Has PPV done any good to Boxing?

I cant think of to much good that it has done apart from giving a few fighters big loads of cash. Has PPV done anything good to boxing? Given fighters and promoters nice pay days, driven fans away from the sport IMO.

Not really, but the impact of how it has hurt boxing is overblown. What has hurt boxing more is how boxing is not shown on network TV now, most likely due to a lack of sponsors. ESPN gets Hair Club for Men for boxing. It's actually Just for Men, but I bring this up because they have a new title Sponsor just announced today: Corona. On this topic though I can say for sure it's hurt boxing. Only up until recently when I've had enough money to get the premium networks and pay per views I had very little interest in the sport. It's not accessible, and poor quality internet streams are not going to gain many people's interest in it. Boxing doesn't necessarily need free TV to get huge, but bigger ESPN fights, and some other networks jumping on board like Versus (again), TBS, TNT, USA, Spike, and other national cable networks that 90% of the population has would be huge.

If I'm not mistaken,espn has had more fights of the year than ppv.That says it all to me. Not sure where you got that idea. Look at the last 20 years: 1991: Quiroga-Anifowoshe- small, cheap PPV for $10. 1992- Bowe-Holyfield 1- PPV 1993- Carbajal-Gonzalez 1- PPV 1994- Castro-Jackson 1- PPV undercard 1995- Sorjaturong-González- I think this was on Fox Sports, although I might be wrong and it was a PPV 1996- Holyfield-Tyson 1- PPV, although this was a horrible choice for FOTY. Barrera-McKinney and Gatti-Rodriguez on regular HBO were easily better, as was Bowe-Golota 2 which was on PPV. 1997- Gatti-Ruelas- PPV undercard 1998- Robinson-Gatti 1- Regular HBO 1999- Ayala-Tapia 1- Regular HBO 2000- Morales-Barrera 1- Regular HBO 2001- Ward-Burton (Augustus)- ESPN 2002- Ward-Gatti 1- Regular HBO 2003- Ward-Gatti 3- Regular HBO. Again, a poor choice, as Toney-Jirov (regular HBO) and Gomez-Arthur (not televised in the states) were more deserving 2004- Barrera-Morales 3- PPV 2005- Corrales-Castillo 1- Regular Showtime 2006- Sithchatchawal- Monshipour- not televised in the states 2007- Vazquez-Marquez 2- Regular Showtime 2008- Vazquez-Marquez 3- Regular Showtime 2009- Marquez-Diaz 1- Regular HBO 2010- Segura-Calderon- PPV That's 8 Fights of the Year on PPV, and one on ESPN.

If I'm not mistaken,espn has had more fights of the year than ppv.That says it all to me.

Not really, but the impact of how it has hurt boxing is overblown. What has hurt boxing more is how boxing is not shown on network TV now, most likely due to a lack of sponsors. ESPN gets Hair Club for Men for boxing. Boxing used to largely be on network TV, CBS and all, Howard Cosell commentating on Saturday afternoons. The sponsors going away from boxing has hurt the sport more. Back in the 80s, and before that, most of the big fights weren't free either. They were on Closed Circuit. Hagler-Hearns, Leonard-Hearns, Ali-Frazier, etc...were on Closed Circuit. PPV is a better viewing experience than Closed Circuit. However, they just put any old crap on PPV nowadays. Smaller cards sometimes put on independent PPVs because they can't get it on ESPN, HBO, Showtime, Versus, etc.. I wouldn't have a problem with PPV if they just put the best fights on it. But some of the PPV main events are crap. And to make it worse, the undercards are often poor too. That POS Don King at least used to stack his undercards.

The money is in the masses and is how you get more new fans. I can count how many times ppl have told me that they didn't see the fight cause it was on PPV, HBO or showtime. Exposure is the name of the game and the more fans the more the sport will thrive

It helps make some fights possible that otherwise wouldn't be. But other than that, it pretty much hurts the sport and the fans, and helps a few of the elite guys make a decent paycheck, and makes bank for the promoters.

In the long run they might even lose money because more people start to watch stuff on live stream with ppv's , and eventually more and more people are going to start doing this, after all some live streams have just as good picture quality as the tv would, so in the long run its hurting the sport in all kinds of ways!

I think rugby and maybe even golf is more popular than boxing in the uk True, maybe.

Without doing any research... Football is like the most popular sport in the UK right, maybe even the world, but TV stations don't charge it's fans to watch matches, yet boxing is maybe 4th most popular in the UK after Cricket, Football & Tennis, and it doesn't even make the front OR back pages like Football does yet they fleece us of our money to watch what the suits deem to be a PPV 'event'...... It's bullshit, start charging football fans and put boxing on Sky Sports. I think rugby and maybe even golf is more popular than boxing in the uk

Overall its bad but at least the whole sport isnt ppv only basis like UFC. I don't mind a ppv once a quarter at most anymore then that is too much. Lowering the cost and online buying options would be smart as well

Without doing any research... Football is like the most popular sport in the UK right, maybe even the world, but TV stations don't charge it's fans to watch matches, yet boxing is maybe 4th most popular in the UK after Cricket, Football & Tennis, and it doesn't even make the front OR back pages like Football does yet they fleece us of our money to watch what the suits deem to be a PPV 'event'...... It's bullshit, start charging football fans and put boxing on Sky Sports.

No. If you wanted to intentionally go about ruining the sports fanbase because you hated boxing, introducing ppv is a good start. Short term gain and greed from the promoters and a handful of fighters is exactly that short term. The model will continue though as long as there are people dumb enough and/or rich enough to pay for it. The advent of live streaming will hopefully force the issue to be reviewed. 3d movies in the cinema are just a reaction to stem piracy and they will probably do the same thing more and more over time with boxing on ppv to combat live streams. Hopefully though they will realise bringing it back to the masses is the best option and make their money from advertising revenue and be happy. They wont make the same obscene amounts granted but the wealth and exposure would be more evenly spread and the sport will become stronger and more sustainable. We will never have icons the size of Ali in the future as long as there is ppv limiting the exposure of the best boxers to only die hard fans.

It wouldn't be a problem if it was just big fighters that can reliably draw a large number. If a fight can't sell 300,000 PPVs, it shouldn't be on PPV. Maybe lower that to 200,000. Boxing is not an easily accessible sport, PPVs are part of that.

It helps the fighters but hurts the fan base, so overall it has hurt boxing.