Mayweather-Cotto: 1.5 million PPV buys
May 12, 2012
An HBO press release indicated that the Mayweather-Cotto PPV scored 1.5 million buys last Saturday night generating $94 million in revenue.
According to all sources, the HBO number is verifiable as opposed to buy rates coming from promoters. The numbers generated come second only to the Mayweather-de La Hoya (for non-Heavyweights) fight which exceeded all PPV buys/revenue records.
Payout Perspective:
Darren Rovell stated via twitter that if Mayweather-Pacquiao ever happens an effort should be made to put it on network television. Rovell cites advertising and sponsorship would make it work. We assume this means that the money generated from ads/sponsors would exceed the money made from PPV. This is an interesting scenario. If the fight ever were to happen, it would definitely exceed all boxing records on PPV. Rovell also tweeted that if Mayweather-Pacquiao went to PPV it would make $200 million in revenue. It would also exceed the 2.4 million buys of Mayweather-de La Hoya. But, the Mayweather pay structure for his fights, the drug test issue and the unwillingness to compromise make all of this a moot point right now. Yet, it could be good for the sport of boxing. It would have people talking about the sport and could bring it back to prominence.
Considering that most did not believe Cotto had a chance against Mayweather, yet 1.5 million still bought the PPV shows that the public is still interested in big fights. Perhaps the undercard of Alvarez-Mosley helped a bit as well. It will be interesting to see how Pacquiao-Bradley does next month in comparison to Mayweather-Cotto.
Petersen-Khan fight canceled due to failed drug test
May 11, 2012
MMA is not the only sport with a drug issue as it was announced on Wednesday that the LaMont Petersen/Amir Khan rematch has been canceled due to Petersen’s failed drug test.
The test comes just over a week before the anticipated rematch as Petersen upset Khan in a controversial decision in December.
MaxBoxing, ESPN and BoxingScene.com have the details. The short version of this is that Petersen failed a random VADA (Volunteer Anti-Doping Association) drug test at a press conference hyping the fight in March. Ironically, it was Petersen’s camp that requested the random blood and urine testing leading up to the fight. According to BoxingScene.com, the samples were split into “A” and “B” samples and sent to the World Anti-Doping Agency in Los Angeles. The notice of the sample was given April 12th to VADA and Petersen’s camp was given notice on April 13th. The “B” sample was tested and it too came back positive on April 30th. Details of what transpired in the interim can be found in VADA’s statement below.
A hearing on the matter before the NSAC would not have happened until fight week and it was likely Petersen would not be licensed in time.
Another issue here, and probably the bigger one, is that Golden Boy and Team Khan were not notified of Petersen’s positive test until May 7th. NSAC head Keith Kizer let Golden Boy know this past Monday. VADA states that it had no contractual obligations to reveal the results to Golden Boy as the two parties did not come to a consensus on contract language for revealing test results. As such, VADA believes that it was a matter of medical ethics with respect to privacy. On the other hand, Golden Boy Promotions believes there was a contract in place in which it should have reported the test results. Golden Boy head Richard Schaefer states that emails with VADA (via ESPN) reflect that it was to disclose information of a failed drug test. If it had known sooner, it could have taken the steps to request the process to be sped up, or in the alternative, find a replacement for Petersen.
Keith Kizer, in an interview with BoxingScene.com indicated that he did not know why VADA did not alert Golden Boy and/or Team Khan. Kizer references the Alistair Overeem drug test in which the UFC and JDS’ camp were alerted immediately of the results of Overeem’s test.
VADA’s statement on the controversy is below:
VADA’s mission is to help protect the health and safety of athletes who are willing to demonstrate their commitment to clean sport. As a voluntary organization, we depend on those who share our vision to help rid boxing and MMA of PEDs. VADA understands and shares the disappointment that is felt by Golden Boy Promotions, Amir Khan, the undercard fighters, HBO, and the thousands of fans who were looking forward to Khan-Peterson II. This unfortunate situation, however, serves to underscore the need for PED education and the high-caliber testing procedures that VADA offers.
VADA has respect for Richard Schaefer, GBP, and their commitment to clean sport. However, VADA disagrees with Mr. Schaefer’s characterizations of the contractual relationship between GBP and VADA. The facts are as follows.
There was never a final or signed contract between GBP and VADA. When VADA became involved with the Peterson-Khan fight in March, the individual athletes signed up for the VADA program and executed the proper documentation.
