Froch vs Groves 2 Ticket Info (Press Release)

First topic message reminder :

The hottest ticket in sport up for grabs as Super Middleweight rivals meet at Wembley

Tickets for Carl Froch and George Groves’ rematch for the WBA and IBF World Super Middleweight titles at Wembley connected by EE on Saturday May 31 will go on sale at midday on Monday March 10.

Froch and Groves meet at the national stadium to settle the score from their epic first encounter in Manchester in November, a fight that sold-out within 15 minutes of going on sale.

Ticket information for the hotly anticipated rematch:

Tickets will be on sale at midday on Monday March 10 from SeeTickets (maximum 6 tickets)

Bowl Ticket prices are £30, £40, £60, £80 and £100 while pitch seating prices are £60, £80, £100, £200, £300 and £500

These will be available at www.SeeTickets.com or by calling SeeTickets General Public booking line: 0871 231 0838

Calls cost 10p per minute plus network extras

Group Bookings (7 to 20 tickets)

SeeTickets Group Booking line: 0844 412 4650

Disabled Bookings

Disabled and Ambulant sales are via Wembley Stadium on: 0844 980 0656

VIP Bookings

VIP packages priced at £1,500 will be available exclusively from Matchroom Boxing, www.MatchroomBoxing.com or by calling 01277 359900

The VIP package includes:

- Inner ringside seating

- Access to VIP area from 5.30 - 8.00pm

- Champagne reception

- Buffet

- Complimentary Beer & Wine

- Official souvenir programme

- Plus an hour in the VIP Area post fight with Beer, Wine & Spirits

Club Wembley

Club Wembley members can purchase tickets and packages via the Club Wembley website.

IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO RESERVE TICKETS - NO TICKETS ARE ON SALE TO PERSONAL CALLERS AT THE STADIUM

Keep up with all the big fight build-up by following

@MatchroomBoxing on Twitter.

Join the conversation using #FrochGroves2

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:

Strongback wrote:

The unknown is how many tickets Eddie will sell.  I can't imagine Wembley was cheap to hire and I would expect with the policing, security, staff costs etc etc that the hiring of the venue was at least a couple of million.  Time will tell I suppose, personally I would not want to pay £120 for a fight I can't really see.

I actually imagine wembley is the cheaper option.

Why?  

I imagine the number of staff required at Wembley would be twice that of the Emirates.

Croke Park with a capacity of 80,000 needs to generate takings of over a million just to break even.  It wouldn't have the policing set-up Wembley does either.

My read of it is Eddie went for the biggest capacity he could get and felt he could do more than 60,000 ticket sales.

Why double? When there's only 1/3 more seats/capacity.  And where're the economies of scale??

And as per sean's point, Arsenal don't need the money and don't want the turf degradation, Wembley needs the former and isn't worried about the latter - so why aren't the basic rules of economics coming into play?

Didn't stop Coldplay doing a gig at the Emirates during the football season.

On the costs I'll just say everything at Wembley is scaled up in comparison to any other ground in the UK. I would imagine economy of scales doesn't really apply to Wembley.  It is a state of the art very large stadium with the best of everything included for.  Opening the doors to Wembley is going to cost a lot just to get to break even.  

Can you not do a financial search on the running costs of Wembley?

So basically you're just guessing and making leaps of faith?

You're the one making the wholesale statements, how about you doing the research to back up some of what you say/to dispel the notion that you're just Eddie-bashing.

Still think people are going to come away disappointed here.........Think the first fight had everything.....

A shocking start........An unfancied challenger winning early.......A big turnaround and a controversial finish....

Moore- Durelle 2
Louis-Conn 2...........Written all over this..

Groves fought the best fight he could last time..........and he couldn't finish a guy with no legs..

Be a huge anti-climax...Hope I'm wrong.......  

Groves fought the best fight he could last time...........and was winning comfortably.

He doesn't need to do anything more, Froch is the only one who needs to change - and history has shown he cannot.

TopHat24/7 wrote:
You're the one making the wholesale statements, how about you doing the research to back up some of what you say/to dispel the notion that you're just Eddie-bashing.

