the ppvs are a huge selling point,if they were gone then some people invariably leave right?
yes some would stay for the VOD but not all. my original statement was simply network could lose some subscribers if sky offered every ppv free,do you truly not think this is the case?
WWE might lose some subscribers, but Sky aren't in a position to offer us the wealth of archive content that many of us enjoy on the Network now, are they?
Out of all that archive content, I've nearly seen everything I want to and I've only had the Network since it launched in the UK. In fact I already have seen everything that I really wanted to - any archive content I'm checking out now is mainly random recommendations.
The fact is that the Network is actually quite bare on the archive content that people really want to see - that being peak-era WWE, wCw and ECW, all of which is missing (apart from the PPVs obviously).
So yes, I think it's pretty fair to say that if Sky were to offer all PPVs for free from this point onwards, you will see Network subscriptions drop in the UK.
the ppvs are a huge selling point,if they were gone then some people invariably leave right?
yes some would stay for the VOD but not all. my original statement was simply network could lose some subscribers if sky offered every ppv free,do you truly not think this is the case?
this is like console wars all over again!
Yes, some, but not many. I just think Sky's Fast Lane move is a panic reaction and we don't even know if and when it'll be repeated.
This is hardly like any console war. The Network and Sky complement one another given the latter shows new Raw and Smackdown. Whereas you can't play a PS4 game on an XBox One
Out of all that archive content, I've nearly seen everything I want to and I've only had the Network since it launched in the UK. In fact I already have seen everything that I really wanted to - any archive content I'm checking out now is mainly random recommendations.
The fact is that the Network is actually quite bare on the archive content that people really want to see - that being peak-era WWE, wCw and ECW, all of which is missing (apart from the PPVs obviously).
So yes, I think it's pretty fair to say that if Sky were to offer all PPVs for free from this point onwards, you will see Network subscriptions drop in the UK.
Aside from the fact that nobody knows if Fast Lane being free on Sky is a one-off or not, I think patience is the key for more archive content being added to the Network.
Also, a heck of a lot of people, myself included, don't have either a Sky TV subscription and/or a Sky Sports sub on any platform. Are we all suddenly going to cancel our £9.99/$9.99 Network plans and plump for the bog-standard Sky Digital package which is more than double that? I can't speak for everyone, but I know which I think remains the better deal.
The Network won't suffer badly even if Sky start giving it all away. I think people are too keen to speculate sometimes, and not in a positive way. Many of you will still be enjoying the Network having not paid a penny for it yet, yet you're predicting mass Network customer departures just because of one (probably one-off) panic move by Sky. Give over.
Unless BT change their way I cant see WWE going over to them to be honest.
On Sky Sports it has a bigger reach. Well in my opinion it has.
BT sports seem to be all about Football. Would people on say Sky pay extra for Raw and SD if it was on BT and pay for the network? I wouldn't as I prefer football to WWE as this moment in time. I could never watch 90 minutes of WWE without fast forwarding at least one segment.
But I suppose it boils down to whether people pay for Sky Sports now just for WWE or do they watch other stuff to. If they watched other stuff that's technically 3 subscriptions they would have to pay for (Sky Sports, BT Sports and WWE network) something would have to give,
Unless BT change their way I cant see WWE going over to them to be honest.
I could have seen it before they launched the WWE Network here.
BT operating a linear version of the network (which includes airings of Raw and Smackdown) would likely have been quite appealing to WWE last year and that's undoubtedly the set up we would have seen with a BT/WWE deal. I'm also not sure it would have thrown up the cost issues you're suggesting but we'll get a better idea of how true that is when we get a clearer picture of exactly what the UK subscriber base for the network is now.
the ppvs are a huge selling point,if they were gone then some people invariably leave right?
yes some would stay for the VOD but not all. my original statement was simply network could lose some subscribers if sky offered every ppv free,do you truly not think this is the case?
this is like console wars all over again!
Im suprised Sky didnt dig their claws in further and have a sky channel done for the network. A few of my friends have complained about this due them not owning a PC or the internet. I guess they hoped it would be like Canada.
As for free PPVs id love to go back to the free PPVs when we got them on Sky One.
Im suprised Sky didnt dig their claws in further and have a sky channel done for the network. A few of my friends have complained about this due them not owning a PC or the internet. I guess they hoped it would be like Canada.
As for free PPVs id love to go back to the free PPVs when we got them on Sky One.
It's just about believable that people don't own a PC/laptop these days due to the increasing complexity of smartphones and tablets, but I'm sorry, I find it almost impossible to believe that someone with the money to buy a SkyTV subscription doesn't have the internet. Especially whenever the bundle deals basically throw it in for you.
I imagine the Network being a pain for those with slow internet (particularly in rural areas) though and can see why those people would be annoyed about the move away from TV.
losing some subscribers in uk is not mass cancellation.
Your exact words were:
if they give all ppvs free again they could see wwe lose alot network subscribers in uk
So initially you're speculating that this (probably one-off) move by Sky might see a lot of Network cancellations, and now you're backpeddling.
