An interesting concept,

Considering that Arum and King are now into their 70's, it is doubtful that they will be around much longer. Looking at the bad, such as the promoter corruption, sanctioning body favoritism, and the monopolies that often prevented fights from taken place because of their personal rivalries against each other, as well as the good, King= quality PPV fights, especially years ago, ability to "get things done" and unbelievable charisma and work ethic) (Arum=The emergence of Top Rank Boxing as a closed circuit TV and PPV leader in the 80's, the launch of ESPN cable boxing, Foreman's comeback, the recognition of the Latino fan-base market as a strong boxing force) What will the future of boxing be when both promoters have retired? What impact will this have on the PPV industry? Will big fights be harder or easier to make under smaller promoter leadership?

Even more important, can the smaller scale promoter develop the boxing sense and economic sense to "make things happen" when they do not have the experience of Arum and King?

Jack

Golden Tool will become a monopoly where smaller promoters will either have to give up options on their fighters, give up their fighters outright, or get paid signifigantly less when dealing with them.

as much shit as King and Arum get I will miss both when those fucks at Golden Tool take over completely. They already bought the Ring, KO etc and yet say they will keep editorial nuetrality when it comes to it's content? Bullshit you know we are going to be seeing stories on why Ponce is miles better than Vazquez and Marquez.

its going to take someone with innovation to take boxing into areas where it hasnt been in a long while. Free TV, enticing matchups where fans do not have to pay to see it, more fights less filler etc

Golden Tool will become a monopoly where smaller promoters will either have to give up options on their fighters, give up their fighters outright, or get paid signifigantly less when dealing with them.

as much shit as King and Arum get I will miss both when those fucks at Golden Tool take over completely. They already bought the Ring, KO etc and yet say they will keep editorial nuetrality when it comes to it's content? Bullshit you know we are going to be seeing stories on why Ponce is miles better than Vazquez and Marquez.

its going to take someone with innovation to take boxing into areas where it hasnt been in a long while. Free TV, enticing matchups where fans do not have to pay to see it, more fights less filler etc

How can people sit here and say King is better for boxing than GBP thats just f*cking ridiculouse.

Oscar(GBP) is taking over I think thats the best thing going for boxing right now.

the only down side he how much some of fights are going for to actually be @ the fight. i mean hopkins/wright was sky high & cotto tickets are threw the roof as well! i used to not like DLH @ one point but after fighting hopkins & mayweather he grew on me a bit! i think GBP could be good for boxing, i mean he considers them partners the way it sounds but live fights cost enough let alone $175 for nose bleed seats! or is it just me?!?!? one thing is for sure though, other promoters will be needed.

the thing is, until it's like the old days & fighters fought the best to get their money, these days everyone wants to just call out the guys who bring money! i mean everyone wants DLH cause they know it's the most money they can make...years ago fuckers just took faces til they got their money! all these protected fighters & the ABC's of the world are a joke. let me tell you something, if you fight the best everytime out, you'll get your money but free fights & an old school way of thinking are all but gone. the funny thing if you think about it is that really these days guys should be bigger, stronger & faster yet everyone looks @ the old fighters as so much better...i believe it's cause the best always wanted the best & they fought more often....not made excuses not too! ok i will STFU now

new blood new directions....... lets just see where it takes us!

did you not just read what I said or are you just going to post out your ass?

when one company forms a monopoly they control everything. If that were to happen with GBP what makes you think they wont dictate every aspect?

tell me how this is good for boxing? since you stepped up tell me what they have done to make this sport better?

lower ticket prices? check Hopkins Wright's price plans

more fights? nope. HBO's card is filled with their fights while others have to scramble for the remaining dates

less PPVs? nope. In order for them to pay out the sums they promised fighters when they took them away from other promoters they have to find a way to pay them

home grown talent? other than Ponce who else have they brought from scratch to champion status?

PPV bang for the buck? we went from 5 fights to 4 now GBP has cards with three fights

affordable PPVs? they charged 55 for dlh mayweather and gave a shit card to support because they knew the casual fan didnt care

free fights? nope unless you count HBO free


no inroads to network TV, no solid advertising of the product, little cooperation amongst their fellow promoters (hell they JUST ended a fued with Top Rank that stifled us for years)

I could keep going if you like?

hell king done that a few years ago with a bunch of heavyweights & i wouldn't pay $10 to see that card. it seems to me that more & more fights are ended up as PPV cards. my farther told me once that he believes that sooner or late, many sports will become like that just to pay big contract/salaries. if you think about how much money some of these guys are getting in all sports, you can ALMOST understand what he is saying. i mean could you imagine making $25-40 million in one night? or even $20 million for a season & yet some end up being broken(tyson one one). so milk dud, you don't think it's cool how DLH considers his fighters partners? have you ever heard ANY OTHER promoter say that? plus IMO, the bottom line is i think DLH might take better care of fighter as a whole when all is said & done cause he is/was a fighter. do you agree with that bro?

hell no...just ask arum & king! furthermore, agreed on his good points he dam sure made some!

I'm kind of wary about the GBP monopoly. It's like they are taking over everything, and that means less room for objectivity and fairness in an already corrupt sport.

Good points,

In fact some years ago there was talk of putting The World Series and Superbowl on PPV. However, nothing ever came of it because those events are such strong American institutions for baseball and football fans, that there would be incredible outrage if they were to become PPV. Such a move would lead to all kinds of Congressional hearings and "The rights of the American people being violated" that the outcry would be too great to take the risk.

Promoter higher-ups don't have commercial network sponsorship backing for boxing anymore for big fights, so they can get away with charging $55 for a piece of shit card. The problem is that there are not enough mainstream public in today's entertainment market who care about boxing compared to football and baseball. (At least not in the USA.)

Food for thought is in theory: How much more (if anything) could a promoter or company profit by making World Series or Superbowls as PPV as opposed to putting them on commercial network TV? Do you believe they would come out ahead or not?

Jack

Does anyone have any statistics on approximately how many people tune in to the Superbowl?

I think if it were a PPV (say around $50) whatever number would probably be cut down to about 25% of that, as in 75% less.

If it were a PPV you'd have MANY more people having Superbowl parties (and bigger parties) and have 20+ people all sharing one PPV. I would think nearly all of the football fans out there that usually watch the big game alone or with a friends would all make a point to watch it in much larger groups to share the cost. I think this alone would cut the number roughly in half.

You'd lose ALL of the non-football fans (people that JUST turn in to the Superbowl due to the event).

You'd lose MOST of the casual fans that watch a few games here and there throughout the season and always tune in to the Superbowl.

All of the people (mostly women like my girlfriend and mother) that tune in "just to see the commercials and half time show" obviously wouldn't buy it.

that last part is a very hard question cause many people would be outraged to have to pay either one of them & if them got pissed off enough they might boycott the events but if everyone bought it, i would that they would make way more money even with the high cost of commercials during those events...especially the superbowl. i didn't think the public would stand for it myself though.

edit; sorry, the boards had a hick-up

they have been around since 2000. 7 years is a good enough time spane to develope talent enough to have someone as champion or even knocking on the door. Back when they were still small-ish they had that ideal, to develop talent (Mike Anchondo, Edwin Valero, Ponce, jose Navarro to name a few) but when they found it was easier to sign away talent thats when you saw less developement. The last young studs they signed were if I am not mistake Rock Allen, Abner Mares, Vicente Escobedo and it does not look like they are investing much time in grooming them for success.

and I am perfectly relaxed. Dude made some wild out claim with nothing to really back it so I asked him a ??? I didn't see anything wrong with that ut if the admins feel otherwise my apologies