BJS v Eubank Jnr 2
Posted: 18 Apr 2016, 12:15
...on Fury/Wlad card according to the BN24 forum.
Would be a great addition to the card if true.
Would be a great addition to the card if true.
Could still be 'allegedly's first PPV' in fairness, as it could be available via Sky PPV but 'free' to subscribers as they were alluding to in the interview with George. As for Hearn....he has nothing to do with non-Sports PPV, as previously mentioned by Bunny.expe wrote:Can't really take ESB seriously as a source, especially when the poster is claiming it will be part of BN's first PPV when it's already been confirmed that it will be part of the subscription and by Hearn that Sky won't be picking Fury-Klitschko 2 up as a PPV, whether through Sky Sports or not.
I do think it will happen and Warren alluded to it being announced this week, but it won't be on the Fury-Klitschko card.
Correct.MarkMcBurney wrote:Could still be 'allegedly's first PPV' in fairness, as it could be available via Sky PPV but 'free' to subscribers as they were alluding to in the interview with George. As for Hearn....he has nothing to do with non-Sports PPV, as previously mentioned by Bunny.expe wrote:Can't really take ESB seriously as a source, especially when the poster is claiming it will be part of BN's first PPV when it's already been confirmed that it will be part of the subscription and by Hearn that Sky won't be picking Fury-Klitschko 2 up as a PPV, whether through Sky Sports or not.
I do think it will happen and Warren alluded to it being announced this week, but it won't be on the Fury-Klitschko card.
From memory Frank said something about an issue with the actual logistics, so it might be that subscribers would need to pay for it and then be refunded, but it would be no additional charge.jamiem26 wrote:Frank said he had Wembley held for if BJS/Eubank could be made for the Fury/Klitscho card. I can't see any way that it ends up on there now.
Correct.MarkMcBurney wrote:Could still be 'allegedly's first PPV' in fairness, as it could be available via Sky PPV but 'free' to subscribers as they were alluding to in the interview with George. As for Hearn....he has nothing to do with non-Sports PPV, as previously mentioned by Bunny.expe wrote:Can't really take ESB seriously as a source, especially when the poster is claiming it will be part of BN's first PPV when it's already been confirmed that it will be part of the subscription and by Hearn that Sky won't be picking Fury-Klitschko 2 up as a PPV, whether through Sky Sports or not.
I do think it will happen and Warren alluded to it being announced this week, but it won't be on the Fury-Klitschko card.
How are people getting confused by this? Any allegedly PPV would obviously not be at any extra cost to subscribers ffs, it would be commercial suicide.
I think there will be an additional charge, they're not going to give anyone a £15 PPV for £12, but you won't have to pay £12 then £15 on top. The way they were talking about it, it seems like subscribers will have to order the PPV on top of the subscription, then be given the following month free.MarkMcBurney wrote:From memory Frank said something about an issue with the actual logistics, so it might be that subscribers would need to pay for it and then be refunded, but it would be no additional charge.jamiem26 wrote:Frank said he had Wembley held for if BJS/Eubank could be made for the Fury/Klitscho card. I can't see any way that it ends up on there now.
Correct.MarkMcBurney wrote: Could still be 'allegedly's first PPV' in fairness, as it could be available via Sky PPV but 'free' to subscribers as they were alluding to in the interview with George. As for Hearn....he has nothing to do with non-Sports PPV, as previously mentioned by Bunny.
How are people getting confused by this? Any allegedly PPV would obviously not be at any extra cost to subscribers ffs, it would be commercial suicide.
Not being funny or anything but given the promoter I would rather the cash stayed in my bank than goes into his, for him to send back to me later, if it's all the same.expe wrote:I think there will be an additional charge, they're not going to give anyone a £15 PPV for £12, but you won't have to pay £12 then £15 on top. The way they were talking about it, it seems like subscribers will have to order the PPV on top of the subscription, then be given the following month free.MarkMcBurney wrote:From memory Frank said something about an issue with the actual logistics, so it might be that subscribers would need to pay for it and then be refunded, but it would be no additional charge.jamiem26 wrote:Frank said he had Wembley held for if BJS/Eubank could be made for the Fury/Klitscho card. I can't see any way that it ends up on there now.
Correct.
How are people getting confused by this? Any allegedly PPV would obviously not be at any extra cost to subscribers ffs, it would be commercial suicide.
JimJim2009 wrote:Not being funny or anything but given the promoter I would rather the cash stayed in my bank than goes into his, for him to send back to me later, if it's all the same.expe wrote:I think there will be an additional charge, they're not going to give anyone a £15 PPV for £12, but you won't have to pay £12 then £15 on top. The way they were talking about it, it seems like subscribers will have to order the PPV on top of the subscription, then be given the following month free.MarkMcBurney wrote: From memory Frank said something about an issue with the actual logistics, so it might be that subscribers would need to pay for it and then be refunded, but it would be no additional charge.
The Traveller does seem to be somewhat of an expert at the boxing. I would tip his knowledge over Eubank’s strength and fitness.CiganoBoxer wrote:If BJS was fitter the first time around he would of won every round ...i think you will see the same thing again ,BJS outboxes him in my opinion once again