Is PPV killing the sport?

[ChrististheAnswer2]

Yes PPVs are killing the sport but thats what happens when the mainstream sports public loses interest. Boxing is forced onto cable networks you have to pay for and the same networks put on PPVs to generate revenue and its getting worse and worse. Although I'm too young too remember my pops was saying that he remembers when you actually got your value at of the money you spent on PPVs becasue once upon a time they used to be good. Almost every fight on a PPV card was a good fight. Not anymore.

But here is a prediction for ya, pretty soon, all boxing will be on PPV, just you wait and see.

[kallsop]

I can watch all kinds of sports on network TV for free. A lot of NFL games are broadcast for example. $50 to watch 3 or 4 fights, and usually at least one is garbage (e.g. JLC Jr. against another nobody - ugh), is crazy.

Problem is, boxing has fallen off the radar for mainstream sports fans and gets essentially zero commercial sponsorship dollars. The path to fiscal sanity is to get boxing back to where it once was, when the World Heavryweight Champion was the premiere sports figure in the world.

Step one is to stop the horrible match ups (e.g. RJJ and PBF fighting nobody of consequence for year after year). Then get a network interested (ABC used to cover a lot of boxing).

The overall problem is that there is not one commission to promote and manage the sport, as for example the NFL and NBA have. Boxing has gone so low that they will have to buy their way back into the networks, and without a central commission, no promoter has a reason to do that. Without a commission, we'll see the sports most promising personalities fighting nobodies and nobody cares to fix it or watch it.

Hopefully, boxing can't go much lower in popularity that where it is now. But who is going to advance the sport?

[TuPrincipe]

Yes I believe they are. No one wants to dish out 50 bucks for 4 fights when the main event is usually a big name fighter vs. a no-name fighter. I have NO problem paying for Castillo-Corrales even though the fight didn't live up it's hype I had no problem paying for it. They had many good fighters on the undercards also which made it appealing to me.

An example of a bad PPV would be the Barrera - Mosley one. Why was Barrera fighting Peden and why was Mosley fighting some unknown. There was NO point for a PPV it didn't affect the division in any way. Anyone with half a brain knew that Peden and Cruz had no chance to win against very good boxers.

[j]

when i used to have satellite instead of cable, they did have much more boxing - i used to have the sky channel. and that's right here in the states.

ppv's suck. end of story.

they should be less frequent with more fights and better match ups. i definitely agree that the general price for a 4 fight ppv should be $20 - $25. the decrease in pricing would be compensated by the increased numbers of consumers.

[TuPrincipe]

Oh. Definetly. I totally agree with you. PPV's should be a rarity that happens maybe 4-6 times a year. There have been many PPV's this year that have not been worth it and it shows in the numbers.

[j]

i wouldn't mind them being a bit more frequent if they were cheaper on a general basis.

and i would like to see the whole card too, not just the last 3 or 4 fights. even if the first few fights are young fighters, there may be some nice ko's involved.

[habZ]

they need to get the ringside writers back for the newspapers, more commercials on tele would get some intrest and fighters need to stop being greedy.

[number6]

In the uk you have to pay 3 times to watch the major fights.
1,tv licence
2,skys monthly charge
3,box office charge.
The only one that was worth the money as far as i can remember was Tyson v Holyfeild 1,Benn v Collins on the same night.
Not sure on this but wasn't Tyson v Bruno 2 the first ppv fight in the uk?