|
Batista posted:Does this take into account that Raw goes to a competitor, meaning it would receive the bump USA did? If it went to a direct competitor I imagine it would but I doubt Fox Sports1 is anywhere near USA. That might be a different story if it went to FX or ESPN or something.
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 03:50 |
|
|
Yeah, I don't pay much attention to the business side of things but I figure I'll know when and if RAW is every as valuable a tv product as Nascar, NFL, or other sports because I'll start seeing beer and truck commercials.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
Tempered expectations make sense. For my own interests I always tend to wait six months or a year for something like this. Long enough for the bugs to be worked out. Long enough for solid reviews to come in. Long enough to see how it will work long term once the initial push is done. If you're buying for Wrestlemania and the PPVs then you're probably relatively fine buying in right away. But yeah, I think if you're looking forward to any of that other stuff like original programming, NXT, or archival stuff then you're better off waiting. That's why I'm not buying tomorrow. I'm really not all that interested in 2014 WWE. If I'm not engaged enough to watch RAW every week then the PPVs don't appeal to me and I had no intention of watching WM unless some friends get a bug up their rear end to split it that week. But the archival stuff or NXT might appeal to me. So I'm just going to wait around and see how it plays out. If it goes to poo poo after six months and they stop adding content like WWE On Demand seemed to then no skin off my nose. If it seems like something that appeals more to my tastes then I can buy in then and probably miss any buggy early day frustrations.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
Considering they do that stuff already for recaps and shows like RAW AM I honestly don't know why you'd expect them not to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
UltimoDragonQuest posted:We'll figure out what's on the network in 7 hours. If it's almost entirely PPV and DVD releases, PSP is going to have a mixed reaction. While that's by far the most demanded stuff, it's also the most common and a lot of the people who would care about online video archives have already seen it recently. But see I also think its somewhat important to remember that what's on the Network tomorrow might not be what's on the network in six months. Just because Hardcore TV isn't there tomorrow doesn't mean it might not show up in time and just because it is doesn't mean they might not take it away later. Its a brand new prospect with nothing to draw from. Unlike WWE booking it makes sense to apply the "wait and see" approach on this. SamuraiFoochs posted:Because editing PPVs and deciding what to edit would be significantly more labor intensive? If they care enough about it they'll do it, I imagine. Its not like they're just throwing DVDs in and copying them over. There's already interns or editors or whatever laboring over this stuff editing out copywritten music. They spent years editing out "WWF" logos and Benoit references. I doubt they'll go through every show and edit out every time the crowd poo poo on Triple H, but if they care enough to "clean up" how Batista was received at the Royal Rumble they'll add it to the list of things to do. They're a multi-billion dollar corporation. I'm sure there are over qualified, under paid people sitting in small offices and cubicles doing lovely tasks like this.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 08:12
|
|
|
Yeah, I loved ECW Hardcore TV and would love to experience it again but those things are going to be butchered to poo poo way beyond the entrance music so its probably not worth it. And honestly, I can't really blame WWE for that. gently caress, what about "Pulp Fiction"?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 08:15
|
|
|
Deadpool posted:I watched a lot of those several years back and honestly the only worth they have is from a historical "Oh so that's what they were showing on the local Philly stations" perspective. The constant music videos and schilling of merch and live event meant there was very little actual full match content on those shows. I've rewatched some and I know the reality of it. I know what didn't age well and how much of the shows was spent selling me RF videos, t-shirts, and whatever. And yeah, that's part of it too. But if you take that and then take out the music videos, the major entrance themes from the likes of the Gangstas and Sandman, and maybe even the Pulp Fiction segments what the hell is even left? The show's just going to be useless by attrition, even from a nostalgic perspective. SamuraiFoochs posted:Do main event video packages not use the PPV theme in them anymore? I was gonna comment on this but then realized every time I could think of in recent history it's been more production music in the actual video packages with the "theme" just playing in the background every once in a while. The WWE PPV themes are probably covered under their original licensing deals, or at least I'd think. When they worked out the deals for those themes to begin with they probably already factored in replays and DVD sales into the cost which I imagine would be covered here or could be extended relatively cheaply. But the ECW themes were ages ago and for a much smaller audience and coverage. WWE probably has to sign new licensing deals for all that stuff which would cost for all the people who could potentially hear them. And we're talking major songs from major artists, not the 8th track from Saliva. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Feb 24, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 08:21
