|
Post by The Legendary Ring Troll {BLM} on Oct 9, 2016 17:19:58 GMT -5
I don't understand the commercial complaints. I'm pretty sure we can all agree that the wrestlers deserve to be paid for the Network and $9.99 just isn't going to cut it revenue-wise. Don't give me regular TV style 5 minute commercial breaks taking up 15 minutes during the whole program, but you wanna throw one or two short commercials in here and there? I'm fine with it. Depending on what other organizations get added under the $15 plan, I might upgrade to that, but I couldn't care less about the Commercial Free option.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Mantis Toboggan on Oct 10, 2016 0:20:10 GMT -5
Am I the only one who's had no problem with ads? I get a 5 second ad plugging the upcoming big event (right now it's No Mercy) and then right to what I wanted to watch. When my Continue Watching feature wasn't working recently, it started to become an issue because I had to start everything over from the beginning, which meant an ad every time. The quick five second PPV plugs are fine, it's the mandatory 30 second or more ads that aggravate me. Two really lame Coca Cola commercials (these I see the most. They only get more annoying with each viewing), the Usos 5 Hour Energy commercial (and it's the lamewad face Usos, not the heel ones), and ads for Jagger Eaton's stupid Nickelodeon show. It wouldn't even be so bad if there was a bigger variety of ads so there's less repetition, like on YouTube, but it's these same five ads over and over.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Oct 10, 2016 1:44:20 GMT -5
I think that's something entirely out their control due to USA contract. Even if it's out of their control, it's still something worth considering for the USA contract. Even if getting next-day Raw/Smackdown means WWE offering "Okay, USA- you give us this for the $14.99 plan, and we'll put some USA Network Original shows on the WWE Network library or streamed on the Network", it's still be worth it for WWE- heck, it'd give something for non-WWE fans to consider the Network as well at the lower price points. But the fact is they CAN'T becuase it's written into the contract. They'd have to wait until the contracts are up for renewal. and USA would most likely not want their shows on the WWE network, they want their shows on their network so they can get the ratings. if there is a trade off it will be We will let you air it on the network next day at a massive pay decrease.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Oct 10, 2016 4:13:43 GMT -5
But the fact is they CAN'T becuase it's written into the contract. They'd have to wait until the contracts are up for renewal. and USA would most likely not want their shows on the WWE network, they want their shows on their network so they can get the ratings. if there is a trade off it will be We will let you air it on the network next day at a massive pay decrease. If USA (or any network) wouldn't want their shows on the WWE Network, then streaming services wouldn't exist, PERIOD (since any one of them are taking it from their network and taking the ratings.) Right there there is a benefit for that claim to change it- USA gets their shows on another streaming service (and is the ONLY non-wrestling on the WWE Network save for Total Divas, giving a bigger piece of the pie) Even then, The fact that a prior price increase survey did ask "would $12.99 for next-day Raw/SD work?" has said that USA may (in fairness, a BIG may) be willing to work on it.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Oct 10, 2016 5:07:21 GMT -5
But the fact is they CAN'T becuase it's written into the contract. They'd have to wait until the contracts are up for renewal. and USA would most likely not want their shows on the WWE network, they want their shows on their network so they can get the ratings. if there is a trade off it will be We will let you air it on the network next day at a massive pay decrease. If USA (or any network) wouldn't want their shows on the WWE Network, then streaming services wouldn't exist, PERIOD (since any one of them are taking it from their network and taking the ratings.) Right there there is a benefit for that claim to change it- USA gets their shows on another streaming service (and is the ONLY non-wrestling on the WWE Network save for Total Divas, giving a bigger piece of the pie) Even then, The fact that a prior price increase survey did ask "would $12.99 for next-day Raw/SD work?" has said that USA may (in fairness, a BIG may) be willing to work on it. But sporting events like WWE, rely heavily on the live ratings, also those shows that are streaming are streamed on the channel's website or on a website where the channel is getting paid for allowing it. USA would not be getting paid for WWE airing Raw and Smackdown the next day, USA would want the money back from WWE for whatever advertisements they wouldn't be able to run.
|
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,317
|
Post by Sam Punk on Oct 10, 2016 11:34:51 GMT -5
no quicker raw/smackdown upload time? I don't like the month wait to watch recent raw/smackdown. Just watch This Week in WWE. You'll see all you need to see in a lot less time.
|
|
|
Post by Zombie Mod on Oct 10, 2016 13:10:23 GMT -5
no quicker raw/smackdown upload time? I don't like the month wait to watch recent raw/smackdown. Just watch This Week in WWE. You'll see all you need to see in a lot less time. it's not the same though
|
|
|
Post by alred1982 on Oct 10, 2016 16:26:23 GMT -5
Won't be long before all ppvs are on a separate package be extra 15 for ppv for that month
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Oct 10, 2016 20:02:47 GMT -5
I don't understand the commercial complaints. I'm pretty sure we can all agree that the wrestlers deserve to be paid for the Network and $9.99 just isn't going to cut it revenue-wise. Don't give me regular TV style 5 minute commercial breaks taking up 15 minutes during the whole program, but you wanna throw one or two short commercials in here and there? I'm fine with it. Depending on what other organizations get added under the $15 plan, I might upgrade to that, but I couldn't care less about the Commercial Free option. The problem though is that the wrestlers won't exactly get paid more if they go up to $14.99 VIP, or increase the level more. Either the wrestlers have a contract for their amount (not sure if the NXTers will have more on touring/PPV bonuses on the main roster- but even then, if WWE manages to switch "you lose your PPV payoff, but in exchange health insurance, travel and accommodations are paid for by WWE"- that'd still be a better deal for performers.) The royalties thing, though- would be like that if the Network was free or if it cost a million dollars a month, because royalties naturally decline with time and wrestlers just never realized that due to how rerun-proof pro wrestling is.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Oct 10, 2016 23:52:27 GMT -5
But the fact is they CAN'T becuase it's written into the contract. They'd have to wait until the contracts are up for renewal. and USA would most likely not want their shows on the WWE network, they want their shows on their network so they can get the ratings. if there is a trade off it will be We will let you air it on the network next day at a massive pay decrease. If USA (or any network) wouldn't want their shows on the WWE Network, then streaming services wouldn't exist, PERIOD (since any one of them are taking it from their network and taking the ratings.) Right there there is a benefit for that claim to change it- USA gets their shows on another streaming service (and is the ONLY non-wrestling on the WWE Network save for Total Divas, giving a bigger piece of the pie) Even then, The fact that a prior price increase survey did ask "would $12.99 for next-day Raw/SD work?" has said that USA may (in fairness, a BIG may) be willing to work on it. USA's contract grants X amount of exclusivity for X amount of days; it's why the Hulu versions of Raw get gutted and trimmed up, and NBCUniversal is even a part owner in Hulu. If Raw goes onto the network a month late, it's there for someone who wants to catch up, but it's absolute shit if you're trying to actively follow the product solely through the network, because PPVs have already gone down and spoiled stuff you're now seeing on TV four weeks later. The Network don't exist because USA Network wills it to and is okay with it, but because it's not their show, it's WWE's. They don't own the content, and by the time the contractually obligated exclusivity runs out, there's very little money to be made in the episode anyway. If they try to sell USA on some kind of thing where they don't have the exclusivity, then they're not only undoing what their main pitch going into last contract negotiations--which didn't turn out in WWE's favour--was, which was that their programming is hot due to its live, sports-like nature and that they are fairly DVR-proof because of it, but they're going in the opposite direction. The amount of money WWE would lose on that deal is astronomical, USA suddenly isn't as willing to go to bat for them and work with advertisers as they have been lately, and even if you figure that the contracts give basically $36 a head for a year's worth of viewership, WWE's international Network subscription numbers and counting all of the accounts that don't even pay shit anymore can't top out Raw's numbers in the US alone. It would be a huge loss in revenue and put their television program, which is meant to drive people to pay them through the Network, into a very different light.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Oct 11, 2016 0:42:27 GMT -5
