DirecTV angry with WWE. May pull PPVs.

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by leprechaun106317, Jan 10, 2014.

  1. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    24,581
    1,425
    Nov 13, 2006
    Actually, not at all. Thats why what they have done is shooting themselves in the foot. They have now made themselves available to anyone with any internet at all a la cart.

    Its one thing to be a la cart for cable and sat dealers, but to basically bypass them all and go strait to the people, wheres the incentive for dtv to spend money to show something they likely will not make money on.

    And flock? Sorry, its not that popular by any means. Thats why they went the way they did, they couldnt get providers to pay the price he wanted for the channel via regular channels. He over values his product most likely.

    Think of it this way, they just priced themselves as being more popular than Netflix. Do you think any cable or sat provider would offer them that much money? No way.
     
  2. Araxen

    Araxen Icon

    794
    7
    Dec 18, 2005
    Not popular? it isn't as popular as it was in the 90's but when MNF isn't on Raw is the #1 show on Cable even during the down years they are in now. They are giving away the PPV's on their Internet service and hoping to pick up a better TV deal to offset the money they are gonig to lose. They'll get the TV deal because either USA sinks down to #4 and loses ad money or someone outbids the USA Network.
     
  3. ws_sw

    ws_sw New Member

    11
    1
    Jan 10, 2014
    them using 720p is pathetic, and if the content was 480i videotaped - it should not be upconverted - and 720p with 4mb still sucks
     
  4. sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member

    14,692
    384
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    While you're right about the ratings on TV, I believe the popularity for the PPVs is dwindling a bit. I believe the buy rate for the biggest PPV every year, WrestleMania, was around 750,000 over every provider available. That's not much for the biggest event.
     
  5. sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member

    14,692
    384
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    That's not true. Netflix Super HD (1080p) doesn't require near that.
    [​IMG]
     
  6. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,536
    1,496
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Netflix Super HD is 24 fps (i.e. intended for movies that are filmed at 24 fps)

    If you wanted "better than broadcast 720p / better than broadcast 1080i" 1080p, i.e. 1080p @ 60 fps, you'd need more than 2x what Netflix states is required for "Super HD".
     
  7. ws_sw

    ws_sw New Member

    11
    1
    Jan 10, 2014
    no mtter what the chart claims, you need 20mb or more to guarntee no jerkiness and no maCRO BLOCKING
     
  8. BuffaloTF

    BuffaloTF Cool Member

    41
    0
    Dec 21, 2007
    This is rather genius. Not for me at my age - at least until my son gets older - but PPVs used to be a big social event for us, with a good 10 at a bare minimum pitching in for the fee. Same for boxing and UFC now. It seems their goal would be to encourage groups like mine and many others to have several people subscribing... And make more money on volume. And I think they'll be wildly successful with that offering.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  9. dualsub2006

    dualsub2006 Icon

    883
    21
    Aug 28, 2007
    Nobody was willing to carry WWE, so WWE did their own thing.

    This could be a massive flop, or it could be the first shot in an over-the-top revolution.

    We'll see, but this kind of offering is a nightmare for the carriers.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using DBSTalk mobile app
     
  10. Art7220

    Art7220 Godfather

    353
    0
    Feb 4, 2004
    Well so far it seems to be working. Except for some glitches during the preshows.

    What happened with Royal Rumble tonight? Reigns still keep his title?
     
  11. SParker

    SParker Active Member

    1,639
    8
    Apr 27, 2002
    Michigan
    HHH was #30 and won the title.
     
  12. zimm7778

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    1,202
    5
    Nov 11, 2007
    The company makes now where near the amount from the network yet they convinced themselves they would and they have not made up the ppv revenue they lost with it. They stay in the black thanks to their new TV contract. However, if ratings are any indication, they won't get nearly the same money deal they got this time when its time to renew.
     
  13. boukengreen

    boukengreen Legend

    603
    38
    Sep 22, 2009
    I wouldn't be so sure about that because NBC Universal loves them so I could see them paying top dollar to keep them from leaving


    I also wish they would put the PPVs back up. My internet speed is not fast enough to stream network content
     
  14. zimm7778

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    1,202
    5
    Nov 11, 2007
    Here's the problem with paying them top dollar. I'm not a TV guy but I see no reason to suspect they would. They have never been able to get good as rates on the show so it's always been about helping the overall station average. With WWE on USA last week or two weeks ago, they were 5th in terms of overall network numbers. Without them, they would have been 8th. Now I don't know the advertising rate drop off from 5 to 8 but I don't know that it is such that it justifies paying them a huge amount. Especially since their ratings continue to slide at alarming levels. They were up last night but the trend this year has been downward and steep. Even in saying the numbers were "huge" last night, they were about 220,000 viewers off where they were for the post Rumble edition of Raw last week. And that is what someone in CT should be looking at. Things have gotten so bad a "huge" ratings night is still close to a quarter of a million viewers less than 51 weeks ago.
     
  15. TJNash

    TJNash AllStar

    210
    12
    Jun 5, 2012
    San Diego
    USA just added Smackdown, so 2 more hours of WWE on USA prime time. Obviously, USA sees strength in the product.
     
  16. boukengreen

    boukengreen Legend

    603
    38
    Sep 22, 2009
    exactly and last summer they had Tough Enough on USA so there is that as well
     
  17. zimm7778

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    1,202
    5
    Nov 11, 2007
    See: my previous post of where they were with 5 hours and where they would be without it.
     
  18. zimm7778

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    1,202
    5
    Nov 11, 2007
    Ratings were extremely low. No one expects it back again.
     
  19. zimm7778

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    1,202
    5
    Nov 11, 2007
    Let me make one thing clear, I am not saying USA will throw them off the air. Just saying I don't think they'll get anywhere near the $$ offer they got this time. But I could very well be wrong. It all depends on what their ratings are with them and what they'd be without them, and if keeping them were more beneficial. I'm not an advertiser, I have no idea what "we are the 5th rated cable network" means monetarily compared to "we are the 8th rated cable network." In my mind, I wouldn't think it's extremely high but maybe it is.
     
  20. zimm7778

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    1,202
    5
    Nov 11, 2007
    Let me make one thing clear, I am not saying USA will throw them off the air. Just saying I don't think they'll get anywhere near the $$ offer they got this time. But I could very well be wrong. It all depends on what their ratings are with them and what they'd be without them, and if keeping them were more beneficial. I'm not an advertiser, I have no idea what "we are the 5th rated cable network" means monetarily compared to "we are the 8th rated cable network." In my mind, I wouldn't think it's extremely high but maybe it is.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall