Comments Thread For: Team Pacquiao: Floyd Mayweather Demands More Money

[IMDAZED]

Yes he is back. HBO pays for a given fight and distributes that fight via their PPV arm, based on what they think the eventual gross will be, the fighters split that gross, which you already know.

In addition to splitting that money, there are sponsorship deals in place for each fighter, sponsors pay a higher ad price on a per event basis, reference the Superbowl for example, a broader audience (Mayweather-Hatton) means higher exposure which equates to higher advertising dollars spent which factors in to what a fighter makes on top of PPV. When you see the ring painted with corporate logos (corporate sponsorships), means more money in the pot.

For example HBO factored in the market value of ODLH and Mayweather combined as an event and saw the potential for it to break records, that comes at a higher cost to HBO, apart from factoring in the market value of each participant. HBO paid more for ODLH/Mayweather than any other fight that they purchased in that fiscal year, more money in the pot means you're splitting a bigger piece of pie, so really there would be no reason for Mayweather to argue about money because one he was the A-side and two Hatton was moving up to challenge him, he was the B-side, rarely in boxing do you see a B-side opponent with sponsorship dollars coming over from Europe, along with television distribution rights, so even though Hatton took a lower split, he made more money than he would have had he fought anyone else.

A 60/40 or even 70/30 split with someone like ODLH looks much different than it would against someone like say Berto. HBO would lower their budget for a match like that, meaning less money on the table to split.

Why do you keep avoiding the question?

WHY DID FLOYD MAYWEATHER GET PAID MORE THAN RICKY HATTON?

[Singleton]

C'mon Gayweather, you're scared...Pacroid doesn't wanna fight...Floyd is a chicken...Floyd deserves more money...Just take the tests Pac...What other excuses do you have Floyd...It should be 60/40 to the winner...my ***** hurts...*****s kill me...*******s kill mee...Pacroid is scared...Manny will destroy Floyd...my thong is bothering me...Floyd Sr. is a crackhead...Roach needs to get rid of the twitch...Ariza is guilty...Floyd is uses PEDS to...C'mon on Floyd just sign the contract...Pac fought drained fighters...Floyd runs when he fights...Pacroid is hiding something...Pacroid is scared of needles...Kentucky Floyd Chicken...Manny got beat by Marques and Morales...Pac got a big head now, proof he's on roids...Floyd is broke...Pacroid is a catchweight champion...Floyd only fights washed up or smaller fighter...AND IT GOES ON AND ON AND ON AND ON.

All you bitches need to just S T F U and stop acting like a bunch of $2 hoes. Talk **** after the fight you ****s.

This is funny. LMAO.

[switchsouthpaw]

Why do you keep avoiding the question?

WHY DID FLOYD MAYWEATHER GET PAID MORE THAN RICKY HATTON?

How am I avoiding the question? I answered it clearly, it's just not the answer you want to hear, because it's not supportive of your position. He was paid more because he was the A-Side of the equation, which I explained in detail as to the reasons why--prior to this most recent post.

I have a question for you, why are you drawing a correlation between Mayweather having gotten paid more for Hatton, how is that relevant to his negotiations with Pac?

Take a look at the numbers and you will see what Ricky brought to the table...//krikya360.com/?m=show&id=11766

[IMDAZED]

How am I avoiding the question? I answered it clearly, it's just not the answer you want to hear, because it's not supportive of your position. He was paid more because he was the A-Side of the equation, which I explained in detail as to the reasons why--prior to this most recent post.

I have a question for you, why are you drawing a correlation between Mayweather having gotten paid more for Hatton, how is that relevant to his negotiations with Pac?

Take a look at the numbers and you will see what Ricky brought to the table...//krikya360.com/?m=show&id=11766

I'm asking because that's where you twisted the conversation to. In case you forgot, you psychoanalyzed Floyd and used that as a crutch to claim that his "issues" were sabotaging negotiations. In turn, I pointed out to you that, in spite of his antics, Floyd has never left the table during negotiations over money and, in fact, you simply never hear of him having such problems. I used Hatton and Oscar as examples, two guys who Manny quibbled over splits with.

So what do you do? You begin talking about how Floyd never had issues with them because guys like Hatton brought more to the table. As if that matters. Oscar De La Hoya brought way more to the table then Pac and that didn't stop the negotiations from turning into a nightmare. Remember how we got here now? Because as you kept twisting the conversation in different directions, you may have noticed me repeatedly typing this:

There is NO precedent for Floyd having issues over finances when negotiating with an opponent. Whereas Manny has had this issue several times...for WHATEVER reason. Take from that what you will.

Remember now?

[switchsouthpaw]

I'm asking because that's where you twisted the conversation to. In case you forgot, you psychoanalyzed Floyd and used that as a crutch to claim that his "issues" were sabotaging negotiations. In turn, I pointed out to you that, in spite of his antics, Floyd has never left the table during negotiations over money and, in fact, you simply never hear of him having such problems. I used Hatton and Oscar as examples, two guys who Manny quibbled over splits with.

So what do you do? You begin talking about how Floyd never had issues with them because guys like Hatton brought more to the table. As if that matters. Oscar De La Hoya brought way more to the table then Pac and that didn't stop the negotiations from turning into a nightmare. Remember how we got here now? Because as you kept twisting the conversation in different directions, you may have noticed me repeatedly typing this:

There is NO precedent for Floyd having issues over finances when negotiating with an opponent. Whereas Manny has had this issue several times...for WHATEVER reason. Take from that what you will.

Remember now?

Right and I stated that it was my "opinion", which I stand by. Just because there wasn't a prior history of doing something doesn't negate the fact that he's doing it now. He didn't do it before because he wasn't in a position to do so, in other words he had to play ball, which I believe went against his better instincts and why? Because no one in there right mind would turn down a fight with Oscar De La Hoya, even if the split was 90/10 in his favor because of the amount of money involved.

Mayweather knew this would have been the biggest paycheck he ever received, so of course he wouldn't argue over numbers--with Hatton the same thing--with all of the money involved and the split favoring him this time he stood to make more money fighting Hatton than anyone else, so "again" of course he wouldn't argue about money.

You saying that there is no precedent with respect to him quibbling over money is irrelevant, because then I will turn around and say look who he was fighting and the money they brought to the table, then ask yourself what reason did he have to quibble over money? He received his two highest paydays, therein lies "context" lacking in your argument.

With Oscar now having retired, Floyd refers to himself as the "uno", meaning he wants the lion's share, but the numbers are only slightly in his favor and they aren't overwhelming like you're making it out to be. What you claim to be an ongoing problem, fails to paint the whole picture. Did Pac demand more money against ODLH? Yes he did and it was resolved under two weeks and why? Because who else was ODLH going to fight and generate those numbers with? Who was left that was marketable enough to bring in big PPV numbers? You ask questions that require explanation beyond just a simple yes or no . It's not as black and white as you're making it out to be, there are reasons as to why certain things happened then and how those things differ in nature from the negotiations currently "ongoing" with Mayweather. You can't draw parallels between those negotiations and this one because both men have a measure of popularity that goes beyond simple PPV calculations. If Mayweather fought Tim Bradley tomorrow it wouldn't go past 700k PPV buys.

[IMDAZED]

Mayweather knew this would have been the biggest paycheck he ever received, so of course he wouldn't argue over numbers--with Hatton the same thing--with all of the money involved and the split favoring him this time he stood to make more money fighting Hatton than anyone else, so "again" of course he wouldn't argue about money.

You see what I bolded? Read that carefully. Replace Floyd with Manny and replace Ricky with Oscar. Then ask yourself...who of the two quibbled over money?

[switchsouthpaw]

You see what I bolded? Read that carefully. Replace Floyd with Manny and replace Ricky with Oscar. Then ask yourself...who of the two quibbled over money?

At the time when Mayweather negotiated with Oscar, who was more popular? At the time he negotiated with Hatton, how popular was Hatton in Europe as evidenced by the fact that more PPV's were sold in Europe than in the US. So again Mayweather had no reason to ask for more in either case.

Now answer this question, do you really believe Mayweather is more popular than Manny, beyond relatively comparable PPV numbers? My point to you is Mayweather and Pac both share parity in terms of popularity and it can be measured in dollars. I would take it one step further and say in terms of mainstream appeal, national endorsements, corporate sponsorships and an upcoming 60 minutes interview, the same 60 minutes that has been a staple of broadcast journalist for decades, guess who they are interviewing? One hint...it isn't Mayweather. So again was there parity in terms of popularity with ODLH....NO and with Hatton it certainly wasn't definitive, because again Hatton sold more PPV's in his own country than Mayweather sold here in the US, WHY?

Now is Mayweather more popular than Manny beyond PPV numbers? I don't think so, because Manny can counter that he has sold out larger venues, Floyd wouldn't fill half a stadium, so Pac has room to negotiate.

[IMDAZED]

At the time when Mayweather negotiated with Oscar, who was more popular? At the time he negotiated with Hatton, how popular was Hatton in Europe as evidenced by the fact that more PPV's were sold in Europe than in the US. So again Mayweather had no reason to ask for more in either case.

I'm doing my best to believe you aren't this dense. This is my final reply. Again, you say Floyd had no reason to ask for more against Oscar. Which he didn't and never quibbled over the split although he received about half of what Oscar got. However, Manny had no reason to ask for more against Oscar either. Yet he quibbled and even left the negotiating table. So, for the last time (and this time I really mean it)...

There is NO precedent for Floyd having issues over finances when negotiating with an opponent. Whereas Manny has had this issue several times...for WHATEVER reason. Take from that what you will.

Good night.

