PDA

View Full Version : Poor PPVs are partly down to streamers.



URATOOL
06-19-2012, 06:29 PM
I see after every PPV we get the same complaints being posted on here. Poor matches, no build up, filler matches and crap non-action segments. Have you ever stop to think maybe it's partly the 'fans' fault.

The WWE is a business and the wrestlers (entertainers) are demanding employees. A hell of a lots of money is needed to keep that Juggernaut rolling. They tour the world with dozens of well paid performers and many, many crew members. They produce shows in small, medium and huge arenas. They broadcast 4 or 5 TV shows a week. This doesn't costs 4 bucks and a can of Pepsi. It's costs millions and millions of dollars (shut it Titus and Darren).

So how do they fund this entertainment monster? Well you pay for it. Every cent they bring in comes from you, either directly or in-directly. PPV buys, merch sales, ticket sales and sponsorship (yes you pay for that to, by buying the products that are advertised). So what happens when literally tens of thousands (possibly even hundreds of thousand) of you stream PPVs rather than pay for them? They fill the income gap. One easy way to do this is have a PPV every month. With that kind of schedule, how do you expect them to pump out a quality PPV with such short run ups!

I've never streamed. If I want to watch the PPV I pay for it. I've paid for 11 out of the last 12 if memory serves me. How many of you can say the same? Or are you to busy bitching about something you didn't even pay for?

K2Jelly
06-19-2012, 06:32 PM
That's an interesting theory.

Whether it's true or not, streamers ruin things in more ways than one. Like you, I never stream. I either pay for the PPV or if I know it's gonna blow, just watch Ryan Clark refresh the results as they go on.

akbar
06-19-2012, 06:34 PM
I stream because I'm broke but I critic the show in a fair manner.

clrj3514
06-19-2012, 06:48 PM
I've streamed maybe 3 or 4 PPVs in like 2 years but never watched one start to finish. Then again though I don't whine when things don't go exactly the way I want. Do I complain? Sure, we all do. I think my Dad & I ordered 3 maybe 4 last year. $55 is a lot to fork out but it's a necessary thing now. Too bad they can't be $25/30 & people leave the streams.

CGBigMan
06-19-2012, 06:55 PM
if i stream its normally a last min thing if i cant sleep
or something ive highly anticipated but cant afford

interesting theory

drumn4life0789
06-19-2012, 06:57 PM
the cause and affect here are completely backwards. I stream everything except for mania. I do this for many reasons. I don't have the money to pay for a ppv every 25 days or so. And I think a lot of people who stream are in this boat. As in if the streams got cutoff then they would not go buy the ppv and I think the WWE has started to realize this. About a year ago to a year and a half streams would get shut off left and right. You would have to find atleast 2 or 3 in a night because atleast one was guaranteed to be shutdown.

Even if I did have the money, I would not be buying current WWE ppv's. They are nothing special and it really doesn't have much to do with the time in between ppv's. It all has to do with storyline. The problem is they try and get the same people on the every single ppv. If they developed storylines for people other than the champs and cena they could have certain feuds overlap ppv's and not have the same rundown repetitive stuff that we have now.

Just wondering did you enjoy those ppv's that you bought?

Tomsta666
06-19-2012, 07:02 PM
I will continue to stream. Bitch about it. Not feel guilty!!

Nothing else to add really :rolleyes:

Robstar
06-19-2012, 07:12 PM
So, is the argument you put forth that WWE is deliberately giving us a shitty product to teach the streamers a lesson, attempting to get them to stop streaming and then they'll somehow make it good again? Are WWE not that concerned with quality product? Does it remove the fact that WWE is making money hand over fist and is attempting to do that at every available opportunity? Sorry, I don't think that makes sense.

People would be complaining even more if they were actually paying for it, I'd think. And then, on another hand - people are going to complain anyway. It's the nature of the beast called humanity. There's an argument to be made that one affects the other sure, but WWE is trying to maintain a company of juggernaut proportions and a great proportion of their mission statement would be - find a way to make more money than we did last year.

But ultimately - I would think that decreased PPV buys would force the hand of WWE into making less PPV's, and while that would mean an amount of downsizing, it would make for a healthier company and by extension, a healthier industry.

So actually - streamers might be the saviours? ;)

akbar
06-19-2012, 07:20 PM
I've streamed maybe 3 or 4 PPVs in like 2 years but never watched one start to finish. Then again though I don't whine when things don't go exactly the way I want. Do I complain? Sure, we all do. I think my Dad & I ordered 3 maybe 4 last year. $55 is a lot to fork out but it's a necessary thing now. Too bad they can't be $25/30 & people leave the streams.
$55?!?! That's pretty expensive...in UK it's £15 which is about $30.

Amerinaine
06-19-2012, 07:23 PM
$55?!?! That's pretty expensive...in UK it's £15 which is about $30.

I would have to pay $45 USD to see a PPV. That is just too much to pay to watch Every PPV. I pay for the major PPV's and stream the others. (Includes TNA). If I had a better job, I'd pay for all of them. Unfortunately, I don't have a job, so WWE can kiss my grits right now with their expensive PPV's. I can go watch a Movie and get 3 popcorns and a Soda for about 45 dollars.

K2Jelly
06-19-2012, 07:24 PM
So, is the argument you put forth that WWE is deliberately giving us a shitty product to teach the streamers a lesson, attempting to get them to stop streaming and then they'll somehow make it good again? Are WWE not that concerned with quality product? Does it remove the fact that WWE is making money hand over fist and is attempting to do that at every available opportunity? Sorry, I don't think that makes sense.

People would be complaining even more if they were actually paying for it, I'd think. And then, on another hand - people are going to complain anyway. It's the nature of the beast called humanity. There's an argument to be made that one affects the other sure, but WWE is trying to maintain a company of juggernaut proportions and a great proportion of their mission statement would be - find a way to make more money than we did last year.

But ultimately - I would think that decreased PPV buys would force the hand of WWE into making less PPV's, and while that would mean an amount of downsizing, it would make for a healthier company and by extension, a healthier industry.

So actually - streamers might be the saviours? ;)

No. What he's saying is this: the fact that streamers stream for PPV's is what's costing WWE money. Therefore, to make up for it, they need to have monthly PPV's to rake in more cash. The problem with that is that with more PPV's, there''s less time to build up storylines and make decent feuds. That's what he's saying.

Robstar
06-19-2012, 07:35 PM
No. What he's saying is this: the fact that streamers stream for PPV's is what's costing WWE money. Therefore, to make up for it, they need to have monthly PPV's to rake in more cash. The problem with that is that with more PPV's, there''s less time to build up storylines and make decent feuds. That's what he's saying.

But if you read the rest of my post you'll see the absurdity of disputing it. I know what he's saying - I just think it's a pointless argument. WWE is obsessed with maintaining their size, I understand that - but market forces have changed the rules on them and they're scrambling to keep up by trying to fulfil their bottom line; to turn a profit. It will ultimately be their undoing. If there was some way of controlling the streams, that'd be a different story. Like a lot of other users, I can't afford to pay for it. Just having basic cable would cost me in excess of $100 per month and then each PPV is $50 on top of that. I'm a single parent. It's cheaper for me to have the internet. If the costs being set by WWE and providers weren't so high, I would consider paying for it. But can you blame me for streaming it? Or should I go without completely?

JSullivan
06-19-2012, 07:37 PM
So, is the argument you put forth that WWE is deliberately giving us a shitty product to teach the streamers a lesson, attempting to get them to stop streaming and then they'll somehow make it good again? Are WWE not that concerned with quality product? Does it remove the fact that WWE is making money hand over fist and is attempting to do that at every available opportunity? Sorry, I don't think that makes sense.

People would be complaining even more if they were actually paying for it, I'd think. And then, on another hand - people are going to complain anyway. It's the nature of the beast called humanity. There's an argument to be made that one affects the other sure, but WWE is trying to maintain a company of juggernaut proportions and a great proportion of their mission statement would be - find a way to make more money than we did last year.

But ultimately - I would think that decreased PPV buys would force the hand of WWE into making less PPV's, and while that would mean an amount of downsizing, it would make for a healthier company and by extension, a healthier industry.

So actually - streamers might be the saviours? ;)

We have our winner.

WWE can taste my left nut if they think I'm gonna pay for these 2 week feuds and 18 second title changes at the biggest events they have.

I'll pay when they produce, and until then, I'll stream.

MachoManFan
06-19-2012, 07:46 PM
I neither stream nor pay, I torrent. I can't afford to buy the PPVs that actually are nor Sky Sports for the freebie ones. I rarely bitch about quality though. I used to have a system with some mates where one of us would buy the PPV and we'd all go round and watch it, chipping in a few quid each for the cost.

As for the point, I understand that wrestlers need time off to recover and WWE can't make every PPV Wrestlemana quality (which I always buy) but I would say the solution is to go back to fewer PPVs so 1) wrestlers are less tired, 2) storylines have more time to develop which creates more buzz and makes people more likely to watch and C) means they are more affordable. I don't disagree with TOOLIE's point, he's probably right, but it's a vicious circle: if a PPV is crap one might stream the next one, revenues go down so WWE put less effort in resulting in a crap PPV...

The solution is for the fans to stand up for what they enjoy and PAY FOR PPVs when WWE book matches we want to see, I can't help but think John Cena would disappear if everytime the IWC flavour of the month was in the main event they sold twice as many PPVs.

JSullivan
06-19-2012, 07:51 PM
I neither stream nor pay, I torrent. I can't afford to buy the PPVs that actually are nor Sky Sports for the freebie ones. I rarely bitch about quality though. I used to have a system with some mates where one of us would buy the PPV and we'd all go round and watch it, chipping in a few quid each for the cost.

As for the point, I understand that wrestlers need time off to recover and WWE can't make every PPV Wrestlemana quality (which I always buy) but I would say the solution is to go back to fewer PPVs so 1) wrestlers are less tired, 2) storylines have more time to develop which creates more buzz and makes people more likely to watch and C) means they are more affordable. I don't disagree with TOOLIE's point, he's probably right, but it's a vicious circle: if a PPV is crap one might stream the next one, revenues go down so WWE put less effort in resulting in a crap PPV...

The solution is for the fans to stand up for what they enjoy and PAY FOR PPVs when WWE book matches we want to see, I can't help but think John Cena would disappear if everytime the IWC flavour of the month was in the main event they sold twice as many PPVs.

150% this.

I've been saying this for a while.

I also think we need some classics back - Survivor Series, King of the Ring etc in place of stupid PPV's like Elimination Chamber and Hell in a Cell - BIG matches like those have lost their prestige of people having survived them, because just about everyone has been involved in them now.

Robstar
06-19-2012, 07:52 PM
I neither stream nor pay, I torrent. I can't afford to buy the PPVs that actually are nor Sky Sports for the freebie ones. I rarely bitch about quality though. I used to have a system with some mates where one of us would buy the PPV and we'd all go round and watch it, chipping in a few quid each for the cost.

As for the point, I understand that wrestlers need time off to recover and WWE can't make every PPV Wrestlemana quality (which I always buy) but I would say the solution is to go back to fewer PPVs so 1) wrestlers are less tired, 2) storylines have more time to develop which creates more buzz and makes people more likely to watch and C) means they are more affordable. I don't disagree with TOOLIE's point, he's probably right, but it's a vicious circle: if a PPV is crap one might stream the next one, revenues go down so WWE put less effort in resulting in a crap PPV...

The solution is for the fans to stand up for what they enjoy and PAY FOR PPVs when WWE book matches we want to see, I can't help but think John Cena would disappear if everytime the IWC flavour of the month was in the main event they sold twice as many PPVs.

That would be assuming that most of the WWE paying public were actually internet users. Over half are not - they are actually paying to go to shows, they're buying Cena merch. That's the bottom line for WWE: merch sales and asses in seats

Rated_R(ob)KO
06-19-2012, 08:05 PM
I've paid for every single PPV for every month since 2001 since I got my own job. And ever since 2005 when I moved out on my own, nothing has stopped me from buying it. Granted, I make $15.00 an hour base pay and $22.50 every hour of overtime but, that's because I don't stay at one low paying job and complain that I don't have any money either.

The point is, URATOOL is actually right. There's a lot to run a business, especially one that big that has an IPO.

JSullivan
06-19-2012, 08:06 PM
That would be assuming that most of the WWE paying public were actually internet users. Over half are not - they are actually paying to go to shows, they're buying Cena merch. That's the bottom line for WWE: merch sales and asses in seats

Exactly the same as with bands.

Shows make more than album sales.

K2Jelly
06-19-2012, 08:15 PM
Doesn't more PPVs rake in more cash through sponsorship?

I'm just paraphrasing what URATOOL said.

Rated_R(ob)KO
06-19-2012, 08:16 PM
Doesn't more PPVs rake in more cash through sponsorship?

No. There's no actual sponsorship for PPV's usually except the band that does the theme song, the army and whatever one sponsor usually does, like Snickers or 7-Eleven. There's not multiple like TV. Also, THE 'E have to pay for their PPV spot which is like 25% of buys.

YOUcanCALLmeCRACK
06-19-2012, 08:38 PM
So what happens when literally tens of thousands (possibly even hundreds of thousand) of you stream PPVs rather than pay for them? They fill the income gap. One easy way to do this is have a PPV every month. With that kind of schedule, how do you expect them to pump out a quality PPV with such short run ups!

I absolutely (but respectfully) disagree with this section.

First, it is the WWE's fault that they overcharge for these PPVs. With today's economy, and demand not being what it once was for wrestling, WWE is really asking for an unfair amount of money. Simple supply and demand tells you this. It is not our faults they feel to pay millions and millions of dollars for these wrestlers, their corporate headquarters, and senate elections.

$50 is a lot of money out of a person's pocket. Not to mention asking for it 14 times a year.

Second, just because they have 14 PPVs, does not mean that they have the right to be lazy with the creative. If they were smart about it, they would use those two or three weeks between the shorten PPV build ups to continue unresolved feuds at the last PPV. Again, you sound like you are blaming the streamers for not being invested.

Many people (including myself) watch PPVs out of pure habit. I stream because there is no way I can afford $700 for WWE PPVs a year. Plus TNA and ROH. Even though your assessment of the 14 PPVs a year is correct, I feel it unfair. It is easy for one to say "look I buy all the PPVs so you should" when you are not in anyone else's shoes. People do not have the means and frankly it is foolish to support something that is not entertaining you.

I guarantee you that if streams were not around, the PPV buy rates would be exactly the same with less ratings in TV and merch sales. People will simply not tune in once a month on Sunday nights and eventually stop watching because there is not point of watching if you can not see the climax of a feud.

Viperfish
06-19-2012, 08:38 PM
I've never streamed. If I want to watch the PPV I pay for it. I've paid for 11 out of the last 12 if memory serves me. How many of you can say the same? Or are you to busy bitching about something you didn't even pay for?

Not to defend streamers, but not everyone can afford a staggering $659.88 USD a year on PPVs(this is assuming you buy all 12 in HD). Figure in the cost of merchandise and tickets every time they come to town and parents must be thrilled that their children are into wrestling.

The cost of actually living on this planet is going up every year in most places... I don't think PPVs are high on most peoples' priority lists. Let's use an example as it relates to me. Skyrim cost me only 5 bucks more and I've gotten almost 180 hours of entertainment out of it so far(and still going)... so you tell me what the better investment is. I'm not saying everyone games, but I don't consider 55 bucks for 3 hours of television to be a good deal. Most people can do better than that for 55 bucks.

I'm fortunate enough to have a group of friends into wrestling and we rotate... one of us will buy and the rest will bring eats and bum off them, and then next PPV someone else buys. Good times watching with friends, but how many people are fortunate to be real life friends with wrestling fans? We're at a time now where it's not cool to be a wrestling fan. At one time it was different but we've kind of slipped back into closet fan status.

EDIT: Just saw the post above. 14 PPVs eh? That's $769.86 a year then.

