DAZN should fire Eddie Hearn.

[IronDanHamza]

Say what you want about Hearn, but he always delivers what he promises.

He brashly stormed the US market and pretentiously claimed he was bringing all the US stars to DAZN. Named dropped the likes of Deontay Wilder, Errol Spence, Adrien Broner, The Charlo’s, Danny Garcia, etc

He couldn’t land any of those but he did end up signing the star studded line up of Tevin Farmer, Danny Roman and Jessie Vargas.

So it’s safe to say Eddie Hearn delivering is huge a understatement.

[brettWall]

Hearn is providing boxing content for DAZN. Won't make any sense for DAZN to severe ties with their major provider. Except that I don't know what happened here with the Joshua/Usyk fight ending up going to Sky.

[Toffee]

So you’re saying Hearn didn’t want DAZN to acquire rights for Usyk-AJ 2?

That’s complete nonsense.

Sky simply outbid them. Hearn f***ed up and DAZN have lost out on a massive chunk of revenue on a fight their employee is promoting. You guys need to stop shamelessly defending Hearn and just accept when he makes a mistake. It was exactly the same when he lost out on Fury-Whyte, you all said he he “didn’t want” to win that purse bid. It’s sheer delusion.

Whenever anyone starts a post with "So you're saying..." it's always followed by rubbish. I'm saying what I'm saying - there's no need for you to incorrectly interpret it

Of course he would want DAZN to get the rights.
Of course he would want to promote Fury v Whyte.

The delusion is yours though. Bidding isn't a straight win/lose. It's a commercial decision that overrides what you might personally 'want'.

Hearn hasn't effed up on the rematch. He took a big site fee from the Saudis that got the fight made and the fighters (and promoters) paid. He did that in an environment where there was no contractual tie between Joshua and DAZN.

DAZN could have still got the UK rights, but it simply wasn't worth as much to them as it was to Sky. Sky have the current subscriber base to bid big and still turn a profit.

Similarly with the purse bids for Fury v Whyte. Warren could always bid more and it still make sense. Matchroom winning in that scenario meant losing money.

The alternatives in both cases were for either Matchroom or DAZN to lose money, or for Hearn to somehow convince the fighters to operate in a setup where they earn less.

Tell me the model where the fight is on DAZN and Joshua gets paid more... considering there was no contractual tie between Joshua and DAZN when this fight was made. I'll tell you that the only way that happens is for DAZN to tie Joshua to an exclusive agreement for future fights. They've since done that but you reckon that's a huge mistake too!

Fully expect my reasoned and commercially realistic response to be met with a reply of "Eddie's an idiot and he messed up"

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Whenever anyone starts a post with "So you're saying..." it's always followed by rubbish. I'm saying what I'm saying - there's no need for you to incorrectly interpret it

Of course he would want DAZN to get the rights.
Of course he would want to promote Fury v Whyte.

The delusion is yours though. Bidding isn't a straight win/lose. It's a commercial decision that overrides what you might personally 'want'.

Hearn hasn't effed up on the rematch. He took a big site fee from the Saudis that got the fight made and the fighters (and promoters) paid. He did that in an environment where there was no contractual tie between Joshua and DAZN.

DAZN could have still got the UK rights, but it simply wasn't worth as much to them as it was to Sky. Sky have the current subscriber base to bid big and still turn a profit.

Similarly with the purse bids for Fury v Whyte. Warren could always bid more and it still make sense. Matchroom winning in that scenario meant losing money.

The alternatives in both cases were for either Matchroom or DAZN to lose money, or for Hearn to somehow convince the fighters to operate in a setup where they earn less.

Tell me the model where the fight is on DAZN and Joshua gets paid more... considering there was no contractual tie between Joshua and DAZN when this fight was made. I'll tell you that the only way that happens is for DAZN to tie Joshua to an exclusive agreement for future fights. They've since done that but you reckon that's a huge mistake too!

Fully expect my reasoned and commercially realistic response to be met with a reply of "Eddie's an idiot and he messed up"

Hearn is supposed to provide quality content for DAZN. He had the rights to Usyk-AJ 2. He sold them to the Saudi’s. He then failed to acquire them for DAZN. He took a gamble and f***ed up. Get over it.

Literally everybody sees it apart from you Matchroom fanboys.

[Toffee]

Hearn is supposed to provide quality content for DAZN. He had the rights to Usyk-AJ 2. He sold them to the Saudi’s. He then failed to acquire them for DAZN. He took a gamble and f***ed up. Get over it.

Literally everybody sees it apart from you Matchroom fanboys.

You're still not getting it. AJ was specifically excluded from the Matchroom/DAZN deal. It was never Hearn's job to deliver AJ fights to DAZN. That's very common knowledge to the point that I'm not sure event someone as belligerent as you could dispute it.

DAZN hadn't paid AJ to get that kind of exclusivity, so guess what? They have to make offers on his fights like everyone else since his Sky deal ended. Why would they get exclusivity or even priority without paying for the privilege?

Hearn's job was to make the fight and get the highest payment possible for his fighter. He made the fight with the highest bidder; the Saudis (at least as far as we know, but no real reason to doubt they were the best offer).

DAZN had the opportunity to bid for the UK rights. They got outbid. I doubt they were even in the ballpark.

I've been a bit generous to you previously and said I can understand why you're struggling with the complexity of the situation. But, let's be honest, it's not that fking complicated!

Again, if you were the head of Matchroom, tell me what deal you would have made.

[KingGilgamesh]

You're still not getting it. AJ was specifically excluded from the Matchroom/DAZN deal. It was never Hearn's job to deliver AJ fights to DAZN. That's very common knowledge to the point that I'm not sure event someone as belligerent as you could dispute it.

DAZN hadn't paid AJ to get that kind of exclusivity, so guess what? They have to make offers on his fights like everyone else since his Sky deal ended. Why would they get exclusivity or even priority without paying for the privilege?

Hearn's job was to make the fight and get the highest payment possible for his fighter. He made the fight with the highest bidder; the Saudis (at least as far as we know, but no real reason to doubt they were the best offer).

DAZN had the opportunity to bid for the UK rights. They got outbid. I doubt they were even in the ballpark.

I've been a bit generous to you previously and said I can understand why you're struggling with the complexity of the situation. But, let's be honest, it's not that fking complicated!

Again, if you were the head of Matchroom, tell me what deal you would have made.

Then you're arguing his point. Hearn isn't doing a good enough job securing good fights for DAZN.

Either way I don't really care. I'm almost certain DAZNs deal with Joshua is filled with a bunch of caveats that make reaching the figure touted as nigh impossible. I've already seen this happen twice, once with Wilder (and their laughable multifight deal for him to fight Joshua) and with Canelo (who sued DAZN to be released). I don't think any of these contracts are worth the paper they're written on.

Hearn has never been a particularly great promoter, but its not like DAZN is a particularly good platform either. I'm seeing more and more fighters leave and with Boxxers rise, it seems like Hearn will end up probably frozen out of major play in the UK and relegated to another player a la Warren. Boxing is still massively popular among boomers and gen Xers, so much so that expecting to get eyes on up and comers on a ****ing obscure boxing app seems like utter madness.

In reality is says a lot about the current state of the labour market and British business. Too many beneficiaries of nepotism and not enough educated businessmen. Hearn tried to relicate the UFC model with DAZN in the US but he was going up against Haymon and Arum. Two Harvard educated businessmen with a history promoting some of the biggest fights and artists ever. Even in the UK he's seemingly getting the worst of Warren...but Warren has been in the game for years. He has more experience tha just about anyone on these shores. Hearn by comparison is a glorified telephone salesman. From what ive heard he's never really shown any real success managing any of his father's businesses before boxing. He doesn't show any real expertise in regards to boxing either. Can't seem to decipher a future champion or even talent. Seems like he got a lucky break having Sky's backing when Joshua turned pro and the rest is history.

Boxing works in peaks and downturns and we seem to be in a peak. There's a lot of talent coming through and a lot of en****** wanting to spend their money. In a more competitive landscape we've only come to learn how amateur Hearn actually is. And I'm just talking about heavyweights. There's a guy in my boxing gym who recently signed with Warren. Bricktop may be a shifty bustard but the fact that he was even scouted by Warren shows just how much better Warren and Queensbury is at having their eyes to the ground and building names from grass-roots. That's fundamentally what works in the end.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

You're still not getting it. AJ was specifically excluded from the Matchroom/DAZN deal. It was never Hearn's job to deliver AJ fights to DAZN. That's very common knowledge to the point that I'm not sure event someone as belligerent as you could dispute it.

DAZN hadn't paid AJ to get that kind of exclusivity, so guess what? They have to make offers on his fights like everyone else since his Sky deal ended. Why would they get exclusivity or even priority without paying for the privilege?

Hearn's job was to make the fight and get the highest payment possible for his fighter. He made the fight with the highest bidder; the Saudis (at least as far as we know, but no real reason to doubt they were the best offer).

DAZN had the opportunity to bid for the UK rights. They got outbid. I doubt they were even in the ballpark.

I've been a bit generous to you previously and said I can understand why you're struggling with the complexity of the situation. But, let's be honest, it's not that fking complicated!

Again, if you were the head of Matchroom, tell me what deal you would have made.

Hearn’s job is also to provide content for DAZN specifically for the UK venture and he’s failed to provide the two biggest fights they could possibly acquire for the UK in Fury-Whyte and AJ-Usyk 2. What’s worse about AJ-Usyk 2 is he could have easily secured them the rights but instead sold them to the Saudi’s.

Again, this thread isn’t about Hearn’s performance for Matchroom or AJ, it’s about his performance for DAZN which has been objectively terrible regardless of how you try and spin it.

I don’t get why you guys just can’t accept Hearn has any accountability. It’s so weird man.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Then you're arguing his point. Hearn isn't doing a good enough job securing good fights for DAZN.

Either way I don't really care. I'm almost certain DAZNs deal with Joshua is filled with a bunch of caveats that make reaching the figure touted as nigh impossible. I've already seen this happen twice, once with Wilder (and their laughable multifight deal for him to fight Joshua) and with Canelo (who sued DAZN to be released). I don't think any of these contracts are worth the paper they're written on.

Hearn has never been a particularly great promoter, but its not like DAZN is a particularly good platform either. I'm seeing more and more fighters leave and with Boxxers rise, it seems like Hearn will end up probably frozen out of major play in the UK and relegated to another player a la Warren. Boxing is still massively popular among boomers and gen Xers, so much so that expecting to get eyes on up and comers on a ****ing obscure boxing app seems like utter madness.

In reality is says a lot about the current state of the labour market and British business. Too many beneficiaries of nepotism and not enough educated businessmen. Hearn tried to relicate the UFC model with DAZN in the US but he was going up against Haymon and Arum. Two Harvard educated businessmen with a history promoting some of the biggest fights and artists ever. Even in the UK he's seemingly getting the worst of Warren...but Warren has been in the game for years. He has more experience tha just about anyone on these shores. Hearn by comparison is a glorified telephone salesman. From what ive heard he's never really shown any real success managing any of his father's businesses before boxing. He doesn't show any real expertise in regards to boxing either. Can't seem to decipher a future champion or even talent. Seems like he got a lucky break having Sky's backing when Joshua turned pro and the rest is history.

Boxing works in peaks and downturns and we seem to be in a peak. There's a lot of talent coming through and a lot of en****** wanting to spend their money. In a more competitive landscape we've only come to learn how amateur Hearn actually is. And I'm just talking about heavyweights. There's a guy in my boxing gym who recently signed with Warren. Bricktop may be a shifty bustard but the fact that he was even scouted by Warren shows just how much better Warren and Queensbury is at having their eyes to the ground and building names from grass-roots. That's fundamentally what works in the end.

He was also very lucky in getting the Sky deal to begin with. Back in 2011 after two disastrous PPV’s in Haye-Harrison and Haye-Klitschko (ironically the former was co-promoted by Hearn) Sky decided to completely scale back on boxing as a product. This left Frank Warren in a tough position as he had a massive stable of fighters who’s contracts he needed to fulfil. This forced Warren to leave Sky and launch Boxnation out of his own pocket. This gave Sky a new competitor in the market so they decided to re-invest in boxing. The plan was for Ricky Hatton to be their new lead promoter but he was caught snorting ******* in a News of the World scandal. Sky then moved towards Frank Maloney but he or should I say she was experiencing some well documented personal problems regarding gender. This, ostensibly, only left Matchroom as the only viable option so Barry Hearn got the gig and passed it onto Eddie. Eddie took the ball and ran with it so you have to give him some credit for that but with the Sky model behind him his success was essentially handed to him on a silver platter.

[Toffee]

Hearn’s job is also to provide content for DAZN specifically for the UK venture and he’s failed to provide the two biggest fights they could possibly acquire for the UK in Fury-Whyte and AJ-Usyk 2. What’s worse about AJ-Usyk 2 is he could have easily secured them the rights but instead sold them to the Saudi’s.

Again, this thread isn’t about Hearn’s performance for Matchroom or AJ, it’s about his performance for DAZN which has been objectively terrible regardless of how you try and spin it.

I don’t get why you guys just can’t accept Hearn has any accountability. It’s so weird man.

He literally had no accountability in this, nor the Fury-Whyte fight. It's not about me accepting that he had accountability, it's about you understanding that he didn't.

Fury v Whyte was a mandatory for a Queensberry/Top Rank fighter. Process that for a second - it wasn't his fight! Ultimately it went to a purse bid and Matchroom backed by DAZN offered what they were willing to spend and were outbid by someone willing to spend more. Hearn isn't responsible for delivering fights to DAZN that others promote, nor fights made at purse bid that DAZN doesn't want to pay for!

Hearn also isn't (or at least wasn't) responsible for delivering Joshua fights to DAZN.

Your answer seems to be that, regardless of any deals prior, he should be delivering the Joshua v Usyk rights to DAZN.

Maybe that's why, I'm assuming, you don't run a business. Because you don't give away something for nothing. Networks pay huge money to have exclusivity or priority on big name fighters. DAZN hadn't paid any of that when it came to Joshua. Joshua had a deal with Sky. Then he had no broadcast deal.

Why would he give that away for nothing when so many companies will pay huge for it? You can't possibly think that. It would be extremely naive.

And just a reminder. Hearn is Matchroom, not DAZN. His contract, at the point of this fight being made, was to deliver fights to DAZN, excluding Joshua.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

He literally had no accountability in this, nor the Fury-Whyte fight.

Behave mate…