boxnation my undying anger

I used to post on the old 606, but since 606v2 i have only viewed articules. Not until the birth of boxnation have I felt like posting. I know there have been a few articules on this already but just wanted to vent my spleen like the rest of us. I feel Mr Warren has truely arse raped boxing fans and did not even have the common courtesy to use lubricant! My non boxing friends have told me, "whats the problem its only another tenner". Well add that onto the rest we have to pay for sky and sky sports is a p*ss take. The sad thing is that alot of us are so used to being the most abused fans we will proberly sh ell out the extra tenner just to see our beloved sport. Why O why did i have to love this cursed sport! Rant over.

Agree, it is the last thing we need.

Think i'll wait to see what the schedule and programming are like before I burst a blood vessel over 2.50 a week. I've no problem paying for something if the content and delivery are decent.

It is 2.50 a week on top of everything else, though, paperbag.

That is what really winds people up, as it is a subscription on top of a subscription and they're just fleecing us.

Welcome to the board rIch

Boxing has gone from PPV once in a while to year round subscription.
I have never paid £120 in one year for PPV fights.
What Warren has done is to remove the middle man who unfortunately for us is key.
HBO in the US and Sky here were just starting to realise they are the power players in the sport. HBO have realised they bent over for Golden Boy and have been getting shafted with mismatches ever since. Adam Smith and Sky have seen this and this year would not renew long standing 5/6 date PPV contracts with Khan and Warren because the bills weren't up to scratch. Sky were demanding more evenly matched fights, for the best young british talent to have to fight domestic talent first and to avoid PPV like the shameful Khan-Fagan or Haye-Harrison.
Warren has removed this obstacle and can now charge us to watch mismatches, DeGale and Grives fighting tomato cans and to watch bloody reruns.

Whether you liked Sky or not, what benefited them benefited us - Sky new to get the paying public to watch they needed the big fights. Now the promoter is running the show and can do whatever the hell he pleases, this is the doorway to mismatch after mismatch.

Apologies for the shameful spelling and grammar but its early and fwank annoys me

That is one of the main concerns, gerard, as you rightly say sky had stopped PPV's and looked like they were going about things the right way.

Warren, the greedy slimy disgusting creature, clearly doesn't give two hoots about the average boxing fan, and I can only hope that the fans react in the best way possible - by not paying for this nonsense.

Just been listening to FW on 5live talking about the corruption in Olympic boxing. He cannot pronounce Azerbaijan, but he kept on trying bless him.

"Well, the Olympics are in London, the judges won't be Aber..., Az..., Aberja..., Aberzijhanies"

He tried to get a plug for BoxNation in but Campbell talked over him.

It is pretty sh*tty to be honest but can't say its a surprise. If i'm against it i'll vote with my wallet and not fork out. Which is pretty likely as Warren's stable looks a bit thin draw wise. Anyone know if they're intending to show other fighters? If I got to see the likes of Segura, Gamboa and Donaire etc regularly i'd happily pay. Unlikely I know.

First post, long time reader and inexplicably banned from EastSide....

This is nothing short of a disaster for boxing fans. As has already been said it dilutes again what we get to see for our Sky subsription and Warren expects us to fork out again to see his fighters. flip that Frank, poke it mate. I totally refuse to play ball with Primetime, Boxnation etc and I hope everyone does likewise.

Competition here doesn't help the consumer.

Fists any chance of a Q&A with Frank? Now that would be tasty... Maybe too tasty..

PPV isn't such an issue, as we can choose which fights we want to watch...with subscription it doesn't matter what matchups are made, we are still paying for it!

As for a Q&A with Frank, I'm not sure I could stand his slimy demeanour, though it would be interesting. I'll see what I can do.

Fists of Fury wrote:PPV isn't such an issue, as we can choose which fights we want to watch...with subscription it doesn't matter what matchups are made, we are still paying for it!

As for a Q&A with Frank, I'm not sure I could stand his slimy demeanour, though it would be interesting. I'll see what I can do.

Be careful, he's sued every other forum. We are about the only one allowed to use his name.

Has anyone ever been so unlikeable as Fwank?

I think he's alright.

Scottrf wrote:Be careful, he's sued every other forum. We are about the only one allowed to use his name.

Are we still taliking about Frank or have we moved on to Voldermort?

The name is as taboo.

Fists of Fury wrote:Has anyone ever been so unlikeable as Fwank?

Hobo unfurls his list of naughty 606v2 users.....

Adam D (Hobo) wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:Has anyone ever been so unlikeable as Fwank?

Hobo unfurls his list of naughty 606v2 users.....

You love us Hobo.

We're the air in your lungs and the warm sun on your face.

I was happy to pay for Setanta as it provided quality and quantity as far as boxing was concerned. Unfortunately any sports channel that wants air in the UK, needs a decent football package to go along with it to survive which Setanta did not have.

As for Boxnation, I can only see this succeeding if they cut a deal with one of the terrestial channels to show its fights on delayed coverage as they do not have to stable to support a subscription channel. Yes they may have a huge back catalogue of fights, but the same people that could be fleeced would pretty much have acces to these fights by other means.

