"Barrios said that if WWE Network produces one million subscribers by the end of 2014, it would yield a 12-month average of 650,000 subscribers for the year. The rate of adoption translates to a 2014 net loss ranging from $45 to $52 million."
And that's if they hit 1 million by the end of the year. If they stay close to where they are now, they could lose like $75 million this year.
In other words, Dana White was right: http://msn.foxsports.com/ufc/story/wwe-network-devalues-product-ufc-will-not-follow-suit-012714
Yeah, that conference call was a bit of a fail, to say the least. Sure, we're disappointed in the number we got, but if we miraculously get another 2 million subscribers, we'll be making record amounts of money! Isn't that what got them into trouble in the first place?
Also, the wrestlers have to feel good knowing that their pay can always be cut back further to prop up the Network.
What was the point of that conference call? They somehow made me think things are even worse than I thought.
ReplyDeleteSomething for the stock/math whizzes: if the stock sinks to a 7.10 (their all time low from 2002), how much more would that cost Vince?
ReplyDeleteAlmost 40 million shares X $4 drop per share = $160 million, roughly.
ReplyDeleteGiving you more material?
ReplyDelete;)
So, realistically since I am horrible at the maths and can't predict this shit to save my life, does this mean you think in 6 months or a year they close the Network down and try to get PPV up again? I know they say you can't stuff that genie back in the bottle, but on the other side, why bother maintaining the Network when it's just a big money pit for them.
ReplyDeleteFigures one of the coolest things we get as a wrestling fan turns out to be a disaster for everyone else.
WSJ said that 3-4 MILLION is the range they really should be looking at for the network to.be a self sustaining money maker.
ReplyDeleteHoly fuck
I think they will see it through for a while, at least until it is up internationally. If it rolls out to the rest of the world and the numbers are still bad, then they may reevaulate.
ReplyDeleteWith WWE's luck, they will bail and a year later this type of product will become huge.
Again, this means nothing until you actually look at what the "losses" actually are coming from.
ReplyDeleteLet's talk cost allocation for a minute. The last thread we had here had the WSJ talking about how WWE Network fixed costs were higher than expected. What fixed costs are we talking about here? Most network costs are inherently variable in nature. Are some of the fixed costs previously allocated to other WWE products/services and not inherently network related (but now partially or fully allocated to the network either correctly or not)? I mean, that's almost certainly true but HOW MUCH of the fixed costs are costs like these. How many of these "fixed costs" are things like rights fees that are paid continuously for as long as the network exists or "fixed costs" as in one time infrastructure updates that aren't recurring.
This is my biggest problem not just with wrestling sites trying to wade through the numbers but even supposed "hard financial news" sites like WSJ.
Until someone can actually break down what these "fixed costs" are and where they're coming from and talk about an an accurate rate of recurrence it's just people flinging shit at the wall trying to be heard. Nobody outside of WWE actually KNOWS anything because nobody has the numbers.
Have they taken into account how many people won't renew their subscription after 6 months? I'm probably going to be one of them. I tried it out. It's nice. But I don't use it enough to justify subscribing. The original shows are stupid (and can be had by way of torrents if I really want them), the only PPVs I watch anymore are Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania (which can be illegally streamed), and the archive just isn't doing it for me. And this is coming from a mark that posts on the BOD as "Johnny Polo". Imagine how many "common" fans won't be renewing if the likes of me aren't.
ReplyDeleteThis has been the most confusing part to me. I can't fully understand if renewals counts towards that total subscriptions... or is it just brand new, unique customers? And if so, do they have to perpetually renew to keep it there? Seems like it has to be one or the other.
ReplyDeleteEndless Alberto Del Rio documentaries to the rescue then!
ReplyDeleteWith WWE's luck they'll double the price, lose half their subscribers, and end up in the same place.
ReplyDeleteThey have to tread lightly there for sure. I think they will probably bump to 11.95 or so heading into Mania next year. No way they can do it before, even though it is still a good deal.
ReplyDeleteRenewals would have to count, I would think. As long as they're paying, it counts.
ReplyDeleteNow, once they stop renewing, then they're no longer part of the subscriber base.
Yeah, I like it, the execution was great, but I'm not going to renew it.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, I would think the same... but I have seen people say it is unique customer subscriptions, which makes no sense. But if renewals count, I think one million seems a lot more attainable than it is being made out to be. You just need half of current subscribers to renew in August to meet that million.
ReplyDeleteDoes that figure include the losses in PPV revenue?
ReplyDeleteAlso, Dana White needs to shut the fuck up, if anyone has devalued his product it's him, thanks to over-saturation and that terrible Fox TV deal. He's also running into the same problem Vince did when he bought WCW. Pride and WEC were once great alternatives to UFC, Bellator is basically TNA.
