Loss Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Two questions: 1) Can't they do like other services do and upload stuff first and CC it later? 2) Didn't WWE Classics on Demand already feature CC's? I suspect it's something where the VP of whatever ordered it to be done this way and with all the budget cuts and layoffs, people are now just doing it without questioning it because that was the original direction. Pure guesswork on my part that may be way off, but this is how corporate environments tend to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I tweeted earlier about putting all the TV on the Network would be what I would do personally but thinking about it what you need to do with your TV is to promote the network heavily by not having the same GOD DAMN matches on your TV that you are having on your major shows. Why should someone watch a Cesaro/Ziggler, Sheamus/Miz, etc when they get those matches every week in some form on RAW & Smackdown. Make your special events actually seem special. The old days you used your TV to build the house shows now use it to build the Network I completely agree. The free TV should be six mans and matches like John Cena vs lower level guy (say Cesaro or Titus O'Neill). If it's a match you might want to pay for it should be on the network or a house show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillThompson Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Bill I buy the argument that the future is in streaming and digital means. Though the right now the WWE isn't ready to go all in on the network and not having t.v. I think you could kill the company dead right now if you do what you suggest. I mean MLB isn't going all in. I don't think MLB is an apt comparison, because well, MLB is an institution across many generations, cultures, etc. It taps into a core audience that WWE can only dream of and that I don't think they can ever achieve. I'd wager that if MLB did go all in they would be very successful because people feel loyalty to their specific team and MLB in general in ways that WWE fans don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 MLB isn't a fair comparison I guess. Their's really not something really to compare it to. With that said I think the negatives far outweigh the positives to attempting to put all the t.v on the network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I tweeted earlier about putting all the TV on the Network would be what I would do personally but thinking about it what you need to do with your TV is to promote the network heavily by not having the same GOD DAMN matches on your TV that you are having on your major shows. Why should someone watch a Cesaro/Ziggler, Sheamus/Miz, etc when they get those matches every week in some form on RAW & Smackdown. Make your special events actually seem special. The old days you used your TV to build the house shows now use it to build the Network I completely agree. The free TV should be six mans and matches like John Cena vs lower level guy (say Cesaro or Titus O'Neill). If it's a match you might want to pay for it should be on the network or a house show. I agree with this in premise. Raw/Smackdown still need to generate ratings so advertisers will pay. I'm not sure you can do that by changing the formula up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 What the fuck is "nerfd"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pol Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I tweeted earlier about putting all the TV on the Network would be what I would do personally but thinking about it what you need to do with your TV is to promote the network heavily by not having the same GOD DAMN matches on your TV that you are having on your major shows. Why should someone watch a Cesaro/Ziggler, Sheamus/Miz, etc when they get those matches every week in some form on RAW & Smackdown. Make your special events actually seem special. The old days you used your TV to build the house shows now use it to build the Network I completely agree. The free TV should be six mans and matches like John Cena vs lower level guy (say Cesaro or Titus O'Neill). If it's a match you might want to pay for it should be on the network or a house show. I imagine they believe three hours of six man matches would cause ratings to tank. They may be right, although since no match on the shows currently feels special anyway because we've seen them all a thousand times maybe it wouldn't make any difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 What the fuck is "nerfd"? When an update to a video game reduces the effect of a character/weapon in a video game it's called a nerf. The opposite effect is called a buff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Redman Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I tweeted earlier about putting all the TV on the Network would be what I would do personally but thinking about it what you need to do with your TV is to promote the network heavily by not having the same GOD DAMN matches on your TV that you are having on your major shows. Why should someone watch a Cesaro/Ziggler, Sheamus/Miz, etc when they get those matches every week in some form on RAW & Smackdown. Make your special events actually seem special. The old days you used your TV to build the house shows now use it to build the Network I completely agree. The free TV should be six mans and matches like John Cena vs lower level guy (say Cesaro or Titus O'Neill). If it's a match you might want to pay for it should be on the network or a house show. I imagine they believe three hours of six man matches would cause ratings to tank. They may be right, although since no match on the shows currently feels special anyway because we've seen them all a thousand times maybe it wouldn't make any difference. I doubt it would make much difference. Even ten years ago there used to be a lot more main eventer vs midcarder and random 6-man tags as TV main events for Raw and SD, instead of just throwing star vs star out there every week. They could do well to at least get back to that kind of ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantherwagner Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Two questions: 1) Can't they do like other services do and upload stuff first and CC it later? 