Comments Thread For: Carl Frampton-Leo Santa Cruz Had Ratings Peak of 549,000

[New England]

showtime will literally stop airing boxing matches if the numbers don't improve. IDK what the f#ck is going on. maybe 18-30 year olds just aren't buying cable TV anty longer. i will say that PBC obviously tries to cater to a younger boxing crowd.

[New England]

Ratings don't mean alot to pay tv.

.......

[Eubankjr]

.......

They make their money from subscribers not advertising you know ?

Pay your $15 a month, why do they care of you watch or not.

Casuals who don't subscribe to watch boxing tuning in makes no difference to the bottom line.

[IMDAZED]

Terrible ratings. Showtime needs to clean house Espinoza has run them in to the ground. Santa Cruz did great ratings his fight on espn with mares. And he came back to showtime early this year to worse ratings then he had on showtime before the mares fight. And now he has a fight even better then mares on paper and it too flops on showtime.

You just reminded me of when that poster, ThePrince, when he said Espinoza's firing was imminent. That was three years ago. Then while Mayweather-Pacquiao was close to getting signed, Dr. Rumack was claiming Mayweather was doing everything to get out of the fight and wanted Cotto. Then after the fight, Derranged said it was fixed. At least you're consistent, dunny. I give you that.

[New England]

They make their money from subscribers not advertising you know ?

Pay your $15 a month, why do they care of you watch or not.

Casuals who don't subscribe to watch boxing tuning in makes no difference to the bottom line.

the premium networks actually do a lot of advertising. they use space on shows, heck, even fights, to promote fights and build fighters. rating are a huge part of that.

they also consider that they have subscribers who buy the networks for the boxing. boxing is also a means by which the networks are promoted. big fights will have an HBO ppv advert on TV, or have their fighters brought onto major, non pay TV to promote the fights, and subsequently the network.


there's jsut a ton that you're missing if you're really going to try and convince me that ratings don't matter because these guys are on pay TV already.

getting back to pay TV matters
getting boxing back on pay TV at all is contingent upon ratings. if they could show a rerun of dude where's my car for a 10,000 dollar license fee instead of paying 2-3 million to pay for purses for a boxing card, and get the same ratings, they would. just trust if you don't get it.

[Eubankjr]

the premium networks actually do a lot of advertising. they use space on shows, heck, even fights, to promote fights and build fighters. rating are a huge part of that.

they also consider that they have subscribers who buy the networks for the boxing. boxing is also a means by which the networks are promoted. big fights will have an HBO ppv advert on TV, or have their fighters brought onto major, non pay TV to promote the fights, and subsequently the network.


there's jsut a ton that you're missing if you're really going to try and convince me that ratings don't matter because these guys are on pay TV already.

getting back to pay TV matters
getting boxing back on pay TV at all is contingent upon ratings. if they could show a rerun of dude where's my car for a 10,000 dollar license fee instead of paying 2-3 million to pay for purses for a boxing card, and get the same ratings, they would. just trust if you don't get it.

Advertising revenue is usually limited by law for pay tv. So big ratings dont mean bigger revenue. It's all about unique subscribers.

Look at this way.

If a fight gets 1mil viewers and 900k of them get Showtime for its series or other shows and 100k are hardcore boxing fans that wouldn't subscribe without boxing. How much money is having boxing bringing in ?

It brings in the money of 100k subscribers. The other 900k would subscribe anyway.

Now if that fight instead gets 200k viewers but the 100k hardcore fans still watch then that fight is also bring in the same money.

The value of a show on pay tv is Directly related to the number of the people who won't subscribe if that show wasn't on. Those 100k won't subscribe for reruns.

That's half the problem, hbo and Showtime put less and less money into boxing but aren't seeing a related drop off in subscribers.

The casuals aren't watching but they don't leave cos they like other shows, the hardcore fans still stick around and watch the scraps we have now because they love boxing.

It's win win for pay tv.

[deanrw]

There is no question that boxing viewership is on the decline in the states. It is not just Showtime and HBO, it is across the board.

It is like about 1 million dedicated hardcore viewers just fell off the earth a few years ago.

[BennyBlanco]

It'd do much better numbers on Hbo no doubt. And of course the numbers are down across the board, Sho has just been hit worse. Their high this year is 500k for Wilder, that's shocking

Of course it would do better numbers on HBO. HBO has 8-9 million more subscribers than Showtime. It's not even a fair comparison.

[M Bison]

This should have been a PPV not the Mr.50k Terence Crawford.

[BennyBlanco]

Terrible ratings. Showtime needs to clean house Espinoza has run them in to the ground. Santa Cruz did great ratings his fight on espn with mares. And he came back to showtime early this year to worse ratings then he had on showtime before the mares fight. And now he has a fight even better then mares on paper and it too flops on showtime.

Once again you demonstrate your ignorance regarding TV ratings.

Showtime has 23M households. ESPN has 90M+ households. So of course ESPN had more viewers for LSC-Mares than SHO did for LSC-Frampton.

But were ESPN's ratings "great" compared to SHO's? Not really.

ESPN is in 4 times as many homes as SHO. LSC-Frampton on SHO averaged 480K viewers and peaked at 549K. To perform the proportional equivalent, ESPN would have needed to attract roughly 4 times the audience that SHO did, or an average of 1.92M and a peak of 2.2M. Did they? No. LSC-Mares on ESPN peaked at 1.6M viewers, or less than 3 times what SHO attracted.

So proportionally speaking, SHO did better ratings than ESPN did.