WWE ‘wants to kill off AEW by the end of current TV deal’

[Infinity Land]

1 hour ago, Snitsky's back acne said:

Okay, and? It's hardly WCW running the UIC Pavilion and WWF booking the Rosemont Horizon with Hogan on top the same night.
It's two states, thousands of miles away from each other (so nobody is having to choose which one to attend) that will both be available to see in the comfort of your own home at your own leisure.

Put aside all the business arguments and focus on the fans then. 

Both are announcing shows seemingly later than ever before. It's 15/08 and this unnannounced Indianpolis PLE main evented by Cena v. Lesnar is to take place on 20/09. The SNME/Evolution/NXT weekender had about 6 weeks official notice.

Even decent advance notice All In Texas was known a year in advance tickets. Tickets went on sale in December. 3 months before the show the start time was moved 5 hours ahead. 

Fans can feel the pinch whether it's the big spenders that fly-in to those trying to manage their budget (time & money). 

[TheScarlettChad]

I don't get why counter programming is a bad thing. Yes it's obvious why they're doing it but at the same time, AEW is established now. If WWE were a threat, they'd have been out of business ages ago. There's really no threat there imo of course. 

[tiger_rick]

3 minutes ago, TheScarlettChad said:

I don't get why counter programming is a bad thing. 

It's petty. Designed to limit the coverage and money spent with the other company, which does harm to the industry overall. It makes fans choose between watching and attending shows when some will have attended or watched both. In the most recent case for WWE, it apparently creatively harmed the build to one of their biggest shows too because their focus was elsewhere. None of it is a surprise, especially with that mob but it's spiteful shit that's rightly called out by fans.

It's even crazier for WWE to want to knock down AEW given how much they've brought to the industry in the last 6 years. What does it look like if AEW don't make new stars, provide a home for people WWE fired during a pandemic, push Cody Rhodes as a main event talent on a nationally televised show and major PPVs, bring CM Punk back to pro-wrestling, etc.

Anyone with half a brain can see that the monopoly of the wrestling industry in North America was fucking dreadful for fans and wrestlers. It only ever suited Vince and his enablers.

[TheScarlettChad]

4 minutes ago, tiger_rick said:

It's petty. Designed to limit the coverage and money spent with the other company, which does harm to the industry overall. It makes fans choose between watching and attending shows when some will have attended or watched both. In the most recent case for WWE, it apparently creatively harmed the build to one of their biggest shows too because their focus was elsewhere. None of it is a surprise, especially with that mob but it's spiteful shit that's rightly called out by fans.

It's even crazier for WWE to want to knock down AEW given how much they've brought to the industry in the last 6 years. What does it look like if AEW don't make new stars, provide a home for people WWE fired during a pandemic, push Cody Rhodes as a main event talent on a nationally televised show and major PPVs, bring CM Punk back to pro-wrestling, etc.

Anyone with half a brain can see that the monopoly of the wrestling industry in North America was fucking dreadful for fans and wrestlers. It only ever suited Vince and his enablers.

Oh I agree that the monopoly was awful. Thankfully I can't see AEW dying like WCW did. 

[Snitsky's back acne]

2 hours ago, BomberPat said:

Why did they suddenly seize on the UK scene when WOS Wrestling came about? There was no danger of WOS stealing their audience. But there was a danger of WOS talent being eligible for union representation, and generally being treated a lot more favourably than wrestlers generally are. And you can see why WWE would want to nip that in the bud.

Absolutely. I'm not saying that WWE are NOT counter programming by the way, everything would indicate they are. I'm just saying it is pointless in an era where everything is recorded and streamed. 

1 hour ago, wordsfromlee said:

From what I've read it seems like WWE are doing the counter programming in the hopes that people watch them live instead of AEW. Therefore AEW's live ratings will be lower and then when it comes to AEW renewing their TV deal, the channel will offer them a lot less money because their viewing figures haven't been as good. This gives them a smaller budget to play with as I presume Tony Khan can't keep using his Dads money to top it up forever.

Something like that anyway.

People can (and do) watch one show on a TV and another on a laptop or phone. Neither show, necessarily, need to be impacted live.

However, I concede the point and concur that it is likely WWE's thought process - but given that, from everything we are lead to believe, conventional TV is a dying medium (or at least not as popular as it once was) and streaming is the way forward it again seems redundant for WWE to do this. 

[SuperBacon]

12 minutes ago, Snitsky's back acne said:

People can (and do) watch one show on a TV and another on a laptop or phone

This is like people who watch two football games at once. Must be the most unenjoyable viewing experience ever. 

[Infinity Land]

15 minutes ago, Snitsky's back acne said:

Absolutely. I'm not saying that WWE are NOT counter programming by the way, everything would indicate they are. I'm just saying it is pointless in an era where everything is recorded and streamed. 

People can (and do) watch one show on a TV and another on a laptop or phone. Neither show, necessarily, need to be impacted live.

However, I concede the point and concur that it is likely WWE's thought process - but given that, from everything we are lead to believe, conventional TV is a dying medium (or at least not as popular as it once was) and streaming is the way forward it again seems redundant for WWE to do this. 

WWE just made a domestic rights deal for $325m a year for their PLEs. UFC are getting a billion a year for their shows & what were PPVs.

When Collision would go head to head with a WWE event the audience for Collision could be less than half their usual number. WWE/TKO think they can help lower rights fees, site fees, and sponsorships going to AEW. Less money for the competition, the less WWE have to spend on talent. 

 

[2Xtreme_lives]

I find the whole thing maddening really, Kill the competition despite talent and others saying that it elevates everyone. Like @tiger_rick said a non AEW world would not give us the WWE landscape of right now and additional talent going back and forth.

A dead industry leaves it dead and cold for everyone. While there's competition wrestling is more likely to be in 

Think Trips needs to think about all the other things they've taken over the years from WWE Press conferences included

[RedTwoster]

1 hour ago, LaGoosh said:

Stuff like this makes it all make a bit more sense. The AEW TV deal was a small fraction of what Netflix paid for Raw and it looks like they might be pretty close in viewership. Obviously this is not good for WWE long term.

I may be wrong, but I’m not sure live viewership is something that Netflix reports, although they do release seven day viewership (link to Wrestlenomics) and they seem to be doing quite well in that. 

Personally, I think their main concern is creating market conditions that allow them to pay wrestlers significantly - and I mean drastically - less, so a small number of people are able to make significantly more.  

[Cannibal Man]

1 hour ago, TheScarlettChad said:

I don't get why counter programming is a bad thing.

Rick explained it all brilliant but on top of all that - I just want to watch the wrestling and have a nice talk about it, I don't want to be sucked into some vortex of insane human shit because WWE decided there has to be one, its fucking exhausting! I can only imagine the headaches I wouldnt be having if they could shut the fuck up for a second and be happy with what they've got and making that better 

[Hannibal Scorch]

5 hours ago, RedTwoster said:

I may be wrong, but I’m not sure live viewership is something that Netflix reports, although they do release seven day viewership (link to Wrestlenomics) and they seem to be doing quite well in that. 

They are doing 2.5m to 3m a week. GLOBALLY. It’s estimated between 40-50% if that is US. So about 1.25m on a bad week. That’s lower than they were getting on cable. It’s about half of what Dynamite is getting, although that’s been going up recently. Netflix are paying $500m a year for Raw (and international PLE). AEW are getting $175m for 2 shows.

So if that live viewership is accurate, they are about 300k viewers above Dynamite. For almost 3x the price. And to add to the woe, Netflix hoped WWE would increase their presence in India due to its popularity on regular TV. Since they launched their it’s had no impact.

[DEF]

I believe and have done from the start of TKO's ownership is that the only reason the higher ups would care is they want to control how much talent could be paid. They want to to be the only game in town that dictates the money that performers are worth. UFC just did 7.7 bn deal which won't translate in the slightest to the fighters pay offs.

Yeah they might increase the knockout bonus by 10k but come on, the gulf of money they get to what the fighter gets is insane. AEW legit can match them and everything that happened with UFC says it would be better if there was no one that could come close.

[Merzbow]

7 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Netflix hoped WWE would increase their presence in India due to its popularity on regular TV. Since they launched their it’s had no impact.

Yeah I can possibly see why, too, the culture of consuming TV and piracy is different there and many using the Internet to watch WWE are just going to continue getting a bootleg stream or torrent.

[Infinity Land]

1 hour ago, Merzbow said:

Yeah I can possibly see why, too, the culture of consuming TV and piracy is different there and many using the Internet to watch WWE are just going to continue getting a bootleg stream or torrent.

Scaled up I think habits have moved on long ago from streams and torrents. In most of Europe/Africa/most of Asia. You wake up and everything's on social media. Both from the official channels and everyone else. No need to sit through 2hr plus shows when it's already been split into bite sized chunks. PLEs and PPVs might be the last hold out for people fearing spoilers. 

[RedTwoster]

8 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

They are doing 2.5m to 3m a week. GLOBALLY. It’s estimated between 40-50% if that is US. So about 1.25m on a bad week. That’s lower than they were getting on cable. It’s about half of what Dynamite is getting, although that’s been going up recently. Netflix are paying $500m a year for Raw (and international PLE). AEW are getting $175m for 2 shows.

So if that live viewership is accurate, they are about 300k viewers above Dynamite. For almost 3x the price. And to add to the woe, Netflix hoped WWE would increase their presence in India due to its popularity on regular TV. Since they launched their it’s had no impact.

But does that even matter? Netflix will be comparing WWE against its other shows, not how the company was performing on cable. Ultimately it gives them a loyal audience that is unlikely to cancel their Netflix subscription. 

I honestly think WWE is its own worst enemy. Most entertainment companies seem to recognise the value in creating goodwill in its audience, but I’m not sure WWE ever has. Blatantly predatory behaviour only serves to alienate a section of the audience willing to watch both companies.