Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Current WWE


Smack2k

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Guest The Jiz

Size matters. It's a lot easier to repackage/repush a giant/monster/huge guy than someone like Tyson Kidd. I bet that within a week or two they could have Khali presented as huge threat and Khali doesn't have nearly the talent of Show or Henry or even Kane.

 

How tall do you think Tyson Kidd IRL? WWE advertises him as 5'10'' but he doesn't look to be more than 5'8'', and he probably wears lifts at that. Anyway, he's really underutilized. I'm not sure if he can sell in a way that 1-2-3 Kid could in getting the fans behind him, but he could play a much more effective role. He does seem a bit short on charisma.

 

 

 

The "youth movement" thing is a little weird to me. Cesaro is 33. Bryan is 32. Punk is 35.

 

For comparison's sake, Orton is 33. Cena is 36.

 

It's very much a New Generation thing when your new generation was a bunch of guys in their early 30s.

 

That was addressed well, but I'll add too as you have before in another thread that most wrestlers aren't going to be much good until they approach 30. So the age issue isn't strange. Roman Reigns is 28, but he came from a wrestling family as well which usually will help with intuition. I think a lot of people are just tired of seeing the same headliners year after year and that there comes a time when the top has to change up. Right now is a good time for that.

 

Cena gave an interview on Austin's podcast saying that he thinks the crowd splits largely because people want to see new faces. If that's true and it's just general fan discontent, this year's Royal Rumble really enhances his point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

WWE's fourth quarter 2013 and full year financial report reveals one of the worst pay-per-view buy numbers in WWE history for the Battleground pay-per-view at 114,000 buys. The pay-per-view featured Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton.

 

The results then show a strong 228,000 buys for the October Hell In a Cell pay-per-view, which featured Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton with Shawn Michaels as referee. That is up from the 199,000 in 2012.

 

The Survivor Series pay-per-view, with Big Show vs. Randy Orton, in November drew 177,000 buys, down from the 208,000 buys in 2012.

 

December's TLC pay-per-view, with John Cena vs. Randy Orton, drew 181,000 pay-per-view buys, up just a bit from the 175,000 buys in 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

WWE's fourth quarter 2013 and full year financial report reveals one of the worst pay-per-view buy numbers in WWE history for the Battleground pay-per-view at 114,000 buys. The pay-per-view featured Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton.

 

The results then show a strong 228,000 buys for the October Hell In a Cell pay-per-view, which featured Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton with Shawn Michaels as referee. That is up from the 199,000 in 2012.

 

The Survivor Series pay-per-view, with Big Show vs. Randy Orton, in November drew 177,000 buys, down from the 208,000 buys in 2012.

 

December's TLC pay-per-view, with John Cena vs. Randy Orton, drew 181,000 pay-per-view buys, up just a bit from the 175,000 buys in 2012.

 

 

This tells me a few things, all of which are not really that negative about Bryan's drawing power.

 

Battleground tanked because it came 3 weeks after the highly-criticized Night of Champions show (which, itself, did a poor number compared to the previous year). One could argue that this shows Bryan wasn't a draw, but let's also remember that SummerSlam did a disappointing number (with Cena and Lesnar in prominent roles). Call me a "glass half full" guy, but can you imagine the numbers these shows would've done WITHOUT Bryan?

 

Oh wait, you can. Look at Survivor Series, where Bryan was put in a tag match of little consequence. It dropped 31,000 buys.

 

Hell in a Cell (which, I must add, also featured Cena's return) was up - and, to me, that has a lot to do with the fact that you had Shawn Michaels serving as ref and people may have actually felt like Bryan was going to win the big one (I'm not sure anyone thought that about NoC or Battleground).

 

As for the TLC butyrate....6,000 more buys? For a card featuring The Most Important Match in WWE History? A card that was 10 Years In The Making? A card that featured a unification match that many fans expected would be a "natural sell"? There's no way to put lipstick on that pig. TLC was an underperformer while Battleground did what most would expect for a last minute, thrown together show mere weeks after an abysmal PPV like NoC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Following the release of the 2013 WWE financials, here is a breakdown of the company's top 10 revenue streams.

  • TV Rights Fees - $160.9 million
  • Live Events - $111.5 million
  • PPV Revenue - $82.5 million
  • Licensing - $43.6 million
  • Home Video - $24.3 million
  • WWE.com - $23 million
  • Venue Merchandise - $19.4 million
  • WWEShop - $15.5 million
  • WWE Studios - $10.8 million
  • Magazine Sales - $5.7 million

    - TV rights fees continue to be the biggest line of revenue, and the $160.9 million represents approximately 32% of the company's revenue, which is up from 2012, when it represented approximately 29%.

    - Live events have been steady as the secondary line of revenue, representing approximately 21% of the revenue for the last three years.

    - PPV remains the third biggest lien of revenue, with $82.5 million, representing 16.2% of the company's revenue. This is roughly even with last year, which was $83.6 (17.3), but up from 2011, which was $78.3 million (16.2%).

    - WWE licensing was at $43.6 million, which is approximately 8.6% of the revenue. Licensing fees for the company dropped for a second straight year, starting at $54.4 million (11.2%) in 2011, then $46.3 million (9.6%) in 2012 and now $43.6 million (8.6%) this year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That tells me house shows should mean way more to the creative direction than they currently do. Seems like missed opportunity.

Seems like the same can be said of TV. Their mentality for a long time now has been to not give away too much on TV because they need to protect their PPV business, but TV is by far their biggest revenue stream so you'd think they'd run more big matches, title changes, and angles on TV than they currently do in order to strengthen their TV footing. Obviously times have changed a ton, but their current TV product is extremely predictable compared to their heydey during the Monday Night Wars, and it's very rare that they do anything on RAW to make the show feel like it's must-see TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious how different the TV will become once the WWE Network launches. I mean, they're not really selling Pay-Per-Views anymore, they'll be selling the network. So does RAW just become a 3-hour commercial for the WWE Network every week? Do you think they'll start doing things like starting a match, or a best-of-series & then telling you to see the rest on the network? Things like that.

 

I know the network is mostly older stuff & RAW and Smackdown will still be on TV but I gotta imagine that the PPV shows won't just cease to matter at all. I'm sure they'll matter less because they're cheaper but that mean that RAW will matter more?

 

It'll be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, knowing how this works, the Network will report their (probably big) earnings, but at the same time, it's destined to be in the red come Q4 2014. And the $260M for rights fees right now still looks hilarious. They should be looking for a similar number while looking to expand on the streams they have already, especially considering TV rights fees are only going to matter for a few years longer before networks get smart to consumer demand for Over-The-Top apps...like the WWE Network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

He's John Cena. There is always a noticeable difference between his absence and his presence. Why would a match that headlined the last two PPVs and did abysmal start suddenly drawing otherwise?

Hell in A Cell. Shawn Michaels. Anticipated title change.

 

 

Shawn Michaels is a difference maker but John Cena is not? Suddenly, people care enough about a match to pay for it, despite that they haven't for the two previous PPVs? I don't buy that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TheGreatPuma

Claudio vs Dragon was terrific on Smackdown. It's the type of match everyone will give thumbs up to. If you want limb selling, than this is your match. Bryan's shoulder injury started by Kane looks to be a long term deal. I don't want to spoil anymore. Watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...