Jump to content

Duco threatening to sue over Joseph Parker fight


maccaz

Recommended Posts

What are your thoughts?

 

I feel like piracy like this is unavoidable these days with facebook live, periscope and other apps like this, but i definitely don't agree that just because the fight is expensive, its fair game to steal it.

when i lived in nz i would always pay the pay-per-view cost and watch boxing or mma, and i dont pirate them now i would just rather watch on a tv etc.

 

do you think dean lonergan is being an idiot thinking he will sue the streamers? i kind of hope he tries just to set a precedent on this type of thing, as i bet there would have been more sales if no free streams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HarryB said:

He's also a hell of a boxer, power in every punch and crazy speed. I think they're trying to line up a fight with Tyson Fury. He's a very entertaining guy. 

ah shit yeah i was thinking of tyson fury lol, dude is hilarious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lonergan is a dick head. only reason people stream it is cause its so expensive. I would never pay $50 for any fight. He is a homo, thinks he can go sue/take the streamer to court lol. good luck. Parker better step up though. Just doing enough wont be good enough against the top end

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bigken1985 said:

lonergan is a dick head. only reason people stream it is cause its so expensive. I would never pay $50 for any fight. He is a homo, thinks he can go sue/take the streamer to court lol. good luck. Parker better step up though. Just doing enough wont be good enough against the top end

 

Agree he's going to have to be on his best against someone like Anthony Joshua. 

 

As for paying I used to always think it was a waste of money but these days I can't be bothered with the crappy links so I just pay. Mind you I'll pay for ufc but I struggle paying for boxing fights. At least with ufc you get a bunch of decent fights. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fury threw from memory like 60 punches in 12 rds vs Klitshko. It's a very strange game at the top level.

 

I think the suspectibility to overhand rights and hooks was concerning for Parker. He's not ready to remain champ with that hole in his game. I think best case is it takes him 2-3 years to get the title shot, sadly it will happen quicker.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What bugs me about Duco is that it was a Parker card. Thats it.

 

You watch a UFC like the recent UFC 198. $30. Heavyweight title fight. #1 MW title eliminator. Debut of Cris Cyborg. There was 3 straight hours of quality for 60% of the cost of the Parker fight. UFC 200 will be even better.

 

Floyd vs Manny apparently ran $50 in NZ too.

It's just not good value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Wookie said:

It's just not good value.

And that, I think, is the problem. Duco is just looking for a scapegoat for poor sales numbers.

 

Let's say the pay per view price was $10. You'd have got a shitload more people watching it, and would anyone be talking about streaming? I doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wookie said:

What bugs me about Duco is that it was a Parker card. Thats it.

 

You watch a UFC like the recent UFC 198. $30. Heavyweight title fight. #1 MW title eliminator. Debut of Cris Cyborg. There was 3 straight hours of quality for 60% of the cost of the Parker fight. UFC 200 will be even better.

 

Floyd vs Manny apparently ran $50 in NZ too.

It's just not good value.

 

agree, i used to be obsessed with boxing and thought it was ok price but now i would get bored in the undercard fights then be pissed off that i paid 50$ and lose interest in the main fight lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the problem with duco exactly? They are running a company and are entitled to turn a profit. If people were stealing power from the power company what would you think about that?

 

david Higgins knew nothing much about boxing and had an idea that Tua could fight Cameron and people would love it. 

Everyone said no can't be done. The guy found a million bucks and made it happen and it created arguably the biggest sporting hype NZ had ever seen. 

He is entitled to charge what he likes and reap the rewards. He took a risk at the end of the day. I really don't get people's attitudes toward lonergan and duco 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It costs money to put this stuff on. It's the same as Moe bringing over Kai Greene or whoever. that costs him money and he has to try and get that back plus profit to make it worth while. 

 

Without reward there is no reason to take a risk.

 

it was like the tickets for auction on trademe. Why did people have a problem with that? Why shouldn't duco get market value for the tickets? Why should some guy who buys 20 cheap and scalps them make profit when he did nothing.

adam silva who runs the NBA got flack for making playoff tickets so expensive. All that happens when you make them cheap is joe average ends up paying the market Value anyway because the scalpers just add on there bit so by making the tickets market value from the start it cuts out all of that and the promoter or or organisation rightfully gets the entire amount of money.

 

Rugby World Cup perfect example of it

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agree real talk.

duco have done a bit of dumb shit in the past e.g. midget fights, convict fights, or whatever but they would be stupid not to create fights that people want to watch.

They created a fight that thousands of people wanted to watch on saturday night and a good portion of those people were thieves.

 

i hope he takes the main streamers to court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Realtalk said:

What's the problem with duco exactly? They are running a company and are entitled to turn a profit. If people were stealing power from the power company what would you think about that?

 

david Higgins knew nothing much about boxing and had an idea that Tua could fight Cameron and people would love it. 

Everyone said no can't be done. The guy found a million bucks and made it happen and it created arguably the biggest sporting hype NZ had ever seen. 

He is entitled to charge what he likes and reap the rewards. He took a risk at the end of the day. I really don't get people's attitudes toward lonergan and duco 


They're out of sympathy because they overcharged for a PPV and got mad when people didn't buy it. So they went after streamers- as is their right.

Parker is popular, and making a profit is a good thing. Duco messed up by overcharging, and then went on the attack that people didn't buy the PPV. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should take the person who streamed it to town on this. I'm sure lonergan will he seems like he is that kind of person.

Sky tv should be concerned as well. Soon their rugby rights will just be stolen and streamed too.

 

The ufc has a much larger audience than what Parker can currently attract so they can afford to charge a lower price and still make a profit and pay the purses purely on demand and volume of watchers.

 

this is just New Zealand, it's a tiny market with the big costs still attached bringing a world class boxer over here. People should be enjoying it while it lasts not ripping it off because soon Parker won't be fighting in New Zealand because it will become too expensive for duco. 

 

People would complain if he wasn't fighting here and then when he is they complain still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UFC charge double in the USA to what they charge in the NZ market, and around a third more in Aussie.

 

Heck, they sold the rights to the fight to Sky in the UK, so it was free to air on Sky Sport 3.

 

They raised the price $10 to $50 over the usual Parker PPV's and obviously didn't get what they wanted.

 

Duco are using a dinosaur model for PPV, with no option to stream without a Sky account.

I'd argue that Parker is a big deal in NZ, and that all culminates in people choosing to stream it.

Not defending the practice, just truth. IMO if it was a $30 PPV they might have got more revenue, which is the end game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wookie said:

The UFC charge double in the USA to what they charge in the NZ market, and around a third more in Aussie.

 

Heck, they sold the rights to the fight to Sky in the UK, so it was free to air on Sky Sport 3.

 

They raised the price $10 to $50 over the usual Parker PPV's and obviously didn't get what they wanted.

 

Duco are using a dinosaur model for PPV, with no option to stream without a Sky account.

I'd argue that Parker is a big deal in NZ, and that all culminates in people choosing to stream it.

Not defending the practice, just truth. IMO if it was a $30 PPV they might have got more revenue, which is the end game.

 

If they charged $5 people would still steal.. it's the nature of the beast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Realtalk said:

It costs money to put this stuff on. It's the same as Moe bringing over Kai Greene or whoever. that costs him money and he has to try and get that back plus profit to make it worth while. 

 

Without reward there is no reason to take a risk.

 

it was like the tickets for auction on trademe. Why did people have a problem with that? Why shouldn't duco get market value for the tickets? Why should some guy who buys 20 cheap and scalps them make profit when he did nothing.

adam silva who runs the NBA got flack for making playoff tickets so expensive. All that happens when you make them cheap is joe average ends up paying the market Value anyway because the scalpers just add on there bit so by making the tickets market value from the start it cuts out all of that and the promoter or or organisation rightfully gets the entire amount of money.

 

Rugby World Cup perfect example of it

 

 

 

 

In this case there isn't a finite number of pay per views available like there is with tickets to physically attend events (due to seating constraints etc). Therefore supply not meeting demand at a lower price isn't an issue

 

It's arguable that a better return might have been made off a cheaper unit price resulting in significantly higher sales.

 

3 hours ago, HarryB said:

 

If they charged $5 people would still steal.. it's the nature of the beast.

 

f*ck all of those people would have payed to watch it anyway.

 

I have pirated software packages that I use occasionally out of interest that licenses cost $2k upwards for. I wouldn't have bought any of it even for $200 each so I don't see who loses by me using illegally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Realtalk said:

It's not an issue with ppv bro. This was a separate issue for the venue tickets a while ago. I just thought it was relevant because was more people slinging mud at duco.

 

Ah yep so they auctioned tickets on trade me to get a market price rather than selling for a fixed price?  Seems pretty fair and clever to me.

 

On separate note I think digital piracy being an offence is a load of shit and that the onus should be on developers/providers etc to protect their products from it either digitally e.g. encryption/locks or adapting economically e.g. dropping prices to a point where it's not worth pirating but selling significantly more units. Or some other innovative way/combination. There are plenty.

 

If someone wants to charge rip off price for something that they don't even have proper control over then lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...


  • Popular Contributors

    Nobody has received reputation this week.

×
×
  • Create New...