Jesus Vince, just get the Milluon Dollar man on the phone to cover the losses
ReplyDeleteYeah, I am not a big MMA guy but as a casual novice fan and someone that would attend random cards at sports bars, it seems like buzz is way down month to month.
ReplyDeleteThey made 82.5 Million in PPV revenue in 2013. How could they lose $75 million this year on that figure?
ReplyDeleteThat would mean NOBODY buys a PPV in the entire world aside from the already reported near 400K who bought Mania in the U.S. alone.
Obviously the network costs a pretty penny to launch and maintain but no way they lose that much in year one.
Same here, not because of anything they've done on their part, but just because I don't watch much wrestling these days.
ReplyDeleteI'd really like to try to rewatch basically the Hogan heel turn up to the Smackdown Six in order but all of those different shows being available is going to take long enough that either a) I'll just wait until they're all up in a year or two or b) it will fold before any of that stuff is available anyway.
Either way, even though the price is incredible for what's offered, I'm just at an age now or whatever where talking wrestling with you guys is way more fun than actually watching any of it.
The gist of what i got was that they are not in trouble but that it seems like they are not going to have any massive growth at all and the network, if they haven't released the new numbers yet, it means they are not good because if they were, it would have been mentioned in an attempt to pacify the stockholders
ReplyDeleteDude, those promotions have been dead for YEARS. The UFC has certainly cooled down in America, absolutely, but the expansions they've made into other countries has been great - other than all the famous ***** match filled tournaments, has WWE had any real success in Brazil, as an example?
ReplyDeleteThings aren't going perfectly for the UFC and they won't go perfectly for the WWE either. When wrestling fans get upset at Dana White, I never understand it. I mean, I DO, but it's so ridiculous.
I was making that point Friday night. If you don't like the current product, them you are not going to keep the network to watch archives.
ReplyDeleteI think they mean consistently. Maybe they don't, but I'd be shocked if that were say. Just doesn't sound right.
ReplyDeleteWhy? Dana is a jackass. He acts like wrestling is an embarrassment compared to the UFC, but hell, the most popular guy he ever had was Brock Lesner, a wrestler!
ReplyDeleteGood point, they can't really come out and say "We have 690,000 subscribers!" without revealing that they've only gotten 30,000 people or whatever to sign up since Mania.
ReplyDeleteI just don't understand some of his decisions. Why is a typical UFC card 6+ hours?
ReplyDeleteWho the hell wants to be at an arena for close to 7 hours? 12-14 fights per card that just go on and on.
With 8 weight divisions, 9 when you count the women there's really no reason why the roster isn't just the champs, the top 10 contenders in each division and about 10-20 extra spots for past their prime "names" and or guys who are working their way back up after switching weight divisions.
Instead Dana has an extra 200 guys on top of that and actually pushes these tomato cans as a big deal.
It kind of is, one is real and one is fake. Vince should LOVE being compared to them, Dana should not like being compared to Vince.
ReplyDeleteBrock Lesnar's a real wrestler, btw.
I would think between Dibiase, JBL, Del Rio, and the group that Bischoff put together to buy WCW that they could come up with enough cash
ReplyDeleteFusient Media Ventures' ultra long game is FINALLY about to pay off!
ReplyDeleteI won't be renewing either. WrestleMania was the only reason I bought the network in the first place. They need to convince me to stick around for another six months and they haven't done that.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, they announced that they'll be releasing those subscription numbers on a quarterly basis as part of their regular quarterly report.
ReplyDeleteReleasing them early does no one any good...unless they did hit the million mark and then yeah they'd release them early.
I'm pretty sure their "1 million" means 1 million subscriptions active at the same time, as they are focused on getting a yearly average of 1 million active subscriptions per month.
ReplyDeleteGranted, this is the company that tried to claim higher total viewers by treating hours 1 and 2 of Raw as separate shows.
Brock Lesnar was famous because of pro wrestling. People weren't watching those PPVs because he was Brock Lesnar, University of Minnesota NCAA wrestling champ.
ReplyDeleteAnd UFC and WWE are both forms of entertainment that attract the same crowd. One being real, one being fake, is irrelevant IMO. Dana put that racist dude (I forget his name) against Jonny Bones Jones, not because he deserved a shot, but because he knew people would want to see that.
I've said it before, its Network or bust for the WWE. Expect to have John Cena wrestling everyone on the roster for a chance to star in a Network Exclusive John Cena Show.
ReplyDeleteMy point is just that from Dana's perspective, the WWE should be below him. He runs a legitimate sports company, being compared to a carnival show (as much as I like it) is not what he wants to be associated with.
ReplyDeleteHe wants to be an actual sport, and be thought of with actual sports like the NBA or NFL. Vince will never have that because the business itself is not legitimate and never will be.
