Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: DiBella: Pay-Per-View is Dying; Wilder-Joshua Not a PPV Fight

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    So put it on PPV in the UK (it'll do big numbers) and broadcast it free-to-air in the US. The reason it's potentially not PPV in the US is because Wilder has fought nothing but bums since winning the title two years ago.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by Kigali View Post
      Says a booted-over vaudeville act.

      'Ole man riiiiivaah....'dat ole man riiiiiva keeps rollin' alooong...
      Tote 'dat barge....lif' 'dat bail..'
      "Kigali" isn't that a famous circus clown?.. it all makes sense now lmao

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by A.K View Post
        "Kigali" isn't that a famous circus clown?.. it all makes sense now lmao
        'tote 'dat baaaarge.....lif' 'dat baaaaaail.....get all drunk an' go toooo jail'


        How you can hold those notes while getting pee'd on is Vaudeville legend.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by Kigali View Post
          'tote 'dat baaaarge.....lif' 'dat baaaaaail.....get all drunk an' go toooo jail'


          How you can hold those notes while getting pee'd on is Vaudeville legend.
          - got molested as a child

          Comment


          • #55
            PPV is dying. sporting fans have gotten more informed in regards to ppv. social media has a lot to do with it along with streaming technology.

            it took pacquiao and floyd a while to be on ppv, nowadays, fighters who havent faced anybody notable already charging ppv money....

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by Eff Pandas View Post
              I'd argue the biggest problem with PPV boxing is the promoters, networks & even the fighters trying to get every single dime they can by "marinating" the fight for months & years sometimes. You put fights on PPV cuz their entertainment & people wanna see competitive, compelling fights...not just to make money. This is what the UFC & Eddie Hearn get right. They make PPV events that make you wanna watch the next one, most of the boxing world makes it a money grab where you only tune in for that one fight which leaves little margin for error if that fight isn't as good as hoped. The UFC & Hearn have built brands. And I'd argue that Mayweather made himself a brand to, but its a different slant on branding where you wanna pay to watch the brand fail or hope to see a brand beaten.

              Hearn could've easily milked Joshua vs top 10 nobodies on PPV for another year or two, but he's going straight to Klitschko who's easily the biggest threat to Joshua that could & probably would fight him right now with Fury on the sidelines.



              Thats a solid dilemma I'd agree. For that reason I do think you need to do a little marinating as much as I'd hate to admit it. Ideally I think you'd wanna do the fight in the UK as Joshua is a proven entity there & broadcast for free on Showtime in the US. So I'd wanna introduce Wilder to the UK fans with a doubleheader (which I'm usually against) in lets say June or July with a tentative date booked for October or November with Joshua vs Wilder, assuming both win in the summer obviously. If you do the fight in the US I think you gotta make Joshua & Wilder sellable as both are unproven here. At least in the UK Joshua is already in with fans on a large scale.
              Marinating is a thing because it generally works if it goes according to plan. The more guys are known the better a fight does, and if they have beef then even better because that heat sells. Now because of this a fight can be held off indefinitely really, but there is a point of diminishing returns.

              To be fair though there is a narrow window where it is perfect of striking while the iron is hot and the fight is properly built up. They do always err on the long side though because it will still sell really good if the fight is set up right. If you are tying to make money in boxing timing really is everything.

              The perfect example of going too soon is Golovkin-Lemieux decent enough fight with two power punchers, the went real quick with it which made it not be as successful as it could have been. Had Lemieux had a fight or two knocking out fringe guys on HBO that fight could have been much bigger. Even though Lemieux would have been the exact same guy the hype from that win would have been much greater if they played it a little smarter (or heck if HBO would have just sprung for Lemieux-N'Dam).
              Last edited by The Gambler1981; 02-11-2017, 03:21 PM.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by A.K View Post
                - got molested as a child
                - molested as a child and as an adult

                - Thinks boxers are cowards.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by The Gambler1981 View Post
                  Marinating is a thing because it generally works if it goes according to plan. The more guys are known the better a fight does, and if they have beef then even better because that heat sells. Now because of this a fight can be held off indefinitely really, but there is a point of diminishing returns.
                  I don't disagree with you in the short term or microeconomics POV. But looking at the long term or macroeconomics POV I believe marinating diminishes the appeal of boxing overall despite enhancing the appeal of any one particular fight. And all that leads to diminishing returns on future fights & diminishing fans or just no new fans or less new fans in the future.

