Minor news items that don't deserve a thread

[IANdrewDiceClay]

Four of the last five PPVs have done better numbers than last year's efforts though so it's not a huge spike despite being a pretty good number. The previous event, Night Of Champions did 189,000 this year compared to 169,000 last time, so an improvement of 20,000. Ryback wasn't even on that show.

Most of them made less money than last year due to the increase in advertising. 20,000 compared to last year without the top star on it is quite an increase by the standards of today. SummerSlam for example did a worse profit this year with an increased number of buys, because last years numbers were so poor they had to find a way raise the average of these dwindling numbers.

 

Hell in a Cell should have died a death by rights. The only thing appealing about it was how over Ryback was.

Edited November 22, 2012 by IANdrewDiceClay

[Dirty Eddie]

I believe it was the Roman Reigns rumours actually (and while I am mentioning him, I'm never going to be able to read or hear his name and not imagine Pontius Pilate from The Life Of Brian saying it. Welease Woman Weigns").

 

 

---

 

Ian, how do you know about advertising costs and all that stuff? And regarding Summerslam, if it made less profit (due to more expense on advertising) then why was the Lesnar thing deemed a huge success - enough to warrant a Wrestlemania rematch with Trips? Surely if you have to blow your budget on ads to get the numbers, then those increased numbers are pointless? Surely profit is more important than what actual number it draws?

 

Also, if "Most of them made less money than last year due to the increase in advertising" then that includes HIAC too, right? So being up 20,000 on last year is less impressive, if it's due in part to them spending loads more to advertise the show (as you say was the case for Summerslam).

Edited November 22, 2012 by Dirty Eddie

[IANdrewDiceClay]

Ian, how do you know about advertising costs and all that stuff?

Its reported online, via various sources (including WWE's stockholders meetings).

 

And regarding Summerslam, if it made less profit (due to more expense on advertising) then why was the Lesnar thing deemed a huge success - enough to warrant a Wrestlemania rematch with Trips? Surely if you have to blow your budget on ads to get the numbers, then those increased numbers are pointless? Surely profit is more important than what actual number it draws?

Depends. It was a success because it justified the advertising. They did huge social media numbers the weekend of SummerSlam as well, which makes them happy. Just because you shove an event down the publics throat doesn't mean its going to reach the target they set. But this did. And the fact they had Brock Lesnar and his massive wages on SummerSlam this year (as well as a bunch of celebs they had knocking about) would have said they were paying out a shitload before the event even happened. The fact Lesnar and Triple H was such a compelling bout to the masses means they now have a hot match for WrestleMania. It was a big event, thus it was a success. If they'd have paid all that money in advertising for another Punk vs Cena match, would that have justified the money spent? Even if it didn't make the money of last year, its still an event that had plenty more eyes on them at a time when nobody seems interested.

Edited November 22, 2012 by IANdrewDiceClay

[Dirty Eddie]

Ian, how do you know about advertising costs and all that stuff?

Its reported online, via various sources (including WWE's stockholders meetings).

 

And regarding Summerslam, if it made less profit (due to more expense on advertising) then why was the Lesnar thing deemed a huge success - enough to warrant a Wrestlemania rematch with Trips? Surely if you have to blow your budget on ads to get the numbers, then those increased numbers are pointless? Surely profit is more important than what actual number it draws?

Depends. It was a success because it justified the advertising. They did huge social media numbers the weekend of SummerSlam as well, which makes them happy. Just because you shove an event down the publics throat doesn't mean its going to reach the target they set. But this did. And the fact they had Brock Lesnar and his massive wages on SummerSlam this year (as well as a bunch of celebs they had knocking about) would have said they were paying out a shitload before the event even happened. The fact Lesnar and Triple H was such a compelling bout to the masses means they now have a hot match for WrestleMania. It was a big event, thus it was a success. If they'd have paid all that money in advertising for another Punk vs Cena match, would that have justified the money spent? Even if it didn't make the money of last year, its still an event that had plenty more eyes on them at a time when nobody seems interested.

 

It just seems to me that profit should be the bottom line. I understand they do have other things to consider (social media, mainstream coverage and all that), but ultimately if you pay loads more to have more celebs and bigger one-off names and yet you make less profit than the year before it just seems like a hollow victory.

