odessasteps Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 The sports channels also have networks on cable for shoulder programming like old games and talking head shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilwaldo Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 2 hours ago, Charlie M. said: I'm not sure I buy that WWE needed to toss all the PPV's on the Network. There's still a lot of money in PPV if you know how to promote. I prefer UFC's more reasonable approach to a streaming service where they're gradually building it up and it's there if they need it for more. I don't think you can say they're way ahead of the curve with their streaming service without some context. What do you mean by that? The major league sports all have streaming services and most of them are miles ahead of WWE when it comes to the quality and functionality of their live streams. This goes back a long time but PPV monies were typically paid out 90 days after the event and the company only kept 50-65% with the cable company keeping the rest. With the Network you get the $9.95 every month with no middleman (cable company). I guess it comes down to how many more eyeballs Network wise and how much more in ad revenues can you generate internally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 The tape libraries and original content are the key to the Network. Any jerk can stream PPV for free. At least when I was a kid you needed the black box. I'd honestly probably pay $10 for Nitro and NXT by themselves. I can tell you that the last PPV I actually paid for before the Network was probably WM XIX 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odessasteps Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 10 minutes ago, evilwaldo said: This goes back a long time but PPV monies were typically paid out 90 days after the event and the company only kept 50-65% with the cable company keeping the rest. With the Network you get the $9.95 every month with no middleman (cable company). I guess it comes down to how many more eyeballs Network wise and how much more in ad revenues can you generate internally. I assume MLBAM gets a piece of the $9.95. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 1 minute ago, odessasteps said: I assume MLBAM gets a piece of the $9.95. That's actually a fantastic question, I'm extremely curious as to the answer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoKnowsWrestling Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 They pay mlb just like the nhl does. Not sure how much though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 I'm shocked that WWE Films generates revenue. I assumed it was still a money pit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolCB Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 9 minutes ago, Ace said: I'm shocked that WWE Films generates revenue. I assumed it was still a money pit. They should remake The Money Pit. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggulator Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 9 minutes ago, Ace said: I'm shocked that WWE Films generates revenue. I assumed it was still a money pit. They put no money into it, either. Not sure why they have it but it is such a blip on their map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 I think being a movie studio was one of Vince's grand ideas like WBF or XFL, but he was a lot quicker about backing off when he realized it wouldn't make any money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggulator Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 43 minutes ago, steve said: I think being a movie studio was one of Vince's grand ideas like WBF or XFL, but he was a lot quicker about backing off when he realized it wouldn't make any money. Taking risks are what a CEO should do. As well as walking away from when a project isn't working. And that's what he did in both the WBF and XFL. And the film division, to a certain degree. Like... Vince is REALLY good at running a business. It is amazing that the people who follow wrestling the most appreciate him the least. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidNatural Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 47 minutes ago, Greggulator said: Taking risks are what a CEO should do. As well as walking away from when a project isn't working. And that's what he did in both the WBF and XFL. And the film division, to a certain degree. Like... Vince is REALLY good at running a business. It is amazing that the people who follow wrestling the most appreciate him the least. It's not the money that he's making that's the problem, it's the money that he's leaving on the table. If they produced compelling television and streamlined the announcing, they'd make even more. I've said it before the WWE is like Adam Sandler, they're comfortable making the money that they make and don't care if they make more. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 I wasn't taking a shot at Vince, I was giving him credit for learning from past mistakes, FWIW. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 1 hour ago, Greggulator said: Taking risks are what a CEO should do. As well as walking away from when a project isn't working. And that's what he did in both the WBF and XFL. And the film division, to a certain degree. Like... Vince is REALLY good at running a business. It is amazing that the people who follow wrestling the most appreciate him the least. I agree with what you're saying, but the one thing I wanna say in regard to your post is this: the show really isn't targeted toward the people who follow wrestling the most anymore. The highest viewership might be amongst the adult males 24-54 demographic, but they're still getting kids. Even in decades previous. We all started watching when we were kids, didn't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeeball Wizard Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 3 hours ago, PetrolCB said: They should remake The Money Pit. The biggest problem with the movies is, they're all paint by numbers copies of the others. The newest one with Ziggler had a chance, started out fun, but then fell into the same pattern as the ones that proceded it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuerrillaMonsoon Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 I like that Bret Hart's insults are like his moveset. He has his own set of insults that he hasn't changed up since 1975, and still uses them despite them not aging well.........then buries that lousy, no-good nitwit Ric Flair who doesn't know anything about anything for doing the exact same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Lord Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 4 hours ago, PetrolCB said: They should remake The Money Pit. Ambrose would be perfect for Tom Hank's role. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolCB Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Renee is Shelly Long? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SorceressKnight Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 2 hours ago, Skeeball Wizard said: The biggest problem with the movies is, they're all paint by numbers copies of the others. The newest one with Ziggler had a chance, started out fun, but then fell into the same pattern as the ones that proceded it. Honestly, though, that's the biggest reason that WWE Films can make revenue now. WWE Films spent too much time trying to be a legitimate movie studio and it was a money pit, then too much time trying to be a serious movie studio and having that fail miserably. Now, on the other hand, WWE Films has finally gotten a Zen-like acceptance of their situation: WWE Films projects will always be treated as shitty Z-grade direct to DVD action movies or horror films, they're never going to be a serious studio...and if they just make shitty Z-grade direct to DVD action movies or horror films, they'll be dirt cheap to make as super-low-budget fare, get the same response they'd get if they actually put money in the film, and the "WWE" name is just enough for someone looking through Walmart to actually buy the DVD at levels comparable action movies wouldn't be able to pull off (leading to them having a better chance to turn a profit on the crap than comparable production studios would have.) Really, the only place WWE is doing WWE Films poorly is not putting WWE Films on the WWE Network. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydneybrown Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 2 hours ago, Phantom Lord said: Ambrose would be perfect for Tom Hank's role. I know what he meant, but I would love to believe that Phantom thinks one of the most famous actors in the world is named Tom Hank. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolCB Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 Or Hank Toms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Lord Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 1 hour ago, sydneybrown said: I know what he meant, but I would love to believe that Phantom thinks one of the most famous actors in the world is named Tom Hank. I didn't even notice I put that in there. I'm sure he would see the humor in it though. MR. HANK...MR. HANK. Seriously though they got gold with Ambrose if they do a buddy cop comedy. Hell, get the rights to a sequel for Turner & Hooch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted May 12, 2016 Author Share Posted May 12, 2016 Just to go back to the Hawaii show for a minute The quoted part is from the newest WON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxB Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 5 hours ago, PetrolCB said: Renee is Shelly Long? I know someone called Shelly Long. Not this one: This one: I saw her husband yesterday. She's only got the same name as a famous person because she married him, like Emma Dale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTTW Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 6 hours ago, SorceressKnight said: WWE Films spent too much time trying to be a legitimate movie studio and it was a money pit, then too much time trying to be a serious movie studio and having that fail miserably. Isn't anything the WWE puts their logo on pretty much doomed to fail? XFL, WBF, Ico Pro, WWE New York, WWECW, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts