The Curse of the WWE Network?
It's no secret WWE suffers lately from sagging ratings and a stagnant product. What else isn't a secret is how much money the company is making and, more to the point, that they've become a titan (yup, that's a pun) in online content.
A fact the conglomerate never ceases to remind us of, barely a RAW or Smackdown goes by without reading -- usually after a break -- how many likes the Facebook page boasts, the views videos get on YouTube (a possible detriment I'll address in a bit), and how collectively it all amounts to more than all the likes and views of the competition and their mothers combined.
 |
| One thing matters to Vince: WWE Network. |
Vince himself flouts critics by pointing to this information like a teenage girl who measures success by her Instagram following.
The push to be at the forefront of 21st-century media and conquering the new frontier is laudable -- it's what's "best for business," for real. But at the expense of your flagship programming which you still produce week in and week out, which draws in viewers and sponsors, which builds all your storylines and buzz for your attractions and mega-shows, which is your lifeblood?
Much as I hate to be a fart in a crowded elevator...maybe focusing on new avenues is a problem. Especially when you do a bang-up job on your recaps.
 |
| The secret to RAW's low ratings might be in the company's priorities, in addition to execution and presentation. |
Unquestionably, YouTube is the top source for highlights of WWE shows, RAW and SD in particular. If you've ever watched a playlist of clips recounting the week's events, you'll understand how complete it feels. You'd also notice how much less time consuming it is.
Instead of letting RAW bore you for three hours, wait an hour or two and catch up with the condensed version (after maybe downing a Red Bull) in 60 minutes or less. That's not only more convenient but more fun than actually watching live in some ways (the risk of zoning out and missing something is minimized, for one thing). I've done it and I know I'm not the only one.
Therein, of course, lies the trouble; ignorant booking/writing aside, why would the audience bother tuning in every week, let alone at all? Eventually, I get everything on demand or archived for free -- or $9.99 -- who cares?
And there we zone in on the event horizon of the crisis. The question is now begged: is it the WWE Network's fault?
The Network predicated on nostalgia and the pure (or, at least, purer) wrestling of NXT, is the linchpin of McMahon's shift in focus. They want to up those subscriptions and retain subscribers; that's the challenge they're concerned about. Never mind making RAW and Smackdown must-see TV.
Granted, WWE Network's launch fell below expectations (and Vince even lost money in the interim), but the two problems really hinge on each other. The real reason anyone wants the Network is to relive the days of their youth when wrestling was hot.
People want to see all that good stuff from the 80s and 90s they grew up on. Curious urchins wanting to see what the territories, the Monday Night War, and the original ECW were all about are a possibility, but not a key demo.
And why, regarding the former? Because, back in the day, wrestling was exciting television. Mid-1980's and late 90's, it was at a creative and cultural zenith -- which enough hay has been made about in other places so I'll spare you.
Now there is an ever-growing glut of great workers amongst all the brands but a lack of a creative edge or coherent direction. The biggest complaint concerning the modern era is it has moments but nothing that keeps you glued for the next segment. It could be eons until the next big moment; they can be that rare.
On the one hand, that's perfect for the Youtube culture: fewer moments means it's easier to generate bite-sized two-minute video. That's good for our attention spans.
By contrast, in the Attitude Era, you had to watch, you just had to! For the full two hours! You never knew what would happen. Rick Rude (thankfully, a Hall of Famer this year) was on RAW one week and then Nitro the next.
And let's not forget the infamous appearance of the Radicalz at RAW in January 2000. On both counts we have serious stay-home, order-in, can't-look-away, WTF viewing.
Is there anything approximating such nailbiting bravura today? Aside from the usual signing from Japan or the Indies to NXT, not quite. New acquisitions rule -- having them front row at a TakeOver special is even better -- but the effect of seeing them in a WWE ring wears thin.
Worst of all, when you run out of names to sign while simultaneously having trouble creating new homegrown stars, coupled with an inability to make your TV riveting, you have a flawed, if not moribund, system for feeding content to your subscription service.
The Network can't function with such a model (if I can call it that) in perpetuity, if it is to be more than "play, rewind, relive."
And the promise is already damaged. Call-ups inevitably render the NXT product stale in spots and the Cruiserweight Division falters after the Classic delivered in spades with the quality and excitement of its matches. 205 Live at times is equal parts bad soap opera and watching croquet.
Bottom line, it's not out of their power to get our eyeballs back. Stop spoon feeding us on YouTube (for your own sake), take risks, try new things, inject some logic and quit taking viewership for granted. Give us reason to tune in every week.
Make moments that will be looked upon fondly in my Network watchlist for years to come, and endeavor to do it more than a few times out of the year. It'll be worth the $9.99 and we'll all keep coming back -- I guarantee it.
 |
| Network subscriptions have been below expectations. |
The Network predicated on nostalgia and the pure (or, at least, purer) wrestling of NXT, is the linchpin of McMahon's shift in focus. They want to up those subscriptions and retain subscribers; that's the challenge they're concerned about. Never mind making RAW and Smackdown must-see TV.
Granted, WWE Network's launch fell below expectations (and Vince even lost money in the interim), but the two problems really hinge on each other. The real reason anyone wants the Network is to relive the days of their youth when wrestling was hot.
People want to see all that good stuff from the 80s and 90s they grew up on. Curious urchins wanting to see what the territories, the Monday Night War, and the original ECW were all about are a possibility, but not a key demo.
And why, regarding the former? Because, back in the day, wrestling was exciting television. Mid-1980's and late 90's, it was at a creative and cultural zenith -- which enough hay has been made about in other places so I'll spare you.
Now there is an ever-growing glut of great workers amongst all the brands but a lack of a creative edge or coherent direction. The biggest complaint concerning the modern era is it has moments but nothing that keeps you glued for the next segment. It could be eons until the next big moment; they can be that rare.
On the one hand, that's perfect for the Youtube culture: fewer moments means it's easier to generate bite-sized two-minute video. That's good for our attention spans.
 |
YouTube and the Network are great platforms but also help WWE
dig itself into a hole.
|
By contrast, in the Attitude Era, you had to watch, you just had to! For the full two hours! You never knew what would happen. Rick Rude (thankfully, a Hall of Famer this year) was on RAW one week and then Nitro the next.
And let's not forget the infamous appearance of the Radicalz at RAW in January 2000. On both counts we have serious stay-home, order-in, can't-look-away, WTF viewing.
Is there anything approximating such nailbiting bravura today? Aside from the usual signing from Japan or the Indies to NXT, not quite. New acquisitions rule -- having them front row at a TakeOver special is even better -- but the effect of seeing them in a WWE ring wears thin.
Worst of all, when you run out of names to sign while simultaneously having trouble creating new homegrown stars, coupled with an inability to make your TV riveting, you have a flawed, if not moribund, system for feeding content to your subscription service.
The Network can't function with such a model (if I can call it that) in perpetuity, if it is to be more than "play, rewind, relive."
And the promise is already damaged. Call-ups inevitably render the NXT product stale in spots and the Cruiserweight Division falters after the Classic delivered in spades with the quality and excitement of its matches. 205 Live at times is equal parts bad soap opera and watching croquet.
Bottom line, it's not out of their power to get our eyeballs back. Stop spoon feeding us on YouTube (for your own sake), take risks, try new things, inject some logic and quit taking viewership for granted. Give us reason to tune in every week.
Make moments that will be looked upon fondly in my Network watchlist for years to come, and endeavor to do it more than a few times out of the year. It'll be worth the $9.99 and we'll all keep coming back -- I guarantee it.
Comments