EDIT 2: I think it's a broken philosophy to demand that we keep supporting a crappy product(subjective of course, that's not my opinion on it) with our money in the hopes that things get better when they make enough money to give a shit. If they aren't giving a shit, why should I? This is what happens when WWE thinks they're not competing with anyone on television. The Monday Night Wars was only between WWE and WCW... I hate to break it to you but the Monday Night Wars NEVER stopped, WWE competes with everything else that's on television when they're on. They also compete with everything else out there today when it comes to how people spend their money. To not put your best foot forward and win people over is frankly an incredibly stupid business decision, unless of course it's a direct result of not being able to afford better than what you have... but cost is not in an equal relationship with entertainment, the ratio is not 1:1.

Robstar
06-19-2012, 08:53 PM
They should be glad I paid for my $150 per seat tickets for the Raw tour - and that's not even floor!

dragonsrevenge
06-19-2012, 08:54 PM
I stream because now, more than ever the motherfuckers are charging 40 bucks for an episode of Raw. And because they're 40 bucks. If they want me to think about buying they're gonna have to start making the storylines consistent, compelling, logical, and just make the fucking thing entertaining, as well as having the PPVs serve as deserved payoff to those storylines.

YOUcanCALLmeCRACK
06-19-2012, 08:55 PM
They should be glad I paid for my $150 per seat tickets for the Raw tour - and that's not even floor!

Obviously I do not know your financial situation but ouch! At that price you almost are better off just watching at home in HD. Less of a commute, cheaper food, and you don't have to sit next to any 45 year old Cena fans :p

K2Jelly
06-19-2012, 08:55 PM
They should be glad I paid for my $150 per seat tickets for the Raw tour - and that's not even floor!

$150? I paid less than that for TLC tickets that were one section away from floor. :/

Amerinaine
06-19-2012, 08:59 PM
They should be glad I paid for my $150 per seat tickets for the Raw tour - and that's not even floor!

I spend about $500 for RAW, SmackDown and PPV seats when they are in the Tulsa, OKC, Denver, KC and St. Louis area. I'll go to all the tapings that are around me. I spend money on floor seats for one of the shows a year.

LostOmega
06-19-2012, 09:26 PM
So basically what you're saying is that because we streamers take money away from the income made off of PPVs, the WWE has made more in order to fill a gap... I'm sorry but I have to disagree with that. The WWE makes enough money off of everything else they do and shitty PPV sales is not a viable excuse for shitty PPVs. No Way Out failed in every way imaginable to impress me so there's no way in hell I'm paying for the next PPV up on the block. If the WWE wants people to pay up then they need to 1. lower prices and 2. give us quality PPVs. I am NOT going to pay $55 for a PPV with a tuxedo match. That's just disgraceful.

bartish2
06-19-2012, 09:29 PM
People are not going to pay for garbage. Some people who did pay still felt ripped off, we saved ourselves money. Maybe if we continue to do this they would be motivated to actually make good PPVs worth our money. I have purchased PPV's before but I am not going to order it if its not worth the money, some are not even worth my time.

K2Jelly
06-19-2012, 09:32 PM
So, if you know the PPV's gonna suck, why stream at all?

YOUcanCALLmeCRACK
06-19-2012, 09:47 PM
So, if you know the PPV's gonna suck, why stream at all?


Mostly habit. Plus you can pick and choose matches that have potential.

SESAfro
06-19-2012, 10:20 PM
Yeah, but being a college student in an internship brings in no money what-so-ever for me to be buying PPVs.

HCollins-TNA1
06-19-2012, 10:39 PM
If the option is there to watch it for free.... Lots of people will choose to.... As many have said who is going shell 45 dollars 11 times year as well as 55 once a year if they can't afford it.... Not many will.... But still they probably have enough PPV buys to make a profit....

I see what is being said from all POVs here.... Streaming hurts the product!!! But how many people that watches RAW about 4.5 million...Smackdown under or at 2 million..... Pays or streams the PPV product of the month??? Usually a WWE PPV do say 200,000 buys..

