Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1

    wWE PPVs, Dish,DirecTV,U-Verse

    was just wondering. As heard last night, Dish, and DirecTV will not be carrying this PPV either. Then I rread this morning AT&T U-Verse will not either. So that just leaves cable providers and WWE Network. While the Network is obviously a great deal not everyone can get it. I live out in the sticks where its dialup, sattilte internet or thru your cellular providor. For years i used dialup which sucks. Now i use my cell providor whiich is vastly better. However i am now limted to how much bandwith i can use so the Network is out of the question for me. I just wonder how many other people are in my posistion. And do you think WWE is not doing the right thing and drop their PPV prices so Dish and others may carry them again?

    Rest in Peace Eva "Ezra"


    ^
    ah, Renee Young


  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by eyehatecena View Post
    was just wondering. As heard last night, Dish, and DirecTV will not be carrying this PPV either. Then I rread this morning AT&T U-Verse will not either. So that just leaves cable providers and WWE Network. While the Network is obviously a great deal not everyone can get it. I live out in the sticks where its dialup, sattilte internet or thru your cellular providor. For years i used dialup which sucks. Now i use my cell providor whiich is vastly better. However i am now limted to how much bandwith i can use so the Network is out of the question for me. I just wonder how many other people are in my posistion. And do you think WWE is not doing the right thing and drop their PPV prices so Dish and others may carry them again?
    While I think WWE could stand to drop a few dollars on their PPVs, I think in this case, it comes down to the DTV, DISH, and the other lot being upset WWE started putting PPVs out on their own, instead of staying with them. They are using the 'drop the prices' thing as their failsafe. "Yeah, well, they won't drop the price, so HA". It's commonly the argument they use when negotiating TV contracts.

    Dropping WWE hurts WWE short term, as far as money, but hurts DTV and them as well. That's just money they are throwing away. TNA doesn't generate nearly as much profit, and no indy company like ROH is going to make up for it.
    Kaige Chamberlain
    Ballad of an Asshole

    Former RTE Tag-Team Champion(w/ Xavier Hightower[1])
    Current EWNCW Tag-Team Champion (Solo; 3/30/14) [1]
    'Father' Black Angel:
    Preacher of the Voices

    Winner of BotN[Seraphim]



    I'm trying to be number one, why would I settle?
    @IWACreative_Parody Tweeter

     

  3. #3
    I actually could sign up for the Network but it would eat up my data usage and i would be charged a lot more for going over so its not worth it. As for wanting to watch/buy a PPV, its really not something that i would do- but if I decided that its a must see PPV and didn't mind forking over 50$ or whatever it cost, I am fucked. Yes, I can buy it when it comes out ond DVD but why? Its old news. Only one i get on dvd is WM, and its usually just for the HoF and a match or two

    Rest in Peace Eva "Ezra"


    ^
    ah, Renee Young


  4. #4
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Richardson, TX
    Posts
    737
    I wonder how soon clueless people will start to blame PPV buy rates on Daniel Bryan's title reign.




  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by ToiletBowl View Post
    I wonder how soon clueless people will start to blame PPV buy rates on Daniel Bryan's title reign.
    By clueless- do you mean the people who run WWE? lol

    Rest in Peace Eva "Ezra"


    ^
    ah, Renee Young


  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJosephBanks View Post
    While I think WWE could stand to drop a few dollars on their PPVs, I think in this case, it comes down to the DTV, DISH, and the other lot being upset WWE started putting PPVs out on their own, instead of staying with them. They are using the 'drop the prices' thing as their failsafe. "Yeah, well, they won't drop the price, so HA". It's commonly the argument they use when negotiating TV contracts.

    Dropping WWE hurts WWE short term, as far as money, but hurts DTV and them as well. That's just money they are throwing away. TNA doesn't generate nearly as much profit, and no indy company like ROH is going to make up for it.
    I hope it only hurts WWE in the short term. That said- the Network is nowhere near the numbers where WWE was hoping at this time

    As for Dish, DTV- they will make their money with others PPVs and movies- so its not gonna be bad on them

    Rest in Peace Eva "Ezra"


    ^
    ah, Renee Young


  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by eyehatecena View Post
    I hope it only hurts WWE in the short term. That said- the Network is nowhere near the numbers where WWE was hoping at this time

    As for Dish, DTV- they will make their money with others PPVs and movies- so its not gonna be bad on them
    While they were hoping for better numbers. 42 days after launch they had 667K. Almost 7/10s of the way to where they wanted to be, so I couldn't particularly see it as bad.

    They will, but still, they shouldn't just throw money away without having something set in place to take it over.
    Kaige Chamberlain
    Ballad of an Asshole

    Former RTE Tag-Team Champion(w/ Xavier Hightower[1])
    Current EWNCW Tag-Team Champion (Solo; 3/30/14) [1]
    'Father' Black Angel:
    Preacher of the Voices

    Winner of BotN[Seraphim]



    I'm trying to be number one, why would I settle?
    @IWACreative_Parody Tweeter

     

  8. #8
    could that that wwe was't really getting a lot of buys on sattilte. maybe the network is making more money for them then sattilte.



  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJosephBanks View Post
    While they were hoping for better numbers. 42 days after launch they had 667K. Almost 7/10s of the way to where they wanted to be, so I couldn't particularly see it as bad.

    They will, but still, they shouldn't just throw money away without having something set in place to take it over.
    I am a business major in college and I'm going based off my text books and professors, but according to both of them 70% of what you are expecting is never good. According to them you want at least 90% to be considered a success considering that your data is only supposed to be skewed by about 5%. Again I could be misreading this I am still only just a student, but from how I understand the date, 70% is not a good sign. Hope I'm wrong though as wrestling dies with WWE.
    Brad Maddox is the new face of the WWE!


  10. #10
    Moderator Asherdelampyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Boktor, Drasnia
    Posts
    10,791
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Kaymakcian View Post
    I am a business major in college and I'm going based off my text books and professors, but according to both of them 70% of what you are expecting is never good. According to them you want at least 90% to be considered a success considering that your data is only supposed to be skewed by about 5%. Again I could be misreading this I am still only just a student, but from how I understand the date, 70% is not a good sign. Hope I'm wrong though as wrestling dies with WWE.
    in 42 days, 70% is golden, given a typical 90 day rollout period. If we opened a new account at work and got 70% of goal for subscribers in the first 42 days, we'd throw a party. If the WWE had a shorter period to get that goal, then it may suck, but it really seems like they are playing the long game with the network (Given the 6 month minimum and the like)
    EHC, PM me with your zipcode, trust me.


    Say my name and his in the same breath, I dare you to say they taste they same.
     

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

© 2011 eWrestlingNews, All Rights Reserved.