Smack2k Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 This is 1 Million Global right? Just to break even, didn't they need well over 1 milion global? Wasn't the goal 1 million US? And wasn't that when the commitment was locked in. The number's going to ebb and flow during the year now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 I never thought they would get to 1 million... ever. However, this feels like a Rumble purchase. They announce 1 million 2 days after Rumble? The coincidence is too strong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 I never thought they would get to 1 million... ever. However, this feels like a Rumble purchase. They announce 1 million 2 days after Rumble? The coincidence is too strong. Didn't the UK launch just start though? EDIT: 18th of January. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smack2k Posted January 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 I do find it VERY odd that the night after they get AWFUL reviews and mainstream media is talking about how bad things are, and the #1 Twitter trend is #CANCELWWENETWORK that they announce 1 million... As for 1 million US or Worldwide, no clue...but I thought it was always 1 million was the magic number.... I am just hoping that it doesnt affirm their current plans... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shining Wiz Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 1 million current subscribers, or 1 million subscriptions since launch. Dollars to donuts says its the later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 The getting the Rumble was a big thing. I think they had people stay on from November from the old WCW fans because of Sting. Sting got a lot of buzz on the streets around Texas. I think the return of Bryan brought fans back who got behind him and checked out when he got hurt. The company has been smart adding new content like Austin's pods with Vince and now HHH a week after ppv shows to keep their audience.I'll be more curious to see the numbers in May. Good for them to getting that number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 1 million current subscribers, or 1 million subscriptions since launch. Dollars to donuts says its the later. We should know when they do the investors call in a few weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Yeah, it was 1.4 Million Global subscribers to be profitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookeighana Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Here's what WWE published about the revised OIBDA levels for 2015 WWE Network profitability: Q3 press release (see last page)Annual Average Monthly Paid Subscribers / Operating Income / Depreciation / OIBDA500,000 / -$38M to -$18M / $28M / -$10M to +$10M1,000,000 / $17M to +$37M / $28M / +$45M to $65M1,500,000 / $72M to $92M / $28M / $100M to $120M2,000,000 / $127M to $147M / $28M / $155M to $175M2,500,000 / $182M to $202M / $28M / $210M to $230MSo, the "break-even" point is about 500k/month. (For comparison, last year, they probably averaged about 715,000 between Q1 and Q4.) So the midpoint would be like maybe $24M from the WWE Network if they did that in 2015. The issue is that in 2011 (before they started spending money on developing what became the WWE Network) they made $78.3M in PPV and earned $40.7M in Profit. If you wanted to hit that level, you'd need to average about 870,000 for 2015. And that's just replicating old PPV revenue profitability. You've still sacrificed profit for several years and you're just getting back to where you started. It's got to be higher to be a huge success.However, that doesn't mean I was caught completely off-guard by WWE hitting 1M already. I do expect they'll continue to swell through WrestleMania. Last year, they added almost 20k a day in the week between 3/31 and WrestleMania. However, last year, we also saw new subscribers completely stagnant for 6 months (growing at 360/day). What will happen this year? Very hard to say. Especially without an idea of what we ended 12/31 at. Was it a swell that started since the UK launch? Was it really carry-over from the November #freefreefree promotion? How the heck did they sell 100k Survivor Series?! So many questions.It's a positive development that the WWE released a number and actually had their stock swell on the news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 It's not a positive sign if Stephanie sells a bunch of stock today to buy another wing on her house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Here's what WWE published about the revised OIBDA levels for 2015 WWE Network profitability: Q3 press release (see last page) Annual Average Monthly Paid Subscribers / Operating Income / Depreciation / OIBDA 500,000 / -$38M to -$18M / $28M / -$10M to +$10M 1,000,000 / $17M to +$37M / $28M / +$45M to $65M 1,500,000 / $72M to $92M / $28M / $100M to $120M 2,000,000 / $127M to $147M / $28M / $155M to $175M 2,500,000 / $182M to $202M / $28M / $210M to $230M So, the "break-even" point is about 500k/month. (For comparison, last year, they probably averaged about 715,000 between Q1 and Q4.) So the midpoint would be like maybe $24M from the WWE Network if they did that in 2015. The issue is that in 2011 (before they started spending money on developing what became the WWE Network) they made $78.3M in PPV and earned $40.7M in Profit. If you wanted to hit that level, you'd need to average about 870,000 for 2015. And that's just replicating old PPV revenue profitability. You've still sacrificed profit for several years and you're just getting back to where you started. It's got to be higher to be a huge success. By my calculations, to hit their 2010 operating income level of $50.3M this year, they'd need to average just over 1.2 million subscribers for the whole year. Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthedoctor Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? The only fans that are going to cancel is those immature kids on Twitter who sulked over what happened at the Ryumble. Quite frankly I enjoyed the event and to me thats all that matters. Its a huge over reaction because you get thousands of hours of classic footage to watch and thats a great service. Getting the current PPVs is just a bonus and if it bothers them that much buy the PPV from SKY/cable operator. What happens on a PPV shouldnt count for whether you do or dont want the network. Its still a great 24/7 channel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? The only fans that are going to cancel is those immature kids on Twitter who sulked over what happened at the Ryumble. Quite frankly I enjoyed the event and to me thats all that matters. Its a huge over reaction because you get thousands of hours of classic footage to watch and thats a great service. Getting the current PPVs is just a bonus and if it bothers them that much buy the PPV from SKY/cable operator. What happens on a PPV shouldnt count for whether you do or dont want the network. Its still a great 24/7 channel. You do realize that the majority of people have the network for the current product and not for old footage otherwise WWE 24/7 would had been a huge success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMick Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? The only fans that are going to cancel is those immature kids on Twitter who sulked over what happened at the Ryumble. Quite frankly I enjoyed the event and to me thats all that matters. Its a huge over reaction because you get thousands of hours of classic footage to watch and thats a great service. Getting the current PPVs is just a bonus and if it bothers them that much buy the PPV from SKY/cable operator. What happens on a PPV shouldnt count for whether you do or dont want the network. Its still a great 24/7 channel. You do realize that the majority of people have the network for the current product and not for old footage otherwise WWE 24/7 would had been a huge success. Yeah Doc, sometimes it seems like you don't accept that you have a minority opinion on things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strand Peanut Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 Questions like these.. Quoting investor reports.. Reminds me how very much Vince has changed the business. Since the IPO, this kind of questioning has been at the root of discontent in a way. It's not just presentation, and the "sports entertainment" approach but the business model as well. Wrestling booking - Guy + Guy = Gate = $$$$ In a basic, sorta simple way. But with WWE, there's what formula? How do they = $$$ ? There's lots of different things. Not quite as simple. Booking critiques are often looked through the lens of boffo box office or not? And through that, a certain logic to booking wrestling. As fans, we all know it. Traditional indicators are still a good barometer of WWE's business. But I think business wise, they have such a different formula going. Seems only natural the booking would follow suit. I'm not even sure booking is the right term for it anymore. Just another example of disconnect between the promotion and some of the wrestling fan base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookeighana Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 The investor documents do have other trends we can look at which help get to core popularity for the product such as average event attendance, PPV revenue/buys, Raw/Smackdown ratings, etc. CY2014 (3 quarters): 236 events averaging 6,137/show; 9 PPV events ($41.3M in PPV + $46.2M in WWE Network) = 2,021,000 traditional PPV buys; Raw was 3.5/SM was 2.3 CY2013: 321 events averaging 5,980/show; 12 PPV events ($82.5M) = 3,838,000 buys; Raw was 3.4/SM was 2.2 CY2012: 314 events averaging 5,921/show; 12 PPV events ($83.6M) = 4,023,000 buys; Raw was 3.3/SM was 2.1 CY2011: 321 events averaging 6,174/show; 13 PPV events ($78.3M) = 3,842,000 buys; Raw was 3.6/SM was 1.9 CY2010: 327 events averaging 6,639/show; 13 PPV events ($70.2M) = 3,631,100 buys; Raw was 3.5/SM was 1.8 CY2009: 342 events averaging 6,933/show; 14 PPV events ($80.0M) = 4,490,200 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 2.0 CY2008: 319 events averaging 6,907/show; 14 PPV events ($91.4M) = 5,034,400 buys; Raw was 3.4/SM was 2.4 CY2007: 308 events averaging 6,868/show; 15 PPV events ($94.3M) = 5,200,800 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 2.7 T2006 (this was a transition year from May 2006 to Dec 2006): 246 events averaging 5,334/show; 11 PPV events ($53.4M) = 3,287,300 buys; Raw was 3.9/SM was 2.4 FY2006: 300 events averaging 5,713/show; 16 PPV events ($94.8M) = 6,241,100 buys; Raw was 4.0/SM was 2.8 FY2005: 325 events averaging 4,977/show; 14 PPV events ($85.5M) = 5,280,800 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 3.2 FY2004: 329 events averaging 5,006/show; 12 PPV events ($95.3M) = 5,604,000 buys; Raw was 3.8/SM was 3.3 FY2003: 327 events averaging 5,551/show; 12 PPV events ($91.1M) = 5,378,100 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 3.4 FY2002: 237 events averaging 8,562/show; 12 PPV events ($112.0M) = 7,135,464 buys; Raw was 4.6/SM was 4.0 FY2001: 212 events averaging 11,556/show; 12 PPV events ($128.2M) = 8,010,400 buys; Raw was 5.95/SM was 4.6 FY2000: 206 events averaging 12,064/show; 12 PPV events ($106.4M) = 6,884,600 buys; Raw was 6.2/SM was 4.7 FY1999: 199 events averaging 11,426/show; 12 PPV events ($81.0M) = 5,365,100 buys; Raw was 5.0 FY1998: 218 events averaging 7,230/show; 12 PPV events = 2,936,100 buys; Raw was 3.1 FY1997: 199 events averaging 5,330/show; 12 PPV events = 2,252,200 buys; Raw was 2.4 FY1996: 247 events averaging 3,773/show; 12 PPV events = 2,831,700 buys; Raw was 3.0 Obviously, there's a lot of factors at play, but overall, after a few years of what I'd call stagnation, WWE is trending up slightly. Looking at metrics like this only tell us about larger trends so obviously the question "Was Roman Reigns the right person to win the Rumble" isn't going to be answered by talking about 2004 Unallocated Corporate Expenses. The boom period is leagues difference from today. (However, WWE's has evolved into a revenue-generating machine. Raising PPV prices, running far more live events and expanding on the revenues generated by each division - especially TV rights - has lead to years such as 2010 being incredibly profitable, for instance.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 One thing about modern internet fans, it seems, is that when WWE has clear creative hits like the Survivor Series main event stip or the build for the Rumble this year (calling them hits based off Network increases), no one really acknowledges it. It's just dismissed as fans being dumb or the brand being a draw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strand Peanut Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 The investor documents do have other trends we can look at which help get to core popularity for the product such as average event attendance, PPV revenue/buys, Raw/Smackdown ratings, etc. CY2014 (3 quarters): 236 events averaging 6,137/show; 9 PPV events ($41.3M in PPV + $46.2M in WWE Network) = 2,021,000 traditional PPV buys; Raw was 3.5/SM was 2.3 CY2013: 321 events averaging 5,980/show; 12 PPV events ($82.5M) = 3,838,000 buys; Raw was 3.4/SM was 2.2 CY2012: 314 events averaging 5,921/show; 12 PPV events ($83.6M) = 4,023,000 buys; Raw was 3.3/SM was 2.1 CY2011: 321 events averaging 6,174/show; 13 PPV events ($78.3M) = 3,842,000 buys; Raw was 3.6/SM was 1.9 CY2010: 327 events averaging 6,639/show; 13 PPV events ($70.2M) = 3,631,100 buys; Raw was 3.5/SM was 1.8 CY2009: 342 events averaging 6,933/show; 14 PPV events ($80.0M) = 4,490,200 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 2.0 CY2008: 319 events averaging 6,907/show; 14 PPV events ($91.4M) = 5,034,400 buys; Raw was 3.4/SM was 2.4 CY2007: 308 events averaging 6,868/show; 15 PPV events ($94.3M) = 5,200,800 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 2.7 T2006 (this was a transition year from May 2006 to Dec 2006): 246 events averaging 5,334/show; 11 PPV events ($53.4M) = 3,287,300 buys; Raw was 3.9/SM was 2.4 FY2006: 300 events averaging 5,713/show; 16 PPV events ($94.8M) = 6,241,100 buys; Raw was 4.0/SM was 2.8 FY2005: 325 events averaging 4,977/show; 14 PPV events ($85.5M) = 5,280,800 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 3.2 FY2004: 329 events averaging 5,006/show; 12 PPV events ($95.3M) = 5,604,000 buys; Raw was 3.8/SM was 3.3 FY2003: 327 events averaging 5,551/show; 12 PPV events ($91.1M) = 5,378,100 buys; Raw was 3.7/SM was 3.4 FY2002: 237 events averaging 8,562/show; 12 PPV events ($112.0M) = 7,135,464 buys; Raw was 4.6/SM was 4.0 FY2001: 212 events averaging 11,556/show; 12 PPV events ($128.2M) = 8,010,400 buys; Raw was 5.95/SM was 4.6 FY2000: 206 events averaging 12,064/show; 