Why Are People So Opposed to PPVs?

[elfag]

streams are pretty reliable these days, that is all i care about.

i did like when they used to do the fights in the theaters. seen like 2 or 3 of floyds fights at the theater, that was pretty cool

[Toffee]

That also makes you think - if they can’t generate the £££ off they believe a fight is worth from standard advertising, or a dedicated boxing subscription (like DAZN in the UK) or increasingly already steep PPV prices - maybe it’s the promoters and fighters overvaluing themselves?

Boxing is broken in so many ways.

Maybe.

But as much as I love boxing, I'm uncomfortable with what I'm actually paying for.

Anything that means fighters get paid less and therefore fight more often isn't something I can ethically bring myself to support.

And promoters are already following a 'build them up to getting the big payday in career or cash out fights' model. I'd rather see them paid more so that we don't have to wait. Fight the top fights in prime, in a sport with as many eyes as possible on it, and retire before you damage yourself too much would be fine by me.

[BustedKnuckles]

I didnt answer your four or so questions in your post, but it seems you believe PPV is just part of life.

Yeah, "paragraphs" exist for a reason. Who the heck wants to read 20 lines without a break?

Anyway, I'm a penny pincher. I'll pay for boxing access (DAZN & ESPN+) but I'm not so invested in a fight that I'm gonna toss $80 or even $50 on it. I'll catch YT highlights if they come out.

[billeau2]

So anytime a fight gets announced on PPV, instantly boxing fans come in and complain. But why? PPVs have been going on for decades and there is a reason why they have been taking place. I can see the argument of the prices being too expensive, but there are other ways to watch the fights if you cannot afford to pay for them or just don't want to pay for them. The PPV market will dictate which fighters stay on PPV and those that have to go back to network TV. Just a few days ago it came out that DAZN was possibly going to start putting on PPVs in the UK and fans started to completely flip out. Sure I get that it goes completely against what Hearn initially said but that man does a million interviews a day and often times makes a fool of himself. Nothing new there....However, it was a pipedream to not think eventually PPVs would be needed for DAZN. ESPN is putting on their first non-Fury PPV in a few years but do you think they did not want to put on PPVs during that time? No, they just did not have any fight they could put on PPV. Now they will put Crawford/Porter on PPV and if Lopez/Lomachenko II gets made next year, guess what? That's heading to PPV as well. And then we know PBC puts on one damn near every month. But you saw them put Charlo's on PPV and because the card did not do good numbers, they returned to SHO. Andy Ruiz did similar numbers and guess what? Unless he is fighting a big name, he's likely right back on FOX or SHO himself. Even Canelo with DAZN, they started allowing people to purchase it on PPV. You cannot sustain a good business just relying on subscribers when boxing is your main sport. PPVs have been prevalent in the past, present and will be in the future as well. If you don't like it, then just don't purchase it and wait to watch the fight the following week or find a stream.

Lets say we are roomates, and I am a nice looking guy... not a real misfit or so... and I complain constantly that I never get any girls. You tell me "Hey bub... you never go out! you are home constantly, what do you expect?"

The powers that be bemoan that there is no fan base for boxing... Nobody gets to know the fighters anymore... So here is how these big networks have tackled the problems: having promoters like Satanic Bob, who have fighters fight less, for more money and past prime.... Cutting down, not allowing commercial establishments to carry the fights... Not even that long ago you could catch fights in sports bar and Mexican places in the Mission (here in San Francisco).

So like me as the dolt of a roomate... NO WONDER no one follows the sport!! Who has the kind of money it takes to watch fights regularly? Boxing used to be the way an ethnic group signified it had become part of the American Dream... Everyone caught the fights on radio... and then on TV.

If boxing is ever to come back people have to have access to the fights. The greedy promoters, Networks and other sycophants can't have it both ways...

Look... I consider myself a fan of the sport... and I catch free streams! I can afford it and there is no way I am paying to see the kind of crap cards and money these networks want these days!

