Quazimoto
Superstar
Joined on: Feb 4, 2014 12:37:37 GMT -5
Posts: 993
|
Post by Quazimoto on May 20, 2014 21:59:13 GMT -5
IMO... It's still way too early to call the WWE Network a success or a failure. Give it a year and have it roll out in a few other countries across the globe, then we can really talk about whether it was a good idea or an XFL type of mistake.
That said, I think WWE may have overestimated the modern day appeal or professional wrestling. If they'd launched the network back in the hey day of the attitude era, they'd be raking in the money quicker than they could count it because wrestling was 'cool' back then. While it still may be a multi-million dollar business, it's just not consider the "in" thing like it was back then. IMO, the product is better (for the most part) than it was back then, but they just don't have the massive fan base of people that would be willing to pony up another $10 (or $20 or $30) a month on top of all their other bills. Die-hard fans will in any era. Casual fans aren't going to be persuaded that easily, especially given the polarizing nature of today's product (seems you either like it or hate it). At times, it just seems like WWE thinks they're way more popular than they actually are. But, like I said above, it needs more time to know whether the expense is justified on WWE's part. I give them major props for taking such a risk and will more likely than not end up subscribing myself sometime in the future (already have all the WWE PPVs and most the good ECW & WCW PPV matches on DVD). Either way; succeed or fail, the WWE Network will have a pretty big impact on the future of the company so it'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on May 20, 2014 22:56:00 GMT -5
especially as more people hear about how nice the pay per views air Ummm no. This is the exact reason I don't subscribe to the Network. Just looking on here after a PPV several people always report of having some kind of issue with skipping, freezing or not even playing. I've said it before but it's not worth the risk to get locked into a contract when there are still multiple problems. While the PPV service is more expensive at least when I sit down to watch it I don't have to worry about any of that. People who are complaining about the streaming service either have sh*tty internet, are watching it on outdated gaming systems like PS3 or 360 that weren't designed to really support streaming services, or a combination of the two. If you have an AppleTV and Comcast, the Network works better than DirecTV. It's definitely on par with Netflix in terms of quality and the PPV content is live. $10 a month is a steal of mega proportions. How every single person who is a wrestling fan hasn't signed up for this thing yet is beyond me. We are ripping WWE off right now with this Network as far as I'm concerned. Still paying for PPVs is absolutely insane at this point imo. You could have 2 PPVs a year OR every PPV WWE has ever offered or will offer for the exact same price. Seems like pretty simple math to me.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 4:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 23:03:01 GMT -5
Good......when Vince has had his back to the wall....things usually get interesting...........
|
|
|
Post by kazoosandstreamers on May 20, 2014 23:18:12 GMT -5
vince was a billionaire, calculated risks are his game. he may have failed here but this is far from the last of it. i can't wait till the network comes to canada. Fixed You know why he's not a billionaire? Because he surrounds himself with glad-handed, nonsensical, douchebag ‘yes men’ like John Laurinaitis who’s going to tell him everything he wants to hear.
|
|
|
Post by Booger Red on May 20, 2014 23:23:15 GMT -5
You know why he's not a billionaire? Because he surrounds himself with glad-handed, nonsensical, douchebag ‘yes men’ like John Laurinaitis who’s going to tell him everything he wants to hear. Maybe this company will be better after Vince McMahon is dead, but the fact is it's going to be taken over by his idiotic daughter and his doofus son-in-law and the rest of his stupid family.
|
|
gawd6sic6™
Main Eventer
" I cross the lines you love to hate "
Joined on: Jan 13, 2009 13:50:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,868
|
Post by gawd6sic6™ on May 20, 2014 23:56:07 GMT -5
Ummm no. This is the exact reason I don't subscribe to the Network. Just looking on here after a PPV several people always report of having some kind of issue with skipping, freezing or not even playing. I've said it before but it's not worth the risk to get locked into a contract when there are still multiple problems. While the PPV service is more expensive at least when I sit down to watch it I don't have to worry about any of that. People who are complaining about the streaming service either have sh*tty internet, are watching it on outdated gaming systems like PS3 or 360 that weren't designed to really support streaming services, or a combination of the two. If you have an AppleTV and Comcast, the Network works better than DirecTV. It's definitely on par with Netflix in terms of quality and the PPV content is live. $10 a month is a steal of mega proportions. How every single person who is a wrestling fan hasn't signed up for this thing yet is beyond me. We are ripping WWE off right now with this Network as far as I'm concerned. Still paying for PPVs is absolutely insane at this point imo. You could have 2 PPVs a year OR every PPV WWE has ever offered or will offer for the exact same price. Seems like pretty simple math to me. The only people I personally know that have issues now are 360 users. My ps4 and ps3 both run it great. As for everything else. I totally agree. Once I told the wife the savings. She was all about it.we bought every ppv anyway. So for us not to do it would be dumb.
|
|
|
Post by HVMMONS on May 20, 2014 23:56:41 GMT -5
You know why he's not a billionaire? Because he surrounds himself with glad-handed, nonsensical, douchebag ‘yes men’ like John Laurinaitis who’s going to tell him everything he wants to hear. Maybe this company will be better after Vince McMahon is dead, but the fact is it's going to be taken over by his idiotic daughter and his doofus son-in-law and the rest of his stupid family.
