BoxRec

Okay, any "George off Rainbow" can see the main event isn't worth PPV status, but the card as a whole? I'm openly against UK PPV when people pay sky circa £100 a month, but, not a bad card, is it?

Paying PPV for 2 novice pro's is a scandal, whoever else is on the undercard it doesn't matter, people tune in to see the main event most of the time and this is just ripping people off!

Really good card and looking forward to it but it's not PPV worthy no. I wish I had the will power to boycott these events but I do not. Caught between a rock and a hard place because my Mrs works most weekends and I am stuck in with the Cubs so if I want to see these events I need to buy them. Already pay 40ish quid a month for Sky and BN alone and that'll be the second PPV in three weeks in the run up to Xmas. Us Boxing fans are constantly getting our pants pulled down. Frustrating.

Can already foresee three PPVs for next year already so it'll be interesting to see how many there have been this time next year. Quigg/Frampton, Khan/Brook (if it happens) and Fury/Klitschko. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Crolla/Mitchell as a PPV complete with 'stacked card' either.

No it is not - yes, I will be buying it - so you can call me hypocritical but for me - I treat these PPV's as most of the general public treat their night out on the town.

But this is buy far the worst SKY PPV in history if you ask me.

The Crolla vs Perez 2 bill (including Abraham vs Murray) was far better value.

There are some decent fights but a lot of the opponents against the UK fighters are unheralded. Just how good are Mitchell's and Warrington's opponents I am not sure?

Bellew vs Masternak is a close fight to call, but largely because how far Bellew has gone back as a Cruiserweight if you ask me. Masternak is hardly a world beater, which is how Bellew has been hyped.

I think Eubank Jnr is a level above O Sullivan (sorry O Sullivan fans).

In fact, the fight I am most intrigued about on this bill is Branco vs Malignaggi - I hope Sky show this.

stujones wrote:No it is not - yes, I will be buying it - so you can call me hypocritical but for me - I treat these PPV's as most of the general public treat their night out on the town.

But this is buy far the worst SKY PPV in history if you ask me.

The Crolla vs Perez 2 bill (including Abraham vs Murray) was far better value.

There are some decent fights but a lot of the opponents against the UK fighters are unheralded. Just how good are Mitchell's and Warrington's opponents I am not sure?

Bellew vs Masternak is a close fight to call, but largely because how far Bellew has gone back as a Cruiserweight if you ask me. Masternak is hardly a world beater, which is how Bellew has been hyped.

I think Eubank Jnr is a level above O Sullivan (sorry O Sullivan fans).

In fact, the fight I am most intrigued about on this bill is Branco vs Malignaggi - I hope Sky show this.

I'm same as yourself. I don't get out much anymore (violins) so the boxing is what I look forward to after a hard week. This PPV ain't worse than Bellew/Clev 2 (which I also bought, cringe). I'm actually looking forward to this card.

No it's not worthy, but if people buy into it and it does good numbers, any half decent/interesting fight will be PPV in the future.

Nightmare Roy wrote:No it's not worthy, but if people buy into it and it does good numbers, any half decent/interesting fight will be PPV in the future.

I think after this all of AJs fights are going to be PPV by the looks of it. Hearn and Sky were always going to take him in that direction. His next fight (providing he beats Whyte) will almost certainly be a defence of the British against Chisora. No doubt that will be PPV also!

Stuarty30 wrote:

Nightmare Roy wrote:No it's not worthy, but if people buy into it and it does good numbers, any half decent/interesting fight will be PPV in the future.

I think after this all of AJs fights are going to be PPV by the looks of it. Hearn and Sky were always going to take him in that direction. His next fight (providing he beats Whyte) will almost certainly be a defence of the British against Chisora. No doubt that will be PPV also!

Yeah I think that's it now.

Remember when Sky used to show "good cards" on their expensive subscription channels.

Doesn't it speak volumes about the absolute Horseshit we are being spoon-fed by Match room, that people can now justify a PPV over and above a scandalous subscription charge, on the basis that it's a fornicate¡ng "good card".

Yay, we have to pay an extra £20 to watch 2 untested prospects backed up with a couple half decent fights, we're so lucky.

Boxing News in their recent puff piece justified Joshua as a PPV attraction because of his "massive' 300K viewing figures for Gary Cornish.

300K. Massive figures.

Remember when Frank Bruno used to decap a man with 10,000,000 watching? Benn, Eubank, Naz, all regularly pulling 7 to 8 figures. Could you ever imagine that a day would come when 300,000 would be considered huge figures for a boxer, and a justification to charge a fee to watch him fight?

Total p_ss take that. Should not be PPV. I'm going off Eddie Hearn.

Has it actually been confirmed that this is a PPV?

Glad i'm working so I don't have to resist and pay the money. I don't see 1 50/50 on the card tbh. No way ppv for me but Eddie and sky try to justify it by it being a grudge match and then they go and stack the card with a load of names. They will keep doing these 7 title fight ppv's as they do decent numbers compared to a usual saturday night bill. Is it any wonder tho as the sky hype machine goes into overdrive when there's ppv and more money involved.

AJ vs Whyte is not PPV worthy.

Not anywhere close. I say that having got over the bitter taste in my mouth at paying £16.95 for the pathetic spectacle that was Klitschko vs Fury.

In any case, Sky making it PPV means cash for them, Eddie and plenty hype remaining around AJ. From a business standpoint - it makes sense.

Anyone use the open box thingys and can you get ppv on them? I'm getting a bit fed up of sky and the money I have to pay. Most of it seems to drift into football and I don't even watch that.

After the Froch v Groves fight, Eddie saw how much money that made and press it got. He's not stupid. So now every fight he puts on he turns it to a "grudge match" so it justifies the PPV. I don't have a problem with him building it up to get interest, just him doing it get PPV.

If May 30th wasn't worthy then I don't see how this can be. The card on May30th was far better IMO with Mitchell and Selby in genuine 50/50 world title fights.

No, it's not worthy. No, I won't be buying. 2 PPVs within 2 weeks with less than a month until Christmas? Matchroom & Sky can go fvck themselves.

Boxerbeetle wrote:No, it's not worthy. No, I won't be buying. 2 PPVs within 2 weeks with less than a month until Christmas? Matchroom & Sky can go fvck themselves.

I agree with you on that.

When was the last time 2 prospects headlined a PPV??
I do not think this has ever happened.No it is not worth PPV and I find it insulting to fans.

Nope, it's no where close.

The two things any PPV should provide is world class fighters and even matches. This card has neither.

I could tell you already every result and would be pretty confident of picking the method of results as well.

I'll watch it on Youtube in a few weeks

Not a chance, won't be buying it. As others have said, the May card (which copped a lot of flack, rightly in my opinion) was much better than this. I also think that the recent Crolla bill had more competitive matchmaking.

It's a shame this bill couldn't have been on Sky Sports as an end-of-year "stacked card". Oh well, there's always Lee-Saunders on the 19th.

No. I'm not paying for it.
It should be included in the already extortionate subscription fee.

Nope
however watching gloves are off and Whyte looking like a c*ck