|
Post by nickcave on Feb 25, 2014 17:40:48 GMT -5
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Feb 25, 2014 17:45:40 GMT -5
May as well throw a pebble into the Atlantic ocean and then credit that with sinking the Titanic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2014 17:47:13 GMT -5
Vice.com - another site I never have to visit again.
Not that the article didn't have some merit, but it was just...well barely an article and more an excerpt from someone's livejournal.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Feb 25, 2014 17:49:55 GMT -5
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Feb 25, 2014 17:50:37 GMT -5
I liked how a wrestling article aimed at wrestling fans felt the need, second word in, to explain the word smarks, and not in a way that explained it at all but rather just revealing it stood for smart mark. As if those reading it would have no idea what a smark was, but a smart mark is some kind of universal language that anyone who hasn't even heard of wrestling would understand.
|
|
Hawk Hart
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sold his organs.
The Best There Is, the Best There Was, and the Best That There Ever Will Be
Posts: 15,296
|
Post by Hawk Hart on Feb 25, 2014 17:52:22 GMT -5
I usually love VICE but uh...swing and a miss on that one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2014 17:55:20 GMT -5
The guy makes some decent points actually.
|
|
|
Post by Just call me D.j.m. on Feb 25, 2014 17:57:19 GMT -5
I despise VICE, but I think it really hit the mark.
The main reason I'm NOT buying the network is because I'm over nostalgia, and buying WWE PPVs at any price is almost never worth it to me.
This is WWE giving its own brand a perpetual energy machine.
To go really crazy, if people are unhappy with the current WWE product, why would they check out TNA, puro or the indies, when they can just go watch a PPV from 2000?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2014 18:04:07 GMT -5
Fantastic article.
The central argument is: The fact that you're making a commitment to pay for the next six months AND getting access to their entire library removes any motivation for them to have to make "draws" anymore. I've been worried about the same thing for months.
|
|
mrbananagrabber
King Koopa
Paul Heyman's unofficial joke writer
Posts: 11,807
|
Post by mrbananagrabber on Feb 25, 2014 18:09:38 GMT -5
And so all those people spending enormous sums of money to go to the live shows are doing it why, exactly?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2014 18:11:07 GMT -5
And so all those people spending enormous sums of money to go to the live shows are doing it why, exactly? To see the WWE. That's their design. Great wrestlers, great stories mattering less than going to see the WWE.
|
|
|
Post by Apricots And A Pear Tree on Feb 25, 2014 18:16:01 GMT -5
Did that Son of a bitch just call me a hipster?
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Feb 25, 2014 18:26:46 GMT -5
Did that Son of a bitch just call me a hipster? maybe he meant "hipster" in an ironic sense (that isn't really ironic, which makes it ironic. if you don't get it then you're just not smart enough)
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Feb 25, 2014 18:40:44 GMT -5
The incentive of nostalgia only has a limited effect. For the Network to work, they MUST focus on their present stars and not rely on trotting out the relics of the past to get a quick bump like a cokehead. I actually think with the way they're utilizing developmental properly once and for all, there's a real chance they can maintain some form of leveling out, which would suffice.
I'm just surprised the article was written on VICE. I only go to VICE if I want to read about cannibalism in China involving North Korean Muslims who want to legalize marijuana for taxpayer money to build prisons to overthrow political dissidents written by someone who lists Hunter S. Thompson as their only influence for writing.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Feb 25, 2014 18:55:04 GMT -5
I don't at all understand the connection between not having a single top draw and anything else in the article. Does the author, while criticizing the WWE, actually buy into the WWE's fantasy that one big huge single wrestler can make wrestling mainstream again?
Also, the end of that article pisses me off, kinda. The names of the people in the ring have NEVER mattered, because they're all replacable and always have been (except for Hogan, but he's the exception to everything). It's kind of infuriating that he says that, and his point is "entertain me!!" and not, "holy crap, this company treats its onscreen employees terribly."
|
|
|
Post by Raskovnik on Feb 25, 2014 19:45:15 GMT -5
Vice is f***ing awful.
|
|
Welfare Willis
Crow T. Robot
Pornomancer 555-BONE FDIC Bonsured
Game Center CX Kacho on!
Posts: 44,259
|
Post by Welfare Willis on Feb 25, 2014 19:52:38 GMT -5
The incentive of nostalgia only has a limited effect. For the Network to work, they MUST focus on their present stars and not rely on trotting out the relics of the past to get a quick bump like a cokehead. I actually think with the way they're utilizing developmental properly once and for all, there's a real chance they can maintain some form of leveling out, which would suffice. I'm just surprised the article was written on VICE. I only go to VICE if I want to read about cannibalism in China involving North Korean Muslims who want to legalize marijuana for taxpayer money to build prisons to overthrow political dissidents. North Korean Muslims - the greatest threat to the world since commie nazis.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Feb 25, 2014 20:40:54 GMT -5
I thought it was a pretty good article, surprised at the hatred.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Feb 26, 2014 2:04:46 GMT -5
If the Network "kills wrestling" it will be because WWE potentially overestimated the bulk of their audience's casual interest in the product and by proxy, paying for it. Even if this deal is a great one that should be snapped up. WWE has to get 2 million paying subscribers this year to even break even on their monetary investment and deal with MLB. There's a lot of red tape here. Hell, to even have it streaming on certain devices, WWE has to apparently pay a percentage fee to said parent company's, that will potentially take upwards of 3 dollars for every ten they make.
The one thing we do know though is that WWE has a core, loyal monthly paying customer base of about 350-400,000 fans worldwide. And with WrestleMania, they pull in casual interest and lapsed fans of another 600,000+ if the event is promoted and presented with proper interest. So, that's just over a million potential customers there. However, there are about 4 million more fans who only watch the show with casual TV interest, and never pay WWE a dime of their money. So, will this deal bring them in? And will there be enough to offset the losses of the traditional PPV market since, as mentioned, WWE isn't pocketing the full ten dollars from each customer a month anyway and needs massive volume to be profitable in this endeavor? Time will tell.
All I do know is, the Network is being sold on the 12 PPV bundle. But that was a dwindling market already. So, is there really enough interest to have 3-4 million people subscribing as WWE has hoped by year's end? The nostalgia content after all is desired by a small percentage of hardcore and lapsed fans. A sad fact revealed with the former WWE Classics on Demand having a surprisingly low customer base of around 50,000 people for the last 3 years or so.
This year could reap WWE huge windfalls or end them up in the red for the first time in years. I currently own myself as an investment around a 1000 shares of WWE stock, but have been told by friends in the market that I should sell half of that this week because of the optimistic growth of it, based on factors only projected and not yet known. Like say the TV rights fees. If WWE ends up with no suitors outside of USA, (WWE, despite monster cable ratings commands the lowest ad revenue rates on TV, which supersedes ratings to networks) it will be disastrous for the stock. And if at the next stockholders address, Vince reveals a disappointing Network buyrate, the stock will plummet.
|
|
|
Post by GEOLINK on Feb 26, 2014 2:35:07 GMT -5
Why don't they wait and watch NXT Arrival and then they can decide whether the Network killed wrestling or not.
|
|