2) Didn't WWE Classics on Demand already feature CC's? I suspect it's something where the VP of whatever ordered it to be done this way and with all the budget cuts and layoffs, people are now just doing it without questioning it because that was the original direction. Pure guesswork on my part that may be way off, but this is how corporate environments tend to work. What it looks like to me is that they laid out a 2014 plan sometime before the launch and by the looks of it they are sticking to it without changing course. They have been true to word so far on the "coming soon" section of the Network FAQ and haven't uploaded anything not on that list. It's odd when you think about WWE executing a long term plan without budging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southofheavy Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 They were running all kinds of six mans and tag team matches last year when The Shield, The Wyatts, The Rhodes, and The Usos were tearing it up. TV was ruling real hard then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Redman Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Yeah but only because they involved actual 6-man teams in The Shield and Wyatts. I mean throwing the top babyfaces and heels in a big multi man main event to prevent them from running the big singles matches on TV every week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pol Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I think the Japanese style of everyone being in factions that include guys at all levels of the card is a tremendous aid for booking. Makes it very easy to have matches that feel meaningful and have real finishes without really giving anything away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 You don't have to run all multi man matches do random singles matches with guys that wouldn't normally face each other. It also would take running hotter angles outside of the matches themselves and more post match angles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Is it really THAT much easier to pirate from the Network than it was from PPV? To the point that this should even be on their priority list? I kinda find that hard to believe as, in my experience, the same folks I know who hadn't paid for a PPV in years, were the first ones to sign up. I know that I didn't even bother pirating (I just didn't watch PPVs) and the WWE is on track to take $120 from me this year after receiving maybe the same amount over the past 4 years combined. Yes, it's easier. Yes, it's a problem. On the most popular wrestling torrent site the average number of downloads for Network originals like Monday Night Wars or Rivalries is about 400-500. For PPVs, depending on the PPV, it's anywhere between 1,000-1500. I'm not saying you're going to convert all those people into subscribers, or even a large number of them. But there's no reason not to do something to make it harder, or track who is doing it so you can cancel their subscription and scare them with legal letters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRMD Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 What the fuck is "nerfd"? When you take the "danger" out of something. Like a Nerf Football or a Nerf Gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilTLL Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Is it really THAT much easier to pirate from the Network than it was from PPV?Yes, it's easier. Yes, it's a problem. Just to expand on this a bit, to pirate PPVs one needed specialized equipment, either to capture component video in HD or to crack HDCP, and then a small amount of skill at editing and transcoding. To pirate from the Network, you need...a computer, basically. Don't even have to transcode, as the Network programming is already in H.264. It's shockingly easy. (Yeah, I did it to take GAB '89 out to a friend's house in the boonie-burbs where there's no broadband. Sue me?) The numbers you quote for private trackers don't sound like much in the scheme of things, but I wonder what the total number of pirate views is after accounting for public trackers, other share methods, pirates sharing with non-pirate friends, group viewing, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoJsyn Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Say instead of saying main eventers, mid card, upper mid card and so on; there is a number system. the number system is just an example but say the main guys are 5 and the roster floats from there to 1. Now on tv a 5 guy would never ever wrestle a 5 guy or even hardly ever a 4 guy and a 4 guy wouldn't wrestle on tv a 4 or 5 guy and maybe hardly a 3 unless something called for it. It would give new match ups and make the eventual match ups on ppv on the network mean something and also on house shows. Also no titles should be defended on tv and if they want to then no more than twice a year and it has to be cause of a feud and not the world title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 A bracket system of workers is exactly what they need and when it comes to title matches you do it very rarely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Abandoning the six-month commitment is the biggest surprise of all to me, because I don't see it making a significant difference in subs. So they've basically cut the price of their shows by 80% and created a lot of confusion in the marketplace in the process. It's lose-lose. Hey, if they want to give me something that is clearly worth more than they are charging, that's fantastic for me as a consumer, but if they didn't have television rights fees, WWE would be in serious danger right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I don't think that the cost has ever been the problem which is why it's weird to me that WWE's entire campaign is the $9.99 thing. If the Network were $4.99 or $19.99 I'm not sure how much would change. To me, it's all about the content. Even if the Network was $20/month, that's still saving $30/month from the old PPV model. More original programming might help. Reality TV stuff is cheap. I mean, it wouldn't be a draw to get new people but it's new, different & sometimes interesting programming that could spread some word of mouth. I used to love WWE Confidential when they would do a WWE Cribs. I still remember Al Snow's hockey jersey collection. NXT should be a bigger draw too. No reason why RAW can't have an NXT match each week where they mention the show on the Network each week. Then they can talk about the upcoming NXT PPVs too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pol Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I don't think that the cost has ever been the problem which is why it's weird to me that WWE's entire campaign is the $9.99 thing. Meltzer has said that Hunter has been expressing irritation backstage at how cheap the people who haven't bought the Network are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I feel they need to inform the public how to stream the network onto their t.v's. A FAQ about what streaming devices work isn't cutting it.Also getting more Smart T.V's that carry the network could help a bit more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantherwagner Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Reality TV stuff is cheap. Meltzer mentioned once that Total Divas costs 400,000 USD an episode and that they don't make a lot of money from it but it's still worth it because they are appealing to a completely different audience and it looks good on their show portfolio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyonthewall2983 Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 That's downright masochism. 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.