Comments Thread For: Anthony Joshua vs. Joseph Parker To Air Live on Showtime

[1hourRun]

Bro...are you on Wilder's payroll? Wtf 😂

Obviously it goes without saying that AJ fights 5 hours earlier compared to prime time for Wilder. It'd be interesting if there were any studies/comparisons that show how that time difference affects viewership.

LMAO you serious? Joshua's live fights are on around 5PM in the afternoon in the east coast. That's not like having it on at 10PM or 11PM in the east coast. This is commonplace with all UK fights shown in the US. Have Wilder in a fight in Alabama around 5PM eastern and see what happens.

Wilder wouldn't be crying about his popularity if Joshua was a nobody

Bunch of excuses, Golovkin vs. Brook had 843,000 viewers on one network alone ( HBO ) the replay which averaged 593,000 beats A.J live feeds! isn't this guy Mr. Bigshot? selling 70,000K seats? how did that help his viewership in America? so Kell Brook or Golovkin are more popular? a mismatch gets more attention than the suppose 'HW' Champion of the world?

I'm sure Deontay 'Bronze-Bomber' Wilder can fight during lunch break in the U.S.A and get far greater numbers fighting a bum.

[JRB123]

SMH

Of course Brook-Golovkin had more viewers than the live feeds that AJ has when HBO has many more subscribers than Showtime does.

Wilder is still crying about popularity and saying that he deserves a 50-50 split with Joshua...lol

[1hourRun]

SMH

Of course Brook-Golovkin had more viewers than the live feeds that AJ has when HBO has many more subscribers than Showtime does.

Wilder is still crying about popularity and saying that he deserves a 50-50 split with Joshua...lol

More excuses, first it was the time-slot now its the network : but lets remove any doubt by focusing on the network in question SHOWTIME -- Anthony Joshua vs. Carlos Takam does 334K, compare that to Kell Brook vs. Errol Spence Jr. that did 291K, one can clearly see that there very little difference in interest from the American public from a Spence to a hype-job like Anthony Joshua.

Now I was looking for Linares vs. Crolla II. which also aired live on Showtime and good thing for you guys I have not found those numbers ; how comical would that be if Jorge Linares did the same numbers as Joshua? you guys mean to tell me that you're going to get virtually the same number no matter who is fighting at that particular hour??? face it, Joshua is a nobody in America.

[N/A]

The truth is only a link away and I'll be happy to be proved wrong if I see some evidence.

http://www.boxingscene.com/joseph-parker-promoter-erupts-tears-apart-anthony-joshua--123138

Initially, Higgins wanted a 50-50 split

"We dropped from 50% to 40%"

[Just looking]

Google: "Wilder Joshua 50 50"

and you'll find a large number of articles about this. Hearn has also said numerous times that Wilder has made it clear that he will only accept 50-50, including in meetings with Finkel and Haymon (see the last article on the list)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianmazique/2017/12/04/deontay-wilders-50-50-ultimatum-to-anthony-joshua-looks-like-a-classic-ducking-tactic/#4285fc9e62d2

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/boxing/anthony-joshua-vs-deontay-wilder-fight-when-where-odds-champion-las-vegas-wembley-a8092351.html

http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/story/_...ay-equal-split

http://www.boxingscene.com/joshua-promoter-wilder-delusional-with-50-50-demand--124476

Finkel and Haymon Article
http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/story/_...ys-eddie-hearn

So that remark got a lot of publicity, but Wilder has not come out since to rebut these articles, as he would have done had he felt they weren't correct. It seems pretty clear from the language Wilder's using, he's not just throwing a figure out there, he's demanding that the fight should be 50 50 or not happen - this is why the first article mentions that it looks like a duck.

I think it's a bit early to say that, personally, but still, it doesn't sound like something that he just mentioned off-hand, it's a clear policy to demand 50-50 which is not something that Higgins ever did. (At least to my knowledge: still waiting on the other poster to post his evidence)

Contrast this with the search that substitutes the word "Wilder" for "Parker" and there's no such mention of Parker making similar demands at any point, which is what the original argument is about.

