Boxing TV coverage in the UK, are we very lucky ?

Morning,

Topical discussion at the moment around PPV for Hearn's 22/11/14 which is a damn right cheek on Sky's behalf as well noted. Read an interesting article on Boxing news this morn putting a little perspective on our TV privileges and how lucky we are to have a dedicated boxing channel.

http://www.boxingnews24.com/2014/11/boxings-ppv-in-the-usa/

Nick Hagan: PPV in boxing is not a new phenomenon. It was first introduced in 1975 to the US market by Don King for the fight between Ali V Frazier “Thriller in Manila”. Following this, during the 1980’s and 1990’s we saw the superstar’s of Boxing, such as Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis and Oscar De La Hoya fight on PPV, for Championship Fights.



During the last decade, we have seen the new stars of Boxing such as Mayweather, Pacquiao, Cotto and Alvarez, become PPV boxers in the USA. However the problem with the new generation of Boxing stars is that they and their promoters expect to be fighting on PPV every time they lace a pair of gloves. This wouldn’t be so bad if the opposition were not so subpar and the price for the PPV was more realistic. A prime example of this is the upcoming fight between Manny Pacquiao v Chris Algieri. The majority of casual boxing fans have never even heard of Algieri. The fight is priced at $69.99 per view in the US, which is just an obscene amount of money to line the pockets opromoters, Television Companies and Boxers alike.

PPV was first introduced to the UK market by Sky TV, for the rematch between Mike Tyson v Frank Bruno. This was priced at £15 or $24. I was one of the thousands of people who purchased this fight, but it’s worth noting here that this was an anticipated mega fight between two superstars of Boxing at the time.

During the last twenty years, we have seen Sky TV in the UK, charge a PPV fee exclusively to World Class fights, which have warranted this status. I.e. Lewis V Tyson, Mayweather V Hatton, Pacquiao V Hatton etc., but notice how all these boxers are household names and have/ were achieving so much in the ring. Earlier this year we saw Froch v Groves II, on Sky PPV, which was an epic and at £22.95 or $36.40 was quite a bargain. Some American fans may disagree, but it needs to be remembered that the PPV was priced realistically and Groves had already become a household name in the UK, from his previous fights against the likes of James De Gale.

In 2011 The UK was introduced to its first dedicated Full Time Boxing Channel in ‘Boxnation’. I have personally been subscribing to ‘Boxnation’ since the early part of 2013 and just think it’s absolutely fantastic value for money. For Subscription of just £12 or $19 per month, week in and week out they air many of the main events shown around the globe. The good thing about ‘Boxnation’ is that they are not contracted solely to one promoter and because of this subscribers have been able to enjoy events from TV companies such as HBO, Showtime and from promotions held by ‘Top Rank’, ‘Goldenboy Promotions’, ‘K2’ and ‘Sauerland Promotions’, to name a few. This year alone they have aired the following events live; Mayweather v Maidana 1 & 2, Pacquiao v Bradley, Alvarez v Lara, Alvarez v Angulo, Cotto v Martinez & Hopkins v Kovalev, along with many other great fights from around the globe. Later in November they are airing Live; Pacquiao v Algieri, Fury v Chisora and in December they have scheduled fights for Bradley v Chaves, Stevenson v Sukhotsky & Crawford v Beltran, all at no extra cost.

The above easily justifies, the disparity between the costs of viewing Boxing in the US, compared to the UK. The US market is seriously overpriced, where the UK market with the introduction of Boxnation and fare strategies by Sky TV, on when to make an event PPV is clear to see. It’s relatively easy Maths to work out that for 3 x $69.99 = $209.97 PPV events in the US. For this price you will pretty much get a whole years viewing on Boxnation. In 2014 alone viewers have enjoyed 6 events that were PPV in the US, at no extra cost. Unfortunately, I personally can’t see how the cost of viewing Boxing in the US is going to change anytime soon. The number of promoters in the US is decreasing by the year, due to the monopolisation of a very few. This monopolisation means that promoters can pretty much do what they want, in terms of pricing strategies and what TV channels they air their events on, thus forcing fans to pay the premiums.

As a true Boxing fan, I just hope that ‘Boxnation’ lives on and Sky TV in the UK doesn’t start charging for meaningless Fights anytime soon.

Cheers, Rodders

Saw the article yesterday the USA fans get majorly ripped off no doubt but doesnt mean we should have to pay £16.95 for fringe level world contenders

What Wheelchair says above.

A bad deal is still a bad deal even if someone else has it worse.

$69.99 for the Pacquiao fight is daylight robbery, only fight that would even come close to being worth that amount is Mayweather vs Pacquiao a few years ago with a stellar undercard

I'd say the UK is very lucky. I'm currently living in Australia and pretty much all international boxing is PPV. Even Wlad versus Leapai and Mundine vs Mosley...
The only Boxing shows we seem to get on Foxtel (equivalent to Sky) are small hall shows and these are all generally mid week.

As was said before a bad deal is a bad deal even if someone else has it worse

I can only agree with Wheelchair and Derby (simmer Strongback ).

I begrudge the whole notion of PPV personally. I pay £60+ a month for Sky because I want to watch the premiership, the hbo stuff on sky Atlantic etc and if the mrs doesn't keep up with the Kardashians the world will apparently stop spinning. Boxing is part of the programming on sky so I think it's a joke that I need to pay an additional fee to watch certain fights.

