>>20593481
Must be doing sub 500k live in US

>>20593556
1.1ish I heard

>>20593481
They had lower views last fall, a bunch of episodes with 2.3 and 2.4 million. Unless they go below that, I don't think Netflix is overly concerned.

>>20593600
Is this true? People on twitter saying this is the lowest ever. Unless they mean in 26.

>>20593481
Let's see what the Netflix EVP says about WWE shall we?

https://411mania.com/wrestling/netflix-vp-says-wwe-has-been-above-our-expectations-so-far/

Now real quick show me what WBD has said about AEW this year. Take your time.

>>20593481
wrestling is a niche

>>20593703
Nice cope kid.

>>20593481
We are almost 18 months into Raw on Netflix, and nobody knows what this means still.

What is considered a view? Is it somebody who watches for 1 minute, 5 minutes, the entire show? Even the disclaimer is vague as hell.
>Netflix global views represent the number of accounts that watches on average throughout the program.

That means nothing at all, what the fuck is "watched on average throughout the program"???

>>20593481
Better than 7k on HBO MAX.

File: hvxfh.jpg (23 KB, 640x480)

23 KB JPG

>>20593481
They never added those old smackdown and raw shows on the international netflix vault after 2 years , this shit is lazy and they wonder why nobody like wwe on netflix

who the hell would subscribe to netflix? there's no reason to. you can watch whatever you want for free unless you're stupid

>>20593481
Who gives a shit? If it's not on netflix it will be on somewhere else.

>>20593692
Check Wrestlenomics website. The lowest view number ever was a december episode with 2.2 (but that's somewhat excusable due to the holidays). Otherwise it's fall last year with 2.3 million. This number right now is the lowest number in 26.

>>20595443
Retards man

>>20593481
Top 10 global and US, you seem to have left that out for some reason

>>20595484
The more content Netflix adds, the lower views will get across the board. That's how adding inventory works.

When Coca Cola comes out with 5 new flavors, do you think the amount of Coca Cola classic goes up or down? If they discontinue the 5 flavors, what happens to classic sales?

>>20595443
>why would anyone pay for anything at CVS?
>you can take whatever you want for free unless you're stupid
And you wonder why we call you a brainwashed retard for saying AEW is profitable and worth $2B

>>20596259
yeah you're right when they release vanilla bullshit coke the classic flavor sales GIGAPLUMMETS by over half im sure great example man

I remember when the 1st Raw on Netflix got over 5 million views. /pw/ was all
>IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET HIGHER
>WAIT UNTIL THEY ADD EVEN MORE COUNTRIES!
Raw on Netflix is a fucking dud. Netflix cancelled shows with much more viewers.

>>20596322
so why haven't they cancelled raw? why are they now going to add triple a?

>>20596328
>so why haven't they cancelled raw?
They have a 5 year deal. It would cost more to break it than to ride it out.
>why are they now going to add triple a?
What are the specifics of the deal? How much are they paying? If it's cheap content, who cares? But Raw cost Netflix $5 billion dollars and the ratings are down 40% from the first episode. And as I said the expectation was "more countries added = more views", and that clearly hasn't proliferated.

>>20596340
so they haven't cancelled raw, are going to add more wwe content all while wbd keeps dropping aew shows left and right??

>>20596346
>so they haven't cancelled raw
Already explained. They are locked in a 5 year deal. Cancelling it would be retarded.
>are going to add more wwe content
AAA isn't WWE, it's AAA owned by TKO. If the math works Netflix will add anything.
> wbd keeps dropping aew shows left and right??
Don't know, don't care.
This is a Raw/Netflix thread and based on the data, it's a failure based on the initial views dropping rapidly, and adding new regions not adding enough new viewers.

>>20596348
so it's a failure but they're going to add more content? why do all the top brass over at netflix keep saying how happy they are with wwe all while no one at wbd ever talks about gayew?

>>20596353
>so it's a failure but they're going to add more content?
Already explained. AAA is not going to cost Netflix billions. The failure of Raw is based on the cost/viewership which you can't seem to grasp.
> why do all the top brass over at netflix keep saying how happy they are with wwe
Because they are company men paid to be company men. The stock would drop if they say a $10 billion investment is underperforming and they are unhappy with it.
>no one at wbd ever talks about gayew?
Again, don't know, don't care.

>>20596360
so they're going to add more wwe content because they're actually mad at the raw numbers? so according to you top brass have to lie in order to not spook netflix stock? why are you trying to sound smart when you're clearly retarded? you do care though aew has been a failure for warner bros, has aew secured a new deal yet? isn't the deal only for another year?

>>20596360
>SAAR THE BLOODY BASTARD STOCK SELL SELL SELL TED SAID THE BLOODY DEAL BAD

>>20596369
>add more wwe content
Again, it's not WWE content.
>because they're actually mad at the raw numbers?
Whether they are mad or not is irrelevant. Any streaming platform is always looking to add cheap content that might get some viewers. The math is the math. You can't seem to grasp this.
>so according to you top brass have to lie in order to not spook netflix stock?
Of course. Call it PR, damage control (and the Raw numbers aren't a disaster, they are just underperforming based on expectations, those expectations being the views of the 1st episode)
>why are you trying to sound smart when you're clearly retarded?
You are the one that can't grasp simple economics of streaming. You think Netflix adding shows from another promotion owned by TKO is indicative of the success of Raw on Netflix when one has nothing to do with the other.
> you do care though aew has been a failure for warner bros, has aew secured a new deal yet? isn't the deal only for another year?
You are beyond saving. Again, don't know, don't care. I never watched AEW.

>>20596386
instead of using chatgpt you should maybe try claude, hopefully it will help you sound less retarded

>>20593481
rumor was they had an option to opt out half way through the contract

>>20596391
>instead of using chatgpt you should maybe try claude, hopefully it will help you sound less retarded
Oh boy
>lose argument
>U USE AI
>no counterarguments
Sad.

>>20596395
you don't have an argument, it's just coping like the retard you are. netflix is going to add more wwe content and the top brass praise wwe every chance they get, no amount of you crying like a bitch changes that, wbd on the other hand will cancel aew

>>20596410
>you don't have an argument,
?
My argument is
>Netflix signed multibillion dollar deal with TKO for Raw
>1st ep of Raw got over 5 million views
>this was a number that was only thought to grow after adding more countries
>more countries added
>views go way down (40%)
Math is math, retard.
>netflix is going to add more wwe content
AAA isn't WWE content. And I answered this in full already. Based on your logic if a Superman TV show on Netflix was getting bad numbers, then Netflix added another DC property like a Batman TV shows, you would be saying "SUPERMAN IS DOING GREAT BECAUSE NOW THEY ARE ADDING BATMAN!". Zero logic.
>wbd on the other hand will cancel aew
You're a true pajeet.

>>20596428
the first episode of any tv show gets huge numbers, so because more countries signed up it was supposed to grow? im sure italy was supposed to add millions of new viewers

>>20596428
>Netflix signed multibillion dollar deal
SAAAAR TRUE PAJEET BLOODY BASTARD YOU BLOODY

>>20596446
>the first episode of any tv show gets huge numbers
Wrestling isn't just "any tv show". If the 2nd episode and eps going forward lost 40%, it would not have seen a season 2. And sports don't have huge drops like Raw did. Fact is, Netflix overpaid.
>so because more countries signed up it was supposed to grow?
Yes. If you are adding more countries (more potential viewers) and your viewers shrink and plateau, that's bad.
>im sure italy was supposed to add millions of new viewers
More than 1 country, and I would say a few million viewers is fair.
You are really holding on for dear life here.