I'd love to see some real figures (I have no idea how they could even be attained) at how big a crossover between fake fighting and real fighting there really is. I don't imagine a lot of the Tapout shirt wearers tuning in to catch a Sandow match.
I loved how they kept talking about "transparency" and "avoiding conjecture" after spending the beginning of the call talking about how much they will make if X subscribers are reached, which is "true" even though (a) X may not be reached (and, aside from a vague 5-point plan, no explanation of how to reach X), (b) the formula (really just a projection/model, not necessarily correlating to the real world) used may be inaccurate (especially as they said how they were learning new things each day, including, for example, higher costs than projected).
ReplyDelete"I don't imagine a lot of the Tapout shirt wearers tuning in to catch a Sandow match."
ReplyDeleteNo, which is why WWE blew it when they brought Lesnar back in 2012. The buyrate proves that thousands of people tuned in to see Lesnar's return match in WWE, fake or not. Jobbing him to Cena and having clowns like Brodus Clay and Hornswoggle dancing in the ring turned off any chance they had at drawing interest from MMA fans who might continue to give WWE a try.
It's an interesting idea, like I said I have no idea how someone could even figure out what potential there is in that fanbase, it's definitely interesting to think about though.
ReplyDeleteAt this point I don't know how UFC fans keep up with UFC, let alone another 5 hours of WWE programming a week.
About 2 XFLs
ReplyDeleteThat's fair. You may be right that there isn't as much crossover as people like me say. I think my main problem is Dana can act all he wants that UFC is this legitimate enterprise, but then he does as much as any promoter (Vince included) to draw people in through non-legitimate (or WWE) reasons. He markets in the same fashion as Vince would. For instance, ripping on Jonny Bones for not putting up his title on short notice, is a "carny" move.
ReplyDeleteOne thing to keep in mind is that regarding technology the 'up cost' is quite a lot of money - servers, programming, digitization, etc, but those are generally one-time costs save for maintenance. The Network may be losing NOW, but it'll be profitable in due time I think.
ReplyDeleteSee also: Dreamworks
Yeah, you can't bitch about being compared when you book your shit like it's wrestling. I guess I have to say something nice, so I will say that he's booking UFC better than any wrestling is booking their shows.
ReplyDeleteThat's what I'm talking about. These are actual fixed costs we know of but are non-recurring and are one time.
ReplyDeleteAlso how many of the costs allocated to the network (various WWE overhead costs, various electronics and talent costs) are not technically network related and were previously allocated to other departments but have been budgeted to the network because that's how accounting works.
Nobody knows this but everyone is running around screaming about how much the network is costing and making 2015-16 projections on numbers they don't have. I'm officially frustrated with the whole topic.
That's what I've been thinking as well. As the technology becomes cheaper and easier the cost will come down. They'll take a bath for the first year but it'll become profitable in a year or two. What they have to really do is make sure that they keep the subscribers they have while adding some.
ReplyDeleteIt's about to be 10, they're starting a new women's division. Still don't understand the point of having a women's division. Are they thinking that they'll draw in a new female demographic? Hasn't really worked for Nascar (or IndyCar) with Danica, at least not in any long term sense, and it's not going to work for UFC. Any women who like MMA are already watching. And no serious fight fan is interested in seeing Rousey slaughter another tomato can.
ReplyDeleteWWE to be renamed 'John Cena'
ReplyDeleteAll his money goes to God now and Vince pissed God off by booking him to lose a match.
ReplyDeleteIf I'm understanding right, fixed costs were factored in to the 1.3-1.5 million subscriber number long-term projections.
ReplyDeleteJohn Cena does, what John Cena does, because John Cena is, John Cena.
ReplyDeleteI was told that the 1 million to break even was fictional and that WrestleMania's success proved the Network was thus going to be an enormous success.
ReplyDeleteTold by who?
ReplyDeleteI still maintain that the XFL could have worked if it was owned by ANYONE else.
ReplyDeleteWWE.
ReplyDeleteHow does that make any sense? 3.5 million subscribers = $35 million dollars a month!
ReplyDeleteIf they made $82.5 million on PPV last year total then....???
I don't know how much the network costs to run and maintain both on the purely technical server side and money for extra content/Apple's cut etc etc but no way are they not throwing a parade at even 2 million subs worldwide.
And Blue Sky?
ReplyDeleteI agree, and it also depends on the era. I think 2004-2005 mat-based, blood-feud WWE might have interested a few UFC fans. But 2012 PG-era WWE didn't have a shot at getting that interest, especially when Lesnar loses his first match to a guy that represents the PG era.
ReplyDeleteJust have Cena only wrestle on the Network. That'll bring up the subs.
ReplyDeleteHe also didn't like coming out to Brodus Clay's theme.
