"Platforms Wars" - Who wins???

I think the PBC remnants will be absorbed by dazn and espn. online live streaming will be the future. I think haymon is looking to cash out as well. Showtime's live streaming app has more subscribers than DAZN has worldwide...

The PBC are the only ones who seem to be making a profit. They get the highest ratings and views without spending the amount of money DAZN is spending. ESPN's plan is more sustainable. They just need more fighters. Golden Boy will probably go there if DAZN gives up.

I think the PBC remnants will be absorbed by dazn and espn. online live streaming will be the future. I think haymon is looking to cash out as well.

... Al Haymon is different from anybody in this business... Al Haymon is placing the boxing fighter (as an individual) in the very center of the process... (people usually forget that Haymon's brother, Bobby, was a journeyman at the WW).... Crazy what that butterfly effect ended up manifesting as. Haymon's brother gets treated fair, and the whole world is likely different. ... I just don't know... I'm only reading things on the Net...

Viva Al Haymon!

... Al Haymon is different from anybody in this business... Al Haymon is placing the boxing fighter (as an individual) in the very center of the process... (people usually forget that Haymon's brother, Bobby, was a journeyman at the WW).... Crazy what that butterfly effect ended up manifesting as. Haymon's brother gets treated fair, and the whole world is likely different.

(...) Haymon Sports/PBC have a different aim; expose the sport to the public, let folks get caught up in the stories of these fighters. Folks get familiar with the fighters, fighters turn to attractions, attractions turn to stars, and stars turn to superstars, rebuilding the PPV track that's been vacant since Floyd finally hung them up and Canelo cashed out. Bet on whatever path you think is most viable for the future, I've said what I said ... Al Haymon is different from anybody in this business... Al Haymon is placing the boxing fighter (as an individual) in the very center of the process... (people usually forget that Haymon's brother, Bobby, was a journeyman at the WW)....

What else are we supposed to be judging this on then? Spence isn't with a network or promoter. Wilder isn't with a network or promoter. I get that being linked with Haymon Sports is a thing, but lets not act like it has the same handcuffs attached to it as being signed to a network or promoter cuz it doesn't appear to be the case. Everything preventing a Haymon Sports athlete from working with a non-Haymon Sports promoter or network is an in theory thing more then a proven thing. I KNOW DAZN isn't likely to let Joshua go fight on Showtime without a matching rights battle or at least an agreement of some sort with Joshua &/or Matchroom. I KNOW Bob isn't going to let Bud fight on Fox PPV unless Spence vs Bud is a lock to do 1.5M buys minimum. I don't know that Haymon Sports won't let DAZN work with Wilder for a fight or a few fights. I don't know that Haymon Sports won't let ESPN/Bob work with Spence. In fact I'll even say that Al Haymon must either not be running Haymon Sports or he's a piece of sh^t manager if he's not allowing fighters to explore their possible best money interests & it goes against the whole job description of being a manager. The best money isn't necessarily on DAZN though, and that's the hang-up in your critique, imo. Daniel Jacobs has had Haymon in his corner for however long; I'm not even sure, tbh, but he's still in the camp. Jacobs comes back, rebuilds his profile, and when the camp finally forces the Golovkin fight, Haymon/Connolly make sure that Jacobs gets the best deal on the fight possible, before then being approached with the HBO deal, locking the money with HBO first, and then basically signing Matchroom Sport to stage the fights. Last fight of the concurrent HBO/Matchroom deal, Jacobs wins his full world title, HBO exits boxing, and he's back on the market again. Connolly (no doubt in my mind that Haymon was still leaned on) helps negotiate the deal, and Jacobs not only ends up with a short deal with really good money on it, he gets Canelo as his first fight! Jacobs lost the fight, but that doesn't matter; he got his big payday first, he has his money locked in for the other two fights, and twists of fate (Canelo weighing a fight with Andrade must be a kick to the nuts for Golovkin, lol) may even net him a second large payday in three fights. Haymon will look to make the best deal for the fighter he works for, full stop. Haymon's fighters have been far more open to running around and discussing deals with almost anyone who has an offer, and the facts still seem to be that the deals have largely not measured up to what the fighters are already getting to begin with. Wilder-Joshua for the unified/lineal heavyweight championship is going to be a monster event; how big it ends up being is still unknown, but I'd assume it to be fair to say that the payout will be bigger than $100m total to the two fighters. Why is Eddie Hearn allowed to block that fight in the name of securing his own bag on DAZN without issue? Terence Crawford drew terribly on PPV (I don't even recall the Postol fight taking this long for Arum to even publicly say that they at least broke even). The PPV potential at the weight is largely on the other side if we're being honest. In what world is he supposed to bend the knee to Arum, and take his terms, simply because Arum put his whole company under a 360 with ESPN. Fights should end up wherever the most money for the fighters can be generated. Odd to see Haymon being the only party consistently doing just that

OK, in the short term you are right... ... but as I said: my question was more about the fast changing broadcast environment... ... now, there is more money than ever in pro boxing -- even if the return of investment is quite low... ... in my opinion, in the mid term, the boxing business would have to secure a viable symbiosis between the "TV broadcast" and the "online" -- because the big advertising money are still on TV... well... Showtime has had live streaming of basically all of their content since 2014 (as an addition to the traditional Showtime channels). I don't have the Fox Sports app, but it's been a thing for some time now and it's used as a supplement to the TV properties. THAT'S the future; quality content, delivered to as many folks as possible, however the viewer wants to access the content. Live sports is the final bastion of advertising on TV; boxing has largely been on the outs for the last 30 years or so, but Haymon took the risk, put up the money to see, and proved that boxing could be presented in a way that could see it be treated like every other sport. Now, we've hit a point where there are three strategies (really two) working off the work that Haymon did. ESPN views boxing as an add-on that boxing fans will happily pay a lesser premium to watch. DAZN doesn't believe that boxing's system works, so they aimed to scoop up enough star talent to eventually have folks simply be done with the system (having multiple sports muddles the picture but there's not much difference, to me anyway, between what DAZN is trying to do in the US and what BoxNation did in the UK). Haymon Sports/PBC have a different aim; expose the sport to the public, let folks get caught up in the stories of these fighters. Folks get familiar with the fighters, fighters turn to attractions, attractions turn to stars, and stars turn to superstars, rebuilding the PPV track that's been vacant since Floyd finally hung them up and Canelo cashed out. Bet on whatever path you think is most viable for the future, I've said what I said

... by "free" you mean "promotional free agent"?... it's a sophism, though... What else are we supposed to be judging this on then? Spence isn't with a network or promoter. Wilder isn't with a network or promoter. ... I get that being linked with Haymon Sports is a thing, but lets not act like it has the same handcuffs attached to it as being signed to a network or promoter cuz it doesn't appear to be the case. Everything preventing a Haymon Sports athlete from working with a non-Haymon Sports promoter or network is an in theory thing more then a proven thing. I KNOW DAZN isn't likely to let Joshua go fight on Showtime without a matching rights battle or at least an agreement of some sort with Joshua &/or Matchroom. I KNOW Bob isn't going to let Bud fight on Fox PPV unless Spence vs Bud is a lock to do 1.5M buys minimum. I don't know that Haymon Sports won't let DAZN work with Wilder for a fight or a few fights. I don't know that Haymon Sports won't let ESPN/Bob work with Spence. In fact I'll even say that Al Haymon must either not be running Haymon Sports or he's a piece of sh^t manager if he's not allowing fighters to explore their possible best money interests & it goes against the whole job description of being a manager. ... I really don't have anything to say against Al Haymon (or his boxing company)!!!... :)

That's not what I said at all. ESPN just paid up something like $400m+ per year to lock up the whole slate of UFC events (ESPN+, ESPN, and UFCPPV through ESPN+); plus the shoulder programming and library push. If you honestly think that ESPN is going to commit that much to the UFC and then keep Top Rank around as they continue to not deliver, that's on you. And, simply put, DAZN doesn't have the depth to do much of anything right now and who knows when that'll change. Prograis-Taylor, Canelo-Andrade (I like sealing divisions; sue me), and I guess Joshua-Usyk. Throw Golovkin in there if you want to, the premium cable level main events are lacking, nevermind fights that would be PPV. OK, in the short term you are right... ... but as I said: my question was more about the fast changing broadcast environment... ... now, there is more money than ever in pro boxing -- even if the return of investment is quite low... ... in my opinion, in the mid term, the boxing business would have to secure a viable symbiosis between the "TV broadcast" and the "online" -- because the big advertising money are still on TV... well...