>>20596463
you're right unlike actual tv shows there is no off season for wrestling, sports do have dropoffs, and shows have more than a 40% drop off and get more seasons, okay so give me the ratings of what raw was doing in other countries before the move to netflix, somehow the more you try and sound smart the more retarded you end up being

>>20596471
>and shows have more than a 40% drop off and get more seasons
Rarely, if ever happens on Netflix.
> okay so give me the ratings of what raw was doing in other countries before the move to netflix,
Don't know. It's irrelevant. WWE is worldwide, that's a given. And the expectation has always been "more countries we are in, the more viewers". I don't even know how you are doubting this logic.

>>20596483
so according to you people who didn't watch raw prior to netflix are now all of a sudden going to watch? are you always this much of a retard?

>>20596487
>so according to you people who didn't watch raw prior to netflix are now all of a sudden going to watch?
How did you come up with that logic? Raw had millions of worldwide viewers that were NOT included in the early Netflix Raw episodes because their countries weren't "added" yet. Once those countries were "added" they expected the 5 million viewers to go up (or at the very least stay the same). Instead it dropped 40%. Everyone around the world subscribed to Netflix is watching Raw less than expected.

>>20596496
it's getting scary how fucking stupid you are, italy recently got wwe content on netflix so did spain, what were they doing ratings wise in those countries

>>20596503
>, italy recently got wwe content on netflix so did spain
And it really increased viewers didn't it? You aren't seeing the reality or the economics.
>WOW 5 MILLION VIEWERS
>WAIT UNTIL WE ADD MORE COUNTRIES THAT NUMBER WILL GO UP
>only 2.7 million? Uh, good thing we have simps to defend us

>>20596508
why are you avoiding the question you retard, prior to moving to netflix what were they drawing in those countries

>>20596509
>prior to moving to netflix what were they drawing in those countries
I already said I don't know and that it's irrelevant. WWE is worldwide and their expansion has always been "get into more countries to get more viewers". Raw on Netflix "got into more countries" and the viewers dropped.

>>20596512
so you don't know what they were getting in other countries but they were supposed to grow when they were added? how many viewers does the nfl get on the usa vs the uk?

>>20596520
>so you don't know what they were getting in other countries but they were supposed to grow when they were added?
No. But a decrease in viewers wasn't supposed to be in the cards.
> how many viewers does the nfl get on the usa vs the uk?
Nobody cares about the NFL outside of America and maybe Canada. WWE has success worldwide.

>>20596523
why wouldn't there be a decrease? tons of people watched it for the first time and never came back because it's fake fighting, wwe is popular in the usa and india, that's it

>>20596531
>why wouldn't there be a decrease?
Not 40%. Not when you are adding more countries as time goes on.
> tons of people watched it for the first time and never came back because it's fake fighting,
Nobody watched Raw on Netflix without knowing what it was.
>wwe is popular in the usa and india, that's it
Are you fucking retarded? You are LEGIT CONFIRMED PAJEET. WWE is worldwide. They have European tours, they just the other day had a major show in ITALY. Why would they do that if they weren't popular there you fucking tardo. WWE is less popular only in countries that have their own wrestling like Japan and Mexico. And you're calling me a retard?

>>20596535
again you're comparing the debut because you're really fucking stupid, and yes tons of people watched raw for the first time it was on the home page for everyone, so because they can go to europe and sell 15k tickets that means millions will watch on netflix? you need to donate your brain to science

>>20596540
>again you're comparing the debut because you're really fucking stupid, and yes tons of people watched raw for the first time it was on the home page for everyone,
So you are saying that if they put the "Raw on Netflix" on the home page for everyone it will get 5 million viewers again?
>, so because they can go to europe and sell 15k tickets that means millions will watch on netflix?
All of Europe? Yes. The only other answer is that NOBODY is watching in Europe and the 40% loss is from USA and India viewers tuning out.
"wwe is popular in the usa and india, that's it" - YOU. This might be the most pajeet quote I've ever read.

>>20596548
no? because it's no longer the debut you retard lol, do you know what a debut is? so millions are watching in europe? show me the tv ratings they were getting prior to netflix

>>20596551
>because it's no longer the debut you retard lol
So now it's debut+homepage = 5 million viewers. So just homepage will bring in no new viewers?
>so millions are watching in europe? show me the tv ratings they were getting prior to netflix
Again, irrelevant. They wouldn't be holding shows in Italy if they had no viewers in Europe.
And Raw is in top 10 in the UK every week.
You said WWE is only popular in USA and India. Literally the dumbest thing I've ever read. WWE hasn't done a show in India in years.

>>20596556
i already brought up the debut being a big deal retard, the debut was in the top 10 in like 30 countries because it was people checking it out for the first time, when did i say they had no viewers in europe? i said it wasnt many

>>20596556
just checked a uk site and in the uk raw was doing 30,0000 to 50,000 on bt sport

>>20596564
>i already brought up the debut being a big deal retard, the debut was in the top 10 in like 30 countries because it was people checking it out for the first time
Everybody that checked it out knew what WWE was. It's wasn't a new show like Squid Game where there was curiosity about what it was about.
>when did i say they had no viewers in europe? i said it wasnt many
Ok, so they don't have a lot of viewers, but they just had a show in Italy, they had the "road to Royal Rumble" European tour 6 months ago where they went to numerous cities in UK, Germany, Denmark, and Belgium. But INDIA, which hasn't had a live show in 3 years and has no live shows planned for the future, has MORE VIEWERS?
Listen. To. Your. SELF.

>>20596567
>just checked a uk site and in the uk raw was doing 30,0000 to 50,000 on bt sport
Because the product isn't good right now. Hasn't been for a while. That's why the Raw ratings haven't increased.

>>20596569
what are you basing that off off besides your own retardation? tons of people especially worldwide don't know what wwe is, are you really trying to argue that wwe isn't big in india?
>>20596571
that was over 10 years ago moron, wwe isn't that big of a deal outside the usa, them being able to sell tickets to 15k hardcore bong fans means fuck all

>>20596571
are you fucking retarded, Raw hasn't been on UK TV in years

>>20596577
>? tons of people especially worldwide don't know what wwe is
Most of those countries weren't added until AFTER the debut.
>are you really trying to argue that wwe isn't big in india?
No, you said it's ONLY big in USA and India. Europe is a bigger market than India, hence why they do more live tours their.
>that was over 10 years ago moron
Why are you bringing up stats from 10 years ago without saying as much until now, retard?
>wwe isn't that big of a deal outside the usa,
YOU said it was big in INDIA. Now you are saying "not a big deal OUTSIDE of the USA"? Bro, you are a legit retard.
>being able to sell tickets to 15k hardcore bong fans means fuck all
That's why they did a TOUR of MULTIPLE CITIES in MULTIPLE COUNTRIES. They wouldn't do this if there weren't lots of viewers and money to be made. India (which to you is the #2 market next to USA) hasn't had a show in 3 years and no shows are planned for the future.
Listen. To.. Your. SELF.

>>20596587
>are you fucking retarded, Raw hasn't been on UK TV in years
I figured as soon as it went to Netflix the TV deal ended. You are pulling out numbers from 10 years ago like they fucking matter. The media landscape was completely different back then.

>>20596590
what countries are you talking about? you're so fucking stupid, they don't go to india because they would lose money, they can sell out a stadium with 100,000 people and the gate would be $100. i said 30 to 50k because that includes the time span retard, you need to honestly just end it your parents will be very happy

>>20596590
You are getting fucking wrecked in this thread AEWtranny.

>>20596598
>what countries are you talking about?
Glasgow, UK: Saturday, 10th January 2026
Copenhagen, Denmark: Sunday, 11th January
Düsseldorf, Germany: Monday, 12th January 2026
Manheim, Germany: Tuesday, 13th January 2026
Newcastle, UK: Thursday, 15th January 2026
London, UK: Friday, 16th January 2026
Gdansk, Poland: Saturday, 17th January 2026
Nottingham, UK: Sunday, 18th January 2026
Belfast, UK: Monday, 19th January 2026
Brussels, Belgium: Tuesday, 20th January 2026
Now YOU list those Indian shows.
>hey don't go to india because they would lose money,
Sounds like a lack of fans.
> i said 30 to 50k because that includes the time span retard,
And such a span is irrelevant because the media landscaped changed so much.
WWE goes where the VIEWERS/FANS are. Clearly that isn't India. Sorry, pajeet.

>>20596600
>You are getting fucking wrecked in this thread AEWtranny.
So you think only USA and INDIA are the only markets that WWE is popular in too?

>>20596595
>the media landscape has changed, we can't compare numbers from years ago
>hey guys, let's compare WWE numbers today to where they were years ago
let me guess, big AEW fan?

>>20596605
>big AEW fan
Never watched. Don't care.
If you want to go back further we can go to the Attitude Era where WWF was getting 8 million viewers a week. But that's irrelevant too. It was a different media landscape. Retard.

>>20596602
i said they could sell out a 100k stadium with ease in india and the gate would be $100 because they're poor, all those countries mentioned were getting shitty tv ratings. it didn't change you're just stupid

>>20596607
>i said they could sell out a 100k stadium with ease in india and the gate would be $100 because they're poor,
Then why did WWE do a big show in 2023?
>all those countries mentioned were getting shitty tv ratings.
So they get shitty tv ratings....but WWE still does tours there.... WWE wouldn't do shows in countries with shitty tv ratings.
> it didn't change you're just stupid
Says the guy that thinks USA and India are the biggest markets....then backtracked and said only USA matters. SAD

>>20596606
The point is that you, specifically, are picking and choosing when decades old numbers matter or don't matter, I've been consistent this entire time that they don't matter. No TV executive is fucking retarded enough to look at what trash TV Raw was doing in the 90s and basing their 2025 media deals on those viewership numbers.

>>20596615
>The point is that you, specifically, are picking and choosing when decades old numbers matter or don't matter,
We are a streaming world now. We are talking about Netflix Raw going from 5 million to 2.7 million (despite more countries being added). Based on your logic Raw on Netflix getting 5 million viewers is a failure because they did bigger numbers than that in the late 90s. It's an unfair comparison.
> No TV executive is fucking retarded enough to look at what trash TV Raw was doing in the 90s and basing their 2025 media deals on those viewership numbers.
I agree. I'm saying what the TV executives are saying. And YOU said I'm picking and choosing. I'm not. I'm flat out rejecting all the old numbers.

>>20596611
because they wanted to please sony? just because the gate would be low they were getting huge tv contracts from sony india, again selling venues that hold like 10k doesn't mean the ratings were good , it's just hardcore fans going and spending a lot of money

>>20596604
No. WWE is popular worldwide. But the Netflix numbers are fine and when Netflix extends the deal to 10 years instead of 5 I want you to admit you were wrong.

>>20596621
>because they wanted to please sony?
Ok so you are admitting WWE did it as an obligation to someone else, whereas in Europe they have no obligation and do it to make money because they have lots of fans in Europe. Got it.
>gain selling venues that hold like 10k doesn't mean the ratings were good
But doing no shows in India means the ratings are good?

>>20596623
>No. WWE is popular worldwide.
Other anon says otherwise:
>>20596531
>" wwe is popular in the usa and india, that's it"
You think this guy is winning the argument.
> But the Netflix numbers are fine and when Netflix extends the deal to 10 years instead of 5 I want you to admit you were wrong.
You don't even understand the deal. It's a 10 year deal with an OPT OUT after 5 years. Not a 5 year deal with another 5 year extension.

>>20596625
they have no obligation because they make actual profit off of the euro shows, because bongs spend $200 for nosebleeds, sony india paid them a lot of money for tv, but the fans paying $1 for front row tickets is a waste without a incentive to go

>>20593703
He’s hardly going to say, “Yeah, complete slop. The Indians are doing the needful on YouTube and the Western fans are 60 IQ Disney Adults who attract zero advertisers. We fucked up massively!”

>>20596620
There's not a single quarter where Raw did 5 million. You purposely being a fag and citing a number for one individual episode just makes you look retarded. Nobody looks at Week 1 NFL Monday Night Football and declares by week 13-14 that the NFL "has lost 30% of their audience" because of course the opening week has the most hype and mid-season has less.

Your performative retardation isn't convincing anyone, and it's not doing you any good either. You already know you're lying to yourself and putting on a performance, because your best effort won't ever be good enough, so you tell yourself you might as well lie then. It's a pathetic way to live your life but like all committed liars, this is the path you chose and you'll likely stick to it. Grim.

>>20596629
Correct, and I'm saying they're not going to opt out. If they weren't happy like you claim they would opt out right? Also the actual deal gives Netflix to even get more than 10 years. They can sign up for 20 if they wanted.

>>20596633
>they have no obligation because they make actual profit off of the euro shows,
You're telling me that with a population of over 1 billion, WWE doesn't have 10k fans in India that will pay the proper rate for tickets and a few tv shirts to make the show profitable? SAD and lack of fans. Doesn't sound like the #2 WWE market to me.
>, because bongs spend $200 for nosebleeds,
I just looked it up. India cheapest ticket was $52. UK cheapest ticket was $80.
You lose again, faggot.

>>20596635
>There's not a single quarter where Raw did 5 million
I never said quarter, I said episode.
> Nobody looks at Week 1 NFL Monday Night Football and declares by week 13-14 that the NFL "has lost 30% of their audience" because of course the opening week has the most hype and mid-season has less.
WWE isn't a season sport. It's a TV show. If Squid Game lost 40% from the premiere, there would be no season 2.

>>20596647
again already said they could sell out 100k stadium, but they would lose money because they're poor you fucking retard, and no there is no ticket going for $52 in india you're looking at rupees retard

>>20596641
>Correct, and I'm saying they're not going to opt out. I
No, you said Netflix will extend the dead. I'm sorry you don't see the difference.
> If they weren't happy like you claim they would opt out right?
I think they will, but we'll see.
>ignoring the other anons dumb quote that I posted
SAD

>>20596650
>again already said they could sell out 100k stadium, but they would lose money because they're poor you fucking retard,
So there aren't 100k fans that can drop $52?
> and no there is no ticket going for $52 in india you're looking at rupees retard
I did the conversion rate you fucking retard:
>Tickets for the WWE Superstar Spectacle held in Hyderabad, India on September 8, 2023, started at ₹5,000 for general admission. Higher-tier and premium podium or floor seating options ranged from ₹7,500 up to ₹15,000 before standard convenience fees were
₹5,000 = $52 US
SAD

>>20596657
what's your source on that?

>>20596648
>We are talking about Netflix Raw going from 5 million to 2.7 million (despite more countries being added)
Exactly one episode did that number (which you for some reason rounded down from 5.9 to 5). If you're a TV station ordering content for 52 weeks per year, you are going to analyze things by quarter, not by what Episode 1 did and compare that to individual episodes 70 weeks later.

>Once those countries were "added" they expected the 5 million viewers to go up (or at the very least stay the same)
You say stuff like this with no source whatsoever. You don't have a single quote from a Netflix OR WWE executive stating what Raw's expected viewership was.

>If Squid Game lost 40% from the premiere, there would be no season 2.
That's not how any of that has ever worked or will ever worked. Shows are continued based on whether or not they are making money and bringing in subscribers, not whether or not they shot above some arbitrary number for one individual episode.

You continue to embarrass yourself by trying to create an entire referendum based on Week 1 of Raw on Netflix and basically having no other argument for anything else you're saying.

>>20596660
>what's your source on that?
https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/hyderabad/2023/Aug/16/wwe-tickets-sell-like-hot-cakes-in-hyderabad-2605699.html

Raw finna get canceled like Fox canceled Smackdown

>>20596651
Yeah Netflix will extend the deal, I think they're going to go over the 10 years. Again that's besides the point if they were unhappy as you claim they have every right to end the deal in 2030. They won't.

>>20596663
>newindiaexpress
saar
>>20596651
>extend the dead
SAAAAAR

>>20596657
Costs go up exponentially for stadium shows which is why AEW moved Grand Slam Australia from a stadium to an arena when ticket sales struggled. They could have dropped prices down to $10-20 and filled it up, but that would have created massive losses everywhere else (lighting, audio technicians, etc, ushers).

>>20596661
>Exactly one episode did that number (which you for some reason rounded down from 5.9 to 5).
Yeah, the first one. The logic was "as we add more countries, that number will stay the same or go up". They added more countries and the number went down.
>You say stuff like this with no source whatsoever. You don't have a single quote from a Netflix OR WWE executive stating what Raw's expected viewership was.
After the 5 millions viewers, all you heard was "more countries = more viewers"
>That's not how any of that has ever worked or will ever worked. Shows are continued based on whether or not they are making money and bringing in subscribers, not whether or not they shot above some arbitrary number for one individual episode.
You're retarded. Netflix cancels shows with less than a 40% drop all the time.

>>20596669
>>newindiaexpress
We are talking about an INDIAN live show, where else would I get info, retard?

>>20596665
>Yeah Netflix will extend the deal, I
We'll see. I say no. OR they will re-negotiate and reduce the $500 mil a year they are paying TKO now.

>>20596671
The Night Agent season 1 had 20.6 million global views

Season 2 had 13.9 million

Season 3 had 8.3 million

We shall see what Season 4 gets

>>20596675
I doubt the Night Agent cost $500 million a year.
And for every Night Agent that survives there are dozens that get cancelled.

>>20596673
i accept your concession

>>20596678
>i accept your concession
You: INDIANS ARE TOO POOR TO BUY A TICKET
Me: They are paying $52 MINIMUM for tickets
You: REEEEEEEE

>>20596671
>The logic was
Now you're shifting from
>the expectation
to
>the logic
so which one is it? Do you have someone you can quote or are you making shit up?

>all you heard was
got it, so you're making shit up and you don't have any sources or attributable quotes

>Netflix cancels shows with less than a 40% drop all the time.
List the shows Netflix cancelled specifically because the weeks after Week 1 dropped by 40% or more. If it happens "all the time" then you should have no problem listing at least 5 minimum.

>>20596674
We can put a friendly wager.

>>20596677
>I doubt the Night Agent cost $500 million a year.
More dishonesty, comparing 50+ episodes (and international PLEs) to the cost of 8-12 episodes

>>20596684
>so which one is it?
Both.
>got it, so you're making shit up and you don't have any sources or attributable quotes
Nobody in WWE or Netflix will say otherwise that it's great and they are 100% happy.
>List the shows Netflix cancelled specifically because the weeks after Week 1 dropped by 40%
Terminator zero
irst-half viewership tracked around 500,000 views, tapering off to roughly 300,000 views for the second half of the series.

>>20596689
>More dishonesty, comparing 50+ episodes (and international PLEs) to the cost of 8-12 episodes
Ok
WWE Raw = $9.6 million per ep
Night Agent started at $2-3 million per ep

>>20596677
The $500 million includes Smackdown and the PPVs outside the USA. People estimate that the Raw USA deal is worth about $350 million which is for 52 episodes a year.