ReplyDeleteJust going off what was in the a WSJ this weekend, they said it's fixed costs are much higher than expected. They didn't give any more details tho. Take it fwiw
ReplyDeleteYeah!
ReplyDeleteI forget. The guy who has a viking or something in his avatar.
ReplyDeleteI love the Network so hope they don't abandon it.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Considering how popular the NFL is now, there definitely was (is?) room for another football league.
ReplyDeleteProblem was that A) it was tied to pro wrestling, which everyone outside of wrestling fans thinks is a joke and B) McMahon presented it as an NFL alternative when the quality of play clearly wasn't on the same level.
As long as it had the stink of McMahon and his circus it was doomed to fail.
Not anymore, but CultStatus, or maybe it was Patrick is Legendary?
ReplyDeleteYeah, probably one of the best things WWE came up with.
ReplyDeleteHe can definitely shut the hell up. I'm so sick of him and I can't stand UFC as a whole.
ReplyDeleteTotally agreed as far as his booking, especially in the last few years when he hasn't had a money guy like Lesnar or Liddell to build interest around.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking maybe a way to gauge it would be buyrate bumps via Lesnar. I know he has the top 2 UFC buyrates of all time, one of them 1.6 million. Shouldn't whatever the bump he represents also represent (at least partially) the number of wrestling fans that crossed over? Sort of the same way we assume his bump at ER represented UFC fans that crossed over? That's probably waaaaaay too simplistic a measure, but if we did that I'd bet we'd find that a lot more wrestling fans were willing to watch fights than fighting fans are willing to watch wrestling.
Not Cult.
ReplyDeleteFurther with invisible wangers?
ReplyDeleteso much funny in this
ReplyDeleteThe circus was fine, if anything that's what made it work. All the rule changes, while many of them idiotic, at least made it different, like the opposite of the No Fun League. Look at the UFL, which played by the same rules as the NFL but used far inferior talent. It was bacially ignored from day one, at least there was a big buzz around the XFL at first. But having Vince involved was the kiss of death. Ask a non-wrestling fan what the first word that pops into his/her head when they hear McMahon's name and I'm sure it's either "fixed" or "fake". Maybe "steroids". The usual Vince-isms like changing rules mid-season also made them look totally Natty-league.
ReplyDeleteI have 0 idea what this meana
ReplyDeleteI was going to post something similar.
ReplyDeleteFact is, I have the Network, but have ZERO interest in the current WWE product. I haven't even watched Backlash, despite it being "free".
As for the archives, I've already watched a lot of the things I wanted to watch. I already have the "big" matches I want on DVD if I want to see them. So, outside of historical curiosity, there's not a lot more for me there. I can only rewatch Flair/Steamboat (which I have most of the matches of on DVD) or Hogan/Warrior (again, on DVD) or the early ECW shows so many times.
Plus, in all honesty, a lot of the whole shows just plain suck. I'd rather not see that... sometimes nostalgia is a great filter to see things through. Seeing a show you watched when you were a kid, and realizing that 90% of it was crappy filler matches does not instill excitement.
I've gotten my $60 worth this time (plus some). But will I get it if I re-up in September? Probably not. I'd rather spend that same money watching up and coming stars in PWG and Chikara, not seeing ones whose time has passed (or, in far too many cases, are dead). It's hard to watch Magnum TA wrestle knowing that that's the best he'll ever get to be, or Mr Perfect wrestle and know that he'll never reach the World Title, or Benoit wrestle.
I figure that, come September, the Network will lose at least 100,000 subscribers, probably closer to 200,000. How many of the 600,000 subscribers are casuals who just got caught up in the hype? How many just got it for Wrestlemania and to see a couple of Rock promos?
I'm not saying that they'll lose that many after EVERY 6-month period. But this first one? Absolutely. WWE is a great hype machine. For this, though, I think it'll bite them in the butt.
Hopefully WWE has planned for this. Actually, hopefully I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.
the takeaway from all of this?
ReplyDeletewrestling in america is dying
ufc/mma is dying
the time is ripe for roller derby to make its triumphant return
If you don't have the network..buy it! They can't give up on this.
ReplyDeletefwiw
ReplyDeleteI think that they're basically committed for the full term on that. It would be an awfully hard sell to shut the network down and ask for 50/month for PPV again.
ReplyDeleteI really don't care as long as they don't take the network away
ReplyDeleteyour avatar always makes me think of cameron from ferris bueller's day off
ReplyDeleteAre you the same Peyton Drinking from twitter?
ReplyDeleteI think it's that berserker guy. He doesn't post often.
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, that's what I meant by "circus" - Vince and his association with being a wrestling carnival barker and steroid pusher.
ReplyDeleteyou'll have fun fun fun till your vinnie takes the network away
ReplyDeleteAh. Takes me a second to compute bad jokes
ReplyDeleteSame here. Between him being a total asshat and the Tapout-wearing 20-something frat boy bro douche nozzles that make up the majority of the UFC fanbase I'd almost be embarrassed to be seen watching UFC in public.
ReplyDeleteSidenote: I'm playing UFC Undisputed on my 360 right now. I'm a man of contradictions.
A wrestler in a legitimate competition, thereby legitimizing him.
ReplyDeleteassuming it was cult (which it might not have been), he always acts like he's an authority on everything, so the thought of him being essentially some random dude speaking "fact" amuses me
ReplyDeleteyessa
ReplyDeleteI think what they'll do is start charging for PPVs for subscribers on the Network. Maybe not the full $50, but I could see them charging a "discounted" rate at maybe $30.
ReplyDeleteRandom TJ: Those DirecTV ads with the life-size puppets are not only incredibly stupid, they're really fucking creepy.
ReplyDelete"The guy who has a viking or something in his avatar."
ReplyDeleteLol, well as long as it was a credible source.
exactly
ReplyDeleteI need an eccenteic billionaire to start: Homeless people shoot fighting to win a house. No way that wouldn't make tons of money
ReplyDeleteProbably roughly the same number of women will actually watch with or without a women's division. But selling to the female demo, merch, is probably easier when you have female faces to wear it or whatever.
ReplyDeleteAre you Torgo?
ReplyDeletebumfights
ReplyDeleteI listened to the conference call and I wasn't impressed. This is a company that brags about every positive number they get, so I think the lack of any specifics is a very bad sign. On a side note, it was funny to hear Vince mutter "oh shit" under his breath when everyone got disconnected from the call at the same time.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the network is going anywhere, because they won't be able to get people to pay $55 for PPVs anymore after giving them away for $10... but I do see a Network price increase to $12.95 or something like that coming for the February 2015 renewal period.
only when i've had too much to drink
ReplyDelete/notthattheresanythingwrongwiththat
The big test will be the 6 month mark, to see how many people re-up. They have a lot further to go to reach 1M if they shrink the existing 660K at the first renewal.
ReplyDeleteWonder if Vince disconnected them accidentally on purpose
ReplyDeleteThey'll lose a bunch of sub's at renewal time and the addition of international sub's will put them back up past 660k, but nowhere near 1 million.
ReplyDelete::runs to google::
ReplyDeleteWow. Never knew this before. Kinda cringe worthy
1984, monkeys went to war, forgot their guns, so they used their bums, 1984.
ReplyDeleteOnce they build up a legit division I'm fine with it whether it draws in the female demo or not, but just having one chick being that far ahead of everyone else is just a waste of everyone's time.
ReplyDeleteWe all know from the RAW Million thing that phones are not Vince's forte.
ReplyDeleteIf they can keep 600-700 domestic subscribers then I think that 1M worldwide is definitely do-able, probably even beatable.
ReplyDeleteBut my feeling is that we will see a drop, and not an increase, in domestic subscribers.
Sure, there was a huge up-front cost, but maintenance costs are going to be really high.
ReplyDeleteThey'll still be digitizing, they'll still need new/replacement hardware, they'll also need a full-time support staff.
You're also forgetting that, come September, they'll be losing a LOT of subscribers. If I were to guess, I'd say in the 100,000 to 200,000 range. That won't happen EVERY 6-month renewal, but this first one, definitely.
A lot of people were brought into this by the WWE hype machine, but how many of those will stick around when their renewal is up? How many just signed on for Wrestlemania, and will leave? How many are ACTUALLY watching the archives.
If a "hardcore" fan like me can't be bothered to re-up (as many others, based on the post below), how many casuals won't be bothered?
Heck, RAW ratings fluctuate several hundred thousand viewers each week, and people aren't paying for that.
No matter what, September is going to be a really interesting month.
Is there a demographic study out there that WWE or a hired consultant did before launching the Network? I'd love to see it to get clued in on who they thought would buy the Network. It's a dream come true for older/lifelong fans like us, but I'm guessing we're not the key current Raw/Smackdown viewing/house show attending audience.
ReplyDeleteDid WWE/a consultant think the stereotypical "13 yr old John Cena fan" was going to get a hold of their parents credit cards to spend $112 a year on Internet PPVs? The Network is awesome, but feels more geared toward adults with disposable income who remember the 80s/Attitude era. I could be horribly wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised to see the domestic level off somewhere around 500-550k.
ReplyDeleteBacklash hasn't been a PPV in a long time.
ReplyDeleteCase in point, then.
ReplyDeleteI can't even be bothered to learn the last PPV name.
How isn't this proving my point about the dullness of the current product?
