Name the fighters who gave someone not even 1/10 of the draw they are 35%+

[john l]

To even mention Takam just kills your argument. Parker is a name. Not a big one, but anyone who even causally follows HW boxing knows Parker is the #3 guy. No one knew Takam. You could have substituted him with any other no-name and the draw would have been the same. Parker adds interest that the Takams and others do not.

From a business perspective, you pay a little extra for a premium item because your profits are going to be greater. People who want to say; Parker made $X in his last and Joshua made $Y so the payday should be $Z simply don't understand how this kind of business works.

I haven't managed boxers but I have managed musical acts and I see what Hearn does clear as day. He's a complete shyster, just like Arum and DLH. He also likes fans to be his social media puppets and manipulates them to his favor.

Amen and well put.

[sunny31]

To even mention Takam just kills your argument. Parker is a name. Not a big one, but anyone who even causally follows HW boxing knows Parker is the #3 guy. No one knew Takam. You could have substituted him with any other no-name and the draw would have been the same. Parker adds interest that the Takams and others do not.

From a business perspective, you pay a little extra for a premium item because your profits are going to be greater. People who want to say; Parker made $X in his last and Joshua made $Y so the payday should be $Z simply don't understand how this kind of business works.

I haven't managed boxers but I have managed musical acts and I see what Hearn does clear as day. He's a complete shyster, just like Arum and DLH. He also likes fans to be his social media puppets and manipulates them to his favor.

You obviously didn't read my argument if thats what you think. You are complicating the issue, at the end of the day I reiterate my original point, the fight doesn't do enough business to justify that kind of pay rise for Parker, its not only that Parker is a $1 million fighter and Joshua is a $15 million fighter, its the combination of those two things.

You obviously have a little bit of problem with Hearn, and Joshua so I doubt your ability to be impartial here but...

Joseph Parker is completely unknown in the UK, in fact I would say Wilder is as well. These guys are not on the radar of casual boxing fans over here. But I can see as the fight builds and the promotion starts, it getting bigger, but the focus on the promotion will be based on Joshua chasing one the other belts, and 'unification' rather than 'Joshua vs Parker' two huge names like you had with Joshua vs Klitschko.

I don't think Hearn is what you think he is. I don't particularly care for any boxing promoter, but I do think they are a necessary evil because boxing training is extremely rigorous and time consuming.

He is pretty transparent, or as much as any promoter out there. He tries to do right by his fighters financially from what I can see. He is also accessible to fans, and puts himself in a position where he is answerable to fans, which no other promoter does.

How many promoters would you get going on a youtube boxing channel, which ended up him having a discussion with Shelley Finkel and Deontay Wilder live?

[STREET CLEANER]

I'd love to hear it. Especially from those claiming Joshua should.

LOL, you really are pathetic. Read Redd Foxx's comments.

[Redd Foxx]

You obviously didn't read my argument if thats what you think. You are complicating the issue, at the end of the day I reiterate my original point, the fight doesn't do enough business to justify that kind of pay rise for Parker, its not only that Parker is a $1 million fighter and Joshua is a $15 million fighter, its the combination of those two things.

You obviously have a little bit of problem with Hearn, and Joshua so I doubt your ability to be impartial here but...

Joseph Parker is completely unknown in the UK, in fact I would say Wilder is as well. These guys are not on the radar of casual boxing fans over here. But I can see as the fight builds and the promotion starts, it getting bigger, but the focus on the promotion will be based on Joshua chasing one the other belts, and 'unification' rather than 'Joshua vs Parker' two huge names like you had with Joshua vs Klitschko.

I don't think Hearn is what you think he is. I don't particularly care for any boxing promoter, but I do think they are a necessary evil because boxing training is extremely rigorous and time consuming.

He is pretty transparent, or as much as any promoter out there. He tries to do right by his fighters financially from what I can see. He is also accessible to fans, and puts himself in a position where he is answerable to fans, which no other promoter does.

How many promoters would you get going on a youtube boxing channel, which ended up him having a discussion with Shelley Finkel and Deontay Wilder live?

I just call it as I see it. I don't think Parker or even Wilder deserve 50/50 and I've been vocal about that. I even think 30% would not be entirely unreasonable for Parker, though 35% is a more savory number.

So many fans try to act sensible, but when you guys consistently fall lock-step in approval of what Hearn says, it shows you're not thinking independently. He's a fking BOXING PROMOTER. One of the lowest forms of scum on earth. You guys should be honest with yourselves about that.

[sunny31]

I just call it as I see it. I don't think Parker or even Wilder deserve 50/50 and I've been vocal about that. I even think 30% would not be entirely unreasonable for Parker, though 35% is a more savory number.