[snowdog]

Well for me personally it's because when I was younger these fights used to be on terrestrial TV and free to watch. All you needed back then was a TV licence or run the risk of getting caught without one.

Football was the same. We had matches on BBC 1 and ITV, no need to pay a fortune to Sky or another TV service every month, it was free to watch.

I don't pay to watch TV as a matter of principle, I watch streams illegally instead. I wouldn't mind paying for a monthly subscription if Sky or any other company would let me watch any match I want no matter what time or day it was on. But they don't. So they can all go and **** themselves lol

[billeau2]

That's a different argument, I'm just talking about PPVs in general. Like you have a choice not to purchase them and eventually the fighters that can't sell get off PPV.

WHO in your estimation is "Worth it" to pay almost 100 bucks to watch? What fighter has clawed his way up, fighting the best, at prime, and now is facing a similar fighter for some undisputed title that makes the fighter an instant hero? last fighter that I can remember doing so is Lewis. Lewis fought guys the public wanted... even when it meant not fighting the ****** mandatory

EDIT: Im using the heavyweight division as an example. Some of Ward's fights, Canelo, etc might be an exception to this rule.

Klitsko fought mandatories who were IMO tomatoe cans most of the time. Certainly not worth a lot of money. For example, lewis deciding to fight Grant instead of Ruiz.. Grant was considered dangerous while Ruiz... well need I say more?

[billeau2]

Well for me personally it's because when I was younger these fights used to be on terrestrial TV and free to watch. All you needed back then was a TV licence or run the risk of getting caught without one.

Football was the same. We had matches on BBC 1 and ITV, no need to pay a fortune to Sky or another TV service every month, it was free to watch.

I don't pay to watch TV as a matter of principle, I watch streams illegally instead. I wouldn't mind paying for a monthly subscription if Sky or any other company would let me watch any match I want no matter what time or day it was on. But they don't. So they can all go and **** themselves lol

Dude... they are shooting these waves all around us... If we happen to catch them on a reciever, well... too bad! lol. I agree.

[billeau2]

streams are pretty reliable these days, that is all i care about.

i did like when they used to do the fights in the theaters. seen like 2 or 3 of floyds fights at the theater, that was pretty cool

How about when Sports Bars were allowed to show them? I mean let them pay something reasonable to the network and show the fights. Some of my best memories are going to Mexican Bars, seeing fights like Quartey and De La Hoya, and to sports bars to see Mike Tyson against Buster Douglas.

[KingOfGlory]

For the same reason they don't pay for music, movies, television, etc. It's easy to find for free and rarely will they ever face consequences for it.

They'll justify it 100 different ways. The price is too high. They need to offer a digital option. The product isn't worth paying for (but is worth stealing apparently).

Even if it was the greatest card of all time, cost $1, and was available on every conceivable platform the same people would still steal it all the same.

[KTFOKING]

WHO in your estimation is "Worth it" to pay almost 100 bucks to watch? What fighter has clawed his way up, fighting the best, at prime, and now is facing a similar fighter for some undisputed title that makes the fighter an instant hero? last fighter that I can remember doing so is Lewis. Lewis fought guys the public wanted... even when it meant not fighting the ****** mandatory

EDIT: Im using the heavyweight division as an example. Some of Ward's fights, Canelo, etc might be an exception to this rule.

Klitsko fought mandatories who were IMO tomatoe cans most of the time. Certainly not worth a lot of money. For example, lewis deciding to fight Grant instead of Ruiz.. Grant was considered dangerous while Ruiz... well need I say more?

Who is worth it? I mean I pay for almost all the PPVs, even Floyd vs Paul and Tyson vs RJJ.

Certain fights are not happening unless it takes place on PPV and I'm fine with that. These guys partake in a brutal sport so they should be able to earn as much as possible. And the consumer should be able to determine which fights they want to pay for and which fights they don't want to pay for.