Why do certain posters want PBC to fail and get happy if they have low numbers?

[The Big Dunn]

He is using other people's money to overpay his fighters, to shut out the competition, to monopilze boxing, he is preventing good fights to happen. He is wasting a ton of money to control the sport, but not for the good, the sport is suffering as you can see. The majority is vastly dissappointed with the PBC!

Everyone suffers, other networks, other fighters (because Haymon prevents their fighters to fight them) and specially the fans.

Be factual-he obtained financing to create PBC in response to being banned from HBO.

HBO is preventing as many good fights from happening as Haymon is. Arum and ODH are holding off on fights just as Haymon is. DO you feel the same way about them?

You feel it is a waste-he and the people that gave him the financing do not.

The sport is suffering not because Haymon is on Bounce, SPike (as is Top Rank) ESPN or BET. The sport is suffering because COLLECTIVELY-Haymon and HBO are wrestling for control over an unregulated industry and are not allowing the best fights to happen as this "war" is ongoing.

If you are choosing not to watch the fights PBC broadcasts that's on you. If you would watch them if they were on HBO or done by someone other than Haymon-well that would tell us a lot.

[OnePunch]

OP, you are smart enough to know the purses are not hurting the sport. We had this discussion last week. You are artificially setting the number low to make your argument true. In fact, there is no "overpaid", only what is negotiated.

HBO's reduced budget hurts the sport far more than large PBC purses. Haymon, if what we read about his kitty is true, has more than enough to pay his fighters this amount for 3-5 years.

On the flip side, HBO reducing its budget has already caused Cotto to not have a fight in December and for both Canelo and Kov to have 4th qtr fights cancelled in the past years. It also forced the GGG/Lemueix fight to PPV.

SO I understand your point but the available data doesn't support your argument.

ok, let me ask you this:

Does Jacobs getting $1.5 million for the Quillin fight, an event that only sold 8500 tickets with an all-NY undercard, and only did 367k viewers at its peak, does that purse amount HELP, or does it HINDER the ability to make more marquee matchups down the road?

If you believe it will have no negative effect, then there's no point in continuing the discussion......

[Larry the boss]

ok, let me ask you this:

Does Jacobs getting $1.5 million for the Quillin fight, an event that only sold 8500 tickets with an all-NY undercard, and only did 367k viewers at its peak, does that purse amount HELP, or does it HINDER the ability to make more marquee matchups down the road?

If you believe it will have no negative effect, then there's no point in continuing the discussion......

Once again stop worrying about another mans money.

[OnePunch]

I did answer his question and told him how i felt, he said how he felt and i was done..what more is there to say?? he stated his opinion

lol whatever. I outlined 5 or 6 points in detail, and your response was "dont care Sherman Act doe"

But like I said, I knew ahead of time that you had no interest in an actual conversation so its all good..........

[OnePunch]

Once again stop worrying about another mans money.

A Floyd fan telling someone else not to count another mans money. Now I've seen it all.....lol

[The Big Dunn]

ok, let me ask you this:

Does Jacobs getting $1.5 million for the Quillin fight, an event that only sold 8500 tickets with an all-NY undercard, and only did 367k viewers at its peak, does that purse amount HELP, or does it HINDER the ability to make more marquee matchups down the road?

If you believe it will have no negative effect, then there's no point in continuing the discussion......

So you ask me a question, then tell me how I can answer it. GTFOH?

It does neither because there is no rule that says a fighter's purse has to increase with each fight he takes. It also has no affect because you do not know what the bid will be for his next fight.

So if Jacobs next fight is a no name. It goes to bid and the bid is only $500k, then his purse is a problem. If he fights a no name Russian or Abu Dahbi fighter, and the backers bid $5 mil, then NO it doesn't.

You keep trying to make this something it isn't.

Boxer's purses are not women's purses-they are not pieces of merchandise with a predetermined price tag on them.

[Champ4Life]

"they give me free stuff."

Yeah call it what you want. I entered a contest and won.

[bigjavi973]

so..... according to posters... PBC & their fighters are the only ones ducking, turning down fights & getting overpaid....

HBO does NONE of this and the promoter that isn't with PBC doesn't do any of this either

[BennyBlanco]

Well he fragmented the sport which is not good for the fans. And after this Pbc experiment fails you'll have a whole generation of fighters unwilling to fight for market rates, since they're used to getting big money for mismatches

The sport was fragmented well before Haymon arrived. Promoter conflicts and network wars have been taking place for decades.

Pretty soon people are going to blame Haymon for moving Tyson from HBO to Showtime.

[OnePunch]

So you ask me a question, then tell me how I can answer it. GTFOH?

It does neither because there is no rule that says a fighter's purse has to increase with each fight he takes. It also has no affect because you do not know what the bid will be for his next fight.

So if Jacobs next fight is a no name. It goes to bid and the bid is only $500k, then his purse is a problem. If he fights a no name Russian or Abu Dahbi fighter, and the backers bid $5 mil, then NO it doesn't.

You keep trying to make this something it isn't.

Boxer's purses are not women's purses-they are not pieces of merchandise with a predetermined price tag on them.

NOT telling you how to answer the question. Just trying to determine if there is any purpose in continuing the discussion. It appears there is not.