Comments Thread For: Joshua: I'm Hungry To Be Undisputed - So I am Begging Wilder

[Bonduu]

The only things dumb are your assumptions that I am a Wilder fan and that Whyte and Chisora are big PPV stars. Yes, they have fought on PPV before but that's due to the over saturation of the PPV market.
Neither of these two would have been near a PPV event ten years ago. That was for the elite fighters fighting for genuine world titles.
Thanks to Eddie H we have people paying for two sub world class fighters, in a domestic clash with no titles on the line.
I hear Eddie has some magic beans for sale if you are interested.

You dumb cvnt, both Whyte and Chisora where involved in a fight of the year and sold out a stadium which warrants a healthy PPV, they are both big stars in the UK, the UK supports their own you silly fan girl. Name one American HW currently that can beat Whyte, your champ Deotay doesn’t want that work, he has consistently told Whyte ranked number 1 that he intends not to fight him because he knows Whyte got a warriors heart and a punch could end Deotay, didn’t Hearn offer Deotay 7m to come fight in UK years back? Yet he settled to fight a grandpa who is a know drug cheat.

[N/A]

It woul appear key details such as Warrens involvement were left out, this could have cost AJ millions to pay of Sky diminishing that 50 mil massively.

Nonsense made up by Hearn months later when his original excuses weren't working. Warren's only involvement was telling Finkel what BT would pay so Finkel knew how much to try to get from Sky.

Why was the meeting booked in the first place if there was no point?

It wasn't booked in the first place.

[N/A]

Wilder gets paid more against Joshua, in the UK

False. Wilder will make more, in the US, in a Fury rematch than he'd make in the UK against Joshua.

[Robbie Barrett]

False. Wilder will make more, in the US, in a Fury rematch than he'd make in the UK against Joshua.

How'd you work that out. C'mon show us.

[N/A]

if the offer was serious enough, they would have sent Hearn a contract first

That's not how things work. You send a term sheet first and if the term sheet is agreed to in principle, then you go to a long form contract.

No different than Hearn's offer. Did Hearn send a contract first when he offered 15 million? No. He sent a term sheet and once that was agreed upon in principle, THEN he sent a contract.

Hearn's own actions show you're wrong.

[Robbie Barrett]

Nonsense made up by Hearn months later when his original excuses weren't working. Warren's only involvement was telling Finkel what BT would pay so Finkel knew how much to try to get from Sky.




It wasn't booked in the first place.

Absolute bollocks again. Why would BT bid for something they weren't getting? Go away you ******.

[N/A]

And there's no way anyone with any kind of business background would think it's as simple as that. 50 million is only 50 million if its 50 million.

I tell you what, I'll pay you $100k to reveal your identity. We have a deal?

If I agree in principle to your offer of 100k, we would then sit down and hammer out the smaller details in a long form contract.

But if I don't accept the concept of revealing myself for 100k, there's really nothing else to discuss. Who would sit down and argue over which escrow company to use if I haven't even agreed in principle to the 100k?

So your own example shows how ridiculous it would be to meet about the finer points when the larger point hasn't been agreed to.

But yes, I do agree to the concept of revealing myself for 100k. So if you wanted to discuss the finer points and draft contracts, there would be a point to doing that. If I rejected the 100k, there'd be no point in arguing over smaller details over a deal that's already been rejected in principle.

[Robbie Barrett]

That's not how things work. You send a term sheet first and if the term sheet is agreed to in principle, then you go to a long form contract.

No different than Hearn's offer. Did Hearn send a contract first when he offered 15 million? No. He sent a term sheet and once that was agreed upon in principle, THEN he sent a contract.

Hearn's own actions show you're wrong.

Wilder team didn't want to reveal all the terms. Hearn asked for the terms. Stop lying you tard.

[Robbie Barrett]

If I agree in principle to your offer of 100k, we would then sit down and hammer out the smaller details in a long form contract.

But if I don't accept the concept of revealing myself for 100k, there's really nothing else to discuss. Who would sit down and argue over which escrow company to use if I haven't even agreed in principle to the 100k?

So your own example shows how ridiculous it would be to meet about the finer points when the larger point hasn't been agreed to.

But yes, I do agree to the concept of revealing myself for 100k. So if you wanted to discuss the finer points and draft contracts, there would be a point to doing that. If I rejected the 100k, there'd be no point in arguing over smaller details over a deal that's already been rejected in principle.

It was a publicity stunt. What difference would it make if Hearn agreed and then turned it down when discussing the terms?

Only difference is the headlines. Which is what Haymon and Wilder wanted.

[N/A]

Yet today he finds himself being a cheerleader trying to convince anybody that will listen that Deontay is well known because he has 1.6 million followers.

Think about how ****** you sound when you say a celebrity, with 1.6 million followers, who stars on a major reality show, who just headlined a successful PPV, and has been Showtime's biggest ratings draw for years, is "unknown."

If 325,000 households are paying $75 to watch you, you're known.