Keyword is IF. IF my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle. Right now Wilder is free. Spence is free. Joshua has outs. And Bud would be the hardest guy to bend into a big fight. Thats the reality today. ... by "free" you mean "promotional free agent"?... it's a sophism, though...

I see your point here: "they're all shit, except the one I love"... (my question "who wins?" wasn't addressed to the fan boys of a certain platform... it was more about the fast changing broadcast environment, tbh...) That's not what I said at all. ESPN just paid up something like $400m+ per year to lock up the whole slate of UFC events (ESPN+, ESPN, and UFCPPV through ESPN+); plus the shoulder programming and library push. If you honestly think that ESPN is going to commit that much to the UFC and then keep Top Rank around as they continue to not deliver, that's on you. And, simply put, DAZN doesn't have the depth to do much of anything right now and who knows when that'll change. Prograis-Taylor, Canelo-Andrade (I like sealing divisions; sue me), and I guess Joshua-Usyk. Throw Golovkin in there if you want to, the premium cable level main events are lacking, nevermind fights that would be PPV.

Joshua isn't a DAZN asset quite yet. He's on a fight by fight matching deal. If DAZN offers him a long term Canelo type deal at some point that could & likely would complicate things. Wilder isn't a Showtime asset. He's a Haymon Sports asset who admittedly may have some contract with Showtime that keeps Wilder on Showtime but publicly Team Wilder has denied that & claimed free agency. Based on Haymon guys fighting all over at various times I have no reason to doubt Team Wilder. ... yes: "Finkel also said that if the Showtime deal is finalized it wouldn't prevent a Joshua fight or Fury rematch on other platforms. (ESPN, Mar 19)

I love the notion that espn has an advantage with "Tv channels and a big name people know" by Robbie barrett....lol...this is the same guy that will turn around and tell you cable network is dying is he not aware of the downsizing espn had to do in the last couple of years...tons of people laid off from office workers to on air personalities....lol...it got so bad they had to charge for stuff that used to come regular with your subscription to cable but I guess cbs and fox aren't known channels/brands right? lol

Top Rank gets pushed off of/relegated by ESPN's full throated committment to MMA/UFC (where they've already put tenfold the money that Top Rank ended up with). DAZN still doesn't have the depth of quality matchups to convince any critical mass of people to sign up for the service at $100. PBC has the money, depth of talent, and basic broadcast reach to be the leading force, right now, for basically the next decade. 2008, 2012, 2016, and a jump on the 2020 cycle (Lorenzo Simpson and Joey Spencer to start with).

No they aren't. If its a one time thing people will complain like they complain 80% of the time when things are going good already. But we are going down a whole other rabbit hole now. You asked how does Showtime & DAZN do a joint event & I gave you two examples. Probably are more examples that more thoughtful or smarter cats here could come up with. My point is its doable its just how you go about doing it. But again I don't see it being a joint deal anyway. DAZN will sign Wilder for a fight or several fights or Joshua will get an opt out of his DAZN situation for a fight to go to PPV. ... In fact: your solution is that Showtime and/or DAZN should just give up their top "assets" (Wilder, AJ) only in order to give us the fight we want... yes, for sure... :)

Crawford vs Spence can be made as a joint ESPN-Showtime PPV... While Joshua vs Wilder can't... I don't think either of those fights will be joint PPVs in the first place so I don't see that as much of a problem with making those fights. I see what you mean... You rather think that the "promoting platforms" should cover all the required costs, only in order to make those fights done for us, the fans of boxing... don't you forget that those "promoting platforms" are engaged in a wild competition for supremacy?...

They just altered their pricing cuz of the churn rate with Canelo. Why couldn't they alter things again for a big HW fight? Are you kidding me?... the moment DAZN makes "one fight payment at $70-100" they are out of business for good...

Make DAZN cost the same as the PPV the month of the fight for new subs. Or just make it a stand alone special DAZN product at the same price of the PPV. I doubt thats the way it'll go anyway just cuz historically its only happened twice that I'm aware of but there is ALWAYS a way to come up with some middle ground/workaround. The DAZN product addresses many sports, as you know... opening new subscription "sub-categories" within the service???... Well, meh... :)