 

If the big buyrate and the exposure Lesnar had brought them had carried through to the rest of the product aterwards (bringing up ratings and increasing live event ticket sales, etc) then the increased social media presence and "Big Name" special guests might have been worth it, but none of that happened.

[King Pitcos]

Shit, 20,000 more WITHOUT Cena! People must have been into The Ryback then.

 

Yup. It was the first match of CM Punk's reign that was of any massive importance. Every other PPV match of his in the last year was either a foregone conclusion that he'd retain or, when there was any doubt, it would've just been another no-big-deal win for Cena, Jericho or Big Show. At Hell in a Cell, they had to either fuck off the 365+ plans for CM Punk or decide not to bother going all in on creating a new star. The result of that match was a big deal. Fair play to Ryback, he got people's interest for that one show before they fucked him. He could've been massive.

Edited November 23, 2012 by King Pitcos

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

Shit, 20,000 more WITHOUT Cena! People must have been into The Ryback then.

 

Yup. It was the first match of CM Punk's reign that was of any massive importance. Every other PPV match of his in the last year was either a foregone conclusion that he'd retain or, when there was any doubt, it would've just been another no-big-deal win for Cena, Jericho or Big Show. At Hell in a Cell, they had to either fuck off the 365+ plans for CM Punk or decide not to bother going all in on creating a new star. The result of that match was a big deal. Fair play to Ryback, he got people's interest for that one show before they fucked him. He could've been massive.

How much credit can Ryback get for that, really? If there was ever a case of a wrestler gaining success through the WWE promotional machine, Ryback would be it. Undefeated streak, cool music, no long matches or promos to expose any weakness, on-air endorsement from top star Cena, and CM Punk selling for him masterfully through facial expressions and what not. Combine all that with the Hell In A Cell spectacle and it's a winning formula. Ryback didn't really DO anything to get people's interest, there was just a lot of people and actions built around him to make him seem like a big deal.

 

I don't know, I haven't really bought into Ryback. He just seems like generic musclehead #3556, and until he shows anything different, I'm going to continue to feel that way. The only notable thing he's done is nearly kill Ricky Steamboat.

[IANdrewDiceClay]

Shane O' Mac Version 2 weirdly thinking wrestling is real here for a second, and that every single wrestler ever hasn't needed the help of promotion and hype. Strange.

[Sphinx]

The fans want someone who isn't a loser and Ryback popped up. They're really pushing their luck at the moment though.

 

The same undefeated streak, catchphrase, music etc. might not have worked with someone else. Not only is he physically massive, he has the face. The eye really adds to his persona. In a time of so many smaller, unintimidating guys, guys like him stand out.

 

As my mate put it, there's not enough hard as nails wrestlers anymore.

[Dirty Eddie]

I think the reason that the HIAC main event seemed like a much more interesting PPV than most was a case of all of the above points that have been raised;

 

Ryback was fresh, new, not overexposed and had never been in either a title match or a PPV main event.

Punk is a great heel, doing the classic deal where he's scraping through with his belt but then bragging like a big man about it.

Heyman is the best heel manager in pro wrestling and he's been bringing it every time he's on the mic.

The Punk Vrs Ryback match was completely fresh and unpredictable.

Cena put Ryback over super strong as a killer.

The HIAC made the outcome even harder to predict than usual, and wrestling is often annoyingly predictable these days.

The build-up was good, despite seeming a bit rushed. The occasions where Ryback got his hands on Punk were excellent. Punk seemed scared half to death and Ryback looks like a monster.

 

All of that stuff made for a genuinely interesting and intriguing match, which is miles better than the constant re-hashes and re-matches we've had lately. Everyone involved did well.

[PSF]

As my mate put it, there's not enough hard as nails wrestlers anymore.

 

Your mates right there. Not only the big musclehead types either. I miss the days of someone like Harly Race. Never had a perfect psysique, but looked like he could smash your teeth in. He was great with his promo's too thoughwhich helped. Regal is probably the closest thing to that at the min. Although I thought Finley and Trevor Murdoch were a simular mould too.

