The interesting Dave Meltzer posts thread

[jdw]

Dave going off is pretty enjoyable.

 

John

[kjh]

Dave and Bryan are back in the mainstream thanks to Brock Lesnar:

 

-- I was on ESPN Radio yesterday talking Brock, the UFC weekend, the potential buyrate, and tons more here, starting around the 14 minute mark.

 

-- Dana White and Dave have also done about a million sports show interviews in the last 48 hours.

[kjh]

Dave "In the Zuffa bubble" Meltzer thinks Strikeforce couldn't outdraw UFC on PPV even if they stole most of their top stars:

 

If all of a sudden, Strikeforce signed the top five fighters in every weight division and UFC had 6-10, and everything else stayed the same, who would do more business on PPV?

 

UFC by a country mile. People want to see who they perceived as stars based on the environment they are in, and true ability is part of it, but nowhere near the biggest part of it.

[goc]

Dave "In the Zuffa bubble" Meltzer thinks Strikeforce couldn't outdraw UFC on PPV even if they stole most of their top stars:

 

If all of a sudden, Strikeforce signed the top five fighters in every weight division and UFC had 6-10, and everything else stayed the same, who would do more business on PPV?

 

UFC by a country mile. People want to see who they perceived as stars based on the environment they are in, and true ability is part of it, but nowhere near the biggest part of it.

It's true to a certain extent. Strikeforce is really not known, and doesn't have the hype machine behind it to where they could even get the word out that they had signed a bunch of big names and when their PPV would be. But at the same time, UFC losing the top fighters in every weight class would pretty much kill them off too. Ignoring that these guys are all champions, if Strikeforce managed to take away Brock, GSP and BJ Penn it would definitely boost their numbers and hurt the UFC's. But I don't think they would come anywhere close to some of the UFC's best PPV numbers at least in the beginning.

[kjh]

Strikeforce is really not known, and doesn't have the hype machine behind it to where they could even get the word out that they had signed a bunch of big names and when their PPV would be.

That's certainly true today, but if Strikeforce somehow stole all of UFC's biggest stars, I'm sure CBS would offer them prime-time shows, which would give them greater television exposure than even UFC has got at the moment. It would be a complete game changer.

[goc]

Strikeforce is really not known, and doesn't have the hype machine behind it to where they could even get the word out that they had signed a bunch of big names and when their PPV would be.

That's certainly true today, but if Strikeforce somehow stole all of UFC's biggest stars, I'm sure CBS would offer them prime-time shows, which would give them greater television exposure than even UFC has got at the moment. It would be a complete game changer.

 

I think the CBS think is a possibility but I wouldn't be SURE about it. I'd think they probably still have a sore taste in their mouth about MMA after the Elite XC thing.

[Bix]

Could someone post the latest Dave vs Snowden wars?

[jdw]

Has there been one since the Josh Gross thread earlier in the month?

 

John

[jdw]

*bump*

 

Before we get too side drained on Flair & Ginger, was there another Dave-Snowden thread after the Josh Gross one?

 

John

[Boondocks Kernoodle]

No, the Gross thread was the last war of words between the two.

[tomk]

None post Gross yet. There were a bunch pre-Gross during the whole period where Dave was pimping all the sports coverage Brock Lesnar got during the deadest week of the year for sports coverage (Baseball All Star weekend)..and all the way back to UFC 93. I don’t think the Gross one is the best.

[Bix]

Is the Josh Gross thread from the UFC 100 aftermath?

[kjh]

The Josh Gross thread started about 3 weeks after UFC 100 from a F4W poster who buried him for his appearance on Inside MMA where he encouraged UFC to co-promote with Fedor.

[Bix]

Ok, I have no idea what this is about. Details/C&P plz.

[kjh]

Good writer. Good connections.

 

Not a lick of understanding the fight business nor what makes fans buy tickets.

Otherwise a really smart guy, by the way.

That's the odd thing to me. Really, anyone should be able to get it, it's not that hard. I think deep down he does get it, he just hates it and can't accept it.

Unless he's suddenly picked it up since January, no he doesn't. I think very few do. 90% of promoters don't. 90% of fighters don't. There are reporters that do but they are a small percentage.

It's probably worth pointing out that 90% of the fans out there aren't obsessed with the "business" of MMA. They are much more interested in the fighters and the fights.

 

For example, when a UFC event is announced the response here is to analyze how it will do at the box office. Most fans are more likely to discuss the fights themselves.

 

So, to say Gross doesn't understand the "business" is fine. But for the most part it doesn't matter. He and Thomas Gerbasi routinely have pieces up that smoke what any of us here produce and are more interesting to the vast majority of fans.

Notice I didn't say fans. It's immaterial to fans. Fans are going to like what they like. But the key is, fans don't have to understand what other fans or the masses of fans like.

 

Promoters and reporters have to or they are going to miss the boat. Fighters should.

Promoters should, for certain. As for reporters, you and Gross have both made the same amount of money promoting shows, so it is immaterial.

 

Dave, when you say "Fighters should" are you advocating all fighters take a page from the Lesnar/Mir build? Wouldn't everyone playing up feuds and cutting wacky promos make it less special? For example, if everyone took the lesson that what Lesnar did worked, would it make it less effective in the future for Brock and other main eventers?

 

There has to be a balance or it's all just noise. It would be like getting juice on every match on the card in a WWE event that is going to end with a blood stop finish.

From there it goes back into discussion about the UFC 100 aftermath.

[tomk]

It's 18 page thread that's built on people criticizing Gross because he covers MMA/UFC the way a sports writer would cover MMA/UFC.

Instead coverage should be based around the nature of the promotional material and the buy rates.

And it builds from there and gets really interesting about 8 or nine pages in as Snowden talks about competive top atheltes ( Snowden doesn't say it but I'd be willing to argue that the basic idea of succesful sports promtion is to create the the illusion of competitiveness) while Meltzer talks about music/ wrestling and the creation of stars/personalities (seperate from their actual level of skill set) .

[sek69]

I know it's Dave and his fans are going to parrot pretty much whatever he says, but how long is he going to get away with saying all real sports should be marketed like pro wrestling?

[jdw]

At times it feels like one should change that "should be marketed" to "are marketed" to get what Dave is saying.

 

The general point Snowden has been trying to make about whether UFC/MMA is a niche form of sport (or entertainment in the minds of folks like Dave) or whether UFC/MMA has a shot at being something bigger like the NFL, MLB, NCAA Hoops, NCAA Football, the NBA or Futbol in the rest of the world... it's a blindlying simple and obvious point.

 

I suspect that Snowden feels stupified when people didn't/don't get the point when he tossed/tosses it out in general terms.

 

But he soldiers on and dumps a lot of examples out in support, and picks apart the poor counter examples tossed back, closing off arguments while supporting his own. And he's pretty much hitting his head against the wall.

 

One could nitpick an example or two of his (though none stick in my mind as red flags... I could add more to his womens tennis example, but it would end up supporting Snowden far more than what Dave tried to make of it). But what he's done to the other side isn't nitpicking: it's pretty much beaten their arguments with a club like a baby seal. Their way of ignoring that they've been clubbed to death is to simply talk over Snowden's points and ignore them, and instead shift the playing field over to things Snowden wasn't saying or disputing.

 

Anyway, I think Jon's done a good job trying to get people to take the blinders off.

 

John

[Eduardo]

Snowden started a thread on September 3rd, so I thought I would post some of the Snowden/Dave posts for you guys that don't have access:

 

First from Snowden, as he quotes a story:

 

"An article last month in Sports Business Journal essentially noted that UFC is still in danger of being seen in the ad community like WWE, something that delivers impressive demo numbers, but that the blue chip advertisers are still leery of. Obviously Harley Davidson and Bud Light are the prime sponsors, and Bud Light couldn’t have been happy with Brock Lesnar coming off the heels of Dana White’s remarks on Loretta Hunt. Larry Novenstern, EVP of Optimedia, said, “I don’t think anyone wants to be there when something bad happens, and something bad is going to happen.” Gibbs Haljun of GroupM, said some of his clients have bought time but many still steer clear. “It’s still niche. It’s not a mainstream sport at this point. If you want an efficient way to each young men, it’s a great opportunity. But it doesn’t have broad appeal.” UFC’s strength to advertisers is its ability to target market Men 25-40, because UFC still draws much heavier from that group as compared to sports that draw a lot more older viewers in particular. But UFC is not a good choice if you are a company targeting outside of that demo."

 

This is almost exactly what I said here and got roundly booed. Where is my apology? I'm not the only one who thinks that an association with pro wrestling can harm the UFC as a mainstream sport, even while boosting it tremendously as a PPV entity.

Now Dave replying:

 

Companies that are afraid someone will die in the octagon and don't want an association because of that are thus are not going to sponsor the show have absolutely zero to do with somebody doing a promo you don't like with the idea that it will keep away sponsors and sour TV execs, when in fact, there is no evidence any sponsors pulled out, and that same said show only increased interest among TV execs.

Another Dave post:

 

How is a guy quoted being afraid somebody may die in the octagon have anything to do with marketing UFC as pro wrestling, which, by the way, nobody has ever suggested.

 

The suggestion has been to market UFC with the best marketing techniques that have proven to work, many of which have been developed through the last 100 years in pro wrestling since both were in the business of selling fights to consumers.

 

If anything, you proved yourself wrong again.

 

If the guy was quoted as saying "We're leery because they are too close to that horrible pro wrestling because they hired Brock Lesnar and none of my clients want to get near it because look who Vince McMahon draws," then you'd have made a great point.

Snowden replying to Dave's last post:

 

That's not the key point at all. The key point is that the sport is seen as niche entertainment for dullards. All you took from that article was an offhand comment about something bad happening in the cage? People in the advertising industry are SPECIFICALLY comparing the UFC to pro wrestling in a negative manner. I told you this months ago after talking to people in the ad industry. But sure....

Another Snowden post:

 

Did anyone actually read the excerpt Dave posted? I find it hard to believe you have if you think his weird and off point counter was somehow a decisive win!

 

Again, it's right in my post. Read it. Read what I wrote about how effective the pro wrestling style is at selling PPV's. Read what the ad guys are saying. What sells to niche fans may not sell to mainstream viewers and advertisers.

Then Snowden starts to get into arguments with random F4W posters...

[kjh]

Dave goes off on Hulk Hogan and TNA:

What a reality check

 

Kimbo Slice took Ultimate Fighter from 1.2 to 3.7

Hogan took Impact from 1.1 to 1.3

So if there was no World Series, Hogan would have taken them from 1.1 to 1.5.

 

You're trying to make it like the World Series was the major difference from 1.2 to 3.7 and 1.1 to 1.3.

 

I'm trying to make a point about television ratings drawing power in 2009.

 

The last season of Ultimate Fighter several weeks did lower ratings than Impact and for the season was slightly above. Now they aren't close.

 

Is anyone trying to suggest that Hogan is going to move TNA to 2.1s?

 

Spike hyped this show more than any episode of Impact I can recall. Every commercial break had a Hogan promo.

And if you watched the Spike promos, you'd think it was a show he was at, because every promo talked about Hogan making his TNA debut on Impact on Thursday.

One week rating is significant?

 

You don't even remember Donald Trump doing a 4.5 and everyone talking about a turnaround and a new boom period coming.

 

Everyone knows Hogan's first two appearances will draw a rating. Everyone knows Flair's first two appearances will draw a rating. A 1.3 against the World Series is a good number, but it's still 200,000 viewers less than several shows they did earlier this year drew.

 

Are we still at the level where one week rating for someone's debut is considered significant? Sting drew his first week. Foley drew his first week. Angle drew his first week. It's still TNA and it's still Hogan.

 

The same Hogan who drew his first week back every time he came to WWF in the last 7 years, and then bailed every time out because he knows better than anyone that at his age, there is no staying power, only a nostalgia pop. If they did a 1.8 for one week, what would it matter because they'll be back to where they were three weeks later anyway. If they spent three months building up a live TV debut, you really think he'd drawing a 3.7 rating on Impact like Kimbo did? I mean, does anyone even entertain the idea that is even possible? He can't wrestle on TV more than once and have it mean something, and physically, the guy can't stand up and shave. He has to sit down and shave. Think about it. If he wrestles, a big if because even he's downplaying the idea of wrestling, he'll get one big buy rate, just like Angle, just like Sting, and TNA is still a company that does 1,500 paid for its biggest show of the year they spent four months promoting.

