|
|
Post by Saul Goodman on Jun 17, 2015 10:11:45 GMT -5
If they cut Wrestlemania from the network or raise the price $10 or do anything related to tier pricing that some of you are suggesting, I'm out. I don't have money that grows on trees and there are more important things in life than wrestling. Especially when your bored to death/not interested anymore. Same here, due to the lack of uploading new "old" Nitro's, Thunders and mostly everything WCW. I do not watch the Network often, I do watch it for PPV's, but lately that is all. I am not willing to pay more than $9.99 a month for something I do not watch more than once a month. Wrestling is a blue collar forum of entertainment, most people that enjoys wrestling has a limited budget. I already pay more for the WWE Network than I pay for Netflix. If the cost raises for the network, I choice Netflix over it. The WWE Network is fun, but not worth paying $20 a month just to watch an extra three hours of Raw (that is how I feel about the last couple of PPV's) a month. WWE is in a bad position, they can't go back to cable PPV's because that is the selling point for the Network and many cable companies refuse to provide the service. They can't charge more than $9.99 a month because many people such as myself would cancel subscription. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2015 10:14:42 GMT -5
For this to really have any relevance, we'd have to know what their expenses were that caused the loss.
For all we know they grossed more than usual, but just spent more.
|
|
|
|
Post by joeiscool on Jun 17, 2015 10:37:25 GMT -5
For this to really have any relevance, we'd have to know what their expenses were that caused the loss. For all we know they grossed more than usual, but just spent more. also you'd have to know if it wasn't just part of their "plan" |
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,322
|
Post by Sam Punk on Jun 17, 2015 11:23:12 GMT -5
Yea, I have always thought the REAL selling point of the Network was the archived library. However, WWE sticks to using the PPVs and the small bit of original content made for the Network as the hard selling point. All of their internal data points to the live content, NXT and the original programming as being the key drivers of views on the Network. The old PPVs, old TVs, etc. aren't driving many views, apparently. And it's not like they don't have old stuff on there - they have a ton. What they should do next year is offer WrestleMania as an in-app purchase for like $9.99-$14.99 on top of the Network subscription. You may get a couple of annoyed fans but I'd be willing to make the bet that most people would pay the extra money. They wouldn't recoup everything, but it might help depending on how great the loss was this year. It seems to me that the only people that are aware of the network, for the most part, are current fans. If that's the case, it's not surprising that current shows get the most views. How many people are going to watch old shows that aired before they were born? I think they'd help themselves by advertising the archive to those lapsed fans that are probably unaware that it even exists. There's got to be a bunch of hulkamaniacs or attitude era fans that would be interested in reliving those shows. But they can't subscribe to the network if they don't know about it in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by Raw is Doodie101 on Jun 17, 2015 11:28:52 GMT -5
All of their internal data points to the live content, NXT and the original programming as being the key drivers of views on the Network. The old PPVs, old TVs, etc. aren't driving many views, apparently. And it's not like they don't have old stuff on there - they have a ton. What they should do next year is offer WrestleMania as an in-app purchase for like $9.99-$14.99 on top of the Network subscription. You may get a couple of annoyed fans but I'd be willing to make the bet that most people would pay the extra money. They wouldn't recoup everything, but it might help depending on how great the loss was this year. It seems to me that the only people that are aware of the network, for the most part, are current fans. If that's the case, it's not surprising that current shows get the most views. How many people are going to watch old shows that aired before they were born? I think they'd help themselves by advertising the archive to those lapsed fans that are probably unaware that it even exists. There's got to be a bunch of hulkamaniacs or attitude era fans that would be interested in reliving those shows. But they can't subscribe to the network if they don't know about it in the first place. They did advertise the network when it first launched to about a year later all over the place on ESPN, NBC, etc. It might just be new stuff is something people like more. |
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Jun 17, 2015 11:34:16 GMT -5
They can pay whatever they want for PPVs bonuses, huh?
"Truth, we're going to have to pay you in Doritos...but not the Nacho or Cool Ranch flavors, sorry..."
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain & Diet on Jun 17, 2015 12:00:18 GMT -5
Maybe it's just me. I get Netflix and Hulu for my kids but the movies on it are so horribly bad that there's no real reason for me to watch those services. To me they have zero value. I watch something on the WWE Network every day. When I compare what I pay if I bought all the PPV the traditional way, then it's a tremendous bargain. I'll tell you how bad Netflix is. I'm watching Sharknado 2 right now. Because my kids asked me to. Kill me now. I just finished watching Amadeus on Netflix. I think you need to take a better look around Netflix. I've looked around Netflix plenty. Amadeus wasn't my thing when it came out. I found it to be self-indulgent. |
|
|
|
Post by Brandon Walsh is Insane. on Jun 17, 2015 12:13:14 GMT -5
I just finished watching Amadeus on Netflix. I think you need to take a better look around Netflix. I've looked around Netflix plenty. Amadeus wasn't my thing when it came out. I found it to be self-indulgent. There's a whole kids section on Netflix, Kids Only. Sharknado 2 wasn't as good as the first Sharknado, but you pretty much know what you're getting going in. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2015 12:17:15 GMT -5
Monday Night RAW build for WM was a mix of the following:
Crap,
Midcarders stealing the I-C belt every week,
More drek, some juicy wormy crap tossed in,
Kane main-eventing because he has an iron-clad contract to stink one up every couple of weeks,
(Cena-Rusev was actually decent)
some bullshit about the DX tank beating Hackenschmidt,
STING, MAGGLE!