12 PPV events ($106.4M) = 6,884,600 buys; Raw was 6.2/SM was 4.7 FY1999: 199 events averaging 11,426/show; 12 PPV events ($81.0M) = 5,365,100 buys; Raw was 5.0 FY1998: 218 events averaging 7,230/show; 12 PPV events = 2,936,100 buys; Raw was 3.1 FY1997: 199 events averaging 5,330/show; 12 PPV events = 2,252,200 buys; Raw was 2.4 FY1996: 247 events averaging 3,773/show; 12 PPV events = 2,831,700 buys; Raw was 3.0 Obviously, there's a lot of factors at play, but overall, after a few years of what I'd call stagnation, WWE is trending up slightly. Looking at metrics like this only tell us about larger trends so obviously the question "Was Roman Reigns the right person to win the Rumble" isn't going to be answered by talking about 2004 Unallocated Corporate Expenses. The boom period is leagues difference from today. (However, WWE's has evolved into a revenue-generating machine. Raising PPV prices, running far more live events and expanding on the revenues generated by each division - especially TV rights - has lead to years such as 2010 being incredibly profitable, for instance.) Thanks for those numbers, a nice reference. I know there's data in the quarterly reports. But it's how a corporate WWE interprets and applies the data. I think, as fans, we're lacking in that information. And I think it ties into the booking of WWE. Why utulize traditional wrestling booking, when you've moved to a non traditional wrestling model, sort of thing. They run personality tests on the talent. We're mostly in the dark on merchandise sales. In ten-ish years, they've presented a booking philosophy that continues to befuddle a segment of wrestling's most dedicated fan base. I find it very interesting, and quite unique. Would love to more the whys and hows. I'm not trying to pass judgement. Everyone's booked bad shit before, missed opportunities, so on and so forth. I'm just wondering if there's an aspect to interpreting the booking that's missing. A crucial one, possibly. And they HAVE been successful running this way, without a doubt. No one thinks we're in a boom, but WWE has been a good bet despite that. In a way (with the boom/bust history of wrestling in mind) that may be one of Vince's more impressive achievements. If he's in the wrestling business that is, ha! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthedoctor Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? The only fans that are going to cancel is those immature kids on Twitter who sulked over what happened at the Ryumble. Quite frankly I enjoyed the event and to me thats all that matters. Its a huge over reaction because you get thousands of hours of classic footage to watch and thats a great service. Getting the current PPVs is just a bonus and if it bothers them that much buy the PPV from SKY/cable operator. What happens on a PPV shouldnt count for whether you do or dont want the network. Its still a great 24/7 channel. You do realize that the majority of people have the network for the current product and not for old footage otherwise WWE 24/7 would had been a huge success. Yeah Doc, sometimes it seems like you don't accept that you have a minority opinion on things. What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? The only fans that are going to cancel is those immature kids on Twitter who sulked over what happened at the Ryumble. Quite frankly I enjoyed the event and to me thats all that matters. Its a huge over reaction because you get thousands of hours of classic footage to watch and thats a great service. Getting the current PPVs is just a bonus and if it bothers them that much buy the PPV from SKY/cable operator. What happens on a PPV shouldnt count for whether you do or dont want the network. Its still a great 24/7 channel. You do realize that the majority of people have the network for the current product and not for old footage otherwise WWE 24/7 would had been a huge success. Actually no. I thought the whole point of the Network was for people to watch classic WWE stuff and current PPVs is just a bonus. 24/7 was just classic stuff but no idea of what numbers it pulled because it wasent available in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? The only fans that are going to cancel is those immature kids on Twitter who sulked over what happened at the Ryumble. Quite frankly I enjoyed the event and to me thats all that matters. Its a huge over reaction because you get thousands of hours of classic footage to watch and thats a great service. Getting the current PPVs is just a bonus and if it bothers them that much buy the PPV from SKY/cable operator. What happens on a PPV shouldnt count for whether you do or dont want the network. Its still a great 24/7 channel. You do realize that the majority of people have the network for the current product and not for old footage otherwise WWE 24/7 would had been a huge success. Yeah Doc, sometimes it seems like you don't accept that you have a minority opinion on things. What is everyone opinion? Once I saw all the backlash last night and today about the Rumble and the fans and the #CANCELWWENETWORK, I thought that "Hey, WWE will see this and make a change of direction (like last year with Bryan) and put things right for their fans and start moving back in a positive direction (as good as it looked post Mania last year).. But then this WWE 1 million subscribers comes out and now I think WWE will stay the course as they will see its working, the stock is going back up and money is being made...they start thinking, "We know what the fans want more than they do…just look at the stock and network…" "They dont know anything....they get mad, but they'll come around to the way we want it.." I am happy the company is doing better (for the employees and others), but not happy for the effects it may have on booking and decisions... Thoughts? The only fans that are going to cancel is those immature kids on Twitter who sulked over what happened at the Ryumble. Quite frankly I enjoyed the event and to me thats all that matters. Its a huge over reaction because you get thousands of hours of classic footage to watch and thats a great service. Getting the current PPVs is just a bonus and if it bothers them that much buy the PPV from SKY/cable operator. What happens on a PPV shouldnt count for whether you do or dont want the network. Its still a great 24/7 channel. You do realize that the majority of people have the network for the current product and not for old footage otherwise WWE 24/7 would had been a huge success. Actually no. I thought the whole point of the Network was for people to watch classic WWE stuff and current PPVs is just a bonus. 24/7 was just classic stuff but no idea of what numbers it pulled because it wasent available in the UK. No, the whole point of the Network was ppv business was dying so this is the new way to promote ppvs. The Network will live in and die by current footage. WWE 24/7 died and wasn't promoted on tv after the first few months, so how successful do you think it was? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 From Dave Sources close to the situation noted that while there were cancellations (as there always are) coming off the Royal Rumble, they weren’t appreciably more than usual and the number of new subscribers the next day outweighed those canceling by a significant margin. That’s one of the reasons why the WWE didn’t even consider a break from its Brock Lesnar vs. Roman Reigns WrestleMania main event direction by the time Raw was taped, because the fan “movement” protesting appeared significant, but their business showed otherwise. As far as why numbers would peak two days after the Rumble instead of the day of the show, when one would think they would, can be attributed to a number of things. It’s probably two key things, one the interest and curiosity in the product gained after the Rumble, and perhaps it had to do with the surprise appearance of Dwayne Johnson, which wasn’t advertised. Some of it may have been intrigue created by WrestleMania coming up and now having a direct main event in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 One thing about modern internet fans, it seems, is that when WWE has clear creative hits like the Survivor Series main event stip or the build for the Rumble this year (calling them hits based off Network increases), no one really acknowledges it. It's just dismissed as fans being dumb or the brand being a draw. You are aware that you're a modern internet fan too, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Um, yeah. But it's true. WWE had a big hit in November with Survivor Series (surprisingly high PPV numbers and a very successful hook for the free Network month), but the general feeling is still going to be that the fall was a miserable time for WWE creatively. The Royal Rumble build was apparently very effective, I thought the Sting appearance and Lesnar destroying everyone was a great go-home segment, but I haven't seen one comment giving them credit for doing a good job. It's just all about how terrible the booking of the Rumble match was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Migs Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 Um, yeah. But it's true. WWE had a big hit in November with Survivor Series (surprisingly high PPV numbers and a very successful hook for the free Network month), but the general feeling is still going to be that the fall was a miserable time for WWE creatively. The Royal Rumble build was apparently very effective, I thought the Sting appearance and Lesnar destroying everyone was a great go-home segment, but I haven't seen one comment giving them credit for doing a good job. It's just all about how terrible the booking of the Rumble match was. How exactly can one call Survivor Series a hit when it was free? Couldn't the free month have been the thing that was the draw? 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.