HBO only offering $1 Million for Walters-Lomanchenko?

[OnePunch]

Man, stop this nonsense. They're different. You can see this in your own everyday surroundings. Boxing have semblance of thriving because of casuals. Which means the income will always be inconsistent. The friends you normally watch with will not always be there for you. There are so many moments in boxing where it's just boring to watch. UFC is just vastly different for regular people where anything can happen in a split second, so viewers are always glued and focused. In boxing, after 3-4 rounds of potshotting and posturing, the entire fight is pretty much determined. Yawning will start, your buddies will start to find excuse and want to leave.

Stop this fantasy.

be careful about disagreeing with that douchebag. Next he will be recommending you see a therapist because if you have the nerve to disagree with him then you MUST be having "issues" elsewhere in life lol

[brettWall]

Man, stop this nonsense. They're different. You can see this in your own everyday surroundings. Boxing have semblance of thriving because of casuals. Which means the income will always be inconsistent. The friends you normally watch with will not always be there for you. There are so many moments in boxing where it's just boring to watch. UFC is just vastly different for regular people where anything can happen in a split second, so viewers are always glued and focused. In boxing, after 3-4 rounds of potshotting and posturing, the entire fight is pretty much determined. Yawning will start, your buddies will start to find excuse and want to leave.

Stop this fantasy.

I liken boxing to US presidential elections where casuals being independent voters. They won't always be there for you. UFC is like having right wings/left wings where you don't need casuals to thrive. Thus the money is consistent. Same customers for life. More are coming.

[al-Xander]

I liken boxing to US presidential elections where casuals being independent voters. They won't always be there for you. UFC is like having right wings/left wings where you don't need casuals to thrive. Thus the money is consistent. Same customers for life. More are coming.

They're simply different. 3 rounds per fight, 5 min per round; pretty much anything goes, punching, kicking, wrestling, karate, judo, you name it. Not to mention 10-12 cards per event.

But the fantasy guy disagrees doe.

[al-Xander]

I liken boxing to US presidential elections where casuals being independent voters. They won't always be there for you. UFC is like having right wings/left wings where you don't need casuals to thrive. Thus the money is consistent. Same customers for life. More are coming.

That's the part Mr Fantasy doesn't get. He really thinks casuals will always be there for uncle Haymon.

[original zero]

One Punch -

I calmly and respectfully answered all of your points. You ignored everything I wrote and instead just called me a childish name.

You're a grown man. Act like it. Nobody is criticizing you for disagreeing with me. I'm pointing out that your ATTITUDE is ridiculous.

But once again, you refuse to discuss the topic, preferring instead to spew more of your bitter negative madness.



BreWall -

UFC has more consistent customers because there is an actual league to follow and the fights you want to see are likely to occur. It's not an accident that UFC fans are more dedicated. The sport is easier and more satisfying to follow.



JoeMan -

Nobody is dis*****g that there are differences in the rules and styles of boxing and martial arts.

But that doesn't change the fact that the way you successfully build a fight is very similar in both sports.

So far, wayyyyyy more people are watching the big PBC shows than are watching HBO or SHO. If PBC continues, there's no reason that won't continue to be the case.

[Ringlife]

These guys deserve a million a piece, I still see that the same trolls making the same moronic post. Nothing has changed......

[al-Xander]

Like I've mentioned earlier, UFC is more like WWE/WWF in terms of fans' dedication. Fans knew WWF/E is fake, yet they don't care. They still keep coming. Think about that for a day or so. Wrestling is fake, yet they watch it as if it's real. Surprising thing I discovered was when I heard some co-workers in their 40s talking about wrestling characters, who beat who the other day, the manner this guy/gal was beat, etc. (This is important to understand because without such dedicated fans you won't have a business. I'm establishing the consistency of it.)

In contrast, boxing got so few devoted fans they can't even fill up stadiums without casuals. It's inconsistent.

[original zero]

Joe Man -

And boxing's judging is fake yet fans watch it as if it's real.

That's irrelevant.

The point is that UFC & WWE (and NFL, NBA, NHL & MLB etc) have an organized structure that can deliver the big match up for the championship. One championship that the fans recognize as the premier title in the sport.

So you have one way of doing business, which leads to devoted fans, then you have the way boxing does business, which doesn't reliably deliver the big match and isn't organized and has less devoted fans.

So why in the world would you scoff at the idea that fans would benefit is boxing's structure was more similar to most successful mainstream sports?

[OnePunch]

One Punch -

I calmly and respectfully answered all of your points. You ignored everything I wrote and instead just called me a childish name.

You're a grown man. Act like it. Nobody is criticizing you for disagreeing with me. I'm pointing out that your ATTITUDE is ridiculous.

But once again, you refuse to discuss the topic, preferring instead to spew more of your bitter negative madness.

the "topic" has been beaten to death, and neither one of us are likely to change our opinions anytime soon. Thats perfectly fine by me, but you seem to think that I must be having personal problems or something, because I get annoyed having to say the same thing over and over and over and over and over again. Its tiresome.

