Contracts part zwei

For once in my life, I have someone who needs me....

Well not quite Stevie but for once in my life I did write a popular boxing thread that didn't involve MMA or Rocky.

Yes, my Contracts thread garnered some attention and most of it surrounded the twins of evil, Brother WK and Brother VK. These two men according to some, have been labelled as making Don King look like Jesus (not my insane words for the record).

There have been a few people who have leapt to the brothers defense, in quite rightly claiming that of course they are going to try and get the best out of any deal they put on the table, due to their dominance.

So what is the point of this meandering thread? Yes there really is one!

I don't want this descending into further talks of how evil/ corrupt/ downright mean they are - the other thread has drawn out that discussion to its overlong conclusion already.

What I would like for us all to think about is this - if you were a independent arbitrator and were responsible over drawing up a contract that both parties must sign without change, what do you think would be a fair one for both parties. Those parties being Vitali and David Haye.

So I want you to take into account the following:

Vitalis stock. Hayes current respect in the division. What you think each brings to the fight in PPV sales. And any other factor I might not have considered but is important.

So let me know, what you think a fair split at this moment in time would be and any other stipulations that you deem fair (such as the fight being in the champs backyard) - over to you.

Is tough to say Adam because the two major things Haye bought to the table last time round were the belt and Sky's PPV muscle. We know the former of these has gone by the wayside and the rumours are the second has also. Even if Sky can be persuaded to get back on board on the back of the Harrison and Wlad debacles you would have to think the sales projections would be on a damned sight reduced level.

Given this I would not have a clue what would be approriate but would have to think Haye would not be likely to get much more than 30%

Wow! 30%?

I actually thought you were going t say lower.

For me, David hasnt done anything to deserve a rematch (is he ranked even?). His last performance was awful.

He has acted disgracefully but that I can forgive as its adding PPV figures.

The only reason I would give him 20% is due to the fact that he was a champ and didnt get a rematch (his own fault for not putting it in the contract I assume).

Other than that, I feel there is a stronger argument for closer to 10%.

That is what I think is fair however, you can bet your bottom euro that Mr Haye is most probably looking at closer to the 40% mark.

Adam in terms of what he deserves I would not give him 20p but you only have to look on here to see there are enough people on here who are not fed up to the back teeth with him and whilst I find his gob and actions at the weekend shameful it does mean there is an angle this fight can be sold from.

You also have to consider the heavyweight cupboard is pretty bare at the minute, is either guys they have already beaten, guys who are not ready or guys who don't want to go anywhere near them, when you add in to the fact most of these possess the charisma of a pair of slippers and much as it pains me to admit it in relative terms haye brings something to the table.

I'd give Vit 60%. Haye 30% and the winner gets the additional 10%

There is no way on earth Haye deserves more than 20%. He brings nothing to the table apart from a gob. I know us boxing fans are fickle, but, I cannot imagine the public will be as easily duped as last time out. Especially considering he has done nothing, in terms of boxing, to convince people that his next match will be anything different from the Wlad affair.

I would go with the suggestion of the winner gets the extra 10% though.

Im not sure what hes looking for but given it wouldnt be hard to become mandatory for either you would have to think its upwards of 30%.

Ive no idea what kind of extra money Haye can generate. Whatever else about him hes proven to be a great salesman so its not beyond the realms of possibility he could hook up some kind deal for a network that generates more income or even convince Sky to back him again.

But I would say if he looking at just flat rate standard challenger stuff and cant guarantee any additional income the Id give him 25% which is about what a mandatory would get. I dont think he entitled to anything more at present unless he can prove he brings more money than other relevant challengers.

trottb wrote:He brings nothing to the table apart from a gob. I know us boxing fans are fickle, but, I cannot imagine the public will be as easily duped as last time out. .

Sad but true but sometimes that is enough, how many times did Audley flatter to deceive or just fail flat out but still he sold 100s of thousands against Haye.

give him 0% and 2.5% per round he wins. That way we can guarantee a fight rather than a toe.

trottb wrote:There is no way on earth Haye deserves more than 20%. He brings nothing to the table apart from a gob. I know us boxing fans are fickle, but, I cannot imagine the public will be as easily duped as last time out. Especially considering he has done nothing, in terms of boxing, to convince people that his next match will be anything different from the Wlad affair.

I would go with the suggestion of the winner gets the extra 10% though.

Many will want to see that gob silenced or filled with humble pie.

I would tend to go for 75 / 25 split without refight clauses against each brother, their mother and the goldfish. It keeps it clean, recognises that Haye will sell, but also recognises that he brings little else to the party.

Still prefer my split but with the 10% for whoever scores a KO. Give them added incentive.

Shah that is a great idea!

Az despite generating a bit of publicity I don't think you will see the same fuss as for the Wlad fight and I cannot see Sky going back on their PPV stance.

One other thing(sorry slightly off) but, in my opinion, will almost certainly not even be a quarter of the amount of travelling fans as last time out, so does anybody see this affecting Haye, being in a much more hostile environment?

