Comments Thread For: Hearn Hopes That DAZN as Middleman Can Make Wilder-Joshua

[THEFRESHBRAWLER]

Are you deliberately being ****** or does it come natural to you?

You’re in timeout boy. I said go sit in the corner like a good boy.

[Oshio]

Eddie Hearn, promoter for IBF, IBO, WBA, WBO heavyweight champion Anthony Joshua, believes there is a new avenue to finalize a potential unification with WBC world champion Deontay Wilder. It's been no secret that Wilder is being courted by streaming service DAZN, who have an exclusive content deal with Hearn.
[Click Here To Read More]

Signing Wilder is not enough to make the Joshua-Wilder fight happen. As long as there's a Hearn and Haymon involved the fight would always be difficult to make

[Jkp]

Does Finkel even know how to use a telephone?
That's how bad he is.

I think hes managed to arrange a fight or two in his 90 years.

[sicko]

It took Les Moonves to get Mayweather vs Pacquiao so that 3rd Party is needed sometimes ESPECIALLY in boxing with all the EGOS in this Business. It is more EGOS from the guys who don't even fight than it is from the actual fighters themselves

[Scipio2009]

So let me guess are you looking at it from the consumer or boxers perspective? As a viewer what do you care if it’s just you and a few of your friends watching the fight so long as you save paying $75 dollars and as a boxer if it is shown in over 2 million homes and you are only guaranteed 30 million as opposed to Dazn that will pay you 40 million yet streamed to just 500 people. A boxer will go where the biggest money is being offered.

I don’t get satisfaction paying for PPV and thinking 2 million people are also paying with me. No thank you

Both; simply put, I don't see the value being brought to bear by DAZN. Alvarez-Jacobs is definitely a fight that I'll be watching (from my usual sports bar, since DAZN saved that mistake; even if it weren't available in the sports bars, I may have even signed up to get that fight), but that's basically been the only main event worth watching live of their entire run so far (and don't even get me started on the undercards). Saunders-Andrade would've been a good fight for core boxing fans, and that upcoming super flyweight rematch is likely good for the hardcore fight fan (won't even embarrass myself trying to name the fighters because I've paid basically zero attention to the whole thing).

For Wilder-Joshua, at whatever price (but most likely $75/$65), we're talking about a fight party; friends and family, the girls your friends bring with them (partners or otherwise), the friend of your friend who likes boxing, the random friend who folks are cool with who just likes to be around, etc.

Before even bothering with paying for the show, a host is out at least $100-$150 on everything else (food, drinks, setting up, etc).

And no one risks the party on a stream, legally or illegally.

From the fighter's perspective, the DAZN offer isn't so cut and dry either. Floyd and Pacquiao, if the numbers are right, split something like $250m on the US TV, but also at least another $5m+ each in personal sponsors, with the event sponsors going for $1m a pop (with Tecate paying well more than that for center ring).

The US TV drove most of the money, but the other money didn't turn out to be pennies either.

For the biggest heavyweight fight since Tyson-Lewis, is any advertiser really going to pay a premium for a fight that near no one will see?

Corona, Under Armor, whatever big movie release that's on the way, whatever ******** site trying to get attention, etc.

The DAZN fee is indeed sizable, but that comes with basically every other US revenue (beyond the tickets sold) being zeroed.

[Scipio2009]

So let me guess are you looking at it from the consumer or boxers perspective? As a viewer what do you care if it’s just you and a few of your friends watching the fight so long as you save paying $75 dollars and as a boxer if it is shown in over 2 million homes and you are only guaranteed 30 million as opposed to Dazn that will pay you 40 million yet streamed to just 500 people. A boxer will go where the biggest money is being offered.

I don’t get satisfaction paying for PPV and thinking 2 million people are also paying with me. No thank you

And I don't get satisfaction from a big fight party hanging on whether a stream doesn't just give out.

[Scipio2009]

Yes, they could make an offer to Hearn and AJ for a fight on ShoPPV. But they wouldn't have asked for a meeting with DAZN to do that, because, like you just said, AJ is not under contract to DAZN.

Wilder's team are obviously meeting with DAZN to discuss the possibility of Wilder getting a deal to fight AJ on DAZN, not on ShoPPV.

Wilder didn't call DAZN; DAZN called Wilder's camp and got the phone basically hung up on them, DAZN passed a dramatically improved offer through Lou DiBella that was good enough for a meeting, and Wilder and his camp will discuss the offer after.

Once the camp weighs DAZN's offer (I doubt that Wilder heads over there for another meeting) against what they've already valued the Joshua fight on their end, the next move will likely be made.

[Scipio2009]

Are you saying that 1m+ Americans would pay $75 to see a fight, but they wouldn't pay $10 to see it?

Do you guys enjoy being ripped off or what?

And you are missing the bigger picture. DAZN wouldn't just be showing the fight in the US. They already have millions of subscribers in other countries and are hoping to attract millions more with fights like this.

DAZN screened Fury vs Wilder in multiple countries outside the US, including Germany, which is one of the most lucrative boxing markets in the world.

I'm saying that the fight is big enough now to do well over 1m PPV buys through the PPV mechanism that's basically governed the last 30 of big time boxing in the United States, and the general US sports fan (nevermind the PPV consumer) could give two chits what a 'DAZN' even is.

Saul 'Canelo' Alvarez fought Rocky Fielding, and maybe 100k viewers watched the fight (if the actual viewership numbers were anywhere near the 25k that allegedly watched Joshua-Povetkin in the US, Alvarez may not have even gotten that many); you strap that same fight to PPV, with how Canelo has been built in the market, and you many been able to get over 750k PPV buys due to the spectacle of the fight.

People work with what they're used to and things that deliver what they want how they want it.

Saul Alvarez and Daniel Jacobs is going to draw so little attention that Wilder-Fury 2 was planned for PPV in May well in advance of Fury's pull out, and Wilder-Breazeale is still happening in may.

[Scipio2009]

Are you saying that 1m+ Americans would pay $75 to see a fight, but they wouldn't pay $10 to see it?

Do you guys enjoy being ripped off or what?

And you are missing the bigger picture. DAZN wouldn't just be showing the fight in the US. They already have millions of subscribers in other countries and are hoping to attract millions more with fights like this.

DAZN screened Fury vs Wilder in multiple countries outside the US, including Germany, which is one of the most lucrative boxing markets in the world.

Real talk, even if you count every market that DAZN does business in, how many users do you earnestly think have DAZN? A German broadcaster with no Bundesliga, but can definitely give those German pigskin fans their NFL fix starting after midnight, lol.

Just to give you some perspective.

[Scipio2009]

I'm sorry to break the news but that fight has been pushed back to 2020. We won't see a Joshua/Wilder fight in 2019. Wilder/Brezeale and perhaps Wilder vs Whyte, Klitschko or Usyk is on his agenda next for the balance of the 2019 calendar year. I guess that means that AJ can bfight Luis Ortiz after Miller next since he will be available.

AJ already owes the IBF their mandatory, Kubrat Pulev is the mandatory, and the IBF has no qualms stripping Joshua (especially with the feds staying on their back).

With the fight mandatory, Joshua having no contract with any US broadcaster, and Arum backing Pulev on ESPN, Hearn better hope on hope.