HBO only offering $1 Million for Walters-Lomanchenko?

You linked to an article written before anybody figured out what was going on and point to it as proof that something shady went down when in reality we found out the truth a year later and clearly nothing shady had gone down. "shady" is simply a matter of opinion. I think the Caldwell situation stinks to high heaven. If a company like Waddell & Reed sacrificed a top money manager for every investment their fund makes (the PBC thing represented less than 1% of Waddell & Reeds portfolio). they wouldnt have any guys left.

So isn't it actually more desirable to a network that Haymon could offer them his biggest fights every month, not just lower tier fights with every big fight appearing on PPV? Even if a deal as big as UFC's isn't realistic, if FOX or Viacom offered half as much for exclusive rights to Haymon's entire stable as UFC got for the rights to their lower tier fights, that's still way more than Haymon would have ended up with by staying with HBO. except that boxing fans do not forgive losses as easily as MMA fans do, so Haymon isnt going to pit his top guys against each other often enough. Sure, he's made some good fights along the way, but besides Mares-Santa Cruz, Quillin-Jacobs, and MAYBE Thurman-Porter, Haymon doesnt give us many matches between 2 of the top 5 guys in a division. HBO's budget is so small now and shared with so many promoters that for this endeavor to result in a bigger pie for Haymon's stable, PBC only needs to land a TV deal that pays a mere fraction of what UFC's deal pays. I dont necessarily disagree with you on this point. Although a "mere fraction" probably doesnt get Waddell & reed back to even lol It was announced publicly as a "monthly" series, but not every series is year round. A weekly series is not necessarily year round and neither is a monthly series. I was told at the time that Haymon had the right to buy up to 12 shows per year. I have no idea what the minimum was. He did 7 shows the first year and if he goes monthly in June, that'll be 7 shows for the second year as well. We agree he's not stupid. You're convinced he's indifferent. I'm not willing to draw that conclusion yet. Would you agree it's possible that Al dangled the potential money ESPN would make on 24 events and used that to get exclusivity, even if he never intended to run more than the minimum required by the contract? My understanding of the deal (and I certainly could have been misinformed), was that the deal was for 24 events over 2 years. It was a straight time-buy, with Haymon paying for the 24 dates whether he provided content or not. No, I don't admit that at all. If W&R is investing half a billion (and potentially more) into Haymon Boxing, which would have to make them a significant if not majority stake holder in Haymon Boxing, why wouldn't they want to make sure one of their guys is there running the thing for them? I dont think thats how it really went down.......... http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2014/06/20/waddell-reed-ryan-caldwell-consulting-contract.html

One Punch - Discussions can still be productive and/or interesting regardless of whether they result in anybody changing their mind. I really enjoyed reading your last post and appreciate the focus on substance instead of insults. If you feel I've contributed to the hostility, I apologize and hopefully from this point forward our interactions can be civil. I am not convinced Haymon will be successful, but I do believe many assume the worst and draw unfair conclusions. Since Haymon doesn't speak publicly, the anti-Haymon propaganda has been very successful because he doesn't defend himself. Not to mention the fact that HBO has been the absolute jedi master of boxing propaganda for the past 30 years and so their spin on the narrative is going to be effective for many years to come regardless of what happens. But I do think there are possibilities you aren't considering beyond "stupid" and "indifferent." We've both ruled out stupid. So that just leaves indifference. Let's look at the subjects you mentioned and see if there are reasonable posibilities beyond indifference. Re: "Dartboard" scheduling - We both agree an organized and easy to follow schedule is one of the benefits of a proper sports league and while PBC appears to aspire to someday be a proper sports league, thus far they have not adhered to an organized and easy to follow schedule. I believe they will do just that eventually, when the time buys are up and they sign traditional TV deals. But at this juncture, is it POSSIBLE, that instead of indifference, the reason for the "dartboard" scheduling is a combination of the following? #1 - In order to get CBS/FOX/NBC in primetime on Saturday night, PBC is at the mercy of the select few Saturdays that those networks have available and if PBC wants the benefit of being on network TV on a Saturday night, the dates will be sporadic and spread out in an unorthodox fashion? #2 - In order to maximize the number of interested parties when the rights are up for sale, PBC must spread out their content during the proof of concept phase to show a variety of networks that boxing can be a success on their channel(s)? Re: Mediocre ratings - Mediocre comapred to what? A big fight on HBO does a million viewers. A big fight on PBC does 2-4 million viewers. That is a HUGE new/lapsed audience checking out boxing that wasn't watching before. Obviously the additional eyeballs are due to being on network TV, but isn't that the whole point? What kind of ratings were you expecting? PBC on network TV is doing around the same ratings as the NBA is doing on network TV. I'm not saying the PBC ratings are great, but to label them as "mediocre" seems extremely unfair. If PBC is doing comporable ratings to what NBA/UFC do on the same night and those leagues are huge TV deals, I don't think mediocre is the appropriate term. Re: Absentee ESPN cards - We don't know the minimum number of cards PBC must provide to ESPN, we only know the maximum number of cards they can produce. If they're paying per show and if one of the benefits of signing the deal was locking out other promoters from being on ESPN, wouldn't it actually be really smart to produce the minimum number of cards to minimize losses while still having the benefit of locking out promoters from being on the channel? I'm not saying for certain that's what the strategy is, but my point is that those who prefer to assume the worst about PBC often over look very realistic possibilities that would paint Haymon in a much wiser light. We agree he's not stupid. I personally believe he's smarter than ESPN and considering he just hired the guy that gave him the deal, I'm much more willing to believe he got over on ESPN than I am willing to believe he paid for time slots he's not going to be able to use. PBC will be back on ESPN this year. PBC had the right to pay for monthly shows. They chose not to. We have no idea the exact details of the arrangement, but you are quick to assume Haymon is "indifferent," while I am willing to reserve judgement. Re: ZERO momentum built for his biggest stars - 3.5 million people just watched Danny Garcia win a world title live on FOX. Deontay Wilder is about to get, by far, the most massive payday of his life. Keith Thurman is about to defend his world title live on America's most watched network. Adrien Broner is about to defend his world title live on basic cable. Amir Khan is about to get, by far, the most massive payday of his life. Charles Martin is about to get, by far, the most massive payday of his life. Errol Spence is about to fight live on NBC on saturday night and will soon challenge for a world title. Ortiz and Berto are about to fight live on FOX on saturday night. Carl Frampton just became one of the very few unified world champions in the entire sport. That's just off the top of my head. If Haymon's stars have zero momentum, who are the managers with more stars and more momentum than Haymon? Re: Burning through cash - We have no idea how much has been spent. We have an amateur financial analysis from some random dude on reddit that didn't realize that the market value of a fund is based on the ROI compared to other things to invest in. It's not necessarily reflective of how much money has been spent. The whole "plan" comes down to the ability to sell it to advertisers, and THATS where I think the PBC model fails. You make comparisons to other sports, but there really is no sport like boxing. All the "big" sports like football, baseball, etc. have regional built-in fanbases, established schedules, backup players in the event of injury, the college system for player development, the drafts, etc, and most importantly, a relatively consistent block of time the event will take. A football game wont be over in 7 minutes. Adveriser-driven boxing content works at the ESPN / Telemundo level, where specific fighter participation is not relevant, but at the higher end of the spectrum, its all about the individual fighter. Big-time national advertisers dont want to allocate part of their budget to buying spots for Thurman-Porter, only to have the event cancelled because Thurman got hurt. The UFC model is probably the closest thing to boxing, and even that isnt the same. The content deal UFC has with Fox is for some lower-tier events, but the biggest part of it is the Ultimate Fighter series. All the big UFC events still have to go to PPV in order to create enough revenue. A 9-figure content deal for boxing, from a broadcast network, I think is never going to happen. There are simply too many other (safer) options for them to take. Look at shows like Criminal Minds. Costs maybe what, $3 million an episode to make? It does about 9.5 million viewers, and then they STILL get to sell it in syndication for the next 30 years after that. Unless a tv executive somewhere is a huge boxing fan, and is willing to put his job on the line, I just dont see a content deal for high-profile fights. I could see a smaller scale deal for lower-end content with the premium events going to PPV or Showtime, but that doesnt fit the "free boxing doe" platform. I will also touch on the ESPN issue. The deal Haymon made was for a MONTHLY series. Obviously we dont know the specific contract details (perhaps they will come out in the discovery portion of the unfair competition lawsuit) but when you make a deal for a monthly series, and then only do 1 show in 8 months, it raises questions. Do they have money problems? Did they buy the ESPN time just to eliminate opportunities for other promoters? (if so that plays right in to the unfair competition angle) And lastly, I think the time-buy scenario was really a bad idea. Sure, I understand the concept of putting boxing on numerous networks to try and get them interested, but I just think that once you give someone something for free, it makes it very hard for them to see the actual value in it. Oh, and one other thing. Even you have to admit that Caldwell selling this idea to Waddell & Reed, getting it closed, and then immediately resigning and taking a position with Haymon is not a good look. It doesnt pass the smell test, and if it's not a quid pro quo, I dont know what is..........

