Tyson’s wife tells court he could quit gambling advert over pigeon show
Mike Tyson’s wife told London’s High Court that he was entitled to withdraw from a £1.5 million gambling advert because its planned “Talking Pigeons” show was ridiculous and went beyond their agreement. Promoter Medier Ltd says Tyson and his company, Tyrannic LLC, broke a January 2024 sponsorship contract after he agreed to a more lucrative exhibition fight with Jake Paul.
The proposed livestream would have featured Tyson speaking with four presenters, including one dressed as a giant pigeon, sharing childhood stories and teaching them to box with a mannequin bearing Evander Holyfield’s face, before playing casino games. Tyson’s lawyers say the contract only required him to be filmed playing casino or other approved games; Medier argues the parties lost interest in the deal once the fight was agreed. Tyson later fought Paul in a £15 million exhibition match streamed on Netflix.
- Tyson’s wife says the planned pigeon show exceeded the advert agreement.
- Medier claims Tyson withdrew after agreeing to fight Jake Paul.
- The High Court is hearing a dispute over a £1.5 million campaign.
New here? Start with this
Mike Tyson is a former heavyweight boxing champion whose public profile has also made him a subject of sponsorship deals. Medier Ltd is a promotions company, while Tyrannic LLC is Tyson’s company; the two companies signed a contract in January 2024 for a gambling advert.
The proposed advert was to be a livestream mixing conversation, boxing-themed material and casino games. The dispute centres on what the contract required Tyson to do and whether the planned format fell within what he had agreed to. Such disagreements can determine whether a sponsorship contract has been broken and whether one party owes the other money.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Tyson’s side can argue that a contract to film him playing approved games did not oblige him to take part in a farcical pigeon-themed show, and that the proposed format went beyond what he had agreed to endorse. A public figure should be able to refuse an advertisement that departs materially from the agreed terms or risks damaging his reputation.
The case against
Medier’s side can argue that the sponsorship contract should be honoured as written and that a more lucrative fight was no justification for abandoning the advert. If the planned show fell within the agreed format, withdrawing after the parties had invested in the deal could leave the promoter bearing the loss and undermine confidence in commercial agreements.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Mike Tyson was entitled to pull out of gambling firm’s £1.5m ad campaign because it would be ‘ridiculous’ to see him talking to giant pigeon, his wife tells court”.