Wilder smiles: "50/50 or no AJ fight, belts not important"

[N/A]

find your own source not my problem if you believe me or not.

UK PPV numbers aren't released. You likely just made up a number, or saw someone make up a number and were ****** enough to believe them.

[N/A]

To my eternal shame, I have no idea how to do that.
However, the interview is on Boxing Social YouTube from 14 August 2018 in the run up to Fury v Pianeta.
It's titled Frank Warren In Depth.

Thank you for helping me find the video. I just watched it. Frank said BT wanted the fight, not that the fight had to be on BT or that BT was financing the fight. Big difference.

At the time, when the negotiations were going on and Hearn said Sky had to be the broadcaster, Finkel publicly said there was no problem with Sky being the broadcaster as long as they made a fair offer.

But how do you determine what a fair offer is? That's where Warren comes in. Finkel asked Warren to find out what BT would pay, so Finkel could then go to Hearn and say, "BT is willing to pay X, so we can put the fight on Sky, but they need to pay close to X."

There's nothing unreasonable about that. Wilder never asked Joshua to leave his UK broadcaster. However, Joshua is asking Wilder to leave his US broadcaster. That's not fair. It's the top UK heavyweight vs. the top US heavyweight. The fair thing would be for Joshua's broadcaster to get UK rights and Wilder's broadcaster to get US rights.

[hugh grant]

Surely wilder won't always pay his future opponents 50-50?

[Cobra Curry]

Thank you for helping me find the video. I just watched it. Frank said BT wanted the fight, not that the fight had to be on BT or that BT was financing the fight. Big difference.

At the time, when the negotiations were going on and Hearn said Sky had to be the broadcaster, Finkel publicly said there was no problem with Sky being the broadcaster as long as they made a fair offer.

But how do you determine what a fair offer is? That's where Warren comes in. Finkel asked Warren to find out what BT would pay, so Finkel could then go to Hearn and say, "BT is willing to pay X, so we can put the fight on Sky, but they need to pay close to X."

There's nothing unreasonable about that. Wilder never asked Joshua to leave his UK broadcaster. However, Joshua is asking Wilder to leave his US broadcaster. That's not fair. It's the top UK heavyweight vs. the top US heavyweight. The fair thing would be for Joshua's broadcaster to get UK rights and Wilder's broadcaster to get US rights.

No problem.

I have to say it sounded to me as though the deal was based around BT Sport, which would somewhat explain the whole "48 hour deadline, no meetings or discussions" scenario, but your point about establishing a ball park figure is fair enough.

As a network free agent, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask Wilder to fight on your platform as long you're willing to pay him.
Isn't that the whole point of free agency? The ability to fight anyone, anywhere?

[N/A]

I have to say it sounded to me as though the deal was based around BT Sport, which would somewhat explain the whole "48 hour deadline, no meetings or discussions" scenario, but your point about establishing a ball park figure is fair enough.

Those kinds of deadlines are a bit of negotiating foreplay. Hard to explain, but there's a bit of an art to the early stages of negotiations, both sides taking firm stances, playing mind games, to see who will soften first.

What fans need to remember though is that when Hearn offered Wilder 12.5 million, it had THE SAME EXACT DEADLINE. Literally. Wilder's 50 million offer literally copied and pasted the deadline from Hearn's 12.5 million offer. Just as a bit of a **** you to Hearn that two can play that game. Obviously these deadlines are never serious. Weeks after the 50 million offer, Hearn talked publicly about being in negotiations, the negotiations going well, Haymon answering all of Hearn's questions, etc. But that it was looking like Joshua's team didn't want to come to the US and would be rejecting the offer.

As a network free agent, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask Wilder to fight on your platform as long you're willing to pay him.
Isn't that the whole point of free agency? The ability to fight anyone, anywhere?

But Joshua is a network free agent too. So it's not unreasonable to ask Joshua to come to Wilder's platform since PPV can generate a lot more money than DAZN.

As for the point of free agency, when it comes to Haymon's fighters, the point of free agency is to keep their current partners honest. Always maximizing leverage. But their current partners wouldn't be willing to work off a hand shake if they didn't believe loyalty would be shown. So it's a delicate balance. If Haymon promises his partners, "my fighters will be loyal as long as you're fair and pay market rate," Haymon's fighters have to live up to that, or else nobody would work on a hand shake anymore and they wouldn't be able to get away with what they've been doing. It wasn't easy to do what Haymon's done in terms of getting so many people to work on a handshake. His entire business model revolves around being loyal . . . as long as the other party is constantly ponying up what's necessary.