I am sure Boxnation could try and go head to head with Sky for showing some big fights from the the US, but as they will be broadcasting on the Sky system, how long will that last before Sky start to demand even more money from him for renting a channel from them?

Just can't seeing it being a success as a subscription boxing channel alone.

Fists of Fury wrote:That is one of the main concerns, gerard, as you rightly say sky had stopped PPV's and looked like they were going about things the right way.

Warren, the greedy slimy disgusting creature, clearly doesn't give two hoots about the average boxing fan, and I can only hope that the fans react in the best way possible - by not paying for this nonsense.

I believe Terry Marsh knows a better way.

Ha, possibly!

Scottrf wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:PPV isn't such an issue, as we can choose which fights we want to watch...with subscription it doesn't matter what matchups are made, we are still paying for it!

As for a Q&A with Frank, I'm not sure I could stand his slimy demeanour, though it would be interesting. I'll see what I can do.

Be careful, he's sued every other forum. We are about the only one allowed to use his name.

Would it be fair to say that none of my questions would be submitted to Mr Warren?

DAVE667 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:PPV isn't such an issue, as we can choose which fights we want to watch...with subscription it doesn't matter what matchups are made, we are still paying for it!

As for a Q&A with Frank, I'm not sure I could stand his slimy demeanour, though it would be interesting. I'll see what I can do.

Be careful, he's sued every other forum. We are about the only one allowed to use his name.

Would it be fair to say that none of my questions would be submitted to Mr Warren?

If they mirror your Foreman ones!

Why would I ask Frank Warren if naming all his sons George caused confusion in his house or if losing to Ali in Zaire had left Frank bitter and twisted

DAVE667 wrote:Why would I ask Frank Warren if naming all his sons George caused confusion in his house or if losing to Ali in Zaire had left Frank bitter and twisted

It probably did.

The fact that they need subscribers means Frank will be under pressure to make better matches because if he doesn't people won't buy. Also they will be broadcasting fights from around Europe and America is good considering Sky have gave up on the American fights. They are also in negotiations with GBP/Top Rank/ESPN/HBO and Showtime about showing some fights from their catalogues.

Doesn't sound to bad. They are also going to be covering more of the lower weights so guys likle Segura and Donaire will be getting T.V time over here. Their will be no extra PPV charges. IMO this cr@ps all over Primetime and their once every 3 months £15 for four or five hours boxing.

The first month is free to air as well.

It is an extra expense but it is for a boxing channel and as a boxing fan I'm sold. To many people saying it's scandalous and Warren is pooping on the fans when they don't know the full facts.

prettyboykev wrote:The fact that they need subscribers means Frank will be under pressure to make better matches because if he doesn't people won't buy.

Depends. Is it £10/m or £120/y?

I think it could be decent and could replace PT, but will wait and see.

It's a month to month subscription no yearly contract.

To many people saying it's scandalous and Warren is EDIT on the fans when they don't know the full facts..

What's to know? A load of boxing that was previously included on my Sky package isn't there any more and I'm being asked to pay extra to get it back. Seems pretty simple to me.

KingMonkey wrote:To many people saying it's scandalous and Warren is EDIT on the fans when they don't know the full facts..

What's to know? A load of boxing that was previously included on my Sky package isn't there any more and I'm being asked to pay extra to get it back. Seems pretty simple to me.

With you King Monkey, cricket fan can buy Sky tv and see pretty much every game worth seeing, football fan can see pretty much everything other than the two games ESPN have a season, likewise golf fans, tennis fans and so on and so on. Boxing fan has to pay whatever extra primetime and box nation levy to do similar. Am struggling to see the upside.

Would appreciate it if folks would please stop trying to find ways around the swear filter. It's a waste of your creativity, and editing out the offending comments is a waste of my time.

Thanks.

Did you read the rest of my post or just that one line?

It's not as simple as you see it. Frank can put on more shows now he's not with Sky. Then their is the back catalogue of fights he is in negotiations to show as I explained above. Along with the fights from Europe and the U.S that Sky won't show and his deal with GBP that will hopefully shut down Primetime.

HumanWindmill wrote:Would appreciate it if folks would please stop trying to find ways around the swear filter. It's a waste of your creativity, and editing out the offending comments is a waste of my time.

Thanks.

Sorry Windy

prettyboykev wrote:Did you read the rest of my post or just that one line?

It's not as simple as you see it. Frank can put on more shows now he's not with Sky. Then their is the back catalogue of fights he is in negotiations to show as I explained above. Along with the fights from Europe and the U.S that Sky won't show and his deal with GBP that will hopefully shut down Primetime.

You. Tube.

prettyboykev wrote:Did you read the rest of my post or just that one line?

It's not as simple as you see it. Frank can put on more shows now he's not with Sky. Then their is the back catalogue of fights he is in negotiations to show as I explained above. Along with the fights from Europe and the U.S that Sky won't show and his deal with GBP that will hopefully shut down Primetime.