>>20596692
1 is not "all the time", you need to name much more shows than that especially if you're not going to include sources

>>20596697
>1 is not "all the time", you need to name much more shows than that especially if you're not going to include sources
The Abandons
>cancelled
>opened at 7.5 million views
>dropped to 4.8 million views

>>20596703
Terminator dropped by 75% viewers (after multiple high rated episodes, not just one) btw, you left that out for some reason

>>20596729
>Terminator dropped by 75% viewers (after multiple high rated episodes, not just one) btw, you left that out for some reason
Other anon:
>"List the shows Netflix cancelled specifically because the weeks after Week 1 dropped by 40% or more"
75% = or more
>(after multiple high rated episodes, not just one)
Same with Raw. It didn't go from 5 million to 2.7 million in one week. It gradually dropped.

>>20596703
>7 episodes
>delayed by writers strike
>show creator left the show before it finished filming
it's like you're not even trying

>>20596733
I misread your original post as 40% or less. 95% is greater than 40%, let's not be retarded, or course a show will get cancelled after losing 95% of their viewers.

If your point is that Netflix is ruthless when it comes to cancelations, you shouldn't be struggling to find shows that only dropped 10-20% in views and still got cancelled. 40% is more than enough rope to hang yourself with.

>>20596733
Raw has had something like 55 out of the last 60 shows fall in a range of 2.5-3.3 - that's the kind of consistency that advertisers are willing to pay for, which is why Netflix is quite happy with WWE and continues to order even more content.

>>20596734
You want more:
The Residence: Pulled in over 177 million viewing hours, cancelled
Are you really trying to deny that Netflix abruptly cancels shows after 1 season?

>>20596739
>40% is more than enough rope to hang yourself with.
TKO has a contract for 10 years. They can't "cancel" Raw because they will still have to pay TKO. But I think they will opt out after 5 years.

>>20596743
>Raw has had something like 55 out of the last 60 shows fall in a range of 2.5-3.3 - that's the kind of consistency that advertisers are willing to pay for, which is why Netflix is quite happy with WWE
Happy with a 40% drop despite adding more countries....
>and continues to order even more content.
AAA is TKO not WWE. If it's cheap (and it probably is) then who cares where it comes from?

A summary of this thread:
>pajeet tries to say that WWE only matters in the USA and India
>I point how WWE does lots of tours in Europe and barely any in India
>he says that WWE ticket prices are so low in India that they wouldn't make money
>I point out tickets are $52 minimum in Inda for the last WWE show
>he reeeees that I fucked up because it must be 52 rupees
>nope, it's 5,000 rupees = $52
>he asks for source
>I give it
>he reeeeees that the source was from India
SAD

>>20593481
That's a great number, constantly in the top 10 next to shit they have to produce themselves instead and have up and downs each season reveal
The only disadvantage of raw is that it has almost zero rewatchability, a lot of ppl watched this week's show but won't watch last 3 if they missed them or because they were cool and want to see them a second time
Ratings have also been stable between 2.5 and 3.5 though years.
This is one of Tony's nightmares

>>20596634
Yet they would watch paint dry before touching aew. Makes you think...

I love that a year and a half later, trannies are still trying to insist that this show that is in the Netflix top ten every single week is actually a horrible failure, despite Netflix leadership coming out and talking about what a success this partnership has been.

>global
>weekly
>"""views"""
kek no wonder the piggiEs are SQUEALIN
this shit is getting cancelled faster than slopdown on Fox

>>20597562
So at the end of a contract when another company outbids Netflix for the rights?

a lone man siloed, cries out;
hark! the pendulum!

>>20597698
He does that a lot of late

>>20597559
You said they would do attitude era numbers. They're in 300 million homes and India and can't do 5 milly.

>>20593481
They are 100% pulling out at Year 5 per the original deal's terms. They have tons of outs. The deal will never reach 10 yrs

>>20593703
The netflix CEO is a known drone and a faggot. He signed WWE because he is a mark. Even tho the netflix universe is not turning out for the typical eslop he's going to pretend it's good because this faggot just wants to be nice his hero eslop wrestlers.

>>20593481
not long now, according to dave they are barely drawing 200k live viewers (US)