Comments Thread For: Spence: We Give 3 Percent To These [Sanctioning] Organizations; What Are They Doing With It?

[sege64]

Figures a muppet like Spence thinks belts are worthless, otherwise he'd have been wearing his when he got pissed and totaled his Ferrari and thankfully didn't kill anyone. How is he supposed to afford another Ferrari when he has to pay 3% to sanctioning bodies! Poor guy.

[sicko]

the Concept of Paying a Belt Organization 3% so that you can "Be Their Champion" is just beyond ridiculous and absolutely no other sport does this, you even have to pay Fees "Allegedly" to climb up their Rankings to get a Title shot and once you stop paying the fee they will remove you from their Rankings all together

the equivalent of making NBA or NFL Players pay for their Championship or Super Bowl Rings...WTF?!

[ELPacman]

Spence better be careful. He talk too loud about this stuff, they just might put a hit out on him, lol.

[trippleupper]

It would be better if all of the title holders went on strike about the 3%. I know Errol was trying to do the right thing, his timing just wasn’t the best. At least he said something! Breaking the ice is a start, hell it may start a new trend!

This only goes halfway.

I'm looking forward to the day when the organizations pay the fighters 3% for them to fight for their titles.

[trippleupper]

they create rankings, belts, pay for representative's expenses to sit at every sanctioned fight. it's not like they don't do anything. they probably waste some money but some expenses are justified.

spence, of all people, should thank them for existing in this form. imagine if spence fought 60 years ago. there was no mandatory challenger (enforced) then. jose napoles, an actual all time great, had to wait 5 years for a title shot despite being ranked number 1. that's why they invented mandatories and enforce them in every division. what recent champion would fight spence if they weren't forced by the bodies? nobody. he would be just a dangerous contender with no ppvs, no sold out arenas, no stadium fights, no p4p ranking, no legacy. would that be better? absolutely not.

the problem is promoters are connected with sanctioning bodies and nobody in the world wants to lose/relinquish their position and status. fighters should have their own organization (union/sindicate) and representatives. hold a meeting with all existing bodies. tell them they are not needed anymore. vacate every belt and announce no more sanctioning fees will be paid. some fighters wouldn't want to do that. lower their purse like they are contender no.5 and not a champion. this is very important because the same boxer gets more money with a belt than without it (it's usually in their contract). networks shouldn't announce and mention beltholders and former beltholder or "title" challengers (pbc did it with wbo for a couple of years). completely ignore them. when existing bodies get aforementioned treatment they would all fold. without money and prestige there would be no reason for them to exist. then create a new body with rankings (they can use tbrb, ring or consult/employ their members) and one belt per division with ibf's rules basically. eliminators must be fought for no. 1 and 2 positions and every champion must fight a mandatory once a year. voluntary defense must be against top10 opponent. we would have current unification level fights every year in every division! contenders would have to beat 2-3 top10 contenders to get a mandatory title shot. now some of them can have 0-1 good wins and wait for a vacant belt.

but this is just a dream . it would never happen.

Could another way be for the networks to bypass the alphabets and simply create their own titles?

Showtime World Champion
ESPN World Champion

unifications could be held on multiple networks...

or a new streaming platform surfaces that outbids all the other networks for bouts

[NC Uppercut]

Could another way be for the networks to bypass the alphabets and simply create their own titles?

Showtime World Champion
ESPN World Champion

unifications could be held on multiple networks...

or a new streaming platform surfaces that outbids all the other networks for bouts

I think is actually a PBC future. That’s what I thought, the PBC belt.

[trippleupper]

I think is actually a PBC future. That’s what I thought, the PBC belt.

There you go:

no more WBC --> PBC
no more WBA --> DAZN
no more WBO --> ESPN
no more IBF ---->> SKY

[Eddegear]

If I was an undisputed champion, I would give all the belts back to the alphabet money grabbers except for the Ring Magazine belt. I would defend that title only. No sanction fees and a extra 12% in my pocket.

[Century Tuna]

———-
Perhaps to you. Floyd asked the same question and refused to pay for some belts. Spence was very particular by pointing out that guys like Canelo paying 3% on a $50 million purse. That’s $1.5 million plus whatever amount the other guy is getting if it’s a unification.
Sanctioning bodies do not negotiate for fighters so why should they get 3% of Floyd’s $200 million payday? That’s $6 million.
In return we get anuses like Moretti and the other corrupt judges.

To begin with, boxing sanctioning bodies do not choose the judges for specific bouts. Local athletic commissions or relevant governing bodies in the jurisdiction where the fight takes place are responsible for selecting judges. These fees are paid to sanctioning bodies by fighters who compete for world titles. Some people believe that these fees are unfair, as they take money away from the fighters. Others argue that the fees are necessary to ensure that the sanctioning bodies can operate and to promote boxing. The question of whether or not sanctioning fees are justified is a complex one. There are valid arguments on both sides of the issue. What are your thoughts on boxing sanctioning fees? Should they be taken out? If they are eliminated, what alternative methods could boxing sanctioning bodies use to cover administrative costs and the production of championship belts?

[Oregonian]

To begin with, boxing sanctioning bodies do not choose the judges for specific bouts. Local athletic commissions or relevant governing bodies in the jurisdiction where the fight takes place are responsible for selecting judges. These fees are paid to sanctioning bodies by fighters who compete for world titles. Some people believe that these fees are unfair, as they take money away from the fighters. Others argue that the fees are necessary to ensure that the sanctioning bodies can operate and to promote boxing. The question of whether or not sanctioning fees are justified is a complex one. There are valid arguments on both sides of the issue. What are your thoughts on boxing sanctioning fees? Should they be taken out? If they are eliminated, what alternative methods could boxing sanctioning bodies use to cover administrative costs and the production of championship belts?

————-
I don’t think they should be taken out. Everything you say is true. 3% of a $200K paycheck is reasonable as it’s only $6k BUT 3% of an 8 or 9 figure pay is a little too much.
There should be a cap after a certain amount is all I’m saying.