Skip to main content

Another well-thought out article on the network

>
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1917295-biggest-takeaways-from-wwe-network-announcement
>
> While they don't quote you in this one (and really, everyone should quote Scott Keith. I try to at least once a day), they raise an excellent point. If 800,000 - 1,000,000 homes are buying 2-3 ppvs a year, the Network is a no-brainer for those homes. I don't believe you're a regular ppv purchaser; I know I'm not. Yet we're both ready to buy the network RIGHT THE HELL NOW. Do you think 1,000,000 subscribers is out of the realm of possibility?
>
> - Joe

Not at all. It's the renewals after the first 6 month cycle that will be the true test.

Comments

  1. So many big pictures.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Prior to Wednesday, I didn't think that this would do anywhere near the 1 million buy mark, but since the announcement, I've heard from a lot of my friends who were fans in the Attitude Era (when we were all in college) but no longer watch, and they all expressed interest in buying the network. Interest seems higher than I figured it would be, so I think the million mark is possible on launch. But, as SK said, the first renewal point in August will be the key figure to watch to see how much retention there will be.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Smartest thing WWE can do is hold some stuff back and release a little more after each 6 month renewal period....

    ReplyDelete
  4. You make a good point as well, like maybe for October could be the " Best of Halloween Havoc"

    ReplyDelete
  5. Your_Favourite_LoserJanuary 10, 2014 at 9:54 PM

    'Attitude Era, Rock, Austin, Punk'

    those are really old though, so its not really a surprise theyre discounted. they sold well enough when they were bran new

    ReplyDelete
  6. As I pointed out below, do we watch these channels because we're genuinely interested or simply because they're there? How many people actually watch The Travel Channel? Enough to justify it not dying? How many of these niche channels are actually serving any purpose now that network decay has turned half of cable into the same fucking network? Is there really anything that separates TLC from VH1 from E! from Bravo?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have two that promos that get a little overlooked...

    ...I love Flair at Survivor Series 91 after costing Hogan the title, if you havent seen it, I highly recommend it and if you have, give it another look...

    ...another one I love is Rock on Sunday Night Heat before WM XV. "This aint sing along with the champ..."

    ReplyDelete
  8. Im guessing Randy Orton vs Big Show wont be headlining any PPVs between September and January this time around...

    ReplyDelete
  9. No kidding, huh? If they could have launched the network a week earlier, the people who paid on Day One would be running out 5 days before Summerslam. Book a near Wrestlemania level Summerslam and you have to imagine anyone still interested in the current product would be renewing. Still in their best interests to have a huge Summerslam and big post Summerslam Raw though, get people excited about future stuff even if it ends up being mediocre.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Prediction: This time next year, the only real PPVs WWE has left will be Rumble, Mania, and SummerSlam. Everything else will turn into another episode of Raw with a fancy name.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Nah, I don't think the time frame is right. I do think that's possible and I've been wondering if that is what they'd eventually do, but the Network isn't even going to launch outside the US until the end of this year/early next year. If it's only just launching outside the US at this time next year, they don't want to kill off all international business that quickly.

    Long term I could definitely see something like this though.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Most non big 4 PPVs are just Raw episodes now anyway, I'm just saying they won't try to hide as much anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think you might be right about the stuff they'll be adding in the future rotating out, but I'm not sure they rotate out PPVs. The wording they used makes it easy enough to do it and still be able to say "See, we didn't lie, we just said the PPVs would be available at launch, not permanently!", but when you're going to be very reliant on not just getting new customers but retaining existing customers, pissing people off by implying they're getting every PPV ever and then pulling the rug out from under them and saying "We meant for February!" is probably not a good idea. I could definitely see a rotating schedule with the rest of the added content though. Not the Legends House type crap but maybe the TV stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  14. That's fair. I mean, the PPV that ended with Big Show randomly showing up and knocking out Bryan and Orton was pretty much just a Raw with some longer matches.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Within 12 months on one of the lesser PPVs, the "main event" will be a angle instead of a WWE title match.

    ReplyDelete
  16. They did mention during the press conference something about "and a couple we can't name yet". Considering they named most things, even the ones that aren't going to be ready at launch (Smart TVs and XBox One), maybe Apple TV is just not finalized yet, but nearly there.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Wild West? What, is a giant robot spider about to make a nonsensical appearance? Spiders are the fiercest killers in the animal kingdom. Well, them and polar bears.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I dunno...define angle. If you're saying the final match will be some random match and then after that they'll be pushing, say, a contract signing as the end of a PPV, I don't think so, not within 12 months. Eventually, maybe, but not yet. If you're saying we'll get something like Bryan/Orton, where the main event was a match but really the ending of the show was just a dumb angle to push the Big Show storyline forward and continue treading water, yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if that happens again.

    The only way I could see an actual angle ending a PPV in the next 12 months is if it was something HUGE and not just some stupid throwaway Raw angle. Again, I don't disagree this may be happening in the future, but it's really in their best interests to keep going strong, at least until this is all up and running internationally. WWE might not always be able to tell what "strong" is and the PPVs could suck as a result of that, but even they have to realize that they can't try to sell a PPV on some random angle if they'd like to get any international buys at all while keeping international (and US fans) excited about getting the Network. Once they're firmly established they can do whatever they want pretty much.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I'm guessing this has been asked on any one of the other threads, but I'm late to the party, so humor me. My question is, hasn't there been issues/crashes with WWE.com livestreaming PPVs in the past? I know the infrastructure for the network will be far superior, but it would be a bummer if the system crashes on PPV days, especially WM, when so many people will be loading up the network at the same time.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yes, but we got to let them play it out and see where it goes.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yes, there have been. But their technical partner in this venture, mlbma or something, is an industry leader in Internet video. They work with ESPN and MLB.tv (both have apps on Apple TV... Just saying), so that's giving me confidence there won't be crashes come Wrestlemania time.

    ReplyDelete
  22. My prediction: this will be the only year Wrestlemania will be on the network.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I feel like we're going to see a more blatant shift in strategy where the ppv finishes will be leading to Vince's real money-maker: Monday Night Raw.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Amsterdam_Adam_CurryJanuary 10, 2014 at 11:24 PM

    IIRC ONS3 was moved to Jacksonville FL (the world hotbed of hardcore wrestling, of course), because WWE knew that the Hammerstein Ballroom (site of ONS 1-2, along with various ECW and ROH shows, and where Raw was held for the first year or so) would shit all over WWECW. Keep in mind, WWECW was essentially founded at ONS2, which tells you how quickly the whole idea went south. It was such a flop (though just as a wrestling show in a vacuum it was **1/2ish) that ONS4 never happened, and that's why we have the Extreme Rules PPV.


    AFAIK those were the only 2 WWECW PPVs. I guess ONS2 makes 3, but technically WWECW didn't exist until 2 days later.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I got to admit that its going to be pretty hard to snark on the wwe after they just offered up streaming access to the entire unedited library for 10 bucks a month. Honestly to me now, they can do no wrong. I cant fucking wait to get this this thing and I'm considering taking a 4 day weekend and just watching non stop the minute I get it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I just saw a late February 1992 WWF superstars episode on YouTube where a babyface tag team of Roddy piper and hulk Hogan cut a promo for some house show tag matches against flair and sid, it is fucking incredible. They had this lethal weapon-esque chemistry and were just feeding off of one and another with these crazy babyface speeches. Might not be my favorite ever but goddamn its pretty fucking amazing.

    I basically think after its all been said and done 1984-92 hogan is my favorite promo guy ever. Just talking all this crazy shit that is so much better than any face promo post rock/Austin and I think I prefer it just for how fucking crazy it is.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The only thing I don't like is that I can't pay more money and get it before everyone else and have it right now this very second! I cannot wait for this fucking thing and I want it right this second. Its not fair I have to wait until the end of next month like everyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Like why can't I just buy a three year subscription right now and just have them lock me in, fork a few bens to Vince, and then just turn it on right now? I wonder what the deal with the weekly TV will be? Probably they just cycle in and out chunks of shows

    ReplyDelete
  29. I just don't know how to feel. I'm excited, but I almost feel like they'll put LESS work into PPVs than they do now.

    Obviously I'll be buying a 6-month subscription (what wrestling fan won't?). After that, I dunno.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Rydered or Billy Gunned?