What I heard was Arsenal offered the stadium to Hearn for nothing because Arsene Wenger is a big fan of George Groves and ginger people in general ever since he had Ray Parlour in his squad. However Eddie picked Wembley anyway just to ensure fans in the cheap seats had a rubbish view.

Rowley wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:
You're the one making the wholesale statements, how about you doing the research to back up some of what you say/to dispel the notion that you're just Eddie-bashing.

What I heard was Arsenal offered the stadium to Hearn for nothing because Arsene Wenger is a big fan of George Groves and ginger people in general ever since he had Ray Parlour in his squad. However Eddie picked Wembley anyway just to ensure fans in the cheap seats had a rubbish view.

  

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:

Strongback wrote:

The unknown is how many tickets Eddie will sell.  I can't imagine Wembley was cheap to hire and I would expect with the policing, security, staff costs etc etc that the hiring of the venue was at least a couple of million.  Time will tell I suppose, personally I would not want to pay £120 for a fight I can't really see.

I actually imagine wembley is the cheaper option.

Why?  

I imagine the number of staff required at Wembley would be twice that of the Emirates.

Croke Park with a capacity of 80,000 needs to generate takings of over a million just to break even.  It wouldn't have the policing set-up Wembley does either.

My read of it is Eddie went for the biggest capacity he could get and felt he could do more than 60,000 ticket sales.

Why double? When there's only 1/3 more seats/capacity.  And where're the economies of scale??

And as per sean's point, Arsenal don't need the money and don't want the turf degradation, Wembley needs the former and isn't worried about the latter - so why aren't the basic rules of economics coming into play?

Didn't stop Coldplay doing a gig at the Emirates during the football season.

On the costs I'll just say everything at Wembley is scaled up in comparison to any other ground in the UK. I would imagine economy of scales doesn't really apply to Wembley.  It is a state of the art very large stadium with the best of everything included for.  Opening the doors to Wembley is going to cost a lot just to get to break even.  

Can you not do a financial search on the running costs of Wembley?

So basically you're just guessing and making leaps of faith?

You're the one making the wholesale statements, how about you doing the research to back up some of what you say/to dispel the notion that you're just Eddie-bashing.

No I'm not making leaps of faith.  I am making a judgement call based on having been to Wembley and Croke park.  It is widely known that Croke park needs to bring in over a million to break even.  Wembley will cost more to run much more.

I don't have free access to the accounts of limited companies like people in the financial sector do. Anyway I did a search, see below.

As for Eddie bashing I think that is a classic strawman given the debate is about Wembley as a boxing venue.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wembley has suffered another huge pre-tax loss of £31.1million - and is not expected to break even until 2014.

Accounts released by the home of English football for the year to December 31 2008 revealed the massive losses, which followed a £53.3m pre-tax loss in 2007.

The 90,000-capacity ground, rebuilt for £800m and reopened in 2007, made a pre-tax operational profit of £5.9m in 2008.

But Wembley had to pay £26.2m in interest on £300m outstanding bank loans. It also wrote off another £10.8m in 'signing fees', adding up to a pre-tax loss of £31.1m, or £23m after tax.

An accounts statement admitted it could be 2014 before the stadium makes an overall profit, but said this was "in accordance" with its plans.

The statement said: "Wembley National Stadium Limited's long-term business plan is to break even within five years."

Operational profit of £5.9m, up from a loss of £21.4m in 2007, was partially due to slashing running costs by £10m - down from £66.8m in 2007 to £57m last year.

Turnover rose to £89.7m last year from £65.5m in 2007, when the stadium had been open just nine months.

But stadium chiefs are optimistic of increased revenue this year, with 2.5m people flocking to Wembley since March for 34 events.

Wembley chairman David Bernstein said: "2008 will be seen as a watershed year as the stadium reclaimed its place on the world events circuit. I am confident 2009 will further underline its status as one of the world's premier venues."


http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Wembley-Stadium-makes-massive-31million-loss-article207599.html

Strongy you protest too much Mate..

Then again some round here protest too little.......

Guess It's left to the "Faithful" to ante up objective views...  

Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

I struggle to see what the issue is, Eddie has booked a venue he thinks he can fill, fans can go to the fight for relatively cheaply. If Eddie has over reached it is good for fans as he will either have to stack the undercard or shift tickets cheaply nearer to the time.

Am still struggling with the downside on this one.

Rowley wrote:

Am still struggling with the downside on this one.

Need to put your green-tinted spectacles on Jeff......

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

Careful Mate he's looking for a new stalking victim.

Rowley wrote:I struggle to see what the issue is, Eddie has booked a venue he thinks he can fill, fans can go to the fight for relatively cheaply. If Eddie has over reached it is good for fans as he will either have to stack the undercard or shift tickets cheaply nearer to the time.

Am still struggling with the downside on this one.

The views will be bad.

As they will be in nearly every football stadium.

Rowley wrote:As they will be in nearly every football stadium.

Wembley's views will be the worst by quite some distance, excuse the pun.

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

And you're a transparent bullsh!tter. Point?

Strongback wrote:

Rowley wrote:As they will be in nearly every football stadium.

Wembley's views will be the worst by quite some distance, excuse the pun.

For which people will have only paid £30 - a price unlikely to be offered with 30,000 less sales potential elsewhere.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

And you're a transparent bullsh!tter. Point?

Yeah and you think Wembley can be got for cheaper than the Emirates.

Do you advise people on financial matters? I hope not.

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

And you're a transparent bullsh!tter. Point?

Yeah and you think Wembley can be got for cheaper than the Emirates.  

Do you advise people on financial matters?  I hope not.

No, I've speculated. Whereas you have definitively stated, whilst providing neither evidence nor sound reasoning for your postulation.

What I advise people on, thankfully, is nothing to do with event management and stadia hire.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Rowley wrote:As they will be in nearly every football stadium.

Wembley's views will be the worst by quite some distance, excuse the pun.

For which people will have only paid £30 - a price unlikely to be offered with 30,000 less sales potential elsewhere.

Not every ticket in the bowl is £30 some are going for £120. That's a lot of dosh just to say you were there.

Tier 5 of the North side of the bowl.....you wouldn't see a mass brawl happening on Tier 1 from there never mind a boxing match far off in the yonder.

Strongy why should anybody give a F**K...If it's cheaper or not..???

I have been to more than my fair share of fights in various types of arenas and stadiums and as I have said previously once you get more than 20 yards away from the ring you are pretty much going for the occasion/atmosphere anyway. I was at Upton Park for Mitchell Katisidis and in relative terms that is a small football ground.

Would not say that was a particularly good view and even allowing for the fact is was closer than Wembley it was nigh on impossible to get a drink and there was nowhere local you would have wanted to get a pint beforehand. I have been to Wembley and neither of these apply.

Truth is there are positives and negatives to every venue, but the list capable of accomodating 60,000 + in this country means the choices are extremely limited.

Do get the impression if Eddie managed to rewrite the laws of physics and find a venue where 80,000 could get in, nobody would have to travel more than five miles to get there, every ticket was free and no seat was more than 3 yards from the ring you would still find some reason to slag him off. Objectivity is not much in evidence from you when it comes to Hearn.

Rowley wrote:Objectivity is not much in evidence from you when it comes to Hearn.

That's the understatement of the year award sorted.

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Rowley wrote:As they will be in nearly every football stadium.

Wembley's views will be the worst by quite some distance, excuse the pun.

For which people will have only paid £30 - a price unlikely to be offered with 30,000 less sales potential elsewhere.

Not every ticket in the bowl is £30 some are going for £120. That's a lot of dosh just to say you were there.  

Tier 5 of the North side of the bowl.....you wouldn't see a mass brawl happening on Tier 1 from there never mind a boxing match far off in the yonder.

But you're missing the point (again) and I suspect deliberately to sustain your Eddie-bashing.

The worst seats, i.e. those which according to you are so dramatically different from the ones at an Emirates, are going for £30-40 a pop. People, particularly Londoners (most money, least hassle) won't see that as much of an obstacle to a casual night out.

