One would hope, not every crowd is as shit as the Philly one but I woudn't put any money on it.
Television Tho Prop Grops Throps
- Thread starter Big-Red
- Start date
Those 1m figures are from WAY before the RR. So I don't know why people are bringing up the CancelWWENetwork thing for or against it.
Hell it probably doesn't even take in the UK launch, third quarter is Oct-Dec(maybe a bit into January).
Hell it probably doesn't even take in the UK launch, third quarter is Oct-Dec(maybe a bit into January).
They hit the million after the Rumble.
its clearly spin from the WWE
1 million have now subscribed but many of them might have cancelled too
To be fair 1. The WWE Network surpassed 1 million as soon as they launched it in the UK - which was last week, so the Rumble bares little reflection on that (though lets be honest, the #CancelWWENetwork thing was a bunch of posturing and little more) and 2. RAW numbers are generally up after a PPV - they were after last years Rumble too if I'm not mistaken. 8% isn't a huge increase either mind you - I thought they'd do a lot more, especially as they replayed Rumble matches (when WCW did something similar back in the day replaying the prior nights PPV, they did a great number).
They have one million ACTIVE subscribers.
If I cancel my Netflix now - I'll still have it for the rest of the month, so wouldn't I be an active subscriber? Not sure how these things are classified.
I doubt many - if any - really cancelled for the Rumble, but I wouldn't dismiss the idea of spin at all - considering a) it's Vince and b) it's off the back of the Rumble.
As I said, they more than likely hit a million as soon as the UK was launched.
its still spin. once you cancel you remain active until the end of the billing period
It was clever timing from WWE
Well according to their 3rd quarter(which well and truly did not take into effect RR business) business report released yesterday....they hit it well before. The timing was pure coincidence and well good for WWE obviously, but obviously it's that time of the year as Apple also released their record breaking third business report.
Despite the Cancelling wave....it'll probably go up for the next report anyway. Given the sign ups for RR to Mania season and bigger UK acknowledgement(which tbf wasn't that great considering it launched a week earlier and no one actually knew and it's barely doing any decent non-WWE marketing for the UK specific).
So if Lesnar is leaving will Reigns win clean over Brock? I bet some sort of interference will effect it, could imagine Rollins cashing in too like on DB 
But this isn't the issue either. Everyone knew that Reigns was going to win this way beforehand, it was obvious. And more importantly, it was not a problem. It really wasn't. Had he beaten Batista last year, everyone would have carried the guy out of the arena on their shoulders, no matter how much of a rookie he was.
The big issue here is not Reign's victory or the lack of a more 'deserving' winner, the main problem is the horribly shitty way that WWE went about setting this Rumble. They could have had Reigns walk out of that ring with (moderate) cheers; with people shrugging that they were disappointed that it wasn't 'their' favourite Bryan or Ambrose or Wyatt, but at least they had seen a good show. What we got was tripe. Utter tripe. Using Kane and BS the way they did in the final stages of the RR was awful, simply awful, if they wanted to do an authority angle with them it should have been done much earlier in the match. It was such a terrible anticlimax, right down to the stupidly predictable final reemergence and elimination of Rusev, that it even got The Rock boo'ed off the stage. You know you have produced some utter utter crapload if you can get The Rock boo'ed off.
Yes, Roman is probably not ready. Yes, his mic skills leave lots to be desired. But the guy has potential and he could have probably put on a decent match and grown into his role along the road to WM. Instead, the WWE creative team have killed the poor guy. It is the worst way of pushing a talent, ever. And I don't think even a grand speech like Heyman's yesterday is going to repair the damage done. WWE is in a creative quagmire.
I million subscribers?
Any word whether they are including the people who apparently cancelled their subs after the Rumble, but whose accounts won't actually expire until the 25/02/2015? (according to the screenshots all over Twitter)
Any word whether they are including the people who apparently cancelled their subs after the Rumble, but whose accounts won't actually expire until the 25/02/2015? (according to the screenshots all over Twitter)
It'll only be a fraction.
