WWE PPV buyrates, Sky Box Office buys/viewing rates?

Butch Cassidy

steelcityblues wrote: »

For the sake of good wrestling and build up, they should cut the PPVs to 6 or maybe 7 a year!

Then again, i'm well aware the almighty $ will override this! :rolleyes:

Last PPV I bought was WM22, and since then I don''t regret it!

When Bischoff sstarted doing 7 and then 10 PPVs a year people were telling him he'd "ruin" the PPV market. It's still bloated at 14 and they just cannot compete with UFC PPVs if you're choosing one or the other.

If there was maybe the big 4 or 5 were they guaranteed they'd be great and then smaller PPVs at half the price perhaps with transitional matches to further storylines and the odd classic thrown in then yeah that'd be deadly.

Butch Cassidy

GTR63 wrote: »

Your right.The last ppv I paid for & felt I got my moneys worth was WrestleMania XXIV(thanks Taker & Hbk).I rented The Rumble for the Rumble match,then Chamber ppv in Feb & the middle of that event was a Disgrace two Chamber matches & the rest thrown together.Then you had Mania that had quite a lot of shortcomings.
PS Love the George Costanza pic.

GTR63 wrote: »

How many here are renting SummerSlam its not looking good on paper.Taker & HHH not returning is a blow & i'm certain that the PPV Buy figures are going to show that(vince won't be able to blame a stale gimmick for bad SummerSlams buys like he tried to do with Survivor Series last year).Not many want to pay to see Miz,Swagger, McIntyre & any new "Main Event Talent".

Where are you guys renting WWE DVDs from? They have printed on the sleeves "Not for Rental" and I've never seen them in video shops.

Willie Stroker

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Where are you guys renting WWE DVDs from? They have printed on the sleeves "Not for Rental" and I've never seen them in video shops.

I think they meant buying out the ppv !

CMpunked

Surely there are multiple factors into the crazy decline of wwe ppvs.

First one that comes to mind is the wwes move to pg.
This obviously directly affects who wants to watch the ppvs, and also who is paying for them.

For example, in 2002/2003 in what could still be called the attitude era, you would have the majority of wrestling fans being at an age where the 22 euro could be given to parents to buy ppvs, or buy their own and everyones happy.
Now in 2010, as the majority of fans that the current angles get over with are kids, they obviously don't have the straightforward capabilities to acquire the money, go asking mam or dad.
And I don't know many parents that would be up for spending about €288 a year on wwe events.


I, as a wrestling fan hates how wwe builds feuds these days and how they draw out the feuds that I don't care for and thought that was over at the last ppv, and the ones that seem in anyway interesting gets 3 weeks to build. And that includes 1 match, 1 promo and 1 tag team where the two wrestlers in question have to team up.

I only buy manias these days, I don't see any point in these match themed ppvs either.
A ppv full of 4 way dances are going to make me unsurprised when they pull a big finish in the main event.

Butch Cassidy

CMpunked wrote: »

Surely there are multiple factors into the crazy decline of wwe ppvs.

First one that comes to mind is the wwes move to pg.
This obviously directly affects who wants to watch the ppvs, and also who is paying for them.

For example, in 2002/2003 in what could still be called the attitude era, you would have the majority of wrestling fans being at an age where the 22 euro could be given to parents to buy ppvs, or buy their own and everyones happy.
Now in 2010, as the majority of fans that the current angles get over with are kids, they obviously don't have the straightforward capabilities to acquire the money, go asking mam or dad.
And I don't know many parents that would be up for spending about €288 a year on wwe events.


I, as a wrestling fan hates how wwe builds feuds these days and how they draw out the feuds that I don't care for and thought that was over at the last ppv, and the ones that seem in anyway interesting gets 3 weeks to build. And that includes 1 match, 1 promo and 1 tag team where the two wrestlers in question have to team up.

I only buy manias these days, I don't see any point in these match themed ppvs either.
A ppv full of 4 way dances are going to make me unsurprised when they pull a big finish in the main event.

