Keith Houchen Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 *Pitcos shoots himself* And the forum loves me so forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted November 11, 2014 Author Paid Members Share Posted November 11, 2014 I hope for WWE's sake that the Network does not end up exclusive to Sky, but I hope that it is made available through Sky for those that do wish to access it that way. The sticking point would seem to be PPVs/special events, for which Sky apparently have exclusive UK rights built into that big contract the two parties signed up to in January of this year, only about a week or whatever before WWE announced their imminent Network launch. I really can't comprehend how two huge corporations like Sky and WWE could possibly have negotiated a multi-million pound, long-term rights deal without sorting all this shit out. Â It may just be that the original contract was worded in an ambiguous way like "exclusive broadcast rights" where it's unclear if it covers internet availability, possibly even to the point where you could argue there's a difference between the live stream and the VOD. Â That said, the most likely sounding explanation at the moment is that Sky knew about the network but weren't expecting it to start until January when the new TV deal takes effect. WWE may have worked on the idea that they'd be fine to run once the PPVs were off Sky Sports, but Sky appear unhappy they've tried that interpretation and livid that they are doing a free month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Arch Stanton Posted November 11, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted November 11, 2014 How much money do Sky actually make on WWE's Box Office events? Any idea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members herbie747 Posted November 11, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted November 11, 2014 Â I hope for WWE's sake that the Network does not end up exclusive to Sky, but I hope that it is made available through Sky for those that do wish to access it that way. The sticking point would seem to be PPVs/special events, for which Sky apparently have exclusive UK rights built into that big contract the two parties signed up to in January of this year, only about a week or whatever before WWE announced their imminent Network launch. I really can't comprehend how two huge corporations like Sky and WWE could possibly have negotiated a multi-million pound, long-term rights deal without sorting all this shit out. Â It may just be that the original contract was worded in an ambiguous way like "exclusive broadcast rights" where it's unclear if it covers internet availability, possibly even to the point where you could argue there's a difference between the live stream and the VOD. Â Â It's probably not likely that a SKY contract was ambiguous. And they fully understand the distinctions between live streams & VOD. Â I'd say it just comes down to the PPVs being on the UK version of the Network. SKY paid a huge increase in the new contract with WWE, and SKY want those PPV shows left intact. But who knows really, except those involved!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sichadelic Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014  I hope for WWE's sake that the Network does not end up exclusive to Sky, but I hope that it is made available through Sky for those that do wish to access it that way. The sticking point would seem to be PPVs/special events, for which Sky apparently have exclusive UK rights built into that big contract the two parties signed up to in January of this year, only about a week or whatever before WWE announced their imminent Network launch. I really can't comprehend how two huge corporations like Sky and WWE could possibly have negotiated a multi-million pound, long-term rights deal without sorting all this shit out.  It may just be that the original contract was worded in an ambiguous way like "exclusive broadcast rights" where it's unclear if it covers internet availability, possibly even to the point where you could argue there's a difference between the live stream and the VOD.  That said, the most likely sounding explanation at the moment is that Sky knew about the network but weren't expecting it to start until January when the new TV deal takes effect. WWE may have worked on the idea that they'd be fine to run once the PPVs were off Sky Sports, but Sky appear unhappy they've tried that interpretation and livid that they are doing a free month.  Exactly how I see it. Anyone else having trouble finding someone to blame in all of this? I see both sides. WWE want the Network up and running, but sky want to keep rights to events they've shown for the best part of 25 years. The irony is, in fighting over this because of the financial aspect of it, they're ultimately both losing money because of the inability they've shown to reach a simply solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 (edited) It does seem absolutely mental if the negotiations really didn't clarify how things were going to work in regards to the network that was changing WWE's business model right at the time they were hashing out the new contract. It was definitely odd that Sky would pay them such a massive rights increase knowing that the PPVs, NXT, Superstars etc might be available separately by the time/at the time the new contract came into effect. Â It wouldn't have just been a case of WWE saying "shh, it'll be fine, don't worry about it" at the time and hoping that broadcast rights weren't impacted by internet streaming if Sky didn't want to partner up, would it? Edited November 11, 2014 by King Pitcos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members herbie747 Posted November 11, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted November 11, 2014 It wouldn't have just been a case of WWE saying "shh, it'll be fine, don't worry about it" at the time and hoping that broadcast rights weren't impacted by internet streaming if Sky didn't want to partner up, would it? Â That's what I reckon it is. They signed a new SKY deal for more money earlier this year (which was to include the PPVs), and WWE probably figured they'd cross that bridge when they came to the UK launch (which was supposed to be next year), and it'd be fine. But when it came to launch time, it certainly wasn't fine to give those shows away for free. Plus, offering November completely for free was deemed a slap in the face for a long-time partner who just gave you a fee increase. So now WWE either need to appease SKY somehow, or do a diluted version of the Network in the UK that excludes the PPVs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator Onyx2 Posted November 11, 2014 Awards Moderator Share Posted November 11, 2014 The Hola VPN app seems to be able to access the network on Android most (but not all) of the time now without having to mess about with any settings. Good to know John. I'll try that over the weekend. Â See what I mean Pitcos? Even demonstrably intelligent people like Keith are aghast at mentions of "DNS". It's like when I mention to people you can get US Netflix, but as soon as I say " simply install a Chrome extension... " the conversation is over. There must be loads like that. It's why Apple products are so successful - pretty much turn them on, and they work. Â And for the record, I'm one of those lapsed Sky customers. I had Sky but when looking to save money I can't justify it when the *only* thing I had it for was WWE. And as you have to go the whole hog with Sports, it's just too much. Surely many families are in a similar place unwilling / unable to get an entire service for one tranche of programming? Many do, sure. But lots can offset it with a wider interest in sport. Â I'm not being argumentative for the sake of it - just trying to point out there is a decent market for the Network exactly like the US service in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTXRussomark Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Yeah I'd agree with the above. I have Netflix and can't be bothered fiddling about to get the US version even though there's loads on there I'd watch. I've no doubts its easy enough to do, it's just extra hassle I can't be bothered with. I'd definitely subscribe to the Network if it was just a case of signing up and watching, but fuck anything more than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil is brill Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 How much would getting the US network end up costing in GBP, including unblock us or whatever. Have I been waiting on the UK version for the sake of saving ÂŁ2-ÂŁ3 or is there a substantial difference? And can I get it working on a PS4 if I take this route? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WyattSheepMask Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) I've never paid more than ÂŁ9 for the network and UnblockUS to access it. Â On PS4, you need to create a US account so that you can download the WWE app (which is exclusively for viewing the network). You can still access it through your normal UK account once it is downloaded Edited November 12, 2014 by WyattSheepMask Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil is brill Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Thanks a lot. Can't believe I've held off for the sake of a few quid. Already got a US PSN account so I'll probably get the network sorted once I'm home from Liverpool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WyattSheepMask Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 There are setup videos on UnblockUS to help you set it up and you get a weeks free trial too. Once you've got it working you'll wonder why you waited so long Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapnut Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 (Incidentally, can we have a forum fight to determine who gets to keep the "Slapnut (s)" name? It's really dumb they have such similar names.) Yes please. I've never been a fan of the name (no offence, Slapnuts), I just couldn't think of anything when I signed up. I'd donate a fiver but apparently only Moo can change names these days and in that case the UK will have the network before I get a name change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted November 12, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 If this were 2000 WCW, they'd stick the name on a pole and make you fight over it, with someone's mum involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.