Nate Campbell: "Don King Can Kiss My Ass, F*** Him"

[rskumm21]

If you guided his decision in the DKP signing you ****ed him and made a terrible decision. Diaz fight or no Diaz fight it was ******. Campbell's name was on the rise w/o Don King. Sure you wouldn't have gotten the Diaz fight but fighting a couple of real fighters with real names for ESPN or ShoBox type money would have made Campbell in demand by the boxing public assuming he won. At that point Arum, GBP, HBO, Shaw, DiBella, etc... would have had no choice but give Campbell a shot against their guy. You lacked the patience to make a sound business decsion and in turned ****ed Nate into signing a deal with the devil.

Let me guess you could have done him better right???

[rskumm21]

Nate was forced to sign with Don King if he wanted to get any fights.

This is the same reason why Pacquiao pays Arum 27% of his purse. He enjoys getting royally screwed by Arum, because he knows if it wasn't for Arum he would not be getting weight drained opponents or C level "vacant belt" championship fights on PPV.

Anybody who knows the game knows that this has been happening forever. It was even worse when King ran the show alone.

[DC Fight Fan]

Let me guess you could have done him better right???

Yeah, I believe I could have. Look everyone knows that King does not have TV dates, does not fund his own PPV's anymore and puts on a very limited number of shows. Nate won the titles in March of 2008. He was to defend against Guzman and Guzman did not make weight, he got stripped of the belts for not making weight against Funeka and he was an opponent against Bradley on a GSP card. King only signed this guy to protect himself in case Diaz lost. It worked. Any adviser or manager who couldn't see that is either blind or whoring his fighter out. Belts are not as important as long term money. Short term money only makes "advisers" rich.

[DC Fight Fan]

Anybody who knows the game knows that this has been happening forever. It was even worse when King ran the show alone.

That's BS. He wasn't forced to sign with King to get fights. He fought more w/o King. Wise up! Pac signed with Arum to get rich. He got rich! Pac came out of relative obscurity until Arum built him back and made him a rich man. Arum made ODLH and Mayweather rich men as well.

[rskumm21]

Yeah, I believe I could have. Look everyone knows that King does not have TV dates, does not fund his own PPV's anymore and puts on a very limited number of shows. Nate won the titles in March of 2008. He was to defend against Guzman and Guzman did not make weight, he got stripped of the belts for not making weight against Funeka and he was an opponent against Bradley on a GSP card. King only signed this guy to protect himself in case Diaz lost. It worked. Any adviser or manager who couldn't see that is either blind or whoring his fighter out. Belts are not as important as long term money. Short term money only makes "advisers" rich.

But that's where you're wrong. It did work in the long term. They may be getting screwed for the time being, but Nate got a big payday vs Diaz, major exposure that money can't buy, a big fight with Bradley, and now he's a name that plenty of young fighters would love to go up against to have him on their resume thinking they could win. None of this would be happening had he never signed with King to get that opportunity against Diaz. King was the only way to get to him at the time. Nate used him in a way. So they both profited from the situation. Now king is just trying to be slick as always, but Nate is standing his ground so he doesn't end up getting royally ****ed.

[DC Fight Fan]

But that's where you're wrong. It did work in the long term. They may be getting screwed for the time being, but Nate got a big payday vs Diaz, major exposure that money can't buy, a big fight with Bradley, and now he's a name that plenty of young fighters would love to go up against to have him on their resume thinking they could win. None of this would be happening had he never signed with King to get that opportunity against Diaz. King was the only way to get to him at the time. Nate used him in a way. So they both profited from the situation. Now king is just trying to be slick as always, but Nate is standing his ground so he doesn't end up getting royally ****ed.

So you are now saying that it is good because NAte is now an opponent for young fighters? Listen to yourself man. Do you really think that promoters would put their young 140 lber in with Nate Campbell unless the networks demanded it? NO! Nate Campbell will be back on ESPN. Mark my words.

[OnePunch]

So you did advise him to sign with Don King?

That's what I thought. Thanks for clearing that up.

Just wanted to make sure the facts were on the table. You got paid for steering Nate to King right? Don't lie now.

Yes, I explained the pros and cons of the deal to Nate, and my advice to him was that we cut as much crap from the King contract as we can, and run with it. We spent 9 hours in Kings office negotiating the particulars, and got it to where it was manageable. No automatic extensions, King has no input on trainers, camp locations, endorsements, etc., etc., etc. along with about 8 other things. The only point we werent 100% satisfied with was the lack of a buyout clause, but King wouldnt budge on that. So we discussed it, and Nate wanted the Diaz fight enough to warrant the risk. And in the end it was worth it. Sure, the next 7 months will suck, but the history books will forever show that Nate Campbell beat the undefeated Juan Diaz for 3 lightweight titles. In the big picture, thats worth 7 months.

And for your information, I actually LOST money on the deal. In order for Nate to be able to sign the King contract, I had to waive the remainder of my promotional rights to him, and take a subordinate position to Don. But Nate was my friend long before I started representing him, and I couldnt give a **** less about the money. The day that I have to rely on boxing for my income is the day that I better do something else in life.

[OnePunch]

So you are now saying that it is good because NAte is now an opponent for young fighters? Listen to yourself man. Do you really think that promoters would put their young 140 lber in with Nate Campbell unless the networks demanded it? NO! Nate Campbell will be back on ESPN. Mark my words.

Hey genius, almost EVERY older fighter is an "opponent" for a young fighter. Glen Johnson against Chad Dawson is a prime example. But I bet if you were advising Glen, you'd tell him to pass on the Dawson fight and go back to ESPN because he's being "used", right? LOL. Would you have advised Bernard Hopkins to pass on the Pavlik fight too?? You dont know ****. You're acting like Nate is 24 and not 37. The opportunities and decisions are different for 35 plus year old fighters than they are for up and coming 20-something kids.............

[rskumm21]

So you are now saying that it is good because NAte is now an opponent for young fighters? Listen to yourself man. Do you really think that promoters would put their young 140 lber in with Nate Campbell unless the networks demanded it? NO! Nate Campbell will be back on ESPN. Mark my words.

Uh...they put him against Bradley. What's so bad about him going against a young gun. Nate has heart, and experience. It could end up being another upset like Diaz. Regardless, the King move got him some big fights, some good, money, and good exposure that he would not have gotten otherwise. He may end up back on espn like you say, but he would have never left that realm if he had not made the move to dkp.

[OnePunch]

Uh...they put him against Bradley. What's so bad about him going against a young gun. Nate has heart, and experience. It could end up being another upset like Diaz. Regardless, the King move got him some big fights, some good, money, and good exposure that he would not have gotten otherwise. He may end up back on espn like you say, but he would have never left that realm if he had not made the move to dkp.

Dont try to confuse the haters with logic. lol