Flexen Article On Boxnation: Update with streaming numbers.

First topic message reminder :

From boxing news online.

MY fellow boxing fans, the day of judgement is almost upon us. In just two days, anyone wanting to watch the BoxNation channel will have to sign up to a six-month contract mandating they pay £10 each month. When the BoxNation concept was first outlined, I was highly sceptical regarding its potential audience being sufficiently large as to make the venture profitable. Since then my personal relationship with the broadcaster has altered and I must declare an interest. I carry out some (paid) research work for the channel in my limited spare time, but far from transforming me into a praise-spewing ‘convert’, the danger of losing this new income stream has made me even more fearful for the future of the endeavour.

One positive aspect of working in close proximity to this business is the resultant realisation that they have the appropriate people in key positions. CEO Simon Green, to be featured in Boxing News this Thursday, combines visionary ambition with gritty realism. Producer Jim Bentley is a boxing man, with a real love of the sport plus the broadcasting knowledge to complement his affection.

My worries about the channel’s future were not related, in the main, to the quality of their output. On that score, and also on quantity, it has delivered, the only caveat being the impossible to foresee front-loading of their content. Ideally, the biggest and best fights (Bernard Hopkins-Chad Dawson, Nathan Cleverly-Tony Bellew and, from a crowd-pleasing perspective, the superb Liam Walsh-Paul Appleby season-opener) would have been spread throughout the channel’s ‘free’ period, with at least one taking place in the two weeks leading up to the paywall’s imposition. Unfortunately for BoxNation, as Boxing Monthly editor Glyn Leach recently pointed out, the more boxing they show, the more the quality level will vary. With belts increasingly tight and tough financial decisions to be made, boxing fans will unfortunately for the new TV player pass judgement on BoxNation’s value with duds like Rob Norton-Leon Williams and Ovill McKenzie-Jeff Evans fresh in the mind.

On the flip-side, quantity is a factor. It may not outstrip quality but one of BoxNation’s key beacons of hope is that fans willingly purchase individual bills on rival Primetime for £15, five pounds more than they charge per month for six-eight shows. Even if only one of those six-eight cards has a top name appearing on it, their deal will appear comparatively attractive, as a customer can justify the chance to watch that elite fighter at a £5 saving and classifying the extra five-seven events as ‘free’ extras.

Building the paywall this week, the glow from the huge spotlight trained on Miguel Cotto-Antonio Margarito just about visible, through the cracks, behind it, is a smart move. If fans want to (legally) view one of the year’s most anticipated fights, they must sign up to Box Nation for six months. This may seem to represent sophisticated blackmail, but for the broadcaster to continue to deliver contests of this magnitude it needs guaranteed income, rendering a month-by-month contract entirely impractical. Every penny that has been spent on their coverage thus far, as in most new companies, has been sourced from investor capital. That had to stop at some point.

Of course agreeing to a six-month tenure is a risk; subscribers have no guarantee that there will be a showdown of the Cotto-Margarito calibre every month or even that the quantity will remain high. That said, BoxNation is a business with a long-term strategy. It does not plan to cut and run after six months – the investors would not make initial their stakes back in that time – so it is in their own interests to encourage customers to renew their subscriptions. Unlike Sky, it does not have the luxury of offering other popular sports in the same package so will rely on boxing fans to keep the project going; for that to work, they will need to show good fights regularly and great fights occasionally.

My main doubt pertaining to BoxNation’s prosperity remains whether the hardcore boxing audience – because I do not perceive it as a channel for the casual fan – is large enough to sustain the concept. At the press conference to announce its inception, it was stated that BoxNation would need 100,000 subscribers to break even, a figure that was almost immediately revised to the worryingly vague “less than that”. Now the combined subscribers to Sky and Virgin – the latter will finally be able to access the channel this week though crucially have missed the free action, which in effect advertised the product before it became chargeable – are around 15 million. Attracting say, 70,000 (or 4.6 per cent) out of that huge market, especially given Primetime often get close to or occasionally (notably for Amir Khan-Paul McCloskey) surpass that figure for a single (£15) event, seems, at first glance, highly achievable. But many boxing devotees are already stretched to their financial limits by Sky or Virgin, plus maybe Premier Sports and Primetime. Also it’s not revealing any trade secrets to note that the combined monthly sales of Boxing News AND Boxing Monthly, a key indicator of hardcore support, do not approach that number, although buying four BNs and one BM costs more than £10 of course (and are arguably well worth it!).

So the key question this week regarding BoxNation could actually be construed as a referendum on the sport’s popularity as a whole. In this age of austerity and with the Noble Art finding itself increasingly marginalised, how many fans are devoted enough to pay for a new provider and is that number sufficient to make BoxNation not just survive but thrive? I don’t have the answer. You do. Until next time...

cant see it working, my sky bill is already at 70 quid a month cant afford any more.

the whole people pay 15 quid for one ppv so this is good value is wrong for most people (certainly me anyway), all the major ppv shows i get at least 4-5 mates round and watch it and we all chip in meaning a ppv event only costs me around 3 quid

That's nasty.

£10 a month seems fine in principle but it's an extra £10 on top of a Virgin bill (for television, phone and broadband) that is already in excess of £100 (thanks to the hike in VAT, Osborne you tw*t). Throw in paying for any Primetime shows and if Sky offered a PPV then you'd be getting close to £150 in some months. I won't be subscribing.

My other concern is that by paying for 6 months upfront you may not get some of you money back if the whole thing does a Setanta and collapses.

Don't THINK you pay £60 up front (Hopefully) I imagine a tenner gets taken from your bank account every month.

You're getting ripped off by Virgin. How is it even possible to pay over £100 to them?

'Tis true Virgin is a poor mans Sky as well.

Sadly we can't put up a Sky dish outside our flat so stuck with Virgin until we move.

We've got the XL TV, phone and broadband package which must have a basic price in excess of £60 and then it's an extra £20 or so for Sky Sports and then 20% VAT on top of that. It works out at just over £100.

From Boxing News:

"Although the channel does not receive ratings on the Sky platform,internet streaming figures are available.The number of online viewers tuning in has been encouraging for Green(BoxNation CEO).
"For the Echo Arena bill in Liverpool(Cleverly/Bellew) we did about 44,000 streams.For the Wembley Arena event on Nov 5(Burns/Katsidis)we did about 33,000 streams.They are big numbers considering we have not yet marketed or promoted our online streaming service to a considerable extent.
Based on these statistics and PPV figures from mine and Franks time at Sky,we're confident we can get around 100,000 subscribers by next spring."

"Boxing is generally the second most popular sport in the country after football.For example,when I was at Setanta,we screened Calzaghe/Hopkins.It took place at 4am and we had a base of roughly 800,000 subscribers.That week,we received another 90,000 subscribers for that fight,whereas a Manchester United match would only put on 10,000 subscribers.These statistics prove that the power of boxing is sensational if you get the product right."

There's no denying big fights can pull in an incredible amount of people, and that's why they force you to pay more for it... They know it will do well regardless.

I've subscribed to it. I'll see how the first six months go then I'll see how I feel about it. I do fear it could be a flash in the pan and all be over in a years time. Although I hope not because they do show stuff that Sky wouldn't have.

Out of interest, kev, are the subscription fees paid on a monthly basis or did they ask for the 6 months' fees upfront?

I have too subscribed; and after the Christmas run of football games is over I will be cancelling ESPN which is £9 a month so swings and roundabouts. I got it for the football plus they show all UFC cards which are PPV's in the US, but they are so rare you can sometimes go a month with 3 games of football and 1 UFC card....That is so pricey considering occassionaly I have either lectures or am out midweek evenings so it is a massive waste when alot of ESPN games are Europa league!

H=When the channel was announced they said it would be pick and choose your months but I think they need to tie down subscribers so they have some guaranteed income.

ESPN ans Sky Sports are a 12 month contract so it's not to bad really.

Quality stuff Scotty..It's a conundrum isn't it??....On the plus side I guess Boxing fans have been short changed in the Boxing they get to watch on TV...This channel provides plenty for the devoted fan..

On the downside we are living in tough times for most people including a majority of Boxing fans.. who just don't need to have to pay anymore to see quality fighters fight....

Also the eye catching names aren't out there to make this product sell...how many fans (apart from a minority of die-hards) would pay £10 a month to see Gamboa and the like who haven't really taken off and have little name recognition ?? In the 80's Boxnation could probably charge £20 and there'd be more takers!!...

Also it seems to show repeat after repeat which isn't great!!

However it's biggest downside is that it's stopping fighters from building an audience/following and it's going to hurt a sport that is already suffering from a mass fan exodus anyway with all it's politics...

Won't be buying it as I disagree with the concept.......

Think in a year's time Warren will be toadying up to sky.. as the biggest winner in all of this is Hearn....All his fighters can get good exposure now and more will look to him for guidance instead of Warren no doubt..

superflyweight wrote:Out of interest, kev, are the subscription fees paid on a monthly basis or did they ask for the 6 months' fees upfront?

You need to register with some cheap form of paypal called paywizard and they take the first month up front then it's a direct debit after it.

Truss if boxnation is a success it could be massive for Warren in terms of enticing talent to him rather than Matchroom, Hatton or Maloney.

He can put on more televised shows than anyone. Sky are reluctant to put on more than one domestic show a week. Warren can do three if he chooses to do a mid week show.

TV time for some up and comers who wouldn't normally get any that might just sway a few prospects his way when thy turn pro. It will be interesting to see what happens with the Olympic lads after the games. If boxnation is a success I think Warren might just have his pick of who he wants.

you reckon sky will just have him back with open arms?

AlexHuckerby wrote:you reckon sky will just have him back with open arms?

Don't fishermen hold their catch out with open arms?