                  Thats why having a bunch of people "running" boxing isn't as good as what most sports have with a bigger power structure that control any particular sport. If 5 en****** were trying to put on the Super Bowl each year or some years they didn't have a Super Bowl at all the Super Bowl wouldn't be as big as it is. There is something to be said for bringing a high caliber competitive event on a regular basis to brand & build a sport into something bigger than itself. You can't do that in boxing cuz there are too many hands in the cookie jar so to speak.

                  The perfect example of going too soon is Golovkin-Lemieux decent enough fight with two power punchers, the went real quick with it which made it not be as successful as it could have been. Had Lemieux had a fight or two knocking out fringe guys on HBO that fight could have been much bigger. Even though Lemieux would have been the exact same guy the hype from that win would have been much greater if they played it a little smarter (or heck if HBO would have just sprung for Lemieux-N'Dam).
                  Damn when will the ideal time be for GGG vs Canelo if GGG vs Lemieux was too early in your opinion? Although to be fair I suppose their PPV numbers suggest that that fight wasn't marinated enough, but from what I recall with that fight is it wasn't even intended to be a PPV & it only was a PPV cuz HBO ran out of money or just wasn't bankrolled for paying both guys what they wanted for that fight. So based on that I don't believe its really fair to suggest its a failure so much as it wasn't put on in its intended viewing realm on regular HBO.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    You see this is the biggest problem with PBC you got this idiot promoter for PBC saying this about there being no ppv stars. Contradicting what the previous PBC promoter just said 2 weeks ago. Schaefer "Mikey Garcia is the next ppv star." A Lightweight who is fighting on undercards but the more famous heavyweight who is headlining is not a ppv star? Wonder how haymon feels about these comments or how promoters he is using are confusing the public. There is no consistent message for PBC and their fighters.

                    As for lou like someone else said he's a fraud back in the day when he had fighters who could sell he had no problem sucking every dime out of them by putting it on ppv. He's part of the shift boxing made in ppvs. But now that he doesn't have a canelo, cotto, manny,Joshua, ect he's acting like he is about the sport and making it all more accessible? LMAO Sorry I call bullshyt his new tune rings hollow. If he had the horses he would put it on ppv to grab every dime not caring of less people had access to see it.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by Eff Pandas View Post
                      I don't disagree with you in the short term or microeconomics POV. But looking at the long term or macroeconomics POV I believe marinating diminishes the appeal of boxing overall despite enhancing the appeal of any one particular fight. And all that leads to diminishing returns on future fights & diminishing fans or just no new fans or less new fans in the future.

                      Thats why having a bunch of people "running" boxing isn't as good as what most sports have with a bigger power structure that control any particular sport. If 5 en****** were trying to put on the Super Bowl each year or some years they didn't have a Super Bowl at all the Super Bowl wouldn't be as big as it is. There is something to be said for bringing a high caliber competitive event on a regular basis to brand & build a sport into something bigger than itself. You can't do that in boxing cuz there are too many hands in the cookie jar so to speak.



                      Damn when will the ideal time be for GGG vs Canelo if GGG vs Lemieux was too early in your opinion? Although to be fair I suppose their PPV numbers suggest that that fight wasn't marinated enough, but from what I recall with that fight is it wasn't even intended to be a PPV & it only was a PPV cuz HBO ran out of money or just wasn't bankrolled for paying both guys what they wanted for that fight. So based on that I don't believe its really fair to suggest its a failure so much as it wasn't put on in its intended viewing realm on regular HBO.
                      Boxing pretty much is always run for short term gain, yea that is part of the issue but given the unpredictable nature of the sport and short life span of most fighter planning long term is kind of a waste.

                      Someone thinking longer term is needed in the sport but that is hard because that is going against the nature of the sport and people (especially current stakeholders) don't like change much because they have to figure out a new normal and will generally fight to keep what they have now rather than adapt.

                      The Canelo Golovkin fight has been like 2 years in the making currently, that is certainly long enough for the event to reach it's max potential. Canelo has limited (probably none) options to improve his credibility going into the fight and Golovkin should he takes care of Jacobs is pretty much in the same boat there are guys to fight but they are not equation changers. GBP ain't about that risk though~ with easy Cotto money out there.

                      I am a big believer in doing something right, something can work any number of ways as long as it is done properly. Golovkin-Lemieux was not put in a position to succeed at what they attempted, if that fight has to be on PPV I would for damn sure want it to be the best damn PPV it could be and make that a plan rather than just throwing it together.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP