WWE reports 3rd quarter results - Page 5 - Wrestling Forum: WWE, AEW, New Japan, Indy Wrestling, Women of Wrestling Forums

 169Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #41 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 06:58 PM Thread Starter
 
validreasoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 10,775
Points: 17,096
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_It_Factor View Post
I just meant "short term" in terms of profitability. If viewership is down, and more people are only tuning in for the network content (such as ppv's), I feel like those people are bound to fall out of the habit of tuning in to PPV's at some point as well. Similarly, if attendance is down (but losses are offset by ticket prices), that's another bad sign for the future of the company IMO.
Basically your argument is that because wwe are profitable now they are thinking short term?

WWE have already reported profits in 2017 will be higher than 2016 (which will be higher than 2015). WWE are not thinking short term here at all. Once network is fully rolled out worldwide costs will fall

Paid Attendance for this quarter was up slightly compared to same period a year ago and and same period in 2014. Raw viewership is down but sd is up last 3 months.

Quote:
It just seems like more and more people are getting out of the habit of watching wrestling on a consistent basis. If that is a continuing trend, I feel like the network won't be as viable in 5-10 years.
10 years is along time to predict but 5 years from now network should be growing still. There was quite a bit more people watching raw in Feb 2014 when network started compared to today yet subs have nearly doubled in the us despite raws falling viewership

Quote:
It's like they've put all of their eggs in one basket with the network. People need to be invested in the current and future product for the network to remain as lucrative as it is.
They still have a lucrative licencing deal, sell more merch now than ever before, have strong tv deals, will sell $150m in live tickets this year alone so eggs are not all in one basket


Quote:
Also, I think it's somewhat difficult to gauge popularity of network content by viewers. I mean, when there is a new show, with new content, it's much more likely that an abundance of viewers will tune in for that new/live show as opposed to large numbers of viewers tuning in to the same program from 1997 all at once. In other words, it is far more likely for HIAC this weekend, or CW stuff, to draw hundreds of thousands of viewers at once than it is for hundreds of thousands of viewers to happen to watch starrcade '93 or the August 20th 1999 episode of Smackdown this weekend. (Granted, I don't know how their viewership works, so my analogy is based off of the assumption that it works similarly to cable viewership, or, which shows are drawing the most viewers at one time... but who knows, maybe I'm wrong)
WWE had a thing called classics on demand on cable featuring alot of the older stuff yet that rarely got above 100,000 subs so it gives us an idea of the size if the audience that exists willing to pay monthly for older material.
validreasoning is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 07:05 PM
Moron
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 9,176
Points: 28,050
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Headliner View Post
Because Vince McMahon is a genius business man. A lot of people were under the assumption that the company is going to shit because the ratings are down, but that's only a small fraction of the business. WWE's internal revenue streams (merchandise, WWE Network, house shows, etc) and their external revenue streams (USA TV deal, international TV deals, domestic and international licensing and marketing deals) provide a much greater measurement of company's stability than bad TV ratings and a bad product.
It's not that simple in the slightest.
First of all, 300 million TV money per year is not a "small fraction", it's a bit more than half their annual revenue.
In addition, success of other revenue streams depends on TV. Merchandise is sold because of exposure on TV. House show tickets are sold based on stories told on TV, based on wrestlers shown on TV. The major Network selling point of having the PPVs is based on TV shows hyping the PPVs.
Even if Raw moved to the Network completely, who would pay for it?
How much would those sponsoring and marketing deals be worth still if TV went to hell? Are you counting on a couple of Network sponsors?

TV is their bread and butter. Period. Without TV, WWE is an indy promotion run by an old guy who can't do anything else in life.

As far as stability on international TV deals is concerned, WWE now wasn't renewed twice within two years in Germany, a major market, because of piss poor numbers. And that after a long period of stability.

A business and ALL revenue streams are based on two things: the product and the consumer. If these two don't match, you're in trouble in the future. It's that simple. Especially if you put your self-righteous daughter in charge, and her husband, who never got anybody over beside himself through some revisionary history.
Raw-Is-Botchamania is offline  
post #43 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 07:51 PM
------------
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 58,975
Points: 51,438
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raw-Is-Botchamania View Post
It's not that simple in the slightest.
First of all, 300 million TV money per year is not a "small fraction", it's a bit more than half their annual revenue.
In addition, success of other revenue streams depends on TV. Merchandise is sold because of exposure on TV. House show tickets are sold based on stories told on TV, based on wrestlers shown on TV. The major Network selling point of having the PPVs is based on TV shows hyping the PPVs.
Even if Raw moved to the Network completely, who would pay for it?
How much would those sponsoring and marketing deals be worth still if TV went to hell? Are you counting on a couple of Network sponsors?

TV is their bread and butter. Period. Without TV, WWE is an indy promotion run by an old guy who can't do anything else in life.

As far as stability on international TV deals is concerned, WWE now wasn't renewed twice within two years in Germany, a major market, because of piss poor numbers. And that after a long period of stability.

A business and ALL revenue streams are based on two things: the product and the consumer. If these two don't match, you're in trouble in the future. It's that simple. Especially if you put your self-righteous daughter in charge, and her husband, who never got anybody over beside himself through some revisionary history.
It is simple. The ratings does not matter as long as they keep their TV deal. The ratings only becomes a problem when they are in jeopardy of losing their TV deal and that's not the case right now.

WWE has recorded an increase in revenue for multiple categories this quarter so they are doing things right. I don't see your argument.

So, as it stands right now the ratings is a fraction of their business and has little importance compared to their major revenue streams that increases the company's equity.

Headliner is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #44 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 07:56 PM
World Rustling Federation
 
Showstopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: North Jersey - Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 51,134
Points: 73,431
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

WWE's current TV deal is up in 2018. That is their main revenue stream by a huge margin. If their ratings from now to 2018 continue to decrease, that will certainly make for an interesting negotiation in 2018. Will USA make a smaller offer than their current one? Apparently, even for this deal they got a smaller deal than what was expected at that time. If the ratings continue to decrease, that will add an interesting dynamic to the next set of negotiations.

Also, while they've gone up in some aspects, they've also gone down or stayed stagnant in some categories, as well. Not a good sign that all of the extra subs they had for the WWE Network at Wrestlemania time, they've lost again.



My slice of Heaven
Showstopper is offline  
post #45 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 08:41 PM
MJF
Salt of the Earth
 
MJF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 16,152
Points: 47,027
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

and THAT is why they won't be changing their product any time soon.

Ratings can be at all time lows. Product can be at an all time bore and talent can be at an all time level of stifelement but when they're raking in the money they are, they have nothing pushing them to improve.

You want to improve WWE and their product? Stop giving them your god damn money.
egnuldt likes this.
MJF is offline  
post #46 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 08:54 PM
 
Saintpat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,218
Points: 4,864
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Quote:
Originally Posted by TakerFreak View Post
Oh well. I guess WWE does not have to change. Exciting!!!!!!
I don't get this meme. Seems to me it's just something to repeat endlessly without paying attention to things like:

* Cruiserweights

* Signing and pushing of indie darlings (note who is holding the current championships for instance)

* Complete change in approach to and promotion of women's division

* Brand split, rise of Smackdown as the more wrestling-oriented show, and SD being live instead of taped

* The shift from having things built around Cena (or previously a few years, Cena/HHH/Orton) and him mostly being out of main events and the title picture for the majority of time over the last few years.

I could go on and on. Now maybe some people don't like these things. Maybe you want to see something else. That's all fine and legit. But to say WWE hasn't made any changes is just ignoring reality.

Release the hounds!
Saintpat is online now  
post #47 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 08:59 PM
Browse me
 
Chrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Google Headquarters
Posts: 25,787
Points: 57,229
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Say what you will about the product, but WWE knows how to market themselves. The Network was a genius move.
southrnbygrace likes this.

Chrome is online now  
post #48 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 10:32 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,276
Points: 7,369
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Headliner View Post
Because Vince McMahon is a genius business man. A lot of people were under the assumption that the company is going to shit because the ratings are down, but that's only a small fraction of the business. WWE's internal revenue streams (merchandise, WWE Network, house shows, etc) and their external revenue streams (USA TV deal, international TV deals, domestic and international licensing and marketing deals) provide a much greater measurement of company's stability than bad TV ratings and a bad product.

They've changed their marketing over the last 6 to 7 years from being centering around a wrestler to marketing the brand. It's not the wrestler who's the top seller anymore. It's the brand. It's brand marketing. If you listen to Vince McMahon or the company's CFO during quarterly press releases, they will say things like "This is further proof that our brand marketing strategy is successfully......" (I can provide examples of them saying this if you want.)

And the brand is more than the wrestlers you see. It's BE A STAR, cancer campaigns, and several other corporate social responsibility measures that you see WWE continuously promote in order to be more appealing to investors, sponsors and mainstream. This opens up more opportunities for WWE to place their wrestlers on TV shows to promote whatever needs to be promoted. This ultimately grows their business.
Then how would you explain The Rock with WM 28 and 29? it wasn't the name WM that drew the numbers but mostly because of The Rock.
Thanks12 is offline  
post #49 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 10:35 PM Thread Starter
 
validreasoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 10,775
Points: 17,096
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raw-Is-Botchamania View Post
It's not that simple in the slightest.
First of all, 300 million TV money per year is not a "small fraction", it's a little more than half their annual revenue.
Tv revenue in total (raw,sd, total divas, tough enough across the world) amounted to $231m last year and this years total revenue looks to top $700m

Quote:
In addition, success of other revenue streams depends on TV. Merchandise is sold because of exposure on TV. House show tickets are sold based on stories told on TV, based on wrestlers shown on TV. The major Network selling point of having the PPVs is based on TV shows hyping the PPVs.
They ain't losing tv. Even if they lost us tv they still have highly lucrative deals in India and UK but they ain't losing tv in the us given its far and away most watched shows on nbcu and if you removed wwe from usa their prime time viewership falls to 11th which would be disaster for usa

Quote:
As far as stability on international TV deals is concerned, WWE now wasn't renewed twice within two years in Germany, a major market, because of piss poor numbers. And that after a long period of stability.
WWE contract in Germany was up, nothing to do with numbers. Wwe has bounced around channels on Germany last 30 years so stable it certainly hasn't been http://www.cagesideseats.com/2014/9/...-short-history

Btw they signed with a new network in Germany almost immediately
Genesis 1.0 likes this.
validreasoning is offline  
post #50 of 99 (permalink) Old 10-27-2016, 10:40 PM
------------
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 58,975
Points: 51,438
                     
Re: WWE reports 3rd quarter results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thanks12 View Post
Then how would you explain The Rock with WM 28 and 29? it wasn't the name WM that drew the numbers but mostly because of The Rock.
I'm talking about how they market their product. This is from WWE's perspective. Rock is obviously a draw due to his success in Hollywood and due to being a top star in the most successful era of all time.

He's an exception to the strategy, but at the same time it doesn't change their strategy since he is a part timer. He doesn't have much of an effect on anything.

Headliner is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome