The Online Onslaught Forums

By contributing to Online Onslaught, you'll help make sure we're around for years to come. Toss us as little as a few bucks, or as much as your generosity allows. Thanks!

Last active: Never Not logged in [Login ]

Printable Version |
Subscribe | Add to Favorites
New Topic New Poll
Author: Subject: DirecTV dispute

Posts 239
Registered 1-24-2002
Location Victoria, BC, Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

posted on 2-7-2002 at 10:44 PM Edit Post
DirecTV dispute

Can someone explain to me what exactly the sticking point of these negotiations is. Since I lost DirecTV as an option so many months ago, I also recently found out that the only good bar that used to show WWF PPVs has stopped doing so.

Here's what I understand. The WWF wants to pay less for their rights to air on the DirecTV system. The WWF used to bring in a huge share of the total buyrates for special event PPVs on all satelite systems. Thus if we were talking about television, networks could charge more for advertising space and therefore cut the WWF some slack in the price for the timeslot as everyone would still be making lots of money.

Now here's where I'm lost. As I understand it, or as it has been explained to me, DirecTV charges a flat rate for any company wishing to broadcast on a particular channel of their network. They don't reap much, if any percentage from the profit of the buyrate itself. Therefore, in DirecTV's eyes, why cut Vince any better a deal when they'll make the same amount of profit by selling the sapce to Columbia Pictures or AWA Wrestling?

Was the person who explained things to me this way full of shit? What other factors am I ignoring? Does Vince have any bargaining power at all? What are the chances of me watching Wrestlemania from home this year?

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Creepy Little Bastard

Posts 87
Registered 1-4-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

posted on 2-8-2002 at 04:43 AM Edit Post
It was all about how much of the revenue from the PPV would go to each company. I heard it was a fickle little amount, but they just couldn't come to an agreement on who would get how much. Until now, of course- It looks like they just agreed on a number the other day. Cool.
View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Monkey on a Rock

Posts 4376
Registered 12-27-2001
Location - The Birthplace of Aviation
Member Is Offline

Mood: See You in Hell ;)

posted on 2-8-2002 at 07:45 PM Edit Post
Here's my understanding...

DirecTV was being treated as a retailer/reseller by the WWF. As such, their cut of a WWF PPV was pretty small...

In Demand is a cable pay-per-view distributor (not just a retailer), and they get to keep almost half of all PPV revenues. They distribute PPVs to just about every cable system in the country, who get a smaller cut as the "retail outlet" in the transaction, so that's why they get the special deal.

DirecTV wanted to be treated like a distributor, rather than as a retailer; the WWF didn't want to do that. Thus, the problems....


View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member

New Topic New Poll

go to top

Powered by XMB 1.8 Partagium Final SP1
Developed By Aventure Media & The XMB Group
Processed in 0.0427270 seconds, 19 queries