VADA was told that GBP also wanted a contract so that GBP would be authorized to receive the testing results, including the preliminary results from an “A” sample analysis. It is important to understand that “A” sample results are only preliminary, do not legally stand up by themselves, and under commonly accepted anti-doping procedures are typically released only to the athlete.
In order for VADA to release the preliminary “A” sample results to a third party such as GBP, VADA requires an executed authorization allowing us to do so. VADA sent GBP a draft contract for its signature which would have authorized the preliminary “A” sample results to be released to GBP. This initial draft (which was never signed) contained a clause pursuant to which GBP would have represented that it had obtained the necessary authorization from the fighters. GBP’s legal team rejected this clause and instead suggested making the fighters signatories to the contract with their signatures being the necessary authorization. VADA’s counsel made it clear to GBP that, if GBP wanted to handle it this way, GBP must take responsibility for obtaining the athlete’s signatures. Unfortunately, and to VADA’s dismay, GBP never obtained the signatures. Various versions of a draft contract were sent back and forth between GBP and VADA. The contract was never finalized. Richard Schaefer may, or may not, have been aware of this situation. The bottom line is that VADA had no contract with GBP. This is not a mere technicality. It involves issues of medical ethics. VADA needed a signed contract in order to deviate from its Results Management Policy (posted on our website) and release the preliminary and personal medical information to a third party. VADA still has never received a signed contract or signed athlete authorization from GBP. VADA would have been happy to inform GBP of the preliminary “A” results. But we needed a signed authorization allowing us to do so, which we never received.
It has also been asked why it took so long to test the “B” sample after the first positive test result. When VADA notified Mr. Peterson of the adverse finding on April 13, Mr. Peterson had one week to challenge the “A” test result and ask for the “B” sample to be tested. During that time, Mr. Peterson also had the opportunity to supplement his earlier written submissions to VADA with regard to drugs and other medications that he had used prior to the testing. Mr. Peterson’s representatives waited eight days (until Saturday, April 21) to respond. At that time, they did not communicate any of the “exculpatory” material later offered to the Nevada State Athletic Commission. Instead, they chose to challenge the positive test result, asserted their right to be present when the “B” sample was tested, and asked that the “B” sample be tested on Friday, April 27th. The UCLA laboratory said that Friday was an inappropriate day to begin testing because four consecutive days are needed to complete the test. The sample “B” test began on Monday, April 30th.
VADA has complied in every way with all signed contracts that we had and will continue to do so. VADA welcomes the discussion about the dangers of PEDs to those who use them and to their opponents. We also reiterate our contention that it is imperative for the managers, promoters, and friends of these brave athletes to assist in the education about PEDs. VADA will help in every way we can. Our hope is that there will come a time when every test is negative.
Payout Perspective:
The cancellation is a dent into HBO’s boxing schedule although it should have Khan for his June 30th bout. While the promotion will have to refund tickets, it was unlikely that paid attendance was a huge concern. The most hurt out of this would be the undercard fighters who will now miss out on a payday. This rematch had some appeal considering Petersen’s strong showing in their first bout. Now, the outcome of that fight may be doubted considering Petersen’s positive drug test. For Khan, avenging the loss would have helped as he may be on track to be next for Floyd Mayweather, Jr.
The discrepancy over when VADA should have released the results is a bigger issue than the actual cancellation. This is highlighted by the fact that NSAC’s Keith Kizer questioned why VADA did not release the info as the NSAC did when Alistair Overeem failed his test. Knowing ahead of time, the UFC was able to insert a replacement for Overeem.
The contractual relationship between VADA and Golden Boy poses the interesting question about releasing the medical information of an individual to outside parties. It also underscores the need for a standard set of rules when it comes to drug testing. MMA has had as many issues related to drug testing, but the timing of releasing the information to a promoter and/or opposing fight camp is a unique twist. Just like most medical places, health information cannot be given to third parties without consent. It appears that the issue here was what entity would ask the fighters about releasing the information. It seems like that there should have been something in the fight contract that would allow Golden Boy/HBO notice of a failed drug test to allow for alternatives to be planned. Still, when dealing with third parties, the fighters would have likely had to sign off on this. We shall see if the VADA/Golden Boy situation turns into a legal battle.
Mayweather taking home $32 million
May 5, 2012
Floyd Mayweather is set to earn a guaranteed $32 million according to the Nevada State Athletic Commission (via Dan Rafael tweet). This amount is a record eclipsing $30 million due to Mike Tyson in his 1997 fight with Evander Holyfield.
