Are GGG's opponents pricing themselves out or are they believing the GGG hype?

[Bullrider]

So what do Jacobs want? Any latest info or people just love throwing their silly biases around making stuff up?

[Scipio2009]

Yeah, the Kovalev example is the one I always think of when considering Golovkin's situation. Granted the situations are somewhat different but it does show what can happen if the right sacrifices are made. I do think that Golovkin should be willing to offer Saunders a good cut - even to 50% if necessary since his stated goal is unification even though no-one would argue that Saunders normal market value would be close to that.

But yeah. I think that last has been their goal from the start. Get a stranglehold on 160 and then in theory at least the fights will come. Can't say it's particularly satisfying as a fan though.

Marvin Hagler debuted in 1973; it took him about 10 years to be positioned for the big marquee fights, and he fought the last 3 years of that run at the world championship level, against serious fighters while he worked.

No doubt that Hagler had concessions along the way, but he did what he did, to position himself to be the guy that Duran, Hearns, and Leonard had to see when the decided to try their hand at 160lbs.

If Golovkin has all of the belts at 160lbs, Andy Lee (Irish fighter with a solid following in the Northeast), EubankJr (potentially another PPV fight in the UK), Saul Alvarez when he comes up (in addition to the slew of quality 154lbers who are massive at the weight), and the slew of quality prospects working their way through (Khytrov, Murata, Derevyenchenko, Sulecki, Quigley, Gausha, Falcao, etc).

For however long Golovkin would have left to fight, he'd be at no loss for opposition to fight, with big fights mixed in there

[OnePunch]

possibly to set the costs for the event ahead of time; with the price of bringing Golovkin in already esablished, Golden Boy can go into the talks with Jerry Jones, basically knowing what type of site fee they would need to make things work out well for them, before then also heading out to NYC to put out the feelers to see what taking the fight there would be worth (unsure if Las Vegas would actually have monster interest in hosting Alvarez-Golovkin).

with a deal in hand, Golden Boy can then use Alvarez's next two fights (rumors are that Alvarez is looking to fight again Feb 2017 and May 2017, before the September fight), to stoke the fever for Alvarez-Golovkin (maxing out Golden Boy's chance to actually make their own money on the back end).

The cost is a bit rich, but Golovkin getting $10m (plus the German TV), the costs of the event being carried by Golden Boy, and Alvarez and Oscar splitting the take, after paying all costs, 80/20 (with Alvarez keeping the Mexican TV), leaves Golden Boy in a pretty safe spot, while also positioning things for continued big-time business were Alvarez to win the fight.

the longer it takes to lock in value, the more the financial risk on the fight becomes to Golden Boy.

I totally disagree. The flat fee offer was not about being "safe", it was about trying to limit their payout. It serves their interest, not GGGs, which is why they offered it in the first place.

Think about it. What is actually safer, doing a flat fee deal where you owe "x" amount even if the event bombs, or doing a percentage deal where you are only guaranteeing a percentage of the revenue? Obviously the safer bet is to do the percentage deal, because its impossible to lose money that way.

But obviously Golden Boy has pretty high expectations for the event or they wouldnt be offering flat fee deals. They were just hoping that K2 was stupid enough to take the bait....

[B-Bomber]

why is this so hard for people to understand? Saunders brings a UK ppv audience. Jacobs does not.

Sure, one could argue that Saunders UK appeal is less than Brook, but it doesnt matter. If they only generate a few million bucks on UK ppv, that is enough to bridge the gap and pay Saunders. Jacobs brings no such audience, and truth be told GGG actually draws better in NY than Jacobs does.

But putting all that aside, Saunders has the leverage of having the last belt that GGG wants. Again, Jacobs has no such leverage. Jacobs is just another mando challenger, perhaps a bit more recognizable than Wade, but in reality not some blockbuster superstar, and certainly no shot-caller.

You cannot compare Saunders and Jacobs because their scenarios are different on every level

Because he doesn't?.
If they fight in the US, there would be no PPV in the UK, because the fight would start around 4-5am local time.
If they fight in England, there is no PPV in the US.

Timezones ... difficult to understand?

For the rest, Saunders holds a rather irrelevant belt, not a huge difference between the two.

[OnePunch]

Because he doesn't?.
If they fight in the US, there would be no PPV in the UK, because the fight would start around 4-5am local time.
If they fight in England, there is no PPV in the US.

Timezones ... difficult to understand?

For the rest, Saunders holds a rather irrelevant belt, not a huge difference between the two.

that belt might be "irrelevant" to you, but to GGG it is quite important.

And no, timezones are not difficult to understand. They would do the fight in the UK. Saunders keeps the UK ppv money, GGG keeps the HBO US money and the eastern europe rights, and they do a reasonable split on the live gate and the remaining international rights. A similar structure to GGG-Brook, bringing in a bit less overall revenue. So instead of Brook making $5 million or so, Saunders makes $3 million or so. I believe its doable......

It doesnt take that many buys (plus a percentage of the live gate) to generate $3 million

[Scipio2009]

I totally disagree. The flat fee offer was not about being "safe", it was about trying to limit their payout. It serves their interest, not GGGs, which is why they offered it in the first place.

Think about it. What is actually safer, doing a flat fee deal where you owe "x" amount even if the event bombs, or doing a percentage deal where you are only guaranteeing a percentage of the revenue? Obviously the safer bet is to do the percentage deal, because its impossible to lose money that way.

But obviously Golden Boy has pretty high expectations for the event or they wouldnt be offering flat fee deals. They were just hoping that K2 was stupid enough to take the bait....

Known unknowns; if GBP can find out what they're costs of an event are going to be, pushing for everything else (with a year to negotiate out the other terms) gives them the best chance, imo, to make money on the event, a fight that isn't as big as folks want to think.

The Golden Boy framework left behind by Richard Schaefer (and also utilized by Eddie Hearn) is rather straightforward; Alvarez keeps the Mexico TV money; Golden Boy stages the event, and Alvarez and Oscar split the take (less the costs) 85/15, a figure that's likely changed somewhat.

Because lets look at the numbers; Cotto-Alvarez did $55m on PPV, while also getting $15m to have MGM Resorts host the fight. No idea what the Mexico TV money end up being, but they likely cleared $40m on the event. $10m to Golovkin, with Oscar taking his own piece on the fight, and Golden Boy is basically locking themselves into a 67/33 Alvarez split on the fight if it does at least what Cotto-Alvarez did.

When you actually compare the relative business that each guy does, locking in an equivalent share on the fight that is basically at 35%, to me, makes it obvious that Golden Boy wants to make the fight and are willing to pay up a ton (beyond where they're already said they think Golovkin's economic value is) to lock in the fight.

On a percentage basis, 1)what percentage does K2 sincerely believe that Golovkin is worth and 2)how big a fight would Alvarez-Golovkin have to end up being to actually get Golovkin $10m on the event?

Because, outside of the Floyd and Cotto fights, the only fighter that got more than about 10% of the take against Alvarez was Khan, and even Kha had to get the vast majority of his own money from the value of the UK TV rights on the fight.

Is Golovkin taking the fight for a 15/85 share on the full event? Because, if they do insist on getting a piece of everything, I doubt that Goldeny Boy offers anything much beyond that, let alone the 40% that was insinuated at with talk of the Mayweather-Pacquiao split.

[Kigali]

So what do Jacobs want? Any latest info or people just love throwing their silly biases around making stuff up?

GGG's team offered Jacobs significantly less than he made fighting Quillan.

That's just short of saying they don't want to fight Jacobs.

[B-Bomber]

that belt might be "irrelevant" to you, but to GGG it is quite important.

And no, timezones are not difficult to understand. They would do the fight in the UK. Saunders keeps the UK ppv money, GGG keeps the HBO US money and the eastern europe rights, and they do a reasonable split on the live gate and the remaining international rights. A similar structure to GGG-Brook, bringing in a bit less overall revenue. So instead of Brook making $5 million or so, Saunders makes $3 million or so. I believe its doable......

It doesnt take that many buys (plus a percentage of the live gate) to generate $3 million

Saunder's belt is rather irrelevant to this discussion because it doesn't make the fight much bigger in the US or worldwide.

As for GGG wanting all the belts, it is also rather irrelevant, he won't become a bigger name or make much more money because of it if he beats Saunders, which I think he would without much trouble.

Yes, if the fight is in the UK then Saunders has more leverage.
However team GGG has been stalling long enough, first the step aside money, then the catchweight issues, now the purse bids issue...
It's right time they fight somebody instead than waiting for Godot.

[OnePunch]

Saunder's belt is rather irrelevant to this discussion because it doesn't make the fight much bigger in the US or worldwide.

As for GGG wanting all the belts, it is also rather irrelevant, he won't become a bigger name or make much more money because of it if he beats Saunders, which I think he would without much trouble.

Yes, if the fight is in the UK then Saunders has more leverage.
However team GGG has been stalling long enough, first the step aside money, then the catchweight issues, now the purse bids issue...
It's right time they fight somebody instead than waiting for Godot.

no doubt the belt is irrelevant as to what revenue the fight generates. But it IS relevant as to how much effort GGG/K2 will exert and how much money they would sacrifice to get the fight made to fulfill GGGs "unification" quest......

[Pain~Lucy]

no I just think in real life youre a coward since you wont admit that industry was flavoring that the fight SHOULDVE been earlier when Pac was in his ''prime.''

apparently Pac is always broke so what does it matter when they wouldve fought?

you like that last question don'T you??

so you admit that Low-ball'd offer is okay because Pacquiao is in his "prime". seems logical thinking by you which I really cant change

It'll generate more than Lemiuex vs GGG. Jacobs isn't as big a star as GGG but he's way more known in the NY area than Lemeiux. He can also reach different audience than Lemeiux& GGG. People say Jacobs-Quillin only did 9k in attendance. But how many fighters are doing that? GGG, Canelo, Ward, Pacquiao. GGG-LEmeiex did a $2mil gate at MSG. Garcia vs Paulie did a $1.1 mil gate in Brooklyn with cheaper ticket prices and and less people. GGG-Jacobs will do more than the $2mil and they'll probably get a site fee for Barclays which they won't get for MSG.

But my point is if GGG is big enough that he can turn down $10mil and a piece of PPV he should've been able to give Jacobs $3mil and put the fight on PPV. If he can't host a PPV fighting a guy more known than the guy he fought previously on PPV then something isn't adding up. An established PPV star, Cotto, did 900k on PPV. How much are people thinking GGG vs Canelo is gonna do?

That's a completely different fight. He turned down a flat fee, even if his guaranteed is 8m + ppv, that's bigger than 10m obviously, you believe Khanelo is bigger than GGGCanelo?

Yes, it will generate more than GGGlemieux, but that 3m is almost 50% of what the fight will generate