PPV or yearly subscription, which do you prefer?

[Eff Pandas]

I mean they are basically the same thing as you pay either way. You just can pick & choose better quality with PPV's, but you get more quantity with a subscription. So I suppose its about whats more important to the person, quality or quantity.

[rickJen]

I mean they are basically the same thing as you pay either way. You just can pick & choose better quality with PPV's, but you get more quantity with a subscription. So I suppose its about whats more important to the person, quality or quantity.

PPV doesn't always equate to quality fights doe.

[KTFOKING]

I didn't say it did. BUT it usually equates to better quality than subs. I mean look at ESPN. ESPN gots a sub deal. They got solid fights. BUT when it was time to do Loma vs Teo they made that a PPV despite most of their fights being seen via the sub.

Nah, Lomachenko vs Lopez was on regular ESPN.

But not sure what the point of this thread is. Of course damn near everyone would take the yearly subscription over a PPV.

[Outwest Exp 355]

Depends on who’s fighting. I’ve never gone with DAZN because they don’t have enough fighters that I support. If DAZN had PBC’s roster then I would **** with them.

[Skillz12]

Yearly sub easily

[Eff Pandas]

Nah, Lomachenko vs Lopez was on regular ESPN.

But not sure what the point of this thread is. Of course damn near everyone would take the yearly subscription over a PPV.

LOL oh sh^t my bad. Thanks for the correction.

Idk why I was thinking that was a PPV.

[Ray*]

PPV doesn't always equate to quality fights doe.

I think this is where some Americans have been brainwashed. They immediately thinks PPV = Better quality. That’s how dumb they are. Who isn’t on PPV these days! I mean regular fights are now on PPV.