Cox Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 I find it amazing that PPV is finding a way to gouge people for ordering these shows in HD. HD is the standard now, not SD. They should be offering HD PPV for $45 and offering SD PPV a $10 discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 I find it amazing that PPV is finding a way to gouge people for ordering these shows in HD. HD is the standard now, not SD. They should be offering HD PPV for $45 and offering SD PPV a $10 discount. You'd be amazed how many people still don't know the difference (or don't care), especially those people who stretched SD screens. Still a lot of them out there. Similar reasons why DVDs are still out-selling Blu-rays. I'm not as surprised. At the end of the day, there's likely a lot of people who buy the SD version and feel it's good enough. At this point, I think the only way HD will completely overtake SD is when digital downloading for everything (TV shows, movies, PPVs) completely overtakes conventional TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 i still have an SD TV with a non-flat screen and unless i suddenly just got a ton of money or something an HDTV isn't on my to buy list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidebottom Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 I order my PPV's in HD, simply because I enjoy watching the events in the best possible quality. I spent a lot of money on my system, and I like to get the most out of it. That said, I only order events I know I'm going to enjoy. This year I've only ordered Rumble, Mania and Summerslam and thought they were all excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 From this week's Observer - However, we've been told the bigger direction was to put Dusty & Goldust & Cody Rhodes against The Shield, probably with jobs at stake for Goldust & Cody, which would eliminate the U.S. and WWE tag titles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyonthewall2983 Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 i still have an SD TV with a non-flat screen and unless i suddenly just got a ton of money or something an HDTV isn't on my to buy list You can get the smaller models at reasonably sound prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 I've said for years that they should drop the tag titles. No point in having them if they're at the bottom of the card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 I don't get it. How does facing the Rhodes eliminate two titles??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 He is talking about two other matches (Usos or PTP vs. Shield and Ambrose vs Ziggler) for the PPV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 Well ok then. That is a better use of the Shield anyways. Not too keen on Dusty in there though. He should have a proxy... like Elijah Burke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted September 19, 2013 Report Share Posted September 19, 2013 Well they should get rid of the tag titles. Either that or do something with them again. Either a strong tag division with at least eight named tag teams that almost only wrestle in tag matches, or just have top guys hold it and do tag title matches as TV main events with the singles titles (WWE and World, anyway) reserved for PPV only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackwebb Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Hmm. So, would a refund have been in order if HHH had held up the title right after the match instead of the next night? Really find it hard to believe that anyone would think they were entitled to their money back for this reason, and even harder to believe that a cable company has indulged them. I wonder if this is partly because of how much harder cable companies need to work to hold customers now. Customers are definitely negotiating from a position of power these days thanks to people dropping and just going with Hulu or Netflix. I've managed to talk my bill down to 10 a month. Get around 150 channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nell Santucci Posted September 20, 2013 Report Share Posted September 20, 2013 Caldwell's Analysis: You could look several factors to explain the drop-off in PPV buys this year. Some main ones include the effect of three-hour Raws, the cost of PPVs, Daniel Bryan being presented like he won a contest to get a WWE Title shot versus John Cena, the McMahons running down Bryan as not being worthy of the title shot even before Triple H's heel turn, and other factors that made it seem like this wasn't Huge Babyface Star vs. Huge Babyface Star clashing to see who the best is Caldwell is a typical Torch "journalist" who plays off of smark dissatisfaction with the intent of making himself look intellectual. The most probable hypothesis is Lesnar no longer bumps numbers in significant ways like he did in 2012 after the HHH feud which didn't so much hurt Lesnar as a draw as much as it made WWE's presentation seem dishonest to any casual viewer. Had the buys for this year been significantly down from 2011, which featured no significant nostalgia acts, then Caldwell's analysis would make sense. Also, history shows that the lack of heat in a drawing position rarely does strong numbers, so the prospect of Bryan as a draw is indeterminable at the moment since had Cena and Bryan been booked with hatred, the numbers might have been a bit stronger than 2011's even though even at most optimized booking, it's unlikely 2012's could have been beaten because Lesnar is a star while Bryan may never be a huge star no matter how he is booked. Anyway, the Torch is a joke. Journalism in wrestling may never recover the day Meltzer retires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stiva Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 So, am I going crazy or is Miz really nailing