Cotto Mosley did just over 400,000 buys-thoughts?

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

Dios Dominicano who is your source

I work in promotions. The financial end. Unfortunately, not fight promotions.

CPG companies, who are typically the corporate sponsors, track the numbers so they can calculate the efficiency of the trade spend and media buys.

Viewership and household penetration is tracked closely. Otherwise, how do you know if you are spending your money wisely?

The two key (purchase and media data) firms used by CPG companies are IRI and AC Nielsen.

[CutMeMick]

Well DiosDomincano to be fair.
Can you explain the difference between the numbers a Promoter gives vs. the numbers a Network gives?
What makes the numbers a network gives more accurate then a promoters?
Let's keep in mind these are the same networks who actually have a saying in who their 'Show Star' fighters fights.
I'm sure you know where DiBella originates from I'm sure you know Shaws connections with Showtime.
Truth is unless YOU yourself counted the buys you'll never know the real numbers.

The numbers that the network reports (a public company that reports revenues, business results and profits to its sharholders) are going to be accurate. Or pretty close. Time-Warner has to file financial reports to the SEC (10Q, 10K). With the Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, they aren't going to abjectly falsify the nums. No reason for it.

The numbers that a promoter reports are intended to , er, PROMOTE his fighter. Those numbers can be anything because the promoter is under ZERO obligation to report accurately. Not his profit. Not his side endorsement deals. Not his cut of the event. He is trying to make his fighter seem like he is a commercial draw to create excitement for future events.

For example, Mark Taffet will directly tell you that 2007 will be his biggest year. They will exceed 4 million buys (in fact, they are close even before 'Undefeated'). The previous record year was 1999.

Right, but you see what I highlighted in Green for you that alone is a window as big as the great wall of China. I mean what exactly does "pretty close" mean? Pretty close to me would be within 10 buy, pretty close to co. means bigger numbers.
I know that, TW or whomever has to report numbers but those numbers are set/given to SEC that does not mean that they are the same numbers the public sees. Unless you yourself work for SEC and have documents for the numbers you listed then I really don't see how ANY of the numbers you or for that matter anyone puts up on the net are accurate.
As I said unless someone here actually counted the buys I really don't see how we can determine who's numbers are right.

[CutMeMick]

It just hit me right now, I'm fucken debating number of buys that my money is going into.

I need a break here to gather myself.

[Fire]

Dios Dominicano who is your source

I work in promotions. The financial end. Unfortunately, not fight promotions.

CPG companies, who are typically the corporate sponsors, track the numbers so they can calculate the efficiency of the trade spend and media buys.

Viewership and household penetration is tracked closely. Otherwise, how do you know if you are spending your money wisely?

The two key (purchase and media data) firms used by CPG companies are IRI and AC Nielsen.

in my opinion you sound like you know what you are talking about, especially with PPV buys

but you seem a bit sensitive to criticism/questions,

if you stay on this forum long enough you will realize this is by far the most knowledgable group of boxing posters on any forum on the net..

and alot of that comes from sources, and people here arnt used to having someone coming in with all the answers but no sources, and that is why they asked... and you gave your sources, and i think they are probably accurate, but there is no reason to be pissed because someone asked you for them...

i hope you keep posting because you seem very interesting and knowledgeable but try not to be so aggressive towards the 1000+ posters here...

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

Right, but you see what I highlighted in Green for you that alone is a window as big as the great wall of China. I mean what exactly does "pretty close" mean? Pretty close to me would be within 10 buy, pretty close to co. means bigger numbers.
I know that, TW or whomever has to report numbers but those numbers are set/given to SEC that does not mean that they are the same numbers the public sees. Unless you yourself work for SEC and have documents for the numbers you listed then I really don't see how ANY of the numbers you or for that matter anyone puts up on the net are accurate.
As I said unless someone here actually counted the buys I really don't see how we can determine who's numbers are right.

Sigh.

The numbers are reported by a the cable companies and they rollup a bit higher after the initial reports. Allow me to dimensionalize the magnitude for you.

From the initial report to the final rollup, you will have a 5% to 10% difference. You will not have a 35% difference as Gamo was indicating.

But believe what you want. Have at it.

Correction: TIME WARNER IS A PUBLIC COMPANY. Public. Let me repeat that : PUBLIC. You don't have to work for the SEC to see the Q or the K. You can google it and read it online. It is an , ahem, PUBLIC document. Do you invest in the stock market?

[CutMeMick]

Right, but you see what I highlighted in Green for you that alone is a window as big as the great wall of China. I mean what exactly does "pretty close" mean? Pretty close to me would be within 10 buy, pretty close to co. means bigger numbers.
I know that, TW or whomever has to report numbers but those numbers are set/given to SEC that does not mean that they are the same numbers the public sees. Unless you yourself work for SEC and have documents for the numbers you listed then I really don't see how ANY of the numbers you or for that matter anyone puts up on the net are accurate.
As I said unless someone here actually counted the buys I really don't see how we can determine who's numbers are right.

Sigh.

The numbers are reported by a the cable companies and they rollup a bit higher after the initial reports. Allow me to dimensionalize the magnitude for you.

From the initial report to the final rollup, you will have a 5% to 10% difference. You will not have a 35% difference as Gamo was indicating.

But believe what you want. Have at it.

Correction: TIME WARNER IS A PUBLIC COMPANY. Public. Let me repeat that : PUBLIC. You don't have to work for the SEC to see the Q or the K. You can google it and read it online. It is an , ahem, PUBLIC document. Do you invest in the stock market?

Am I upsetting you?
So the sigh is for?
You know you don't have to reply to peoples posts if you really don't want to. You threw some numbers out in a post, you realize any content in a post is up for debate. If you didn't want people to question your numbers then you should have put an asterix at the bottom that read:
"These numbers are real and there is no room for questioning them"
that way no one here would have even bothered with it.
I am an invester but NOT in thief-scum-sucking-leeching companies like that. The market is controlled by those waaaaay at the top and unless your one of them then your pretty much supporting everyone but yourself. On the ocassion one or two will get lucky here and there but for the most part it's all the same shit, just different day.

If you must know I invest in real estate I choose the product and choose how much money is invested, this way I don't have anyone playing with my money and or using it to feed themselves.

[BoardBULLY]

Hey DiosDominicano, you seem very credible and I believe you. Anyways I wanted to know if you could tell me UFC's ppv numbers for 2007.

Thank you

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

Am I upsetting you?
So the sigh is for?

a) No
b) Disappointment

[BoardBULLY]

What about the UFC buys?

[DaxxKahn]

Well DiosDomincano to be fair.
Can you explain the difference between the numbers a Promoter gives vs. the numbers a Network gives?
What makes the numbers a network gives more accurate then a promoters?
Let's keep in mind these are the same networks who actually have a saying in who their 'Show Star' fighters fights.
I'm sure you know where DiBella originates from I'm sure you know Shaws connections with Showtime.
Truth is unless YOU yourself counted the buys you'll never know the real numbers.

The numbers that the network reports (a public company that reports revenues, business results and profits to its sharholders) are going to be accurate. Or pretty close. Time-Warner has to file financial reports to the SEC (10Q, 10K). With the Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, they aren't going to abjectly falsify the nums. No reason for it.

The numbers that a promoter reports are intended to , er, PROMOTE his fighter. Those numbers can be anything because the promoter is under ZERO obligation to report accurately. Not his profit. Not his side endorsement deals. Not his cut of the event. He is trying to make his fighter seem like he is a commercial draw to create excitement for future events.

For example, Mark Taffet will directly tell you that 2007 will be his biggest year. They will exceed 4 million buys (in fact, they are close even before 'Undefeated'). The previous record year was 1999.

Right, but you see what I highlighted in Green for you that alone is a window as big as the great wall of China. I mean what exactly does "pretty close" mean? Pretty close to me would be within 10 buy, pretty close to co. means bigger numbers.
I know that, TW or whomever has to report numbers but those numbers are set/given to SEC that does not mean that they are the same numbers the public sees. Unless you yourself work for SEC and have documents for the numbers you listed then I really don't see how ANY of the numbers you or for that matter anyone puts up on the net are accurate.
As I said unless someone here actually counted the buys I really don't see how we can determine who's numbers are right.

usually the correct PPV numbers come out a week or more after the fight....ones posted the same or next day are from the major metro areas....many times the smaller companies or contract companies that service less populated areas do not get their exact sales to the parent company for a few days past the time of the fights.....PPV #'s origionally reported are often exact buys from the larger metro areas then for unpresent numbers from the smaller companies are estimated....

also at times numbers from the cable companies and promoters will be off...due to such reasons....prornoters will also estimate for unreported sales until the final tabulation and if their est number is higher they will keep it for their PR area...somewhere in buried fine print of their advertising and reporting contracts there is a small small clause stating they possibly will do that and give a % of max amount numbers could be off.....It is called estimeted projectory of forcasted sales....and allows that margin of error based on mass population per capita divided on the probability of forcasted reports by comparing prior buys in the outer metro areas and popularity if the event in advertising revenue spent in the region......take the highest credible reported sales and the lowest reported sales and it is usually somewhere in between

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

What complicates the accuracy of the reporting is the final rollup from all the RBOC's. For example, The initial nums for TWA was 2.15 mil. And then it rolled up to 2.4 mil.

The most accurate reports SHOULD be from the distributor (Time-Warner) or from an industry data source (AC Nielsen). The promoter is your LEAST reliable source.

The general perception, for example, is that Cotto-Mosley packed out MSG. In truth, there were tons of empty seats. When Shane fought Collazo, the arena was 60% EMPTY.

There are very few legitimate, consistent draws in the sport. Cotto isn't one of them.

Daxx,

What you are referring to is what I said above. The "rollup of all the RBOC's."

[BoardBULLY]

dios dominicano, do you know the UFC PPV buys for 2007

[LEGION]

dios dominicano, do you know the UFC PPV buys for 2007

Hey Bully, not to sound rude or get in your business, but you asked the dude 3 times already. I'm sure he would have or will answer you without needing to be reminded Relax man

[BoardBULLY]

yeah your right, maybe he missed it

haha

no offense taken

[SalTheButcher]

It's on boxing talk,Arum mentions it. Pacquiao MAB 2 did 350k. I'm pretty impressed by Cotto-SSM. I initially though it would be 500k but SSM has never been a massive star.For a young fighter,Cotto did dam good and hopefully his stock will keep on rising.

i think judah cotto did 500

Dream on

Oh you mean 500 exactly?

AHAHAHAH



180?!?!!?


i thought i remembered hearing an insanely high number like 500, maybe i was thinking of judah mayweather