One Punch - I calmly and respectfully answered all of your points. You ignored everything I wrote and instead just called me a childish name. You're a grown man. Act like it. Nobody is criticizing you for disagreeing with me. I'm pointing out that your ATTITUDE is ridiculous. But once again, you refuse to discuss the topic, preferring instead to spew more of your bitter negative madness. the "topic" has been beaten to death, and neither one of us are likely to change our opinions anytime soon. Thats perfectly fine by me, but you seem to think that I must be having personal problems or something, because I get annoyed having to say the same thing over and over and over and over and over again. Its tiresome. You believe in Haymons model. I dont. You seem to think you know his moral compass, and know what his intentions are to his investors. I dont. I dont know the man, and can only base my opinion on what I have seen, and the moves he has made appear to me like he doesnt care one way or the other. He's too smart an individual to have made the kinds of mistakes that PBC has made over the past 10 months. So to get in the position they are in at the moment (sporadic "dartboard" scheduling, mediocre ratings, absentee ESPN cards, ZERO momentum built for his biggest stars, burning through cash, etc etc) Haymon would (in my opinion) have to either be stupid, or indifferent. And he is not stupid.

Like I've mentioned earlier, UFC is more like WWE/WWF in terms of fans' dedication. Fans knew WWF/E is fake, yet they don't care. They still keep coming. Think about that for a day or so. Wrestling is fake, yet they watch it as if it's real. Surprising thing I discovered was when I heard some co-workers in their 40s talking about wrestling characters, who beat who the other day, the manner this guy/gal was beat, etc. (This is important to understand because without such dedicated fans you won't have a business. I'm establishing the consistency of it.) In contrast, boxing got so few devoted fans they can't even fill up stadiums without casuals. It's inconsistent.

These guys deserve a million a piece, I still see that the same trolls making the same moronic post. Nothing has changed......

I liken boxing to US presidential elections where casuals being independent voters. They won't always be there for you. UFC is like having right wings/left wings where you don't need casuals to thrive. Thus the money is consistent. Same customers for life. More are coming. That's the part Mr Fantasy doesn't get. He really thinks casuals will always be there for uncle Haymon.

I liken boxing to US presidential elections where casuals being independent voters. They won't always be there for you. UFC is like having right wings/left wings where you don't need casuals to thrive. Thus the money is consistent. Same customers for life. More are coming. They're simply different. 3 rounds per fight, 5 min per round; pretty much anything goes, punching, kicking, wrestling, karate, judo, you name it. Not to mention 10-12 cards per event. But the fantasy guy disagrees doe.

Man, stop this nonsense. They're different. You can see this in your own everyday surroundings. Boxing have semblance of thriving because of casuals. Which means the income will always be inconsistent. The friends you normally watch with will not always be there for you. There are so many moments in boxing where it's just boring to watch. UFC is just vastly different for regular people where anything can happen in a split second, so viewers are always glued and focused. In boxing, after 3-4 rounds of potshotting and posturing, the entire fight is pretty much determined. Yawning will start, your buddies will start to find excuse and want to leave. Stop this fantasy. I liken boxing to US presidential elections where casuals being independent voters. They won't always be there for you. UFC is like having right wings/left wings where you don't need casuals to thrive. Thus the money is consistent. Same customers for life. More are coming.

Man, stop this nonsense. They're different. You can see this in your own everyday surroundings. Boxing have semblance of thriving because of casuals. Which means the income will always be inconsistent. The friends you normally watch with will not always be there for you. There are so many moments in boxing where it's just boring to watch. UFC is just vastly different for regular people where anything can happen in a split second, so viewers are always glued and focused. In boxing, after 3-4 rounds of potshotting and posturing, the entire fight is pretty much determined. Yawning will start, your buddies will start to find excuse and want to leave. Stop this fantasy. be careful about disagreeing with that douchebag. Next he will be recommending you see a therapist because if you have the nerve to disagree with him then you MUST be having "issues" elsewhere in life lol

Rigondeaux made $750k against Donaire. are walters and lomachenko huge draws and get huge ratings? what am i missing? they were simply overpaid in the past. doens't mean hbo should continue to make the same mistake in the present. ggg makes more because he draws more fans and better ratings. too simple? did you miss this part? also i'm not sure that even applies to the donaire-rigo fight since donaire was a semi-draw when they fought so of course rigo's purse would be high. neither walters nor loma are draws so where would the money come from? 2 no draws=not a big fight in reality. yes we have been conditioned to seeing fighters overpaid but like i said in my original post just because it was done in the past doesn't mean they should continue to do it.