the babyface fire right now? I enjoy this infinitely more than whatever his last year has been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerva Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 It doesn't matter how Miz gets, he is so far so behind the 8 ball that it would take a ton to catch up By the way, why the fuck is RVD working the main event after getting the crapped beat on him for about 20 minutes? I know selling is never his thing but gimme a break Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.Q. Murder Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 I fucking love that Goldust came out of the crowd in full face paint and street clothes, some good pro wrestling right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 i have NO idea what the point of that shield vs. 11 faces match was but it totally fucking ruled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 Ok I missed Raw for various reasons tonight, including new fall TV. This is one time that by reading the results alone I have no idea what they were going for in the main event. I'll catch it tomorrow, but in the mean time, yeah, someone explain to me what the mindset behind that is? Is Trips trying to put one over on people? Is he afraid of the face roster? Was he trying to tire them out? Was he punishing the Shield for losing to Bryan too much? Is he trying too hard to come off as the "Cool boss." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmare007 Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 i have NO idea what the point of that shield vs. 11 faces match was but it totally fucking ruled My exacts feelings. It made no sense but it was fun as fuck to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exposer Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 Ok I missed Raw for various reasons tonight, including new fall TV. This is one time that by reading the results alone I have no idea what they were going for in the main event. I'll catch it tomorrow, but in the mean time, yeah, someone explain to me what the mindset behind that is? Is Trips trying to put one over on people? Is he afraid of the face roster? Was he trying to tire them out? Was he punishing the Shield for losing to Bryan too much? Is he trying too hard to come off as the "Cool boss." I can't explain the thought process of that match booking but Roman Reigns was the best guy in the match and he's well worth the time checking it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 Hunter and Stephanie think they're babyfaces. That's the key to all this. None of this is for the sake of being evil, they genuinely feel that their heelish behavior is for the greater good of the company and the fans' enjoyment. Speaking of Stephanie, it took her the better part of 15 years, but like her husband, she's doing amazing work right now, and is arguably outdoing him. In the past she was effective plenty of times, but never actually good aside from MAYBE the early marriage stuff in 2000. Her delivery is fantastic doing the phony gladhanding "fan friendly" executive shtick and I'm actively looking forward to everything she does now. Heyman doing his thing is fantastic, don't get me wrong, but Stephanie is a really strong contender for best non-wrestler performer this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 Yeah I mentioned that last week. She has vastly improved. Maybe being a mother and 37 years old she is less self conscious than she was in her 20s and is just going out there without a care. Or it just took her a long time to get better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCampbell Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 Ok I missed Raw for various reasons tonight, including new fall TV. This is one time that by reading the results alone I have no idea what they were going for in the main event. I'll catch it tomorrow, but in the mean time, yeah, someone explain to me what the mindset behind that is? Is Trips trying to put one over on people? Is he afraid of the face roster? Was he trying to tire them out? Was he punishing the Shield for losing to Bryan too much? Is he trying too hard to come off as the "Cool boss." I can't explain the thought process of that match booking but Roman Reigns was the best guy in the match and he's well worth the time checking it out. I can't beleive his first loss was wasted on the fucking Usos. Unless this leads to a serious tag title program between them and Reigns/Rollins, and when was the last time the tag titles were really involved in a serious program? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantherwagner Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 Hunter and Stephanie think they're babyfaces. That's the key to all this. None of this is for the sake of being evil, they genuinely feel that their heelish behavior is for the greater good of the company and the fans' enjoyment. Speaking of Stephanie, it took her the better part of 15 years, but like her husband, she's doing amazing work right now, and is arguably outdoing him. In the past she was effective plenty of times, but never actually good aside from MAYBE the early marriage stuff in 2000. Her delivery is fantastic doing the phony gladhanding "fan friendly" executive shtick and I'm actively looking forward to everything she does now. Heyman doing his thing is fantastic, don't get me wrong, but Stephanie is a really strong contender for best non-wrestler performer this year. Really? I could be in a minority here but I think that Stephanie is a terrible actress, even in the realm of the generally terrible pro-wrestling acting. Hunter is great in this role though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 24, 2013 Report Share Posted September 24, 2013 I thought she was great in the Dusty segment last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts