Support NeoGAF

[bigkrev]

I understand they fear their death coming, but this would delay it no?

I'm not sure what you are asking . The reason they are getting money isn't because they sell ads (they don't), its because the amount of people viewing the Show allow USA to be the number 1 cable network on Average on a year-long basis (If WWE wasn't on, they would probably fall to Disney). So broadcasting the show on the Network, ads intact, does nothing for USA.

If WWE wanted to break the contract with USA, which is paying over 200 million dollars guaranteed a year for a unknown amount of years, they would need to add something like 1.7 million subscribers per month (and that's assuming 0% of the money goes to MLB.tv who powers the network) to get the same amount of money. And they would need to maintain that, because if people cancel, they would be fucked

 

[ElRenoRaven]

Wow. I thought it would do better then that. Still this just shows you that they have to get the promised content up. They promised all Raws, Smackdowns, Nitros, Thunders, etc and none of the WCW stuff other then PPVs has shown up.

 

[jmdajr]

This already happens.

it does?

 

[mreddie]

Wow. I thought it would do better then that. Still this just shows you that they have to get the promised content up. They promised all Raws, Smackdowns, Nitros, Thunders, etc and none of the WCW stuff other then PPVs has shown up.

Slow burn?

 

[Into]

They are so fucked with this thing, and who knows what the percentage of that 700k are actually international users using proxies and whatnot. Meanwhile WWE is telling investors there is this huge international audience, we will see

Best to trim down costs and make a profit with around 500k loyal fans who buy it for Mania and the hardcore retro stuff

The network has 700,000 subscribers as of 6/30. They didn't give an updated number. Between 4/7 and 6/30 they added 161,000 subscribers, but had 128,000 cancellations. They wouldn't give details but this is likely shortly after WrestleMania when they had the big jump in subscribers.

*The cancellation number is the huge story here.
Dave Meltzer

128k people figured out how you can cancel it. Lets see how many "cancel" in the official way, by not renewing

 

[mreddie]

They are so fucked with this thing, and who knows what the percentage of that 700k are actually international users using proxies and whatnot. Meanwhile WWE is telling investors there is this huge international audience, we will see

Best to trim down costs and make a profit with around 500k loyal fans who buy it for Mania and the hardcore retro stuff

The network has 700,000 subscribers as of 6/30. They didn't give an updated number. Between 4/7 and 6/30 they added 161,000 subscribers, but had 128,000 cancellations. They wouldn't give details but this is likely shortly after WrestleMania when they had the big jump in subscribers.

*The cancellation number is the huge story here.
Dave Meltzer

128k people figured out how you can cancel it. Lets see how many "cancel" in the official way, by not renewing

When were those? I suspect Cena winning the belt was the reason.

 

[Google]

it does?

It seems it's not on all platforms, but it works perfectly on PS3. You can watch a PPV, skip to the specific match because they're all bookmarked and pause and resume even after you've turned the console off.

 

[Into]

When were those? I suspect Cena winning the belt was the reason.

He dosent cite when the people cancelled, you can read most of important stuff:
http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-...7-dave-meltzer-notes-from-wwe-conference-call

*If they average 650,000 subscribers in the third quarter, they estimate OIBDA losses of $12 to $17 million in the next quarter, but with the cost cutbacks, annual OIBDA losses would be $25 million to $35 million. Previously they had estimated annual losses (not OIBDA, but total losses) at $45 million to $52 million.

*The network itself lost $15.5 million in OIBDA.

*The cutbacks are so significant that they now feel they can break even on 500,000 subscribers in 2015 as opposed to 1.4 million subscribers and at 1.5 million subscribers they will have OIBDA of $100 million to $120 million, which is more than they had pre-network.

*For the quarter, the company recorded $156.3 million in revenues and lost $14.5 million.

They pretty much need to cut costs to such a extent where 2 hamsters are employed to make get the Network working and one intern uploading content.

But for real:

* Limit WWE Network to one IP address that can only be shared by 2 people of the same IP
* Cut costs aka nice way to say fire people
* Hope international is a big number
* Beef up the Network with more shows, right now anyone who was into Nitro and/or Raw from that late 90s period has no reason to sub (or resub). Having all PPVs is almost pointless since they lack context. Its like having season finales of Sopranos but not the season itself
* Hope Reigns becomes the next Austin or something.

 

[Lambda Pie]

dead company walking.

 

[bigkrev]

It seems it's not on all platforms, but it works perfectly on PS3. You can watch a PPV, skip to the specific match because they're all bookmarked and pause and resume even after you've turned the console off.

Yep, and it's great- they bookmark the start of the match after the entrances, and they also bookmark the "finish" of the match ("Shawn Micheals Superkicks and Pins Jericho"). The only issue is that they normally don't bookmark Benoit matches- I was watching Backlash 2004 last night and was confused that there was a giant gap between the end of the last bookmark and the end of the show, because Benoit was in the main event.

 

[Killing_Joke]

What are you even talking about? People have posted many reasonable and valid reasons for why the network isn't living up to their expectations.

Because their favorite Raw episode from 1997 isn't up? Or because they couldn't have a RAW/SD simulcast because that would hurt them ever more? Here's what i expected. Good connection. $10 PPVs. And that's what i got.

There's plenty of stupid nitpicking to bitch about. But at the end of the day the network is solid. But hey if paying $50 or watching lamps is better in your eyes then more power to you.

 

[PaulLFC]

dead company walking.

It's not a good situation (not at all) but that's a bit of an overreaction.

According to the Observer they'll be expanding it to 170 countries on August 12, so they'll pick up more subscribers - how many is anyone's guess, but it'll be some.

The UK is coming later for some reason (October, despite Hogan appearing at Smackdown in London and announcing it "in time for SummerSlam"), which is probably one of their biggest markets after the US.

f4wonline also says this

The cutbacks are so significant that they now feel they can break even on 500,000 subscribers in 2015 as opposed to 1.4 million subscribers and at 1.5 million subscribers they will have OIBDA of $100 million to $120 million, which is more than they had pre-network.

Now how much trust we put in WWE's projections is a matter of debate (they're still running with that stupid survey saying something like "1 in 3 homes has a wrestling fan") - but if there's any truth to that, they're already over the "break even" point. Now they just have to stay there when it's time for cancellations.

 

[Rafa=FedKilla]

dead company walking.

Just like Dana.c

 

[Into]

Bryan Alvarez on their radio show is saying the number is 690.000, Meltzer called it "unbelievable"

The show was taped yesterday before the official 700k number, which might be WWE rounding up if Alvarez source is correct.

 

[RBH]

I don't understand, it hasn't been six months since launch yet, how could every addition not be a net addition for now?

128,000 subscribers managed to cancel their subscriptions either by letting their credit/debit cards expire, or by using PayPal to stop payment.

 

[bigkrev]

Now how much trust we put in WWE's projections is a matter of debate (they're still running with that stupid survey saying something like "1 in 3 homes has a wrestling fan") - but if there's any truth to that, they're already over the "break even" point. Now they just have to stay there when it's time for cancellations.

If I were guessing a year ago how many people would subscribe, I would take the number of WrestleMania buyers (at least 800K in the US the past few years), and assume all of them would sign up, because the cost of a 6 month subscription was cheaper than the cost of just buying WrestleMania. I would then assume that there was some percentage of my fanbase that would be willing to buy PPVs if they weren't expensive, and assume they would subscribe to the network(even if it's only 2% of the people who watch Raw are willing to do this, that's another 100K). I then would assume that everyone who used to subscribe to WWE 24/7 would buy the network, for the old stuff and the original programs. I'd assume that I could probably get 1 million subscribers early with this, and add a couple thousand each month (creation of new fans), with the occasional 15-20K boost (for Summerslam).

 

[BoboBrazil]

128,000 subscribers managed to cancel their subscriptions either by letting their credit/debit cards expire, or by using PayPal to stop payment.

Losing 20% of your subscriber base is so bad, especially when people didn't think they could cancel.

 

[Kornflayx]

I just want a secret livestream of Vinces office when the 6 month commitment is up. Vince will be lucky if he can keep 500k subscribers.

I live in Germany and everyone I know who's interested in the Network already uses unblock-us to watch it and most of them will not renew once the 6 months are up. The Q3 investor call will be a massacre.

 

[SymbiantXenos]

+1 when it's available in the uk. (I know there's ways around that but im cool waiting)

 

[CrashPrime]

So, why isn't Raw/Smackdown aired on the Network? Isn't that kind of the whole point of this?

I got in for some random free 2 week trial a few weeks ago (watched a few old ECW PPV's, watched Bash at the Beach '96, and searched for 90's era RAW ... and was left holding my dick) but I was totally shocked by the fact that the new episodes airing were nowhere to be found.

 

[mrboo001]

It probably means that canadians will need to go through a rogers front-end to access the online content. BAsically you'll need to verify your rogers credentials (think WatchESPN)

What a bunch of horseshit.