Why would I stop comparing boxing to UFC (or wrestling for that matter)? They're all in the business of trying to get people interested in fights. There is no better comparison. Man, stop this nonsense. They're different. You can see this in your own everyday surroundings. Boxing have semblance of thriving because of casuals. Which means the income will always be inconsistent. The friends you normally watch with will not always be there for you. There are so many moments in boxing where it's just boring to watch. UFC is just vastly different for regular people where anything can happen in a split second, so viewers are always glued and focused. In boxing, after 3-4 rounds of potshotting and posturing, the entire fight is pretty much determined. Yawning will start, your buddies will start to find excuse and want to leave. Stop this fantasy.

are walters and lomachenko huge draws and get huge ratings? what am i missing? they were simply overpaid in the past. doens't mean hbo should continue to make the same mistake in the present. ggg makes more because he draws more fans and better ratings. too simple? and yes the pbc has a short term plan of overpaying their fighters massively and losing money but hbo can't play that game with them since they don't have the budget. they are just waiting for the pbc to either go away or for the pbc to destroy them. even if hbo does fail there is not enough money in the pbc/showtime combined to pay all these fighters those huge salaries so unfortunately we just have to wait until the money runs out. Rigondeaux made $750k against Donaire.

are walters and lomachenko huge draws and get huge ratings? what am i missing? they were simply overpaid in the past. doens't mean hbo should continue to make the same mistake in the present. ggg makes more because he draws more fans and better ratings. too simple? and yes the pbc has a short term plan of overpaying their fighters massively and losing money but hbo can't play that game with them since they don't have the budget. they are just waiting for the pbc to either go away or for the pbc to destroy them. even if hbo does fail there is not enough money in the pbc/showtime combined to pay all these fighters those huge salaries so unfortunately we just have to wait until the money runs out.

Yes UFC was able to buy up a lot of the talent. Which is what Haymon is trying to do. But what you're ignoring is that in sports, a monopoly is good for fans. Fans prefer it. People need to stop comparing Boxing to UFC, or vise versa. UFC fans are consistent. They may watch one or two boring fights here and there, but they're not going to go away. Not to mention there are 10 - 12 fight cards in one event. So there's plenty of fights fans get excited about, as opposed to 5 max in boxing. UFC fans are fans for life no matter what. Therefore, the income it generates is consistent. It's no different from WWE/WWF even though fans knew it's fake. The solution to me is a boxing network where fight cards are covered all around the world, aside from the locally-produced ones. If they can do that, then I might go back signing for a subscription. Of course, they can't cover events happening at the same time, but fans are fans. They'll watch replays or on delayed telecast.

Wow. This guy got a spin for everything. And he's taking this "Haymon taking over boxing" thing way too seriously. For a while I thought he is just day- dreaming. Now he really thinks it's going to happen. It's a fantasy. HBO boxing is not going to go away. Fact that its not their main bread and butter. It is just bonus to their subscribers, who sign up not because of boxing, but because of their regular programming. Fact is HBO has already been decapitated, thus marginalized long time ago, when Schaefer took all his fighters with him to Showtime. They may have 2-3 stars right now, but that's about it. I see no reason why Haymon can't implement whatever the hell he wants to. On paper the Haymon monopoly should have already been happening. He's still got Showtime on his side. Hellooo!! Canelo and Golovkin are not the only fighters you can make stars of. There are literally hundreds of fighters around the world! Which means HBO is irrelevant in the overall grand scheme of things. Haymon doesn't have to wait for its total disappearance. Man, that would take decades. Reason why Haymon will never succeed is because he's too scared to pit his top fighters against each other. He could have made Khan vs Thurman, for example, which is the more competitive fight than Canelo/Khan. And it would have generated the same interest, if not more. But he didn't. Matthysse vs Broner could have been made easily, considering Broner called the guy out and Matthysse response, "I hope he's not joking." Interesting part was both were undercards in 2 events fighting other fighters after their respective defeats vs Maidana and Garcia. Finally, the nail was finally hammered on the coffin when Matthysse decided to sign back to GBP. Will we ever see Matthysse vs Broner getting made. No. It's gone forever. Fast rewind, Guerrero confronted Broner in a parking lot calling his bluff. It ended with Broner saying, "Send me the contract over and I'll sign it." Did anything happen? None. If these guys were UFC fighters, Dana White would have taken advantage of that incident and capitalized on it as a promotional goldmine. There are just few examples among many. It became clear that this Haymon personality is just about showcasing stars fighting cab drivers. It's similar to movies where the hero defeats the villain and gets the girl. With or without HBO I don't think things will change much.

You also can't deny Khan a massive payday in the dying days of the old model while you try to build a new model. Doesn't benefit Khan at all if Al kills PPV five years from now, but in doing so largely increases the average pay of non-PPV fighters. So you're saying he can't deny Khan a massive payday now, but you're also saying it's Haymon's goal is to eliminate PPV's, which would in effect deny massive paydays to his fighters down the road.

Exhibit A. well then, case closed!!!! lol

right, because anyone not on the Haymon dick-riding wagon MUST be "bitter". There is no other possible reason that someone might not like the idea of one person (regardless of who it is) completely taking over the sport lol Exhibit A.

LOL @ OnePunch tripping over his own bitter responses in this thread. Sad, sad, sad. right, because anyone not on the Haymon dick-riding wagon MUST be "bitter". There is no other possible reason that someone might not like the idea of one person (regardless of who it is) completely taking over the sport lol