What stresses me out more is when everyday boxing fans try and play promoter and say 'x, y and z are PPV fighters'. Just be boxing fans! As a fan and nothing more, I'd like to get some value for money.

Obviously there are people worse off in the world but that doesn't mean I'm going to happily hand over my money for something I'm already paying for.

Don't get me wrong. I despise PPV in general, it is just another promotional tool to steal from the fans. I was merely highlighting that, compared to most, the UK does get it pretty good. I certainly miss the value that you get with Sky.

Dipper Brown wrote:I can only agree with Wheelchair and Derby (simmer Strongback ).

I begrudge the whole notion of PPV personally. I pay £60+ a month for Sky because I want to watch the premiership, the hbo stuff on sky Atlantic etc and if the mrs doesn't keep up with the Kardashians the world will apparently stop spinning. Boxing is part of the programming on sky so I think it's a joke that I need to pay an additional fee to watch certain fights.

What stresses me out more is when everyday boxing fans try and play promoter and say 'x, y and z are PPV fighters'. Just be boxing fans! As a fan and nothing more, I'd like to get some value for money.

Obviously there are people worse off in the world but that doesn't mean I'm going to happily hand over my money for something I'm already paying for.

You should use that as an excuse to look at the full frontal naked pictures of Kim Kardashian doing the rounds. She's nowt special but I thought I'd have a look in the interests of keeping up with popular cultures...that and the fact I like t!ts

DAVE667 wrote:

Dipper Brown wrote:I can only agree with Wheelchair and Derby (simmer Strongback ).

I begrudge the whole notion of PPV personally. I pay £60+ a month for Sky because I want to watch the premiership, the hbo stuff on sky Atlantic etc and if the mrs doesn't keep up with the Kardashians the world will apparently stop spinning. Boxing is part of the programming on sky so I think it's a joke that I need to pay an additional fee to watch certain fights.

What stresses me out more is when everyday boxing fans try and play promoter and say 'x, y and z are PPV fighters'. Just be boxing fans! As a fan and nothing more, I'd like to get some value for money.

Obviously there are people worse off in the world but that doesn't mean I'm going to happily hand over my money for something I'm already paying for.

You should use that as an excuse to look at the full frontal naked pictures of Kim Kardashian doing the rounds. She's nowt special but I thought I'd have a look in the interests of keeping up with popular cultures...that and the fact I like t!ts

....Explains why you spend so much time on here.

Ms kardashian looks fine from the waist up, but I can't relate to this fashion for capacious rumps.

Must be an age thing, but I'm from a time where a girl having an arse the size of a small country was a thing of ridicule not of desire. Fashion eh.

milkyboy wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

Dipper Brown wrote:I can only agree with Wheelchair and Derby (simmer Strongback ).

I begrudge the whole notion of PPV personally. I pay £60+ a month for Sky because I want to watch the premiership, the hbo stuff on sky Atlantic etc and if the mrs doesn't keep up with the Kardashians the world will apparently stop spinning. Boxing is part of the programming on sky so I think it's a joke that I need to pay an additional fee to watch certain fights.

What stresses me out more is when everyday boxing fans try and play promoter and say 'x, y and z are PPV fighters'. Just be boxing fans! As a fan and nothing more, I'd like to get some value for money.

Obviously there are people worse off in the world but that doesn't mean I'm going to happily hand over my money for something I'm already paying for.

You should use that as an excuse to look at the full frontal naked pictures of Kim Kardashian doing the rounds. She's nowt special but I thought I'd have a look in the interests of keeping up with popular cultures...that and the fact I like t!ts

....Explains why you spend so much time on here.

Ms kardashian looks fine from the waist up, but I can't relate to this fashion for capacious rumps.

Must be an age thing, but I'm from a time where a girl having an arse the size of a small country was a thing of ridicule not of desire. Fashion eh.

Have seen the ar$e shot and have to say it's quite frankly ridiculous. Seen better rear ends, breasts and "skin mittens" (although without the anatomical close up favoured by German porn directors it's fair to say that they're pretty much all of a muchness). Fail to see the fascination with KK and why seeing her t!ts and pu$$y are likely to "break the internet".

As an aside, the possibility of seeing which person naked is likely to "break the internet" (and by break I mean "cause it to crash due to heavy traffic as people flock to see these amazing pics" as opposed to it "imploding due to the sheer horror of the pictures posted - ie naked Susan Boyle fisting pics")

I have noticed Wlad vs Pulev is on Eurosport tomorrow for those if anyone didn't know.

As for KK "I've been with worse"

Cheers, Rodders

I kind of half agree with the Op....Back home I got to see all kinds of title fights on ESPN, NBC, ABC, HBo etc..............I was spoilt for choice..

However coming over in 89 there was little or no Boxing at all.............There was a show called sportsnight that used air the odd fight......ITV bought a few major players.....But most titles changed hands off screen. In fairness Boxnation does show plenty of title fights and offers fights SKY wouldn't buy..

However If all the big names are going to be on PPV.........Where are the kids going to get the inspiration to become tomorrow's Froch ???.....The majority of people in these hard times are struggling and don't need the added expense....

Can't think it's a good idea to marginalise the sport.......