Crazy, random stat for you: In 1975 Nevada hosted 62 pro boxing events. In 1985 Nevada hosted 45 pro boxing events. In 1995 Nevada hosted 54 pro boxing events. In 2005 Nevada hosted 41 pro boxing events. In 2015 Nevada hosted 26 pro boxing events. In 2023 Nevada hosted 13 pro boxing events.
New York state hosted 49 pro boxing events in 2015. In 2023 they hosted 16. Kind of a quiet story in boxing that, my guess is, few are noticing. On the positive side, there has never been a time that I can recall where boxing events are at least streaming in some form or fashion. The reduction on regular television, though, is the lowest that I’ve ever seen it.
Some crazy things that stick out: There are roughly 24,000 active male pro boxers on the planet currently. Several decades ago there were more than that just in the United States. When I was a kid there were more like 10,000 in the U.S. Now there are around 3,300 (average of 66 per state). There are not even close to 200 active male pro boxers in Canada. That’s insane to me.
The WASAX Ivy fund by Waddell and Reed shows it (Media Group Holdings series “H”) in the most recently available data but that was, admittedly, back in 2017. If the rumor is that they recently sold it will likely have to wait until an updated summary is released for that WASAX fund. Will probably be this summer.
I keep hearing that stated (that Fox is paying about half what they were paying UFC) but that’s not technically true when you really look at it. UFC deal averaged around $120 per year over the life of that 7 year deal. PBC’s deal with Fox is supposedly $50 million per year. But UFC provided close to 40 live events and/or prelims. PBC is offering 21, I think. So on a per event basis PBC is a little more affordable than UFC, but not much.
Actually DAZN has 350K $99.99 subscribers and 420k random average $20 month hits.
DAZN prefers to make the monthly random buys based on fights.
Canelo vs Jacobs is expected to make $30million for the month of May.
How do you know this?
Whites boxing organization won't be tied to actual current sanctioned bodies it's a separate entity so it wouldn't be relevant if they lost in high risk fights in his promotion it wouldn't go on their pro record .
The fighter would be able make more then what a fighter that actually does get paid peanuts unless that are popular in boxingb, it won't be the case here if they are guaranteed a set amount and is ideal to the boxing business model of years of fighting before making notable amounts.
How would it not go on their “pro record”? If it’s sanctioned by a state athletic commission as a boxing match it goes on their pro record.
They’re not trying to “change boxing” or takeover or even be one of the dominant players in the space, regardless of what DW says. Watch what they do, instead. They’re merely going to, over time, build into a player in that industry. They don’t need to make money on that particular venture (which is good because, like most boxing promoters, they won’t). Their ROI will come in the form of their ability to bundle the content in several years as part of their next domestic and international broadcast deals. They’re merely expanding out and diversifying.
They’re (Endeavor, not UFC) going to establish at least somewhat of a presence in the sport of boxing. Whether that’s buying into an existing entity or not is the only question. They’re talking with Haymon and Hearn over the next couple of months, maybe others. Those are the two they’re most likely to end up associated with. My guess is late 2018 is when they want to begin. They won’t be the industry leader in boxing, nor are they seeking to be, I’d guess. They will be a factor, though, and will provide capital and help improve television deals for whomever they partner with.
Then why is the world series of boxing separate to ones pro record ? I'll tell you why it has different rules of 5 rnds and minor changes it is not in alighn to the pro ciruit it is a fight league really.
Those are amateur boxers currently also competing in AIBA tournaments, etc... Maybe I misunderstood you. Are you predicting that Dana is going to be featuring boxers that haven’t turned pro? That could be.
They’re not trying to “change boxing” or takeover or even be one of the dominant players in the space, regardless of what DW says. Watch what they do, instead. They’re merely going to, over time, build into a player in that industry. They don’t need to make money on that particular venture (which is good because, like most boxing promoters, they won’t). Their ROI will come in the form of their ability to bundle the content in several years as part of their next domestic and international broadcast deals. They’re merely expanding out and diversifying.
As long as this doesn't impact ESPN's commitment to boxing I'm fine with it. But if this means less boxing on ESPN in favor of UFC in the coming future that sucks. Have to see how this all plays out Bob Arum just got the ESPN deal is UFC taking away from his dates?
No. Top Rank deal is for broadcasting, streaming and content library, ancillary programming, etc.... UFC deal doesn't include broadcasting on cable (only streaming on ESPN+). Top Rank shows on ESPN won't be cut into by this deal at all.
Killa, a few questions for you:
- Do you know what the Eddie Hearn matchup is on Thursday, by chance?
- Any idea what the deal with PBC is? Right now they exist almost exclusively on Showtime. Is that their long-term plan or are they still seeking other television deals?