You believe in Haymons model. I dont. You seem to think you know his moral compass, and know what his intentions are to his investors. I dont. I dont know the man, and can only base my opinion on what I have seen, and the moves he has made appear to me like he doesnt care one way or the other. He's too smart an individual to have made the kinds of mistakes that PBC has made over the past 10 months.

So to get in the position they are in at the moment (sporadic "dartboard" scheduling, mediocre ratings, absentee ESPN cards, ZERO momentum built for his biggest stars, burning through cash, etc etc) Haymon would (in my opinion) have to either be ******, or indifferent. And he is not ******.

[original zero]

One Punch -

Discussions can still be productive and/or interesting regardless of whether they result in anybody changing their mind. I really enjoyed reading your last post and appreciate the focus on substance instead of insults. If you feel I've contributed to the hostility, I apologize and hopefully from this point forward our interactions can be civil.

I am not convinced Haymon will be successful, but I do believe many assume the worst and draw unfair conclusions. Since Haymon doesn't speak publicly, the anti-Haymon propaganda has been very successful because he doesn't defend himself. Not to mention the fact that HBO has been the absolute jedi master of boxing propaganda for the past 30 years and so their spin on the narrative is going to be effective for many years to come regardless of what happens.

But I do think there are possibilities you aren't considering beyond "******" and "indifferent." We've both ruled out ******. So that just leaves indifference. Let's look at the subjects you mentioned and see if there are reasonable posibilities beyond indifference.


Re: "Dartboard" scheduling - We both agree an organized and easy to follow schedule is one of the benefits of a proper sports league and while PBC appears to aspire to someday be a proper sports league, thus far they have not adhered to an organized and easy to follow schedule.

I believe they will do just that eventually, when the time buys are up and they sign traditional TV deals. But at this juncture, is it POSSIBLE, that instead of indifference, the reason for the "dartboard" scheduling is a combination of the following?

#1 - In order to get CBS/FOX/NBC in primetime on Saturday night, PBC is at the mercy of the select few Saturdays that those networks have available and if PBC wants the benefit of being on network TV on a Saturday night, the dates will be sporadic and spread out in an unorthodox fashion?

#2 - In order to maximize the number of interested parties when the rights are up for sale, PBC must spread out their content during the proof of concept phase to show a variety of networks that boxing can be a success on their channel(s)?



Re: Mediocre ratings - Mediocre comapred to what? A big fight on HBO does a million viewers. A big fight on PBC does 2-4 million viewers. That is a HUGE new/lapsed audience checking out boxing that wasn't watching before. Obviously the additional eyeballs are due to being on network TV, but isn't that the whole point?

What kind of ratings were you expecting? PBC on network TV is doing around the same ratings as the NBA is doing on network TV. I'm not saying the PBC ratings are great, but to label them as "mediocre" seems extremely unfair. If PBC is doing comporable ratings to what NBA/UFC do on the same night and those leagues are huge TV deals, I don't think mediocre is the appropriate term.



Re: Absentee ESPN cards - We don't know the minimum number of cards PBC must provide to ESPN, we only know the maximum number of cards they can produce. If they're paying per show and if one of the benefits of signing the deal was locking out other promoters from being on ESPN, wouldn't it actually be really smart to produce the minimum number of cards to minimize losses while still having the benefit of locking out promoters from being on the channel?

I'm not saying for certain that's what the strategy is, but my point is that those who prefer to assume the worst about PBC often over look very realistic possibilities that would paint Haymon in a much wiser light. We agree he's not ******. I personally believe he's smarter than ESPN and considering he just hired the guy that gave him the deal, I'm much more willing to believe he got over on ESPN than I am willing to believe he paid for time slots he's not going to be able to use.

PBC will be back on ESPN this year. PBC had the right to pay for monthly shows. They chose not to. We have no idea the exact details of the arrangement, but you are quick to assume Haymon is "indifferent," while I am willing to reserve judgement.



Re: ZERO momentum built for his biggest stars -

3.5 million people just watched Danny Garcia win a world title live on FOX.

Deontay Wilder is about to get, by far, the most massive payday of his life.

Keith Thurman is about to defend his world title live on America's most watched network.

Adrien Broner is about to defend his world title live on basic cable.

Amir Khan is about to get, by far, the most massive payday of his life.

Charles Martin is about to get, by far, the most massive payday of his life.

Errol Spence is about to fight live on NBC on saturday night and will soon challenge for a world title.

Ortiz and Berto are about to fight live on FOX on saturday night.

Carl Frampton just became one of the very few unified world champions in the entire sport.

That's just off the top of my head. If Haymon's stars have zero momentum, who are the managers with more stars and more momentum than Haymon?



Re: Burning through cash - We have no idea how much has been spent. We have an amateur financial analysis from some random dude on reddit that didn't realize that the market value of a fund is based on the ROI compared to other things to invest in. It's not necessarily reflective of how much money has been spent.