Comments Thread For: What is Al Haymon Planning?

[warp1432]

He makes it clear he is speculating in several areas. Theorizing and postulating... There is very little to go on With Haymon.. He operates behind the scenes. I, for one, appreciate the author's efforts in shedding a bit of light on the situation.

Right, but from an ethics point of view in journalism not all of that would have made it in the article. I'm getting my Master's in journalism and so it bugs me.

Don't get me wrong, this is some great reporting. The NBC and Schaefer stuff in fascinating. I just don't like how Hauser paints a picture to be (a) overly dramatic (i.e. Brewster) (b.) stuff that wouldn't ever make it past an editor at a higher publication like the Times, ESPN or the Tribune Company.

And it always seems Hauser has a tendency to do that too with his articles. I've criticized him for it in the past, but I just don't like when bias is overly apparent in an article. Especially when it is already good to begin with.

[mrpain81]

Sums up the fear of Haymon from fans and media.

from on .

[Da Machine]

Wow, so Haymon and Schaeffer tried to buy out DLH? Interesting.

So much good info in there, and honestly I dont know how to feel about. Something is telling me this is going to be bad for boxing real soon. I hope the **** not.

Thank you to the reporter of all this info.

[Accountoffline]

I think maybe a threesome with two ********, and a baby from Bonquisha named Hayniqua?

[Mitchell Kane]

Thomas Hauser with another good article on Haymon...and this one raises a lot of questions.

Interesting that NBC and NBC Sports, which have been doing business with Main Events/Duva, would potentially go into business with Haymon, given the Main Events lawsuit against Haymon, et al.

I guess Haymon's group is hoping to showcase their roster over the course of that year on NBC enough to build an audience that will be willing to transition to the online subscription service...but I don't know, the SHO audience already seems to have been falling off with all the showcases on that network

I'm not sure boxing fans will be jumping at a some kind of online subscription service after a year of similar match-making on NBC/NBC Sports.

A budget of $20 million for 20+ boxing events seems like at-best, a continuation of what we've been seeing on SHO, with like 99% of the budget going Haymon boxers and the rest to the opponents.

What happens to SHO boxing if all this goes down?

[Mitchell Kane]

Some interesting things raised by this article:

Most of Haymon’s contracts with fighters state that they are governed by California law. But it appears that few if any of the contracts were signed before a representative of the California State Athletic Commission or filed with the commission as required by California law.

Haymon is also licensed as a manager in Nevada. But few if any of his contracts have been filed with the Nevada State Athletic Commission.

Similarly, if Haymon gave four tickets to a sold-out September 2010 concert at Yankee Stadium headlined by Jay-Z and Eminem to a network executive he was doing business with, that might violate the network’s policy on gifts. But it’s unlikely that it would rise to the level of a criminal matter.

If someone were to track what happened to the total license fees paid for each of the televised shows that Al Haymon’s fighters have been involved with, things might get interesting. For example, shifting license fees from one fight to another is sometimes improper; particularly when it has the effect of disadvantaging a particular fighter, manager, or promoter without that person’s knowledge. Here, one might note that, under federal law, certain revenue streams paid to promoters must be accurately disclosed to fighters.

[Hook-Right]

Thomas Hauser is Arum's servant. He does whatever Arum wants. He does the same for HBO now too. Nothing he says can be taken honestly.

[Syf]

Right, but from an ethics point of view in journalism not all of that would have made it in the article. I'm getting my Master's in journalism and so it bugs me.

Don't get me wrong, this is some great reporting. The NBC and Schaefer stuff in fascinating. I just don't like how Hauser paints a picture to be (a) overly dramatic (i.e. Brewster) (b.) stuff that wouldn't ever make it past an editor at a higher publication like the Times, ESPN or the Tribune Company.

And it always seems Hauser has a tendency to do that too with his articles. I've criticized him for it in the past, but I just don't like when bias is overly apparent in an article. Especially when it is already good to begin with

New York Times has shareholders... it has accountability. If anything it prints is found to be false they have to retract it, depending on pressure put on them. Against a button up journalism outfit like NYT, a cease and desist letter castrates a potential article.. let's be real about that.

Hauser has no pressure on him like that. He's grass roots journalism. His opinion and speculation is in his pieces, and I'm fine with that. Anyone with their own head can form their own opinion based on the information given anyway.

Good luck in your journalism career though.

[radioraheem]

Right, but from an ethics point of view in journalism not all of that would have made it in the article. I'm getting my Master's in journalism and so it bugs me.

Don't get me wrong, this is some great reporting. The NBC and Schaefer stuff in fascinating. I just don't like how Hauser paints a picture to be (a) overly dramatic (i.e. Brewster) (b.) stuff that wouldn't ever make it past an editor at a higher publication like the Times, ESPN or the Tribune Company.

And it always seems Hauser has a tendency to do that too with his articles. I've criticized him for it in the past, but I just don't like when bias is overly apparent in an article. Especially when it is already good to begin with.

I'm damn near standing up clapping at your posts! Hauser has made a habit out of fabricating all sorts of nonsense and running with it. And then his pieces are insanely long and drawn out. I blame at least half of all this crappy journalism on the internet because it has blurred the lines of what true journalism is all about. True journalism is about presentation of facts, and typically in the most unbiased manner as possible. And if it is biased, it is still based upon cold facts.

He can get away with this crap because it's the internet and not too many will call him out on it. Anyone can write crap like that these days and get away with it. The days of fact-checking are long gone unless it's from a still reputable organization like the NY Times. And speaking of the NYT, you are correct. The NY Times aren't likely to run with shaky crap that isn't solid or has weak sources. And in the few times in the past when they did -- they got called out on it.

I don't even trust half his 'sources.' He's like a Stephen Glass, but in professional boxing.

[way2strong]

WarBoxing!!!