shoe Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 Well they need someone. I'd rather have them who do have a better chance of getting hired than their pat hand. They're not going to hire someone they're not familiar with. I liked Mookies, Loss, and your ideas on fixing the network. I know you were kidding, but they aren't going to hire you guys or guys like you. Right now the group they have aren't cutting it. I'd rather have guys who might be passionate about what concepts they're pitching who do have a wrestling background than some media guy from NFL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 I watched the first Rivalries too - very familiar stuff as Shoe noted. I'm curious about how they'll handle part 2, covering Austin's comeback from late 2000 onward. The burial in June '02 was pretty brutal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 I completely disagree with your wish list. They need less carny fucks. I don't disagree with this. Where are they going to find these guys. Most importantly how are these guys going to get on the WWE network radar. The pat hand is wrong, my suggestion is realistic but flawed, option 3 "unknown wrestling/media experts who aren't on the radar."Option 4 our mystery saviors. 5. Who knows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted October 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 I like the idea of mystery savior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 Who is this superhero? Â Â Â Â Sarge? Â Â No! Â Â Â Â Â Rosa Mendes the never winning telephone operator? Â Â No! Â Â Â Â Â Big E? Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantherwagner Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 Â Â Â Big E? Â Â Â The hoover hand. So close yet so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Â I completely disagree with your wish list. They need less carny fucks. Â Yes, that's a list of carny fucks that would do what they think Vince wants, which, actually, is the problem. Tony is the only one that has moved on with his life. Â The problem is not the lack of knowledgeable people in the company. Again, I redirect people to the WWE classics section of the website as proof that they already have the smart people there. The website is great. Look at the playlists. There's a Stan Hansen playlist, a "rare ladder matches" list that actually features rare ladder matches, Best of Muta and Sting together, a freaking Savio Vega playlist. Stuff from all eras to appease nerds like us. Cool features like "where are they now" (these would translate well to mini-original content features), the program with the archivist... Â Basically the wrestling geeks are working on the website, not the network, AND the network has more oversight (meaning Vince vets all the new content). That's why there's such a disparity. Â Having said that, there's clearly been a decline in the quantity of cool shit on WWE.com since the the budget cuts got going. Which I guess is to be expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jushin muta liger Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Â Â Â Â I completely disagree with your wish list. They need less carny fucks. Yes, that's a list of carny fucks that would do what they think Vince wants, which, actually, is the problem. Tony is the only one that has moved on with his life. Â The problem is not the lack of knowledgeable people in the company. Again, I redirect people to the WWE classics section of the website as proof that they already have the smart people there. The website is great. Look at the playlists. There's a Stan Hansen playlist, a "rare ladder matches" list that actually features rare ladder matches, Best of Muta and Sting together, a freaking Savio Vega playlist. Stuff from all eras to appease nerds like us. Cool features like "where are they now" (these would translate well to mini-original content features), the program with the archivist... Basically the wrestling geeks are working on the website, not the network, AND the network has more oversight (meaning Vince vets all the new content). That's why there's such a disparity. Â Having said that, there's clearly been a decline in the quantity of cool shit on WWE.com since the the budget cuts got going. Which I guess is to be expected. Doesn't Joey Styles run WWE.com and is a producer on the Network? I remember him posting a picture on Twitter beta testing the Network. Â I'm guessing everybody in the production department is stretched thin with budget cuts and jumping from project to project and having so many first run shows to produce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilTLL Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I just don't know how we all didn't call this from day one (maybe a lot of us did, but I was foolishly optimistic). It's a WWE project with huge, nigh-unlimited potential. Of course it's going to be mismanaged and underfunded as all hell. Â I would seriously contemplate paying the double-dip if they hadn't cancelled COD. I know it wasn't a very big selection, had the limitations of cable VOD, and didn't show much that was rare in the scheme of things, but it was done with way more TLC than the archives on WWEN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantherwagner Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I just don't know how we all didn't call this from day one (maybe a lot of us did, but I was foolishly optimistic). It's a WWE project with huge, nigh-unlimited potential. Of course it's going to be mismanaged and underfunded as all hell. Â I had come back from a 5 year hiatus as a fan (I'd watch maybe 15 or 20 hours of wrestling a year) and I was optimistic (perhaps also foolishly) because I knew 24/7 had shown a decent variety of footage. They would constantly show new ECW, Primetime, TNT, NWA TV, MACW, MSG shows and other stuff I'm surely forgetting. Mixed in with old PPV's, SNME/COTC, 80s and early 90s Coliseum Tapes and from time to time some Stampede or CWF or World Class. We even got some cool shit like Race vs Graham in a WWWF vs NWA match, Zbyszko vs Bruno in a cage (with Michael Cole and Foley commentating). Â I imagined that formula + a bigger focus on current programming and original series was a winner that would make everybody happy: old fans, new fans, attitude era fans... but I guess not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoos Leg Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 I have a Roku 2 and none of the on demand streams currently working for me. Anyone else having issues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoos Leg Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Not working on the laptop either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 A lot of it comes down to managing expectations. They told us early on that the full home video library would be there and it still isn't and they've never explained why. They told us early on there would be the social component and links to merchandise of the people you're watching and that's not there either. Still no explanation. In charging $9.99 a month, instead of giving us greater value for our dollar, they have opted to just make the monthly PPVs mean less. If they had promoted the Network better and more clearly, it would be a different tone. Instead, we'd be impressed that they added the RAWs, Clashes and SNMEs while wondering what was yet to come. But they left too much of the hype to our imaginations instead of being specific, and fans of WWE clearly thought "bigger" than WWE did. Â I still think they'll get it right eventually. But it's going to take a long time, and it will only get worse before it gets better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexstar Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Still think they need to, for lack of a better term, outsource some of the network projects to the community, or bring in some new partners. Â For instance: Â https://rabb.it/ Â This actually, in my limited trial with friends, works for group watching a WWE Network stream. Which would be a great built-in function for the Network. Â There's probably negatives to pushing people to a 3rd party for some of the wishlist functions, but at the same time you'd open up some new functionality to the service that a lot of people aren't going to go out of their way to figure out on their own. Â Similar concept with chapters - if it was left up to the users, certainly almost everything would have the markings within a couple months, right? You wouldn't be able to just let people mark willy nilly, but some sort of "suggest a chapter mark" feature may be a relatively simple solution for that. Â On the social end, no clue why they don't have a profile for each user that at the very least allows you to track what you've watched. Add some discounts to the Shop if people watch every Nitro or something. Get 5% off a t-shirt for watching a premier of a new show. Get a badge (I don't get into social gamification personally, but plenty of people do) for watching all of a certain series in a certain time, little stuff like that would go a long way, in my opinion, to making this feel like a real service and not just me paying $10/month because I don't want to deal with finding a bootleg stream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petey Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I think they'd be a lot further along with the content had they not laid so many people off due to the budget cuts. Â I don't have a ton of time to watch The Network so even with its limited variety, it still covers enough ground for me. That said, I was really hopeful I'd be able to watch some stuff that hadn't already aired on Classics on Demand, specifically the entire home library. I think the best thing we can hope for is that they get a miracle number of subscribers and it allows them to invest more resources into the project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khawk20 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Did I hear right that updated subscriber numbers are due out today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Did I hear right that updated subscriber numbers are due out today? Yep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowboy hats Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 In ma inbox: Â Â Â No 6-Month Commitment Great News! WWE Network is now $9.99 per month with no commitment. That's right. You'll continue to get every LIVE pay-per-view, access to our massive on-demand library and more for the same $9.99 per month you currently pay, but without a 6-month commitment!There is no action is required on your part. On your billing date in December, your WWE Network subscription will automatically convert to a no commitment account and will continue uninterrupted for $9.99 per month, plus applicable taxes. If you have any questions regarding your subscription, please visit wwe.com/help. wwe.com/help . Thank you for being a WWE Network subscriber. Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Are they advertising the network on other avenues? I know they do it on their own programming. Are they advertising it during the World Series, or NFL Games, on ESPN etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Network Numbers:  703k Domestic 28K Intl  oof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Those #'s are bad. No way to spin it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chief Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Can somebody more numbers-oriented than me explain what they were expecting and what would be considered successful ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Are they advertising the network on other avenues? I know they do it on their own programming. Are they advertising it during the World Series, or NFL Games, on ESPN etc? Â I see it advertised on facebook and websites all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I believe that 1 million is the break even point. I don't think those numbers are really THAT bad. Especially considering that there wasn't some huge drop off of people who only wanted Mania and then forgot about the Network. I still think there is the potential to add a lot more subscibers but whether they are ever going to get their shit together and figure out how to improve the content & delivery of the Network, and more importantly the marketing is questionable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakla Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Plus, per the blurb on the observer site, there was pretty heavy turnover, with around 250k of the previous subs not renewing/sticking around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.