Comments Thread For: Wilder: I'd Definitely Rather Fight Breazeale On Fox Than PPV

[Ray*]

I understand that he is contractually bound to fight on Sky. However, that's HIS issue, not anyone else associated with the fight. As such, Sky will still have to pay for broadcast rights of the fight.

His issue is there issue, anyone that wants to fight Fury would have to respect his exclusive contract with ESPN in America, just like Joshua in the UK...Legally there is zero way around it.

[Scipio2009]

You can believe whatever suits your Wilder fangirling. I would go with words from Warren and Lou Di Bella. BT sport were putting up the 50 and the 30m. No network put that money up for another fighter that is signed exclusively to another network.

Some of you guys are either uneducated or brainwashed, Wilder isn’t signed exclusively to any network, so you can shop his name around and get the best deal..... like they are doing now.

Tyson Fury is signed EXCLUSIVELY to ESPN, so you can offer him 50m and 30m for two fights on DAZN but you would be wasting you time because he wouldn’t have been able to sign a contract like that.... knowing Fury has an exclusive contract with ESPN and DAZN offering him 50 and 30m shows they aren’t serious.

The fact that you think BT Sport was putting up $50m for Wilder-Joshua in the US, when the biggest fight in British history, in Britain, saw Joshua/Klitschko split a total of $42m, or that the bidding for Mayweather-Pacquiao only got up to maybe $25m, shows everyone how ****** you actually seem to be.

Why the **** would BT Sport put up $50m for a fight that will air in the UK at 3am?

[Ake-Dawg]

His issue is there issue, anyone that wants to fight Fury would have to respect his exclusive contract with ESPN in America, just like Joshua in the UK...Legally there is zero way around it.

Respect isn't giving in. That's when either joint broadcast are done (not likely) or the fighter with the contractual obligation compromises in negotiations to meet his network obligation. Just like with Wilder and DAZN, if another network is promising more money, you don't just shrug your shoulders and say "my network won't let me". You figure it out. Sky has a financial motivation to facilitate getting Joshua fights made so they can actually make money off of him.

[Ray*]

The fact that you think BT Sport was putting up $50m for Wilder-Joshua in the US, when the biggest fight in British history, in Britain, saw Joshua/Klitschko split a total of $42m, or that the bidding for Mayweather-Pacquiao only got up to maybe $25m, shows everyone how ****** you actually seem to be.

Why the **** would BT Sport put up $50m for a fight that will air in the UK at 3am?

Way to spin things again lol, show me where I said BT sport are putting up the 50m for the fight in the USA.

[Ray*]

Respect isn't giving in. That's when either joint broadcast are done (not likely) or the fighter with the contractual obligation compromises in negotiations to meet his network obligation. Just like with Wilder and DAZN, if another network is promising more money, you don't just shrug your shoulders and say "my network won't let me". You figure it out. Sky has a financial motivation to facilitate getting Joshua fights made so they can actually make money off of him.

Wilder “Am a network and promotional free agent”.... Try again.... Instead of using a fighter who is a free agent. Why don’t you use a fight who isn’t.... Fury signed to an exclusive ESPN deal (Can’t take showtime or DAZN money) in America. Joshua exclusively signed to Sky sports (Can’t take BT sport or ITV sport money).... You guys have to try again.

[Ake-Dawg]

Wilder “Am a network and promotional free agent”.... Try again.... Instead of using a fighter who is a free agent. Why don’t you use a fight who isn’t.... Fury signed to an exclusive ESPN deal (Can’t take showtime or DAZN money) in America. Joshua exclusively signed to Sky sports (Can’t take BT sport or ITV sport money).... You guys have to try again.

Can't fight on the networks unless expressly given permission by contractual network. I'd venture to say the network likely has language in the contract which allows for fighting on another network, even if it comes with a financial penalty per se.

[Ray*]

Can't fight on the networks unless expressly given permission by contractual network. I'd venture to say the network likely has language in the contract which allows for fighting on another network, even if it comes with a financial penalty per se.

Am sure the language on those sort of contracts would be NO.... end of.

[Ake-Dawg]

Am sure the language on those sort of contracts would be NO.... end of.

And I am sure a network would withhold the right to make an exception if it was financially beneficial to them. End of.

[Ake-Dawg]

The offer obviously wasn't good, we all found out in the end why it wasn't. BT sports were funding it. Which would have given the chance of that fight happen 0%.

The fact that you think BT Sport was putting up $50m for Wilder-Joshua in the US, when the biggest fight in British history, in Britain, saw Joshua/Klitschko split a total of $42m, or that the bidding for Mayweather-Pacquiao only got up to maybe $25m, shows everyone how ****** you actually seem to be.

Why the **** would BT Sport put up $50m for a fight that will air in the UK at 3am?

Way to spin things again lol, show me where I said BT sport are putting up the 50m for the fight in the USA.

End of.....

[Ray*]

And I am sure a network would withhold the right to make an exception if it was financially beneficial to them. End of.

Lol you are dumber than I thought. In the box you go..