Miguel Cotto will earn $8 million and a portion of the PPV share. This will be the most Cotto will have made in his career.
In addition to his $32 million, Mayweather will receive an additional amount from PPV and other revenue generators from the night. You may recall he earned up to $40 million in his last fight against Victor Ortiz.
Dan Rafael also reports the salary figures of the undercard released by the NSAC:
-Saul “Canelo” Alvarez – $1.2 million
-Shane Mosley – $650,000
-Jessie Vargas – $125,000
-Steve Forbes – $40,000
-Deandre Latimore – $55,000
-Carlos Quintana – $23,000
Payout Perspective:
The release of Mayweather’s salary is topical considering we’re debating the privacy of fighter pay in the UFC. We only bring this up but realistically cannot compare Mayweather or Cotto’s salary to that of a UFC fighter. But, it’s interesting to look at the other salaries on the card. Certainly, this is a big card and cannot be compared with a regular boxing card or a regular UFC PPV, but it shows that boxing can payout its fighters.
Golden Boy sets record highs for Mayweather-Cotto
May 2, 2012
The Sports Business Journal reports on Golden Boy’s haul of blue chip sponsors for this Saturday’s Mayweather-Cotto fight. Corona, not Tecate, will have the center of the ring as the beer sponsor recently signed with Golden Boy.
In addition to the new beer sponsor, “AT&T, DeWalt, O’Reilly Auto Parts, History Channel and the Mexican state of Puebla the CEO of Golden Boy Promotions (Richard Schaefer) estimates the fight will bring in about $2 million in sponsor rights fees and a promotional value of at least $8.5 million,” according to the SBJ.
Among the various promotions, the sponsorship activation includes DeWalt promotions in Home Depots, O’Reilly promotions at its stores as well as $1.5 million in radio ad buys, AT&T advertising its GoPhone and NCM Fathom advertising showing of the fight in theatres.
The sponsor fees and promo values are the most ever for Golden Boy as it overshadows its previous top fight ever of Oscar de la Hoya vs. Mayweather. Coincidentally, that fight occurred the first weekend of May as well. In addition, the fight had the biggest PPV buys ever with 2.4 million. This Saturday will likely not beat that record.
The ring layout for this Saturday’s fight.
Payout Perspective:
If the UFC wanted blue chip sponsors, maybe it should look to Golden Boy to find them. We are kidding of course. If your name is not Mayweather or Pacquiao, boxing would not see this amount of sponsorship money and promotional value. While we have debated whether boxing is dead, big name fights in boxing are still in the marketing budget for blue chip sponsors.
Despite the fact that the Mayweather fight is secondary to the hype surrounding the fight, we still see sponsors willing to spend big money to be a part of it. The activation involved is a sign that projections for buys in this fight should be robust. It also shows that no matter how much people hate Mayweather, he is still the top draw in boxing (dare I say the Brock Lesnar of boxing).
With Corona taking the center of the ring, it means no $25 rebates for the PPV as Tecate has done in the past. While Corona spends a lot on media buys but does not do a lot of activation surrounding events as Tecate has for promoting its fights.
Mayweather unhappy with HBO’s 24/7
April 30, 2012
Bad Left Hook reports that Floyd Mayweather is upset with the current HBO offering of its 24/7 series with Miguel Cotto. Mayweather believes that the producers have edited out footage he believes would be more entertaining.
After this past Saturday’s episode, Mayweather tweeted his displeasure for the show and stated that the Mayweather camp had “exciting content” which was not used.
As BLH points out, the 24/7 franchise is wearing thin when it features either Mayweather or Manny Pacquiao. There’s only so much that you can show of either fighter when most of the world awaits for them to fight.
Payout Perspective:
The 24/7 series is a great platform to promote boxing. As such, it should take a break from Mayweather and Pacquiao and focus on another compelling fight. And just do one episode. Perhaps the problem is that there are three or four episodes which makes the series repetitive. With big HBO PPV fights being promoted on multiple Time Warner networks, its likely we will continue to see the 24/7 series. While its stale to HBO viewers, the experience is relatively new to those watching it on CNN.
What would be more entertaining to promote fights is to show past fights to show how exciting the upcoming fight will be. The Audience Network does this and HBO has in the past. However, I’m sure there’s a need for original content and 24/7 still does it the best.