USA's contract grants X amount of exclusivity for X amount of days; it's why the Hulu versions of Raw get gutted and trimmed up, and NBCUniversal is even a part owner in Hulu. If Raw goes onto the network a month late, it's there for someone who wants to catch up, but it's absolute shit if you're trying to actively follow the product solely through the network, because PPVs have already gone down and spoiled stuff you're now seeing on TV four weeks later. The Network don't exist because USA Network wills it to and is okay with it, but because it's not their show, it's WWE's. They don't own the content, and by the time the contractually obligated exclusivity runs out, there's very little money to be made in the episode anyway. If they try to sell USA on some kind of thing where they don't have the exclusivity, then they're not only undoing what their main pitch going into last contract negotiations--which didn't turn out in WWE's favour--was, which was that their programming is hot due to its live, sports-like nature and that they are fairly DVR-proof because of it, but they're going in the opposite direction. The amount of money WWE would lose on that deal is astronomical, USA suddenly isn't as willing to go to bat for them and work with advertisers as they have been lately, and even if you figure that the contracts give basically $36 a head for a year's worth of viewership, WWE's international Network subscription numbers and counting all of the accounts that don't even pay shit anymore can't top out Raw's numbers in the US alone. It would be a huge loss in revenue and put their television program, which is meant to drive people to pay them through the Network, into a very different light. That is the big point- but it also gives the pretty obvious sweet spot, especially with NBC-Universal as a part owner in Hulu: Let WWE put next-day Raw for VIP subscribers- BUT it has to be the Hulu version instead of the full version (which goes up a month later.) Heck, if WWE does something to add to the Hulu version where the matches/angles that make the cut are mixed with exclusive interviews about them like Talking Smack, it could actually be a selling point.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Oct 11, 2016 4:34:16 GMT -5
Jim Smallman has said on the Progress fan group that someone linking to this Newz was the first he'd heard of it.
Though he also said Jimmy Havoc would risk never being able to walk again if he returned to wrestling before January so I'm not sure I believe him...
|
|
Talent Name
Ozymandius
Got fined anyway. Possibly a Moose
James Franco is the white Donald Glover
Posts: 62,616
|
Post by Talent Name on Oct 11, 2016 5:56:36 GMT -5
I kinda hope EVOLVE is one of the ones in the 14.99 plan
|
|
|
Post by RadcapRadsley on Oct 11, 2016 6:33:21 GMT -5
I honestly don't see how a $15 an hour plan with(Evolve,TNA,ROH) etc is very profitable. Given how many people watch TNA,ROH for free then 100K network subscribers upgrading(optimisict amount) paying for a higher tier subscription would bring in 6 million dollars of revenue to split btwn 2-3 Companies. Add to the fact even if WWE split it evenly with all said parties having it on WWE would delude their viewership numbers and revenue from tv.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Oct 11, 2016 7:55:49 GMT -5
Being in the UK anyway I already pay 12.99 with the exchange rate. Would pay more for the other shit though.
|
|
|
Post by 111111 on Oct 11, 2016 8:42:15 GMT -5
I'd pay the extra fiver to not have to watch a 30 second Diet Coke advert every f***ing time I try to stream something.
|
|
Shai
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,507
|
Post by Shai on Oct 11, 2016 20:33:34 GMT -5
I'd honestly do the 14.99 plan in a heartbeat. I'd also love the next day access to Raw/SDL if they could make it happen. I'm a cord cutter so Hulu is mostly how i watch the weekly stuff and now that they don't have CW stuff I'm paying 11.99 for less stuff then I was before. I pretty watch Raw/SdL and Smallville on Hulu.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2016 7:46:34 GMT -5
I honestly don't see how a $15 an hour plan with(Evolve,TNA,ROH) etc is very profitable. Given how many people watch TNA,ROH for free then 100K network subscribers upgrading(optimisict amount) paying for a higher tier subscription would bring in 6 million dollars of revenue to split btwn 2-3 Companies. Add to the fact even if WWE split it evenly with all said parties having it on WWE would delude their viewership numbers and revenue from tv. The logic is probably in that ROH is syndicated so they'd probably just need to pay the syndication fees, which'd be pretty minimal, and TNA's probably desperate enough to take any offer of that sort they'd give them just for having a little extra money coming in.
|
|
|
Post by Martin: #TeamBella Treasurer on Oct 15, 2016 8:58:46 GMT -5
I'd pay the extra fiver to not have to watch a 30 second Diet Coke advert every f***ing time I try to stream something. Or, bring back some old 90s Diet Coke ads!
|
|
|
Post by joeiscool on Oct 15, 2016 11:59:49 GMT -5
I haven't had very many commercials, granted I only watch ppvs and nxt specials mostly.
|
|