• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

more CW talk, now about programming strategys Part I: Mondays

O

oldvnewschool

Now that CBS will have more say on the new network

I doubt that they will try to keep a 2 hour Monday comedy block

on the new network since the one on UPN is really a poor man's NBC at

best.

So here what I would do for Monday's:

It has come to light that before the merger, the WWE signed a new

two year deal with CBS Corporation to keep Smackdown on that side of the

fence.

WWE Raw has done well ratings wise since moving to the USA Network

(ADVERTISING PEOPLE) last week they did a 4.5 rating

So how's this sound

Mondays 7-9pm WWE MONDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN

they will be one hour ahead of Raw, and then we can have a little

in house competiton.
 
>
> (ADVERTISING PEOPLE) last week they did a 4.5 rating
>
> So how's this sound
>
> Mondays 7-9pm WWE MONDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN
>
> they will be one hour ahead of Raw, and then we can have a
> little in house competiton.

Sounds like piss poor planning to me. If you were the President of your company, you would not be so stupid to want the your product going up against each other. Why would you put your entire product against each other?

If you were Jerry Bruckheimer, would you want both of your "CSI" franchises up against each other?

No, because that's stupid.

Not to mention, "Smackdown" is recorded on Tuesdays at whatever venue it is scheduled at.
 
> Now that CBS will have more say on the new network
>
> I doubt that they will try to keep a 2 hour Monday comedy
> block
>
> on the new network since the one on UPN is really a poor
> man's NBC at
>
> best.
>
> So here what I would do for Monday's:
>
> It has come to light that before the merger, the WWE signed
> a new
>
> two year deal with CBS Corporation to keep Smackdown on that
> side of the
>
> fence.
>
> WWE Raw has done well ratings wise since moving to the USA
> Network
>
> (ADVERTISING PEOPLE) last week they did a 4.5 rating
>
> So how's this sound
>
> Mondays 7-9pm WWE MONDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN
>
> they will be one hour ahead of Raw, and then we can have a
> little
>
> in house competiton.
>


I really doubt that is going to happen. Do you really think Vince McMahon and his shareholders would take the risk of destroying their advertising dollars? I don't think so.
 
> >
> > (ADVERTISING PEOPLE) last week they did a 4.5 rating
> >
> > So how's this sound
> >
> > Mondays 7-9pm WWE MONDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN
> >
> > they will be one hour ahead of Raw, and then we can have a
>
> > little in house competiton.
>
> Sounds like piss poor planning to me. If you were the
> President of your company, you would not be so stupid to
> want the your product going up against each other. Why
> would you put your entire product against each other?
>
> If you were Jerry Bruckheimer, would you want both of your
> "CSI" franchises up against each other?
>
> No, because that's stupid.
>
> Not to mention, "Smackdown" is recorded on Tuesdays at
> whatever venue it is scheduled at.
>
There are more chances to see Smackdown moving back to Thursday than moving to Monday night.
 
> > Now that CBS will have more say on the new network
> >
> > I doubt that they will try to keep a 2 hour Monday comedy
> > block
> >
> > on the new network since the one on UPN is really a poor
> > man's NBC at
> >
> > best.
> >
> > So here what I would do for Monday's:
> >
> > It has come to light that before the merger, the WWE
> signed
> > a new
> >
> > two year deal with CBS Corporation to keep Smackdown on
> that
> > side of the
> >
> > fence.
> >
> > WWE Raw has done well ratings wise since moving to the USA
>
> > Network
> >
> > (ADVERTISING PEOPLE) last week they did a 4.5 rating
> >
> > So how's this sound
> >
> > Mondays 7-9pm WWE MONDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN
> >
> > they will be one hour ahead of Raw, and then we can have a
>
> > little
> >
> > in house competiton.
> >
>
>
> I really doubt that is going to happen. Do you really think
> Vince McMahon and his shareholders would take the risk of
> destroying their advertising dollars? I don't think so.
>


This idea has also came up on one of the wrestling boards I'm on. There's no way it will happen, and since the CW referred to the show as "Friday Night Smackdown" in the renewal press release, it seems pretty certain that it will remain in its current slot.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone tossed around the idea at WWE HQ, though. If they could truly create the illusion of interbrand competition(which really hasn't worked so far), two shows at the same time would actually generate more viewers rather than lose them.
 
