Tooth and Nail said:I think this ppv is also Viacom deciding whether or not Bellator will ever be profitable, and worth keeping around.
I think that's why the event is so stacked, despite that being a bad idea for business over the next few months.
Basically if Bellator can't draw profit with THIS stacked ppv, it's evidence the market is too saturated and won't ever draw.
If they get 200k buys, Bjorn will be dancing in the streets. They probably won't even sniff that.
I don't see that a TV channel wants to judge how well a TV show will do on that TV channel by having a PPV. I think the Alvarez angle makes more sense. Or they just want to see if they can make money from a pay-per-view.
Then you're stupid because Alvares has 1 or 2 BFC fights left before he is released with no matching clause. You think Viacom would let BFC water down all the TV events for a PPV if the PPV did not interest them? It's not about a TV show, it's about the brand, and if the brand will succeed.
Would it be possible that PPV is done so that in the future they can use their matching right? Eddie say UFC offer PPV but Bellator can't, now they do one PPV so they can claim they have matched UFC PPV in future dispute with fighter who wants out.
that just means the competitor(Ufc conceivably) needs to word the contract with verbiage that Bellator cannot match. Whether UFC will do that is debatable and to be seen. If Eddie would have waited out the matching period, he could have been in UFC by now. That's on Eddie and his team for taking that riskYou might be on to something here, it could be that they do a PPV with loss just to avoid legal disputes later on.
that just means the competitor(Ufc conceivably) needs to word the contract with verbiage that Bellator cannot match. Whether UFC will do that is debatable and to be seen. If Eddie would have waited out the matching period, he could have been in UFC by now. That's on Eddie and his team for taking that risk
I don't see that a TV channel wants to judge how well a TV show will do on that TV channel by having a PPV. I think the Alvarez angle makes more sense. Or they just want to see if they can make money from a pay-per-view.
if the PPV is a failure, how do they prove they're matching the contract? aren't they proving exactly the opposite?