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on May 21, 2014 1:54:18 GMT -5
I agree. Still Vince losing $350 million in a week or so is crazy! actually he lost that in 1 day. That makes it a LOT worse..
|
|
|
Post by Joey Cush on May 21, 2014 2:00:18 GMT -5
Gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet. im hungry
|
|
|
Post by BØRNS on May 21, 2014 3:29:12 GMT -5
Well I got $25 so far from a friend subscribing so maybe that will help them out
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 4:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 4:06:20 GMT -5
Gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet. im hungry Same here......I could go for some bacon and scrambled egg right now!!
|
|
PudgieTheSheep
Superstar
Joined on: Jun 6, 2012 16:41:55 GMT -5
Posts: 651
|
Post by PudgieTheSheep on May 21, 2014 4:22:30 GMT -5
People are realising that all of the $50-$60 for a PPV wasn't going to WWE directly? Think how much the PPV companies were charging to show it! I'd be surprised if even close to half went to WWE. They make half. That's still 25 bucks a month vs 9.99 for the network. WM 29 did 1.039 million buys. That's 30 mil profit in 1 month after expenses. Wow. I didn't realise it was so high. So the 'Mania profit wasn't quite up there yet. There were still people that would have bought Mania through PPV so although it wasn't up there on the Network quite yet, it will come around once people become happier with streaming their TV. The buy rates for Payback and other "filler" PpV's will be a lot bigger though as they will already have the cash through the Network, and if you're paying for it... Then hell, you'd might as well watch it! Plus, all PPV's are still available to pay to view on cable so they will still be getting the revenue from that.
|
|
|
Post by greenjack1992 on May 21, 2014 5:42:53 GMT -5
WWE Network would have been better off as a cable channel This. I was really confused when they released it as an online subscription. A television network should be on ... television.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 2, 2024 4:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 6:00:16 GMT -5
Ummm no. This is the exact reason I don't subscribe to the Network. Just looking on here after a PPV several people always report of having some kind of issue with skipping, freezing or not even playing. I've said it before but it's not worth the risk to get locked into a contract when there are still multiple problems. While the PPV service is more expensive at least when I sit down to watch it I don't have to worry about any of that. People who are complaining about the streaming service either have sh*tty internet, are watching it on outdated gaming systems like PS3 or 360 that weren't designed to really support streaming services, or a combination of the two. If you have an AppleTV and Comcast, the Network works better than DirecTV. It's definitely on par with Netflix in terms of quality and the PPV content is live. $10 a month is a steal of mega proportions. How every single person who is a wrestling fan hasn't signed up for this thing yet is beyond me. We are ripping WWE off right now with this Network as far as I'm concerned. Still paying for PPVs is absolutely insane at this point imo. You could have 2 PPVs a year OR every PPV WWE has ever offered or will offer for the exact same price. Seems like pretty simple math to me. I'm surprised the price of the network includes the live PPVs tbh.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on May 21, 2014 7:20:01 GMT -5
WWE Network would have been better off as a cable channel This. I was really confused when they released it as an online subscription. A television network should be on ... television. As a television network it would be Classics on Demand, which while good, wasn't the best they could do with all of their content. Delivering it as a streaming system allows for it to reach cell phones, PS3s & PS4s, Xbox One and 360, laptops, Rokus, Tablets, etc. It reaches a MUCH larger audience than as a television network. I don't even have cable but I have a PS3, laptop, cell phone, tablet and Roku. I enjoy the WWE Network immensely and that's money from me and probably a lot of other people that they wouldn't have gotten if it was just a channel on cable.
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on May 21, 2014 8:37:16 GMT -5
WWE Network would have been better off as a cable channel This. I was really confused when they released it as an online subscription. A television network should be on ... television. exactly
|
|
jakksking1
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 2, 2011 14:45:41 GMT -5
Posts: 2,843
|
Post by jakksking1 on May 21, 2014 8:48:15 GMT -5
Can someone explain why you would want it as a regular network rather than streaming? You'd rather have to wait for a show to come on than watch what ever you want whenever? Man wrestling fans are hard to please. You understand you'd probably still have to buy PPVs if it was a regular cable station, unless you want an hour of commercials during Wrestlemania.
|
|
PudgieTheSheep
Superstar
Joined on: Jun 6, 2012 16:41:55 GMT -5
Posts: 651
|
Post by PudgieTheSheep on May 21, 2014 9:08:01 GMT -5
Can someone explain why you would want it as a regular network rather than streaming? You'd rather have to wait for a show to come on than watch what ever you want whenever? Man wrestling fans are hard to please. You understand you'd probably still have to buy PPVs if it was a regular cable station, unless you want an hour of commercials during Wrestlemania. This. It also makes it available worldwide without having to find TV stations to broadcast in each individual country. Plus, Cable/satalite TV is dying. Streaming is the future.
|
|
becks007
Main Eventer
BELT MARK
Joined on: Aug 14, 2011 9:11:57 GMT -5
Posts: 2,185
|
Post by becks007 on May 21, 2014 9:19:27 GMT -5
People also need to remember that not everyone who is currently subscribing will stay subscribed. Yeah exactly. The commitment is for 6 months. So after 6 months, he or she wld have the option of unsubscribing to the Network and that is not a good thing for the WWE. They really should start venturing globally with the network asap...
|
|
Falconsinclair
Superstar
Joined on: Jun 24, 2012 9:16:24 GMT -5
Posts: 803
|
Post by Falconsinclair on May 21, 2014 17:47:10 GMT -5
People also need to remember that not everyone who is currently subscribing will stay subscribed. Yeah exactly. The commitment is for 6 months. So after 6 months, he or she would have the option of unsubscribing to the Network and that is not a good thing for the WWE. They really should start venturing globally with the network asap... Different countries have different copyright laws. Take a look at netflix, the American and Canadian versions differ drastically. The tie up with the Network launching in other countries could be related to these issues. Mind you since the WWE owns all of there content they won't have to constantly make sure something clears different countries copyright laws, so once the network launches in those countries it should have all the same content that the the US does right away.
|
|