Longtime readers know that one of the most consistent topics this observer has discussed over the many years that I have covered the sport of Boxing has been the pay-per-view model and more specifically, the increasing need for the sport, those who promote it, and networks that televise it to move away from a model that no longer benefits the sport and rarely offers value to consumers who support it. While I have at times been criticized for my stance that Boxing would be much better off in the long-term picture by adapting a reasonably priced subscription-based approach like what has already been established by digital streaming networks DAZN and ESPN+, my motivation has always been what will benefit the sport and help it grow and be more accessible to anyone who wants to see it regardless of economic scenarios one might find themselves in rather than any vested interests as I do not write or otherwise work for any other outlet or network outside of the one I own and operate here at The Boxing Truth®.
Even as my stance seems to have been increasingly validated as years have gone on as networks that have relied on the pay-per-view model have exited the sport since 2018, coincidentally the same year ESPN+ launched here in the United States and DAZN also entered the U.S. market, despite the sport being in the midst of a transition to being almost exclusively available via streaming, both in response to consumers looking to move away from traditional cable/satellite pay television, as well as general decline continuing in regard to pay-per-view buys, the model still remains more of an issue for the sport rather than a beneficial solution both for Boxing as well as consumers. Although I have been supportive of both DAZN and ESPN+ for each’s introduction of subscription-based alternatives to the model, I would not be objective if I said I have not also criticized both when they have ventured into pay-per-view, despite the evidence that it is not a profitable strategy for either in the now largely streaming-based era.
Many likely remember that when DAZN entered the U.S. market, the main pitch to consumers was pay-per-view quality Boxing events “Without The Pain of Pay-Per-View!" Their reasoning for eventually venturing into pay-per-view starting in 2022 was as a means to attract fighters and promoters who have insisted on the model to the negotiating table. It should also not be overlooked that at the time, much like many others businesses globally, DAZN was in the process of recovering from the effects of the global COVID-19 epidemic, so the move to what they insist is a “Selective/Sporadic" use of pay-per-view may have been seen and justified by some as a necessity.
As the pay-per-view model has continued to decline with the latest casualty being pay-per-view distributor InDemand preparing to cease operations by the end of 2025 ending 40 years as a primary pay-per-view distributor across cable/satellite providers in the United States and in recent years streaming via it's PPV.com platform, even as DAZN and platforms like Prime Video have continued doing periodic pay-per-view events, despite the evidence that it is not being embraced by consumers, one may be tempted to ask when will common sense enter the equation? More specifically, when will it no longer be ignored that things need to change as no doubt such stubbornness has to negatively impact the bottom line.
Perhaps the next example that will be used to illustrate the need to change will come in the coming weeks as DAZN will present three pay-per-view events in a span of one week. First, on April 26, DAZN will air the highly anticipated grudge match between sons of Boxing legends Chris Eubank and Nigel Benn, two-time world champion Chris Eubank Jr. and Conor Benn, which will take place at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium in London, England, which will be available for $24.99 here in the United States.
While that price point on it's own is certainly budget-friendly and a throwback to a time where most Boxing pay-per-view cards were priced under $30 and were less frequent throughout the 1980’s and part of the 1990’s, one might wonder how consumer-friendly the price might be when one considers that on May 2nd and 3rd back to back pay-per-view cards will be held also on DAZN.
First on May 2nd, a card headlined by a triple header featuring Ryan Garcia facing Rolando Romero, Devin Haney facing Jose Ramirez, and WBO Jr. Welterweight world champion Teofimo Lopez defending his title against Arnold Barboza will take place outdoors in Times Square in New York City. This will be followed on May 3rd when Unified WBO/WBA/WBC Super-Middleweight world champion Saul “Canelo" Alvarez will be attempting to become a two-time Undisputed Super-Middleweight world champion when he faces undefeated IBF world champion William Scull in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Beyond the latter being the first time Alvarez has fought in the increasing hotbed of Boxing in Saudi Arabia and a significant shift in Alvarez not fighting on Cinco De Mayo weekend in Las Vegas, and the Times Square event bringing the overdue return of Hall of Fame broadcaster and longtime HBO play by play voice Jim Lampley to calling Boxing for the first time since HBO exited the sport in 2018, one would be justified in questioning if one or both of these events will be priced consumer-friendly considering that there will be a pay-per-view card just days before.
Although it should be pointed out that like any sporting event, some events will draw more eyes than others, the question here is will this gamble for DAZN be too much for Boxing fans given the state of economic conditions and whether these events will fit into one's budget. While it needs to be noted that all three of these cards are being promoted in part by the Riyadh Season group that has largely established Boxing’s footprint in Saudi Arabia and who has generally began to price their pay-per-view cards in a more consumer-friendly approach, the question that needs to be asked is how much is too much?
How much is too much not only in regard to the frequency of when these cards take place, how closely they are placed on the schedule to each other, and finally the price points to not only draw in the interest of the hardcore Boxing enthusiasts, but also the casual sports fan? For DAZN, the question should also be whether the value of a monthly or annual subscription to their network is going to be diminished by not only doing pay-per-view a bit more frequently than the pledge of “Selective/Sporadic?" Furthermore, is it a disservice to their network that is still growing to not include these events as part of a subscription to the network for existing subscribers?
While price points for the May 3rd and 4th events have not been announced as of this writing, I do believe that if pay-per-view is going to continue to be used by networks/platforms that already have established subscription-based models that it should be used as a way to draw in consumers who may not be subscribed to try these networks. For existing subscribers, it should be either included with their subscriptions, which would be the more common sense approach, or should be offered to subscribers at a reduced price that should not exceed $30 regardless of who might be on the card.
Under circumstances like this with three cards occuring within a week’s time, perhaps selling the three events as a package bundle with a budget-friendly price with a cap of under $60 should be something DAZN should consider. Unfortunately, numbers will continue to generally decline only with rare exceptions without adapting to the changing landscape. This includes folks who get on social media platforms and boast about how they will look for not so legal walk-arounds to access events that either do not fit within their budget or they simply have no interest in paying for.
Although I discourage such practices and pay the same fees as the average consumer to ply my trade, though I do sympathize with those who feel they have no other options to watch the sport they love, the way to reach those folks is not by continuing to rely on a model that consumers continue to reject and perhaps in spite of evidence continuing to resist change, which whether networks or promoters want to admit it or not will ultimately benefit them and the sport. Unfortunately until such realization occurs with networks having left the sport largely due to their over reliance on pay-per-view, with one network in ESPN perhaps either nearing an exit itself or a significant revamp in terms of their commitment to the spot by the end of 2025, it will be up to DAZN, who despite their growth, will have to make the decision as to how long they want to walk a tightrope by using a model that they were insisting on changing at the risk of alienating their subscribers not just here in the United States, but globally. At the risk of being unpopular, that is a gamble that may not be worth taking.
“And That’s The Boxing Truth."
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
