BoxRec

"Canelo Alvarez fight could be in jeopardy due to purse demands"

Saul ‘Canelo’ Alvarez 53-1-2 (36) is holding fast on purse demands with streaming service DAZN, putting his September 12 ring return in jeopardy according to ESPN.

According to promoter Eddie Hearn, WBA super middleweight champion Callum ‘Mundo’ Smith 27-0 (19) is the top option for Alvarez, who signed an 11-fight, $365 million deal with DAZN in 2018.

DAZN is believed to be asking for a sizeable discount to the 29-year-old Mexican’s contracted minimum due to the chaos caused by the global coronavirus pandemic.

Alvarez’s lawyer Greg Smith said if it was up to the world middleweight champion, the fight would have already been announced.

“Canelo is in great shape. He’s been training hard, he is absolutely ready and on track to fight in September, ” Smith told ESPN.

“If it’s up to him – and him only – he would’ve already announced the fight… There’s obviously other parties and other things involved that are out of his control. But everything he can control, he’s on track and prepared.

“Everybody, including Team Canelo, is waiting to find out if DAZN’s going to live up to its obligations… I am aware of no other sticking points.”

Golden Boy Promotions president Oscar De La Hoya issued an update on fight negotiations on Thursday.

“Golden Boy has always been about making the best fights for the fans; this is particularly true for Canelo, the No. 1 attraction and best pound-for-pound fighter in the sport,” the statement read.

“Together with Canelo and his team, we have come up with a list of great opponents – including potential world championship fights – for a premium fight on Mexican Independence Day.

“We are still waiting for DAZN to approve one of those great fights.

“Canelo and Golden Boy intend to put on a fight in September and expect that DAZN will honour their obligation and give fight fans what they deserve; an evening with the best fighter in the world.”

Thoughts?

DAZN agreed to terms with Canelo, and they need to fulfil their contractual obligations.

If DAZN had significantly profited from Canelo’s $365m 11-fight contract, they would likely choose to strictly adhere to the terms of the agreement and not pay the Mexican fighter any extra.

Now that it seems that DAZN may incur losses, due to having to fork out $33m per Canelo fight (excluding the purses of the other fighters appearing on the same card), they need to either fulfil their contractual obligations or terminate the contract and compensate the Mexican accordingly.

Fighters have short careers, and Canelo may have legal grounds to sue the streaming service if DAZN chooses to procrastinate or attempt to delay the date of his next outing (to stage his events at a more suitable time to prevent losses from being made).

Cannot believe trash like Quigley was mentioned as Canelo oponent. No fight is better than Quigley fight. Even Monroe jr is level above Quigley

Cent0089 wrote: ↑27 Jul 2020, 05:41 Cannot believe trash like Quigley was mentioned as Canelo oponent. No fight is better than Quigley fight. Even Monroe jr is level above Quigley

This quote is from an extract of an article published two days ago:

“I think it’s Quigley,” said Bernard Hopkins to the Ali and Barak show on DAZN when asked who Canelo should fight on September 12.

And Bernard Hopkins is a 5% shareholder of Golden Boy, who promotes Canelo.

We're roughly six weeks away from the previously proposed 12th September fight date. And whoever takes the Canelo bout will also have to endure a couple of weeks' worth of disruption in their training camp to cater for activities to sell the fight, such as travelling between locations and media interviews.

And if DAZN is adamant about staging Canelo's next fight on the 12th September, against a last-minute unheralded foe like Quigley (since I wouldn't expect any marquee name to willingly face the Mexican in such dire circumstances), then they'll be competing for viewers against the Tyson-Jones Jr. PPV.

DAZN was previously expected to use Canelo's bout on the 12th September to launch their streaming service in new territories, such as the UK, but their plans are now in jeopardy.

"Oscar De La Hoya: DAZN hasn’t approved Canelo Alvarez’s opponents"

Oscar De La Hoya is frustrated with DAZN for them failing to approve any of the names that he’s presented to them for Canelo Alvarez’s next fight on September 12.

De La Hoya is bent out of shape because DAZN hasn’t approved any of the names that he’s asked them to look over as potential options for Alvarez to fight in September.

“Canelo, the No. 1 attraction and best pound-for-pound fighter in the sport,” De La Hoya said to ESPN.

“Together with Canelo and his team, we have come up with a list of great opponents. We are still waiting for DAZN to approve one of those great fights,” said De La Hoya.

“Canelo and Golden Boy intend to put on a fight in September and expect that DAZN will honor their obligation and give fight fans what they deserve; an evening with the best fighter in the world.”

If DAZN wants Canelo to take a pay-cut for his next fight, then it probably doesn’t matter how great the list of opponents De La Hoya has for them to choose from.

Maybe DAZN can approveCallum Smith or Demetrius Andrade? Maybe Andrade would not ask that much money and is a very good oponent

I am sure DAZN included clauses in the contract that allowed outs for catastrophic events...force majeure provisions...that would give them protections against any Canelo lawsuit over “procrastinations”.

Expecting pandemic era fights to move money around like fights in normal times is just going to stop there from being any major marquee fights for a good long time.

ldlamb wrote: ↑08 Aug 2020, 20:58 I am sure DAZN included clauses in the contract that allowed outs for catastrophic events...force majeure provisions...that would give them protections against any Canelo lawsuit over “procrastinations”.

100 percent yes. Im sure the contract isnt fully guaranteed with opt outs too

There's just over four weeks remaining until Canelo's 12th September fight-date and no opponent has been named yet.

Does anybody think he'll still fight on that date? And if so, against whom? I haven't seen anything concrete recently.

ldlamb wrote: ↑08 Aug 2020, 20:58 I am sure DAZN included clauses in the contract that allowed outs for catastrophic events...force majeure provisions...that would give them protections against any Canelo lawsuit over “procrastinations”.

I doubt that any contractual agreement between a fighter and a broadcaster would include terminology specifically referring to global pandemics. The wording is key.

DAZN would need to prove that the direct consequence of the coronavirus makes it impossible for them to fulfil the terms of the contract.

DAZN can’t rely on the fact that it’s more difficult to fulfil the terms of the contract due to financial constraints, especially considering the fact they’ve only just invested $1.5 billion acquiring rights to televise Bundesliga football matches.

DAZN will have to fulfil their promise. And if they choose not to, both parties will either have to agree to compromise or terminate the contract. And if it's the latter, Canelo's handlers will probably file a lawsuit seeking damages for breach of contract.

Think about it… how on earth can DAZN refrain from fulfilling the terms of their contractual agreement with Canelo, due to financial issues, and then subsequently sign a new contract with the Bundesliga, costing them $1.5 billion?

There is 100 percent a force majeure clause. Dazn will argue covid triggers it. Canelo will sue. Dazn will settle and get out of the contract. It is inevitable.

Mate, the forum legal scholar has already ruled

Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 23:17 There is 100 percent a force majeure clause. Dazn will argue covid triggers it. Canelo will sue. Dazn will settle and get out of the contract. It is inevitable.

So in other words, you agree with what I wrote?

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 07:07And if [DAZN] choose not to [fulfil their promise], both parties will either have to agree to compromise or terminate the contract. And if it's the latter, Canelo's handlers will probably file a lawsuit seeking damages for breach of contract.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 23:18 Mate, the forum legal scholar has already ruled

You don't need to be a legal expert to predict the potential outcome of DAZN's actions if they refuse to fulfil the terms of their contract with Canelo.

As we've already seen with other promoters and networks (i.e. Top Rank & ESPN), there is nothing preventing from Canelo competing on a fight card promoted by Golden Boy, except for DAZN's refusal to sanction his opponent and also not paying him the monetary amount they promised to pay him as part of his 11-fight, 5-year, deal.

How can DAZN prove the COVID-19 situation is adequate justification to trigger a force majeure clause when they've only just forked out $1.5 billion agreeing on a new contract with the Bundesliga? This undermines their legal argument.

For sure, you're welcome to mock me, but you haven't provided any logical explanation to justify your belief about me being wrong about this.

I think DAZN and Canelo will ultimately agree to a compromise and revise the terms of their contract accordingly, but this will likely scupper the 12th September fight-date, because it'll take time to negotiate the details.

DAZN definitely won't be able to terminate the contract without having to compensate Canelo to some degree.

I wonder if Gennadiy Golovkin is experiencing the same issue with his six-fight $100m deal with DAZN?

If the earliest date for GGG's next fight isn't until November or December, then he would have only competed once over an 18-month period, which isn't beneficial for a guy his age.

Promoters working for other networks are having their fight-cards televised. And that has set an undeniable legal precedent.

And we already know that DAZN can't blame a lack of cash for their inability to cover the sport of boxing, because they definitely had sufficient funds to fulfil their existing contractual obligations immediately prior to them committing to a new $1.5 billion contract with the Bundesliga.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑11 Aug 2020, 03:50

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 23:18 Mate, the forum legal scholar has already ruled

You don't need to be a legal expert to predict the potential outcome of DAZN's actions if they refuse to fulfil the terms of their contract with Canelo.

As we've already seen with other promoters and networks (i.e. Top Rank & ESPN), there is nothing preventing from Canelo competing on a fight card promoted by Golden Boy, except for DAZN's refusal to sanction his opponent and also not paying him the monetary amount they promised to pay him as part of his 11-fight, 5-year, deal.

How can DAZN prove the COVID-19 situation is adequate justification to trigger a force majeure clause when they've only just forked out $1.5 billion agreeing on a new contract with the Bundesliga? This undermines their legal argument.

For sure, you're welcome to mock me, but you haven't provided any logical explanation to justify your belief about me being wrong about this.

lol when did i say you were wrong about this bruh, show me the facts and stop lying lol!

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑11 Aug 2020, 10:54

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑11 Aug 2020, 03:50

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 23:18 Mate, the forum legal scholar has already ruled

You don't need to be a legal expert to predict the potential outcome of DAZN's actions if they refuse to fulfil the terms of their contract with Canelo.

As we've already seen with other promoters and networks (i.e. Top Rank & ESPN), there is nothing preventing from Canelo competing on a fight card promoted by Golden Boy, except for DAZN's refusal to sanction his opponent and also not paying him the monetary amount they promised to pay him as part of his 11-fight, 5-year, deal.

How can DAZN prove the COVID-19 situation is adequate justification to trigger a force majeure clause when they've only just forked out $1.5 billion agreeing on a new contract with the Bundesliga? This undermines their legal argument.

For sure, you're welcome to mock me, but you haven't provided any logical explanation to justify your belief about me being wrong about this.

lol when did i say you were wrong about this bruh, show me the facts and stop lying lol!

The objective of my response was to compel you to concede that I was correct, despite you having previously mocked me.

And as far as I'm concerned, it's mission accomplished.

Ah, so you just decided to lie for the heck of it, nice job my man

Not fulfilling a contract is debatable. Thats why there is a court system

LOL i just love how all top names around 160 and 168 just sit on their butts and waiting for that Canelo paycheck Avoiding any other fight they can lose. Lemieux, Andrade, Eubank, Smith .....hyenas

DAZN is a disaster