I was meant to say this in my first post, this is shameless milking of a successful thread Adam!

Sky would be utterly mental to go back on their ppv stance so soon and I can say with 100% confidence that I wouldn't pay to watch it.

trottb wrote:

I was meant to say this in my first post, this is shameless milking of a successful thread Adam!

Its my thread and I am going to milk it dry!

by KingMonkey on Tue 21 Feb 2012 - 16:29

Sky would be utterly mental to go back on their ppv stance so soon and I can say with 100% confidence that I wouldn't pay to watch it.

As a matter of interest, would you pay to watch Chis v Haye?

If I were the mediator, I would say a fair split between the two at this time would be 80% - 20%

Reason on Vitalis side:

Haye has done nothing to warrant a shot at the WBC title. His record at Heavyweight is limited at best. He is a former champion so he does have marketability, however facing him will put the lid on a very impressive and dominant career. Vit holds the german TV companies rights in his contract, he is also the champion so he can dictate where, when and pretty much how. He wouldn't do this through wanting to be controlling - it makes good business sense to call Haye out and fight him to top off his career and take a career high payday due to the market value of Mr. David Haye.

Wladimir got a career high earning from his fight with Haye, not because it was a good boxer, or a mandatory, but because of all the controversy and the Sky hype machine. That was 50/50 - and still more than Vitali is likely to earn even if he took 100% which Haye would never agree to.

Hayes side:

No real need to come out of retirement unless its for money he's willing to earn if he loses. If he beats Vitali then he's going to be stuck fighting Wlad and probably Vitali again. He's unable to demand as much as before due to the fact he doesn't have Sky PPV figures, and he doesn't have a title. He's lucky to get the shot at a title considering his status currently and his record at HW. The only reason he's getting the shot is because Vitali hates him.

Its win/win for both parties. Haye gets 20% of a decent (ish) pot that to be fair will be bigger than Chisora vs Vitali, Vitali if he loses, gets his rematch but earns a career high payday in the process and suddenly we're in a trilogy of fights that nets him even more. Haye doesn't need the money, he needs legacy and Vitali offers him redemption. Its alos enough so if he loses he's got a decent amount of money to "fall back on" to retire properly.

I like the idea of 10% to the winner so like Az's 60:30:10 split.

Haye could sell this fight better than any other challenger and also looks better on a CV which is why I think he should get a smidge more than the 20-25% I'd have otherwise said.

by KingMonkey on Tue 21 Feb 2012 - 16:29

Sky would be utterly mental to go back on their ppv stance so soon and I can say with 100% confidence that I wouldn't pay to watch it.

As a matter of interest, would you pay to watch Chis v Haye?[/quote]

I've been talking abut this today... I'm not sure I would. I mean, I want to see it but I really, really don't want to give one single penny to Chisora. The bloke is vermin.

Adam D wrote:

trottb wrote:

I was meant to say this in my first post, this is shameless milking of a successful thread Adam!

Its my thread and I am going to milk it dry!

Clearly, it's nice to see Waingros spirit live on.

Waingro would have got a poll out of this, Adam is playing at it.

rowley wrote:Waingro would have got a poll out of this, Adam is playing at it.

Adamek?

Adam D wrote:

rowley wrote:Waingro would have got a poll out of this, Adam is playing at it.

Adamek?

Could really do with that :facepalm: emoticon back, shocking punnery there....

All depends on how much money is on the table, assuming it is in the region of 5mil;

2.5mil for Vitali
1.5mil for Haye
1mil for the winner

No rematch clause or any ring entrance clauses.

Or;

Haye- 35%
Vitali- 50%
Winner- 15%

25/75. As haye and booth were claiming vatali agreed a deal in Dec it would have be interesting to know what the agreed split was.

It doesn't have to be PPV. Sky definately will buy it. Other countries will buy it. The brawl has made Haye even bigger than his mouth made him. Even Dana White will be calling him soon after seeing those elbow strikes he rained down on Chisora.

No other fighter brings as much to the table as Haye. Love him or hate him, people will pay to watch him.

Plus he will KO Vit in 7-8. Slow, ponderous and very vulnerable to the right hook.

I'd love it, love it (keegan style) if Haye beats Vit, goads Wlad into a rematch but postpones it and promptly retires.

Take the meds az. The tranquilising ones - you're a bit too excited about this.

Frankly - a decent revenge for the K-bros after the way Haye mucked Wlad around for a couple of years whilst making a living on the back of calling them out - would be to keep negotiations going - very-very-very slowly - until next year, when Vit is 41, when he can promptly retire and become Mayor of Kiev.

Then, at 48, when the HW division is at an all time low and his brother has just retired, aged 40, to become a Hollywood icon for Rocky VII(a la Dolph Lundgren, just with a more boring boxing style) - Vitali can make a shocking comeback to win the HW championship of the world and take Hopkins and Foreman's record.

As far as the OP goes - anything more than 80/20 Vitali is the Kbros being unreasonably generous.