It’s an interesting idea in theory: reduce the price of an event in order to ensure people buy it rather than steal it, all in the hope that you, the promoter, end up making even more money as a result.
Though hardly an example of altruism, the decision of Turki Alalshikh to lower the pay-per-view price for Anthony Joshua vs. Daniel Dubois is nevertheless a decision both shrewd and welcome.
According to PPV.com, fans in the United States will be able to buy the Joshua vs. Dubois heavyweight fight, set to take place in London on September 21, for as little as $19.99. This, if compared to the $89.99 it will cost you to watch the September 14 fight between Canelo Alvarez and Edgar Berlanga, or the $69.99 it will cost to watch the UFC event on the same night, represents an almost radical move in this age of combat sports.
“You mention the PPV, I think this is my next big fight,” Alalshikh, the chairman of Saudi Arabia’s General Entertainment Authority, told talkSPORT’s Jordan and White show on Monday morning. “I dream of a PPV with a good price to make the fans happy and subscribe and get them to watch it legally.”
So long accustomed to being fleeced, or simply made to feel as though they should pay for everything, now boxing fans are suddenly being greeted with what appears, on the face of it, a bit of a bargain. It is a bargain motivated entirely by their growing propensity to seek alternative, illegal ways of watching overpriced products, sure, but still, at a time when prices are soaring, it is a bargain all the same. Rejoice in the fact. Imagine it will continue. Imagine lessons have been learned.
You may recall that before and after Oleksandr Usyk fought Tyson Fury in Saudi Arabia there was much talk of records being broken and history being made. However, one record, which came to light only afterwards, would have irked Alalshikh and the other characters involved and may indeed have been the impetus for this latest shift in attitude.
The record, revealed in a report by the Daily Mail, had to do with the amount of people who had watched Usyk vs Fury fight their 12 rounds in the desert – illegally. At least 20 million people, so said this report, watched the fight via illegal streams, equating to 95 million euros in lost revenue for the various broadcasters. If that sounds a lot, it’s because it is.
The analysis, conducted by Yield Sec for Mail Sport, also claimed there was evidence of 2,000 streaming locations across the world with 18 per cent of those watching illegally – approximately four million people – in the UK, and 25 per cent (five million) of illegal streams located in North America. These figures, which count only the number of streams and not the number of people watching those streams, are among the highest recorded for a sporting event.
At best, you can say it showed the level of interest in the fight. Clearly, from the figures provided, you can see that this fight caught the public’s imagination and was one they wanted to watch, which only adds credence to the view that if you match the best in the world against each other the people will come. Yet, while encouraging, this would have been no consolation for those behind the event; those wanting members of the public to pay for what it was they were selling.
Equally, it is an example, yet again, of how the internet is, for both boxing and human beings, as much a curse as a blessing. For all its good, and much of boxing’s “promoting” of late has been an exclusively online affair, there is also the bad; that is, its very lawlessness and immaturity
Know your way around it, and how to circumnavigate the traps, and you will know how to avoid paying for most things, let alone a silly old fight. What is more, the temptation to avoid paying for a fight these days is only heightened by the price tag (in the case of Usyk vs. Fury: £24.95 in the UK) and the fact this offering typically comes on top of the money you are already paying for a subscription. For some, that’s a joke taken too far, whereas others, those who prefer picture quality and lack the impatience to endure a buffering stream, will be happy to pay.
Certainly, whatever the rights and wrongs, if any fight is worth paying for in 2024 it was Usyk vs. Fury. That, without wishing to play salesman, is about as good as it gets in the modern era and, more importantly, possessed everything you could hope for in a fight: two unbeaten champions, so many questions, and the ever-appealing prospect of clarity at its conclusion. Not only that, the fight delivered. It delivered in every respect and one would struggle to find anybody who paid to watch it unfold and then wanted a refund at its conclusion.
In that respect, it’s a shame so many cheated the system and, yes, took money from those involved. However, is that not simply the price you pay for becoming so reliant on social media to do your selling and flexing? You have, after all, targeted this very audience – an audience mature only in matters of online clout-chasing – and identified your ideal media lineup with this utopia in mind. You want things quick and easy; superficial and stupid. You want to avoid scrutiny by relying on diminishing attention spans. You want to have things your own way.
That is all well and good, of course, but best not to then complain when the very audience you have targeted rebel – for they know how – and get what it is you have spent weeks or months selling to them without paying a penny. They will still be the people liking and retweeting your posts, and they will still consume your content and watch your reaction videos, but just know that on the night itself – when it really matters – some of these fans know of ways to ensure they have the last laugh.
This is something the men behind Usyk vs. Fury have perhaps discovered the hard way and are now, with Joshua vs. Dubois, doing all they can to learn from the lesson. They are now dealing with a distracted world, after all. A world that is not only savvy when it comes to circumnavigating the system but also spoiled by a million different options every minute of the day. Like it or not, human beings now have countless alternatives to The Big Fight. If they deem it too expensive, they can find something else to do at 11pm on a Saturday night. There are other apps, other tabs, and all manner of other subscription services available, all within reach, all just a tap of a button away. There are also other ways of watching fights. Good fights. Mediocre fights. Fights of interest yet, in a punter’s opinion, still not worth the money it would require to watch them legally.
Which, in a nutshell, has been boxing’s problem of late. Yes, there are millions of people out there who will forever be curious about the prospect of two human beings punching each other in the head for 12 rounds, but how many of these people are actually prepared to pay money to see the spectacle unfold in 2024?
Read the full article here