Fox Sports-Golden Boy enter TV deal for live events
April 26, 2012
The Sports Business Journal reports that Fox Sports and boxing promoter Golden Boy Promotions have entered into a multiyear, six figure agreement. The deal will give Fox Sports live events on Fox Deportes and Fuel TV.
At least one live event each month will be shown on the Fox networks although no plans are in the offing for a boxing event on the major Fox channel. According to the SBJ, the deal is significant as Fox paid a six-figure rights fee to Golden Boy for the events. The rights fee is a sign that boxing is gaining steam once again as rights fees for boxing on basic cable were nonexistent in recent memory.
The deal is for 15 months with options to extend it multiple years.
Payout Perspective:
The move reflects the commitment Fox has to combat sports for its smaller cable channels. It shows its belief in broadcasting live sports content as a way to attract its target demos of mainly younger males.
Is boxing on its way back? Just a while back we talked about the problems with the sport and whether it could make a comeback. So far, we’ve seen NBC Sports Network with a quarterly show, the talk of Spike TV having boxing and now the Fox deal. Certainly, the Fox deal is important due to the type of exposure it can receive over the span of the Fox networks. If it does do well, we could see its return on Fox. Its a nice hedge on the part of Fox to see if audiences will gravitate to boxing again. It is interesting that Fox did pay a rights fee to Golden Boy. One would think that Fox would have the bargaining leverage in the negotiations.
Hennessy debuts Pacquiao commercial
April 6, 2012
Manny Pacquiao’s first commercial with sponsor Hennessy was released earlier this week. The commercial is part of the liquor brand’s “Wild Rabbit” campaign which is said to “redefine what it means to be a luxury brand,” according to Hennessy vice president Rodney Williams.
The commercial features the rise to greatness of Pacquiao from a young man in poverty to a successful boxer to a congressman.
Payout Perspective:
Pacquiao’s deal with Hennessy is for 1 year and $1 million dollars. While the commercial is confusing at first, it accomplishes its goal of conveying a rags to riches story and is very well done. What it has to do with the cognac I do not know but its a much better effort than the Pacquiao’s State Street Produce commercial.
Timothy Bradley signs with Nike
March 29, 2012
The Sports Business Journal reported that Timothy Bradley has signed a deal with Nike. The next challenger to Manny Pacquiao will ensure that Nike will own the ring on June 9th.
The one year shoe and apparel deal includes Bradley branded robe, trunks and cornermen apparel. Financials of the deal were not disclosed although there’s speculation that its just a “swap of gear for exposure.” Since Bradley is a lesser known fighter he would not get a monetary deal although if he does well there would be an opportunity for compensation. In addition to the clothing, Bradley will make an appearance at the Niketown at the Forum Shops in Caesar’s Palace to promote the fight.
The deal was brokered by the promoter of the fight, Top Rank.
Payout Perspective:
The deal gives Nike more visibility for the June 9th Pacquiao-Bradley fight as both fighters will be sponsored by the swoosh. For Bradley, the Nike deal will help increase his brand as a boxer. The fact that its more than a one-off helps Bradley as well as it gets his foot in the door with the brand and hopefully he can remain with them for years to come. For Nike, it’s a cost-effective move to sign Bradley prior to HBO’s 24/7 as he should be adorned in Nike training gear for the show and the fight.
The financial punch of delaying fights
February 29, 2012
Larry Pugmire of the LA Times reported on the financial impact of delaying boxing matches due to injury. Its an interesting article that shows the differences between MMA and boxing when faced with injuries.
As most know, 2011 was a year wrought with injuries for the UFC. Zuffa had to shuffle around PPV lineups and make accommodations for fighters. Already this year, Mark Munoz had to pull out of his network televised co-main event against Chael Sonnen.
The LA Times article looks at the millions that are lost when the main event of a boxing card is scratched due to injury. Most of the time, even if the other boxer can go, the fight is scrapped altogether instead of finding a replacement fighter.
One of the more egregious examples of losing money due to a late scratch was promoter Gary Shaw, who purchased a Ferrari with the site fee advance for the Lennox Lewis-Kirk Johnson fight in 2003. When an injury postponed the fight, an alternative fee structure was offered.
Via LA Times:
Tim Leiweke, president of AEG and Staples Center, then scratched the $3.4-million site-fee payment to Shaw and offered a new deal in which the promoter would collect money based only on how many fight tickets could be sold for a different Lewis matchup.
The most recent example is the anticipated Victor Ortiz-Andre Berto fight which was postponed earlier in February due to an injury to Berto. The rematch has tentatively been pushed to June.
A repercussion of the postponement of a fight to a later date is the depletion of live gate due to the fact that fans that planned to attend the original date cannot make it to the rescheduled date. Pugmire’s piece points to the Andre Ward-Carl Froch fight which was postponed due to injury. Many British Fans of Froch could not make the rescheduled date in Atlantic City.
The article also states that delaying a PPV is a headache since a new date has to be approved by satellite and cable providers. This also has to be coordinated with the site of the fight. The trickle down effect continues as fighters on the undercard must agree to the new date to keep the card together. This can place a huge burden on undercard fighters who don’t make a lot as it is.
Payout Perspective:
Even if a main event is scrapped in the UFC, Dana White will find someone to replace the injured fighter and make sure that everyone agrees to the new fight. Also, ample time is given to hype most of the main card of the PPV. The UFC did cancel its Montreal PPV far in advance to ensure that it could bring the city a quality night of fights. As most of us know, big boxing PPVs are based solely on the main event matchup and rarely is the undercard hyped. As outlined in the article, a delay of a boxing card is a financial burden for the promoters, their staff and fight camps.
The huge fees to hold the cards and the reliance solely on one fight are big issues promoters will need to address if boxing is to turn itself around. As for the UFC, it may be unfair to compare the two business models considering the amount of control Zuffa has with its fighters. If you are not at the top of the card, you may not have a say as to who or when you will fight next. One need only look at Frankie Edgar as a fighter that may be directed into his next fight.
Can boxing make a comeback? More thoughts
February 19, 2012
Does boxing need pro wrestling hype to sell itself? Saturday night heavyweight fighter David Haye crashed a post-fight press conference and challenged heavyweight Dereck Chisora.
To bolster the spectacle, Chisora inevitably asked Haye to say something to his face and a fight ensued. While the video is not the best, punches were exchanged and Chisora threatened to shoot Haye after the melee subsided. For those not following the story, Chisora lost earlier in the night to heavyweight champion Vladimir Klitschko. Chisora had slapped Klitschko at the weigh-ins and then spat in the face of Klitschko prior to the fight. Unfortunately, for all of the antics, Chisora did nothing of note against Klitschko in the ring.
While the outside the ring hype garnered some press, it does little for the sport. Showtime actually had a good card on Saturday but a post-fight press conference brawl is more interesting to the casual sports fan.
Last week, we opined about the future of the boxing business and whether it would ever return to network television. Do antics like Chisora and Haye spark interest in seeing these two fight in the ring? In the UFC, we’ve seen out of Octagon confrontations to sell fights. Chael Sonnen is a prime example of this with his quasi-pro wrestling rants (e.g. UFC 136). There’s also Anderson Silva putting on a Jabbawockeez mask and getting into the face of Vitor Belfort last year at weigh-ins.
The problem is that most people are not aware of Chisora or Haye as they are British boxers that have fought exclusively in Europe. Thus, North American fans wouldn’t know these guys unless they are hardcore boxing fans and/or follow boxing in Europe. The fact is that there are few Heavyweight fighters from the United States that can challenge the Klitschkos.
But the issue with Saturday night’s brawl might not be that there was a brawl. It might be the fact that the Heavyweight champion of the world defended his belt in Germany and that the fight could only be seen online at Epix for those of us in North America. Or, if you were in Manhattan, the jumbo screen in Times Square. In fact, Alexander Povetkin and Vitali Klitschko, other claimants to a heavyweight title, also will fight overseas and on Epix. The Klitschkos are as popular in Germany as Jeremy Lin is to New York (there, I’ve satisfied the Lin requirement). So, its hard to argue that they fight anywhere else.
If boxing is going to make a comeback, it needs to develop a heavyweight division that is visible to North America. Being on HBO or Showtime would help as well. It appears that the Klitschko brothers have disappeared from the boxing landscape due to the fact they aren’t on one of the two big networks for fights. There are successful regional promotions, like Fight Club OC, that have maintained a steady fan base while promoting good fights. NBC Sports Network’s quarterly fight program could help if its willing to develop its fighters and back stories.
Getting back to the brawl. Its a spectacle but it doesn’t seem like much traction can be made of it. This probably was not a coordinated stunt since threatening to shoot someone is probably frowned upon.
We promise to be back with more MMA talk this week as we ramp up to the UFC’s visit to Japan this Saturday.
