 |
| Credit: DAZN |
On March 18th, the focus of the Boxing world focused on Madison Square Garden in New York City where a press conference was held where digital subscription sports streaming network DAZN announced its latest partnership in forming a multi-year worldwide broadcast deal with Hall of Fame promoter Bob Arum and Top Rank Inc, marking the latest promotional entity to join the network that has marketed itself as “The Global Home of Boxing.”
While the aforementioned tagline is a clever marketing tool, it is really as close to reality as one could claim. After all, in 2018 when DAZN entered the United States market, many laughed at the idea of a strictly streaming-based platform that would operate primarily under a subscription model as a potential power broker in the sport of Boxing. This observer has from the moment I was informed of the network’s entry both into the United States, but also Boxing was supportive of what was being attempted. Before I elaborate further, it is important for me to state for the reader that I do not currently work for any other outlet or network outside of the platform I own here at The Boxing Truth®. The reason for my previous statement in full disclosure and honesty with the reader, is it is important for me to state that my support of DAZN was not and is not rooted in bias and I have not been compensated in any way by the network by being vocal in my support over the last eight years.
Why was I and remain a vocal supporter? The short version is understanding what a consumer goes through and having seen what had increasingly become a pay-per-view centric approach by many promoters and networks throughout the sport become out of control both in the frequency in how often it was used as well as prices for such cards on a per event basis, something I have often compared to that of the mentality of a compulsive eater. In that more often than not, those with such a mentality know when enough is enough, but simply lack the control to stop themselves. Although I by no means am comparing the mentality of insisting on what was in 2018 and remains an outdated and overpriced model to that of a disorder that many suffer from and is in no way an attempt by yours truly to be humorous, the continued insistence of some to continue using such a model, despite increasing evidence both in changes in consumer habits in how content both television and audio is consumed, but also the steady decline in pay-per-view buys as price points have increased and consumers continue to increasingly reject the model, makes the reference appropriate.
Of course, longtime readers know that while I have been and remain supportive of DAZN and really of any network or platform that is not only consumer-friendly, but also tries to do right and grow the sport by making it more accessible to the public regardless of economic level, I have also called out networks when appropriate. This was no different when DAZN ventured into pay-per-view. Even though the network in the aftermath of the COVID-19 global epidemic, insisted that their use of the pay-per-view model would be selective, I felt it was a mistake, while also acknowledging that the impacts of the epidemic, which affected just about every industry one could name, including the sports and television industries, necessitated the adaptation at least in the short term as a way to try and recoup lost revenue from when sports were inactive, which had to have had a negative impact on subscriptions to DAZN and other streaming networks.
As pay-per-view has remained an option, the introduction of an “Ultimate” subscription, an upgrade to a standard subscription from DAZN that would include pay-per-view offerings at no additional cost for an increased monthly or annual fee, was no doubt a response to consumers/subscribers not embracing pay-per-view even on a selective basis. Other digital subscription networks within the space, most notably ESPN+ (Now ESPN Unlimited) also saw their attempts at using the pay-per-view model dwindle over time and this included the handful of pay-per-view offerings promoted by Top Rank between 2018-2025 during its most recent deal with ESPN.
Although not doing nearly as many pay-per-view offerings as other promoters and networks, and consistently producing events across ESPN’s networks, the commonality remained the same, consumers generally voted no on pay-per-view. This resulted in the majority of Top Rank’s events being available on ESPN’s streaming platform included with subscription. Despite it mostly being a win for Boxing fans, the network, likely due to increased competition and increasing rights fees for other major sports including the NBA opted not to renew its long-standing deal with Top Rank in the summer of last year. This resulted in Top Rank putting on select events on its free ad-supported Top Rank Classics streaming channel, while actively negotiating for a new broadcast deal with multiple networks, which turned out to be DAZN being able to secure the rights in a multi-year agreement,
The obvious question is what can one expect now? With so many notable promotional entities under one network banner with DAZN, it's natural to assume that it would be easier at least in theory both in an attempt to keep their broadcaster pleased by putting the best fights possible on the network, and in turn, drawing interest and ratings/subscription numbers to DAZN, that there will be more willingness from promoters to put their top talent in against each other. It is worth pointing out, however, that this is certainly not the first time that multiple promoters, each with sizable stables of fighters, have done business with one network platform and some might say that simply being aligned with the same network does not guarantee a streamlined process nor does it mean that fights of significant public interest will necessarily get made in a more reasonable timeframe than is typically the case.
What makes this a bit different is this consolidation of major promoters is occurring in the streaming realm rather than traditional television or cable. Although the method of distribution has changed significantly, there are other factors that change things slightly from how things were done for decades. There are more than one streaming network that have invested significantly in Boxing as well as new promotional entities such as Zuffa Boxing that are each trying to carve out their respective space within the sport as well as possible changes to the Muhammad Ali Act, which some have claimed is a response at least in part to Boxing’s many ills and flaws within the existing structure of the sport. While this observer has been vocal in stating that I support the existing legislation of the Ali Act and do not support potentially taking rights away from fighters, potentially limiting fighter pay, and possibly giving promoters more power with little or possibly no oversight, which could lead to conflicts of interest including allowing promoters to crown their own world champions and dictate their own rankings, the fact that reforms to existing legislation may indeed become law here in the United States, should put pressure on other promoters and the sport’s existing sanctioning organizations to not only put their best effort forward, but also attempt to clean up some of the flaws that somehow always leaves Boxing open to consistent ridicule and outright mockery.
Much like with the pay-per-view model largely no longer being of value and consistently rejected by consumers, it will likely be those same consumers who will vote both with their opinions and their wallets as to whether or not an approach by promoters, whether it be those who are advocating for significant change via legislation, which could ultimately prove to be good or bad depending on one's perspective and whatever those who are pushing for such reforms are ultimately motivated by, or those existing promoters who continue to operate under the more traditional model of the sport. Although things may seem like they are on an upward wave of momentum for Boxing in a streaming/digital age, promoters will always walk a tightrope and ultimately if consumers reject whatever approach a promoter might take for whatever reason, ultimately those networks that the promoters are aligned with will want to see not only an adequate return on their investment, but will want to see numbers, both in terms of viewership and in terms of their financial bottom lines that will convince the leadership of those networks to keep an ongoing investment in Boxing. Whether it is a commitment of a few years or as was the case with networks like HBO and Showtime, who were each involved heavily in the sport for decades before each bowing out, one should not assume a network will continue to support the sport for the sake of it unless they see consistent performance in both numbers and dollars as well as commitment from promoters to put out the best product possible.
While DAZN now finds itself in a position not unlike those that HBO and Showtime found themselves in at their highest points, one can only hope that along with a more consumer-friendly approach in a move away from pay-per-view, that the network avoids the type of complacency that arguably led the two one time power brokers in Boxing to each exit the sport within the last decade.
“And That's The Boxing Truth."
Update: While this column was in development over the last week, it was also announced that Oscar De La Hoya’s Golden Boy Promotions signed a multi-year extension with DAZN keeping its slate of events along with Top Rank, Matchroom Boxing, Queenberry Promotions, Riyadh Season, Ring Magazine, and several other promoters all available on the network.
Photo Courtesy of: DAZN Used with permission.
The Boxing Truth®️ is a registered trademark of Beau Denison All Rights Reserved.
Follow Beau Denison on the following Social Media Platforms:
X: (Formerly Twitter) www.twitter.com/Beau_Denison
Facebook: www.facebook.com/BeauDenison1
Threads: www.threads.net/@BeauDenison1
Instagram: www.Instagram.com/BeauDenison1
BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/beaudenison1.bsky.social
No comments:
Post a Comment