shows pull in, for the bigger domestic/world fights they do? And also how many subscribers they have (roughly)?

Cheers.

I had read in another forum that Tris Dixon had suggested Haye Vs. Chisora pulled in more viewers than Froch Vs. Bute. Froch Vs. Bute reportedly peaked at 668,000. That would suggest back in July had over 668,000 customers. Of course I haven't seen proof of these figures myself however I'm sure other posters in this forum have heard this suggestion also?

i heard the same rumour ref haye v chisora, trouble is that for every pub that paid to show it allegedly were calling it 200 subscribers!!

hence the exagerated figured

chad wrote:

Mensa07 wrote:Anyone know what kind of viewing figures the BX shows pull in, for the bigger domestic/world fights they do? And also how many subscribers they have (roughly)?

Cheers.

I had read in another forum that Tris Dixon had suggested Haye Vs. Chisora pulled in more viewers than Froch Vs. Bute. Froch Vs. Bute reportedly peaked at 668,000. That would suggest back in July had over 668,000 customers. Of course I haven't seen proof of these figures myself however I'm sure other posters in this forum have heard this suggestion also?

If that was the case we would not be having Cleverly next opponent.

This is a good read:

http://www.606v2.com/t19135p50-flexen-article-on-b allegedly-update-with-streaming-numbers

You'll need to take out the space between the b and o of the word allegedly in order to get the link to work. If I don't add the space, the word allegedly gets changed to allegedly and the link doesn;t work.

Some highlights:

My main doubt pertaining to allegedly’s prosperity remains whether the hardcore boxing audience – because I do not perceive it as a channel for the casual fan – is large enough to sustain the concept. At the press conference to announce its inception, it was stated that allegedly would need 100,000 subscribers to break even, a figure that was almost immediately revised to the worryingly vague “less than that”. Now the combined subscribers to Sky and Virgin – the latter will finally be able to access the channel this week though crucially have missed the free action, which in effect advertised the product before it became chargeable – are around 15 million. Attracting say, 70,000 (or 4.6 per cent) out of that huge market, especially given Primetime often get close to or occasionally (notably for Amir Khan-Paul McCloskey) surpass that figure for a single (£15) event, seems, at first glance, highly achievable. But many boxing devotees are already stretched to their financial limits by Sky or Virgin, plus maybe Premier Sports and Primetime. Also it’s not revealing any trade secrets to note that the combined monthly sales of Boxing News AND Boxing Monthly, a key indicator of hardcore support, do not approach that number, although buying four BNs and one BM costs more than £10 of course (and are arguably well worth it!)."

""Although the channel does not receive ratings on the Sky platform,internet streaming figures are available.The number of online viewers tuning in has been encouraging for Green(allegedly CEO).
"For the Echo Arena bill in Liverpool(Cleverly/Bellew) we did about 44,000 streams.For the Wembley Arena event on Nov 5(Burns/Katsidis)we did about 33,000 streams.They are big numbers considering we have not yet marketed or promoted our online streaming service to a considerable extent.
Based on these statistics and PPV figures from mine and Franks time at Sky,we're confident we can get around 100,000 subscribers by next spring."

"Boxing is generally the second most popular sport in the country after football.For example,when I was at Setanta,we screened Calzaghe/Hopkins.It took place at 4am and we had a base of roughly 800,000 subscribers.That week,we received another 90,000 subscribers for that fight,whereas a Manchester United match would only put on 10,000 subscribers.These statistics prove that the power of boxing is sensational if you get the product right."

Thanks for that, interesting.

Wazza reported that subscriber figures were ahead of schedule a few weeks ago.

Well if Wazza says so it must be right.

twenty six wrote:Well if Wazza says so it must be right.

The allegedly first anniversary press conference threw up some very positive and interesting quotes earlier today.

Simon Green CEO in reference to the channels growth:
"The fastest growing subscription channel that this country has ever seen."

allegedly on the channels current subscription levels:
"The subscription levels we are at now are what we where forecasting to get by next March."

allegedly on the next 12 months:
"Some of the signings we are going to be announcing in the next month or so, will be great for the channel"

Sounds like allegedly are surpassing their own targets and expectations. Sounds like the next 12 months will be exciting for allegedly subscribers.

They also posted on Facebook earlier today to suggest a HD channels is in the works for early 2013.

chad wrote:The allegedly first anniversary press conference threw up some very positive and interesting quotes earlier today.

Simon Green CEO in reference to the channels growth:
"The fastest growing subscription channel that this country has ever seen."

Evidence, please!

dondada wrote:

chad wrote:The allegedly first anniversary press conference threw up some very positive and interesting quotes earlier today.

Simon Green CEO in reference to the channels growth:
"The fastest growing subscription channel that this country has ever seen."

Evidence, please!

Yeah Simon Green, show us your fcking evidence!

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

dondada wrote:

chad wrote:The allegedly first anniversary press conference threw up some very positive and interesting quotes earlier today.

Simon Green CEO in reference to the channels growth:
"The fastest growing subscription channel that this country has ever seen."

Evidence, please!

Yeah Simon Green, show us your fcking evidence!

I find it hard to believe that it grew faster than the likes of Playboy, etc.

dondada wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

chad wrote:The allegedly first anniversary press conference threw up some very positive and interesting quotes earlier today.

Simon Green CEO in reference to the channels growth:
"The fastest growing subscription channel that this country has ever seen."

Evidence, please!


Yeah Simon Green, show us your fcking evidence!

I find it hard to believe that it grew faster than the likes of Playboy, etc.

I dont think Playboy got many subscribers, "most people" just knocked one out during the 10 minute freeview at midnight.


Ahhhh the memories.

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:
I dont think Playboy got many subscribers, "most people" just knocked one out during the 10 minute freeview at midnight.


Ahhhh the memories.

Ahhhh the mammaries.

chad wrote:The allegedly first anniversary press conference threw up some very positive and interesting quotes earlier today.

Simon Green CEO in reference to the channels growth:
"The fastest growing subscription channel that this country has ever seen."

allegedly on the channels current subscription levels:
"The subscription levels we are at now are what we where forecasting to get by next March."

allegedly on the next 12 months:
"Some of the signings we are going to be announcing in the next month or so, will be great for the channel"

Sounds like allegedly are surpassing their own targets and expectations. Sounds like the next 12 months will be exciting for allegedly subscribers.

They also posted on Facebook earlier today to suggest a HD channels is in the works for early 2013.

They hardly going to say the channel is not doing that well are they!

leforge wrote:

chad wrote:The allegedly first anniversary press conference threw up some very positive and interesting quotes earlier today.

Simon Green CEO in reference to the channels growth:
"The fastest growing subscription channel that this country has ever seen."

allegedly on the channels current subscription levels:
"The subscription levels we are at now are what we where forecasting to get by next March."

allegedly on the next 12 months:
"Some of the signings we are going to be announcing in the next month or so, will be great for the channel"

Sounds like allegedly are surpassing their own targets and expectations. Sounds like the next 12 months will be exciting for allegedly subscribers.

They also posted on Facebook earlier today to suggest a HD channels is in the works for early 2013.

They hardly going to say the channel is not doing that well are they!

If they where struggling, I don't think they would have held the press conference in the first place. Boxing journalists have a habit of finding out the "inside story". It would have been too risky spouting out all this positivity if it wasn't fairly accurate. At the end they opened the floor to questioning. Imagine if someone with the "inside story" challenged their claims of being a success in front of a room full of boxing journalists?

chad wrote:If they where struggling, I don't think they would have held the press conference in the first place. Boxing journalists have a habit of finding out the "inside story". It would have been too risky spouting out all this positivity if it wasn't fairly accurate. At the end they opened the floor to questioning. Imagine if someone with the "inside story" challenged their claims of being a success in front of a room full of boxing journalists?

Sorry Chad, I feel like I keep pulling you up - not intentional. Loads of boxing journalists know loads of stuff. Most don't want to do anything because life's much easier for them that way. Those who want to can't, usually, because it's too risky in legal terms. And 'Oh, if you're right, you've got nothing to worry about' simply isn't true, I'm afraid. As a result - but not solely because of this - there isn't one single investigative journalist in British boxing.

I can't imagine many are tuning in for the Friday night shows which are just dreadful (Saunders v Fletcher looks good but the rest of the card has been mismatches)

iamasadlittleboy wrote:I can't imagine many are tuning in for the Friday night shows which are just dreadful (Saunders v Fletcher looks good but the rest of the card has been mismatches)

Its actually been a good watch so far mitchell smith looks like he might be something special.

kingfinn wrote:

iamasadlittleboy wrote:I can't imagine many are tuning in for the Friday night shows which are just dreadful (Saunders v Fletcher looks good but the rest of the card has been mismatches)

Its actually been a good watch so far mitchell smith looks like he might be something special.

Smith looked good but the bout wasn't good. Senkov's survived (and did well to survive) but it's hardly going to get pulses racing "young top prospect beats journeyman in thoroughly 1-sided fashion"

I'll be fair though Skeete v McDonagh was better than expected...but then again Skeete usually sends me to sleep

iamasadlittleboy wrote:

kingfinn wrote:

iamasadlittleboy wrote:I can't imagine many are tuning in for the Friday night shows which are just dreadful (Saunders v Fletcher looks good but the rest of the card has been mismatches)

Its actually been a good watch so far mitchell smith looks like he might be something special.

Smith looked good but the bout wasn't good. Senkov's survived (and did well to survive) but it's hardly going to get pulses racing "young top prospect beats journeyman in thoroughly 1-sided fashion"

I'll be fair though Skeete v McDonagh was better than expected...but then again Skeete usually sends me to sleep

Was? Its still only round 7 of the skeet fight.

Was/Is

dondada wrote:

chad wrote:If they where struggling, I don't think they would have held the press conference in the first place. Boxing journalists have a habit of finding out the "inside story". It would have been too risky spouting out all this positivity if it wasn't fairly accurate. At the end they opened the floor to questioning. Imagine if someone with the "inside story" challenged their claims of being a success in front of a room full of boxing journalists?

Sorry Chad, I feel like I keep pulling you up - not intentional. Loads of boxing journalists know loads of stuff. Most don't want to do anything because life's much easier for them that way. Those who want to can't, usually, because it's too risky in legal terms. And 'Oh, if you're right, you've got nothing to worry about' simply isn't true, I'm afraid. As a result - but not solely because of this - there isn't one single investigative journalist in British boxing.

Im sure that if all the curruption, drugs etc in boxing was exposed to the public there would be a big drop off in interest.

allegedly viewing figures are a non story.

Rampant corruption and PED use are what investigative journalists should look at.

I was speaking generally, not just about this. This is just an interesting trade story. The ones you mention are much more worthy.