I think you've mistaken the move to TVPG there. Part of the reason I think they altered their product content to be more kid/family friendly is the competition with UFC - WWE don't wanna compete with them so they don't try. They're marketing directly at the pre-teen audience and they don't care about the 17+ market because they see that as unwinable due to UFC. I'm just making assumptions here but I think that's the reason there. They probably have a better chance of getting kids to bug their parents to buy the PPVs than enticing the 17+ market in buying them.

Don't forget: WWE's main market is the USA where PPVs have always been erm.. pay-per-view! I suppose the reason I started this thread was to see if anyone knew what the buyrates are like for Ireland/Britain. I wonder do they care at all about this market and/or would they go back to the previous Sky Sports deal if the Sky Box Office was somehow loss making. Though I don't know how it couldbe loss making as even 1,000 people buying a PPV on Box Office is 1,000 more than would watch it on Sky Sports "for free" and the live PPVs don't have any breaks so I don't know if ad revenue is a factor there.

niceguy_182002

hi i stay in UAE can anyone tell me do i have to apply for visa first and if i get the visa than only i shd buy wrestlemania 27 travel pakage?as its not refundable.

Butch Cassidy

Wrong forum pal. Try the Pro Wrestling travel forum and then the North American forum
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1386

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1183


You don't need a visa for a short holiday stay to the USA no. At least I don't think, there's an agreement or something between Ireland and USA....

CMpunked

Bring back channel 4 ppvs I say! :P
I remember watching mania x-seven and no one else had the balls to watch it so I was the only one who saw it.
Needless to say I was a walking dirt sheet the next day in school.

Sorry, off topic. :rolleyes:

I can't imagine there's much ad revenue made off free ppvs, like as far as I can remember (it's been a while).. The only ads on are for sky based programmes?

D2D

Source: PWInsider

Here is an interesting breakdown of the top 10 lowest domestic PPV buyrates in company history. It is interesting to note that seven out of the 10 events all come in from 2009.

Bottom 10 WWE PPV buyrates of all time (numbers are domestic)

1. ECW December to Dismember (2006): 52,000 buys.

2. Fatal Four Way (2010): 82,000 buys.

3. Cyber Sunday (2008): 92,000 buys.

4. Extreme Rules (2010): 105,000 buys.

5. Breaking Point (2009): 105,000 buys.

6. Bragging Rights (2009): 105,000 buys.

7. Over the Limit (2010): 113,000 buys.

8. The Bash (2009): 114,000 buys.

9. No Mercy (2006): 114,000 buys.

10. Backlash (2009): 116,000 buys.

CMpunked

52,000?!

There could have been more than that sitting in the arena!

Butch Cassidy

Dare_2_defy wrote: »

Source: PWInsider

Here is an interesting breakdown of the top 10 lowest domestic PPV buyrates in company history. It is interesting to note that seven out of the 10 events all come in from 2009.

Bottom 10 WWE PPV buyrates of all time (numbers are domestic)

1. ECW December to Dismember (2006): 52,000 buys.

2. Fatal Four Way (2010): 82,000 buys.

3. Cyber Sunday (2008): 92,000 buys.

4. Extreme Rules (2010): 105,000 buys.

5. Breaking Point (2009): 105,000 buys.

6. Bragging Rights (2009): 105,000 buys.

7. Over the Limit (2010): 113,000 buys.

8. The Bash (2009): 114,000 buys.

9. No Mercy (2006): 114,000 buys.

10. Backlash (2009): 116,000 buys.

Does it matter how many they sell? Is there a minimum they need to break even somehow or is even a few thousand buys better than none?

I'd love to see figures from Sky of say how many people were watching PPVs prior to the box office-ing of them and how many are now paying.

CMpunked

I those are the us figures I can only imagine that it's about 10% of them.

jaykhunter

CMpunked wrote: »

I those are the us figures I can only imagine that it's about 10% of them.

Actually domestic sales account for about 60-65% of total PPV sales. Remember wrestling isn't as big in other countries where they don't charge for PPVs, or it's inclusive in their version of 'Sky Sports'.......just like how it used to be here about 15 years ago lol

International sales have been picking up more and more of the 'slack' since US sales are dwindling. It also is seen that WWE (and TNA) are doing 1-2 tours per year now! (remember back in the day they'd never come!)

Anyway with lower PPV buyrates (which is great -- it means WWE try harder) maybe Vince will be more reticent to blow his cash on useless projects (WBF, XFL, WWF New York....) .....actually he hasn't blown WWE's cash on anything huge lately (his own for Linda's campaign) so he's actually due another useless venture!

Charisteas

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Does it matter how many they sell? Is there a minimum they need to break even somehow or is even a few thousand buys better than none?

I was thinking the same thing. If only 1 person in America bought the PPV, is that still a $40 profit?

They always seem to almost sell out arenas on the PPV's (unless the stand behind the hard camera is empty!) so they must make a nice profit from the arena sales anyway, with PPV buys (and DVD sales of the event) as just a bonus money.

jaykhunter

Charisteas wrote: »

I was thinking the same thing. If only 1 person in America bought the PPV, is that still a $40 profit?

They always seem to almost sell out arenas on the PPV's (unless the stand behind the hard camera is empty!) so they must make a nice profit from the arena sales anyway, with PPV buys (and DVD sales of the event) as just a bonus money.

Assuming WWE has the same PPV setup as TNA, WWE need ~15-20,000 buys to break even, the rest is, yup, sweet, sweet profit :pac: It's really expensive to air things live, and then again on PPV. But since you're charging the consumers, if your product is decent you'll see great returns.

I think with DVD sales, if it's anything like regular DVDs, WWE only make a few bucks per DVD sold; even if they're >$20 sold, it's the warehouse, distribution and retailers that take large chunks as well.

Butch Cassidy

Charisteas wrote: »

I was thinking the same thing. If only 1 person in America bought the PPV, is that still a $40 profit?

They always seem to almost sell out arenas on the PPV's (unless the stand behind the hard camera is empty!) so they must make a nice profit from the arena sales anyway, with PPV buys (and DVD sales of the event) as just a bonus money.

Well don't forget that "sold out" is not the same thing as a full arena. They will give away free tickets if they have to in order to fill a venue and save face from having it not full. Royal Rumble 97 I think was the most "papered" event in history (apparently). Most websites that publish huge lists of results will often have the crowd numbers and if there were many freebies.

jaykhunter

Thought I'd post this here as we're talking numbers.

2010 PPV buyrates (Worldwide)

Royal Rumble 462,000 (up from 450,000 in 2009)
Elimination Chamber 285,000 (up from No Way Out's 272,000 in 2009)
WrestleMania 26 885,000 (down from 960,000 in 2009)
Extreme Rules 182,000 (same as Backlash 2009)
Over The Limit 197,000 (down from 228,000 for Judgment Day 2009)
Fatal 4 Way 143,000 (second lowest # PPV buys in history; down from Extreme Rules 2009's 213,000 buys)

---

MITB (unofficially between 162-189,000; last year's The Bash got 178,000)
SummerSlam ???
Night of Champions ???

Overall in the first 6 months (which includes WWE's yearly WrestleMania boom), WWE are 151,000 buys down.

I also have to mention, WWE have been taping RAW multiple times over the last few months. WWE save $600,000 each time they don't do RAW live (from TFN)

chordtype

Listening to Monday nights Wrestling Observer radio and the question of how many PPV buys does WWE need to break even came up. 75,000 worldwide was the answer Meltzer gave. That means despite the dropping numbers they are still making money on the shows. If they drop below 75,000 then Vince would have an aneurysm.

Rjd2

Does anything think they should do a themed Chris Masters PPV, to kickstart business? Or it would be to hard to market?

chordtype

Rjd2 wrote: »

Does anything think they should do a themed Chris Masters PPV, to kickstart business? Or it would be to hard to market?

The problem is that PPV providers wouldn't be able to handle the demand for such an event.

I actually think they need to move away from the theme PPV's.

Charisteas

Hell In A Cell is only two weeks after the last PPV, surely that's going to affect buy rates, why have two PPV's in three weeks? And then Bragging Rights is only three weeks after that, so that's 3 PPV's in 6 weeks :eek:

chordtype

Charisteas wrote: »

Hell In A Cell is only two weeks after the last PPV, surely that's going to affect buy rates, why have two PPV's in three weeks? And then Bragging Rights is only three weeks after that, so that's 3 PPV's in 6 weeks :eek:

Plus Bragging Rights is the night after a certain UFC card featuring a Mr. Lesnar who likes to pull in around a million plus whenever he fights. That WWE show is going to get murdered.

jaykhunter

Charisteas wrote: »

Hell In A Cell is only two weeks after the last PPV, surely that's going to affect buy rates, why have two PPV's in three weeks? And then Bragging Rights is only three weeks after that, so that's 3 PPV's in 6 weeks :eek:

Here's my thinking -- there's 2 PPVs in October instead of one; so two bad PPVs buys is greater than 1 usual PPV buys i.e.

2 x 140,000 > 1 x 230,000

so even tho it costs more to run it, WWE make more profit.


But.....Delving deeper using chordtype's 75,000-to-break-even figure....

2 PPVs in October
2 x 140,000 = 280,000 buys; less the (2 x 75,000) to cover costs = 130,000 buys of sweet profit.

1 PPV in October
1 x 230,000 buys; less the (1 x 75,000) to cover costs = 155,000 buys of sweet profit.

Hang on! They'd make more money doing one PPV then!! As long as that PPV gets over 205,000 buys.....

D2D

Thank God we get Bragging Rights for free, that PPV is gonna get murdered by the UFC

Butch Cassidy

jaykhunter wrote: »

Thought I'd post this here as we're talking numbers.

2010 PPV buyrates (Worldwide)

Royal Rumble 462,000 (up from 450,000 in 2009)
Elimination Chamber 285,000 (up from No Way Out's 272,000 in 2009)
WrestleMania 26 885,000 (down from 960,000 in 2009)
Extreme Rules 182,000 (same as Backlash 2009)
Over The Limit 197,000 (down from 228,000 for Judgment Day 2009)
Fatal 4 Way 143,000 (second lowest # PPV buys in history; down from Extreme Rules 2009's 213,000 buys)

---

MITB (unofficially between 162-189,000; last year's The Bash got 178,000)
SummerSlam ???
Night of Champions ???

Overall in the first 6 months (which includes WWE's yearly WrestleMania boom), WWE are 151,000 buys down.

I also have to mention, WWE have been taping RAW multiple times over the last few months. WWE save $600,000 each time they don't do RAW live (from TFN)

They're all domestic American rates though yeah? I'm damn curious to know how many Sky sell. If only we had a mole..

Paul Heyman's been saying that domestic MMA last year outsold global wrestling PPVs. Surely WWE should be looking at moving away from PPV altogether? What if their PPVs stop breaking or just barely breaking even?!

jaykhunter

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

They're all domestic American rates though yeah?

Nope, they're total! 2010 PPV buyrates (Worldwide) . Roughly about 55-60% of total PPV sales are domestic, which are more grim figures!

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

I'm damn curious to know how many Sky sell. If only we had a mole..

Jay wrote : Some more figures available for Extreme Rules. [...] In the UK, the live broadcast for free on Sky Sports attracted 162,000 viewers on the first run, with an additional 75,000 watching the first replay (237,000 viewers total). Over The Limit (which aired on Sky Box Office) attracted less than 6,000 buys for the live broadcast. Wrestlemania drew almost 70,000 buys

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Paul Heyman's been saying that domestic MMA last year outsold global wrestling PPVs. Surely WWE should be looking at moving away from PPV altogether? What if their PPVs stop breaking or just barely breaking even?!

chordtype wrote : Listening to Monday nights Wrestling Observer radio and the question of how many PPV buys does WWE need to break even came up. 75,000 worldwide was the answer Meltzer gave. That means despite the dropping numbers they are still making money on the shows. If they drop below 75,000 then Vince would have an aneurysm.

D2D

Source:

The early PPV projections have this year's Summerslam generating about 206,000 buys domestically, according to Dave Meltzer. Last year's Summerslam drew 369,000 worldwide PPV buys. More official numbers should be available soon.

:eek:

jaykhunter

206,000 buys domestically....

WM did 889,000 (514,000 Domestic / 375,000 International) = 58% US buys

so if SummerSlam did 206,000 buys in the US, it'd be 355,000 worldwide.

So i'd expect the final SummerSlam number to be around that.

Rjd2

jaykhunter wrote: »

206,000 buys domestically....

WM did 889,000 (514,000 Domestic / 375,000 International) = 58% US buys

so if SummerSlam did 206,000 buys in the US, it'd be 355,000 worldwide.

So i'd expect the final SummerSlam number to be around that.

They did 350 000 buys according to the Torch and everyone!
Nothing to be proud of but I suppose when you factor in the price increase, its probably not that bad of a drop.

chordtype

http://www.snl.com/interactive/lookandfeel/4121687/Q2_Key_Performance_Indicators_9.28.10.pdf

Page 4

CMpunked

chordtype wrote: »

http://www.snl.com/interactive/lookandfeel/4121687/Q2_Key_Performance_Indicators_9.28.10.pdf

Page 4

They're quite sharp decreases when you see it layed out :eek:

Butch Cassidy

chordtype wrote: »

http://www.snl.com/interactive/lookandfeel/4121687/Q2_Key_Performance_Indicators_9.28.10.pdf

Page 4

Page 5 seems more interesting as it charts the decline over the last few years a bit clearer.

They seem to be doing very very well with DVD sales though!


I wonder will they at any point look into a different model for the supershows something akin to how UFC is operated here on a subscription channel? I recall rumours of a WWE station years ago...

jmolloy

jaykhunter wrote: »

Jay wrote : Some more figures available for Extreme Rules. [...] In the UK, the live broadcast for free on Sky Sports attracted 162,000 viewers on the first run, with an additional 75,000 watching the first replay (237,000 viewers total). Over The Limit (which aired on Sky Box Office) attracted less than 6,000 buys for the live broadcast. Wrestlemania drew almost 70,000 buys

.

When sky put together the figures for first run do they include people who sky plus events. I find it hard to believe 162,000 sat up to watch a second line PPV

Loughc

jmolloy wrote: »

When sky put together the figures for first run do they include people who sky plus events. I find it hard to believe 162,000 sat up to watch a second line PPV

I do believe Sky Plus the live event counts as a first run.

D2D

Source: Prowrestling.net

Preliminary numbers for last month's WWE Night of Champions PPV have the show doing around 169,000 buys, a 37% decrease from last year's show that did 267,000 buys.

waltersobchak

Cant wait to see the Hell in a Cell buyrate... Have a feeling WWE wont release that one:pac:

chordtype

waltersobchak wrote: »

Cant wait to see the Hell in a Cell buyrate... Have a feeling WWE wont release that one:pac:

They have to. Shareholders and all that lark need to see where there money is going to be coming from. Bragging Rights will be even worse than HIAC.

waltersobchak

chordtype wrote: »

They have to. Shareholders and all that lark need to see where there money is going to be coming from. Bragging Rights will be even worse than HIAC.

Id actually say Bragging Rights might do better than HIAC, that Cena/Barrett/Orton angle would have accounted for more buys for sure..

chordtype

waltersobchak wrote: »

Id actually say Bragging Rights might do better than HIAC, that Cena/Barrett/Orton angle would have accounted for more buys for sure..

I'm not sure. Hell in a Cell has been a decent draw in the past. Bragging Rights was coming right after 2 other WWE PPV's and a huge UFC show. The signs don't look that good for it. Having Cena not actually advertised to wrestle probably wasn't smart either.

jaykhunter

chordtype wrote: »

I'm not sure. Hell in a Cell has been a decent draw in the past. Bragging Rights was coming right after 2 other WWE PPV's and a huge UFC show. The signs don't look that good for it. Having Cena not actually advertised to wrestle probably wasn't smart either.

Chord's absolutely right. 3rd WWE PPV in 5 weeks with an extremely weak gimmick, that bombed last year, no advertised Cena match, a night after a Brock Lesnar fight = horrific # of buys. I doubt anyone really believed Wade would actually win the belt prior to ordering the PPV -- Survivor Series has a much bigger chance with the stip firmly in place so that storyline would sell much better. I'd also mention that the average fan probably isn't interested in Nexus, it's a complete wrestler-building storyline. Average fans would probably much prefer Cena vs Orton # 231!

Bragging Rights was the definition of a filler-PPV. It should have never taken place. WWE deserve the low # of buys. That said, I quite enjoyed the free PPV. It was like a 3-hour RAW without ads.

jaykhunter

Just to update everyone on how this year has been for WWE on PPV

Long story short, they're going to be OVER 600,000 BUYS DOWN from 2009.

2010 WWE PPV # of Buys (Worldwide)

Royal Rumble 462,000 (up from 450,000 in 2009)
Elimination Chamber 285,000 (up from No Way Out's 272,000 in 2009)
WrestleMania 26 885,000 (down from 960,000 in 2009)
Extreme Rules 182,000 (same as Backlash 2009)
Over The Limit 197,000 (down from 228,000 for Judgment Day 2009)
Fatal 4 Way 143,000 (second lowest # PPV buys in history; down from Extreme Rules 2009's 213,000 buys)

WWE dropped The Bash completely, last year it drew 178,000 buys
MITB 165,000 (last year's NoC drew 267,000)
SummerSlam 350,000 (down from 369,000 last year)
Night of Champions 165,000 (similar to Breaking Point's 169,000 last year)
Hell in a Cell - Over 200,000*** [last year drew 300,000]
Bragging Rights - Under 150,000*** [last year drew 200,000]
Survivor Series - ~240-250,000*** [last year drew 235,000]
TLC - ??? [last year drew 228,000]

*** = preliminary number from Corporate.WWE.com

So, doing the maths :

We'll assume TLC gets the same buyrate as last year.
In the first 6 PPVs of 2010, WWE are 151,000 buys down compared to last year.
In the last 6 PPVs of 2010, WWE are 265,000 buys down compared to last year.
WWE dropped having 2 PPVs in June.

So in total, WWE are over 600,000 buys down from last year!

---

A few random notes :
WWE dropped down from 14 PPVs/year to 13 (The Bash is gone completely)
Bragging Rights was offered a day after UFC 121, featuring Brock Lesnar vs Cain Velasquez.
WWE have been taping RAW multiple times over the last few months. WWE save $600,000 each time they don't do RAW live (source : The Fight Network)
Also, to break even broadcasting a PPV, WWE must have at least 75,000 buys (source : The Wrestling Observer)

parker kent

I think this is further proof of the decline in the product. There are many reasons behind a drop in PPV buyrates but to me there are a few stand out issues. So in no particular order, here goes!

1: Loss of top stars over the past 5+ years: Steve Austin and The Rock leaving was a crippling blow. Top stars are always an essential part of great buy rates. They are not the only reason, but they are needed. Then add in The Undertaker's limited schedule and Shawn Michaels retirement, it is clear that they are major blows

2: Lack of New Stars: The new top guy in the company is extremely off putting to many who were previously watching WWE. Cena is obviously not the sole reason, but viewers who have an extreme dislike to the Cena character are less likely to watch shows that are based around him. As the face of the WWE, Cena IS causing viewers to leave. People can say that they are too afraid of ratings decreases when Cena is off air, but there has been a major decline in PPV buyrates and ratings during Cena's run as the lead face. He has to take some of the blame for that. There have been thousands of words written on the failure of the WWE to elevate new stars and the sudden pushes for Sheamus and Barrett indicate how they are grasping at straws trying to create new stars now.

3: The move towards kids: Pro Wrestling Torch had a good article the other day about how moving towards a kids based audience means that programming will move towards simple good versus evil angles. It will also mean that the audience is a TV audience and PPVs are not the centerpiece of the WWE anymore.

4: The PPVs themselves: That point brings up the actual quality of the PPVs. The build up to so many is virtually non-existent. The usual problems of gimmick based PPVs (HIAC, TLC etc) are another issue. If people do not care about feuds, they are not going to pay to see it.

5: Streaming PPVs: Many of the younger audience are going to be aware of streaming PPVs, so why pay when you can get it for free? Especially when there are very few PPVs that have "must see" matches.

6: There will be a natural decline after such an extreme peak. This happened before and it took a few years in 90s to recover and create sufficient interest for the Attitude era boom

7: Lack of credible competition for the WWE. WCW going out of business was always going to be bad news for the WWE. The Attitude era would not have happened had the NWO not occurred. Competition keeps them on their toes. Now they have none and can do pretty much whatever they want.

8: UFC: There will be an amount of people who will not want to spend too much on PPVs per year. So the WWE will lose out when the UFC's buyrates increase, much in the same way that boxing is suffering

rossie1977

wwe increased the price of all their ppvs in 2010, the hd version of mania 26 cost $65 :eek:

all the other ppvs increased by $5 to $45

http://www.wrestlingexposed.com/headlines/12909.shtml

jaykhunter

Great list Parker, very well said. here's some thoughts i had on it.

1 : Add Batista, Triple H and Vince McMahon to the list. WWE have been milking those babies for a long time. The udder ran dry last year.

2 : WWE have very few top draws and fresh feuds with them, so business is way down. On a positive note, we can see that WWE are clearly trying to build new stars, with big pushes for Sheamus, The Miz, and Wade Barrett (Daniel Bryan is pushing himself). It'll take many years before people will actually pay to see these guys on a consistent basis when they actually lead a feud.

3 : Surely moving towards simple, clear-cut good vs evil storylines are a good thing? I look at WCW/TNA and see grey vs grey, which is not conducive for selling a feud in this day & age. Maybe you mean "2-dimensional good guy vs bad guy" feuds but sure clearly defined heels and faces do draw the best. (Save for the ultra-rare face vs face)

4 : Yep, gimmick-based PPVs are killing WWE. There's no spontaneity, and we're generally left with "oh it's this gimmick this month, so let's have that gimmick match" as opposed to a natural progression towards a gimmick match to finish a feud.

5 : I still think pirating is a relatively small chunk -- maybe 3,000 people tops. It pales in comparison to the ~200,000 that do buy a PPV. But I'm sure the pirating number is bigger than it was last year....also, the PPVs aren't worth paying for.

6 : I don't accept a "natural decline after a peak" as an excuse. If WWE continually evolved, made new stars, and didn't saturate the marketplace with a boring product they would only lose maybe 15-20% of it's fanbase, tops, not 30-50%. In order to bury WCW they buried their own product. The closure of ECW and WCW brought in tons of new talent, not to mention ROH and TNA's homegrown talent. Besides having limited stars in WWF during the early to mid 90s, the product itself was awful. Some horrible hybrid of 8-year-old neon useless programming.

7 : Definitely. No competition, no urgency to continue striving for the best. If WCW were still around, I doubt Tripper would've been given the go-ahead to bury RVD, Booker T and Kane, amongst others.

8 : Yep, a similar, fresh, better produced and focused product definitely is eating into WWE's bottom dollar. In short, "UFC are doing Pro-Wrestling better than Pro-Wrestling."

That's a good point, rossie. Buyrates might be down but thanks to the cost increase, every 9 buys in 2010 is now worth 10 buys in 2009.

jaykhunter

Bump, i didn't factor in that WWE had 14 PPVs in 2009, and 13 this year. It means that they're over 600,000 buys down this year!

parker kent

jaykhunter wrote: »

Great list Parker, very well said. here's some thoughts i had on it.
<SNIP>

Two quick points, I didn't properly expand on the good versus evil point. What I mean is that there is an over-simplification. I agree TNA have too many over-complicated stories. But the WWE has moved towards more childish feuds. It just feels like the product is being geared towards children and goofy stuff is on the increase.

Then the natural decline, I think there will always be some sort of decline after a great period. That does not excuse a terrible drop, just that it is normal for there to be peaks that are hard to follow. Plus you will have the usual issues of people having problems with guys that have replaced there personal favourites. The decline periods in wrestling are normally when new top draws are being created. Much like how in the early 90s Vince moved towards Diesel, Shawn Michaels, Yokozuna, Bret Hart, Undertaker etc. It is natural that it will take time for new guys to reach their peak.

I'm hoping that something similar is happening with CM Punk, Sheamus, Morrison, Miz etc and that some of them become genuine top level stars. Creative are to blame for this too as there is normally little thought into the future when the company is doing well. They often realise too late that they have to make new stars.

Good point about how a modern WCW would be great for guys like RVD. It would be a great place to hone a main event character too should anyone decide to jump ship too. Wrestling really misses a second big league.

reynolsg87

AND I

Originally Posted by jaykhunter
I don't know why that Mania (XIX) drew so badly. Maybe because all of the focus was on McMahon/Hogan, which no-one wanted to see. Or that Triple H was in full c**t mode and they didn't rally behind Booker. Or maybe it wasn't promoted well enough.

But at the time Angle and Lesnar (along with Benoit, Guerrero and someone else) were leading the best smackdown shows of it's entire run and was much better than smackdown. I can only imagine how bad the rating would be if they didn't have Lesnar there.

I wonder if there are many households that would get Sky Sports for the wrestling first of all, and not because it's an added bonus for being able to watch the footie...
In retrospect, its one of the best Mania's of the 00's especially from a wrestling standpoint, and on paper, McMahon/Hogan.. Brock/Angle.. Austin/Rock.. Jericho/HBK and HHH/Booker T should have drawn big time, but it must have been a number of factors, that contributed to its failure. Like the Brands, Raw being terrible at the time, lack of proper promotion of the storylines, also Perhaps had WWE debuted Goldberg at the PPV instead of the following Raw, that would definitely added to PPV buys imho.

I know this is an old point but just to point out myself - Wrestlemania XIX took place on March 30th 2003, about a week and a half after the US invaded Iraq, so I'd say that had a big affect on the buyrate.

D2D

reynolsg87 wrote: »

I know this is an old point but just to point out myself - Wrestlemania XIX took place on March 30th 2003, about a week and a half after the US invaded Iraq, so I'd say that had a big affect on the buyrate.

Erm.... how does a US InVasion (sorry, force of habit) of Iraq affect a PPV buyrate??

jaykhunter

Thanks for the point of information, but...

Did you find that excuse out on Planet Hogan!

Machismo Fan

I actually think WWE doing a good number for Survivor Series (at least relative to last year) is a bad thing. Considering the show was alright overall, the main stip. that sold the show wasn't adhered to in the slightest and the Raw the night after was much more buzzworthy - I'd feel very annoyed if I payed for that show. It most likely hurt consumer sentiment even further.