1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Report says DirecTV has "no interest" in WWE Network

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by leprechaun106317, Jun 28, 2012.

  1. Jun 29, 2012 #21 of 222

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    I remember watching "Professional Wrestling" in black and white. Portland Wrestling (Oregon) was perhaps bigger than roller derby at the time.

    I actually prefer the old-school stuff as there were a whole lot more conventional wrestling moves and practically no bleeding. The drama never dominated the grappling.
  2. Jun 29, 2012 #22 of 222

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    Nov 11, 2007
    I was still a member of a wrestling news site long after I gave up watching it altogether. A friend of mine clocks how much in-ring "sports entertainment" (they aren't even allowed to call it wrestling apparently anymore) there is. Now for comparison, back when I was obsessed with it as a kid, I'd time the matches on TV. I found that the average 1 hour show from both NWA/WCW and the WWF there would be 20-25 minutes of wrestling featuring the name guys beating the crap out of the no names. Now, on a 2 hour show it's (drum roll).....about the same length of in-ring "action". Here's the difference, many years ago I went to one of those NWA shows that wound up being a TV taping for NWA Worldwide Wrestling and NWA Pro Wrestling. There were other matches on the show not aired on TV that made it a full wrestling night, probably an hour or so more stuff including an infamous "Skywalkers" Scaffold match. Now, you go pay a whole lot more than was paid back then to sit there and essentially watch exactly what you see on TV. Maybe they give a match or 2 extra but I'm sure they last maybe 10-15 minutes total and ultimately signify nothing. If I'm wrong about this last part, I'm wrong and someone is free to correct me. It's so made for TV now it's pathetic.

    I read on Zap2it back when USA did their upfronts that Raw is expanding to 3 hours every week soon proving those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
  3. Jun 29, 2012 #23 of 222

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    Sep 3, 2007
    I sure hope this is true.
  4. Jun 29, 2012 #24 of 222

    Shades228 DaBears

    Mar 18, 2008
    Too bad Soapnet is losing distributors as well because they could just merge with them and be a one stop shop.
  5. Jun 29, 2012 #25 of 222

    Xsabresx Icon

    Oct 8, 2007

    That just brought back memories of being in St Pete Fl in the early/mid 80's and seeing Championship Wrestling fro Florida at the Bayfront Center every Saturday. Admission was $5 and I still have the blood soaked t-shirt from when Ric Flair and Abdullah the Butcher ended up in my lap.
  6. Jun 29, 2012 #26 of 222

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    Nov 11, 2007
    Not being from here (if you noticed I live in Tampa) I saw all my shows at the Veterans Memorial Coliseum in Jacksonville. Question, where exactly was the Bayfront Center? I know it's torn down but where was it? Was it close to Tropicana Field?

    And about Flair and Abdullah, you probably saw more in that one match then people see now in a weeks worth of both WE(no point in using that other W anymore) and TNA.
  7. Jun 29, 2012 #27 of 222

    chick3112215 AllStar

    Jul 20, 2010
    ohwell, now what are my teenage sons going to watch? :rolleyes:
  8. Jun 29, 2012 #28 of 222

    trainman Hall Of Fame

    Jan 9, 2008
    Not too far from Tropicana Field, probably about 2 miles east -- it was right in downtown St. Pete on Tampa Bay (as the name would imply).
  9. Jun 29, 2012 #29 of 222

    KyL416 Hall Of Fame

    Nov 10, 2005
    Tobyhanna, PA
    Has ANY provider said they have any interest in it? WWE wanted to launch it before WrestleMania but no one agreed to it. They have a hard enough time getting their shows distributed in the USA. When Raw moved back to USA, they did't pick up Heat, Velocity, The WWE Experience, and Afterburn and Bottom Line left syndication. In order to get Smackdown on Syfy they had to give up NXT's timeslot. The new Superstars show barely lasted a year before WGN America dropped it and now its being canned for a new version of Main Event on Ion. Oddly enough all of these shows and more are still produced and distributed internationally although some cancellations and replacements have occured in the past 7 years. (Velocity was replaced with ECW which itself was replaced with NXT, Heat was replaced with WWE Vintage Collection hosted by Mean Gene, an additional half hour show called This Week in WWE debuted.) And now WWE isn't even streaming the new NXT in the USA and aren't even acknowledging that it exists on air or on their site. This weeks episode had new commentary that clearly caters to the international market. (i.e. JR always saying "in the states" when referring to a superstar's hometown)
  10. Jun 30, 2012 #30 of 222