Kev appreciate what you are saying but my fear is if we as fans accept this and shell out in sufficient numbers and the channel takes of what is to stop the Hearns from deciding this is the way to go, or Golden Boy deciding this is a way into the European market for them, or HBO or Showtime for that matter. Have no issues with the content of the channel which looks decent enough it is the business model and what this could mean fiscally for fans long term

No probs, kev.

BALTIMORA wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Did you read the rest of my post or just that one line?

It's not as simple as you see it. Frank can put on more shows now he's not with Sky. Then their is the back catalogue of fights he is in negotiations to show as I explained above. Along with the fights from Europe and the U.S that Sky won't show and his deal with GBP that will hopefully shut down Primetime.

You. Tube.

That's fine but there is no other TV channel showing this stuff except the odd decent fight on ESPN classic when they do stray from showing Ali vs Foreman/Frasier/Bugner/Cooper.

BALTIMORA wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Did you read the rest of my post or just that one line?

It's not as simple as you see it. Frank can put on more shows now he's not with Sky. Then their is the back catalogue of fights he is in negotiations to show as I explained above. Along with the fights from Europe and the U.S that Sky won't show and his deal with GBP that will hopefully shut down Primetime.

You. Tube.

In glorious 5 pixels per screen.

Why is it that a channel proposing to show what are essentially repeats is being lauded as a good thing? I know that some classic fights have great 'replay' value, but I'd rather have new content personally. Showing replays is just making you pay for something you've very possibly already paid at least once to see. Christ knows, people complain enough that the BBC are guilty of that!

BALTIMORA wrote:Why is it that a channel proposing to show what are essentially repeats is being lauded as a good thing? I know that some classic fights have great 'replay' value, but I'd rather have new content personally. Showing replays is just making you pay for something you've very possibly already paid at least once to see. Christ knows, people complain enough that the BBC are guilty of that!

These are supplementary to at least 2 shows a week, a boxing news channel, and a magazine style show.

I'm a boxing fan sure but all that 'extra' stuff really wouldn't be worth my while with the occasional acception aside. My main concern is the domestic scene and my coverage has just been heavily diluted.

If Frank somehow does an amazing job and puts fights on every week that I want to see then great, I might tune in but as someone has already said I worry for the cards of those, his fighters will be spread far too thin.

Puff it out as much as you like, all I see is something being taken with very little offered back and for more money.

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Did you read the rest of my post or just that one line?

It's not as simple as you see it. Frank can put on more shows now he's not with Sky. Then their is the back catalogue of fights he is in negotiations to show as I explained above. Along with the fights from Europe and the U.S that Sky won't show and his deal with GBP that will hopefully shut down Primetime.

You. Tube.

In glorious 5 pixels per screen.

What are you watching it on? My point is that it's a bit of a joke asking to pay for stuff that's widely available FOR FREE. Also, a lot of older fights don't have such great quality picture no matter what you watch them on.

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Why is it that a channel proposing to show what are essentially repeats is being lauded as a good thing? I know that some classic fights have great 'replay' value, but I'd rather have new content personally. Showing replays is just making you pay for something you've very possibly already paid at least once to see. Christ knows, people complain enough that the BBC are guilty of that!

These are supplementary to at least 2 shows a week, a boxing news channel, and a magazine style show.

That's how many hours? I simply don't think there's enough content of the right kind being offered. How much news can a boxing channel realistically look to mention? Have you ever watched BBC News 24 for any length of time?

The archive stuff is to fill time you can't have live boxing on 24/7. Small hall shows on a Friday bigger shows on a Saturday. Good cards from around the World. Sounds not bad.

Amateur shows as well. Something no one else is showing.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Why is it that a channel proposing to show what are essentially repeats is being lauded as a good thing? I know that some classic fights have great 'replay' value, but I'd rather have new content personally. Showing replays is just making you pay for something you've very possibly already paid at least once to see. Christ knows, people complain enough that the BBC are guilty of that!

These are supplementary to at least 2 shows a week, a boxing news channel, and a magazine style show.

That's how many hours? I simply don't think there's enough content of the right kind being offered. How much news can a boxing channel realistically look to mention? Have you ever watched BBC News 24 for any length of time?

I presume you work, how much can you watch? Would you watch it between 2am and 6 am on a Thursday morning?

Maybe I'm out of my depth here but do you guys REALLY want to watch that much boxing? A few extra shows is one thing but I don't watch it for the sake of watching it. Saturday Fight night suits me, the odd extra night is great and the ocasional big fight from the US that I can catch up on in the morning.

News (SSN), Bunce (was free previously) magazine show (ringside).... It's all spin.

Oh and dare I say it but amateur boxing is no spectator sport.

prettyboykev wrote:The archive stuff is to fill time you can't have live boxing on 24/7. Small hall shows on a Friday bigger shows on a Saturday. Good cards from around the World. Sounds not bad.

That doesn't sound bad, but it's nothing that couldn't be put on Channel 5 or such like. As someone's already said; it is pretty much a case of being made to pay for some of the things you were alreadly receiving.