WWE RAW MOVING TO NETFLIX! EVERYBODY PANIC!!!!

[ExcellenceofAirPollution]

8 minutes ago, SirSmUgly said:

I wonder if it's more or less of a downgrade in visibility than the move to TNN/Spike was. 

I'd say more, but it's such a different world now....

[Dolfan in NYC]

6 hours ago, Kevin Wilson said:

This is not the main thing to take away from this but something I thought about - after 30 years of talking about RAW Ratings (UP? DOWN? VS NITRO? VS TNA? VS AEW?) that will finally end. Netflix not only doesn't like releasing numbers but the numbers wouldn't be 1:1 anyway. Their viewing reports (if they keep releasing them) will be interesting but aren't measured the same way. What will people do with their extra free time.

WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF POOR DAVE? 

[Matt D]

11 minutes ago, SirSmUgly said:

I wonder if it's more or less of a downgrade in visibility than the move to TNN/Spike was. 

It's hard not to feel that a big chunk of the current boom has to do with the fact that so many people had Peacock for free over the last few years. People who traditionally watch Raw will go out of their way to watch Raw. This made it a lot more accessible, especially to kids who (anecdotally) seem to make up a huge chunk of said boom.

[odessasteps]

9 minutes ago, John from Cincinnati said:

Am I crazy for thinking Netflix is ubiquitous enough that it’s at worst a neutral move in terms of visibility? Among streamers, I think it’s the only one you could credibly make that claim about. 

I'd think going to Amazon Prime would be better for visibility/synergy. Imagine if they guaranteed a Raw banner ad on the front page of Amazon dot com every week. 

[ExcellenceofAirPollution]

1 minute ago, odessasteps said:

I'd think going to Amazon Prime would be better for visibility/synergy. Imagine if they guaranteed a Raw banner ad on the front page of Amazon dot com every week. 

That was my thought too.  Would love to know the difference in bidding.....Amazon doesn't need them....Netflix clearly thought they did

[Phantom Lord]

I was surprised to read this news earlier. I figured Amazon would get them if a streamer were to win. Has Netflix live broadcast anything aside from Chris Rock's new special? I watched that and it went off without a hitch (I think). Well it's a brave new world with content and how it's shown so we'll see how this all works.

[StretchMediatedHypertrophy]

18 minutes ago, AxB said:

Sky lost WWE like 4 years ago. They've been on BT Sports/ TNT Sports since January 2020.

As far as the third hour, RAW as a 3 hour show with 42 minutes of Wrestling Television and 18 minutes of commercials, is 126 minutes long. A 2 hour show without commercials but with an overrun is like the same length.

I beat you to the punch by 1 minute muahahaha.

[Cobra Commander]

like Dave couldn't make some friend at Netflix who will source stuff to him?

[John from Cincinnati]

8 minutes ago, Phantom Lord said:

Has Netflix live broadcast anything aside from Chris Rock's new special? 

They’re going to air the SAG awards live on Netflix next month. Me and dozens of other people will be watching. 

[Zakk_Sabbath]

1 hour ago, StretchMediatedHypertrophy said:

you're Tony, do you think 'f it' and consider running Monday nights?

Yup. I said similar in the AEW/ROH Finances thread cause I wasn't sure if it would be appropriate here in a more WWE/breaking news oriented thread (and the last thing I want is to be the 'Ugh, why are you bringing up AEW? No one even mentioned them' guy).

I know Khan doesn't want to compete with the NFL on cable as Jags owner, but MNF isn't what it used to be - SNF and the 1PT/4ET are the big games now. I understand linear, live TV is no longer the be all, end all, but counting PTW, you have almost 40 years of people being in the habit of sitting down to watch wrestling Monday nights on cable - I think TK and WBD would have to be crazy not to at least consider moving Collision to Mondays and taking advantage of those viewer habits. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work, but there's zero way it does worse than it does on Saturdays (plus it frees the night up for PPVs and, if they ever start giving a shit about them, BOTB). I mean, if it means that much to him, move it back to Saturday 16 weeks a year - it isn't like Dynamite and Rampage would be going anywhere, so it's a lateral move back to the current situation at WORST.

Edit: yes it was 900 years ago and no one has cable anymore, but TNA didnt do that much worse than AEW's current numbers in 2010 AGAINST Raw. I feel really, really strongly about this being worth a shot.

Edited January 23 by Zakk_Sabbath

[Cobra Commander]

scheduling-wise, I wonder how many AEW guys wouldn't mind getting Collision off of Mondays so that (a) they don't have to try avoiding embarrassing attendances on Saturdays for their B show and (b) they can work Saturday Indy shows to supplement income instead of maybe working every other Collision

I think the non-wrestling attendance competition would be lighter on Mondays than Saturdays too.

Maybe setup a schedule where Collisions are on Mondays, Dynamites are on Wednesdays, and Rampage is taped at Collision and/or Dynamite. So that the schedule most weeks is Monday/Wednesday.

Wrestling companies typically don't give up televised programming easily no matter how much I dislike Raw being 3 hours or AEW running multiple two hour shows per week.

Wonder how many weeks a year AEW could run 90 minute shows from 6-7:30 Central (7-8:30 Eastern) on Mondays to try and be the pre-MNF program and avoid taking the full force of running directly against MNF. Maybe pretend it's different since it's a 90 minute show, even if you probably have to tape it on Sunday since it'll be a tough ask to get people in an arena for a show in that timeslot (like if you're in Pacific Time)

[Matt D]

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-netflix-pro-wrestling-wwe-deal-makes-sense-2024-1?amp
 

Business Insider says it’s all about ads. 

[odessasteps]

2 minutes ago, Matt D said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-netflix-pro-wrestling-wwe-deal-makes-sense-2024-1?amp
 

Business Insider says it’s all about ads. 

And how you play them 

[piranesi]

forever

forever

for....Netflix LLC has decided to take a value downgrade for tax purposes. The following content will be leaving this month.

[SirSmUgly]

1 hour ago, Matt D said:

It's hard not to feel that a big chunk of the current boom has to do with the fact that so many people had Peacock for free over the last few years. People who traditionally watch Raw will go out of their way to watch Raw. This made it a lot more accessible, especially to kids who (anecdotally) seem to make up a huge chunk of said boom.

I genuinely have a hard time conceptualizing that there's currently a boom. Are we saying this because WWE and AEW are doing well in the rights game? What constitutes a boom in a more fragmented market where only the NFL has clearly universal pull among viewers of all types?

[Infinit]

It's crazy that they announced this on the 40th anniversary of the birth of Hulkamania.

[Raziel]

52 minutes ago, SirSmUgly said:

I genuinely have a hard time conceptualizing that there's currently a boom. Are we saying this because WWE and AEW are doing well in the rights game? What constitutes a boom in a more fragmented market where only the NFL has clearly universal pull among viewers of all types?

It may not be a boom, but we are indeed likely in the hottest Era of pro-wrestling since the Monday Night War, and by far the most accessible. 

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

53 minutes ago, SirSmUgly said:

I genuinely have a hard time conceptualizing that there's currently a boom. Are we saying this because WWE and AEW are doing well in the rights game? What constitutes a boom in a more fragmented market where only the NFL has clearly universal pull among viewers of all types?

It depends on what metric people would use for a "boom". Tickets sold? Eyes on the show? TV ratings? Gate? Trending on social media? How many groups are successful? How many individual people are successful? That can be argued non-stop. What was a boom in the 1980s isn't the same as what was a boom in the 1990s, and that isn't the same as what was a boom now.

But I would say that if everything else on TV is drowning but TV products like pro wrestling are getting Big Four sports level rights fees and their gates are near or at record levels? We're probably in a boom.

[odessasteps]

Makes sense, given the wrestling is often the worst when the business is at its hottest to a mainstream audience. 

[Elsalvajeloco]

Just now, odessasteps said:

Makes sense, given the wrestling is often the worst when the business is at its hottest to a mainstream audience. 

I dunno if that's necessarily true post going national when it's clear 1991-1995 pro wrestling in North America was in the doldrums for a good reason. I grew up with that wrestling, but it ain't anything I would trade in to go back to outside of small bits and pieces of history.

[GuerrillaMonsoon]

55 minutes ago, Infinit said:

It's crazy that they announced this on the 40th anniversary of the birth of Hulkamania.

Also the 20th anniversary of Hulk being given the chance to get in on the ground floor of Netflix, but declined as he was too far along in negotiations with what then became the Foreman Grill.

[odessasteps]

20 minutes ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

I dunno if that's necessarily true post going national when it's clear 1991-1995 pro wrestling in North America was in the doldrums for a good reason. I grew up with that wrestling, but it ain't anything I would trade in to go back to outside of small bits and pieces of history.

I think the traditional talking point, at least for WWF, is that the in ring product (and later skits) was not great in both the expansion era and attitude era. 

Since I don't watch anything current, outside of the occasional cmll show, I can only go by word of mouth on stuff now, which also had tonbe filtered through the tribalism lens. 

[Matt D]

1 hour ago, SirSmUgly said:

I genuinely have a hard time conceptualizing that there's currently a boom. Are we saying this because WWE and AEW are doing well in the rights game? What constitutes a boom in a more fragmented market where only the NFL has clearly universal pull among viewers of all types?

I was going on the crazy sell outs everywhere.

[Elsalvajeloco]

13 hours ago, odessasteps said:

I think the traditional talking point, at least for WWF, is that the in ring product (and later skits) was not great in both the expansion era and attitude era. 

Since I don't watch anything current, outside of the occasional cmll show, I can only go by word of mouth on stuff now, which also had tonbe filtered through the tribalism lens. 

I would argue that you could say 1998-2001 WWF that the high points are extremely high and the low points are some of the lowest (especially prior to significant roster change over once ECW and WCW are on the verge of going out of business). However, because you didn't have those points, at no point does it reach the level of mediocrity of the downswing of Hulkamania into the mid 90s. In ring, it's no contest cause the main events and most of the notable matches are largely significantly better in the Attitude Era. There is no way in hell you could put on a PPV as bad as King of the Ring 1994 today. It's virtually impossible. However, because of tastes, you're going to get a bunch of notable events where opinions are divided. 

[Octopus]

I’m Excited for the return of the Thunderdome