Maybe the solution to curb the streaming issue is to reduce the number of PPVs and move certain or all PPVs to the WWE Network airs??? As also said lots of factors makes up for how WWE gets it money from Sponsors, to merchandise sales, and etc... so who to say it a big loss??
Do I complain yes and no... If I see fit or something that don't make sense such as having Job matches on a PPV well that shouldn't happen esp in cases you know the no name jobbers isn't going to win!!

Robstar
06-19-2012, 11:12 PM
Obviously I do not know your financial situation but ouch! At that price you almost are better off just watching at home in HD. Less of a commute, cheaper food, and you don't have to sit next to any 45 year old Cena fans :p


$150? I paid less than that for TLC tickets that were one section away from floor. :/

If you take into account the cost of bringing the production to Australia, insufficient promotion (they'll send someone down a few weeks prior to try hype it when it's gone on sale months before) and a really-don't-give-a-fuck-if-we-sell-out attitude since they're not televising then those prices are to be expected. They come down here once a year, only to ensure that they satiate the already existing wrestling fan. They're not interested in making new fans here really. The reality is they'll half fill a large venue (if that) since to book something smaller might show signs of weakness. At least thats what I think

URATOOL
06-20-2012, 05:16 AM
Having read most of the replies in this thread I have some questions for the streamers. And try and be honest with your answers.

1) If the PPVs were as good as you think they could reasonably make them, would you pay the current prices they charge? Cause some of you seem to be saying "I'm not paying cause the product is poor quality".

2) If they cut the price, by say a third, would you start paying? I'm puzzled by some of your PPV prices. Cause I pay $39.99 for regular PPVs and $49.99 for WM. Sounds like the Yanks are getting raped at $55 for a standard PPV.

3) Do you seriously think if streaming was stopped tomorrow there wouldn't be an increase in PPV buys?

Robstar
06-20-2012, 06:24 AM
Having read most of the replies in this thread I have some questions for the streamers. And try and be honest with your answers.

1) If the PPVs were as good as you think they could reasonably make them, would you pay the current prices they charge? Cause some of you seem to be saying "I'm not paying cause the product is poor quality".

If that is as good as they can make them, I really think they're in trouble.

2) If they cut the price, by say a third, would you start paying? I'm puzzled by some of your PPV prices. Cause I pay $39.99 for regular PPVs and $49.99 for WM. Sounds like the Yanks are getting raped at $55 for a standard PPV.

I can't really afford cable at the current time. When I did have it last year, I would purchase maybe 2 ppv's and read the result of the rest as they became available. I admit I have started streaming since I got decent internet - actually NWO was my first WWE ppv stream. I've streamed a couple of TNA ones and a few Raws. I do question if most fans could maintain the level of commitment to wrestling it took me when I was mostly just reading results for the better part of the last few years.

3) Do you seriously think if streaming was stopped tomorrow there wouldn't be an increase in PPV buys?

I still couldn't afford to buy them more than once or twice a year - actually now I write that I realise that it goes beyond that - I simply wasn't drawn in enough by storylines to fork out for more PPV's than that. Even though they run slightly cheaper I would still find the money to watch UFC ppv's. It's just far, far, far more compelling and interesting. As it is, I've found when streaming I'm not that interested in actually watching it - I'm in chat talking about it and mostly listening to it happen. So yeah, I guess the answer for me is I find the product incredibly predictable and stale but I'm still a fan.

I just don't think they're doing much to inspire my loyalty to the point where I feel bad about what I'm doing. Perhaps if they weren't getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year....which is why I do feel a slight twinge of guilt streaming TNA ppvs, but it's my only chance to view the product.

bartish2
06-20-2012, 08:43 AM
1) If the PPVs were as good as you think they could reasonably make them, would you pay the current prices they charge? Cause some of you seem to be saying "I'm not paying cause the product is poor quality".
Yes, I HAVE purchased a few pay per views before because I was interested enough to buy them, some of them delivered... most were a dissapointment

2) If they cut the price, by say a third, would you start paying? I'm puzzled by some of your PPV prices. Cause I pay $39.99 for regular PPVs and $49.99 for WM. Sounds like the Yanks are getting raped at $55 for a standard PPV.
Problem is, most cannot or do not want to pay almost 50$ per PPV and most are not worth it. Here is our problem, too expensive, not worth it... and it would cost almost a thousand dollars a year for all PPV's... yeah no thanks. Waste 50$ on most likely horrible PPV or stream for free? yeah not a hard decision. and why you ask watch if its horrible? who would turn down a free wrestling ppv? better than raws & we would buy if it was worth it & cheaper... I have but the product isnt worth my money right now. They would think I am paying for the boring cena matches when I would want to pay for the title matches. Until the product gets better and or prices decrease, stream will continue.

3) Do you seriously think if streaming was stopped tomorrow there wouldn't be an increase in PPV buys?
If they lowered the price, there would be a increase in buys... if the price remained the same the buys would not budge much. Nobody wants to spent 50$ on something thats probably not worth their money, 40-60$ depending on the PPV is alot to spend, especially in this economy and especially when you are not even guaranteed good quality wrestling. People want quality for their money or they won't buy.

lewism173
06-20-2012, 12:56 PM
I live in Scotland the ppv's are on at 1 in the morning, I have school the next day I can't really order a ppv and sit in the living room watching it obviously my parents arent going to let a 14 year old or even a 18 19 year old stay up until 4 am they have school, work, uni etc so I do have to stream that, I can watch wrestlemania and I do pay for it though

Automatic
06-20-2012, 01:27 PM
I am forced to download.

But I quite like it actually.

I actually tried to buy a PPV once, but I don't have the necessary stuff for it.

If WWE produced more compelling TV, more people would buy the PPV's. People who illegally download are a small percentage in comparison to the people who buy.

rodrik
06-20-2012, 01:31 PM
I get what you mean, but you have to take in account that in some country's, you can't watch wwe, for example I live in Belgium, you can't watch wwe here on tv, so I have no other choice but to stream online

Cabers
06-20-2012, 02:07 PM
I stream because I'm broke but I critic the show in a fair manner.

Exactly my problem!!

jwt15
06-20-2012, 02:41 PM
I never pay and how can they expect us to with the shit they put out? I mean if they were on a role maybe I would buy but I can't spend 50.00 for something that will suck like Big Show/Cena

evilgenius780
06-20-2012, 04:35 PM
I'm kind of a sucker, I don't think I've not ordered a PPV since 1998 (WCW or WWE), you can stream it, all good..but really if you watch it for free, why bitch? I don't even bitch if it sucks, my own damn fault for buying it.

Robstar
06-20-2012, 06:37 PM
Some think that the line between critiquing and bitching is quite fine, if existent at all

bearkg88
06-20-2012, 06:47 PM
Some think that the line between critiquing and bitching is quite fine, if existent at all

I think it is how you come off in regards to reviewing a product.

rhyno535
06-20-2012, 08:13 PM
A question. I dont know how much you guys in USA earn every month but here in Sweden we have the money and i would be very happy to buy a PPV if i knew how. I watch a stream for every PPV and every Raw because i love WWE. The thing is that if they want to earn more money from PPV buys they need to start to have good storylines. If im going to compare to the attitude era ill do it. In 2000 they hade 14 PPVs and on those 14 PPVs we hade almost a storyline for every match on the card. It doesnt matter if it was a 7card PPV or a 11card PPV it had a storyline. Sure some of them sucked but still we knew why they were on the PPV. Thats what WWE is lacking, good writers. I dont know how many house shows they had back then but you cant say that the writers are burned out because it was almost the same thing back at the attitude era, 2hours Raw 2hours Smackdown 3hours PPV. So if you have a storyline so we know why they are on the PPV and not some unannounced squash match, we can pay WWE the money they deserved from us fans.

Robstar
06-20-2012, 10:26 PM
@rhyno535 - are PPV's tied up with cable services there? That might be your problem

HCollins-TNA1
06-20-2012, 11:37 PM
@rhyno535 - are PPV's tied up with cable services there? That might be your problem

Do PPV buys matter overseas like it does in some or most cases(or as the companies make it seem that way) as it does here in the USA???
With limited TV access in some countries...