That must have taken hours.
ReplyDeleteIf they had the FULL archive, like everything they own (well, I could care less about shit like AWA and WCCW, but I want EVERYTHING from WWF/E, WCW, and ECW), I would get it. That's all I want, I don't care about streaming PPVs for "free" (work Sunday night anyway) or any of their shitty original programming.
ReplyDeleteYeah, the stigma of wrestling is a tough one to overcome.
ReplyDeleteWould give Countdown a chance if you haven't. Really good show.
ReplyDeleteJust change the name from WWE to 'John Cena'. Have John Cena wrestle in every match. Change the name of RAW to 'Monday Night Cena'. And have all of HHH and Steph's future children be named John Cena Levesque regardless of gender. Then collect your fat cheques at the door.
ReplyDeleteIf you get 500,000 subscriptions yourself, WWE will be fine.
ReplyDeleteThe way they're talking about subscription numbers confuses me. I can't tell whether or not their goal is 1 million total, unique sign ups or 1 million active subscribers at any given time. I can't see them getting a million active, once the renewals are up I have a feeling their active subscriber number will drop.
ReplyDeleteThe on demand catalog is awesome and epic, but the current product is so stale that it's going to scare non-marks away. I look at my subscription as $10 a month for the entire home video archives, couldn't care less about the current content. If they raise the price, I'm out.
Is that the Raw pre-show or whatever? I have no interest in Raw.
ReplyDeleteOK that makes sense now. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteDon't agree. The NFL has become a 365 days a year league, an alternative isn't really needed.
ReplyDeleteNo, its a countdown show where they take a topic and do a top 10 with highlights and talking head interviews.
ReplyDeleteUFC and Call of Duty: A LOT of Darwin Award candidates there. And ones that would not be badly missed.
ReplyDeleteWell, they need 1.3-1.5 million to break even so I'm not sure where this million number is coming from.
ReplyDeleteNo, it's literally a countdown. Best ladder matches of all time! (Number one is TLC2, no way you could've guesses that)
ReplyDeleteOr craziest gimmicks, best villians, best tag teams. It's basically a part of the Network I like to call "The 411 Main Page"
I think that the PPVs are the sell, really, and if they can get some original programming to catch on.
ReplyDeleteThe market to watch the archives is pretty small, I would imagine, and will only shrink as the hardcore fans watch all of it that interests them, or get frustrated that the specific niche programming they are looking for isn't up yet.
People will buy the network once, or so, for the archives, but no one is keeping it for years based on that.
Ditto. And I wouldn't require 100%, but more than they have now.
ReplyDeleteThe NFL would've CRUSHED the XFL, by basically threatening any network that even thought of showing it with either a) keeping NFL content off of them, or b) offering them actual NFL-related content in exchange for not showing the XFL.
ReplyDeleteThe McMahon circus made it a curious look at first, but NBC dropped them like a sack of jobbers once the NFL package was available.
Oh yeah, he's the LAST person on earth that should be promoting a legit sport. And how do we know that the games weren't fixed? Of course, you could say that about a lot of NFL games, and we know that NBA and MLB games have been rigged in the past.
ReplyDeleteI fixed the number. Regardless, my point is the same.
ReplyDeleteI don't get where they expect the millions of subscribers they need to come from. If you didn't get the Network when it launched and included Mania, you ain't gonna subscribe now. The numbers will surely only remain constant if not drop off when subscriptions end.
ReplyDeletePlus with the international launch, all the die hards have already found means of getting it which will affect those figures on a big way.
They've put all their eggs in this basket and I can't see it paying off.
Nah, it definitely wasn't Cult. All I can remember is that he has a picture of some viking-looking dude as his avatar.
ReplyDeleteThat's what I thought. Some people are really into defending WWE, though.
ReplyDeleteProvides a nice alternative to the people that love shitting on WWE.
ReplyDeleteThe only way the domestic subscriber # will go up and not down is if they moved RAW to the network exclusively. And that will never happen.
ReplyDeleteROLLERGAMES! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MP6xT_ThxdI
ReplyDeleteThere's enough networks to go around. You're totally right about NBC, but as long it was profitable someone would have picked it up. It would have been perfect for either Spike or MTV (both owned by Viacom, I believe), and with WCW basically (totally? When did the XFL play, 2001?) dead Turner may have been an option.
ReplyDeleteOK, that does sound pretty cool. Not really original programming though, I was referring to all the shitty reality TV shows and what not. And TLC2 might be the most overrated match ever.
ReplyDeleteA lot of the lower networks are owned by the higher networks... and I wouldn't put it past the NFL to tell NBC (example) that if ANY of their networks carried the XFL, they could forget about getting any NFL games.
ReplyDeleteDrawbacks to the semi/sorta oligopoly that TV (and most media, for that matter) has become.