Wait I need cable to get the WWE Network in Canada?

FUCK YOU CRTC, WWE AND ROGERS

Well said.

 

[Plinko]

People who keep asking why RAW/Smackdown isn't shown on the Network:

Don't current TV deals prevent airing on another network?

 

[bigkrev]

So, why isn't Raw/Smackdown aired on the Network? Isn't that kind of the whole point of this?

An over 200 Million dollar guaranteed contract they signed a month ago in America that keeps it exclusive to Television (to the point that USA, who puts all of their shows on Hulu, only allows a 90 minute edit of the 3 hour broadcast to go up on Hulu).

 

[nateeasy]

They need to cut their losses and just shut down the company.

 

[jmdajr]

People who keep asking why RAW/Smackdown isn't shown on the Network:

Don't current TV deals prevent airing on another network?

yes

 

[daycru]

Comcast pays WWE $200,000,000 a year for rights to Raw and Smackdown, WWE can't just do whatever they want with the footage. Month delay ensues USA and Syfy aren't bleeding viewers to the Network.

 

[SoulPlaya]

Comcast pays WWE $200,000,000 a year for rights to Raw and Smackdown, WWE can't just do whatever they want with the footage. Month delay ensues USA and Syfy aren't bleeding viewers to the Network.

While I get your premise, I think your numbers are way off.

Comcast currently pays $90 million, and will start paying $150 million when the new TV deal kicks in.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...-wwe-stock-falls-tv-deals-20140516-story.html

 

[daycru]

While I get your premise, I think your numbers are way off.

Comcast currently pays $90 million, and will start paying $150 million when the new TV deal kicks in.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...-wwe-stock-falls-tv-deals-20140516-story.html

You're right, the $200M number is worldwide.

 

[Anth0ny]

Can't WWE put highlights of Raw on the Network?

If there's 90 minute Raw on hulu, why not 60 minute Raw on WWE Network? (genuine question, surely there's a good reason why they can't)

 

[bigkrev]

Can't WWE put highlights of Raw on the Network?

If there's 90 minute Raw on hulu, why not 60 minute Raw on WWE Network? (genuine question, surely there's a good reason why they can't)

Hulu has contracts with the networks to put their shows up. USA only allows for a 90 minute version to be put on Hulu. USA would have to have a contract with WWE if WWE wanted to put Raw up on the network.

That said, they do have "This Week in WWE" on the Network, which is a show that is nothing but clips from Raw and Smackdown

 

[Darkangel]

Is WWE Films profitable?

They should make the Gears of War movie.

 

[Anth0ny]

Hulu has contracts with the networks to put their shows up. USA only allows for a 90 minute version to be put on Hulu. USA would have to have a contract with WWE if WWE wanted to put Raw up on the network.

That said, they do have "This Week in WWE" on the Network, which is a show that is nothing but clips from Raw and Smackdown

I see. So current Raws on the Network aren't happening, even in condensed form, until 30 days pass. Bummer.

 

[Shiv47]

I can't say I'm surprised by the numbers; wrestling is a niche product, whatever their ratings for Raw and Smackdown are, and it will likely always remain so. The number of people who care enough to subscribe to a network dedicated to it has to be pretty small. I subscribe to the network primarily to watch the PPVs; I was in eighth grade when the first Wrestlemania aired, and that is still the only PPV I ever paid for. Ten bucks a month, though, and all the archival stuff? I can do that. I'll certainly never pay $60 or whatever they were before the network - that's nuts.

 

[Spider from Mars]

They just need to put the top of the hour segments of each Raw on the network, because that is the only time something important happens. You can watch a 3 hour Raw in 20 minutes and miss nothing of substance.

put the 20 minute version on the network!

 

[CartridgeBlower]

See Vince,

This is why you don't destroy your entire business model in one swoop.

WWE network needed to either

1) Go all in with all content live.

2) Be an archive of on-demand old matches and specials.

Giving away the PPV but not the TV product was really, really dumb.

This is exactly the problem. It was taking half of a chance. One foot in, one foot out. Terrible.

And now that they just signed their new TV deal, who knows what kind of assurances (time wise) they gave the networks about not showing Raw and Smackdown on the network. That may not be in the cards for years now, so Vince is handcuffed and unable to pull that trigger even if he suddenly decided he wanted to.

 

[Parch]

Which means that I require a subscription to either of those services, which I don't have, and nor would I subscribe to cable/satellite/IPTV just for that.

