Hearn sent the contract to Wilder 3 days late. Now he's ignoring Wilder's emails

[Ray*]

Yes. On NSB. And if you're dealing with a promoter in 1972 trying to secure funds from Zamunda. Maybe today...but not when you're dealing with Al Haymon, Shelley Finkel and Stephen Espinoza.

Hearn scoffed at the offer initially. Said he wanted proof. Said he had questions. Said Haymon answered those questions. Said it was a "really good offer" that he was going to present to Joshua who wanted the fight in the UK. Days later, Hearn said Joshua was willing to take less money for the fight to be in the UK because of what they built there. And here we are today.

I don't even know how you legit responded to that guy. He's on my ignore list. Has been for so long, I don't even know why. Probably conspiracy theories like that

I like to give everyone a chance, maybe he has some info that we don't have? I mean i know Hearn confirm that money. So for Hearn to do so am believing they are happy that the funds was there. So from Jugs post am not sure if i was reading it right but he seems to be insuniating that the funds would only be available due to Joshua name (If they have his name on a contract to attract the funds)....I very much doubt Hearn allowing that to happen.

[uppercut510]

I don't think i have heard of that before, Is that even possible?

anything is possible with these posters on boxing scene they are promoters, financial managers, they know the ins and outs of contracts, and much much more

[IMDAZED]

I like to give everyone a chance, maybe he has some info that we don't have? I mean i know Hearn confirm that money. So for Hearn to do so am believing they are happy that the funds was there. So from Jugs post am not sure if i was reading it right but he seems to be insuniating that the funds would only be available due to Joshua name (If they have his name on a contract to attract the funds)....I very much doubt Hearn allowing that to happen.

Makes no sense. The funds are coming from the fight itself (in the US). They aren't going to go panhandling or soliciting.

[uppercut510]

Yes. On NSB. And if you're dealing with a promoter in 1972 trying to secure funds from Zamunda. Maybe today...but not when you're dealing with Al Haymon, Shelley Finkel and Stephen Espinoza.

Hearn scoffed at the offer initially. Said he wanted proof. Said he had questions. Said Haymon answered those questions. Said it was a "really good offer" that he was going to present to Joshua who wanted the fight in the UK. Days later, Hearn said Joshua was willing to take less money for the fight to be in the UK because of what they built there. And here we are today.

I don't even know how you legit responded to that guy. He's on my ignore list. Has been for so long, I don't even know why. Probably conspiracy theories like that

he makes it up as he goes and he has no shame, 666 fits him

[uppercut510]

I like to give everyone a chance, maybe he has some info that we don't have? I mean i know Hearn confirm that money. So for Hearn to do so am believing they are happy that the funds was there. So from Jugs post am not sure if i was reading it right but he seems to be insuniating that the funds would only be available due to Joshua name (If they have his name on a contract to attract the funds)....I very much doubt Hearn allowing that to happen.

at some point u have to understand, some people don't deserve a chance brother, I used to have the same mentality. people will lie to protect their own ego and have toxic energy, stray away

[kafkod]

I never thought about that, was that confirmed? So you are saying they don't actually have that money in cash? But they would use Joshua name to get that money once he has sign a contract?

The way I interpreted it .... Hearn was given proof that Wilder's backers were willing to guarantee AJ $50million minimum, whatever the fight made, and that they had enough funds to do that.

The money would probably have come from more than one backer, and yes, it would have needed AJ's name on a contract for a US fight before it became available.

It definitely wasn't available for a US fight between Wilder and Povetkin, because Haymon was only able to bid $5million for the rights to that match.

[Ray*]

The way I interpreted it .... Hearn was given proof that Wilder's backers were willing to guarantee AJ $50million minimum, whatever the fight made, and that they had enough funds to do that.

The money would probably have come from more than one backer, and yes, it would have needed AJ's name on a contract for a US fight before it became available.

It definitely wasn't available for a US fight between Wilder and Povetkin, because Haymon was only able to bid $5million for the rights to that match.

So we can all agree that the funds are there then to pay AJ those 50M. Because as far as i know Hearn was happy with that.

[Just looking]

I like to give everyone a chance, maybe he has some info that we don't have? I mean i know Hearn confirm that money. So for Hearn to do so am believing they are happy that the funds was there. So from Jugs post am not sure if i was reading it right but he seems to be insuniating that the funds would only be available due to Joshua name (If they have his name on a contract to attract the funds)....I very much doubt Hearn allowing that to happen.

Nah, none of the two would be able to do this type of money by themselves. It's a **** argument from the start. Only both names on the contract would attract the funds

[uppercut510]

The way I interpreted it .... Hearn was given proof that Wilder's backers were willing to guarantee AJ $50million minimum, whatever the fight made, and that they had enough funds to do that.

The money would probably have come from more than one backer, and yes, it would have needed AJ's name on a contract for a US fight before it became available.

It definitely wasn't available for a US fight between Wilder and Povetkin, because Haymon was only able to bid $5million for the rights to that match.

aj turned down a 50mil guarantee and said he would rather take less to fight at home, its all over the net, hearn said it. bringing up pedvtkin and anything else does not matter at this point, STOP IT. hearn said he got his questions answered by haymon and stated the offer was legit but aj wanted to do it at home so they declined. why cant you guys just accept it?

[LacedUp]

aj turned down a 50mil guarantee and said he would rather take less to fight at home, its all over the net, hearn said it. bringing up pedvtkin and anything else does not matter at this point, STOP IT. hearn said he got his questions answered by haymon and stated the offer was legit but aj wanted to do it at home so they declined. why cant you guys just accept it?

he definitely did say he'd take less to fight at home - that's a fact.. however, Wilder only offered the 50m so he could fight at home too and get all the advantages.

We haven't heard what Wilder's guarantee was for the 50m offer.

So don't act like both guys haven't stretched to get home town advantage.

Joshua has the advantage that he could fight Povetkin for 25m whilst Wilder's other option is Breazele for 1.5m so Wilder has to bend.