i don't get why hbo hasn't done what al haymon is doing now.

they should have done that a long time ago. HBO is unwilling to commit the money to boxing to do such a thing; they've been trading off of their status as the "de-facto home of top boxing" for far to long. Say what you want about Espinoza and his tenure, but CBS has shown that they are willing to commit the type of resources to boxing to make a run at things. HBO needs to adapt or fade away.

Boxing on National TV makes allot is sense. You can make more money from advertising revenue than you can from PPV buys. The rate the network can charge for a 30 second advert depends on the number of viewers. A big event like the Superbowl has a massive audience so they can charge million dollar rates per 30 seconds. A smaller boxing card with a few hundred thousand viewers might only command a fee of maybe $50,000 and you can only air a limited amount of adverts per fight. Of course the numbers rise as you book big names but they come at a bigger purse... and when they get too big they move to PPV. It's complicated.

HBO boxing could actually benefit from Haymon's move. If the PBC generates new national interest in the sport, and HBO still has some of the best fighters in the business, then their ratings will increase, and presumably their subscriptions as well. This actually happened for a short while in mma. The UFC was generating a ton of interest in the sport, but they didn't have some of the best fighters in the world like Fedor. As a result Fedor's earnings went to an all time high because there was new and growing interest in his fights. Of course then he got old and started losing. I think one benefit to HBO might be these PBC broadcasts taking guys like Thurman, Guerrero, Garcia and Broner off SHO for significant periods of time. SHO is still HBO's main competitor, not NBC...at least not until the PBC proves that networks like NBC and CBS and ESPN are a viable option for HBO and SHO level fights. Guys like Garcia and Broner did some of SHO's best ratings, and they're not even on SHO's schedule for maybe the first half of the year. SHO does have Chavez Jr. on their schedule, and that fight might do big ratings for SHO, but there's not that much else at the moment.

HBO subscribers still exist for Game Of Thrones, Broardwalk Empire and their other Original Programming to be honest. It is not because of Boxing nor is it for the Movies they show which most of them you can watch at anytime on Netflix or any other Streaming Sites/Apps. HBO been able to get fights for CHEAP on HBO even heard Max Kellerman talk about how with the Way Haymon does things it makes it difficult now for a Network like HBO get Fight at Affordable Prices. HBO, Arum they want guys like Al Haymon and Cameron Dunkin out of the way because they're the type of Managers who actually DO THEIR JOB compared to others who just take what ever is offered to them and their Client for the Quick Money. HBO will never invest in boxing as much as Haymon has, they depend on Promoters like Arum and Oscar to continue to "NEED THEIR NETWORK". They maybe pick a few fighters they want regularly on their Network but that is about it.

HBO boxing could actually benefit from Haymon's move. If the PBC generates new national interest in the sport, and HBO still has some of the best fighters in the business, then their ratings will increase, and presumably their subscriptions as well. This actually happened for a short while in mma. The UFC was generating a ton of interest in the sport, but they didn't have some of the best fighters in the world like Fedor. As a result Fedor's earnings went to an all time high because there was new and growing interest in his fights. Of course then he got old and started losing.

they should have done that a long time ago. they did, and hbo was putting on expensive gaymon showcase bs fights. they got smart, kicked the trannyboy lover off hbo and put the highest rated shows on tv.

Why don't you people start a thread like this after a year or so? Right now Haymon hasn't proven anything. He's still notorious for building stars out of scraps and rarely make them fight each other.

Why would they do that if they intend to only have 2 to 3 boxing shows in their monthly programming? Besides it's not yet proven if haymon's strategy will be successful...he's just about to start with it ffs.