> > > Now that CBS will have more say on the new network
> > >
> > > I doubt that they will try to keep a 2 hour Monday
> comedy
> > > block
> > >
> > > on the new network since the one on UPN is really a poor
>
> > > man's NBC at
> > >
> > > best.
> > >
> > > So here what I would do for Monday's:
> > >
> > > It has come to light that before the merger, the WWE
> > signed
> > > a new
> > >
> > > two year deal with CBS Corporation to keep Smackdown on
> > that
> > > side of the
> > >
> > > fence.
> > >
> > > WWE Raw has done well ratings wise since moving to the
> USA
> >
> > > Network
> > >
> > > (ADVERTISING PEOPLE) last week they did a 4.5 rating
> > >
> > > So how's this sound
> > >
> > > Mondays 7-9pm WWE MONDAY NIGHT SMACKDOWN
> > >
> > > they will be one hour ahead of Raw, and then we can have
> a
> >
> > > little
> > >
> > > in house competiton.
> > >
> >
> >
> > I really doubt that is going to happen. Do you really
> think
> > Vince McMahon and his shareholders would take the risk of
> > destroying their advertising dollars? I don't think so.
> >
>
>
> This idea has also came up on one of the wrestling boards
> I'm on. There's no way it will happen, and since the CW
> referred to the show as "Friday Night Smackdown" in the
> renewal press release, it seems pretty certain that it will
> remain in its current slot.
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if someone tossed around the idea at
> WWE HQ, though. If they could truly create the illusion of
> interbrand competition(which really hasn't worked so far),
> two shows at the same time would actually generate more
> viewers rather than lose them.
>
Thank You!

That was the point.

Back in the mid 1990's

wrestling was super popular when you had WCW on TNT and WWF on USA on

Monday Nights

I'm not saying it will ever happen

but think of the possibilities.
 
You're STILL Not Getting It!

> Thank You!
>
> That was the point.
>
> Back in the mid 1990's
>
> wrestling was super popular when you had WCW on TNT and WWF
> on USA on Monday Nights

Please don't tell us that someone has to spell this out why THAT was ok.

> I'm not saying it will ever happen
> but think of the possibilities.

Yeah, I can think of the possibilities. And it ain't good.

You haven't a clue in the world about programming or even doing business at all, do you?
 
Re: You're STILL Not Getting It!

The only reason WWE is still on the CW is because it's perfect Friday night counterprogramming. Warner Bros. and CBS aren't in the wrestling business and would NEVER in a million years cede valuable real estate to a product that has no true upside for them.

Please, learn about programming before posting such an obviously inane possibility here. WWE is fringe programming at best. TW and CBS are in the business of producing and distributing series programming.
 
Re: You're STILL Not Getting It!

> The only reason WWE is still on the CW is because it's
> perfect Friday night counterprogramming. Warner Bros. and
> CBS aren't in the wrestling business and would NEVER in a
> million years cede valuable real estate to a product that
> has no true upside for them.
>
> Please, learn about programming before posting such an
> obviously inane possibility here. WWE is fringe programming
> at best. TW and CBS are in the business of producing and
> distributing series programming.

That's not even it, really. The poster suggests something that is just ridiculous business practice. Putting your product (WWE, regardless if it's "Raw", "Smackdown" or a syndicated WWE program) against one another. It's just stupid. Yeah, 'stupid' is a strong word, but c'mon. Common sense here. WWE would never ever allow it, not to mention, I am sure some serious contract negotiations would have to take place prior.

Then, the poster uses reasoning of the WCW going up against WWE. Bueller? Bueller?

Two different entities. And we see who won that competition.

WCW up against WWE is one thing.

It's called "competition."

Look at "Dr. Phil". It's spelled out in the syndication contract that "Dr. Phil" is NOT to air opposite of "Oprah" in the market.
 
Raw vs. Smackdown!? No way

I'm new to the national board (I usually post on the WNY Radio board) but I was just reading some of the speculation on here.
Before we start speculating, why don't we think things through before posting ideas on here? The poster's comment about Smackdown! and Raw competing against each other makes about as much sense as, to paraphrase what a previous poster said, CSI, CSI: Miami and CSI: NY going up against each other.
It's always about the money in the TV business (or busine$$, however you want to look at it), and if Vince would put those two shows against each other, he stands to lose a lot of it.
 
Re: You're STILL Not Getting It!

> The only reason WWE is still on the CW is because it's
> perfect Friday night counterprogramming. Warner Bros. and
> CBS aren't in the wrestling business and would NEVER in a
> million years cede valuable real estate to a product that
> has no true upside for them.


That's funny because from'97 to '99 Time Warner made over $700 million from WCW, the wrestling company they owned at the time. And the WWE regularly make over $150 million a year. That seems to be a pretty good upside.
 
Didn't exsist then...

www.fightnetwork.com/ why not dump all WWE (etc) programming there that is counted as more of a hinder than a help to the bottom line? At least then, those who want such a thing have a home to watch it on.
Back then, (the 90's) there was no such option, but today there is.<P ID="signature">______________
"If you never say NO, How much is your YES worth?"
</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom