Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted October 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted October 12, 2011 So even if (after the providers and everyone else gets their cut) WWE still made say $10 per buy on PPV, then the Money In The Bank PPV made them over $300 000 more than the same event last year (33 thousand buys more at $10 a pop). Plus whatever they made with the fast-selling new Punk T-shirt. Not exactly a rubbish result is it? I can't get my head around what WWE expected to do? For me it's not the MITB stuff that should be criticised (as it was bloody good and the buys were up). It's his return after a week off and the shit that was produced post-Summer Slam. Post-Summer Slam Punk has been poor, he got all the things he was after during the MITB lead up, yet still moaned. I think it was Ian that said he is like a 30 year-old with the temperament of a teenager. Granted, WWE rushed things way too much but Punk's material hasn't hit the heights a man of his talent can reach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Yeah, sorry, ignore this. was looking at the wrong numbers  D'oh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
300 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 The Triple H come back was at Night of Champions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loligan Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 HHH didn't wrestle at summerslam! That was night of champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 The Triple H come back was at Night of Champions. Ah, shit, I just looked at the last number and jumped the gun. Will edit it - my mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loligan Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I think wwe in 2011 would be well served considering a move of ppv day from Sunday to Saturday. I reckon it would be more appealing, buy the show, have a few beers, make a night if it. Instead of Sunday night, when everyone has work Monday morning and will probably instead download it for free monday and watch before Raw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted October 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted October 12, 2011 Lets take all the figures away for a second, and ask yourself this: do you think the quality of TV is worth the money for PPV? I cant remember the last time I fancied buying a WWE PPV. WrestleMania probably, but that was because it was WrestleMania (and I watched it on a stream anyway so that just killed my own point). I think both companies have lost the trust of the average buyer. Â The TV the last few months is WCW 2000-esque in the sense that a million things happen, the commissioner character keeps changing and old faces are added to try and spike a rating. WWE is cold at the minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz Windham Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Lets take all the figures away for a second, and ask yourself this: do you think the quality of TV is worth the money for PPV? Â My personal answer is boring and simple but yes because I do. I still look forward to Raw and PPV's and have loved most PPV's this year. If I stopped enjoying it and thought it was of a poor quality then I would switch off and not even download it etc, probably just keep an eye on results to see how it's going. As for the wider picture of if they are producing enough good TV for others to buy PPV then I don't know, there are proabably lots of other reasons PPV's do averagely these days and no-one really has all the answers. All the WWE can do is put out what they think people want to see which is I assume what they always do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Lets take all the figures away for a second, and ask yourself this: do you think the quality of TV is worth the money for PPV? I cant remember the last time I fancied buying a WWE PPV. WrestleMania probably, but that was because it was WrestleMania (and I watched it on a stream anyway so that just killed my own point). I think both companies have lost the trust of the average buyer. Â I was just asking myself this very question as I scrolled down the thread towards this post, and my reaction to it is pretty much the same as your own. It being a recession and all, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Lets take all the figures away for a second, and ask yourself this: do you think the quality of TV is worth the money for PPV? I cant remember the last time I fancied buying a WWE PPV. WrestleMania probably, but that was because it was WrestleMania (and I watched it on a stream anyway so that just killed my own point). I think both companies have lost the trust of the average buyer. TNA has never had that trust. And I'd have definitely bought Money in the Bank if it had been on Sky Box Office and I was at a house that had Sky.  So even if (after the providers and everyone else gets their cut) WWE still made say $10 per buy on PPV, then the Money In The Bank PPV made them over $300 000 more than the same event last year (33 thousand buys more at $10 a pop). Plus whatever they made with the fast-selling new Punk T-shirt. Not exactly a rubbish result is it? I can't get my head around what WWE expected to do? They probably expected the same as some people on here, that there were about five million people who were waiting for ice cream bar references before they'd spend money on WWE again. I remember someone either on the forums or in UKFF chat going "wrestling is going mainstream again, the Internet audience is the majority!" And to some extent, WWE must have thought the same thing. Which might also be why they don't think they need to bother doing anything to make Daniel Bryan interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted October 13, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted October 13, 2011 TNA has never had that trust. To go from averaging 50,000 buys a month to 7500 is as a significant drop. Probably more significant considering the size of TNA compared to WWE. The audience is there for WWE to win back. It'll be far harder for TNA. Â As far as the Money in the Bank buyrate, they made no bones about the fact they wanted that One Night Stand 2005 type buyrate. Where it did far, far more than your average B-show. They threw the kitchen sink at it in the buildup. These days WWE just piss past the PPV's with little or no build (i.e. HIAC and Vengeance is looking the same way). For that one, they were put the effort in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Were they ever doing close to 50,000 consistently? That is a big drop off then. I thought they'd always been doing largely as poorly as they are now for pay-per-views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted October 13, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted October 13, 2011 Were they ever doing close to 50,000 consistently? That is a big drop off then. I thought they'd always been doing largely as poorly as they are now for pay-per-views. A few years back they were. Maybe not 50,000, but they were regularly hitting the 35/40,000 margin. Without TV they were doing better than they are now. Without TV, people were desperate to see it. Now they can see it for free. Probably because its pointless paying for it because they give so much away on TV anyway. Bound For Glory is expected to do as many buys as the last four or five TNA PPV's. So the audience will pay for the big ones. Especially if its built right. Its probably why they've brought Brother Love in as the overseer of the creative end. He's editing the scripts now and slowing the product down. Which is exactly what they've needed since about 2002. TNA's always had far to much on it, even back in the Nashville Daze!~. Â Their biggest ever buyrates have been from slow, serious, none-comedy builds. Joe vs Angle, Joe vs Steiner, Angle vs Sting, Joe vs Sting. And Bound For Glory is looking at their biggest buyrate since about 2009, probably because all the main matches have been built well. You think they'd have learned from this before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted October 13, 2011 Author Paid Members Share Posted October 13, 2011 Decided to look further into the ratings history. I found information on gerweck.net going back to 1998 so I'm working with that for now. I might try and go back even further. This is WWE Raw's average rating by year: Â 1993 = 2.83 1994 = 2.95 1995 = 2.97 1996 = 2.66 1997 = 2.73 1998 = 4.35 1999 = 6.02 2000 = 5.88 2001 = 4.64 2002 = 4.01 2003 = 3.77 2004 = 3.67 2005 = 3.81 2006 = 3.90 2007 = 3.61 2008 = 3.27 2009 = 3.57 2010 = 3.28 2011 = 3.25 Â Same for Smackdown: Â 1999 = 4.37 2000 = 4.73 2001 = 4.03 2002 = 3.52 2003 = 3.31 2004 = 3.18 2005 = 3.06 2007 = 2.64 2008 = 2.33 2009 = 1.94 2010 = 1.82 2011 = 1.91 Â More to follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrasslin Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Lets take all the figures away for a second, and ask yourself this: do you think the quality of TV is worth the money for PPV? I cant remember the last time I fancied buying a WWE PPV. WrestleMania probably, but that was because it was WrestleMania (and I watched it on a stream anyway so that just killed my own point). I think both companies have lost the trust of the average buyer. The TV the last few months is WCW 2000-esque in the sense that a million things happen, the commissioner character keeps changing and old faces are added to try and spike a rating. WWE is cold at the minute.  Does anyone else think this is a huge contributing factor? I think PPV numbers will fall year on year regardless of the quality of product (Not saying that it's at its best by any means). It's getting easier and people are becoming more aware of how to watch these shows online for free.  Why would people pay for something they don't need to? Look at the drop off in music sales.  WWE could come out with an amazing product and the buys will never be what they were in 99-00 etc. Same with the ratings, too many different ways to watch the product. I for one mostly watch Raw on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.