[switchsouthpaw]

I'm doing my best to believe you aren't this dense. This is my final reply. Again, you say Floyd had no reason to ask for more against Oscar. Which he didn't and never quibbled over the split although he received about half of what Oscar got. However, Manny had no reason to ask for more against Oscar either. Yet he quibbled and even left the negotiating table. So, for the last time (and this time I really mean it)...

There is NO precedent for Floyd having issues over finances when negotiating with an opponent. Whereas Manny has had this issue several times...for WHATEVER reason. Take from that what you will.

Good night.

You simply claim I'm being dense because again my responses don't fit your narrative. Did Oscar need Mayweather? No....not at that point of his career because no one knew who Mayweather was beyond boxing fans, but with 24/7 factored in, it presented an interesting opportunity for America to be exposed to it's best talent in Mayweather, eventually turning him into a star.

Now did Oscar need Pac at that point in his career? YES and that's the difference. The story of the little big man who could against a bonafide superstar, which generated huge numbers because of the interest that the story line created.

Now conversely does Floyd need Pac, in order to generate huge numbers now....HELL YES. The money he makes with Pac, does not exist anywhere else and that is the distinction I'm trying to make.

A 50/50 split which Floyd accepted before, even when he had slightly higher numbers then. I'm asking you--what has changed from now to then when he originally accepted the 50/50 deal? He held slightly higher numbers then also, so what is the difference between now and then, what has changed? Pac isn't the one arguing about anything, isn't Floyd the one requesting 60/40 now? Isn't he now the one extending the goal post?

FACTS: Pacquiao received 15 to 30 million dollars (share of the pay-per-view), plus a guaranteed amount(which was the sticking point in negotiations) .Tickets reportedly sold out just hours after they went on sale. Moreover, the total gate revenue for the fight was said to be nearly 17 million dollars, making it the second largest gate revenue in boxing history.

FACT 2: The squabble over money with Hatton was conducted by both sides and not one sided as you're trying to infer.

[LeadUppercut]

You simply claim I'm being dense because again my responses don't fit your narrative. Did Oscar need Mayweather? No....not at that point of his career because no one knew who Mayweather was beyond boxing fans, but with 24/7 factored in, it presented an interesting opportunity for America to be exposed to it's best talent in Mayweather, eventually turning him into a star.

Now did Oscar need Pac at that point in his career? YES and that's the difference. The story of the little big man who could against a bonafide superstar, which generated huge numbers because of the interest that the story line created.

Now conversely does Floyd need Pac, in order to generate huge numbers now....HELL YES. The money he makes with Pac, does not exist anywhere else and that is the distinction I'm trying to make.

A 50/50 split which Floyd accepted before, even when he had slightly higher numbers then. I'm asking you--what has changed from now to then when he originally accepted the 50/50 deal? He held slightly higher numbers then also, so what is the difference between now and then, what has changed? Pac isn't the one arguing about anything, isn't Floyd the one requesting 60/40 now? Isn't he now the one extending the goal post?

FACTS: Pacquiao received 15 to 30 million dollars (share of the pay-per-view), plus a guaranteed amount(which was the sticking point in negotiations) .Tickets reportedly sold out just hours after they went on sale. Moreover, the total gate revenue for the fight was said to be nearly 17 million dollars, making it the second largest gate revenue in boxing history.

FACT 2: The squabble over money with Hatton was conducted by both sides and not one sided as you're trying to infer.

I agree, except for the numbers part.

Right now Pacquiao needs Mayweather WAY more than Floyd needs Manny.

Floyd could fight Berto, Martinez, or Williams, and probably make 30 mil off each fight. If he fought those three guys within the next 12 months, he probably makes 100 mil. If the Pac fight falls through, Floyd will move on.

But it's different for Manny, he HAS GOT to fight Floyd because of how-and-why the previous negotiations failed, and because he does not have the same options available to him that Mayweather has.

How much will Pac make fighting Margo?

And who the hell, other than a hardcore Manny fan, would buy Cotto/Pac II?

Within a couple of decades OST's will be mandatory, and anyone who is seen to be publicly avoiding them will be judged as a drug-cheat, just as athletes are currently judged within Amateur competition.

It is actually amazing to think that a professional contact sport is so far behind the times.

Team Pacquiao are now well-aware of the damage that was caused to Manny's legacy because the sticking-point that prevented the fight from being signed happened to be the "cut-off date" for random blood tests.

History will reflect that there is actually no such thing as a cut-off date for OST's. Olympic Standard Testing is ANYWHERE/ANYTIME.

So when my grandkids look at a boxing record book and see that Team Pacquiao would not agree to fight Floyd because they insisted upon a cut-off date for OST's..... my grandkids will come to their own conclusion.

Manny has to fight Floyd now, there is no other option available to him.

The world has changed at some point, and I missed the whole thing. I had absolutely no idea that it was acceptable to quibble over testing for steroid abuse.

Since the dirty Olympics, MOST people think that..... " where there is smoke, there is fire ".

Manny has got to clear the air with this cut-off date bull****.