Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

JANUARY 2021 Discussion of Wrestling


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, mattdangerously said:

How many people are actually watching? Raw is hovering around 2 million viewers a week. It's hard to argue that they're popular when no one is watching. 

Disagreeing with their popularity being at an all time low isn’t the same as saying they’re popular.

You’re throwing out that 2 million number without any sort of context or background information due to confirmation bias.  Out of last week’s ten highest rated network programs, the one with the smallest audience was an episode of the voice with 7 million viewers.  On cable, the top ten program with the lowest viewers was a Maddow ep with a 2.3 rating and 3.4 million viewers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can throw out all the excuses you want, but if less people are watching a TV show than they were previously, then that's a pretty decent indication it's not as popular as it used to be.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mattdangerously said:

You can throw out all the excuses you want, but if less people are watching a TV show than they were previously, then that's a pretty decent indication it's not as popular as it used to be.

I'm not like, rooting for the show to fail or anything, but unless I'm interpreting the numbers completely wrong (possible!) Raw is bleeding viewers way faster than the rate of other cable shows, so you really can't go by the whole "Well, no one watches TV anymore" thing

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mattdangerously said:

You can throw out all the excuses you want, but if less people are watching a TV show than they were previously, then that's a pretty decent indication it's not as popular as it used to be.

I don’t disagree, but it’s also not a pretty decent indication that it’s historically unpopular.

You do realize that the Peacock deal doesn’t even include the weekly live Raws, right? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mattdangerously said:

This never would have happened under Jack Donaghy's watch, though.

I don't know. Sure, he's the man behind huge summer hits like Milf Island and he's the reason the microwave tray spins. But he's had his misses. Remember KouchTown?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

51 minutes ago, Boydy said:

When I was a kid I think I watched all of them. I remember California Dreams, City Guys and Hang Time definitely. They come just after Saved By The Bell ended and just before Boy Meets World come along in my tv viewing as a kid.

Happy memorie.

Topanga from Boy Meets World was having twitter beef with FTR last week. Apparently she's a big fan of The Acclaimed.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AxB said:

 

Topanga from Boy Meets World was having twitter beef with FTR last week. Apparently she's a big fan of The Acclaimed.

Checkmate, '80s kids. Kelly Kapowski ain't #AllElite

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boydy said:

When I was a kid I think I watched all of them. I remember California Dreams, City Guys and Hang Time definitely. They come just after Saved By The Bell ended and just before Boy Meets World come along in my tv viewing as a kid.

Happy memorie.

I would always watch USA High, the show they produced and deemed not good enough for the NBC Saturday morning lineup, because it came on immediately after WWF Superstars on USA. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Peacock made this purchase with the idea that it's worth it because WWE Network's user base is big enough that they can make up the shortfall through advertising.

Has anyone discussed how WWE Network's numbers are hilariously inflated by all the free months, etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Technico Support said:

Peacock made this purchase with the idea that it's worth it because WWE Network's user base is big enough that they can make up the shortfall through advertising.

Has anyone discussed how WWE Network's numbers are hilariously inflated by all the free months, etc?

They are also probably banking on the inflated numbers from the "Free" subs turning over into $5 subscribers who stick around for the non WWE content.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Technico Support said:

Peacock made this purchase with the idea that it's worth it because WWE Network's user base is big enough that they can make up the shortfall through advertising.

Has anyone discussed how WWE Network's numbers are hilariously inflated by all the free months, etc?

I imagine mookie or Brandon Thurston have looked at the numbers if they’re available. Last time I checked, which has been almost two years now, you couldn’t sign up for more than one free month without using a new email and credit card.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, paintedbynumbers said:

Peacock would be so much better if they added all the old video game cartoons they used to air Saturday Mornings such as Captain N,  Zelda,  and the one with Gretzky, Bo Jackson, and Michael Jordan.  Anyone remember those?

hell yeah! i loved Captain N and ProStars!  Legend of Zelda was laughably bad but i ate it up. 

i'd imagine that tv execs have bought into the "wrestling is cyclical" argument and think they're getting in before the fanbase rockets back up.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Technico Support said:

Peacock made this purchase with the idea that it's worth it because WWE Network's user base is big enough that they can make up the shortfall through advertising.

Has anyone discussed how WWE Network's numbers are hilariously inflated by all the free months, etc?

I do think it's still at least 1 million paid, but I'm not sure if that's worldwide or not. Let's assume that's just the US though. This is simplifying things by a ton, by on the surface, NBC/Comcast's rationale looks like they value each customer at around $1,000 and to bring in a million more customers into their app instantly then the cost is $1b.

I'm only a graphic designer and communications specialist so what do I know, but to me, that seems like a gross overspend considering those additional million users they'll suddenly have in March my not give much of a shit about, uh, AP Bio or Save by the Bell or the Psych movie. At least with Paramount, they have very unique programming for their app like the Star Trek stuff. I don't see NBC having much of a selling point there outside of the Office and Parks and Rec.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, twiztor said:

hell yeah! i loved Captain N and ProStars!  Legend of Zelda was laughably bad but i ate it up. 

i'd imagine that tv execs have bought into the "wrestling is cyclical" argument and think they're getting in before the fanbase rockets back up.

So, to show an example of how fucking annoyed I am at my old man brain, I can still remember how the theme song for ProStars goes, but I can't remember family trip stuff from 6 years ago 😕

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Morganti said:

They are also probably banking on the inflated numbers from the "Free" subs turning over into $5 subscribers who stick around for the non WWE content.

Ah, right.  Good point.

34 minutes ago, Craig H said:

I'm only a graphic designer and communications specialist so what do I know, but to me, that seems like a gross overspend considering those additional million users they'll suddenly have in March my not give much of a shit about, uh, AP Bio or Save by the Bell or the Psych movie. At least with Paramount, they have very unique programming for their app like the Star Trek stuff. I don't see NBC having much of a selling point there outside of the Office and Parks and Rec.

I'm only an IT guy/middle manager but it feels really overinflated to me as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not saying NBCU over valued the WWE network and what it might bring to peacock, but I can also see it being a huge value add through cross over, both ways.  People who might be tangentially interested in old wrasslin binges like binging The Office or Parks and Rec will be happy to have one service.  and for someone like me who was never gonna get peacock any other way, if the accounts are merged, suddenly I can be like aight, I can dig this.

 

From a purely corp consolidation standpoint, since Disney wasn't gonna scoop them up, and since NBCU got rid of their hulu stake, I can see it making sense to the C Suite folks of both companies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking into things more, Peacock supposedly already has over 20 million subscribers, although I don’t know of that includes the free tier.

As for overinflation, remember that value is relative. Peacock paid roughly half a billion for the rights to The Office for five years. Reports are that WWE is getting around a billion for the Network over five years.  For twice as much money as they paid for one show, Peacock is getting vastly more archived content in addition to new content every month and (presumably) new paying subscribers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Morganti said:

I am not saying NBCU over valued the WWE network and what it might bring to peacock, but I can also see it being a huge value add through cross over, both ways.  People who might be tangentially interested in old wrasslin binges like binging The Office or Parks and Rec will be happy to have one service.  and for someone like me who was never gonna get peacock any other way, if the accounts are merged, suddenly I can be like aight, I can dig this.

 

From a purely corp consolidation standpoint, since Disney wasn't gonna scoop them up, and since NBCU got rid of their hulu stake, I can see it making sense to the C Suite folks of both companies.

I've seen several analyses (from mainstream media, not wrestling press) suggesting that, even in the best case scenario, NBC overpaid.   The same articles suggested it added value to the service, though.

i like Peacock and feel like it it's worth $5 (though it's free to me through Xfinity).  I also think, for what's offered, it's kind of inessential.  I'd drop Peacock without a thought before I drop any of my other streaming services.  I imagine things might improve once long-term contracts for NBC content on other channels expire.  Peacock offers Law and Order, for example, but only season 13 on.  I assume the rights to the first 12 seasons are tied up with one of the 7-10 channels in my cable package that shows L&O reruns.

WWE doesn't change my thinking about Peacock.  I'll probably watch a few of the PPV's but I'm a former subscriber to the Network and have minimal interest in revisiting it.  Peacock has House.  That's much more interesting to me at the moment.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I don't think I've seen mentioned about the Peacock purchase... what is the advertising budget of Peacock? And what amount of that did they allocate to this purchase? In addition to the actual network they purchased, they've now get what amounts to 5 prime time hours of promotion every week on USA Network, and probably more importantly 2 prime time hours of promotion on Fox. We all know how WWE hammers people over the head non-stop with whatever they're pushing. They are gonna run the promotion of Peacock into the ground during the weekly shows. And that advertising makes the price make a little more sense. They get the WWE Network and 1,800ish hours of potential promotion over the next 5 years. On two networks.
 

It's a ton of content. It's a ton of advertising. It's roughly 1 million subscription growth. I still think $1 billion is a major overvaluation. But I kinda get it when you look at the whole package.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...