Why Are People So Opposed to PPVs?

[deathofaclown]

I don’t think people are opposed to it as such. I think people are a against pay-per-view fights when it shouldn’t be, like most of sky sports PPV’s.

As for DAZN, well their whole marketing spiel was that it’s the end of PPV and what not, only to decide they might do a U-turn on it. People should rightly be unhappy. Imagine you paid a Netflix subscription and then they said you had to pay an extra $20 for certain shows or films.

DAZN was meant to be a game changer by offering the best fights for a subscription, that was their ethos and they did a big song and dance about it.

The problem with DAZN doing PPV is they say it would only be for very rare huge fights. Sure it might start that way, but they would start adding lesser fights eventually. Or they will want fighters like Canelo to stay, so will want to offer him a PPV platform and money regardless of who he fights. It’s obvious the direction it will take.

I just think it’s poor from a company that we’re supposed to be changing the game with their model.

but nobody is forced to buy it so it is what it is.

[KTFOKING]

How many fights are worthy of PPVs?

No one has a problem spending money when it will serve as an event. As in everyone wants to see it so fight parties and trips to the pub are arranged.

How many fights are worthy of PPVs? Doesn't the consumer determine that themselves? What one may deem PPV worthy, the other may not.

[ShoulderRoll]

You DON'T have to pay for them! And when you don't and the PPV tanks? Then that fighter will be moved away from PPV.

But PPVs did not just start now. At one point on HBO/SHO, there were PPVs literally every single month. Always been like that.

You're right, we don't have to pay for them.

Which is why people are vocal about reminding our fellow fans of that. The more of us that don't pay for a mediocre product the better. That way they tank hard and get moved away from PPV as you said.

Hopefully to be replaced with what we want: only top fights on PPV, or reduced pricing, plus good undercards.

[MeanestNiceGuy]

Boxing is like the Democratic Party...they'll act as though we're "all in this together" and promise you the opposite of what seems to be an issue. What ends up happening is, they''' slowly but surely subject you to that of which you were told was a threat.

The same happened during the Pandemic...all you heard from handlers was, "PPV isn't feasible right now!" and blah blah blah, but we got RIGHT back to the old model....scheduling 2 PPVs per month or 1 PPV every frickin month with guys they KNOW can't sell ****.

They rolled PPVs back in slowly and now look at us...$80 fights every two weeks. Lol

Didn't streaming services sell the dream of "free" PPVs if you're willing to pay the monthly subscription and now look. Look at ESPN+. Look at DAZN. All of these promises. Lol

[KTFOKING]

I don’t think people are opposed to it as such. I think people are a against pay-per-view fights when it shouldn’t be, like most of sky sports PPV’s.

As for DAZN, well their whole marketing spiel was that it’s the end of PPV and what not, only to decide they might do a U-turn on it. People should rightly be unhappy. Imagine you paid a Netflix subscription and then they said you had to pay an extra $20 for certain shows or films.

DAZN was meant to be a game changer by offering the best fights for a subscription, that was their ethos and they did a big song and dance about it.

The problem with DAZN doing PPV is they say it would only be for very rare huge fights. Sure it might start that way, but they would start adding lesser fights eventually. Or they will want fighters like Canelo to stay, so will want to offer him a PPV platform and money regardless of who he fights. It’s obvious the direction it will take.

I just think it’s poor from a company that we’re supposed to be changing the game with their model.

but nobody is forced to buy it so it is what it is.

No problem with killing them for their early marketing ploy of "PPV is dead." But let's be real, PPV will NEVER be dead unless boxing gets invested in to the extent of other sports leagues. Joshua in particular was NEVER not going to be fighting on PPV. If so, then that would be a huge disservice to him as he generates so much money on PPV.

Eventually these companies want to make money off the sport they invest in. DAZN could not just continue relying on subscribers to make money, especially for a niche sport like boxing.

[KTFOKING]

You're right, we don't have to pay for them.

Which is why people are vocal about reminding our fellow fans to oppose PPV. The more of us that don't pay for a mediocre product the better. That way they tank hard and get moved away from PPV as you said.

Hopefully to be replaced with what we want: only top fights on PPV, or reduced pricing, plus good undercards.

Absolutely, once a fighter can no longer sell, then they will be taken off of PPV.

That is the right of every person but no one should lose their mind when fights go on PPV.

[anonymous2.0]

I just remember playing soccer, tennis, and swimming growing up and when I watched the World Cup, UEFA, Premier League, Olympics, or any of the major tennis tournaments I never had to pay anything additional so it kinda rustles my jimmies that boxing puts fights behind paywalls.

I also remember doing the math sometime in 2014 or 2015 and found that if I were to get all the PPVs in that year I was spending 700+ dollars or something like that.

[CornerCutman]

I don't mind PPV for a big event where I can get a bunch of friends to come over, chip in 5-10 bucks, and have a good time. The problem is that the bar for PPV is lower than the bar for casuals. My friends don't care about Crawford-Porter, for example - but I do. I'll watch fights every weekend, but they won't. This is important to me also - if I "sell" friends on coming over for a fight where they know nothing about the boxers nor have any excitement for it, there's this kind of pressure for the fight and the undercard to be entertaining. I don't want to play promoter, I want to sit back with a cold beer and watch the fights.

Also, since I'm a student I can't afford buying a PPV on my own more than a couple of times a year, even with my job and whatnot. I make enough to cover tuition and living expenses, so when choosing between investing in myself or in boxing I'm faced with a pretty clear choice.

[buddyr]

ppvs should be for TOP FIGHTS!!!! Tyson at his height in popularity during the late 80s was still fighting top contenders on HBO. Tyson fresh out of prison fought his 2nd fight on Fox television. 1 of the 8 champions in a division fighting a guy they found on the street is not worthy of a ppv. Especially considering the undercards are trash to go along with the mismatch main event. I don't have a problem with Wilder vs Fury being ppv. Or even plant vs Canelo, but Canelo should not be on ppv just because he fights twice a year if it's not against a top contender. F'k that. Lopez vs kambosos shouldn't have been on ppv either

[Shadoww702]

Because they are poor. And I hate poor ppl. Especially poor ppl who always complain