[ColinBollocks]

How much credit can Ryback get for that, really? If there was ever a case of a wrestler gaining success through the WWE promotional machine, Ryback would be it. Undefeated streak, cool music, no long matches or promos to expose any weakness, on-air endorsement from top star Cena, and CM Punk selling for him masterfully through facial expressions and what not. Combine all that with the Hell In A Cell spectacle and it's a winning formula. Ryback didn't really DO anything to get people's interest, there was just a lot of people and actions built around him to make him seem like a big deal.

 

You should have just said you don't like Ryback and refuse to judge his situation fairly. By your logic, the only work the Ultimate Warrior ever did in the ring was meaty cock.

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

Shane O' Mac Version 2 weirdly thinking wrestling is real here for a second, and that every single wrestler ever hasn't needed the help of promotion and hype. Strange.

Thanks for putting those words in my mouth.

 

No, what I meant was that outside of the promotion and hype, Ryback's actual work has been very basic. Other wrestlers show certain skills and qualities that merit the hype. He hasn't delivered a big promo, nor a big match. For a 'power' wrestler he seems to struggle with the feats of strength that made Warrior, Goldberg etc. so popular.

 

You should have just said you don't like Ryback and refuse to judge his situation fairly

 

Didn't the next bit of me saying "I haven't really bought into Ryback yet" pretty much cover the fact that I don't like him all that much? I'm just waiting to see something out of him to make him stand out. I don't know how I haven't judged his situation fairly. I know we shouldn't expect anything 'technically classic' out of a wrestler of his mould, but he should have something distinguishable. Batista had great intensity, Warrior had wild charisma through playing to the crowd and promos. Both wowed crowds with their superhuman strength. Ryback attempts these things, but he doesn't do it half as well, and it comes across as a cheap imitation. Those "Goldberg" chants persist because he hasn't found his own niche.

[IANdrewDiceClay]

No, what I meant was that outside of the promotion and hype, Ryback's actual work has been very basic. Other wrestlers show certain skills and qualities that merit the hype. He hasn't delivered a big promo, nor a big match. For a 'power' wrestler he seems to struggle with the feats of strength that made Warrior, Goldberg etc. so popular.

He isn't Goldberg or Warrior though. I still don't understand your point. He is over because people like his act. Can you not be over without doing the same the Warrior and Goldberg did?

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

No, what I meant was that outside of the promotion and hype, Ryback's actual work has been very basic. Other wrestlers show certain skills and qualities that merit the hype. He hasn't delivered a big promo, nor a big match. For a 'power' wrestler he seems to struggle with the feats of strength that made Warrior, Goldberg etc. so popular.

He isn't Goldberg or Warrior though. I still don't understand your point. He is over because people like his act. Can you not be over without doing the same the Warrior and Goldberg did?

To me, and obviously many fans at live events, his act is pretty much the same as those guys, hence why I'm drawing the comparisons. I never questioned how or why he was over, I get that he's catching on, it's all well and good.

 

My original point was just that WWE deserve the credit for Ryback's popularity through the things they've orchestrated, rather than Ryback showing anything unique as a performer to catch on. The original post I quoted (Pitcos?) said, "Fair play to Ryback" and I simply felt in this case, WWE deserve the lion's share of the credit. Some wrestlers catch on due to raw talent, others catch on because of hype, others have a mix of the two. To me, Ryback's success is solely hype, I hope to be proven wrong and he starts delivering at that level. God knows we need more bonafide main eventers. I don't hate Ryback, I just haven't been impressed yet.

[IANdrewDiceClay]

My original point was just that WWE deserve the credit for Ryback's popularity through the things they've orchestrated, rather than Ryback showing anything unique as a performer to catch on.

So like everyone there has ever been in wrestling then. Everyone in wrestling is orchestrated and hyped up, but that means nothing if you don't catch on. That you only bring up Goldberg and Warrior as examples shows this, because there have been so many people who have had those type of pushes who have failed. They have tried a thousand times to get characters over and judging by the amount of faceless nobodies on Raw and Smackdown WWE usually fails miserably introducing new characters.

 

Ryback's debut, Ryback wrestling boring job matches for months, being asked to sell for shite like Curt Hawkins and then losing his undefeated streak in his first title shot seems like a promotion desperate to ruin him actually. Their booking of Ryback has been suspect since April.

Edited November 23, 2012 by IANdrewDiceClay