Ian 86 Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 I tell you who I like? The One Man Gang. What a name first of all, and that splash was something else. Was great as Akeem as well. I watched his shoot interview recently, and he starts it off like "HOOOOOOOT, it's the One Man Gang coming from RF VIdeo Studios, brother ..." all shouting in gimmick and by the 30 minute mark he was like "... and then they told me I was sacked ". Its hilarious to see someone try and work his gimmick in a shoot interview setting and then lose interest so quickly. I remember as a kid thinking Akeem was solid. Tougher than Andre. That old WWF ring had little give, so didnt give off the big sound when people landed. It actually sounded like a tamborine falling on a kitchen floor. But when Akeem hit the 747 it would go "BOOOOOOM!" Top bloke. He's also proof that everyone nicked all the good names years ago. The One Man Gang is such a wicked name. Yes! Akeem was quality. I got into wrestling in the mid-90s and developed an extensive VHS collection that still lives in one of my cupboards. When I was looking for old tapes of events I'd never seen the first things I'd look for were Bret, Bulldog, and then The Twin Towers. I absolutely loved these guys. OMG is a great name and his look was brilliant, more big guys should rock the mohawk and beard combo
villarule19 Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 Just a quick though. With the rise of the network recently and it gaining in the next couple of years. Surely it would make sense for WWE to look for a free view channel to air all its programs once its sky contract is complete. Access to more viewers including alot more casual viewers. No need for box office as the network is cheaper. Live raws and smackdowns should increase many channels viewing figures at the time they are on. A couple of repeats at more suitable hours would surely make it a win win for all involved.
Paid Members Big Benny HG Posted November 20, 2015 Paid Members Posted November 20, 2015 They'll go with the channel that pays the highest rights fees since that, above Network subscriptions and remaining PPV buys, is the most significant income stream.
King Pitcos Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 Just a quick though. With the rise of the network recently and it gaining in the next couple of years. Surely it would make sense for WWE to look for a free view channel to air all its programs once its sky contract is complete. Access to more viewers including alot more casual viewers. No need for box office as the network is cheaper. Live raws and smackdowns should increase many channels viewing figures at the time they are on. A couple of repeats at more suitable hours would surely make it a win win for all involved. Which freeview channels do you think have the resources and the desire to outbid Sky for the rights to WWE?
Paid Members BigJag Posted November 20, 2015 Paid Members Posted November 20, 2015 No UK terrestrial channel would see enough value in WWE to pay SKY money. WWE seeing value in the terrestrial exposure for the Network is something to ponder. How was the CH 4 deal for Heat and ppvs constructed?
Sphinx Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 My mate proposed we go to a Latin night out tonight, which prompted me to crank Latino Heat up to 11 and dance like goons. He doesn't even watch wrestling and he loved it. What a tune.
villarule19 Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 Just a quick though. With the rise of the network recently and it gaining in the next couple of years. Surely it would make sense for WWE to look for a free view channel to air all its programs once its sky contract is complete. Access to more viewers including alot more casual viewers. No need for box office as the network is cheaper. Live raws and smackdowns should increase many channels viewing figures at the time they are on. A couple of repeats at more suitable hours would surely make it a win win for all involved. Which freeview channels do you think have the resources and the desire to outbid Sky for the rights to WWE? The only logical one to me would be itv2. They are a bit more flexible with what they put out. To me it makes sense for wwe to do it for advertising purposes and more eyes seeing the product. But like you said there may not be many that could outbid sky let alone want that format of entertainment on there channel
King Pitcos Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 To me it makes sense for wwe to do it for advertising purposes and more eyes seeing the product. It's not the eighties where promotions are buying TV time to advertise the house shows. WWE's television output is their main -- and only real stable -- source of revenue, and the UK television deal is something like the second or third most lucrative of all their TV contracts. Without the TV money, they're fucked. It would be mental of them to reject a big-money Sky deal and go with some shite ITV2 contract because they think there are millions of people who'd forget to turn over after Keith Lemon and end up putting a tenner a month in Vince's pocket.
Paid Members Carbomb Posted November 21, 2015 Paid Members Posted November 21, 2015 WWE's television output is their main -- and only real stable -- source of revenue I thought their house shows were their most stable source of basic, regular revenue? I mean I know that TV's clearly their biggest earner, but I just remember JR going on about house shows being their "bread and butter" on the Ross Report a lot. Granted, this was some time ago, but they do still run quite a lot of house shows.
Ant Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Depends what period you're looking at. Standalone a TV taping nowadays probably makes a loss in terms of the building income and expenditure. But it's needed to draw the advertising income. And with consumer habits changing to online platforms traditional TV advertising income is probably dropping.
King Pitcos Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 WWE's television output is their main -- and only real stable -- source of revenue I thought their house shows were their most stable source of basic, regular revenue? I mean I know that TV's clearly their biggest earner, but I just remember JR going on about house shows being their "bread and butter" on the Ross Report a lot. Granted, this was some time ago, but they do still run quite a lot of house shows. House show income goes up and down depending on factors like the talent, creative and marketing (and market). The TV money is a guaranteed sum every year.
The Clint Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Sky holds the rights to air WWE until 2019 so it would be another 3 year before any other broadcaster could even try to purchase it. But at the end of the day I can't see Sky ever let WWE go because it still draws a large number to their Sky Sports bundle. Even though PPV's no longer air on the sports channels there will still be a lot that subscribe to Sky Sports just for the weekly shows. WWE has always lured the non football fans to their sports channels.
Paid Members BigJag Posted November 21, 2015 Paid Members Posted November 21, 2015 Have all the PPV's gone to Box Office?
The Clint Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Have all the PPV's gone to Box Office? Yeah since Jan. With a £5 price rise on the big 4.
Paid Members herbie747 Posted November 21, 2015 Paid Members Posted November 21, 2015 Anyone else ever think that wrestlers like Test, Bob Holly, and Justin Credible could never have been main-eventers because they had goofy teeth? I always figured they could only get so far with that look.
Recommended Posts