Boxing has always walked a tightrope between spectacle and sport—but these days, fans are demanding a fairer balance, especially when it comes to the price. With DAZN announcing that the upcoming “Ring III: Berlanga vs Sheeraz” event will cost $59.99 in the US and £24.99 in the UK, the response hasn’t exactly been championship-worthy. And despite the presence of two big stars in Edgar Berlanga and Shakur Stevenson, the backlash might be louder than the bell at Madison Square Garden.

At first glance, the headliners might seem like a solid draw. Berlanga, the Puerto Rican power-puncher, facing the undefeated British knockout artist Hamzah Sheeraz, is a solid match-up that very likely won’t go till the final bell. Then you have one of the best matchups in lightweight as the co-main event. Shakur Stevenson—the Olympic silver medalist—defends his WBC lightweight title against the Mexican knockout artist and interim champion William Zepeda.

Then there’s Alberto Puello vs. Subriel Matias—an excellent matchup for Puello’s WBC junior welterweight title. If that wasn’t enough, you have the highly anticipated return of David Morrell after his first career loss to David Benavidez in February. However, many in the comments were still disgruntled when Eric Gomes, a boxing commentator, unveiled the pay-per-view price of $59.99. Part of the reason might be His Excellency Turki Alalshikh’s promise to reduce the PPV cost of all Riyadh Season cards.

DAZN tried sweetening the deal—offering a 33% discount for subscribers on an annual plan. But fans aren’t just doing the math—they’re doing the judging. And in the court of public opinion, this card has already taken a standing eight count.

Fans put the $60 PPV on the ropes

One user commented: “I thought Turki was doing $25.99 PPV cards. 😂” That line set the tone for what would quickly become a digital drag fest. By invoking Saudi Arabia’s recent wave of premium, affordably priced mega-fights, this comment mocked the idea that Edgar Berlanga–Hamzah Sheeraz and Shakur Stevenson-William Zepeda card deserved a higher price tag. The subtext? If Riyadh can deliver Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua at a discount, why should this card cost double?

Another fan said: “I’m not paying to see shakur 😂” It wasn’t just shade—it was a straight-up stylistic rejection. While the Olympic silver medalist remains undefeated, critics argue his cautious, defense-first style doesn’t exactly scream must-watch. Shakur Stevenson’s flashy footwork and shoulder rolls don’t seem to excite everyone.

Someone else joked: “Could buy 3 family size McDonald’s meals with $60.” The humor here hits harder than a liver shot. It playfully compares the PPV price to something far more universally loved—fast food. But beneath the laughs lies a serious question: what’s really worth sixty bucks these days? One user added: “A bottle of melatonin is cheaper 😆” That’s not just a dig—it’s a knockout line. By likening the event to a sleep aid, the fan didn’t merely criticize the fighters; they forecasted the fight night as a yawn-fest.

Another fan wrote: “It isn’t even about the money. I’m simply NOT paying to watch Shakur.” This one cuts deep. Forget discounts, bundles, or early-bird specials—the fan isn’t tuning in at any price. It points to a bigger issue than price: lack of interest. Some styles just don’t connect with casual viewers, no matter the record.

Another comment stated: “There’s going to be a lot of illegal streaming ain’t nobody paying for those fights 😂😂” This wasn’t speculation—it was prophecy. The tone was casual, the emojis were loud, and the message was clear: the price doesn’t match the product, and fans know exactly where else to look.

Finally, one viewer summed it all up with a meme and the caption: “Nah that ain’t it y’all.” No further analysis needed. It was the digital version of walking out before the final bell—a casual shrug that said more than a 10-minute rant ever could.