Eddie Hearn really doesn't understand the US market

[N/A]

But wrestling has way more viewers though. That's why their price per 30 second ad is higher

That's not what was being discussed. Don't try to trick people joining the conversation late. You know we were discussing price per viewer and that you were caught in a lie.

That wouldn't be enough to improve Showtime boxing's garbage ratings.

First of all, OF COURSE a 20% boost would improve a rating. Second of all, those watching on Showtime Anytime aren't counted by Nielsen either. Those are cable/satellite Showtime subscribers like me who often end up watching the live feed on a Roku or laptop. That's usually another 10% boost. So you're already talking a 30% increase. You then also have people watching the west coast replay, the Showtime Extreme, replay, etc. Solely the Nielsen number doesn't give you an accurate idea of how many people watched.

[Scipio2009]

Hearn doesn't understand the US market, he's a Brit. That's a given.

But why is Haymon/PBC try to emulate a guy who doesn't understand the market? Why are they overpaying Wilder for fights that don't make any profit?

I'm not a Brit, so I don't have any idea how Hearn is able to pay AJ x-times more than what Showtime/PBC/Fox is able to pay Wilder. And I once read that Hearn doesn't rely on PPV sales.

What I don't get is why are these people carrying Wilder's fights like to lose money just for the purpose of making it look like they're more macho than a non American like Hearn? It sounds ******.

Because an undisputed heavyweight champion, who knocks near everyone out, with reach into the casual audience, is worth the investment and then some.

Showtime/CBS bet $250m for 30 months/6 fights with Floyd, and not only did the business off of those 6 fights more than cover the money, they were able to leverage the Floyd sweepstakes and Floyd's fights to develop a core talent base that vaulted them to the #1 boxing brand rather quickly.

Time is valuable (and airtime could be just as valuable), but Showtime/PBC have basically spent 7 years developing Wilder (nearly 5 years as champion), and the returns on this Ortiz 2 fight will give us a good gauge of whether he's 1-3 fights away from stardom.

Wilder does 1 million buys on PPV @$75hd, the event generates $75m, the proceeds still get split up, but Showtime's share on that fight is $6m-$7m. Deduct whatever production costs that Showtime paid for the event, you still have a nice dividend likely over $3m to steer toward covering the expenses of developing Wilder.

Wilder holds up his end of the projection, and the investment in Wilder gets basically covered in less than a handful of PPV fights that deliver (even on the 350k of the Further PPV, Showtime likely got near $3m to deduct production costs from and start covering the Wilder development spend).

It's a long bet, but if it pays off, it's a win for everyone

[Bob Haymon]

That's not what was being discussed. Don't try to trick people joining the conversation late. You know we were discussing price per viewer and that you were caught in a lie.

There's no point in discussing price per viewer because it's irrelevant. PBC could be getting $1 million per viewer but if they only have 1 viewer they're still getting hundreds of millions of dollars less than WWE. Networks and advertisers aren't paying per viewer, they're paying for the overall viewership in the demographics they care about.

First of all, OF COURSE a 20% boost would improve a rating. Second of all, those watching on Showtime Anytime aren't counted by Nielsen either. Those are cable/satellite Showtime subscribers like me who often end up watching the live feed on a Roku or laptop. That's usually another 10% boost. So you're already talking a 30% increase. You then also have people watching the west coast replay, the Showtime Extreme, replay, etc. Solely the Nielsen number doesn't give you an accurate idea of how many people watched.

Literally every other show out there has digital only viewers. Showtime boxing is still doing much worse than nearly all of them. The west coast feed is counted in the live + same day ratings. Why do you think ratings charts never have the Showtime West airing listed separately? Most people aren't subscribing to Showtime's stand alone service just for boxing when they can easily find an online stream. A 30% boost in viewership is just a fantasy.

[N/A]

There's no point in discussing price per viewer because it's irrelevant.

Then you should have said that initially, instead of lying about it, getting caught, then trying to change the subject, getting caught, then finally, claiming it doesn't matter.

Literally every other show out there has digital only viewers. Showtime boxing is still doing much worse than nearly all of them.

You can't subscribe to ESPN directly. You can't subscribe to Fox directly. 20% of Showtime's subscribers have no middle man and therefore aren't counted by Nielsen. This is in addition to the traditional subscribers that watch digitally.

[Robbie Barrett]

Then you should have said that initially, instead of lying about it, getting caught, then trying to change the subject, getting caught, then finally, claiming it doesn't matter.




You can't subscribe to ESPN directly. You can't subscribe to Fox directly. 20% of Showtime's subscribers have no middle man and therefore aren't counted by Nielsen. This is in addition to the traditional subscribers that watch digitally.

You don't even know how Nielsen ratings work you moron. They do take in to account streaming views now. So your whole argument is absolute bollocks.

"Today’s program content is viewed on more than just television sets but also via the Internet in-home and out-of-home, live and time-shifted, free and paid, rebroadcast and original programs.

Nielsen provides advanced measurement solutions, rich demographic data and deep behavioral insights that help clients understand how consumers engage with media within and across all the platforms they use—TV and online.

HOW WE DO IT
We measure TV viewing using Nielsen’s Peoplemeter technology to electronically capture all viewing from our nationally projectable sample of panelists.

Nielsen representative panels of Internet users provide browsing and streaming metrics for online users. Using census-based measurement, we provide in-depth tracking and analysis of site performance as well as information about audience consumption of, and engagement with, streaming media.

Finally, through single-source panels along with modeled databases, we measure how consumers engage with multiple media platforms."

https://www.nielsen.com/uk/en/solutions/measurement/audience/

[Bob Haymon]

Then you should have said that initially, instead of lying about it, getting caught, then trying to change the subject, getting caught, then finally, claiming it doesn't matter.

I was never talking about what they were getting paid per viewer. My claim was always that WWE has higher ad rates than PBC then you were the one who brought up that boxing gets more per viewer.

You can't subscribe to ESPN directly. You can't subscribe to Fox directly. 20% of Showtime's subscribers have no middle man and therefore aren't counted by Nielsen. This is in addition to the traditional subscribers that watch digitally.

You are wrong again. It's not 20% because a lot of those digital subscribers come from Hulu, Youtube TV, Sling, or any of the other dozens of streaming options. That puts them on a nearly even playing field as any other program. Even with a 20% boost they'd still be getting in the low 200k viewers for trash fights like Barthelemy-Easter and Ennis-Fernandez. On the bright side they're not as dead as FS1.

[N/A]

I was never talking about what they were getting paid per viewer. My claim was always that WWE has higher ad rates than PBC then you were the one who brought up that boxing gets more per viewer.

I said a boxing viewer was more valuable than a wrestling viewer. You disagreed. Now you realize you're wrong, so you keep trying to change the subject.

You are wrong again. It's not 20% because a lot of those digital subscribers come from Hulu, Youtube TV, Sling, or any of the other dozens of streaming options.

Nielsen counts linear channels on services of that nature. Nielsen doesn't count apps like the Showtime app. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Bob Haymon]

I said a boxing viewer was more valuable than a wrestling viewer. You disagreed. Now you realize you're wrong, so you keep trying to change the subject.

You're delusional. You were the one who started shifting goalposts by talking about boxing being more valuable per viewer. I never agreed or disagreed because it's irrelevant.

Nielsen counts linear channels on services of that nature. Nielsen doesn't count apps like the Showtime app. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Showtime lumps all their OTT subscribers together whether they subscribe through a third party service or directly through their stand alone service. You have no idea how many are or aren't measured by Nielsen. If their linear ratings are anything to go by it's not a pretty picture.