Also, the most expensive bowl tickets are £100 according to the OP and will therefore be right at the front and comparable to anything at Emirates. So stop talking blarney out your arris.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

And you're a transparent bullsh!tter. Point?

Yeah and you think Wembley can be got for cheaper than the Emirates.  

Do you advise people on financial matters?  I hope not.

No, I've speculated. Whereas you have definitively stated, whilst providing neither evidence nor sound reasoning for your postulation.

What I advise people on, thankfully, is nothing to do with event management and stadia hire.

partially due to slashing running costs by £10m - down from £66.8m in 2007 to £57m last year.


These figures demonstrate running Wembley is not cheap.

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

And you're a transparent bullsh!tter. Point?

Yeah and you think Wembley can be got for cheaper than the Emirates.  

Do you advise people on financial matters?  I hope not.

No, I've speculated. Whereas you have definitively stated, whilst providing neither evidence nor sound reasoning for your postulation.

What I advise people on, thankfully, is nothing to do with event management and stadia hire.

partially due to slashing running costs by £10m - down from £66.8m in 2007 to £57m last year.


These figures demonstrate running Wembley is not cheap.

AND..........??????????????????

Surely, as an (assumed) intelligent human being you can't be using that as the sole pillar to your argument??

A figure in isolation is totally meaningless without a comparable to contrast it with.

Emirates may cost £100m a year to run, or maybe £10m a year. Who knows? But without the comparison your feeble attempts and trying to sustain this charade to hide your Eddie-bashing are laughable.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Rowley wrote:As they will be in nearly every football stadium.

Wembley's views will be the worst by quite some distance, excuse the pun.

For which people will have only paid £30 - a price unlikely to be offered with 30,000 less sales potential elsewhere.

Not every ticket in the bowl is £30 some are going for £120. That's a lot of dosh just to say you were there.  

Tier 5 of the North side of the bowl.....you wouldn't see a mass brawl happening on Tier 1 from there never mind a boxing match far off in the yonder.

But you're missing the point (again) and I suspect deliberately to sustain your Eddie-bashing.

The worst seats, i.e. those which according to you are so dramatically different from the ones at an Emirates, are going for £30-40 a pop.  People, particularly Londoners (most money, least hassle) won't see that as much of an obstacle to a casual night out.

Also, the most expensive bowl tickets are £100 according to the OP and will therefore be right at the front and comparable to anything at Emirates.  So stop talking blarney out your arris.

Go to the Emirates and then go to Wembley is my suggestion to you. It's chalk and cheese in terms of size.

I wonder how many posters have been to Wembley. It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has also attended the stadium.

While this fight is big in terms of boxing I don't see it a fight that would bring out people who don't really watch boxing. Eddie will be looking towards the Sky and C5 audience that tune into the odd fight on TV to buy tickets. Boxing is bigger in the North of England anyway which is why the MEN is a popular venue. It's not like there will be an abundance of the target audience, white 24-44 year old males, living in London.

I have been to Wembley, twice.

Rowley wrote:I have been to Wembley, twice.

Then you are well aware of the scale of the stadium.

I'm struggling to work out the relevance of this argument.

Wembley as a venue choice has positives and negatives like any other venue.

But, ultimately, a huge, all-British stadium fight is a good thing isn't it?

How people think themselves able to credibly speculate on the economics of the event without knowing any level of detail is beyond me.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

And you're a transparent bullsh!tter. Point?

Yeah and you think Wembley can be got for cheaper than the Emirates.  

Do you advise people on financial matters?  I hope not.

No, I've speculated. Whereas you have definitively stated, whilst providing neither evidence nor sound reasoning for your postulation.

What I advise people on, thankfully, is nothing to do with event management and stadia hire.

partially due to slashing running costs by £10m - down from £66.8m in 2007 to £57m last year.


These figures demonstrate running Wembley is not cheap.

AND..........??????????????????

Surely, as an (assumed) intelligent human being you can't be using that as the sole pillar to your argument??

A figure in isolation is totally meaningless without a comparable to contrast it with.

Emirates may cost £100m a year to run, or maybe £10m a year.  Who knows? But without the comparison your feeble attempts and trying to sustain this charade to hide your Eddie-bashing are laughable.