UFC isn't dying it's just giving up it's spot as the hot thing of the moment.
ReplyDeleteBefore that it was extreme sports, and before that wrestling, and before that golf. Probably others too, but those were the big sport fads that really stand out to me over the past couple of decades.
In order for them to compete, the XFL would have to be first and foremost NOT a direct competitor to the NFL. The AFL exists (so far) b/c no one would compare them to the NFL, and people who watch are only reminded how much they prefer the NFL.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Vince's name being attached to it killed it dead moreso than lack of interest afterwards.
Well, that's my point. The NFL wasn't quite 365 in 2001 in the pre-social media era, so if an alternate league was going to spring up that was really the last opportunity one could've happened on that level.
ReplyDeleteAnd nobody "needs" another football league, but with 500 sports channels on cable and internet TV -- some of which showing car auctions and Division III sports -- there certainly room for a minor league if someone other than McMahon wanted to present one.
Right now they have the PPVs from those 3 companies and just added all the Clashes, right? Give me every Nitro, every Hardcore TV/ECW on TNN, and all the ECW home video releases from before they got on PPV and I'm in.
ReplyDeleteThe NFL was slightly interested in making the AFL a "feeder" league for a short while, when they got onto NBC back around 2004-05... there was a fair bit of cross-ownership (Benson owning both the Saints and the Voodoo being my best memory) then.
ReplyDeleteBut they always fail. I don't see why anyone would want to try at this point.
ReplyDeleteIt's time for XTREME GOLF!
ReplyDeleteMy point entirely. You think NBC would piss off the NFL by showing "Crappy Football League" on OLN at 3AM?
ReplyDeleteYeah, but they were looked at as little more than the minor leagues, and the AFL is smart enough to not try to be more.
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way. If you didn't get it when it launched, why would you decide to get it over the summer? But I guess circumstances change as well.
ReplyDeleteExactly. And unless the AFL suddenly decided to drop the "Arena" part, they would NEVER be a true "competitor" to the NFL.
ReplyDeleteI'd love for them to put the Hulu version up later in the week, but again, I'm sure that won't be happening anytime soon either.
ReplyDeleteMy brother plays CoD obsessively, and he's a pretty sharp guy. Fuck it man, keeps him out of trouble. There's like a dozen of those games, and God knows how many Halos and knockoffs of those 2 series, and they all look identical to me.
ReplyDeleteQuite cringe-worthy.
ReplyDeleteMe neither. But there's a decent-size market for unaffiliated minor league baseball out there, and football is more popular at the current moment. There's a way to do it right somehow, I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteAll I know is that McMahon wasn't the guy to do it.
I would support your last line.
ReplyDeleteI think the only thing they can hope for is old fans suddenly finding the network, and signing up to watch old content. That, and obviously increase their current Raw and Smackdown viewership.
ReplyDelete... Not all the UFC/CoD crowd needs to be visited by the Reaper in the near future. Just a majority of them.
ReplyDelete;)
so you're saying that you really dislike their cords?
ReplyDeleteFootball's a different enough beast that the only real "minor league" I could see making it would be a regional one. Or "ones", depending on how many teams could be supported.
ReplyDeleteFor me, I'd keep the Network in September, even if I didn't watch it that much, because I know I'm going to want to see Royal Rumble. For about the same price as waiting to pay for it in January, I can get that AND all the other PPVS and access to old content; I wonder how many subscribers would be in the same boat come September.
ReplyDeleteAs has been said before, if people didn't sign up immediately, or for WM, why now? I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just not sure what number they will finally settle on.
ReplyDeleteI am.
ReplyDeleteI think you misread my post.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget Nascar. It's certainly not dying or anything, but way below the popularity it had 10 or even 5 years ago. Though that's more to bad economic conditions than anything else. And as someone who used to ride BMX street/vert, we knew that bubble was about to burst.
ReplyDeleteThat would not be the worst selling point. But anyone with intelligence might let the sub slip come September, renew in December, and get the whole Road To Wrestlemania.
ReplyDeleteTo hell with the summer/fall stuff.
Yeah but again, he was a draw because of pro wrestling.
ReplyDeleteNo, they're creepy ass faces and dialog. And fuck DirecTV, when fucking TIME WARNER is a better option, that's a problem.
ReplyDeleteThe add-ons will be people who couldn't sign up before now. Remember, the Network is "U.S. only" at present, and won't hit other countries in a "legitimate" manner until the end of this year/beginning of 2015.
ReplyDeleteI would assume there was a lot more crossover in the attitude heyday, but nowadays everything WWE does seems to be with little kids in minds, so there probably isn't as much.
ReplyDeleteSo basically the WWE has done a pretty poor job if expanding their fanbase the last decade and has hidden that fact up by diversifying their revenue stream to keep making money.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes time that they need to really have a large core fan base to help push this network off the ground, they realize they fucked up growing that
Yeah, I'm not going to say I'm the guy who knows how to make it work. But I think it would've been possible, as long as McMahon is kept out of the mix.
ReplyDeleteFWIW, they've got a subscriber in me once it comes to Canada, assuming a very similar price point.
ReplyDeleteSix months though, and maybe a year, is probably about it unless they hook me with something amazing.
I'd be lying if I said a small part of me sort of hopes wwe gets brought to it's knees, simply so the monopoly get's broken and the wrestling business gets rebuilt from the ground up with more than 1 company running the roost. I think the barrier to entry is so high right now that there's no way in without wwe self-destructing.
ReplyDeleteBut does an increase in their Raw and Smackdown viewership really help them all too much? It isn't like those people will start shelling out $50/month for the PPVs.
ReplyDeleteBut the closer that you get to $15/month, the less likely that is to be true.
ReplyDeleteI would prepare yourself to pay higher, and get less content than the yanks are getting, when it launches north of the border.
ReplyDeleteOh, some of the guys he plays with online don't necessarily need to be killed, but at least sterilized. And for some reason a lot of those guys are REALLY racist. One time someone called him a "cocksucking sipc". If you're going to toss around racial slurs at least be accurate. We're not Hispanic, we're micks.
ReplyDeleteWe need to factor in laziness/forgetfulness as well. There will be a great deal of subscribers that let it roll over since you don't have to actively reactivate.
ReplyDeleteThere are people that sign up for stuff and just keep letting it roll month over month, sign up over sign up.
I expect a higher price point, and 12.99 I would probably do, but over that is really pushing it.
ReplyDeleteI look at how Netflix Canada is a pale shadow of the American version as a window into what to expect with the wwe network. I'd agree that 12.99 is about as high as I'd be willing to go as well.
ReplyDeleteOh God, those ads. Creepy indeed.
ReplyDeleteAll we would see is history slowly repeat itself.
ReplyDelete"All of this has happened before, and will happen again"
ReplyDeleteIt will be interesting to see how the distribution rights work, I don't follow that type of thing much. Hopefully they can give us everything.
ReplyDeletecome on now really? that is comedy gold. You crazy Marv.
ReplyDeleteCertainly hoping so.
ReplyDeleteI'm not talking about competing, hell, MLB can't compete with the NFL, and they were around something like 50 years before the NFL. I'm just talking about being sustainable, and giving people their fix until the real football starts.
ReplyDeleteAre you Dish or AT&T?
ReplyDeleteThats just the root of the WWE problem. They are tremendous at the short term but no one has long term vision. To be fair, some long term visions would be hard to follow through on due to the fickle nature of the business, but there is absolutely no excuse for stuff like the InVasion and Trips' 02 title run. People rag on creative and Vince for stupidity, but everyone in the company should've known they'd fail there.
ReplyDeleteIf WWE had long term vision they'd give the book to JR, although maybe he didn't necessarily want it. JR is one of those old guys who is not completely tunnel visioned into a 1980s mindset, which is what you want. JR clearly had some long term vision even in his corporately castrated Ross Reports, and he was present for some of the most disastrous periods in wrestling history, so he'd know what to avoid doign at the very minimum.
And now due to 13 years of shit (maybe more, really, cause the Kliq's effect on the business still resonates now), they've had the Network blow up in their face in spectacular fashion.
NASCAR was popular?
ReplyDeleteNot sure I buy that 100K to 200K will be leaving. That's basically saying a third of the current base aren't happy with what they're getting, and I'm not sure I buy that. This service is basically exactly what they advertised it to be. Is every minute of content up? No, but I don't think enough is missing for people to say it isn't worth it.
ReplyDeleteTime Warner. Dish Network sucks, and we can't get AT&T here (they're about to buy DirecTV, BTW), just Verizon Fios. I went with Time Warner because they have better internet.
ReplyDeleteCM PUNK! CM PUNK! CM PUNK! CM PUNK!
ReplyDeleteCould be Patrick is Legendary, he has a Viking helmet.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of... somebody needs to steal this for their entrance music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrWm3hNiR5Q
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to fault them with their track record in profitability the last 10 years. When you're publicly traded, you need to answer to investors TODAY, the "well take a step back today to optimize our success in the future" approach doesn't work.
ReplyDeleteSure they could have run netter creative storylines and hooked more fans on the product, but they've been pretty successful in their approach the past decade
So do we have an accurate number for subs at this point? That 667000ish number people have been using was released like a month or two ago, so maybe its like 8-900000 now?
ReplyDeleteI'm with TWC as well.
ReplyDelete