Ricky Jackson Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Rumble 99 was awesome, and it led to one of their biggest "b-show" PPVs ever, the St. Valentine's Day Massacre Austin v. Vince cage match I'm fine with retroactively crapping on the attitude era, because most of that shit does not hold up well, but that was Austin v. Vince at it's peak and it absolutely drew assloads of money for the company Yeah, they drew a ton of money with the feud. Probably the most Vince has ever made with a program. The heat was off the charts. Ratings were sky high. Everybody watched Raw. But if I live the rest of my life without seeing the Austin vs Vince stuff from that era again I'll be fine with that. The feud was good at the start, great even. The cage match was likely good, but I can't remember because I haven't seen it since the day it aired. But in the end, the feud went on way TOO LONG and was the start of TOO MUCH VINCE AND FAMILY on TV, which I couldn't stand then and can't stand now. Really, it's about my personal taste. Outside of a few moments here and there, Vince as Mr. McMahon has never really done it for me. Give me babyface announcer Vince any day. And Rumble 99 was horseshit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricR Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 My friends and I didn't always get together to buy in on PPVs, but in the late 90s there was more of our crew than normal watching wrestling, so more people were willing to go in on PPVs. We ended up getting Royal Rumble '99, WM XV and King of the Ring '99. By the end of that shitty trifecta, most of thos casual fans could not give a shit about wrestling any longer. Those shows were just fucking brutal to watch live. Worst Rumble match ever, arguably worst mania, and such a bad KOTR tourney. I remember thinking of what a huge rip off those shows were even though the price was split like 8 or 10 ways. In fact, the Rumble was ordered by one of my friends' moms, because it was his birthday. It still felt like a total rip off, because I had to drive 25 minutes to get to his house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Things I Learned from WO Radio: UFC is losing 100k buys per PPV from piracy because Dave has friends who watch on illegal streams. Even Bryan was all "uhh, I don't think so", but Dave was still "I HAVE SEVERAL FRIENDS WHO WATCH STREAMS!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Seriously that was the dumbest thing I have ever heard. I would be surprised if 75,000 actually stream and pirate the shows in the first place and the fact that at least that many would not only pirate but also buy the show if pirating didn't exist is maddening. Dave is really ignoring what I think are some pretty big indicators of what is a declining company. Will UFC be dead in the next 5 years? Doubt it but when was the last time they received any better than expected news in regards to buyrates, ratings, etc. that was considered good news. I think Nov. 12 will say a lot about where they are and where they are headed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Rumble 99 was awesome, and it led to one of their biggest "b-show" PPVs ever, the St. Valentine's Day Massacre Austin v. Vince cage match I'm fine with retroactively crapping on the attitude era, because most of that shit does not hold up well, but that was Austin v. Vince at it's peak and it absolutely drew assloads of money for the company have to remember that Russo hated the Royal Rumble concept. The 99 Rumble was his way of illustrating how silly the concept was (in his opinion) Around 1998 he wrote an article in WWF magazine trashing the match and concept and that it insulted the fan's intelligence. He didn't even want to do the Rumble match on the show sort of the same way Bret Hart hated the Survivor Series concept I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Jackson Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 An opinion like that pretty much sums up why Russo has booked so much garbage over the years. If he was in charge of the NFL he would advocate scrapping touchdowns and field goals in favour of teams scoring points based on which players delivered the best hits or some such nonsense. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he had a hand in the original XFL concept somewhere along the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted October 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 I'm not a huge fan of the Rumble either, but I can't deny that it works and that it usually draws well. I'd never advocate changing it just because I personally think watching guys hold on to ropes and hang upside down for over an hour is boring. Plenty of people like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 From the latest WON: The 2005 run was a success business-wise, although Hogan didn’t get paid commensurate with it and it left hard feelings, because of the success of Hogan vs. Shawn Michaels as a match (although one still wonders how much the last week virtual promise of Bret Hart showing up had to do with that monster buy rate). Wait, what? The only Bret-related stuff I remember in the buildup was Shawn trolling the fans in Montreal with Bret's Titantron. Hogan named-dropped Bret once or twice in the build-up as well, if memory serves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 I love Vince vs Stone Cold in that Rumble. I'd also thought Rumbles sucked cock for ages before that. Rather than keep the numbers low so people can work and you can track what's going on, they'd just bog down, filling