How many PPV's does it take to make Floyd-Maidana a success?
Collapse
-
-
I agree with you, I think Floyd was key to whole Haymon-Showtime deal. I wouldn't necessarily say that 'its working' though. By what criteria? Showtime boxing seems to be doing the same ratings as it was 2-3 years ago and that's after throwing money around like confetti for the past 12 months.ya but the thing everyone is ignoring is that this deal was more or less to have showtime pass hbo as the #1 boxing platform. They knew they were over paying floyd even tho with the canelo fight they are ahead still. Hes basically being paid to be the ambassador of showtime boxing and its working. When floyd leaves unless something major takes place they will be far ahead because of it even if they lose money.
What really happened is that Haymon used Floyd to get leverage with the networks, and used to that to build a stable. That stable was what enabled him to set up this whole deal with Showtime and get Floyd more money than he could normally have expected.
Showtime's ratings have to grow for it all to be sustainable. Just like at HBO, the money being spent on boxing can be invested elsewhere. If ratings don't grow then logically someone will ask what the point of investing all that extra money was.Comment
-
all he has to do is average 1.5 over 6 fights and so far so good and with the way maidana gave him great fight and he didnt look so good you know dam well his next fight is going to be gigantic.Comment
-
I think they would be close to breaking even with a million buys.
the 32 Million alone needs a million buys.
The gate and foreign revenue would pay for his opponent/undercard and the cost of the promotion. It would be cutting it close though.Comment
-
That is right except it is not about ratings for Showtime, it is about subscribers and on every commercial I see for Showtime I see a clip of Floyd fighting.I agree with you, I think Floyd was key to whole Haymon-Showtime deal. I wouldn't necessarily say that 'its working' though. By what criteria? Showtime boxing seems to be doing the same ratings as it was 2-3 years ago and that's after throwing money around like confetti for the past 12 months.
What really happened is that Haymon used Floyd to get leverage with the networks, and used to that to build a stable. That stable was what enabled him to set up this whole deal with Showtime and get Floyd more money than he could normally have expected.
Showtime's ratings have to grow for it all to be sustainable. Just like at HBO, the money being spent on boxing can be invested elsewhere. If ratings don't grow then logically someone will ask what the point of investing all that extra money was.
There is a huge premium on live sports right now with all ways to consume media, live sports are different because fans have to watch live.
If in 2 years after the they have the exact same subscriber base it would be failure to them, even if they gained subscribers over the deal so they didn't lose money.Comment
-
1 mil at 75 per is $75 million which is $37.5 million, 850k is almost exactly break even at $32 million.Comment
-
Comment
-
Subscriber base is obviously the key measuring stick for the networks, but it's not as clear a metric as ratings. Growth or fall in subscribers can be explained by a lot of factors, but ratings are ratings. They're immediate and they are something that the networks are responsive to.That is right except it is not about ratings for Showtime, it is about subscribers and on every commercial I see for Showtime I see a clip of Floyd fighting.
There is a huge premium on live sports right now with all ways to consume media, live sports are different because fans have to watch live.
If in 2 years after the they have the exact same subscriber base it would be failure to them, even if they gained subscribers over the deal so they didn't lose money.
You're right to say that the subscriber base is the bottom line, but it seems to me at least that ratings are still an important performance indicator. If there's no uptick in boxing viewership, it wouldn't strongly indicate growth in boxing related subscriptions.Comment
-
It is hard to tell why someone subscribes was it because they thought Penny Dreadful was cool or because of boxing, so they do look at ratings but when it comes to live sports they will pay a premium.Subscriber base is obviously the key measuring stick for the networks, but it's not as clear a metric as ratings. Growth or fall in subscribers can be explained by a lot of factors, but ratings are ratings. They're immediate and they are something that the networks are responsive to.
You're right to say that the subscriber base is the bottom line, but it seems to me at least that ratings are still an important performance indicator. If there's no uptick in boxing viewership, it wouldn't strongly indicate growth in boxing related subscriptions.
MLS (Major League Soccer) does terrible rating on networks that need ratings, but they are getting a new TV deal today that will look dumb when you consider the ratings they pull solely because it is live sports and it could grow even though the ratings for the league have been stagnate for a decade.Comment
-
Damn I would pay $20 more for HD I can't handle SD, but hey to each his own.
I would have figured most people capable of buying PPV would just get the HD, but the larger percentage that buy SD then yea they have to sell more.Comment
Comment