Comments Thread For: What's Happening With DAZN? - Part Two

[ShoulderRoll]

I agree except people need to understand what happens when there is a major fight. Casual fans want to see major fights so they have no issue with PPV's. In fact, they seem to like it because they pay for the event, have a party, and then its over.

The issue with PPV is that too many non PPV quality fights make it to PPV.

I would like to see them all restructure things such that the top p4p guys have 3 fights a year with one being a major fight that is PPV worthy and the other 2 on regular TV. Also want to see them get rid of network deal and allow all platforms to bid on fights which will encourage the better fights because they will yield a higher bid.

You have Crawford make 2 defenses and Spence make 2 defenses on regular TV/cable, then they fight on PPV.

The problem is that those defenses on regular tv and cable are usually garbage, against Kavaliuskas-level opponents or worse. To get you to pay for the good fights.

The NFL doesn't put the first round of the playoffs on free tv then ask you to pay for the conference championships and the Super Bowl.

I do like your idea of having all platforms bid on fights, though. But then you get douchebags like Arum complaining that the networks are trying to play matchmaker.

[The Big Dunn]

The problem is that those defenses on regular tv and cable are usually garbage, against Kavaliuskas-level opponents or worse. To get you to pay for the good fights.

The NFL doesn't put the first round of the playoffs on free tv then ask you to pay for the conference championships and the Super Bowl.

I do like your idea of having all platforms bid on fights, though. But then you get douchebags like Arum complaining that the networks are trying to play matchmaker.

True but the mandos need to get their shots even if in some cases the mando will be a huge underdog. It doesn't sit right with me that a guy earns the mando spot then gets bypassed.

True, but the NFL and NBA do put the opening rounds on cable (TNT, ESPN) while the championship is on ABC and then rotates on the big networks because ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC are in more homes than TNT, TBS and ESPN. Same with the NCAA-the championship game is CBS while earlier games are spread out on various CBS affiliated networks.

The networks absolutely should be the matchmaker. What I don't like is them being the fighters employer. This Crawford/Spence fight would happen if neither was a network guy and all the networks could bid on the fight with the highest sight fee offer getting the fight.

[sicko]

Right, and PBC fanboys on here celebrate getting 1 million viewers on Fox. Those are garbage numbers on free network TV.

Well for boxing and in this ERA in which again boxing is not very popular as a whole, they're lucky to reach 1 Million. Lets look pass this PBC vs DAZN vs Top Rank/ESPN garbage...

So If Free Boxing on major Networks is barely being watched/consumed...Imagine what the Numbers are for a App that people have to pay for like ESPN+ and DAZN

If they're not watching Boxing even when it for free, how the hell can people expect them to subscribe to a APP to watch Boxing? Which once again makes the entire PBC vs DAZN vs Top Rank/ESPN childish back and forth so ******! It all works hand in hand, Boxing Fans should support and want ALL Platforms of boxing to succeed

[killakali]

Except that PBC was selling ads during basically all of the shows of Phase 1 (a simple point that still gets ignored today); the outlay was the outlay, but the ads and basically selling near all of the slate internationally (BoxNation still needed content) likely made the "hemorrhage" far less that folks wanted to argue it was.

Phase 2 has now hit, that outflow+ads has now turned into a $400m+ inflow over the next 4 years, Phase 3 will likely see that inflow increase even further, and that's before you count any proceeds to the project from PPV.

What's DAZN's path now, especially after their "shock and awe" strategy hasn't worked?

how much did the investors get back from the 600 mil they were duped out of?

[_Rexy_]

The problem is that those defenses on regular tv and cable are usually garbage, against Kavaliuskas-level opponents or worse. To get you to pay for the good fights.

The NFL doesn't put the first round of the playoffs on free tv then ask you to pay for the conference championships and the Super Bowl.

I do like your idea of having all platforms bid on fights, though. But then you get douchebags like Arum complaining that the networks are trying to play matchmaker.

Kavaliuskas wasn't a bad opponent though, just nobody had heard of him and he wasn't the opponent people wanted. Was a good fight, and Kavaliuskas was ranked in the top 10 by all of the big lists (ring, tbrb, espn, etc.)

again though, he just wasn't the opponent any of us wanted for Crawford.

[Sheikh]

All of the channels and promoters are in trouble for a simple reason. Boxers are still being paid huge purses and boxing is declining in popularity. This model is not sustainable.

For instance the wilder v ortiz ppv did 275,000 buys and that number could be a huge success but it was not because it lost money because of the huge purses for wilder and ortiz. If the purses were far smaller it would be sustainable.

[ShoulderRoll]

Kavaliuskas wasn't a bad opponent though, just nobody had heard of him and he wasn't the opponent people wanted. Was a good fight, and Kavaliuskas was ranked in the top 10 by all of the big lists (ring, tbrb, espn, etc.)

again though, he just wasn't the opponent any of us wanted for Crawford.

He was just the first example that came to mind. It turned out to be closer than expected by pure luck, but that definitely wasn't the opponent most people wanted for Crawford.

[_Rexy_]

He was just the first example that came to mind. It turned out to be closer than expected by pure luck, but that definitely wasn't the opponent most people wanted for Crawford.

None of us wanted that opponent, but the one we did want just flew threw a windshield, so I was fine with it lol

[Scipio2009]

I agree except people need to understand what happens when there is a major fight. Casual fans want to see major fights so they have no issue with PPV's. In fact, they seem to like it because they pay for the event, have a party, and then its over.

The issue with PPV is that too many non PPV quality fights make it to PPV.

I would like to see them all restructure things such that the top p4p guys have 3 fights a year with one being a major fight that is PPV worthy and the other 2 on regular TV. Also want to see them get rid of network deal and allow all platforms to bid on fights which will encourage the better fights because they will yield a higher bid.

You have Crawford make 2 defenses and Spence make 2 defenses on regular TV/cable, then they fight on PPV.

Only issue with that is that Spence-Danny, Pacquiao-Spence, Spence-Porter 2, and possibly Spence-Thurman have all been built enough to be viable PPV fights.

Depending on when, Spence-Ugas and Spence-Lipinets may get to that level too.

Getting every fight for free would be cool, but the economics of that don't make sense

[Scipio2009]

how much did the investors get back from the 600 mil they were duped out of?

No one was "duped" out of anything.

The investment from Waddell and Reed was what it was, the money was spent on 3 years of various TV deals, the revenue from the commercials that did get sold (plus Haymon's fee allegedly) was rolled back to W&R, and now W&R are seeing a piece of the basically half a billion dollar TV rights deals for the next 4 years, with Phase 3 likely seeing the package go up even higher.

PBC is still around, W&R still own a massive chunk of it, and the investors will likely see at least $75m of that $500m off the TV deal, a piece of whatever PPVs get done over the next 4 years, and Haymon's fee for however long he agreed to use it as a marker for the deal.

Put up $600m (or whatever the amount was to start), spend it down on the initial TV outlay, make some of it back in commercials on that start, get at least $100m as their piece of the first 4-year deal, watch that number go up even more on the next deal, with FOX/Showtime keeping boxing for the foreseeable future.

2015, the investment was made; by 2019, the investment was bringing in money from steady income streams that don't look set to disappear any time soon.

No idea what the books are, but wouldn't shock me if W&R ends up with dividends enough to cover the outlay by 2025 (or sooner), with the investment in the black from then on in.

1% of the fund, with the money dividended back in 10 years, and a growing positive stream from then on in?

Not a bad deal