I don't know what this even means. What HBO should be saying is promoters should be allowed to take their fights to the other networks if the fight happens to look more lucrative. Why is Duva, for example, intent on making the Kovalev vs Stevenson fight on HBO when the other side's offer is presumably more lucrative?
PBC and HBO can now work together
Collapse
-
HBO is in the business of promoting their brand, not in the business of making sure good fights get the most money possible.I don't know what this even means. What HBO should be saying is promoters should be allowed to take their fights to the other networks if the fight happens to look more lucrative. Why is Duva, for example, intent on making the Kovalev vs Stevenson fight on HBO when the other side's offer is presumably more lucrative?
As for Duva, I'm guessing the reason is because the HBO offer/deal is more lucrative long-term than anything Haymon would offer them, they also have a stronger negotiating position with their HBO backing.Comment
-
So you're saying Duva taking one fight over to another network effectively loses her long-term relationship with HBO. Exactly what I was lamenting in my previous post.HBO is in the business of promoting their brand, not in the business of making sure good fights get the most money possible.
As for Duva, I'm guessing the reason is because the HBO offer/deal is more lucrative long-term than anything Haymon would offer them, they also have a stronger negotiating position with their HBO backing.Comment
-
You say this as if Duva and Kovalev aren't benefiting from that long-term relationship. They are certainly doing better as the A-side of their own promotional efforts than they would as the B-side of whatever Haymon wants to do.Comment
-
Well I agree with you that whatever happens, won't be for a few years at least. HBO is a long way from being thought of as third-rate, and PBC has a long way to go to match their quality of promotion and presentation.Originally posted by saint laurentNinth Layer -
But the point is that HBO's budget is too small for overall business to grow as long as they are the top dog, so Haymon is trying to create a scenario that will entice another entity into wanting to become a much bigger top dog.
If Haymon's longterm goal is either Disney, NBC Universal or Viacom paying NINE FIGURES a year for the exclusive rights to top tier boxing in America, he's not going to do anything that will help HBO prevent that.
So when a fan, who doesn't understand that reality, thinks HBO promoting a new boxing executive is somehow going to result in some of Haymon's fighters appearing on HBO, they need to realize that it's never going to happen.
Haymon is all in. He's fighting for all the marbles. He's not going to do anything that assists HBO in any way. Yes, HBO have 5-6 great stars right now that can fight 2-3 times a year each and fill HBO's schedule. HBO isn't going to leave boxing next year, the year after, or the year after that.
BUT, as their budget continues to shrink and as boxing continues to become less and less important to them, if PBC successfully develops the NEXT generation of stars and due to the major network exposure, manages to minimize the influence of HBO boxing, at some point HBO is going to wash their hands of the whole thing.
It would be too damaging to HBO's image to be thought of as a third rate boxing brand.
Boxing is a tricky sport for big networks because it's not the most advertiser-friendly, not just due to the way the fights are laid out (breaks only between rounds, variable fight lengths) but also because the sport is violent and somewhat unsavory to the public, making it less appealing to a lot of companies. Does Mercedes want their car commericals so close to an image of a guy's bloody ****ed-up face? Possibly not. This also means boxing would have to get a lot more sanitized and corporate.
More importantly for advertisers, is the general public going to care that boxing is on free TV enough to tune in? I don't see boxing ever becoming as popular as, say, college football, which boxing competes with for nearly half the year. HBO doesn't have to worry about this problem because they're catering specifically to boxing fans, not a general audience, with their programming.
I agree with you that the deciding factor for Haymon is going to be how well he can develop the next crop of up-and-coming fighters. IMO the only guy in his current stable with any real cross-over star power is Deontay Wilder, mostly just because he's an American heavyweight with some promise, but outside of that I have trouble picturing, say, Keith Thurman or Danny Garcia suddenly capturing a ton of public interest.
Finally, boxing is a global sport which means that stars can come from literally anywhere. That's okay if you're HBO catering to boxing fans, even if a fighter has an eight-syllable name and can't speak English you know that people are still tuning in and watching the fight, just because they are boxing fans, plus from HBO's perspective more demographics = more subscribers. If you're NBC then you probably don't want some Slavic guy's name showing up on the TV guide for people to flip past.Comment
-
Nelson was involved in the decision to ban Haymon in the first place.
I don't think airing a fight with a Haymon fighter is an issue. The issue is Haymon having control, which is a huge no no.
Hbo cannot afford to be destroyed by Haymon.Comment
-
No, the point is maximum value, hedge funds, venture capitalist, they don't care about anything else. They want serious returns on their investment. The only want to ensure that, is be non discriminatory when it comes to diversifying.Comment
-
Yeah right ... The purses for Jacobs $1.5M, Quillin $1.5M do you really see HBO putting up that type of money for a fight like this??
They getting more then Rousey and Holm , and that fight was next to 42,000 fans in the arenaComment
Comment