BoxRec

Saw an interview with the Hearns on the Guardian website today (good read BTW); and they mention a predicted million buys for AJ/Wlad, apparently Mayweather/Pacman did 1.1m? Anyway, in the article it quotes Hearn as saying Froch v Groves did 850,000 buys.

Never actually heard this figure before, but it seems very, very high?!

Information on PPV buys seems very hard to come by no matter who the promoter is, must be some sort of tax dodge. That figure for Froch Groves seems about right, I've heard 900k mentioned a couple of times so the Hearns might be telling the truth there.

Truth telling doesn't last long in Hearn interviews though - Barry recounts that cringeworthy made up story about him and Eddie sparring one time.

No, they were in the spar having a father son pamper day more likely

them two sparring

Out of interest- how much does the AJ fight cost in the UK PPV?
I just coughed up $34.95 NZD which is about 17 squids to get the whole package here in New (you bloody beauty) Zealand

KiwiRider wrote:Out of interest- how much does the AJ fight cost in the UK PPV?
I just coughed up $34.95 NZD which is about 17 squids to get the whole package here in New (you bloody beauty) Zealand

£17 i think. There's normally a quid or two added on if you buy it on the day rather than pay in advance.

MarkMcBurney wrote:Saw an interview with the Hearns on the Guardian website today (good read BTW); and they mention a predicted million buys for AJ/Wlad, apparently Mayweather/Pacman did 1.1m? Anyway, in the article it quotes Hearn as saying Froch v Groves did 850,000 buys.

Never actually heard this figure before, but it seems very, very high?!

Crazy numbers those.
National office statistics says there are 26.7m households in U.K.

If Froch Groves did 850,000 PPV buys then that means roughly 1 in every 30 households bought the fight. Dunno that seems quite high to me?
Ok some pubs will have bought it, but not enough to skew the general point.

Does 1 in 30 houses buying the fight sound accurate to everyone else for Froch groves?

When I read that article I thought the hearns were seeing the figures up to suit them. They mentioned that Hatton v Mayweather did 1.01m which is a lot less than has been suggested previously and that was one hell of an event. Everyone knew about that fight and was watching even at 5am!

CaptainSpacerod wrote:Information on PPV buys seems very hard to come by no matter who the promoter is, must be some sort of tax dodge. That figure for Froch Groves seems about right, I've heard 900k mentioned a couple of times so the Hearns might be telling the truth there.

Truth telling doesn't last long in Hearn interviews though - Barry recounts that cringeworthy made up story about him and Eddie sparring one time.

There's no tax dodge.

PPV buys for Sky/Matchroom are something that their competition would be very interested to know so it would make no sense for them to disclose the figures.

maverick23 wrote:
There's no tax dodge.

PPV buys for Sky/Matchroom are something that their competition would be very interested to know so it would make no sense for them to disclose the figures.

Would PPV numbers not show up in their accounts though ?

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

maverick23 wrote:
There's no tax dodge.

PPV buys for Sky/Matchroom are something that their competition would be very interested to know so it would make no sense for them to disclose the figures.

Would PPV numbers not show up in their accounts though ?

Nope - they're a limited company so only need to show their turnover, geographical split of revenue and in some cases the revenue split between different business units.

There's nothing in their accounts that would be any benefit to their competition.

I think the Froch/Groves rematch generated 900,000 PPV buys, still falls short of Hatton/Mayweather numbers

maverick23 wrote: Nope - they're a limited company so only need to show their turnover, geographical split of revenue and in some cases the revenue split between different business units.

There's nothing in their accounts that would be any benefit to their competition.

What about Sky's accounts would they not detail revenue from PPV events ?

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

maverick23 wrote: Nope - they're a limited company so only need to show their turnover, geographical split of revenue and in some cases the revenue split between different business units.

There's nothing in their accounts that would be any benefit to their competition.

What about Sky's accounts would they not detail revenue from PPV events ?

I'd be surprised if they detailed revenue from PPV but even if they did they wouldn't need to distinguish between the different PPV areas I.e. Wrestling (PPVs once/month), boxing and movies.

MarkMcBurney wrote:Saw an interview with the Hearns on the Guardian website today (good read BTW); and they mention a predicted million buys for AJ/Wlad, apparently Mayweather/Pacman did 1.1m? Anyway, in the article it quotes Hearn as saying Froch v Groves did 850,000 buys.

Never actually heard this figure before, but it seems very, very high?!

Yeah, I saw that article. Made them look a right pair of knobheads.

Not that this was something we didn't already know.