Stone Cold's podcast review of the Rumble is great, highly recommend listening to it.
Raw was cancelled, and yet more people were still tuned in in the last hour of the 'replacement' show as were averaged last week on the take home show. If it was an actual Raw with live matches then sure you'd have a point. People often use the 'failure' to hit 1m subscribers as a sign that WWE is going down the pan and it clearly isn't the case. It was always said that they would pass that figure as soon as it was launched in the UK but people still insisted that because Daniel Bryan didn't win ever Raw, PPV and unify every belt in the company that the network was failing and WWE were tanking and didn't understand their customers.
Evidently what they're doing is working despite the fact that some of us are in agreeance that things could be more to our liking.
Apparently post Rumble sign ups vastly outweighed cancellations.
RAW was cancelled - but the casual fan would only know this after tuning in.
Plus if you didn't want to pay for your PPV you could suddenly get its main matches for free instead. Boy must the PPV purchasers feel duped.
I think for the average wrestling fan who doesn't browse forums and read the gossip pages, Reigns winning would be just fine. For those that knew well in advance he would win it does feel forced. I imagine many people won't know Lesnar is leaving so the suspense is still there.
Reigns will be a decent champion I think but he needs to drop the shield getup and find his own identity now. Coming through the crowd is also getting a bit boring in my eyes.
I would like Rollins to cash in on him, which could stem their rivalry nicely. It could be a little like Austin v Rock if they want to play it out like that.
Reigns will be a decent champion I think but he needs to drop the shield getup and find his own identity now. Coming through the crowd is also getting a bit boring in my eyes.
I would like Rollins to cash in on him, which could stem their rivalry nicely. It could be a little like Austin v Rock if they want to play it out like that.
Make. It. Reign.
Noticed for the second time now which I've never seen before that Sky Sports on Twitter and Facebook have been advertising tickets for TNA events when they come over to the UK. Guessing after the whole network thing between Sky and WWE they've moved their allegiance to TNA?
I said exactly the same earlier. What's even worse is during the adverts for RAW, SKY were still advertising the replay of the Rumble for £19.95. I can't see anyone taking that offer up after Mondays RAW. Especially as it is repeated again this week and it's on, on demand. So SKY must be pissed off too.
What I also cannot understand is everyone banging on about 1 million subscribers (WORLDWIDE) as being a surprise. Actually I agree, to me it is a huge surprise, a huge surprise that's all they have got. It's also a massive surprise that RAW only gets 4 Million viewers in the US. If you think of the Worldwide audience, think that every state in America they visit they get a full crowd of 15,000+ they get the same in every country they visit, completely full sell out RAW and Smackdown shows, it boggles the mind to think that they have only got 1 million subscribers.
For example Eastenders still regularly pulls in 8-9 Million viewers. Call the midwife got over 10 million last weekend, and that's in the UK where we have a population of 64 million, the US has a populations of 316 million, that makes RAW's 4 million look quite poor. The WWE has 5 million followers on Twitter and John Cena has nearly 7 Million. Couple that in with the popularity of the toys and other merchandise that are sold worldwide in huge numbers, yet again i'm surprised at the viewing and subscription figures.
Also factor in that PPV prices are moronic in the US. It's something like $50 for a standard PPV and over $70 for Wrestlemania. Surely Wrestlemania gets huge figures worldwide? The prices for tickets to live shows are also ridiculous they are £70+ for a standard untelevised house show like Butlins in the UK. Yet they always sell out. $9.99 is exceptionally cheap compared to what we all used to pay for these events. I'd hate to think what it costs for Wrestlemania tickets. So yet again I am extremely puzzled at 1 Million being classed as huge. But maybe I just hugely overestimated the WWE's popularity.
Then they could have tuned out after finding out. They stuck with it for the entire show despite the Royal Rumble the day before.
It's the fastest growing digital subscription service. Are you surprised that every other service in the world is even 'worse'?The Raw viewership is regularly more than the other top shows of the week, in some cases combined. It's boggling that you think this is low?
Eastenders is a completely different kind of show. It's intended for a completely different audience where as WWE caters for a much smaller target audience.
Last edited:
The Raw viewership is regularly more than the other top shows of the week, in some cases combined. It's boggling that you think this is low?
Eastenders is a completely different kind of show. It's intended for a completely different audience where as WWE caters for a much smaller target audience.
Fastest growing doesn't mean biggest (yet)
To your second point, yeah I know it's the biggest show on cable, so that's why I am a bit puzzled and do think it is a bit low. I know Eastenders is different, completely different, but was just using that as a bad example for viewing figures in a much smaller country.
I know the WWE is a niche market and has a much smaller target audience, but I am just honestly surprised. Even though it's a smaller audience the WWE is HUGE. Like I said and as you pointed out, highest cable network figures and that's just in the US. The WWE is worldwide! The WWE Network is worldwide. And as pointed out the prices for PPV events is insane, let alone going to live events, yet they always sell out. So I naturally presumed that the Network would have been more popular.
I would love to be able to get the viewing figures for the last years PPV events (in all countries that they were shown) And similarly i'd like to see the PPV figures for the Royal Rumble. That might help make some sense of it.
But if it wasn't impressive, it wouldn't be the fastest growing. Fastest growing implies that nobody else has reached those numbers as quickly. Therefore your statement that 'that's all they've got' implies they should be even faster than faster than everybody else. Nobody said biggest, it likely won't be the biggest as the target audience just isn't the same.
With regards to the next point, a lot of the WWE fanbase are casual fans that have no interest in paying £10 a month to watch old WWE stuff. It's really not that much of a jump that there's a much smaller loyal and dedicated fanbase. Plus it's only recently been launched in some areas like the UK and I believe Canada? So it should definitely grow some more.
Yeah sorry, I'm at work and was distracted a few times so didn't really explain it properly. I am sure it will grow a lot more, and I'm not looking at it as £10 a month for old WWE stuff, that to be honest is just a bonus. I'm looking at it as £9.99 a month for a PPV rather than £14.95 as it used to be or £19.95 or more as it is now. And seeing as it is a minimum of $50 for a PPV in the US and as much as $75 for Wrestlemania, I'm a little shocked others aren't looking at it in the same way. That's what I meant. And like I said, the PPV viewing figures would be a great help in understanding the overall network figures. Or maybe it would just show there are still millions of idiots paying full whack.
Please don't let Reigns beat Brock. That would be awful
How do you work that out?
Seems the undertaker rumours are back. Some sites are already reporting Taker vs Bryan at WM! 
And it's time The Authority went away for good. I cringe every time I see Kane and someone else deliver a beatdown. First Orton, now Big Show. Just so boring.
And it's time The Authority went away for good. I cringe every time I see Kane and someone else deliver a beatdown. First Orton, now Big Show. Just so boring.
Seems the undertaker rumours are back. Some sites are already reporting Taker vs Bryan at WM!
It looks like he is coming back, but he's facing Bray Wyatt.
In other news, Vince McMahon is further confirmed as the greatest man that ever lived.
Is there any chance of Undertaker coming back as heel to team with the Authority and face Sting?
I hope not. They're both old farts who will need a younger opponant to shine them up.
I think it would be an interesting attraction. A bit like Rock vs Hogan, all about the story and atmosphere more than the actual in ring action
But The Rock was about 29 when that happened. Say what you will about in ring action, you still need someone to do some stuff in the ring.
I really can't imagine the crowd would care half as much about Taker v Sting as they did Hogan v Rock.
If Sting is going to fight an old fart, drag Flair out of retirement. Now that would have some meaning.
I can think of nothing worse than a topless 2015 Ric Flair in HD.
His face has already started to look more like a Gammon shank than a human.
I remember the first time I saw Flair, it was in 1991 (when he joined the WWF) and he was an old bastard then.
Him and Sting have an epic history though and it would be cool to see them face to face in a WWE ring (even if they don't wrestle).
