Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 5:54:16 GMT -5
Even if you have the Rock vs Cena, Stone Cold vs Hogan and Bret Hart vs HBK all on one card, $50 is still too much. You can go to a movie for $15, you can get into a club for $10, you can watch the Super Bowl for free.
Only a complete mark would pay $50 for a wrestling PPV.
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Oct 26, 2012 9:15:17 GMT -5
I'll say a couple reasons I haven't really seen mentioned yet. in this economy, a lot of people have to work 6 days a week. sunday is their only day off and when you only have one day off you become a lot more discerning about how you spend it. 4 hours is a big chunk of time to give up in the evening, especially taking into account having to be up at 6 AM on monday.
also, there's a lot more things to do with your free time than there used to be. more people play video games, netflix is just a couple clicks of the remote away, and then there's people who spend their free time on the internet.
another thing ties to marketing. WWE is aimed at kids, and yet they still have their show going from 8-11 on a school night. most kids get sent to bed at 9 or 10, so they don't see the whole show, and thus have no reason to care about the main events they'll never see. and as someone else mentioned, kids aren't the ones with expendable income to spend on PPVs, their parents are. and I have to say if I had a kid there's no way in hell I'm spending 45-60$ a month so they can watch a wrestling show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 12:36:00 GMT -5
I'll say a couple reasons I haven't really seen mentioned yet. in this economy, a lot of people have to work 6 days a week. sunday is their only day off and when you only have one day off you become a lot more discerning about how you spend it. 4 hours is a big chunk of time to give up in the evening, especially taking into account having to be up at 6 AM on monday. That's a great point. Given I live in the UK I know of several friends who actually make the time to get up early on Tuesday morning to watch an (admittedly illegal) copy of Raw online. Three hours of that alone is far too much. Doing that on a Monday morning is just as painful, I'm used to burning the candle at both ends with wrestling when a friend orders a PPV but every year there's another aspect of my life that's filled and that's the same with everyone. To be a big fan of wrestling is difficult in the same way it's hard to be a huge music fan, but wrestling is visual so it can't be listened to on the move or whilst on a break at work. Right now the storylines and formula for PPV matches they have do not make the most of the time they have and I definitely agree that it's costing them. I'm not staying up to watch any PPVs outside of the Rumble/Wrestlemania/Extreme Rules unless they put up a Hell of a marquee match because I know that the same match with a new gimmick will happen at the next PPV anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 13:03:13 GMT -5
I'm glad I grew up in the UK in a time when all PPV's were free over here and now i'm glad that I live in a time where I can watch all PPV's free online (even if i wanted to order them I dont have sky TV so couldn't) I dont envy Americans having to pay ridicolous amounts back in the days when it was impossible to get them for free. I can imagine there being some marks out there who spend $100+ a month ($1200 a year ) on both TNA and WWE ppv's
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Oct 26, 2012 13:04:06 GMT -5
I'm glad I grew up in the UK in a time when all PPV's were free over here and now i'm glad that I live in a time where I can watch all PPV's free online (even if i wanted to order them I dont have sky TV so couldn't) I dont envy Americans having to pay ridicolous amounts back in the days when it was impossible to get them for free It was always possible to hear it for free. Seeing it, well, that would cost you. And I guess there was pirated cable too.
|
|
|
Post by molson5 on Oct 26, 2012 13:27:22 GMT -5
The WWE doesn't pick the price of the PPVs out of thin air, I'm sure there's a ton of data and research looking for that "sweet spot" of what will bring in the most total revenue (a number which is a lot more important than mere buys). And it seems as though other companies have come to the same conclusion - Boxing, UFC, TNA, are all in the same ballpark pricewise, as are a lot of the one-shot indy shows - Batista's MMA show was around $55 on DirectTV.
If the shows cost half as much, they would have to generate more than twice as many buys to make it worth it (since the cable/satellite provider takes a flat cut.) They obviously don't see that happening. I think there's a psychological element at play there. If you're the kind of person that won't steal the shows, maybe because you're watching it with a group, or want to watch it on your giant TV, or maybe because you have a ton of cash, an extra $10 or $20 probably doesn't matter too much. So those people are effectively subsidizing the thieves who get the show for free, and are probably more likely to steal the show no matter what it costs (I know people claim that if they show was $30 they'd pay for it and not steal it, but I don't think the data backs that up and any kind of widespread trend - people steal everything regardless of the cost, music, TV shows, audiobooks, whatever, they can always claim that their theft is justified because of expense.) But there's obviously a ton of people who would just never pay anything for a PPV, either because they can get it for free, or just because they don't want to pay for wrestling content. It's probably a lot easier to get the hardcores to pay $10 or $20 more than it is to change that culture.
I think you're seeing the same kind of thing happen with regular cable. Cable and satellite are getting more expensive, even though more people are "cutting the cord" and dropping cable and satellite service. But some people are just always going to keep their cable/satellite service because of live sports, habit, whatever. So those people have to pay more to make up for the smaller audience. And enough of them will to make the price increases make sense. Cable and satellite could cut their costs, but they'd still likely be seeing membership declines, so there's no point to doing that.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Grimm on Oct 26, 2012 13:45:56 GMT -5
4. There demographic. 2002 was still more to the teenagers and adults. Compared to the PG more kids friendly types. Who buys the events? The adults. How many moms you think will still be ordering the PPVs for there kids? Then you take that number to the fans who turned away from the WWE because not liking the PG stuff. It maybe a small number but still effects the numbers. To add to this, I know a mom with two younger kids that love wrestling. However, due to their age and a lower income, she doesn't order WWE PPVs because she can find them online the next day. That way the kids can watch them during regular hours and she saves the money.
|
|
|
Post by Snaptastic on Oct 27, 2012 8:37:47 GMT -5
Was this reported already as the article I lifted it from is dated yesterday
|
|