    ReplyDelete
  31. "The WWE Network is BONZO GONZO!" - Scott Keith

    ReplyDelete
  32. It's not the offense I worry about with the old guys, it's taking bumps. Sure, Jake could land a few punches and maybe hit a DDT, but what about when he has to flip over the top rope and land on the floor? I don't think he should be officially in the Rumble, but maybe he can come out as a non-entry and put the snake on somebody.

    ReplyDelete
  33. People complain about nothing significant happening on Smackdown, but then when something significant does happen, people complain about it being a wasted opportunity. I'm all for more title matches and special-occasion stuff happening on Smackdown. That's how they'll get more people to watch.

    ReplyDelete
  34. But if the system is benefiting the networks, who is going to do the unbundling?

    ReplyDelete
  35. What difference does that make? If the producers and the cable companies are all making money off of them, who is going to want to change the dynamic?

    ReplyDelete
  36. I dunno, wouldn't that potentially change as soon as the husband said "look honey, a six month subscription to the network is cheaper than a one off buy of Wrestlemania?"

    ReplyDelete
  37. Basically, the DVD market is dead. Not this year, but maybe next year, or 5 years, or 10. Same for Blu-ray. Streaming will overtake it. That's why the network is genius.

    The money isn't in giving away a lot for not very much. It's in under-cutting the live-streaming market, the DVD market, the Blu-ray market...pretty much making it the best option for doing any kind of media inhalation.

    Vince has got SO MUCH wrong these past ten years. But the Wrestlemania comparisons are spot on. He's got this one JUST right. Distribution methods make this a winner.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I want a playlist of all the matches where HHH blew out a quad available on launch day.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I have been fortunate (or unfortunate) enough to work for an organization in the US for the last ten years that provides cable services to its customers. For a cable or satellite provider, the only cost associated with carrying a PPV event is upfront capital costs for equipment to receive the signal.

    For a company like the WWE, if they charge $50 for a PPV, $25 of that went into our pockets. The other $25 did not go to the WWE, it goes to distributors such as iNDemand, who provide the service to the cable and satellite operators. The WWE then receives a portion of that revenue, based on terms of the distribution agreement.

    So when you see that Wrestlemania does 1M buys @ $70 a pop, the WWE is not seeing $70 million in revenue. They are likely seeing somewhere around $20-$25 million. While nothing to sneeze at, it is certainly not what it appears to be on the surface.

    With that being said, it would be a huge mistake for cable providers to stop carrying pay-per-view events. Their costs have already been incurred and the equipment cannot be used for anything else other than PPV. So they would be pissing away free revenue at this point.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I think at least for the first year they'll try to make the PPVs seem (key word: seem) as exciting as possible because they'll want to convert the occasional PPV-buyers to subscribers to the Network.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Exactly. Besides, I'm sure THEY'VE thought all of that through already.

    Well, you can't be too sure with WWE, but yeah.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Good point. I think it will draw a bunch of the 20 and 30-somethings who were reared on the Attitude Era simply for the price tag alone. I mean hell, ten bucks a month? People gladly spend that on Spotify Premium to have access to a hell of a lot of music at any time rather than wait for the right song to come on Music Choice or whatever. Hell, I spend $10 when I go to Five Guys.

    Obviously the retention/new subscriber rate after the first six months will tell more of the story though.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I've been watching a lot of older wwe stuff like WM 4-8 years and Hogan is gold in alot of his promos. For all the shut he gets, that aspect of his work really gets overlooked. It's a different type of promo then we see, it's alot less heavy handed, but it still fucking good stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I can't imagine what a ppv with less work than Battleground would look like.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The first few Summerslams didn't have a WWE title match. The title wasn't defended at the Royal Rumble or Survivor Series, either. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a shift to that kind of philosophy on some of the minor shows. Maybe Ballteground's main event this year is something like Punk/Bryan/Big Show v. Orton/Shied, with Bryan pinning Orton to set up a title issue the next night on Raw.

    ReplyDelete
  46. The NEXT six month period would include the Royal Rumble, but would not include WrestleMania.... I guess the big three are the Rumble, WrestleMania and Summerslam, and they'll always have 1 of the 3 in each six month window. As far as keeping interest there, as long as that's always the case they won't be losing subscribers.


    And again, I suspect Maina 31 won't be a part of the package next year (at least without an additional fee).

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yeah, I remember that, but I thought she specifally said there was an Andriod device they couldn't mention yet... The company that is backing the technical end also does MLB.tv and ESPN, and they both have apps on the Apple TV. So hopefully it's just a matter of time.


    If not, I have a PS3 or an iPad that I *should* be able to mirror to my Appple TV and 42" TV, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I was worrying about that too. Maybe they could have someone pull him out from the floor, very carefully?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Well of course they'll have that Raw with the Muppets.

    ReplyDelete
  50. With half of them being black, he's starting to go into racist territory.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I agree with with what your saying, but the more I think about it, I believe there were 4 ONS PPVs altogether. The first 2 were ECW related, the next 2 were just another WWE PPV.
    And on how the Extreme Rules PPV came to be, I think that they wanted a show that had the elements ONS, but without the title One Night Stand because they just turned PG the year before. The name usually isn't affiliated with something a kid should see, so they went with the new name for that reason.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Porn-Peddling Jef VinsonJanuary 11, 2014 at 8:44 AM

    This shouldn't be a factor because if they TRULY show things uncut that alone will pull people in. I will buy if they show old MSG shows.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Surprisingly well written article from Bleacher Report. I expected it to be "Top 10 Reasons that the WWE Network Will Change Your Life and The World as We Know It Forever!!!"

    ReplyDelete
  54. They're marking out bro!

    ReplyDelete
  55. Or that would be a mark out report.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Just wait til Monday night. The cycle will begin again.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Is the wwe network not gonna be available on Apple TV?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Apple TV isn't like an iPhone where you can install apps as you want them. When you update the device, it puts apps on there for you, but you can't customize it. Examples of current apps are Hulu, Netflix, Crackle, ESPN, HBO to Go, MLB.tv, NBA.tv, Disney, YouTube, PBS, Weather Channel. Amazon Instant Video is a notable app that's missing. But there is an Amazon Instant Video app for the iPhone/iPad, and there's a way to mirror video on the iPad or iPhone to the AppleTV.


    So, will the Network be on Apple TV. Absolutely I will be able to set something up to play on my iPad, then mirror it to the Apple TV. But will their be a WWE Network app on my Apple TV at launch? That is unclear.... it wasn't announced as a supported device, but I don't think they're were WWE-branded Apple TVs under each reporter's seat at that conference because Vince wanted to give away a bunch of them.

    ReplyDelete
  59. If they shut down the network, everything will be gone. But my DVDs or Blu Rays will still stand on my shelf. So...

    ReplyDelete
  60. Streaming will cut into DVD sales as it has already done to cd's but I still want to own a copy of my favorite bands Album and my favorite movies books and wrestling matches. There is something about having my own copy of stuff that feels right. Also the network will only stream stuff at certain times I'm sure. Something found one month may not be found the next and with DVDs if I want to watch an obscure match from the early 90's at 2am I can do that.

    ReplyDelete
  61. He's not taking a Paul London bump sure, but you can easily eliminate him in a slow careful fashion much in the same way you eliminate big guys.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Me, I'm a special features geek is why DVD/Blu-Ray is still the way to go for me. Hell, tons of DVDs that have special features the Blu-Rays of those same movies don't have and WWE always does a brilliant job with their documentaries so not throwing mine away anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  63. If you have a DVD recorder, just connect it to whatever device you plan on using to watch the network and record the hell out of everything. That way, if the network ever shuts down you will still have a ton of new content and cool rarities to watch. If I'm not mistaken, Scott claimed he did this when he had Classics On Demand and I currently do it with the Epix channels.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Worst case scenario: If cable continues to dwindle, that just means we're going to get a lot more over-the-air digital subchannels to replace those departed cable channels.
    That movement has been in place for quite some time, thanks to the success of This TV and Me TV and now it seems like we're getting a new one every month and the cool thing is these subchannels truly have variety and different programming unlike cable's so-called "variety" channels that all seem to have the exact same programming.
    The rise of digital subchannels is the one elephant in the room that so far has not been acknowledged yet but that will be just as important of a factor as streaming in the decline of cable because it's over-the-air, it's free and just like cable but unlike streaming, it's ad-supported and so far they've spent very little on programming (but I have a feeling that will change over time) so it's pretty much all profit.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment