Wrestling Forum banner

Meltzer on how advertisers view the WWE fanbase: "A worse demographic than NASCAR"

12K views 92 replies 69 participants last post by  SilvasBrokenLeg  
#1 ·
In today's WOR episode at http://f4wonline.com, Dave addressed a mailbag question that noted that advertisers have historically been reluctant to sponsor WWE shows because advertisers see WWE fans as poor and unlikely to spend money. The question asked whether this reputation is deserved, or just an antiquated view that stubborn ad executives are unwilling to abandon.

Dave answered that multiple demographic studies have repeatedly found that WWE fan demographics (or "demos") are low-income, and "very ethnic" which he immediately clarified specifically meaning "very, very, Mexican," and overall unlikely to spend money.

Dave contrasted WWE with other "sports entertainment" demos, noting "soccer has the good massive demos, hockey has the good demos," and concluding that advertisers apparently believe NASCAR has better demos to advertise to than WWE does, though he conceded WWE demos skew younger than NASCAR.
Carny.
 
#5 ·
At first I thought this was bullshit, but now that I think about it, it really isnt. WWE is for the children and for people who like the superhero cheesy storylines of WWE. They also have no main stream stars and dont have that big of a fanbase that they used to have and other sports currently have. Maybe if WWE try to be more modern and try to stay in the times, then we may get something worth of note.
 
#14 ·
Since when is this news? Even during the monster boom period in the 90s, selling ad time or getting big sponsoring deals was difficult. And wrestling was hot then. It's lukewarm at best today.
 
#15 ·
Nowadays I don't think you can be taken seriously if your wrestlers pretend to fight each other with cheesy lingo and "I'm gonna kick your butt!" Pre-schoolers use worse language. They should take lessons from the UFC on how to build up matches and cut promos because in that respect, Conor is a better pro wrestler than any of them.
 
#37 ·
Yeah but that's really only specific to Conor. Go on any mma board and most slam the UFC's promotion department from posters to their lack of effort to promote anything besides folk being loud mouths. They wouldn't learn much from them, most of McGregor's star is due to him just being that one in a million star. They have plenty that try to talk shit to build interest and have way less success. The UFC isn't actually the brighter side of things like most thing. Really most of the criticism here could directly apply to how hardcore fans feel about the UFC its executives and who they push.
 
#18 · (Edited)
Meltzer on how advertisers view the WWE fanbase: "A worse demographic than NASCAR"

Once again Dave is wrong. One of WWE's sponsors this past yr were Coke Cola, who is there biggest sponsor and the most well known brand. Coke sponsored an entire week of WWE content across multiple platforms during the Holiday season. The other high dollar sponsors were

Disney/ABC
General Motors
Ford
DreamWorks
Paramount Studios
Kay Jeweler
And ToysRUs to name a few.

Mattel is a major sponsor who they have a $160 Million toy contract with through 2019.

MARS INC's brand Snickers who for the second yr in a row was the presenting sponsor for WrestleMania week.

They have licensing contracts with Hulu, YouTube, Facebook

WWE has done a tremendous job at attracting major sponsors and shedding itself of the low rent stigma since Michelle Wilson their Marketing Officer joined the company. This guy is a clown and a hack.

I'm passionate about this because I have a marketing and advertising background. WWE has come a long way even since 2012.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#24 ·
No fucking surprise with how terrible and illogical the storylines are, and that's when there even are storylines.

The fact that WWE doesn't appear to respect the intelligence of its viewers means that only stupid people end up watching it.

It doesn't mean wrestling couldn't appeal to a better demo though. It just needs to present smarter stories.
 
#52 · (Edited)
It could. But it has to fight off the stigma that it built up around itself.

That and it needs more intelligent writing. Won't get that; the writers don't have the capabilities. That or they just love having a stupid fanbase. Dunno.

Bray Wyatt tried to have a more intelligent story going with his character and most people went, "What?" which meant he had to revert to jargon that sounded cool as opposed to things that actually made sense.

Some are/were trying.
 
#27 ·
You know what. After spending a few hours outside of the Mania travel threads, I'm realizing that a lot of folks on this forum are idiots. So maybe I was wrong in my previous post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#32 ·
WWE is going into the tank ratings wise and the company can only garner mainstream attention when one of its past stars does something or is involved in something else.
The new stars do not generate excitement.
Even the big dawg roman reigns is a pathetic top guy. He should be more well known by now after maineventing so many wrestlemania's but even Brock Lesnar has the hype over him
 
#35 · (Edited)
Very interesting. I typically envisioned most fans either being children whose parents buy them things, neckbeard basement-dwellers who would buy up all the merchandise, or Europeans... None of which seem detrimental to marketing (unless you're marketing demographic is adult, non-neckbeard Americans). Oh well, the more you know.

Edit: Also, regarding advertising... 3 hours is the worst thing that Raw could have done (aside from that + Smackdown live, aside from that + SDL + roster split). No one wants to devote that much time to watching a show each week. While everyone will naturally blame Russo, I think WWE should have learned from what happened to WCW going 3 hours. It's brutal, and it will eventually catch up to them.

Leaving wrestling at a 2-hour Raw and 1 hour Smackdown each week would have been ideal. Sure they'd make less money per show on advertising, but I guarantee more people would want to watch the shows... thus increasing the value of their advertising spots, and most importantly, promoting longevity in viewership.

I literally don't think there could be a worse scenario than 5+ hours of live wrestling in a matter of 2 days with a terrible roster that is split in half. It's impossible to make compelling programming under those circumstances. The fact that it still even draws ANY viewers is a testament to the (declining) revolving door of wrestling fans - children that watch, grow up, quit watching.