Dirty Eddie Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 I dunno, I'd say it was more like having Burt Reynolds as a timekeeper at Wrestlemania X than when they built it all around Pamela Anderson at XI or people tuning in to see what Mike Tyson and Austin were going to do to each other at Wrestlemania XIV. I reckon this one was more to get into Variety and the USA Today. Â Â But why do they want to get into Variety and USA Today? It's so more people will watch their product, surely. The fact that they actually put her in a wrestling match means surely they hoped people (Jersey Shore fans, presumably) would pay to see her wrestle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Green Posted April 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 30, 2011 Well, at least a million people saw that Miz video package. Â Just a shame they saw everything else. Are you actually Bryan Alverez or do you just paraphrase every single opinion he and the Meltz have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Supremo Posted April 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 30, 2011 Why, what did they say about the buyrate? The same regarding the video package being the only redeemable part of the show? And that the upcoming months are likely going to suffer thanks to the dog shit booking of guys like The Miz, perhaps even enough to where it offsets this number? Genuine question, I haven't heard their shows from this past week yet. Â EDIT: So I just checked the audio update to see whether you had a point and that I had similar opinions to what they said. Turns out you're wrong. Dave talks about what a big success it was, Bryan talks about how surprised he is that The Rock drew such a big number despite being in a non-wrestling role, they lament about how next year's will likely do even bigger and then discuss the posibilities of them fucking the Cena vs. Rock angle up between now and then, deciding it's unlikely and that Cena will, "up," his game in order to salvage it. They didn't talk about the video package at all, they didn't make mention of it being a bad show, and they didn't make mention of how the booking of that show made complete chumps of guys like The Miz and Cena in the long term. So in conclusion; fuck off. Â It's an interesting point though. The Rock vs. Cena in an actual match at Wrestlemania sounds like an angle that'd be impossible to fuck up. But then you could've said that about The Invasion, Nexus, Bret vs. Vince, The Rock as guest host, and everything else over the past decade that seemed like a dead certainty to make millions. Â The idea that they could do a smaller number with The Rock actually wrestling seems alien now, but given their track record I wouldn't be surprised at all. I bet they start as they mean to go on this Monday by having Cena cut another one of those embarassing promos on The Rock, maybe involving some, "comedic," birthday gifts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted April 30, 2011 Moderators Share Posted April 30, 2011 I dunno, I'd say it was more like having Burt Reynolds as a timekeeper at Wrestlemania X than when they built it all around Pamela Anderson at XI or people tuning in to see what Mike Tyson and Austin were going to do to each other at Wrestlemania XIV. I reckon this one was more to get into Variety and the USA Today. Â Â But why do they want to get into Variety and USA Today? It's so more people will watch their product, surely. Â That, and mainstream publicity. Remember, WWE isn't a wrestling company anymore, and to get their entertainment covered in the mainstream press by presenting a current legit US pop culture icon as part of their production positions them as a vibrant entertainment brand with their finger on the pulse of current trends. It isn't true like, but that's how it would be positioned to look to advertisers and as an invitation to the public at large to sample their entertainment lines by featuring Cool folks, if they got Michael Sorrentino as well I'd have gone apeshit crazy chuffed.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 I dunno, I'd say it was more like having Burt Reynolds as a timekeeper at Wrestlemania X than when they built it all around Pamela Anderson at XI or people tuning in to see what Mike Tyson and Austin were going to do to each other at Wrestlemania XIV. I reckon this one was more to get into Variety and the USA Today.   But why do they want to get into Variety and USA Today? It's so more people will watch their product, surely.  That, and mainstream publicity. Remember, WWE isn't a wrestling company anymore, and to get their entertainment covered in the mainstream press by presenting a current legit US pop culture icon as part of their production positions them as a vibrant entertainment brand with their finger on the pulse of current trends. It isn't true like, but that's how it would be positioned to look to advertisers and as an invitation to the public at large to sample their entertainment lines by featuring Cool folks, if they got Michael Sorrentino as well I'd have gone apeshit crazy chuffed..  Oh yeah, absolutely, that's how WWE see's it. But as you said yourself...  