KB Answers Wrestling Questions | Page 769 | WrestleZone Forums

KB Answers Wrestling Questions

Hogan
Austin
My Time Is Now
Nothing springs to mind for the last decade.

It has to have that catchy hook to start and keep energy up throughout. Those songs all do that.
 
Will you be getting the WWE Network?

Does this mean you'll be paying to see WWE PPVs for the first time in years?
 
Yes, in an answer to the stupidest question I've ever gotten in this thread.

Unless you count buying a ticket to Wrestlemania, yes.
 
With the titles being unified and the Network starting, is it safe to say that we're in a new era?

I think in 6-year eras anyway (1978-1983, 1984-1989, 1990-1995, 1996-2001, 2002-2007, 2008-2013), so this would fit at least. How would you rank these eras (not WWE-exclusive)?

How does WWE make more money with the Network? Considering around 600 million dollars a year are earned via PPV, around 5 million people would have to subscribe. I guess not having to split the revenue with cable companies is a huge plus.
 
And yeah we're in a new era.
How would you rank these eras (1978-1983, 1984-1989, 1990-1995, 1996-2001, 2002-2007, 2008-2013)? If you don't want to, I'm especially interested in if you rate 1984-1989 or 1996-2001 higher.

Huge. That takes about half of their PPV money.
It'll probably lure like half of the dirty streamers like you and me, so there's huge potential, too. The more I think about it, the greater it sounds and I even see WWE in a more positive light now.

Thinking further, I guess a much larger portion of the IWC will pay for the content. Does that also mean that there will be a shift in programming, with a higher exposure of wrestlers that people who in the past didn't pay, but in the future most likely make up a much larger portion of the paying audience like ("IWC darlings")?
 
Will CM Punk be regarded as one of the greatest of all time when he retires?

Yeah.

How would you rank these eras (1978-1983, 1984-1989, 1990-1995, 1996-2001, 2002-2007, 2008-2013)? If you don't want to, I'm especially interested in if you rate 1984-1989 or 1996-2001 higher.

I'll put the 80s higher from a wrestling perspective. 99 is just such a bad year for actual wrestling that it drags stuff down.

Thinking further, I guess a much larger portion of the IWC will pay for the content. Does that also mean that there will be a shift in programming, with a higher exposure of wrestlers that people who in the past didn't pay, but in the future most likely make up a much larger portion of the paying audience like ("IWC darlings")?

I doubt it. Fans, no matter what kind, pay to see the top guys whether they want to admit it or not.
 
What was WM 4 buyrate compared to tv ratings of the first Clash of Champions

With no Impact tapings past February is their a new potential buyer or do you think ROH and TNA join as one

If within the first six months WWE Network does double of their expectations do you think WWE would get a tv deal for the network and who would possibly land the deal
 
So WWE are promising that the Network will show all old PPVs completely uncut. What do they do with Over The Edge 1999 - just leave it as is?
 
What was WM 4 buyrate compared to tv ratings of the first Clash of Champions

With no Impact tapings past February is their a new potential buyer or do you think ROH and TNA join as one

If within the first six months WWE Network does double of their expectations do you think WWE would get a tv deal for the network and who would possibly land the deal

Wrestlemania 4 set a new record for highest buyrate ever.

No.

No. It defeats the purpose.

So WWE are promising that the Network will show all old PPVs completely uncut. What do they do with Over The Edge 1999 - just leave it as is?

That's a really good question. I'd assume so as you don't see anything on it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top