You have decided to go to the fight so you want to have a goodnight.  You are hardly objective.  I wonder if Rowley is going?

As to you and others that are saying I am Eddie bashing I say I have argued that Wembley is not a good venue to host boxing, I would say this no matter who the promoter is.

I have said Wembley is not a cheap venue to hire and anyone with a titter of wit would recognize this.  If Webley costs a million a week to run and it doesn't hold events every week I think most can understand Eddie shelled out to get Wembley.  If the average ticket price is say £80 and he sells 60,000 tickets then his ticket revenue alone is  80 x 60000 =  £4.8M.  Then there is the profits from food and drink which is possibly part of the deal with Wembley and I wouldn't be surprised if there is a nice array of merchandising.   If Eddie hits 80,000 at an average of £70 a ticket he lands £5.6M.    Add in 500,000 PPV sales at £15 and that's £7.5M.

I wouldn't be surprised if the fight turns over £15M and yes folks this is what its all about. The punters ability to view the fight or lack of isn't part of the considerations.  I fully expect there will be a back lash from fans after the fight because they could not see it.  No promoter out their would be bothered in this situation.  As for the fans......sheep keep following the flock.

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Rowley wrote:As they will be in nearly every football stadium.

Wembley's views will be the worst by quite some distance, excuse the pun.

For which people will have only paid £30 - a price unlikely to be offered with 30,000 less sales potential elsewhere.

Not every ticket in the bowl is £30 some are going for £120. That's a lot of dosh just to say you were there.  

Tier 5 of the North side of the bowl.....you wouldn't see a mass brawl happening on Tier 1 from there never mind a boxing match far off in the yonder.

But you're missing the point (again) and I suspect deliberately to sustain your Eddie-bashing.

The worst seats, i.e. those which according to you are so dramatically different from the ones at an Emirates, are going for £30-40 a pop.  People, particularly Londoners (most money, least hassle) won't see that as much of an obstacle to a casual night out.

Also, the most expensive bowl tickets are £100 according to the OP and will therefore be right at the front and comparable to anything at Emirates.  So stop talking blarney out your arris.

Go to the Emirates and then go to Wembley is my suggestion to you.  It's chalk and cheese in terms of size.
 

Been to both. England versus Montegro (worst match ever) and Oxford winning the playoff final vs York, both at Wembley, and twice to watch Arsenal in midweek cup games.

Next?

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Strongy

Nobody buys your smokescreen.

And all your post shows is a) Wembley's running cost; and b) How much more desperate Wembley would be to host.

You're a waffler.  

And you're a transparent bullsh!tter. Point?

Yeah and you think Wembley can be got for cheaper than the Emirates.  

Do you advise people on financial matters?  I hope not.

No, I've speculated. Whereas you have definitively stated, whilst providing neither evidence nor sound reasoning for your postulation.

What I advise people on, thankfully, is nothing to do with event management and stadia hire.

partially due to slashing running costs by £10m - down from £66.8m in 2007 to £57m last year.


These figures demonstrate running Wembley is not cheap.

AND..........??????????????????

Surely, as an (assumed) intelligent human being you can't be using that as the sole pillar to your argument??

A figure in isolation is totally meaningless without a comparable to contrast it with.

Emirates may cost £100m a year to run, or maybe £10m a year.  Who knows? But without the comparison your feeble attempts and trying to sustain this charade to hide your Eddie-bashing are laughable.

You have decided to go to the fight so you want to have a goodnight.  You are hardly objective.  I wonder if Rowley is going?

As to you and others that are saying I am Eddie bashing I say I have argued that Wembley is not a good venue to host boxing, I would say this no matter who the promoter is.

I have said Wembley is not a cheap venue to hire and anyone with a titter of wit would recognize this.  If Webley costs a million a week to run and it doesn't hold events every week I think most can understand Eddie shelled out to get Wembley.  If the average ticket price is say £80 and he sells 60,000 tickets then his ticket revenue alone is  80 x 60000 =  £4.8M.  Then there is the profits from food and drink which is possibly part of the deal with Wembley and I wouldn't be surprised if there is a nice array of merchandising.   If Eddie hits 80,000 at an average of £70 a ticket he lands £5.6M.    Add in 500,000 PPV sales at £15 and that's £7.5M.

Guesses.......guesses.........guesses.........

Still absolutely totally and utterly meaningless without comparison.

You're talking about your backside unless you can actually prove anything you're saying - by COMPARING it with one of your so called infinitely better stadia options.

Strongy, if you view it as expensive then it's not Eddies fault he can't cater for those who can't afford it. I understand even a cheap ticket would be most of your dole money gone, but let's not be bitter and twisted that you didn't work hard when younger to get somewhere?!

Izzi, as much as I like needling Strongy, you're quite far wide of the mark there.

He's building mud huts for free in Mongolia and I shouldn't take the Micky out of him as he's doing a great thing for people?

Can I just add I'm super pumped for this fight and will be defo going. The ticket site have said (comments section) that the seating map is coming soon. I'll decide what tickets to go for then.

And remember guys, but there will be giant screens above the ring. And unless your in York hall then the views from every other venue is crap unless you fork out £100

I haven't been super pumped for a long time.

There's talk of hall/ward vs Jamie mcdonell for a world title on the undercard. Also Selby/Mitchell fighting for there 1st world title and Paul Smith vs fielding for the the British title. That's a pretty good undercard.

Well, it's a start......

Someone did a thread on here recently about Don King's cards. Now THOSE were undercards!!

lambertm100 wrote:There's talk of hall/ward vs Jamie mcdonell for a world title on the undercard. Also Selby/Mitchell fighting for there 1st world title and Paul Smith vs fielding for the the British title. That's a pretty good undercard.

Unless it's talk from Eddie Hearn it's irrelevant. The cast of Loose Women could be discussing it, doesn't mean it'll be happening.

I'll be paying £30/£40 for a ticket and will probably watch a lot of the fight on the big screen. People are going for the atmosphere and can say 'I was there'. Serious boxing fans with deeper pockets can pay £100 for a ticket. £30/ £40 is good value if its £20 to buy on PPV.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Well, it's a start......

Someone did a thread on here recently about Don King's cards. Now THOSE were undercards!!

To be fair, King was ripping off most of his fighters so could afford to get a stacked card together!

In terms of an undercard it's one of the best I've seen on these shores. No doubt Strongy will come on with something to moan about though. Miserable git.

Still no seating plan, might be Monday until it's released

DAVE667 wrote:

lambertm100 wrote:There's talk of hall/ward vs Jamie mcdonell for a world title on the undercard. Also Selby/Mitchell fighting for there 1st world title and Paul Smith vs fielding for the the British title. That's a pretty good undercard.

Unless it's talk from Eddie Hearn it's irrelevant. The cast of Loose Women could be discussing it, doesn't mean it'll be happening.

It was Hearn on IFL TV.

lambertm100 wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

lambertm100 wrote:There's talk of hall/ward vs Jamie mcdonell for a world title on the undercard. Also Selby/Mitchell fighting for there 1st world title and Paul Smith vs fielding for the the British title. That's a pretty good undercard.

Unless it's talk from Eddie Hearn it's irrelevant. The cast of Loose Women could be discussing it, doesn't mean it'll be happening.

It was Hearn on IFL TV.

Once it's signed and sealed, start getting excited...otherwise, take a leaf out of Kell Brook's book and assume it's more bollox from Eddie.

He'd be a fool NOT to stack the undercard but once he's got his hands on your money...you're his. BWAHAHAHAHAAHAAAAAAAA

Hall v McDonnell is ambitious considering Hall is fighting at the end of this month, be surprised if the rematch on the Groves/Froch bill will happen.

Realistically I believe we'll get Mitchell vs Coyle and the rest of the Hearn academy knocking over tomato cans again.

Cheers Rodders

Tbh, Luke Campbell and AJ on the undercard would find favour with me, even if it is only versus tcans.

tcans = terminator cans?

tcans? Those birds with the multi-coloured beaks that used to advertise Guiness?

Still think he should have Quigg - Frampton and no one would give a toss about tomato cans beforehand..