This article sheds some light on the issue of boxing leaving broadcast television. It points to the same practices that Al Haymon (he's not alone) is known for, in protecting his fighters with lackluster matchups. Now he wants to bring boxing back to network tv, but if he resorts to protecting his fighters as he has in the past, networks will likely once again drop boxing. It's all in the ratings. He'll have to supply fights that keep fans' interest. No wonder he has to put up his own money to get started. Why Has Boxing Been Off The Networks?January 9th, 2013 Tweet by Charles Jay Those who are relatively new to boxing (i.e., those who have started to follow it in the last ten years or so) may be wondering why boxing has not had a foothold on network television of late. After all, with TV networks always on the lookout for affordable sports programming and avenues like social media open to support the promotion of such programming, all of the ingredients should be in place. All it takes is to make great fights, and perhaps get a little lucky. Right? Well, many television people, including NBC’s own Jon Miller, who is their programming head, will tell you that the uncertainty of boxing matches, which sometimes suffer from pullouts, and the tendency on the part of promoters to protect their “properties” at all costs, thus resulting in a lower quality of matchups, are contributing factors to the hesitation sponsors have had in going “all in” behind the sport. There is an inherent problem, of course. The nature of the sport is such that pullouts are always going to be part of the game, and it often can’t be helped because of injuries and illness. While an injury wouldn’t necessarily ruin a football or basketball telecast, it could greatly change the nature of a boxing telecast, particularly if one or both of the combatants are well-recognized as a brand. This is one of the reasons why networks had been known in the past to deal with a small circle of promoters. When a commitment is made to a TV boxing date, and something unexpected happens, it is often what a promoter is able to do afterward that can salvage things. This is where the “double-edged sword” comes in. Some promoters have been known to substitute garbage, acknowledging that there is certain leverage created by the short notice. There have even been inexperienced, unprepared promoters who have let an entire show fall apart, leaving television people scrambling for a solution. Others might prefer to insert something that may not have the marquee value but is even MORE competitive. That may not often occur; it depends on how strong the network’s position is and how much the promoter actually “gets it.” Regardless, there is a great deal of value placed on “deliverability” as a key to a promoter’s ability to secure dates. And the promoters who are able to secure dates, in turn, usually have quite a few fighters under contract – fighters for whom they have bigger plans. By and large, when it came to the network level, there was some point at which the promoters began to have a tendency to protect their own; that is, the fighter they had under control, as promotional deals became more and more prevalent. Then it was a matter of getting away with the LEAST competitive fight they could, with was at odds, ideally, with what the network was seeking. What we’re trying to explain is that there is something in the fabric of how this business currently operates that has made it somewhat less user-friendly for the broadcast networks to do business with, and some changes in philosophy have to take effect for things to get back to the level where boxing on the networks is a more frequent occurrence. Many of the people working in the fight game right now were weaned on the weekend fights that appeared on all three of the networks (ABC, NBC, CBS). They were considered a very important part of a chain of development, not only of the fighters, but of those fighters as attractions. Generally the progression went from the local club show, to cable (as it started to blossom), to network television, to premium cable (HBO, Showtime, etc. as it was available) to pay-per-view. At one point at least one link in that chain was skipped – the role of the networks. Perhaps it was a combination of the fights that might normally be earmarked for that destination winding up on either basic cable or pay (premium) cable – more often than not the latter. That notwithstanding, the aforementioned solipsistic attitude on the part of promoters – with more of a stake in fighters and therefore less interest in risk – has hurt boxing, both on network TV as well as cable. When the networks were paying good money for fights, and not making “output” deals (package deals with promoters, in the absence of buying individual fights), they were able to command better matchups, at least if they sought to use their own leverage to the fullest, and it was more about the cream rising to the top. Certainly, network people were not blind to the fact that there was the possibility of some genuine stars emerging, and they did, on occasion, make allowances in terms of the matchmaking to affect that. One thing you would see on the networks, however, was some depth on the cards. NBC in particular would have backup fights, and interesting ones, just in case a main event unexpectedly ended early, or in the case of John “The Beast” Mugabi, quite expectedly. By having other boxing programming at the ready, advertisers knew that viewers would stay interested. And they did. But that involved a spirit of matchmaking that is intended to serve the viewer, not the promoter. There’s a big difference there. NBC is going to do a couple of network fights over the air as part of its cable deal with the New Jersey-based Main Events promotional outfit, which is working with J. Russell Peltz, a Hall of Fame promoter/.matchmaker who truly understands what it takes to put together a fight the public is going to like, even if it means the “house” fighter may be in tough. Peltz’s career extends back to an earlier era, before promotional contracts began to dominate the landscape, so his sensibilities are probably a bit different than some fight people who arrived long after him. Ask anyone who has ever attended the shows he used to do at the Blue Horizon in Philadelphia. But really, how many more Russell Peltzes are there? This sport will need more of them to make a compelling case for once again becoming a regular staple on broadcast television. http://www.*************.com/columns/why-has-boxing-been-off-the-networks/

HBO is a network....Haymon is a person...what kind of dumbass question is this?

It's a huge risk financially. There are still a lot of people in the industry who think Haymon is going to lose all of his investors' money with this move. It's much easier and safer to get guaranteed money from HBO or Showtime and do a few PPVs a couple times a year. This ^^^ People forget that Haymon is paying the networks to showcase his fights. Not the other way around.

fights on tv is not a new concept.

It's a huge risk financially. There are still a lot of people in the industry who think Haymon is going to lose all of his investors' money with this move. It's much easier and safer to get guaranteed money from HBO or Showtime and do a few PPVs a couple times a year.

sign fighters to their own stable and cut out the promoters. have all in house hbo fights. Some boxers can actually sell tickets and fill venues and don't rely solely on TV for their money. Most of those ones have good promoters.

HBO boxing wouldn't be HBO boxing if it did what Haymon is doing.

they should have done that a long time ago. When you are the only or the biggest game in town, why change? That has been HBO's philosophy. They will consider changes when their ratings start to go down.

You can make more money from advertising revenue than you can from PPV buys. Not without a big fight...and even then it's unproven.

Boxing on National TV makes allot is sense. You can make more money from advertising revenue than you can from PPV buys.

Buy time on sports networks to build your guys then have the main fights be on HBO have everyone be on HBO contracts. HBO couldn't do that because they kept shrinking their budget, you can't embark on a plan like that on a shoe string budget.

I don't understand.... your question sign fighters to their own stable and cut out the promoters. have all in house hbo fights.