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    Nov 11, 2007
    Well, I guess thanks for the tv history lesson. Here's the dirty little secret, most if not all tv networks don't want it. They air it because of the ratings it brings in helps them sell ads to everything else and call themselves the #1 cable network in America or whatever higher number they got to. Even when wrestling was hot those who ran TBS were not happy losing an evening of prime time to Thunder. But, when they did that they dropped the 2 1 hour long weekend shows. Wrestling is not what it was in the late 90s. Dare I say it never, ever, ever will be again and it's because of what I talked about earlier. Until those in charge at both WE and TNA realize people tune in for WRESTLING there will continue to be a lack of interest. He can run off all the old time fans and cheer as we leave because we aren't who he wants and that's great if we are being replaced at the same rate we are leaving.....we aren't and apparently ratings bear this out. So, now bringing this back to this stupid network idea. A genre with a lack of interest altogether + low ad rates because top advertisers won't advertise on these type shows due to the stigma attached to them = Providers not interested.

    I believe I said this before. All it would have taken was a little brain matter in order to see this wasn't going to work. You have an on demand service that is a premium. Meaning you sell it to consumers in addition to their regular bill. Through Verizon it was $9.99. This programming took up space on computer servers which the providers have or could have plenty of. They STILL couldn't get a lot of providers or either satellite company to take it. So, now their answer to this was to start a network that was going to take up part of the limited bandwidth on these providers channel lineup? Didn't see it then and I don't see it now.
  11. Jun 30, 2012 #31 of 222

    tampa8 Godfather/Supporter

    Mar 30, 2002
    I just don't see most carriers would add this to a package. There simply is just not enough interest to raise rates for everyone over it, when by percentage so few will watch. And WWE knows going as a premium channel, they are only going to get that very small percentage that would pay every month. Their best shot is to team up with an existing channel that would want to split time with them more than just showing an event.
  12. Jun 30, 2012 #32 of 222

    txtommy Icon

    Dec 30, 2006
    I liked wrestling when it was a sport. Bring on the Olympics.
  13. Jun 30, 2012 #33 of 222

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    Nov 11, 2007
    Let's be fair, pro wrestling was never a sport. I just liked it when it looked like one, had "rules" governing it, and what mattered happened in the ring. Imagine watching a football game and 3/4 of the game were just players yelling at each other from opposite sides of the field or doing bush league SNL skits in the locker room.
  14. Jun 30, 2012 #34 of 222

    carlsbad_bolt_fan Icon

    May 18, 2004
    Carlsbad, CA
    Real sports, ones that don't have a "fixed" outcome. :lol:
  15. Jun 30, 2012 #35 of 222

    carlsbad_bolt_fan Icon

    May 18, 2004
    Carlsbad, CA
    Except the NFL doesn't fix the outcome of their games. WWE is a "faux" sport.

    As for this channel, another one I wouldn't watch or pay for.
  16. Jun 30, 2012 #36 of 222

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    Nov 11, 2007
    That's kind of what I said.
  17. Jun 30, 2012 #37 of 222

    Chilcoot Legend

    Jun 22, 2008
    I am sorry people won't get programming they desire, whatever it is.

    I'm very glad that I do not like wrestling, I don't think I could like myself if I did. But that's just me, ymmv.
  18. Jun 30, 2012 #38 of 222

    kevinturcotte Active Member

    Dec 19, 2006
    Why does something tell me that if a distributor wants to carry it, it's going to forced on the lowest package like ESPN is, and cost more than the average channel?
  19. Jun 30, 2012 #39 of 222

    fleckrj Icon

    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    Wrestling peaked in the late 40s or early 50s. Its decline was due to over exposure and replacing sport with theatrics. Wrestling in the Olympics is still a sport, but what passes for pro wrestling on RAW, WWE, etc, is pure garbage. What existed in the late 90s cannot hold a candle to what wrestling was in the late 40s.
  20. Jun 30, 2012 #40 of 222

    zimm7778 Hall Of Fame

    Nov 11, 2007
    I can't imagine any provider would and it isn't like they are in any position to demand it. If the NFL can't get it, no way WE is. That's laughable to think they'd even try.

Share This Page