Al Haymon plummet $434 million in a single year?

[The Tribe]

LOL!! Way to avoid the issues you coward.
And pbc/haymon is a promotion/promoter! He can use the term advisor all he wants. You realise callng himslef an Advisor is just a loophole cos that dude plays manager and promoter.





So...
What did you mean by this



I'll ask one more time
Are you playing the race card or are you just a pbc fanboy?

you mad we running **** now huh??

[IMDAZED]

LOL!! Way to avoid the issues you coward.
And pbc/haymon is a promotion/promoter! He can use the term advisor all he wants. You realise callng himslef an Advisor is just a loophole cos that dude plays manager and promoter.





So...
What did you mean by this



I'll ask one more time
Are you playing the race card or are you just a pbc fanboy?

How many times you gonna change your identity on here? Nobody's avoiding, I just can't take you serious

[IMDAZED]

PBC is a promoter. Lord have mercy

[The Gambler1981]

The article pointed out that success over long term had evidence in the valuations during the start up years. A successful business would be in the red, but it's value would be positive. This isn't the case for PBC where the value is going the wrong way. If PBC was spending all the money, but the value was going up, than that would be par for the course for the long term strategy and there wouldn't be lawsuits and under average ratings.

That is some dudes opinion and high valuation often leads to failure because companies can't keep up. He doesn't know the true valuation of PBC and is using other figures to try and deduce it. So like I said assumptions are being made and passed off as fact. which hurts the credibility of the whole piece.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

"From the very beginning, PBC’s business model was reportedly to spend money on risky deals in the hopes of earning future high returns."

Yea that would had been the case if the person knew WTF they were doing but in this case, Haymon didn't/doesn't know WTF he was doing so...

[buddyguns]

What the **** is this rambling nonsense???

If boxing was under one umbrella then that would be a monopoly you
dumb mother****er.

Now if boxing was "1 umbrella" how would that insure matchups between
top guys??
Haymon has lots of top guys in many weights and they don't fight each other now. Why would that change if fighters were under 1 umbrella??

How can it change if it doesn't go under one umbrella?

[The Gambler1981]

Well i think the writer did ouch your points, he basically said the amount of money that has been lost is monumental compared to other brands losses. Anyone with a small business knowledge knows you are going to lose to gain, problem is PBC has no real capitol. The fighters should be the capitol but how are any of these fighters stocks going to rise when they hardly fight and when they do they are not fighting the best?

Also you say the money needed to be spent, sure it did but were these long time investments? Did PBC buy out rights to these TV networks for a year at a time or a decade at a time? I am sure if it was a year, the networks may want to put something else in those time slots if things keep looking so grim.

But I do agree with you that something else is going on that we all dont see, Haymon did just come out and say he is going to expand to the UK audience. I seriously doubt hed expand if he had very little left unless this is a last ditch effort.

TV time is expensive so a couple years worth is going to be pricey across multiple networks.

Like I said the guy is making assumptions and I don't know his financial credentials to be making these assumptions. Even if the dude writing this was an A-1 financial analyst it is still just one view and what I would call an incomplete view because he only has access to public numbers not the whole picture. It would be interesting to really look at PBC's books which obviously would not look good (to me that is expected) and what Waddle and Reeds expectations were because I have no clue what their expectations were.

[Fetta]

Great comeback....
You really defused all my arguements!!! LOL!!!

I'll ask again, as simply as I can.
What would change about match making in boxing if pro boxing was under "1 umbrella"



Said the guy who doesn't know what a monopoly is.....

I know what a monopoly is and explained the changes in matchmaking if it was under 1 umbrella too.

I explained it all already to you in other posts but anger has gotten the best of you and there is no debating with angry people. They just blow and are not grounded enough to understand simple things. Thats where you are now.

Go back and read them and see for yourself. But you wont cause....anger.

Go on thinking you are winning the debate. Dont want some poor co-worker getting punched by you

[IMDAZED]

I know what a monopoly is and explained the changes in matchmaking if it was under 1 umbrella too.

I explained it all already to you in other posts but anger has gotten the best of you and there is no debating with angry people. They just blow and are not grounded enough to understand simple things. Thats where you are now.

Go back and read them and see for yourself. But you wont cause....anger.

Go on thinking you are winning the debate. Dont want some poor co-worker getting punched by you

He thinks PBC is a promotional outfit. That ended any semblance of a serious conversation with him for me.

[The Gambler1981]

I don't understand your question??

A great many fighters are already promoted by pbc/haymon.
And pbc didn't save boxing. None of haymons main fighters are fighting each other.

So what difference would it make to expand his stable??
Because that is all your really saying by suggesting this 1 umbrella nonsense.

You do realize one of the main reasons fights don't happen is because one side stands to gain while a competitors stands to lose a great deal. So making a high end fight is difficult because one investment is going to take a large hit while a competitors gets over. So it is a double edged swords which make people only want to put their guys at risk when chances are good or long term potential no longer outweighs shorts term gain.

Put fighters under one banner that all goes away. Fighters probably make less because there is less competition for their services but these guys still have to get in the ring so the prizes have to be worthwhile or no one will take up the sport.

Monopolies get a bad wrap but they almost always make a business run more efficiently and honestly boxing is run in about the most inefficient way possible currently so boxing cold certainly use some morganization.