up with bodies, waiting for the Big Guy to come in and throw a bunch of people out. You'd see it year after year after year... same old shit. It got to be a painful match to watch. Even the "great ones", like 1992, don't really hold up as being any good. Probably the most overrated gimmick concept in history: Royal Rumbles. It's too bad the Survivor Series concept crapped out, largely because the WWF didn't know how to book it and wanted to protect folks from even doing job if freaking tag team matches. A well done Survivor Match runs circles around a Rumble concept. John Like you, I enjoyed Austin-Vince in the '99 Rumble, but the rest of it was pretty unwatchable, sometimes painful to sit through. I agree that the Royal Rumble is generally overrated (although not nearly as much as most WWE ladder matches). Really, the Rumble match itself is often only as good as how well they can incorporate stories/storylines into it. The Austin-Vince one is actually a good example of this. Flair's early entry with Heenan freaking out made the '92 one entertaining. Most cases of these, though, are few and far between, and due to the sheer numbers (often at the same time as you mentioned), they don't always stand out. Even Punk lucking out with the Nexus early in last year's wasn't bad, although it goes to show you the state of the Rumble when the biggest reactions (aside from Santino's would-be upset) were the surprise entrants (Booker and Nash). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted October 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Any idea why with King of the Ring, they eventually stopped doing the quarterfinal match the same night? I think the appeal of KOTR was doing the entire tournament in one night. 2000 ... wow, that one should have been a fantastic night of wrestling that could have had months of fallout and they completely killed it with rushed matches and the wrong guys going over in almost every match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Seriously that was the dumbest thing I have ever heard. I would be surprised if 75,000 actually stream and pirate the shows in the first place and the fact that at least that many would not only pirate but also buy the show if pirating didn't exist is maddening. Dave is really ignoring what I think are some pretty big indicators of what is a declining company. Will UFC be dead in the next 5 years? Doubt it but when was the last time they received any better than expected news in regards to buyrates, ratings, etc. that was considered good news. I think Nov. 12 will say a lot about where they are and where they are headed. Not to beat the "Dave thinks wrestling and MMA are the same thing" dead horse yet again, but he correctly attributes WWE's sagging PPV numbers to them running too many shows and not having interesting matchups. Yet somehow when it comes to UFC it can only be due to people watching streams. To be fair, a lot of it was out of the company's control with so many main events being scrapped at the last minute due to injuries, but you can't discount the WWE effect of each show losing some luster when there's a new PPV nearly every month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLIK Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 but he correctly attributes WWE's sagging PPV numbers to them running too many shows and not having interesting matchups. Yet somehow when it comes to UFC it can only be due to people watching streams. He might not have on that particular show but Meltzer's been using the "too many shows is costing them business" talking point for a long ass time now in regards to UFC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cox Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Any idea why with King of the Ring, they eventually stopped doing the quarterfinal match the same night? I think the appeal of KOTR was doing the entire tournament in one night. 2000 ... wow, that one should have been a fantastic night of wrestling that could have had months of fallout and they completely killed it with rushed matches and the wrong guys going over in almost every match.Add KOTR '00 to the list of "Lousy PPVs that Cox has attended in person." What made this one worse is that I drove five hours each way and spent two nights in Boston, all so my friends and I could watch an absolutely horrible PPV live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm funk Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 I watch some UFC shows via streams and I can say 100% if streams didn't exist I wouldn't be buying them. Streams cost them some business, but there's no way it's anywhere close to 100,000 buys per show, because most people who stream are like me and just wouldn't watch or would wait for the show to be uploaded the next day. I will never pay $40+ for a PPV, it's just not worth it, and it still seems easier to get people interested in throwing in on a big boxing event than a big UFC I'd go to a bar to watch them if there was a bar near me that showed them, but I live in a rural area and UFC charges such an exorbitant fee (I believe it's 2K) that it's not worth it for any of the local bars to show them. I'd have to drive like an hour away to the nearest BWW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLIK Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Streams cost them some business, but there's no way it's anywhere close to 100,000 buys per show, I've been around forever and I have no clue whear to even find streams for UFC/Wrestling PPVs and i'm guessing a lot of other ppl are in the same boat. Pirating in general cost every business if we're being honest but yeah I wouldn't put streams at the top of that list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 I think a majority of streamers are like Funk: folks who would otherwise *not* buy the PPV's. So does the UFC think 1,000,000 people are streaming, of which 100K would otherwise be dropping a dime on *every* show? $50 x 16 events = $800 Perhaps it might dawn on Dave that those 100K people aren't buying every PPV because... um... we're in a near-depressions and... er... People Got No Money? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Chavo's real downfall as a worker was aping Eddie's act after his death. Yeah being an Eddie tribute wrestler instead of being his own man really hurt him. Also when was the Kidman injury? But honestly you look at his stuff with Matt Borne and I can't think of anyone else in the WWE who could have pulled off that kind of heel getting over Bourne act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 From the WON, not exactly Pritchard related, but certainly TNA: One of the reasons Bischoff has a lot of power is because Spike works through him, which gives him a lot of power. Spike lost a lot of faith in Dixie Carter after she pushed to them about how they were doing the angle to get the Main Event Mafia back together last year and they spent months building it up, telling Spike about Booker T and Kevin Nash and that she had them, only for Booker to have been in talks with WWE already and have no interest in coming back. She had Nash under contract but Nash did whatever it was that he did (he told friends he threatened to tell the truth about her) and she released him from his contract and allowed him to sign with WWE. This left them with months of build and no angle, and led to the Fortune babyface turn on Immortal and a feud that largely went nowhere. So what is "the truth about" Dixie? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Dave trolling Dylan: "--Who is the best wrestler of the current world champions? Davey Richards 44.4% Mark Henry 16.3% Hiroshi Tanahashi 12.3% James Storm 9.3% Alberto Del Rio 7.5% Jeff Jarrett 3.4% Go Shiozaki 1.8% Masaaki Mochizuki 1.8% Hector Garza 0.8% Suwama 0.4% Well, that's quite embarrassing" How can any of those guys point to drawing like our boy Mark Henry's TV ratings power? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 MMA has had commercial success at the fake level. Keep in mind historically basketball was more popular commercially at one point on the fake level than the real level. So there's hope for MMA in 40 years. Is Meltzer talking about the Globetrotters? By more popular comercially is he talking about having a cartoon show and appearing on the love boat? Or is he talking about draw? Is he talking about that one huge gate they drew in post war Germany? Is he talking about the Globetrotters when the NBA was segregated? The legit games they had against segregated college teams of the 20s, the segregated Miineapolis Lakers of the 40s? Did he miss the whole segregation thing? Is the Harlem Globetrotters point more or less insane than the WNBA argument? If Curly Neal opened a Swedish restaurant... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I'm also interested in the first half of that: "MMA has had commercial success at the fake level." That has to mean that: Pro Wrestling = MMA in this fashion: Pro Wrestling = Fake MMA Pro Wrestling = (Fake) MMA Pro Wrestling = MMA John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I'm going to give Dave the benefit of the doubt this time and guess he meant Pride (due to the mix) and shoot style that happened after UFC and Pancrase launched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 From the WON, not exactly Pritchard related, but certainly TNA: One of the reasons Bischoff has a lot of power is because Spike works through him, which gives him a lot of power. Spike lost a lot of faith in Dixie Carter after she pushed to them about how they were doing the angle to get the Main Event Mafia back together last year and they spent months building it up, telling Spike about Booker T and Kevin Nash and that she had them, only for Booker to have been in talks with WWE already and have no interest in coming back. She had Nash under contract but Nash did whatever it was that he did (he told friends he threatened to tell the truth about her) and she released him from his contract and allowed him to sign with WWE. This left them with months of build and no angle, and led to the Fortune babyface turn on Immortal and a feud that largely went nowhere. So what is "the truth about" Dixie? John I'll have to plug my former Cageside Seats colleague Sharon Glencross' pieces on Dixie Carter and TNA management here: A Closer Look At TNA President Dixie Carter Nightmares in Nashville: A look at TNA/Impact Wrestling management Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I'm going to give Dave the benefit of the doubt this time and guess he meant Pride (due to the mix) and shoot style that happened after UFC and Pancrase launched. Bix, read the thread. Even if I give him that benefit of the doubt----the globetrotters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I'm going to give Dave the benefit of the doubt this time and guess he meant Pride (due to the mix) and shoot style that happened after UFC and Pancrase launched. Bix, read the thread. Even if I give him that benefit of the doubt----the globetrotters? I would need the thread pasted here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.