[Fabes88]

You are making excuses by backtracking. You know Wilder is ducking. You use to be a straight forward poster. Not sure what happened to you. Shame doe

There’s a set of fans who pretend to be objective but it’s quite clear they aren’t

[Fabes88]

Thank you for helping me find the video. I just watched it. Frank said BT wanted the fight, not that the fight had to be on BT or that BT was financing the fight. Big difference.

At the time, when the negotiations were going on and Hearn said Sky had to be the broadcaster, Finkel publicly said there was no problem with Sky being the broadcaster as long as they made a fair offer.

But how do you determine what a fair offer is? That's where Warren comes in. Finkel asked Warren to find out what BT would pay, so Finkel could then go to Hearn and say, "BT is willing to pay X, so we can put the fight on Sky, but they need to pay close to X."

There's nothing unreasonable about that. Wilder never asked Joshua to leave his UK broadcaster. However, Joshua is asking Wilder to leave his US broadcaster. That's not fair. It's the top UK heavyweight vs. the top US heavyweight. The fair thing would be for Joshua's broadcaster to get UK rights and Wilder's broadcaster to get US rights.

Did you hear the part where warren admitted he wouldn’t go for that deal if It was offered?

Secondly aj has an exclusive deal with sky. All his fights have to be broadcast by them there’s no “well bt have offered more for the fight”

[N/A]

Did you hear the part where warren admitted he wouldn’t go for that deal if It was offered?

I'm happy to listen to any part you want me to. Just post a link and a time stamp. Thanks.

aj has an exclusive deal with sky. All his fights have to be broadcast by them there’s no “well bt have offered more for the fight”

You can't ask for 50 million and then also expect to retain the UK TV rights on top of 50 million. That would be insane. So whatever Sky would have normally paid Joshua, that money would instead be going to PBC to try to make back their 50 million.

Regardless of Joshua's Sky deal, there's a negotiation for every fight, based on the level of opponent, for what Sky will spend on marketing, how many buys they'll guarantee, how much money they'll put up in advance, what the split will be, etc.

Sky has no incentive to negotiate in good faith if they automatically get the rights no matter what. That's not how it works. Getting a bid from BT gives you a base line on what the marketplace values the fight at, what would be an appropriate marketing budget, etc.

[EnglishOxide]

But Joshua is a network free agent too. So it's not unreasonable to ask Joshua to come to Wilder's platform since PPV can generate a lot more money than DAZN.

So WHERE IS THE GOD DAMN OFFER FROM SHOWTIME!?

Wilder is being fucking milked dry. AJ is the only fucking side making offers.

Deyonce is ducking.
Haymon is marinating.
AJ is conceding (2 way rematch and 60/40 split and first fight on US turf).
Hearn has been making offers to fight NOW.
DAZN have guaranteed $100m+ to Deyonce.
Showtime offered a bluff $50m or 50/50 split 15 months ago.

Enough of the excuses from Deyonce. Enough.

I don't want to hear no shit about mandatories, injuries, Fury rematches, flat fees, baby oil, pregnancy, gypsy magic, restraining orders, broken arms, bad referees, inkless pens, no date on the contract, no signature on the contract, no 50/50, no lineal title, no Whyte fight for 2 years, no opponents lined up for 3 years without AJ, no idea what AJ is making, no loyalty BS.

I fucking guarantee you that if Deyonce and AJ win their next fights then Deyonce will find a new excuse not to fight. And do you know what it is? I'll ****ing tell you.

DAZN will guarantee $100m for Deyonce to fight AJ twice.

Haymon will tell him that Showtime may generate more than that for him over 2 fights on a PPV model, without guarantees OR he can make big money still against Fury or 44yr old Klitschko.

Deyonce will believe him, and this shitshow will carry on.

Nobody should support this excuse making, ducking piece of shit.

If I was American I would be fucking ashamed that this man is taking a big steaming shit on the great American heavyweight heritage that came before him.

[N/A]

So WHERE IS THE GOD DAMN OFFER FROM SHOWTIME!?

Why would you be privy to Showtime's offers?