It's not even on the main SportsNet channel and not part of the basic cable package in most areas. They show all the WWE stuff on SN360, which requires you to buy an additional package of sports channels.

 

[NastyBook]

See Vince,

This is why you don't destroy your entire business model in one swoop.

WWE network needed to either

1) Go all in with all content live.

2) Be an archive of on-demand old matches and specials.

Giving away the PPV but not the TV product was really, really dumb.

Yup. Pretty much only using the network for the PPVs at this point. I signed up primarily to watch old Nitros because I love the Cruiserweight division of the WCW.

 

[CartridgeBlower]

Why the hell is it taking so much time to put up the old Nitros, too? Licensing somehow, even though they own it? I don't get it.

 

[ChosenPredator]

the canada thing is mind boggling, I can't believe thats even real, lol.

 

[bigkrev]

Why the hell is it taking so much time to put up the old Nitros, too? Licensing somehow, even though they own it? I don't get it.

Digitizing the footage takes time, as does edits (anytime a phone number shows up they blur it out with a "Number not in service" warning, editing out music). And considering how they have budgeted out the rest of the year, they maybe have 1 or 2 people working on this

 

[Killing_Joke]

WWE wasn't going after the TV crowd with the Network. That's painfully obvious. They make a lot of money with TV. It's the one of the reasons why they continue to exist actually. They would need at least 5+mil subs to make up for it. The average RAW only hits about 4mil viewers. No TV deal would ever allow a simulcast I'm not even sure how any one could expect that. They should however put RAW/SD at least the day after. But i'm not sure if Hulu or any past contracts is stopping that. But that's probably the best we'll ever get.

 

[somedevil]

Digitizing the footage takes time, as does edits (anytime a phone number shows up they blur it out with a "Number not in service" warning, editing out music). And considering how they have budgeted out the rest of the year, they maybe have 1 or 2 people working on this

Also, it makes me wonder because the old Raws are two months behind till Nitro debuts. So I wonder when the old Raws get to Sept 1995 they will start putting up the nitros as well.

 

[bigkrev]

Oh, and the other thing that might be taking time? The shows they did digitize for DVD releases and WWE 24/7 had the Scratch logo edited out (and that logo was everywhere, from the turnbuckles, to the apron, to the logo at the bottom of the screen, ect). Now that they have the rights to use it again, they have to go back in and un-edit those shows

Also, it makes me wonder because the old Raws are two months behind till Nitro debuts. So I wonder when the old Raws get to Sept 1995 they will start putting up the nitros as well.

That's a perfectly reasonable theory that would also be close to the time for renewals for most people.

 

[Anth0ny]

I don't know if putting up EVERY old Raw/Nitro at once is such a great idea. Neither is their current strategy (one old Raw a week, if that?)

I'm thinking a year's worth of Raw (all of 1997) right when most subscriptions are set to expire (end of August) makes sense. Maybe you put a year of Nitro too, since the situation is so dire. Everything all at once is like... you sign up for six months, watch what you want to watch, and then you're done with the Network forever. Gotta keep people resubscribing, but there is NOT enough content up right now. All of the PPVs ain't worth much when you don't have the accompanying Raws and Nitros.

The original content is mostly garbage, too. And lets not get started on the current product.

 

[JKRMA]

Ouch at the Canada deal. Not available on computers, tablets, consoles or smartphones. I have cable already that I barely watch, it's just mostly for my family so it being an actual channel will have no benefit for me and I assume many many people. People are cord cutting left and right.

 

[Officerrob]

If this isn't a downright disaster, it's pretty fucking close. Also, when we last got network subscriber numbers, we got an exact number, this looks to be rounded-up to me.

 

[BoboBrazil]

If this isn't a downright disaster, it's pretty fucking close. Also, when we last got network subscriber numbers, we got an exact number, this looks to be rounded-up to me.

Real number is 690k per Bryan Alvarez.

 

[Officerrob]

Real number is 690k per Bryan Alvarez.

That's just...abysmal. They are going to lose a nice chunk here when people opt out after the six month commitment as well.

Edit: Meltzer said those 10k cancelled in July. I'm guessing right after Cena won the title...

 

[StylesClash]

That's just...abysmal. They are going to lose a nice chunk here when people opt out after the six month commitment as well.

Edit: Meltzer said those 10k cancelled in July. I'm guessing right after Cena won the title...

That's when I knew I was done.

 

[The Silver]

I'm cancelling my subscription, I wanna watch the AE era and they're dragging their feet, I aint got time for that.