So many fans try to act sensible, but when you guys consistently fall lock-step in approval of what Hearn says, it shows you're not thinking independently. He's a fking BOXING PROMOTER. One of the lowest forms of scum on earth. You guys should be honest with yourselves about that.

My opinion on this isn't based on what Eddie Hearn is saying, I have been saying the same since Wilder-Stiverne. My post history will back that up.

I haven't agreed with everything Hearn has done, his £1.5 million offer to Frampton on live tv was dumb. I am still not sure he made the right decisions by Kell Brook, he did make him a millionaire, but it has come at a cost to his career progression and legacy.

I have a feeling when Hearn presents an offer as a %, backed up by the projected numbers, and the projected bottom line for Parker, it will be so big that in the end they will not walk away even if the % isn't exactly what they want.

[asgarth]

NSB users still have no concept of "synergy". You pay more for a desirable opponent because the two of you sell far more together than you do on your own. That's why Oscar paid Golovkin well, because guys like Smith don't bring in the buys. Golovkin may be a PPV bomb on his own, but pair him with a guy like Canelo, and it's one of the biggest fights of the year. Synergy.

Synergy is a factor, but your comparison is farfetched.
Golovkin is way more popular than Parker and therefore was able to command a higher purse.
While its true that he bombed with his PPV (150k or 97k depending on which source you believe), he still was in a position to headline a PPV, had the highest rating on regular HBO and could draw a decent crowd. He also was recognised as the #1 guy at middleweight and held 3 of the 4 major belts.

Parker has none of that. He is seen as a decent threat, because he holds a belt and has beaten some ok/decent opponents (barely without looking dominant).

In terms of viability I would rate him around the same as Bradley in the first fight or Maidana after he beat Broner. Both guys were seen as decent threats to the cash cows and were relatively well known, but neither of those two could demand 35% of the pie or a 15 mio pound purse.

[sunny31]

Synergy is a factor, but your comparison is farfetched.
Golovkin is way more popular than Parker and therefore was able to command a higher purse.
While its true that he bombed with his PPV (150k or 97k depending on which source you believe), he still was in a position to headline a PPV, had the highest rating on regular HBO and could draw a decent crowd. He also was recognised as the #1 guy at middleweight and held 3 of the 4 major belts.

Parker has none of that. He is seen as a decent threat, because he holds a belt and has beaten some ok/decent opponents (barely without looking dominant).

In terms of viability I would rate him around the same as Bradley in the first fight or Maidana after he beat Broner. Both guys were seen as decent threats to the cash cows and were relatively well known, but neither of those two could demand 35% of the pie or a 15 mio pound purse.

This is more or less how I feel about this from a financial point of view.

In terms of the fight, I genuinely believe Parker has a legit shot, he has good coordination and handspeed, and Joshua is a relatively stationary target. It will be a good clash of styles, neither guy fights off the back foot too well.

[Redd Foxx]

Synergy is a factor, but your comparison is farfetched.
Golovkin is way more popular than Parker and therefore was able to command a higher purse.
While its true that he bombed with his PPV (150k or 97k depending on which source you believe), he still was in a position to headline a PPV, had the highest rating on regular HBO and could draw a decent crowd. He also was recognised as the #1 guy at middleweight and held 3 of the 4 major belts.

Parker has none of that. He is seen as a decent threat, because he holds a belt and has beaten some ok/decent opponents (barely without looking dominant).

In terms of viability I would rate him around the same as Bradley in the first fight or Maidana after he beat Broner. Both guys were seen as decent threats to the cash cows and were relatively well known, but neither of those two could demand 35% of the pie or a 15 mio pound purse.

You're making the mistake of calling it a "comparison" and trying to make a linear comparison. It was an example. Not a comparison.

[Raggamuffin]

I'd love to hear it. Especially from those claiming Joshua should.

Why, Joshua's gates are not even close to the top gates boxing has ever seen, and Joshua isn't the undisputed or lineal hvw champ lol.

[asgarth]

You're making the mistake of calling it a "comparison" and trying to make a linear comparison. It was an example. Not a comparison.

But in your example you also did a comparison.
You compared Liam Smiths synergy power with that of Golovkin. And we both agree that Golovkins factor is much higher.

Smith < GGG
=> Oscar paid GGG well

How else should you evaluate how much synergy a fighter is responsible for without comparisons?


So I used your concept of synergy and applied it to Parker and GGG.
Parker < GGG
=> Parkers synergy factor is less than GGGs and should earn accordingly.

I could also do the same with Smith and an even lesser known fighter.
If Canelo picked a random guy like Ishe Smith instead of Liam Smith, he would pay Ishe Smith less than Liam.

Ishe Smith < Liam Smith.
=> Liam had more cloud with his WBO belt and undefeated status and could demand a higher purse.


Parker (well-meant) = around Bradley/Maidana/Mosley
=> should look at a percentage around these guys.