|
|
|
Yeah but I liked ECW so besides there being a nostalgic aspect to it there's also probably more that appeals to me today even beyond what hasn't aged well or what I've grown past. But obviously there's something hugely lost watching a weekly show like that 20 years later where the pacing and hype just feels empty since its all done and past. The PPVs would naturally seem more appealing in a lot of ways because they were complete packages of content, but for a lot of old ECW fans like me Hardcore TV is what we fell in love with. To me ECW isn't "hardcore" wrestling so much as it is the grainy, 90s show with the music packages and different matches that usually ended with a pulp fiction montage. And the same video commercials played over and over again so that I could probably quote them for you all these years later. Nostalgia is what it is I'm not pretending there's not some of that in my appreciation of Hardcore TV. But I also thing there's some value to seeing something historically significant to wrestling like that as the way it truly existed. I'd like to sit and watch WCCW shows too. They might be poo poo but I'd like to be able to experience them for myself.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
laz0rbeak posted:Didn't WWF do it again in the same time period with the IC belt? Something like Eddie and Chyna vs. Val and Trish? Didn't they do it fairly recently with like Edge, Kelly Kelly, Dolph Ziggler, and someone else?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
Jason Funk posted:I knew, deep down, long ago that nbc wouldn't let them stream raw/sd or let them put it up the next day, but I was really hoping it would happen anyway (I don't have cable). Is it still worth the You should have known that easily, on the surface because it just makes sense. I'd actually love to be in the hypothetical negotiation meeting where WWE turns to NBC and says "So were starting a 24 hour streaming service on line with a huge catalogue of video on demand which we're pushing our entire audience to sign up for by putting all our PPVs there for a fraction of the price of PPV. Also, we're going to show RAW and SD live on it and then stick replays into the on demand service. So how much money are you willing to give us for the honor of showing it live knowing full well we're actively undermining your ratings?" That poo poo's just not happening because no network with half a brain would give WWE half of what they want for the shows them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:They still get to put it up on demand after a month, which is a fuckload more than I expected. Also SD is next-day on Hulu Plus. As I understand it Hulu is a joint venture by NBC, Fox, and ABC to capitalize on this stuff and control it a little. And Hulu Plus is its on paid service so not only is NBCU controlling how you catch Smackdown and getting a piece of the cut but its also not part of some massive wrestling package that you're signing up for anyway because you want PPVs or archives. I'd imagine that putting things up a month later isn't too much of a hurt for ratings and the networks. If you're willing to be a month behind on serialized storytelling then you're probably not going to be factoring heavily into their profits and ratings anyway. So yeah, I guess that works but it still doesn't really provide any help for people who don't have cable unless those people are willing to watch everything a month late including PPVs, or watch the PPVs live and all the tv in delay. Which sounds like a terrible way to enjoy wrestling. It just doesn't make any sense to me to think any network would be willing to let WWE stream or archive their shows in a timely fashion. It sounds like something which is great for WWE and disastrous for the network. Maybe I'm wrong and if someone can explain to me why I'd be grateful.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:They're offering a "second screen experience" via the Network so they actually are doing at least something like that; they've straight-up advertised it. From my limited experience "second screen experiences" are just like facts and trivia and maybe some backstage stuff during commercials that they air as supplementary to the show. At least that's what I've seen on like Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, or Walking Dead second screens. And that seemed to be what the WWE App already is.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:My hope is that, during commercial breaks, the app will stream poo poo that would normally just be on YouTube. Interview segments and the like. But live. Doesn't the App already do that? Isn't that where the Ziggler worked shoot promo came from? Hell even TNA did that during live shows.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:They update the app to have them, yes, but it's not a second screen thing. You still have to refresh the app and press play on the videos. A second screen experience would have the show cut to commercial, and then automatically continue the experience on the app during the commercial, then go back to the show afterwards. Huh, that's weird. What the hell is the point of the WWE App if it isn't doing that? Even TNA was managing that. I remember watching impacts live that summer they were shown live and having the TNA website up on my ipad because every commercial break there would be backstage interviews.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Yeah, I would be surprised if they keep that stuff up in perpetuity. They want to keep you on the hook and to keep subscribing so limiting the availability of content and making you subscribe a long time to watch something full out seems the easiest way to do that. They told you you we're getting the. PPVs so those are probably safe for now. Everything else I'd watch while its there.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
