Comments Thread For: ESPN: Garcia-Malignaggi Peaked Near 1.5 Million Viewers

[285Kid]

This is a good rating for a ESPN fight , but let hope no more mismatches

[bigdunny1]

So you dont know what numbers are being sought but will constantly complain about them anyway. Ill go with ESPN being happy.

But what do they know.

So even if the numbers were horrible you think ESPN would tell you that? Come on man this is pr spin. I can point to articles like this right before a TV show that was too expensive got canceled. Networks and companies never come out and say those stink we lost money, we missed the mark we were aiming for.

[R_Walken]

Leaving out the fact that for over 20 years ESPN boxing cards operate at a tiny fraction of what it costs PBC to put on these fights. That's kind of a big point you glossing over. Like comparing a big blockbuster movie with a 100 mil budget to a indy movie made for less then 5mil. If the indy movie makes 40 mil that's a major success for the blockbuster does that is a massive failure because one is ridiculously more expensive.

Does HBO pay you in real $ or is sniffing the used joc.kstraps after the fight compensation enough ?

[bigdunny1]

Does HBO pay you in real $ or is sniffing the used joc.kstraps after the fight compensation enough ?

No your momma pays me in bjs. The same payment you give haymon

[ea22]

I am not sure this bodes well for retention of viewers, but Shumenov vs Flores was worse.

[-DSG-]

This is a good rating for a ESPN fight , but let hope no more mismatches

Well Santa Cruz-Mares is a fight everyone has wanted to see and their is no other big fight that night so well how good those numbers are

[Beater_of_ass]

Ratings don't mean **** if you overspent marketing the event.

Like I said, it's an improvement, so that's good, but we don't really know what #s they are looking for.

And PBC still doesn't have sponsors, which in the end is the goal here.

Overspending on marketing is a bad thing if it fails, this didn't fail. They got best ratings in 20 years, if you and bigdunny want to talk cost and all this I could care less. ESPN did something they haven't done in 20 years, **** all over it because it "cost too much." If it's not coming out of your pocket why would you care? Because you're a hater.

[AddiX]

So you dont know what numbers are being sought but will constantly complain about them anyway. Ill go with ESPN being happy.

But what do they know.

I didn't say it was a bad number, I said any improvement was good, you just sensitive PBC **** riding hoe who can't comprehend any negative feedback about PBC.

But at the end of the day, you cant just compare ratings and assume it's a good number. If espn does all day coverage for almost any sporting event, it does big numbers.

1.5 is nothing special with that kind of coverage. HBO and Showtime get 0 coverage on espn and pull those kinds of numbers, and that's from paying subscribers.

[AddiX]

Overspending on marketing is a bad thing if it fails, this didn't fail. They got best ratings in 20 years, if you and bigdunny want to talk cost and all this I could care less. ESPN did something they haven't done in 20 years, **** all over it because it "cost too much." If it's not coming out of your pocket why would you care? Because you're a hater.

PBC spent more than espn boxing yearly budget for one fight, and that's with 0 paid subscribers, or sponsors, it's still a financial loss.

Comparing there ratings is pointless.

[hhs661]

@NigelBoxing: Garcia-Malignaggi delivers the largest ESPN boxing audience since 1998. Average audience: 1,073,000. Peaked at nearly 1.5 million.

Love him or hate him, DSG is a draw

since 98.. but dis failed doe. premlims to the ufcs biggest start beat it doe