09-11-2018, 09:56 PM | #41 |
Let me talk to ya
Posts: 11,749
|
xrod is correct, about the only thing they could do is move Smackdown to FS1. It'd probably be better for Fox on FS1 to start but with the network TV they are probably hoping for a bit of a ratings boost. Fox needs the content and has the money to pay for it.
|
09-11-2018, 10:04 PM | #42 |
Posts: 60,919
|
I want to hear BigCrippyZ out on this, because he actually knows what he's talking about, lol. Why would WWE have the leverage to making it so they cannot be canceled, but somehow don't have the leverage to ensure that they aren't kept on network television. That doesn't seem to make any reasonable sense, lol.
I don't know how FOX signs a contract that doesn't allow them to cancel SmackDown if their ratings drop 85% or something. There would be some expectation of service on WWE's part. As I said, I imagine that it would need to be demonstable in a measurable sense in relation to other television, or with a line that WWE is not realistically going to reach. <1.5 million people or something. There's no way FOX is paying for a complete flop. A relative flop, sure, but not one that kills their Fridays. Which SmackDown is not going to do, even if it doesn't light them on fire. This would all be under the proviso that WWE can be expected to generate a viewership of at least that size. It would have been insane for WWE to promise any more, but it would also be insane of FOX pay for "live entertainment" that no one ends up watching. Come on now. And I find it hard to believe that there wouldn't be a review period of the contract. |
09-11-2018, 10:05 PM | #43 |
Let me talk to ya
Posts: 11,749
|
It'd be like them canceling the NFL or NASCAR. The lawsuits and court proceedings would probably take longer than the deal its self. WWE is just a content provider, its Fox's job to air and promote it how ever they so choose. It's 5 years and chump change to Fox, I doubt they'd even consider canceling Smackdown.
|
09-11-2018, 10:06 PM | #44 | |
RoBOT Reigns
Posts: 9,619
|
Quote:
But they are on the hook for the contract, the money, and airing 2 hours of Smackdown somewhere. If they want out of it, it will cost them and they will have to get WWE to agree to the terms of a buyout, maybe even to the point that they have to wait until WWE has a new network lined up. As for provisions, yeah they probably have some, but again they would have had to be agreed to by WWE. An 85% drop in ratings, WWE would agree to that because they know they are going down to a .2 rating, so it's a non issue. |
|
09-11-2018, 10:14 PM | #45 |
Posts: 60,919
|
There's a difference between saying they probably wouldn't consider doing it and that they can't. I don't expect SmackDown to get cancelled, I'm just saying that if FOX is really disappointed with them, there would have to be measures put in place so that they can do it, because television needs to be adaptable like that, because you're dealing with advertisers and affiliates as well. It would be genuinely insane for FOX to not have that built into their contracts in a very permanent way.
I'm sure they have clauses that would allow them to do that with the NFL or NASCAR too. It all sounds very standard to me. With "live sports" you want to be able to provide a league or a company or promotion or whatever you want to call them with reassurance, but you also want to be able to treat them as content too. And if content doesn't do it's job effectively, it's actually kind of a big deal for the networks, so they would have to have something that can cover their ass, even if they really, really want that content. |
09-11-2018, 10:15 PM | #46 | |
RoBOT Reigns
Posts: 9,619
|
Quote:
That is actually FAR cheaper then everything else they air. |
|
09-11-2018, 10:21 PM | #47 |
Let me talk to ya
Posts: 11,749
|
Canceling Smackdown would cost them more money than just letting the contract run out. Plus they'd just have to give money to someone else for that timeslot since they don't have a studio to create shows themselves anymore. They're basically in it for the advertising money now with the live sports.
|
09-11-2018, 10:26 PM | #48 | |
Posts: 60,919
|
Quote:
Yeah, or they can use the loopholes and revision periods that I am sure are placed into the contract, lol. I feel like I am repeating myself, but I am sure that it would be insane of FOX to just decide 2 months in, after fantastic ratings, that they don't want SmackDown anymore. But I'm sure there are periods (I would guess it would be somewhere in the middle of the run), where FOX can say "Look, we aren't going to be showing SmackDown after this day, here's (x) amount that we agreed to if we decide we are going in a different direction with (x) amount of time and after honoring (x) amount of time on the contract." Of course the provisions would have to be agreed to by WWE. That's what a contract is, lol. I'm not saying that WWE is lamenting at the idea of these provisions -- I think they are pretty standard stuff. If you show starts failing, we get to bail. That no one expects WWE to flat-out fail, given they have a 20-year history of doing 2 million viewers or whatever is exactly my point. That's why it seems ludicrious to suggest that it wouldn't be in there. That's what FOX is paying for -- 2 million eyeballs every Friday. If they get 1.8 or 1.9, I'm sure that's within the scope. But if WWE starts doing even a 1.4, I'm sure FOX can say "Come on now, that's not what we paid for." |
|
09-11-2018, 10:30 PM | #49 |
Let me talk to ya
Posts: 11,749
|
Can they cancel it? Yes. Does it make econmomical sense to cancel it if it gets to that point? No. They'd just move it to FS1 where it'd be the highest rated show every week.
|
09-11-2018, 10:31 PM | #50 | |
Posts: 60,919
|
Quote:
|
|
09-11-2018, 10:33 PM | #51 |
Posts: 60,919
|
And I'm sure that when the revision period came up, they would cancel it, because they don't want to be paying $200 million a year or whatever for a show they wanted to spend that much on for network. And I'm sure WWE would recognize this ahead of time and also be looking for other networks to pay them a large sack of money, because I'm sure being moved to cable would feel exactly like losing your time-slot.
|
09-11-2018, 10:33 PM | #52 | |
RoBOT Reigns
Posts: 9,619
|
Quote:
I will refine my original statement. Fox can't just cancel Smackdown unless WWE breaches the agreement without costing themselves the majority of the money agreed upon. In the case of this deal where there were competing offers, WWE surely received more favorable terms then says a pilot order. They did not get a standard contract. The 5 year length itself proves that. |
|
09-11-2018, 10:34 PM | #53 | |
Let me talk to ya
Posts: 11,749
|
Quote:
But WWE is to the point where they are finally getting in good with advertising. They're product has been declining during that time period to fans but not advertisers for some odd reason. |
|
09-11-2018, 10:34 PM | #54 |
Posts: 60,919
|
I think the contract being "$200 million for 5 years, no questions asked" is a gross oversimplification of what these things would be. I'm sure these things would be very tiered and particular.
|
09-11-2018, 10:36 PM | #55 |
Posts: 60,919
|
Well, because television sucks. But in the event that WWE turns sour with advertisers again, which is always a possibility, then I'm sure FOX reserves the right to cancel, because so much of the deal would be based on advertising. If WWE doesn't bring it, then what are they even doing there?
|
09-11-2018, 10:38 PM | #56 | |
Posts: 60,919
|
Quote:
|
|
09-11-2018, 11:43 PM | #57 | |
Former TPWW Royalty
Posts: 66,588
|
Quote:
Basis was USA Network and/or NBC realizing how disastrous the deal to make Smackdown into a live show was going to be for them in the long run unless drastic changes were made. USA Network was giving WWE a ton of money but was getting way less back in return from ads. |
|