It's all relative anyway, because there's many Network users who don't have Sky anyway, me being one of them. Why do you think so many people were worried that the Network was to become a Sky-only channel/service back when the UK launch was postponed in November?
So initially you're speculating that this (probably one-off) move by Sky might see a lot of Network cancellations, and now you're backpeddling.
It's all relative anyway, because there's many Network users who don't have Sky anyway, me being one of them. Why do you think so many people were worried that the Network was to become a Sky-only channel/service back when the UK launch was postponed in November?
IF THEY GIVE FREE PPVS AGAIN clearly means if this is not a one off AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
alot of subs in little old UK is not mass cancellation
Huh Jimmy? I do like your soundcloud remixes Jimmy, the dance music! Very 1990s, I like my wrestling the same way I like my music lol 1990s.
Yeah hopefully Sky stick them all on Sky One from now on and that means people with Sky Sports subs can just stick with Sky+ing the shows instead of all this downloading apps business. Just watch it on TV like your'e supposed to.
Huh Jimmy? I do like your soundcloud remixes Jimmy, the dance music! Very 1990s, I like my wrestling the same way I like my music lol 1990s.
I knew we'd find some common ground one day
Yeah hopefully Sky stick them all on Sky One from now on and that means people with Sky Sports subs can just stick with Sky+ing the shows instead of all this downloading apps business. Just watch it on TV like your'e supposed to.
I do watch all the Network on TV. If it was only available for PCs and mobile devices I doubt I'd even bother with it. You're insinuating that an OTT service like the Network is someho complicated and unreliable. It really isn't.
Huh Jimmy? I do like your soundcloud remixes Jimmy, the dance music! Very 1990s, I like my wrestling the same way I like my music lol 1990s.
Yeah hopefully Sky stick them all on Sky One from now on and that means people with Sky Sports subs can just stick with Sky+ing the shows instead of all this downloading apps business. Just watch it on TV like your'e supposed to.
I watch the Network on TV and so do all the people I know who have the Network
I watch the Network on TV and so do all the people I know who have the Network
I wonder what the proportion of people in the general public who'd rather just get everything via one means i.e. Sky Box actually is.
I remember back when the Network was announced a lot of people posting on here were hoping for it to be a Sky linear channel.
I guess we are online posting on a Digital website forum - so we're always going to be more OTT savvy than the average customer. Plus Internet quality varies across the UK too.
Me personally, I've completely switched to a mix of OTT services with Freeview, and am not missing a beat whilst saving a not unsubstantial amount of £ every month.
Watching the Network via the TV is something of a misleading statement though I suspect.
I mean I watch it via TV but that's because I mostly watch it via my PS4 or I cast it onto the TV via Chromecast (both which is also true of Netflix). Although I'm still waiting for them to add official Chromecast support for the Network. But mostly I do this because usually I'm using my laptop or tablet for other things at the same time which makes it difficult to watch stuff on them.
For me the bigger question wouldn't be how many people are watching via their television but how many people are watching the linear WWE Network something I've only ever done for Pay-Per-Views, pre-shows and post-show specials. That I'd suggest would be a bigger indicator of how many people would actually have been happy with a linear Sky channel and I can't say I would have been overjoyed with having to access the WWE library via Sky on demand a service I am growing to hate.
For me the bigger question wouldn't be how many people are watching via their television but how many people are watching the linear WWE Network something I've only ever done for Pay-Per-Views, pre-shows and post-show specials. That I'd suggest would be a bigger indicator of how many people would actually have been happy with a linear Sky channel.
Yes, really good point - I've been exactly the same apart from just throwing it on to see what was airing. A linear channel with some Sky OnDemand functionality would have been such a step backwards in terms of functionality - especially with the growing familiarity with OnDemand services over here via the Internet.
Sadly Canada seem to have been experiencing that very pain, at least early on.
Comments
the ppvs are a huge selling point,if they were gone then some people invariably leave right?
yes some would stay for the VOD but not all. my original statement was simply network could lose some subscribers if sky offered every ppv free,do you truly not think this is the case?
this is like console wars all over again!
Out of all that archive content, I've nearly seen everything I want to and I've only had the Network since it launched in the UK. In fact I already have seen everything that I really wanted to - any archive content I'm checking out now is mainly random recommendations.
The fact is that the Network is actually quite bare on the archive content that people really want to see - that being peak-era WWE, wCw and ECW, all of which is missing (apart from the PPVs obviously).
So yes, I think it's pretty fair to say that if Sky were to offer all PPVs for free from this point onwards, you will see Network subscriptions drop in the UK.
Oh yeah, agreed on this. They'll be back on Box Office next month.
Yes, some, but not many. I just think Sky's Fast Lane move is a panic reaction and we don't even know if and when it'll be repeated.
This is hardly like any console war. The Network and Sky complement one another given the latter shows new Raw and Smackdown. Whereas you can't play a PS4 game on an XBox One
Aside from the fact that nobody knows if Fast Lane being free on Sky is a one-off or not, I think patience is the key for more archive content being added to the Network.
Also, a heck of a lot of people, myself included, don't have either a Sky TV subscription and/or a Sky Sports sub on any platform. Are we all suddenly going to cancel our £9.99/$9.99 Network plans and plump for the bog-standard Sky Digital package which is more than double that? I can't speak for everyone, but I know which I think remains the better deal.
The Network won't suffer badly even if Sky start giving it all away. I think people are too keen to speculate sometimes, and not in a positive way. Many of you will still be enjoying the Network having not paid a penny for it yet, yet you're predicting mass Network customer departures just because of one (probably one-off) panic move by Sky. Give over.
you call others negative when you are blatantly pro network and seem to take things personally.
On Sky Sports it has a bigger reach. Well in my opinion it has.
BT sports seem to be all about Football. Would people on say Sky pay extra for Raw and SD if it was on BT and pay for the network? I wouldn't as I prefer football to WWE as this moment in time. I could never watch 90 minutes of WWE without fast forwarding at least one segment.
But I suppose it boils down to whether people pay for Sky Sports now just for WWE or do they watch other stuff to. If they watched other stuff that's technically 3 subscriptions they would have to pay for (Sky Sports, BT Sports and WWE network) something would have to give,
Anyway waffling on now
BT operating a linear version of the network (which includes airings of Raw and Smackdown) would likely have been quite appealing to WWE last year and that's undoubtedly the set up we would have seen with a BT/WWE deal. I'm also not sure it would have thrown up the cost issues you're suggesting but we'll get a better idea of how true that is when we get a clearer picture of exactly what the UK subscriber base for the network is now.
Im suprised Sky didnt dig their claws in further and have a sky channel done for the network. A few of my friends have complained about this due them not owning a PC or the internet. I guess they hoped it would be like Canada.
As for free PPVs id love to go back to the free PPVs when we got them on Sky One.
It's just about believable that people don't own a PC/laptop these days due to the increasing complexity of smartphones and tablets, but I'm sorry, I find it almost impossible to believe that someone with the money to buy a SkyTV subscription doesn't have the internet. Especially whenever the bundle deals basically throw it in for you.
I imagine the Network being a pain for those with slow internet (particularly in rural areas) though and can see why those people would be annoyed about the move away from TV.
You were hinting at mass cancellations. And is being pro-Network meant to be an insult or a bad thing?...
I certainly am everytime they charge £15-£20 for a humdrum B-level PPV ;-)
Your exact words were:
So initially you're speculating that this (probably one-off) move by Sky might see a lot of Network cancellations, and now you're backpeddling.
It's all relative anyway, because there's many Network users who don't have Sky anyway, me being one of them. Why do you think so many people were worried that the Network was to become a Sky-only channel/service back when the UK launch was postponed in November?
IF THEY GIVE FREE PPVS AGAIN clearly means if this is not a one off AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
alot of subs in little old UK is not mass cancellation
the fact its hurt you so much is laughable.
Yeah hopefully Sky stick them all on Sky One from now on and that means people with Sky Sports subs can just stick with Sky+ing the shows instead of all this downloading apps business. Just watch it on TV like your'e supposed to.
I have the 2013 TX-L39E6B and the TX-L32E6B Models
I knew we'd find some common ground one day
I do watch all the Network on TV. If it was only available for PCs and mobile devices I doubt I'd even bother with it. You're insinuating that an OTT service like the Network is someho complicated and unreliable. It really isn't.
I watch the Network on TV and so do all the people I know who have the Network
I wonder what the proportion of people in the general public who'd rather just get everything via one means i.e. Sky Box actually is.
I remember back when the Network was announced a lot of people posting on here were hoping for it to be a Sky linear channel.
I guess we are online posting on a Digital website forum - so we're always going to be more OTT savvy than the average customer. Plus Internet quality varies across the UK too.
Me personally, I've completely switched to a mix of OTT services with Freeview, and am not missing a beat whilst saving a not unsubstantial amount of £ every month.
I mean I watch it via TV but that's because I mostly watch it via my PS4 or I cast it onto the TV via Chromecast (both which is also true of Netflix). Although I'm still waiting for them to add official Chromecast support for the Network. But mostly I do this because usually I'm using my laptop or tablet for other things at the same time which makes it difficult to watch stuff on them.
For me the bigger question wouldn't be how many people are watching via their television but how many people are watching the linear WWE Network something I've only ever done for Pay-Per-Views, pre-shows and post-show specials. That I'd suggest would be a bigger indicator of how many people would actually have been happy with a linear Sky channel and I can't say I would have been overjoyed with having to access the WWE library via Sky on demand a service I am growing to hate.
Yes, really good point - I've been exactly the same apart from just throwing it on to see what was airing. A linear channel with some Sky OnDemand functionality would have been such a step backwards in terms of functionality - especially with the growing familiarity with OnDemand services over here via the Internet.
Sadly Canada seem to have been experiencing that very pain, at least early on.