Jump to content

Minor news items that don't deserve a thread


Richie Freebird

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members
2 minutes ago, Liam O'Rourke said:

The more I think about it, the more I think this is a really big deal, and kinda scary. He's making all the money he can now, but this company will be so precarious in three years if every other metric goes south the way it is trending now, based on this move and the TV deals...

This is 1995 all over again. TNT are showing a rival company which is doing really well in the key demos, which costs a lot less to run then what WWE are spending over 4 brands (Iā€™m talking number of wrestlers they have on the books, plus touring and production costs). Ratings are down, tickets are down. This is a chance for AEW to really grab the bull by the horns, much more of an opportunity then TNA ever got.Ā 
Ā 

Vince must think the future is in the XFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subscriber numbers are down 10% on last year apparently, which makes sense considering the streaming market has become so saturated and people are going to pick maybe 2 or 3 services at most to subscribe to. Add in the fact that most network era 'PPV's' feel like extended versions of TV as opposedĀ  to the unique PPV's of old and you can see why WWE might be inclined to take any decent guaranteed money on the table at the moment. Long term it could definitely fuck them though.

Edited by DCW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Liam O'Rourke said:

The more I think about it, the more I think this is a really big deal, and kinda scary. He's making all the money he can now, but this company will be so precarious in three years if every other metric goes south the way it is trending now, based on this move and the TV deals...

Agreed, surely this canā€™t be considered ā€˜minor newsā€™ and definitely does deserve a thread?

It utterly reeks of short termism. Aside from the potentially fatal blow it would give the network, the bad will it would create with fans could be absolutely devastating for the company.Ā 

Once contracts are signed, no amount of social media outrage could change course.

The only way I could possibly see this working would be if they were to air several newly created specials elsewhere each year, whilst keeping most PPVs - including the Rumble and Wrestlemania -Ā on the network (but quietly reducing their numbers)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
10 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Would you pay $9.99 for just old content?

Absolutely. It's all I ever bought it for. Surely it's not that unusual? I'd watch some current PPVs because I could but if they switched it to that tier system where old stuff was $9.99 and PPVs were extra, I wouldn't have been bothered at all. Not going to say I've never checked out any of their new stuff, docs and podcasts and the like but I wouldn't go out of my way to see much of it (Did make sure listen to the Austin/Taker one on YouTube for example).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
12 hours ago, Liam O'Rourke said:

My gut tells me that's the Barrios/Wilson issue. They were big drivers for the Network, so it may be that they didn't want to outsource the shows thinking it kills the Network, which means less people view the big events than ever, meaning attendance and merch drops even lower, so before long they are a content provider without an audience.

This is something I've been pondering for a little while now. Attendance is down, viewing figures are down, yet WWE are raking in more money than ever thanks to TV deals, the Saudi deal, and so on.Ā 

Every metric we've traditionally used to measure the success of a wrestling company is based on audience engagement, but WWE seem to be pivoting more and more to being a content provider, which involves playing by a whole different set of rules.Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
5 minutes ago, tiger_rick said:

Absolutely. It's all I ever bought it for. Surely it's not that unusual? I'd watch some current PPVs because I could but if they switched it to that tier system where old stuff was $9.99 and PPVs were extra, I wouldn't have been bothered at all. Not going to say I've never checked out any of their new stuff, docs and podcasts and the like but I wouldn't go out of my way to see much of it (Did make sure listen to the Austin/Taker one on YouTube for example).

I think $9.99 just for old content is excessive, especially compared to rival streaming services. But everyone has different budgets. What I am saying though is they gain subscribers for Wrestlemania, and lose them after. If you take away all the PPV's as well, which is a big draw for many (There are three types of fan. New Content, New and Old content and people like you who are driven by the old content). You would lose a lot of those first 2 types of subscribers if they had to pay elsewhere to get new content. It's impossible to know exact numbers of each type of fan, but I honestly think that they would see a huge drop if they lost the new events

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
4 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

I think $9.99 just for old content is excessive, especially compared to rival streaming services. But everyone has different budgets. What I am saying though is they gain subscribers for Wrestlemania, and lose them after. If you take away all the PPV's as well, which is a big draw for many (There are three types of fan. New Content, New and Old content and people like you who are driven by the old content). You would lose a lot of those first 2 types of subscribers if they had to pay elsewhere to get new content. It's impossible to know exact numbers of each type of fan, but I honestly think that they would see a huge drop if they lost the new events

There'd definitely be a drop but it's impossible to quantify. Obviously they'll have the numbers we don't so they'll be looking at whether the drop in the Network is offset or even dwarved by the potential sale of the PPV rights.

Pitcos is right in his usual way though. According to everyone, they don't watch current WWE. No-one does. So you'd think they'd still have a big market for the archive footage. Only they know though how many people have watched SummerSlam 1993 compared to Saudi Shitshow #1 2019 to make educated decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imo Ā£9.99 for such an expansive catalogue of classic content is a fucking bargain. If I remember correctly some were actually saying that WWE undervalued wrestling content online.

Wrestling wise the majority of promotions streaming services are cheaper but have nowhere near the amount of content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

They absolutely did undervalue it, and at the time people were saying it would bite them in the arse if the Network model collapsed and they had to go back to conventional PPV, trying to charge $50-$60 a month for shows that they'd taught people were worth $9.99 as part of a greater package.Ā 

The reason other promotions' streaming services cost less than the Network isĀ becauseĀ WWE set their price point so low. WWE have set the tone, and smaller promotions know that fans by and large won't accept having to pay more for a smaller video library than what they've been taught is the "correct" price to pay for the largest wrestling video archive in the world.Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
19 minutes ago, The King Of Swing said:

Imo Ā£9.99 for such an expansive catalogue of classic content is a fucking bargain.

I'm definitely on this brainwave, given how much I used to pay to try and get old VHS tapes of oop shows Ā£10 is a bargain to have all that and so much more at my fingertips.

I'd watch new stuff too if the camera work didn't give me a headache.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
24 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

They absolutely did undervalue it, and at the time people were saying it would bite them in the arse if the Network model collapsed and they had to go back to conventional PPV, trying to charge $50-$60 a month for shows that they'd taught people were worth $9.99 as part of a greater package.Ā 

The reason other promotions' streaming services cost less than the Network isĀ becauseĀ WWE set their price point so low. WWE have set the tone, and smaller promotions know that fans by and large won't accept having to pay more for a smaller video library than what they've been taught is the "correct" price to pay for the largest wrestling video archive in the world.Ā 

It's been interesting seeing AEW and NWA going down the route of fewer PPVs, but charging more for them. Even with my AEW+ FiteĀ membership, I'm fine with that, as it's not too often, and the Fite sub is pretty cheap.

NJPW World is obviously a different model, but that's one where it does feel like I'm paying for the new events more than anything. I wonder how they're doing on it? I have no idea what PPV is like in Japan, obviously, so it may not be a similar game there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...