It's obvious everyone made an article about this, this is the heavyweight fight everyone wants to see, no wonder Wilder values himself better than Parker. The thing is, your argument is that Parker team never offered 50/50, but you forget Wilder didn't offer it either. 50/50 was all talk back there and is again now, don't go buying trash talk, that's all to make the fight bigger

[Redgloveman]

http://www.boxingscene.com/joseph-pa...joshua--123138

Initially, Higgins wanted a 50-50 split

"We dropped from 50% to 40%"

I would say fair play to you, but actually - doing some research - found this article fairly quickly

http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/i...n-offer-insult

This is Higgins's immediate response to Hearn's offer of 80-20% in which he mentions

"I'll pay Joshua respect. He deserves a bit more [than an even 50-50 split] as it's his home country but we've come from the bottom of the world and earned a genuine world title."

and

"I'm not saying a 50-50 split as we think Joshua deserves a bit more, but it certainly should be a more balanced ratio like that. We reached out to Hearn and have had no response."

That's his original position in response to Hearn's first offer

Your article, which is in notably less detail, is from over a month later when Higgins has been frustrated by Joshua not accepting 65%.
Evidently Higgins wants to exaggerate the concessions that Team Parker have already made to argue that they should not be expected to make further concessions beyond 65-35.
In actual fact, however, he is on record (above) saying that he didn't expect 50-50 and clearly this is something that Hearn was aware of when it came to negotiations.

The article that I've posted is closer to the time of the initial offer and is in greater detail, and contains an actual admission on the part of Higgins, so I'm sure you'll agree that it should be considered more significant than statements that Higgins made later on as to what his supposed negotiating position was after the fact.

To be fair, I appreciate you going to the effort of finding something to back up your point.

[N/A]

I would say fair play to you, but actually - doing some research - found this article fairly quickly

http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/i...n-offer-insult

This is Higgins's immediate response to Hearn's offer of 80-20% in which he mentions

"I'll pay Joshua respect. He deserves a bit more [than an even 50-50 split] as it's his home country but we've come from the bottom of the world and earned a genuine world title."

and

"I'm not saying a 50-50 split as we think Joshua deserves a bit more, but it certainly should be a more balanced ratio like that. We reached out to Hearn and have had no response."

That's his original position in response to Hearn's first offer

Your article, which is in notably less detail, is from over a month later when Higgins has been frustrated by Joshua not accepting 65%.
Evidently Higgins wants to exaggerate the concessions that Team Parker have already made to argue that they should not be expected to make further concessions beyond 65-35.
In actual fact, however, he is on record (above) saying that he didn't expect 50-50 and clearly this is something that Hearn was aware of when it came to negotiations.

The article that I've posted is closer to the time of the initial offer and is in greater detail, and contains an actual admission on the part of Higgins, so I'm sure you'll agree that it should be considered more significant than statements that Higgins made later on as to what his supposed negotiating position was after the fact.

To be fair, I appreciate you going to the effort of finding something to back up your point.

hearn's 80/20 was offered after higgins had originally mentioned 50/50.

[Redgloveman]

It's obvious everyone made an article about this, this is the heavyweight fight everyone wants to see, no wonder Wilder values himself better than Parker. The thing is, your argument is that Parker team never offered 50/50, but you forget Wilder didn't offer it either. 50/50 was all talk back there and is again now, don't go buying trash talk, that's all to make the fight bigger

To be honest, I'm not too worried by all this **** personally because I believe that ultimately the fight will be made. I'm not going to call Wilder a duck for offering 50-50 because I'm sure he will move from there. If the fight doesn't happen, that's when we can get serious about who's ducking who etc.

[Redgloveman]

hearn's 80/20 was offered after higgins had originally mentioned 50/50.

And your evidence for that is?...

[N/A]

And your evidence for that is?...

Having spoken to Higgins directly, he claims negotiations went as follows:

Higgins: 50/50
Hearn: 80/20
Higgins: 60/40
Hearn: 75/25
Higgins 65/35
Hearn: 70/30
Higgins 66.66/33.33
Hearn: 68/32
Deal made at 67/33.

His timeline of events seems to line up with what we know from public statements.

In your version of events though, Higgins drops from 50/50 to 60/40 without ever asking for 50/50 first, which doesn't make any sense. So even if you only want to stick to public statements, you're forced to only selectively include them.