"Occasional" and one blurb for the show during every single break are not the same. Spike hyped it more than any TNA show and the same as a major UFC event.

 

For two days I heard the argument that TNA got more mainstream pub than ever before, nothing like this in history due to Hogan, and now it's changed to "There was only two days and an occasional TV commercial." By the way, exactly whose fault is it when a guy who is supposedly part of the ownership group continually fails to promote on national TV shows his debut on the show he is going to turn around? And you don't see that as a warning sign right off the bat?

 

At least even in TNA, Hogan's appearances were seen as a major warning sign that Hogan's not really into this more than taking them for a ride and they were neither thrilled with nor unhappy with the rating.

Would it make you more excited to know that I was more positive about the potential of this than everyone in the company I've spoken with in the past few days.

 

While nobody can say it publicly, the general feeling is that Hogan showed he was taking us for a ride on the Larry King Show, and look at his track record, bailing on everyone all the time.

 

I'm not saying it's doomed. There is a chance things could get better. The odds are not in that direction.

 

But, the idea that the 1.3 rating indicates anything whatsoever is astounding to me that anyone even gives a second of belief to.

Other than in today's culture, that Hulk Hogan for one week means a hell of a lot less than Kimbo Slice.

My idea of a success is they would take in more money with Hogan than they are spending to get him.

 

If he costs them $3 million a year and raises ratings and buy rates to the point they lose money on the deal, it's not a success.

 

If he costs them nothing, he only has to sell one ticket and it's a success.

A .1 increase in average weekly ratings likely means $0 dollars to TNA unless the ratings are up significantly the last year of the contract and somebody else is looking at trying to get the deal.

 

20,000 extra buys on the first show means $300,000.

 

So if he, and Bischoff together, are working for a combined less than $300,000 per year, yes, that's a success.

[sek69]

I love how Dave (that was his post, right?) seems to enjoy rubbing it in everyone's face that Hogan in 2009 isn't the same draw he was in 1986. I think pretty much everyone had that figured out after his last WWE run at the very least, if not before.

 

 

Also re: the whole Snowden/Dave wars....it seems that Snowden's raging against the machine and he will never be able to convince anyone on that board since they desperately hope UFC going mainstream will legitimize pro wres since one of "theirs" is heavyweight champ. That's really all it seems to boil down to, wrestling fans hoping to finally be able to have a comeback when a non fan starts busting their balls over liking that fake wrestling stuff.

[S.L.L.]

Nice to see Dave's analysis can still contain common sense every now and again. It probably helps that he's going after one of his favorite targets, but good to see, regardless.

 

Of course, the real revelation is that there are apparently Hogan defenders at Wrestling Classics now.

[Bob Morris]

Nice to see Dave's analysis can still contain common sense every now and again. It probably helps that he's going after one of his favorite targets, but good to see, regardless.

What I want to know is this: If Ric Flair follows Hogan into TNA, is he going to use that same common sense when ratings don't materialize or is he going to remain silent on the issue?

 

Of course, the real revelation is that there are apparently Hogan defenders at Wrestling Classics now.

When I was at Wrestling Classics, there was the occassional Hogan defender. Most likely, it's the same fan or same two fans going after Dave, tossing out ridiculous claims that he can easily refute.

[kjh]

Of course, the real revelation is that there are apparently Hogan defenders at Wrestling Classics now.

When I was at Wrestling Classics, there was the occassional Hogan defender. Most likely, it's the same fan or same two fans going after Dave, tossing out ridiculous claims that he can easily refute.

The posts were from the Figure Four message board, where you're more likely to find Hogan and TNA defenders. Dave stopped posting at Classics when the Observer site merged with the Figure Four site. The thread title is a bit outdated now. Sorry for the confusion!

[Bix]

That said, I'm pretty sure they're the same Hogan defenders.