BoxRec

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/ja ... television

By the looks of things, the big issue is not being able to attract ad revenue even though the viewing figures are good - the 'boxing audience' is not seen as desirable to advertisers, unlike, for example the Big Brother viewers.

I find it very hard to believe that outside X Factor ITV has any other show which attracts more than 2.5 million people after 9.00pm!!

This sounds more like "We've spent x million on getting FA Cup and England matches, now let's see where we can cut some money".

Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:I find it very hard to believe that outside X Factor ITV has any other show which attracts more than 2.5 million people after 9.00pm!!

I don't think it's because they aren't getting enough viewers versus how many other post-9pm shows are, but rather they aren't getting enough viewers versus how much they have to pay to show the fights.

Well I think its partly down to Warren's tendanciesto piss off television companies. They were known to be realy kean on Enzo haye that its now a title unification fight musht really piss them off.

I think the'll stick with it if Warren gets Khan a title and that fight gets good viewing figurs.

2.5 million isn't that special we have also to consider how much they pay per fight as opposed to per eppisode of "honnest"

Asterix wrote:

Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:I find it very hard to believe that outside X Factor ITV has any other show which attracts more than 2.5 million people after 9.00pm!!

I don't think it's because they aren't getting enough viewers versus how many other post-9pm shows are, but rather they aren't getting enough viewers versus how much they have to pay to show the fights.

It's partly that, but it's partly to do with the fact advertisers are obsessed with environment and 'reach' as well as numbers - that's the reason why GQ has much lucrative advertising than FHM despite only selling around a third/quarter of the copies.
Rightly or wrongly, advertisers have a general perception of boxing audiences being made up of predominantly working class, lower income males and don't view this as an attractive target audience.
If ITV was able to offset the cost of televising the fights through getting strong advertising and a lucrative 'headline' sponsor (such as how BB used to have Carphone Warehouse), there wouldn't be an issue.

Deserter wrote:

Asterix wrote:

Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:I find it very hard to believe that outside X Factor ITV has any other show which attracts more than 2.5 million people after 9.00pm!!

I don't think it's because they aren't getting enough viewers versus how many other post-9pm shows are, but rather they aren't getting enough viewers versus how much they have to pay to show the fights.

It's partly that, but it's partly to do with the fact advertisers are obsessed with environment and 'reach' as well as numbers - that's the reason why GQ has much lucrative advertising than FHM despite only selling around a third/quarter of the copies.
Rightly or wrongly, advertisers have a general perception of boxing audiences being made up of predominantly working class, lower income males and don't view this as an attractive target audience.
If ITV was able to offset the cost of televising the fights through getting strong advertising and a lucrative 'headline' sponsor (such as how BB used to have Carphone Warehouse), there wouldn't be an issue.

Yeah, get a headline sponsor as Sentanta does with Mitsubishi and ITV with F1 (used to be Honda, can't remember what it is now).

I'd be interested to know how much the Warren deal was for ITV. Anyone know?

Strange decision as there isnt many people in work on a Monday Morning who has not seen the Khan fight on a Saturday night.

TJAY wrote:Strange decision as there isnt many people in work on a Monday Morning who has not seen the Khan fight on a Saturday night.

But the problem is they're not the ones paying for it to be broadcast...

ITV have dropped everyone other than Khan anyway, looks like Khan could be on his way to Setanta as well then

How much does it cost to show the fight?

I know US fights live on SKY were costing between 30,000 and 65,000 last year, so wondered how much a Khan fight would cost ITV. Or did the contract stipulate money up front?

Chambers2 wrote:ITV have dropped everyone other than Khan anyway, looks like Khan could be on his way to Setanta as well then

At £9.99 a month, most sports fans will soon be subscribing to Setanta. Most boxing fans already do. And I think Khan's probably already generated enough interest amongst the casual fans to help increase Setanta's audience. It's no big deal if ITV discontinue boxing coverage.

Without regular action - the ratings will dip. When Jim Rosenthal doesn't give say when the next action is going to be (because there is nothing scheduled) then there is going to be lay fans forgetting about it. But if Jim said - and its two weeks we have a WBA world middleweight title fight from Germany (as an example) - then people will think "oh thats sounds good".

Rediculous excuses I think.... Give the big fights a chance.

josh fg wrote: They were known to be realy kean on Enzo haye that its now a title unification fight musht really piss them off.

You got it. Mr Sharman was not a happy man when the arse fell out of Haye-Maccarinelli and he ended up with Enzo beating on Gunn. ITV got a hell of a lot of emails slating that match before it was on and, of course, those sending the emails were proved correct.

Now they see Enzo-Haye being made on Setanta? It would piss you off too, no?

Money talks though at the end of the day.... if ITV were that keen on Enzo vs Haye - then they should have signed a different deal with Frank. I am sure, ITV discussed contract renewal before Setanta got involved.

stujones wrote:Money talks though at the end of the day.... if ITV were that keen on Enzo vs Haye - then they should have signed a different deal with Frank.

'Frank' now is it, hmmm? First name terms, eh? You'll go far

As always, Stu, you know best lad.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:Money talks though at the end of the day.... if ITV were that keen on Enzo vs Haye - then they should have signed a different deal with Frank.

'Frank' now is it, hmmm? First name terms, eh? You'll go far

As always, Stu, you know best lad.

Ha ha

Thought I would keep it formal - its usually Frankie Baby.

All I am saying is that no point signing a deal stating all they want is Khan and the being upset that they haven't got Enzo vs Haye. Besides its going to be a 2 am show anyway - so according to the article ITV wouldn't have been happy with that anyway.

If it was Enzo vs Haye they wanted, then they should have negotated a different deal.

stujones wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:Money talks though at the end of the day.... if ITV were that keen on Enzo vs Haye - then they should have signed a different deal with Frank.

'Frank' now is it, hmmm? First name terms, eh? You'll go far

As always, Stu, you know best lad.

Ha ha

Thought I would keep it formal - its usually Frankie Baby.

All I am saying is that no point signing a deal stating all they want is Khan and the being upset that they haven't got Enzo vs Haye. Besides its going to be a 2 am show anyway - so according to the article ITV wouldn't have been happy with that anyway.

If it was Enzo vs Haye they wanted, then they should have negotated a different deal.

No, Stu - they had a deal with Warren's stable, not just Khan, initially. And the Enzo fight they got was garbage when they were hoping for Haye.

So, they pay money and get a poor product (re Enzo, at least) and then someone else gets a much better one, if you get my drift.

Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:I find it very hard to believe that outside X Factor ITV has any other show which attracts more than 2.5 million people after 9.00pm!!

This sounds more like "We've spent x million on getting FA Cup and England matches, now let's see where we can cut some money".

Exactly right.

To be fair to ITV, they did at least give it a go, but the likes of F rank Warren let them down by putting on farcical fights like Enzo Maccarinelli -v- Bobby Gunn & Joe Calzaghe -v- Peter Manfredo. Before that, we had the likes of Audley Harrison bricking it everytime an opponent aimed a punch in his direction, so it comes as no suprise really.

how far are we away from every TV show being available on PPV over the internet?
i want to watch HBO boxing live, i want to watch ESPN, Setanta and SKY boxing as well as all the German, Japanese and Aussie feeds.
When will i simply be able to buy the shows i want to watch without having to be dicatated to by some TV channel that screens shit i'm not bothered about?
I think in 10 years it will be the norm and then we wont have to worry about what these berks do.

lowersmiths wrote:how far are we away from every TV show being available on PPV over the internet?
i want to watch HBO boxing live, i want to watch ESPN, Setanta and SKY boxing as well as all the German, Japanese and Aussie feeds.
When will i simply be able to buy the shows i want to watch without having to be dicatated to by some TV channel that screens shit i'm not bothered about?
I think in 10 years it will be the norm and then we wont have to worry about what these berks do.

Setanta and SKY already do it. I can't see us ever getting HBO/Showtime or ESPN as they have agreements with UK Broadcasters to show fights. You could be sneaky and change your IP address to an American one though.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote: 'Frank' now is it, hmmm? First name terms, eh? You'll go far

As always, Stu, you know best lad.

Ha ha

Thought I would keep it formal - its usually Frankie Baby.

All I am saying is that no point signing a deal stating all they want is Khan and the being upset that they haven't got Enzo vs Haye. Besides its going to be a 2 am show anyway - so according to the article ITV wouldn't have been happy with that anyway.

If it was Enzo vs Haye they wanted, then they should have negotated a different deal.

No, Stu - they had a deal with Warren's stable, not just Khan, initially. And the Enzo fight they got was garbage when they were hoping for Haye.

So, they pay money and get a poor product (re Enzo, at least) and then someone else gets a much better one, if you get my drift.

My mistake, but wasn't Haye vs Enzo Mac all the more marketable AFTER the initial Warren/ITV deal had expired and then ITV just signed with Khan. Thats when Haye was well and truly knocking on the door - after his win over Bonin.

In my opinion, strictly my opinion - Haye vs Enzo had a similar appeal as Enzo/Haye vs Hobson during the a large chunk of the first ITV deal.

Just looking at it from a fans point of view who doesn't know any of the TV execs and their views. ITV have hardly mentioned Haye at all since their return.

stujones wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote: Ha ha

Thought I would keep it formal - its usually Frankie Baby.

All I am saying is that no point signing a deal stating all they want is Khan and the being upset that they haven't got Enzo vs Haye. Besides its going to be a 2 am show anyway - so according to the article ITV wouldn't have been happy with that anyway.

If it was Enzo vs Haye they wanted, then they should have negotated a different deal.

No, Stu - they had a deal with Warren's stable, not just Khan, initially. And the Enzo fight they got was garbage when they were hoping for Haye.

So, they pay money and get a poor product (re Enzo, at least) and then someone else gets a much better one, if you get my drift.

My mistake, but wasn't Haye vs Enzo Mac all the more marketable AFTER the initial Warren/ITV deal had expired and then ITV just signed with Khan. Thats when Haye was well and truly knocking on the door - after his win over Bonin.

In my opinion, strictly my opinion - Haye vs Enzo had a similar appeal as Enzo/Haye vs Hobson during the a large chunk of the first ITV deal.

Just looking at it from a fans point of view who doesn't know any of the TV execs and their views. ITV have hardly mentioned Haye at all since their return.

Think you're right stu. I thought the initial deal with ITV was for SN, and then the latest contract, which I believe was signed pre-summer, was exclusively for Khan and the other SN fighters signed with Setanta.

If that's the case, I really don't see ITVs point in moaning about Khan moving to "the other side" when they only wanted him on terrestrial TV in the first place. Would they have kept him if he did an Audley?!?!?

are the advertisers really upset just about the violence and the apparently undesirable male audience, queasy hypocritical corporate pussies as they are? or are they concerned about the oft-wretched competition level, the unsporting nature of matchups, rife with pathetic FW mismatches & devalued title belts?

That's what the advertisers think of the target audience I reckon: bullying, cretinous, callous arseholes. Based upon a good portion of the fights that were made.