So can someone run down some of the business aspects of this for me? - Are they just abandoning the PPV format entirely or are they splitting between the two until PPV providers get sick of it and cut them off. I gather Dish has already done that but has anyone else or do we anticipate it happening soon after WM? - Has there been any news on what happens to wrestlers' PPV bonuses? That seems like it should be a major problem for the roster. - Did I read it right that wrestlers won't be getting revenue cuts off the Network like they were getting off DVDs? Isn't that another really low blow on the roster and cut into their actual earnings?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:Both So like, just out of curiosity at what point do they start devaluing the worth of a WWE contract? I recognize that they're not in any kind of immediate trouble. TNA isn't a threat and has been cutting back dramatically lately and no one else could dream of competing. But in theory aren't they chipping away at the financial advantages of working for WWE? And if they're just able to get away with it because the wrestlers have no where else to go doesn't that make the Network kind of a lovely/scummy thing for talent?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:I think they're trying to hedge their bets until the Wrestlemania numbers come in. Well I guess my question is do we have any idea what WWE actually wants to do? Is their ultimate goal for the PPVs to be 100% on the Network and for you to have to buy in to watch them? Or are they looking to supplement the Network with traditional PPV subscribers and its in the hand of the networks whether that's worth it to them? Or is this, as people seem to imply, all very up in the air and no one seems to really know, maybe not even WWE? Skinty McEdger posted:There's a lot of truth to this, but the big problem is that no one knows for sure until they start explaining details to the workers and renegociating deals. For those in a position to do so the option to look elsewhere is now more attractive than it has been previously, for the lower card talent their situation hasn't really changed. Basically it comes down to how WWE wants to structure deals going forward, and no one least of all WWE seems to know at the moment. That's fair. Its probably very stressful for workers right now not knowing how it will play out but that theoretically will start to work itself out over the next six months or so when deals start getting signed or negotiated under the new paradigm.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Other than That Spot, what are examples? I've read here that the ECW PPVs are censored for foul language and that the Kat nudity is censored. I don't need to see nudity and foul language, but it seems obvious the "uncensored" tag line was marketing BS. Which honestly, I think you'd be naive to not have known all along.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
I just watched This is NXT with a friend on his account. See, now that's the sort of thing I want to see in WWE. An honest to god feud. Imagine if you were doing that poo poo on WWE programming? You'd have a real midcard feud that made Zayn and Cesaro look like real players. And a bunch of other interesting characters and wrestlers who made achievements too. More of this sort of thing is how you get my money, WWE.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Flameingblack posted:Almost everyone in the Monday Night Wars had an on-going feud or were part of a large faction. Now the focus is almost entirely on the top 5 guys in the company, and some tag-teams. And even in the tag-team division, there's not a TON of character or feuding outside of Shield vs Wyatts. WWE has just decided that people aren't interested in mid-card feuds. Yeah, even with the tag teams it just seems like its either "I want the titles" or "we have tension." I'm all for simple storytelling but some effort would be nice. But I don't want to make this about criticism of WWE's booking. I just meant that This is NXT made NXT look like a company I'd want to follow and the Zayn/Cesaro feud one I would have liked to have watched. Its the closest I've come to buying the WWE Network and the best chance of me buying it soon is probably if I just do it on a whim tomorrow before Arrival. If I make it past Arrival then I'm pretty sure I won't be buying the Network for a very long time unless they start doing more live events for NXT. Because that's the sort of thing I'd like to watch. But wouldn't it be nice if WWE could take some booking cues from NXT? How backwards is that? Do they have archived NXT shows? I admit that after that if you told me they have every NXT show and I can go back and watch from the beginning that might put me over the edge.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:I haven't seen any ECW stuff but I have to feel like it's going to be missing something without all the cussing and Paul Heyman music copyright violations. Would I be better off tracking down the originals if I want to binge on ECW? Stripping ECW of all that stuff really takes a lot out of it. A lot of ECW was the ambiance and feel which was heavily set by Heyman's use of popular and recognizable music, all which became synonymous with the wrestlers. Another big part of ECW was the lewd, edgy promos and storylines and the atmosphere that didn't at all feel like a safe, family friendly WWF or WCW show. I wouldn't watch censored ECW shows, especially if its your first time. You'll lose a ton of what made ECW ECW and get the wrong impression. Love or hate ECW, what its sounds like the Network is presenting isn't ECW at all. Its the equivalent of those videos where people pull the laugh tracks out of sitcoms to prove they suck. Whether you love or hate The Big Bang Theory the fact is its made with a laugh track so if you just take that out then you're just not watching what they made anymore. UndergroundHero posted:Looking through old PPV's and it looks like they cut out the New Jack and Spike Dudley vs. Dudley Boys match from Guilty as Charged 1999. I didn't see it while watching the show and the PPV only clocks in at 2 hours and 14 minutes. This is probably a perfect example. Its quintessential ECW. I'd have to rewatch the match to be sure but I'd guess this match includes: - Joel Gertner being the crassest motherfucker in the world. - Bubba Ray Dudley trying to incite a riot with the crowd. - "Natural Born Killaz" playing through half the match. - Flaming tables? I wouldn't be surprised if WWE got half way through editing and censoring the match and just said "gently caress it, just erase the whole thing." Love it or hate it, that's ECW. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Feb 27, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
Deadpool posted:The thing about the censoring is that some of the stuff that was already digitized and cut for Classics on Demand is probably cut that way here too. Anything that wasn't probably has censorship on the harsher language. Like the ECW Hardcore Heaven promo from the Dudleys which only censors the slurs, any variation of gently caress, and dick. The rest of that promo is left intact. So if you see a WWE PPV which has a middle finger censored that's probably just because they're still using the Classics on Demand version. I watched both of the 1998 Raws on the day of launch and there's middle fingers all over the place. But didn't they have a couple of years to recut the original tapes? If they presented this as "uncut and uncensored" then "we cut this a couple of years ago and it was just easier to put it up than do it again" feels pretty cheap. Especially if it means you start a PPV and an entire match is missing. DeathChicken posted:It's just so wwe.txt that they'd launch a thing with the newer product and old stuff, then be surprised that anyone's paying attention to the old stuff. "Get the WWE Network and get access to all past WWE, WCW, and ECW PPVs uncut and uncensored!" "We already cut up those old ECW PPVs so lets just throw those censored ones up because its easier." "What? People actually wanted that stuff we sold the Network on? We can't handle that!"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Asked before, is there any NXT up archived. If I can go back and watch months of NXT I might buy for Arrival.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Yeah, the time table on this never made a ton of sense to me. Rolling out after the Rumble seems like it might have been a time when more fans were tuned in and it theoretically would have given them Extreme Rules to uses as a test. That also would give you a better chance that all the bugs were worked out by WM time so you could have a well reviewed and quality product to push when all those people are tuned in. It's going to be bad if they're pushing the Network at WM and some of these bugs persist. Personally I'm glad I didn't give in and buy it yesterday for Arrival hearing today that there were problems.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
elf help book posted:Instead of joining a free trial and missing a non-wrestling segment, you instead missed the entire thing. I get excited for live wrestling. I enjoy sitting down with a beer and some snacks and watch a live wrestling event the same way I enjoy a big game. I'm willing to pay for that if its a good enough game. Watching the show taped or having it interrupted by technical difficulties ruins that atmosphere for me and takes me out of it. I can still enjoy a good wrestling show that I know is taped or even know the results of, just like I can enjoy a good game I've seen before or seen the score of. But it takes something big away from my ideal enjoyment. Its fine if you don't share these feelings or preferences for watching wrestling. I don't imagine everyone does. It also sounds like people missed more than one "non wrestling segment" but I admit I haven't paid close attention to the results or details since I'll probably watch the taped version with a friend some time whenever. I just won't get that big event feel that almost had me hyped up enough to buy into the Network yesterday for the first time. The next time I consider it will probably be Wrestlemania. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
Jake Soo posted:The ECW censorship is getting ridiculous. Rewatched Heatwave 1998 and noticed that the commentary on the entrances was redubbed. Might not be bad, until I heard "Leading the way is Jinsei Shinzaki, known to you sports entertainment fans.." I'd have to hear to be sure but couldn't he be saying that as a knock towards WWE? He used to do that stuff all the time. Introduce a wrestler and take a shot at the poo poo gimmick they had in WWF or WCW. The point being that "wrestling fans" know Shinzaki as a high flying star of Japan while the "sports entertainment fans" know him as Hakushi, the guy with a Japanese takeout menu pasted all over his body.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
Well then that's pretty ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
oatgan posted:tony schiavone said "sports entertainment" all the time as well quote:joey styles is insufferable
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
That was the night I really learned to respect and appreciate Cena. He didn't get upset or try and change the crowd, he just recognized what he had to do and did it perfectly even if it went completely against his character. He recognized what the fans wanted and gave it to them. It's when I got that he's good at what he does and its the booking I hate. But compare that to how Batista has dealt with hostile crowds by just looking furious and flipping them off when the cameras stopped.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 09:07
|
|
|
Efexeye posted:I have friends that drive like 150 miles round trip to watch PPVs at my house. I'm going to be pretty cheesed if I end up having to spend $60 on 'Mania to make sure we can watch it "normally". Honestly, as much as it sucks if you're throwing a party your best bet is probably to take a collection and buy it on PPV. I just don't seem how WWE can run a proper stress test before WM and the Arrival problems have to scare people counting on WM. Maybe it will run clean and maybe it won't but without a PPV level event to test the Network on before then I don't see how you can be secure in it. And you probably won't know how it will go until during/after WM.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
Parlett316 posted:It's a green service, it's going to have it's bumps and bruises. I believe with the proper testing and push, this run will succeed and draw big money. I wasn't burying it. Some early problems are understandable. I'm less bothered by the early hiccups than some of the seemingly misadvertised ideas like "uncensored shows". But a lot of that stuff can work itself out. I honestly wouldn't make any kind of strong judgement of a new technology service until six months or so down the line when they've had time to work out the bugs, adjust to demand, and to see if they're still interested in improving it. But I do think if you're really counting on WM and have guests counting on it you have to be concerned. I don't think that's burying the Network, just being realistic about it and the problems it's had thus far.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Parlett316 posted:I used to order the PPVs and watch them live online from the web when I worked night shift. It would have a hiccup here or there but nothing crazy. I think the first one I ordered was the wrestlemania with HHH vs Cena. I don't see how the situations compare. Besides the fact that there's obviously going to be a much higher demand of users for this WM on the Network than past ones online they're also using a completely different system and service. The unfortunate reality of this situation seems to be that Wrestlemania is going to be a first flight for the Network dealing with that kind of demand.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Parlett316 posted:All I'm saying is it's a new service, it's going to have a rough time like all other online services we have seen. My posts weren't directed specifically at you but all the people jumping off the service during a free week trial. Does anyone remember how Steam went? And I think you're being offer defensive of the Network. When I suggest to someone worried about a WM party that he should consider just buying the show seperate that's because there are reasonable concerns about how stable the WM stream will go. That doesn't mean the overall Network is bad nor that future streams won't be better, just that for his immediate concerns the Network has a decent chance of ruining his party. And the people cancelling simply don't want to pay for a faulty service. If the Network works out its issues in the next month than they're able to subscribe then. The six months they pay for then will probably be a better, less bug free six months than if they stayed on after the trial week. And it seems totally unreasonable to judge people for not wanting to pay if they're not getting the full service. Sure, these sorts of things have problems and a lot of the time they get worked. Then again sometimes they don't. But either way no one has a responsibility to pay for the early, faulty service if they're willing to wait a little while to see how it goes. And even if all the VOD and app issues get sorted out the issue of the live WM stream is probably going to be a reasonable concern all the way through the event.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
The Grey posted:I know they thought it would be great promotion, but having Wrestlemania be the first PPV on the network was really a dumb idea. Yeah, they should have "opened" with Elimination Chamber or Royal Rumble and just done a bigger pressure a "grand opening" at Wrestlemania once all the bugs were worked out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Or maybe (and this is just an idea, not an accusation) you just bought into this reality show more than the other reality shows because it revolves around wrestling which you obviously love so much and have so much passion for. If you're able to buy into the fake emotion of a WWE match then why not the fake emotion of a reality show? Sure, you may not buy into Desperate Housewives or The Real World but shows like Total Divas and Legends House hit you in your vulnerable spot. I know you take offense to this word being used negatively but I'm just using it as it was originally intended. Maybe you're an "easy mark" in this case?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
A PPV isn't worth it to me unless its the culmination of stories and builds. A card filled with good matches is all well and good but I can get that in a hundred ways from just about any company. What sets a good WWE PPV apart from a random NJPW show or PWG show or ROH show is that I'm invested in the storylines and care about the matches I'm watching for more than just their technical prowess. That's why I'm skeptical of the "the PPVs are good its just the TV that's bad" line of thinking. I get it. If you're just looking to watch 3 hours of wrestling than a WWE PPV might be good wrestling. Especially now that they're part of the Network plan so a WWE PPV is like a random show on TV to a lot of fans, just something they're already paying for so whatever it gives good is a positive. But for me I still grade a PPV on how it pays off on stories. I think that's why there's such a divide with fans right now, especially with Hell in a Cell and Ambrose/Rollins. Some viewers saw Hell in a Cell as the culmination of that story and found it deeply unsatisfying and a flop. Others just saw Hell in a Cell as another Sunday night of wrestling that was pretty good.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:Why do they need network exclusive PPVs when they have PPVs? PPVs are very expensive to run and right now they aren't making their money back with 12 a month. KOTR can't even draw extra ratings on Raw when they run it, it isn't going to do anything as a Network special. Here's my thinking. NXT is the ONLY reason I ever consider buying the WWE Network. The archived shows are vaguely interesting but I don't have the kind of time to fully take advantage of that, I have other interests other than wrestling, and the complaints I heard about what's missing and the interface problems make me totally uninterested in this. If I can't even make a watchlist or resume a half watched show than its a joke of a streaming service. And "The PPVs are such a value" poses no attraction to me since I haven't bought a WWE PPV in years. Its like offering a sale of Cheetos. Sure, I might sometimes crave them but I don't really like them and I never buy them so just because they're cheaper than before doesn't mean I'd buy them. NXT is the only thing that ever makes me consider getting the Network because its different and unique. And I think if the WWE Network offered MORE unique and different wrestling products that maybe I'd feel more compelled to watch. Because 1 hour of NXT a week and a PPV event every 3 months isn't worth $9.99 a month to me. But maybe if there were unique and interesting events every month or every week? Maybe then it would be worth it? I said it early on in the WWE Network experiment but I'd kind of like to see WWE steal the One Night Only idea from TNA. Come up with a snazzy name and logo. Dress up the NXT Arena in some new colors. Grab a bunch of talents who are generally underused. King of the Ring. A CW tournament. A World Cup. A Divas show. Stuff like that which uses the talent and resources you already have and stand apart from the RAW/PPV product that people like me have next to no interest in. Maybe it will impact the subscriber numbers and maybe it won't, but I think the fundamental problem here is that the Network product just ISN'T that attractive or diverse and it seems to me that adding things to it is the most direct way of changing that. And different/new events are more interesting than "8 more episodes of RAW from 1996 uploaded!"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
See, I can enjoy NXT for what it is. Its its own thing, separate from WWE, and that's fine. In fact, that's the draw. I don't care what happens when the talents get to WWE. WWE sucks. I can appreciate NXT storylines separate from WWE the same way I can appreciate a ROH storyline and not care what that talent is doing in PWG. There's just not enough of that kind of thing to justify $10 a month for me. Which was my point before. Take Tyson Kidd, Justin Gabriel, Kofi Kingston, Kalisto, Adrian Neville, Sami Zayn, KENTA, and Fergal Devitt and run a simple, one night 8 man "World Cup/CW" tournament where they all get to show their stuff with a bullshit purse or trophy as the prize. Film it at the NXT arena, tape it at your leisure, and hype it for air and I might care about that. Sure, they're all jobbers on RAW or will be soon but if you let them shine for 3 hours I can enjoy that as a separate thing. And its nothing you're EVER going to do on RAW so its not like you're wasting it. On its own that doesn't get my $10 either but do enough of stuff like that and NXT and you're building a product I'm interested in.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 03:50 |
|
|
Well, you know, if you've been a loyal customer since day one then the message you're sending is "I'm totally satisfied with what my money is getting me" so you don't need extras. You want free stuff? Call up customer service and tell them to cancel your subscription. If they're like every cell phone company, cable company, and any other subscription based company I've ever had that's when they'll start offering you the discounts and free stuff. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2014 00:59
|
|