Dana White‘s goal of transforming boxing by bringing together the best fighters in the world and putting on the best possible events is seemingly facing a rude awakening. Amid a string of regular events, his Zuffa Boxing surprised everyone by putting together Ryan Garcia‘s first welterweight title defense against Conor Benn. Yet, despite Garcia and Benn’s star power, growing reports suggested that their showdown barely made a ripple, raising questions about whether their drawing power translated into the expected audience. Those concerns have gained after veteran boxing journalist Dan Rafael offered his take.

“They don’t release their numbers. So that’s that’s that’s a tell,” Rafael said on Total Boxing with Tris Dixon. “But I don’t think anybody expected them to do big numbers right off the bat.

“But I do think people expect them, including Paramount executives themselves, that when they brought a fight like Ryan Garcia against Connor Ben to Paramount and they had paid Connor Ben astronomical money for his first fight of that agreement with him to be on an undercard that was on Netflix and then to come and have the big main event on Paramount with Ryan, they had expectations to get some big bang for their buck.”

Rafael’s comments center around the difficult position Paramount and Zuffa Boxing now find themselves in, given the hefty payout they reportedly made to lure Conor Benn away from his longtime promoter, Eddie Hearn’s Matchroom Boxing.

Reportedly, Benn received $15 million under a one-fight deal. After completing that arrangement with the Regis Prograis bout, he signed a 5-fight contract. While the financial terms of the extension remain unavailable, the amount paid under the previous deal and Benn’s status as one of Great Britain’s most well-known fighters suggest that the new agreement was also expected to be lucrative.

With that kind of money involved, the promoters and broadcast platform would naturally expect a reasonable return on their investment. They are answerable to stakeholders and need to justify the money spent signing Benn if the event fails to attract the expected audience.

Rafael said he usually gets at least a ballpark figure when he reaches out to sources familiar with such situations. However, in the case of Garcia-Benn, he received no response.

“To me was the biggest tell of all,” he said before adding, “Like they were embarrassed by the numbers, I’m sure, for that fight, and it cost them a lot of money.”

The questions surrounding the event stem largely from the lack of publicly disclosed viewership figures that have emerged since Garcia and Benn fought at the T-Mobile Arena on September 12, 2026. The build-up featured a fierce back-and-forth between the champion and the challenger, helping generate interest in the matchup.

The card also featured a title fight between Zuffa standout Jai Opetaia and Noel Mikaelyan. Several prominent names from the boxing world made appearances, adding to the event’s star value. Yet, questions remained about whether the event attracted a substantial audience beyond the sport’s core fan base.

A few days after the event, a user, reportedly drawing on a report by veteran combat sports journalist Dave Meltzer, claimed that the Zuffa Boxing card had fallen flat and wrote, “The show didn’t enter the top 10 in any country, and the rating was lower than the same-day UFC card. It didn’t do well at all. There’s just not that much interest in boxing.”

Everybody’s talking about Ryan Garcia vs. Conor Benn – Except the viewership figures

Garcia pushed back against the claim, writing, “FALSE—The numbers are coming in; no one has them. Why do you have to put out fake reports?”

Meltzer later clarified that Garcia vs. Benn was “top ten” in several countries but “not top ten anywhere on Sunday, just showing people didn’t watch it on delay.”

However, that clarification did little to settle the questions surrounding the event’s overall audience, particularly as official viewership figures remained unavailable.

Early this month, a post from World Boxing News read, “Paramount+ has refused to release viewing figures for Ryan Garcia vs. Conor Benn amid reports the event was a major flop for Zuffa Boxing and the network. The numbers remain under wraps following one of Zuffa’s biggest boxing events to date. 🥊📺.”

The uncertainty persisted after a user asked Rafael whether Paramount had shared any details about Garcia-Benn’ viewership. The veteran journalist replied, “Paramount+ has declined to release any numbers.”

Viewership figures can take time to establish, while live-gate figures are generally easier to obtain. With around 18,855 people attending the card at the T-Mobile Arena, Garcia-Benn reportedly generated $8.03 million in live gate revenue.

Still, it raises a question: why would a broadcast giant like Paramount, which has released viewership figures within days of several major UFC events, remain silent on one of the year’s biggest boxing matchups, featuring a widely recognized box-office draw?

Following UFC 324 on January 24, 2026, Paramount+ announced its viewership figures on January 26, reporting an average-minute audience of 4.96 million and reaching 7.18 million households. The same pattern appeared with UFC Freedom 250, the White House event held on June 14, 2026.

Paramount+ announced four days later that the event had drawn 17 million viewers across the United States and Latin America. UFC 329, held on July 11 and featuring Conor McGregor’s comeback bout against Max Holloway, provided another example. On July 16, Paramount+ announced 15.9 million viewers and a peak of 8.3 million concurrent streams.

Although these examples do not establish a universal timeline for releasing viewership figures, they show that Paramount+ has announced audience data within days of several major UFC events. That raises the question: why has the Garcia-Benn event been treated differently?