A bunch of more smelly stuff,
Bray Wyatt reading Goosebumps stories,
Samoan twins fighting Tito Santana's kids,
BU-ROCK Less-nar might be there.
Some snowstorm BS, which was the best RAW all year.
And yet, they lost money, who'd-a thunk it?
(So, let's blame the Dungeon descendant and the 2Swiss guy.)
|
|
|
|
Post by MrElijah on Jun 17, 2015 12:35:37 GMT -5
"Do you know how quick it is to go through 6 million?"
"Can't say that I do Brain."
"OK let's try this: do you know how quick it is to go through 9 bucks and a can of spam?"
|
|
|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Jun 17, 2015 13:51:10 GMT -5
Does anyone actually believe this? It has to be something where they only count a certain percentage of the Network subscribers as money towards Mania allowing them to do something with the taxes or worse screwing over the wrestlers.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847 
|
Post by Reflecto on Jun 17, 2015 14:29:20 GMT -5
They can pay whatever they want for PPVs bonuses, huh? "Truth, we're going to have to pay you in Doritos...but not the Nacho or Cool Ranch flavors, sorry..."  "Dixie never pays ME in Doritos...all right, I'll sign with them. Thanks for looking out, Truth..." |
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 28,325
|
Post by chazraps on Jun 17, 2015 15:29:00 GMT -5
I just finished watching Amadeus on Netflix. I think you need to take a better look around Netflix. I've looked around Netflix plenty. Amadeus wasn't my thing when it came out. I found it to be self-indulgent. Who was being indulged? Everyone portrayed has been long dead! Regardless, there's 10,000 titles with many, many of them quality. A quick glance: Fargo The Conformist Silver Linings Playbook Hoop Dreams Django Unchained Blue Velvet Heavenly Creatures Inglorious Bastards The Big Lebowski The Exorcist Jerry Maguire Glengarry Glen Ross Annie Hall This Is Spinal Tap Wet Hot American Summer Hot Fuzz The Last Waltz The Bicycle Theif Dead Man Walking Trainspotting There, 20 movies. All better than Sharknado 2. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2015 15:36:39 GMT -5
I've looked around Netflix plenty. Amadeus wasn't my thing when it came out. I found it to be self-indulgent. Who was being indulged? Everyone portrayed has been long dead! The term could be used for the directors, writers, actors, etc. Not my opinion necessarily. |
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,596
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Jun 17, 2015 16:06:15 GMT -5
Perhaps the traditional Big 4 should be a premium membership deal on the Network or simply heavily discounted, but not free to all members. All other PPVs can be on the Network as currently done, but WM, Summerslam, Survivor Series, and Royal Rumble should cost a little extra. That way you can A) make more money off of them, B) promote them as bigger shows, and C) better organize your booking. In the old days, the Big 4 were big because they built up to them for 3 months each. Repeat this process, while having the intervening PPVs simply part of the overall build, and maybe you might improve your storytelling and your profit margin.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jun 17, 2015 16:08:39 GMT -5
Does anyone actually believe this? It has to be something where they only count a certain percentage of the Network subscribers as money towards Mania allowing them to do something with the taxes or worse screwing over the wrestlers. The network needs 1.4 million subscribers to break even, they're at 1.3 and costs for running Mania haven't gone down any, they've gone up thanks to the reliance on part time talent so yeah, I believe the WWE for once. The McMahon's fortunes are tied to the WWE and it's stock price and declaring their biggest event has lost money will be horrible for that so will cost them more than it could possibly save them by screwing over talent. |
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jun 17, 2015 16:45:34 GMT -5
Does anyone actually believe this? It has to be something where they only count a certain percentage of the Network subscribers as money towards Mania allowing them to do something with the taxes or worse screwing over the wrestlers. The network needs 1.4 million subscribers to break even, they're at 1.3 and costs for running Mania haven't gone down any And the simple fact that in years prior they had between 700,000 and over a million people paying upwards of $60 to watch Mania. Even with the PPV companies taking their cut, that's a huge sum of money that just isn't being covered by the Network subscriptions. |
|
|
|
Post by Brandon Walsh is Insane. on Jun 17, 2015 16:47:15 GMT -5
I thought that after fees and what not, WWE only took in $10 per PPV sale?
I read that somewhere, at least.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Jun 17, 2015 16:53:58 GMT -5
Perhaps the traditional Big 4 should be a premium membership deal on the Network or simply heavily discounted, but not free to all members. All other PPVs can be on the Network as currently done, but WM, Summerslam, Survivor Series, and Royal Rumble should cost a little extra. That way you can A) make more money off of them, B) promote them as bigger shows, and C) better organize your booking. In the old days, the Big 4 were big because they built up to them for 3 months each. Repeat this process, while having the intervening PPVs simply part of the overall build, and maybe you might improve your storytelling and your profit margin. Even if the Big 4 ppvs were put on a premium section, the fans would just wait until after the ppv when it gets put into the archives. |
|
|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Jun 17, 2015 17:04:05 GMT -5
I thought that after fees and what not, WWE only took in $10 per PPV sale? I read that somewhere, at least. I thought it was a little over 20 |
|