an invitation to the public at large to sample their entertainment  Ultimately, the idea is to make people aware of both the WWE brand and the specific event of Wrestlemania, so they might buy it. As such, the only way to rate whether it was successful of not is by looking at the numbers.  That was my original point: was the extra cash paid to Snooks and Rocky worth it in the end. Were their combined fee's worth the additional PPV buys. If they hit a million, dead-on, then that's 115 thousand more than last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Supremo Posted April 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 30, 2011 Was it ever reported anywhere how much The Rock got paid? Â Did he get the Lesnar fund? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 I don't remember reading any money figure for either of the Rock or Snooki's appearances. But then i don't subscribe to meltz or anyone else, and that seems to be where this sort of info comes from. Â At $55 a pop, the additional 115 thousand buys means just over $6 million extra. That's total PPV cash though, not taking into account the percentages that go to the PPV providers and whoever else gets a cut before WWE see their actual profit numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted April 30, 2011 Moderators Share Posted April 30, 2011 The split is around 60/40 in favour of the Provider, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 The split is around 60/40 in favour of the Provider, I think. Â Ah ok, interesting. If that's the case then, you could round up and say that this years Mania (PPV wise) made around $3 million extra compared with last year. That is of course only if you assume that the extra buys came from the USA, as I have no bloody clue what they charge for Wrestlemania in India or somewhere like that! Â I wonder what they did pay for the celebrity appearances? Â Just heard on the WO podcast that they think the USA did 650 000 buys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Seven Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 The much-loved and oft-referenced "This Is Your Life" segment with Rock and Mankind also involved "comedic gifts", for what it's worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members FLips Posted April 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 30, 2011 Speaking of Mick Foley, this story cracked me up. Â Foley indicated last week on Twitter that he would like to appear at Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson's birthday celebration, which takes place this Monday night on Raw. It is said that TNA officials were okay with him appearing at the event, but WWE declined. Â I don't know what I find funnier, Mick Foley's sense of self importance being reality checked, or how amatuer TNA are for letting one of their "big names" just turn up on Raw when he feels like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted April 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 30, 2011 But they havent let one of their "names" turn up on WWE whenever he feels like it. He's booked for an appearance on the day that Raw is broadcast. So them "being OK with it" is impossible, considering he cant actually be there. Considering WWE have asked TNA to use talent in the past (WWE wanted to use Shane Douglas, Raven and others at the request of Heyman and Dreamer for the ECW reunion) and have offered TNA talent in the past (WWE offered TNA Matt Hardy for a few shots in 2005) and both sides declined, I doubt this would be any different. I will agree that Foley seems pretty desperate though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shane O' Mac Version 2 Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Speaking of Mick Foley, this story cracked me up. Foley indicated last week on Twitter that he would like to appear at Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson's birthday celebration, which takes place this Monday night on Raw. It is said that TNA officials were okay with him appearing at the event, but WWE declined.  I don't know what I find funnier, Mick Foley's sense of self importance being reality checked, or how amatuer TNA are for letting one of their "big names" just turn up on Raw when he feels like it. I always find this strange, when people put Foley down. Yes, he has let his ego get away from him in recent years, but is it not true that: a) He was a major superstar in WWE and b) He had a significant impact on the Rock's career during the boom period of WWE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PepperPlunge Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Yeah, saying his self-importance being reality checked doesn't seem to make much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted April 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 30, 2011 Yeah, saying his self-importance being reality checked doesn't seem to make much sense. Â Foley : "I'd love to be on Raw with the Rock. That would be fun, and great tv. I'll see if I can swing it." Â WWE : "As if. Stay where you are, has-been. We don't even want you for the sake of pissing off and belittling TNA. Because they don't matter, and neither do you any more." Â Makes perfect sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.