****** claims Khan-Kotelnik sold more than 100k PPV's

[ishy]

He is pretty pissed off at Boente for quoting 30,000.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[djoc175]

30,000 did seem a bit low though but then I'm not really qualified to say

[kosaros]

I think the Haye vs Valuev fight will get more buys.

The freak aspect of the fight has to come into account for the casual fan.

[El Cepillo]

I actually find it odd that PPV numbers are so important. Put the big fights in free-to-air slots and you'd get more people watching and therefore more advertising revenue, which is where the money is made. This whole concept of PPV's is really outdated and damaging.

[Flea Man]

I actually find it odd that PPV numbers are so important. Put the big fights in free-to-air slots and you'd get more people watching and therefore more advertising revenue, which is where the money is made. This whole concept of PPV's is really outdated and damaging.

they still get ads for ppv though....best of both World I guess..........which is wrong, as I agree with YOUR standpoint on the matter

[izmat]

How would Boente get access to PPV figures so soon after the Kotelnik fight?

[El Cepillo]

they still get ads for ppv though....best of both World I guess..........which is wrong, as I agree with YOUR standpoint on the matter

Yeah I know what you're saying, BUT PPV restricts the number of people watching, and the more people that watch, the more the network can get from the advertisers. And advertising revenue is THE main source of income for most TV networks and print publications.

Like for example, national newspapers don't give a fuck about price-at-point of sale in terms of getting revenue, they want to make their paper cheap so that more people will buy it, increase their ciruclation, so when the addvertisers come along they can say "our paper is read by x amount of people, we want x amount of money".

I'm just pulling these figures out of the air, but for example if 100,000 people bought PPV, then the advertisers would only pay for their product to be seem by that number, if a fight was on free-to-air, and they got an audience of 1 million +, then the network would get 10x the revenue from the advertisers, because there would be 10x more people watching.

Plus when you think about the net now, basically you can watch anything on there for free (I'm NOT advocating this, its illegal of course and shouldn't be done) but its a bit naive and outdated this concept of PPV, IMO.

[destruction]

The advantage of PPV is that it is cold hard cash up front.

Advertising cannot ever be quantified in terms of benefits accurately.

Advertising = Guess work of benefits, and advert sales based on this guess work.

PPV= Cold hard cash in the bank up front no questions.

I know why PPV is more popular.

[itrymariti]

Yeah I know what you're saying, BUT PPV restricts the number of people watching, and the more people that watch, the more the network can get from the advertisers. And advertising revenue is THE main source of income for most TV networks and print publications.

Like for example, national newspapers don't give a fuck about price-at-point of sale in terms of getting revenue, they want to make their paper cheap so that more people will buy it, increase their ciruclation, so when the addvertisers come along they can say "our paper is read by x amount of people, we want x amount of money".

I'm just pulling these figures out of the air, but for example if 100,000 people bought PPV, then the advertisers would only pay for their product to be seem by that number, if a fight was on free-to-air, and they got an audience of 1 million +, then the network would get 10x the revenue from the advertisers, because there would be 10x more people watching.

Plus when you think about the net now, basically you can watch anything on there for free (I'm NOT advocating this, its illegal of course and shouldn't be done) but its a bit naive and outdated this concept of PPV, IMO.

That's a good point. Maybe the advertisers are scared that the viewers will just flick on for the fight and not watch the build up and reaction - obviously, even if you show an advert in between every round, you aren't going to have very many at all. That would leave little room for advertisers...

I guess boxing PPVs wouldn't have limited the audiences that much in the good old days, but now it's just become part of the culture.

[itrymariti]

The advantage of PPV is that it is cold hard cash up front.

Advertising cannot ever be quantified in terms of benefits accurately.

Advertising = Guess work of benefits, and advert sales based on this guess work.

PPV= Cold hard cash in the bank up front no questions.

I know why PPV is more popular.

Hardly. With PPV there's always a big risk that no-one will buy the fucking thing. But that's just a low risk if it's on for free. And there's ALWAYS people looking to advertise.

[achillesthegreat]

100k is still piss poor. Put Khan on free TV and that fight draws in at least 5 million!

[destruction]

Hardly. With PPV there's always a big risk that no-one will buy the fucking thing. But that's just a low risk if it's on for free. And there's ALWAYS people looking to advertise.

Unless there is cash analysis here and a comparison I am not buying this, my money brain is telling me that PPV is the cash cow.

Khan is a cash cow for ******.

[Losfer_Words]

If Frank 'the truth' ****** said it, then I'm sure it's veracity cannot be disputed:blood.

[El Cepillo]

Unless there is cash analysis here and a comparison I am not buying this, my money brain is telling me that PPV is the cash cow.

Khan is a cash cow for ******.

For a sporting event with 10 million + viewers, which is what boxing could potentially get (Hamed did those numbers on ITV consistently), you're looking at anywhere between £750,000-£2,000,000 per twenty second advertisement. Two advertisements between each round, not to mention pre and post (where the slots are much cheaper).... you'd have to sell a lot of PPV's to generate anything like the revenue from advertising.

The PROBLEM is, that broadcastors have no confidence in boxings ability to draw the big numbers, so they go for the safe and steady option of PPV's.

[UndisputedUK]

So lets say less than a million people watched the fight PPV. The promotion gets a big slice of money, but, the other 6 -10 million who could have watched it free on Sky or ITV surely it would have been a great advertising opportunity for someone.

How come lots of stuff like Spanish and Italian football are on Sky for free and then a fringe WBA title and foreign boxing is either not shown or is PPV?

I'm losing interest since nearly all world title fights now are either PPV or not shown live.

Are there any others who just follow boxing now by reading these forums?

[destruction]

For a sporting event with 10 million + viewers, which is what boxing could potentially get (Hamed did those numbers on ITV consistently), you're looking at anywhere between £750,000-£2,000,000 per twenty second advertisement. Two advertisements between each round, not to mention pre and post (where the slots are much cheaper).... you'd have to sell a lot of PPV's to generate anything like the revenue from advertising.

The PROBLEM is, that broadcastors have no confidence in boxings ability to draw the big numbers, so they go for the safe and steady option of PPV's.

I can appreciate your numbers, but if they are true then why is ****** not whoring himself to ITV or channel 5. I am excluding channel 4, because everyone knows that they hate boxing?

I think it is because Sky sports are the only channel that wants boxing right now and thats the reason why he has to go the PPV route, because a basic Sky sports has low overall viewing figures.

However, I agree that ****** is better off getting an ITV contract for his major fights, maybe he does not understand this, but I dont think so. I think the issue is that the ITV execs are thick as shite.

[phonk]

If the fight did indeed sell 100,000 PPV buys in the UK then that totals £1.5m in PPV revenue.

The question i suppose would be could ****** and co, in the midst of a recession, be able to match the £1.5m raised in PPV sales through the sale of advertising slots were the fight to be on in front of 5+ million ITV

Keep in mind that during the actual fight advertising is very limited. A single 30 second advert every 2 or 3 rounds.

[kosaros]

For a sporting event with 10 million + viewers, which is what boxing could potentially get (Hamed did those numbers on ITV consistently), you're looking at anywhere between £750,000-£2,000,000 per twenty second advertisement. Two advertisements between each round, not to mention pre and post (where the slots are much cheaper).... you'd have to sell a lot of PPV's to generate anything like the revenue from advertising.

The PROBLEM is, that broadcastors have no confidence in boxings ability to draw the big numbers, so they go for the safe and steady option of PPV's.

Maybe the lower end, but not near £2m. The super bowl in America is watched by 90m+ on average and they charge $2.5m per 30 second advertisement, so I don't think advertisements for a 10m show would cost as much as £2m here.

Harvey's have a deal with coronation street (which is watched by more people than boxing) to have their advertisements to be screened before and during every programme for 2 years (so 500+ shows?) and that only cost £20m.

[Farmboxer]

And ****** never lies?