|
Post by joeiscool on Apr 8, 2014 13:46:52 GMT -5
From the sound of this I think I might be the only one in this thread that has the wwe network.
As of right now wwe does not have full current raw or smackdown watchable until 4 weeks after it's aired. You can watch a pre show, and you can watch the post show, but anything in between is not view-able from the network in any timely manner.
As of right now there are no WCW nitro's or thunders you can watch on demand. If you are trying to watch wcw you can only watch ppvs out of context.
Right now there's nothing that really can keep people engaged for hours at a time. There's nothing to really binge watch or keep up with. With wrestlemainia over I'm trying to figure out what I want to watch, and I can't really find anything that catches my interests. 9.99 is more money than hulu and netflix, but im getting way less engaging content. If they don't start thinking outside the box the wwe network will lose a ton of people in 6 months.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Apr 8, 2014 14:01:21 GMT -5
The NFL Network doesn't play games from anyone not part of the NFL. Same for the NBA, NHL, and MLB Networks. There are no obligations from WWE to air any show not part of their corporate umbrella. You got a better chance of Apple endorsing Microsoft products. Well, proving the point- uh...all of those sports networks kind of...sort of...DO. NFL Network will show some CFL games, NBA Network shows some Euroleague games, as does NHL for hockey's European/Russian leagues. And that ties into the real point: Well it's a ridiculous subject. "Hey, let's talk to a rival company (no matter how much higher on the food chain they are) about putting our show on THEIR network! I'm sure they'd go along with that no problem!" It'll only happen if WWE buys TNA. You don't see other current wrestling promotions on the WWE network. It's a silly idea. TNA shouldn't air on the WWE Network- not because they're a rival, but because they're TOO BIG to run on the WWE Network. HAVING SAID THAT, if the WWE Network were to deal in a similar way with giving smaller indy promotions time on the WWE Network, that could work better. TNA is too big to really get a proper symbiotic relationship with WWE, but since WWE wants to do some scouting of top indy talent, WWE offering the middling indy companies (think PWG or the promotions in the respective WWN/CHIKARA/SHIMMER/Beyond families) timeslots for iPPVs every so often, with caveats to WWE (they get to keep the shows on the Network for WWE's video library instead of DVD sales, and if WWE's interested in signing a wrestler for the promotion in question, the promotion has to agree to stop booking the wrestler early or cancel that wrestler's booking on the promotion's end so they can finish their dates quicker)- that would work better. The promotions are nowhere near challengers to the WWE's throne like TNA positions itself as, so they get some more exposure to fans while the WWE gets an easier way to scout top indy promotions and get a first-hand look at which wrestlers per promotion can get over with the WWE audience.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Apr 8, 2014 14:03:08 GMT -5
I've had the network from day 1. Matter of fact on my phone at work I'm looking forward to No Way Out from 2012 coming on shortly.
If you don't have anything to watch on there for you I'm sorry. With all the federation libraries they own I imagine they'll be releasing them in blocks..similar to what they are doing with the old raws and ecw tv shows.
But seriously, for the price even if you use it once a month it's worth it just for the deep discount on monthly ppv's alone.
|
|
|
Post by Slanted and Enchanted on Apr 8, 2014 14:07:35 GMT -5
What's the WWF doing in the Impact Zone?!
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Apr 8, 2014 14:27:06 GMT -5
The NFL Network doesn't play games from anyone not part of the NFL. Same for the NBA, NHL, and MLB Networks. There are no obligations from WWE to air any show not part of their corporate umbrella. You got a better chance of Apple endorsing Microsoft products. Well, proving the point- uh...all of those sports networks kind of...sort of...DO. NFL Network will show some CFL games, NBA Network shows some Euroleague games, as does NHL for hockey's European/Russian leagues. And that ties into the real point: Well it's a ridiculous subject. "Hey, let's talk to a rival company (no matter how much higher on the food chain they are) about putting our show on THEIR network! I'm sure they'd go along with that no problem!" It'll only happen if WWE buys TNA. You don't see other current wrestling promotions on the WWE network. It's a silly idea. TNA shouldn't air on the WWE Network- not because they're a rival, but because they're TOO BIG to run on the WWE Network. HAVING SAID THAT, if the WWE Network were to deal in a similar way with giving smaller indy promotions time on the WWE Network, that could work better. TNA is too big to really get a proper symbiotic relationship with WWE, but since WWE wants to do some scouting of top indy talent, WWE offering the middling indy companies (think PWG or the promotions in the respective WWN/CHIKARA/SHIMMER/Beyond families) timeslots for iPPVs every so often, with caveats to WWE (they get to keep the shows on the Network for WWE's video library instead of DVD sales, and if WWE's interested in signing a wrestler for the promotion in question, the promotion has to agree to stop booking the wrestler early or cancel that wrestler's booking on the promotion's end so they can finish their dates quicker)- that would work better. The promotions are nowhere near challengers to the WWE's throne like TNA positions itself as, so they get some more exposure to fans while the WWE gets an easier way to scout top indy promotions and get a first-hand look at which wrestlers per promotion can get over with the WWE audience. Part of me would rather see those companies become viable in their own right than seeing them basically officially becoming minor leagues.
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Apr 8, 2014 14:57:26 GMT -5
I'll say this. Give it a few months. And you'll probably be able to.
|
|
Sajoa Moe
Patti Mayonnaise
Did you get that thing I sent ya?
A man without gimmick.
Posts: 39,683
|
Post by Sajoa Moe on Apr 8, 2014 18:19:54 GMT -5
The NFL Network doesn't play games from anyone not part of the NFL. Same for the NBA, NHL, and MLB Networks. There are no obligations from WWE to air any show not part of their corporate umbrella. You got a better chance of Apple endorsing Microsoft products. MLB Network airs games from the Caribbean World Series and the World Baseball Classic.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Apr 8, 2014 20:14:28 GMT -5
TNA shouldn't air on the WWE Network- not because they're a rival, but because they're TOO BIG to run on the WWE Network. HAVING SAID THAT, if the WWE Network were to deal in a similar way with giving smaller indy promotions time on the WWE Network, that could work better. TNA is too big to really get a proper symbiotic relationship with WWE, but since WWE wants to do some scouting of top indy talent, WWE offering the middling indy companies (think PWG or the promotions in the respective WWN/CHIKARA/SHIMMER/Beyond families) timeslots for iPPVs every so often, with caveats to WWE (they get to keep the shows on the Network for WWE's video library instead of DVD sales, and if WWE's interested in signing a wrestler for the promotion in question, the promotion has to agree to stop booking the wrestler early or cancel that wrestler's booking on the promotion's end so they can finish their dates quicker)- that would work better. The promotions are nowhere near challengers to the WWE's throne like TNA positions itself as, so they get some more exposure to fans while the WWE gets an easier way to scout top indy promotions and get a first-hand look at which wrestlers per promotion can get over with the WWE audience. Part of me would rather see those companies become viable in their own right than seeing them basically officially becoming minor leagues. I agree- I'd rather those companies become viable in their own right- but there's also different levels OF "viable." All five of the companies/groups I mentioned are very viable right now, as indies. However, they all also are what they are". The only way an indy can get to be truly viable is if they have TV (hence why I didn't mention ROH on that list), but all of those promotions are DVD or iPPV-based for their events and seemingly are happy to be DVD/iPPV-based anyway. Because of those, they are effectively minor leagues as well...and nothing short of either getting a TV deal or, failing that, Highspots trying to make an indy WWE Network clone (which wouldn't have a prayer of succeeding like WWE Network's has) is going to get them to that point. In addition, we know some, from the example I made, have seen streaming as the way of the future (CHIKARA had their show on Neon Alley for edited events, and DGUSA did advertise on that network during its existence]. Going to an agreement with WWE Network would be a deal with the devil for a good indy promotion- but it might still be the right move to make.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjames on Apr 9, 2014 1:04:37 GMT -5
Since everyone's jumped on Hitogoroshi's example, let's put it this way. The Big Ten Network doesn't show games from the Big 12, the Pac 12 Network doesn't show games from the SEC, and The SEC Network won't show games from the ACC. The point of the WWE Network or any network is to make money for their owners and expand exposure for their product, not to help their competitors financially or promote them.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Apr 9, 2014 7:05:12 GMT -5
Since everyone's jumped on Hitogoroshi's example, let's put it this way. The Big Ten Network doesn't show games from the Big 12, the Pac 12 Network doesn't show games from the SEC, and The SEC Network won't show games from the ACC. The point of the WWE Network or any network is to make money for their owners and expand exposure for their product, not to help their competitors financially or promote them. That does make sense- but that's also what my point was as a whole as well. The question shouldn't be companies that are competitors getting on WWE Network, but for people who are NOT competitors, at all, and really have no hope of being a competitor. On TNA itself, to be honest, I'd be more interested in seeing TNA sign a deal with Netflix to have their PPVs/DVDs/Impact streamed- that would be a good equivalent for a "TNA Network" and give Netflix the best counter to the WWE Network possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2014 7:06:52 GMT -5
I remember before the network was announced there were rumours the WWE would consider other wrestling promotions.
I doubt TNA would ever happen. If ROH weren't owned by a TV company then I could see them being on there if the WWE did let other promotions on there (and that's a big IF, it's very unlikely)
|
|
|
Post by Chip Jordan on Apr 9, 2014 11:12:33 GMT -5
Impact has 1,000,000 viewers per week. WWE Network has 600,000 subscribers. Not to mention Spike are basically propping up TNA financially.
In short, not going to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Apr 10, 2014 0:25:37 GMT -5
There's a perceived benefit for a company running occasional products from a lesser competitor? Wha?
Out of every six pack of Coca Cola, will one of em be a Diet Mr. Pibb?
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Apr 10, 2014 0:40:22 GMT -5
There's a perceived benefit for a company running occasional products from a lesser competitor? Wha? Out of every six pack of Coca Cola, will one of em be a Diet Mr. Pibb? There really isn't. But I think some people just like the idea of WWE and TNA having a relationship so that WWE can cherry pick the "stars" from TNA to "be on the big stage like they deserve" and leave the "worthless jobbers" to "rot" in TNA.
|
|