Wrestling Forum banner

41 - 60 of 65 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,775 Posts
If KO is the number one heel then thats a good indicator of how bad WWE is. I like KO but he's a terrible heel, he panders and sucks up to the fans so much, he's constantly chasing pops and chants and cheers. His heel work every now and then is great, but msot of the time he's an awful heel.
You just say your opinion every time, these aren't facts, they're just your opinions :v

You called Rollins' title reign boring, now you're saying KO is a terrible heel, all that while saying AJ Styles is a fantastic champion!!!

Seriously you can't shit on Rollins and KO and praise AJ while the other two guys clearly had a better title reign than AJ. These are just your opinions, bias opinions.
 

·
Let's talk about six, baby.
Joined
·
8,419 Posts
Meltzer also said the network has eaten into their profits, which are something like $93M down in the last three years. They're still making them, but the 'old method' would be giving larger ones.
 

·
Baby Yoda
Joined
·
29,768 Posts
I'm actually quite happy with the SD numbers, for a no name brand to being doing those numbers with a lack of depth in the roster is great. Raw is known brand with a deeper roster - Roman, Jericho, Rollins, KO, Zayn, Cesaro, Sasha, New Day, Bayley and Charlotte. Then there's the point of Raw working working the bigger markets more often than SD, and SD working on Monday's (Raw and MNF) to push down their average.

Meltzer also said the network has eaten into their profits, which are something like $93M down in the last three years. They're still making them, but the 'old method' would be giving larger ones.
I don't think they'd get many buys with the PPV method. They have no stars left and would need to sign up more attitude era stars to get buys.
 

·
Let's talk about six, baby.
Joined
·
8,419 Posts
I don't think they'd get many buys with the PPV method. They have no stars left and would need to sign up more attitude era stars to get buys.
That's a good point. In a way the Network might be saving this company's ass. It would be interesting to see how WWE would be doing if it was still relying on buys and had no network. I can't see the numbers being good with this roster and the ridiculous amount of PPVs.
 

·
Baby Yoda
Joined
·
29,768 Posts
That's a good point. In a way the Network might be saving this company's ass. It would be interesting to see how WWE would be doing if it was still relying on buys and had no network. I can't see the numbers being good with this roster and the ridiculous amount of PPVs.
The only ones who could get buys are Cena, Lesnar and Goldberg, everyone else is a geek that can't draw.

The WWE are probably in a way as they don't need to create megastars who will up and leave them, if presented with better opportunities.

Seriously you can't shit on Rollins and KO and praise AJ while the other two guys clearly had a better title reign than AJ. These are just your opinions, bias opinions.
AJ's reign hasn't been bad, but it hasn't been turn off the TV and don't watch till the champ loses the title bad like Rollins was. 40 minutes of trash every Monday nights followed by a mediocre PPV main event... As bad as both shows are right now, they're still miles better than it was when Seth Borllins was champ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
As bad as both shows are right now, they're still miles better than it was when Seth Borllins was champ.
I don't know, man. Watching some fucking weirdo beating the WWE champ in the main event left me with a bad taste in my mouth.
 

·
Student of the game? I am the f***in' Game!!
Joined
·
8,351 Posts
That's a good point. In a way the Network might be saving this company's ass. It would be interesting to see how WWE would be doing if it was still relying on buys and had no network. I can't see the numbers being good with this roster and the ridiculous amount of PPVs.
Th trade off is that they've given all their content away with the ppv to sell it.

For $9.99.

There's always the quarterly revenue report how they're breaking records to impress the marks but no profit stat because they're having trouble profiting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Meltzer also said the network has eaten into their profits, which are something like $93M down in the last three years. They're still making them, but the 'old method' would be giving larger ones.
You have to pull teeth in order to get people to pay $10 for their shitty ppvs now. Only the markiest of marks and WWE loyalists would pay $60 for this shit product.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,951 Posts
This is WWE, Cena, and Reigns' fault. They buried their roster for the last 10 years to put Cena over as a star and he left them with nothing but this talentless loser Reigns as their number one guy.
 

·
The Blue Meanie
Joined
·
15,838 Posts
If KO is the number one heel then thats a good indicator of how bad WWE is. I like KO but he's a terrible heel, he panders and sucks up to the fans so much, he's constantly chasing pops and chants and cheers. His heel work every now and then is great, but msot of the time he's an awful heel.
Agreed.

I like KO as a performer, but he's panders too much as a heel.

As for the low numbers, I'm not surprised. Even $9.99 is too much for the current product.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,812 Posts
This is WWE, Cena, and Reigns' fault. They buried their roster for the last 10 years to put Cena over as a star and he left them with nothing but this talentless loser Reigns as their number one guy.
How is it Cena or Reigns' fault?

Reigns wasn't good enough and ready to be a main eventer, yet WWE pushed.
They sabotaged Bryan.
They didn't go full way with Punk.

It's only WWE's fault, it's not like Cena was demanding that he gets booked like the only star in the company, it's not like Cena asked them to scrap SD and merge the shows in 2011/2012 making only a #1 guy option..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,115 Posts
dont understand the idea that smackdown is a no name brand, its just had its 900th episode ffs stop acting like its heat or velocity
wwe smackdown is a known brand
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
Are you going to elaborate or continue to act like a virgin?
No, that was the bait answer. You took the bait, and NOW I get to elaborate. The idea was to waste your time. You know, since you're half a moron anyway.

WWE house show numbers begin to dwindle even more, and the answer from WWE fans, which is who I'm talking too, because I'm not talking to Wrestling fans, is to get rid of House Shows. That there is no purpose in house shows.

A wrestling fans response on the other hand, see's the danger.

See if we study our Wrestling history, we'd know that Live Events are Wrestlings bread and butter. Historically speaking. It's also known that Wrestling must have TV. Why does Wrestling need to have TV? Because TV is a big advertisement for the live events. TV was used as a way to advertise the talent, and then you'd buy a ticket to see them when they came to town.

It's still done to this day, because house shows are still very important as a revenue stream in Pro-Wrestling. It's what people talk about when they are talking about the importance of star power in Wrestling. Back in the 70's Wrestling was in many ways where it is now. All the promoters had oversaturated the product. Made it too show business. People got tired of it, the ratings dropped, and Wrestling started losing TV. The AWA was pretty much the biggest thing left. So if I wanted to watch Wrestling from the other territories I had to do what? That's right, I had to buy a TICKET to a live event. Over time live events started doing great business again, Wrestling got TV back, and we had our late 70's boom that led well into the 80's.

Those who do not do live events have suffered. LU is popular, but does shit ratings, and has no revenue stream outside its TV show because it doesn't do live events. So what do we hear? We hear how screwed up money wise LU is.

TNA doesn't do live events. It hasn't in years. They have no money, and one shit TV deal.

The mistake WWE has made in conditioning its fans, like yourself, is that they caused the Wrestling part not to matter. So a WWE fan like yourself, doesn't understand why'd you need to go to a live event to watch Wrestling. Because fans, like yourself, don't understand why'd you watch fake Wrestling. Interesting what 15 years can do to change the mindset over the previous 100.

So lets go to one possible future, one that we'll probably never see(probably a good thing), one where WWE loses TV. WWE will still do live events though, because regardless of what it has become it's also still a Pro-Wrestling promotion at its foundation.

Thus little Cooper one day will get up. Perhaps he'll be thinking about how he misses WWE RAW. He turns on the TV or looks at this phone, and see's an ad for a WWE live event near by. If he wants to see WWE, then he's going to have to buy a ticket.

That ticket he will buy will be for a LIVE EVENT. A FUCKING HOUSE SHOW!!!

Now you're going to have nice long winded reply, I hope. I'll read it, but not respond. Simply because I'm right and you're wrong. I'm no expert on the subject, but I know Live Events are an important thing. There's no one in Wrestling that will tell you otherwise. But please, waste your time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,263 Posts
I blame Roman Reigns. There's either too much of him or not enough. Whatever it is... it's his fault.

Seriously though why would a half savvy american fan go to a house show? I'd save my money and do a PPV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
613 Posts
I blame Roman Reigns. There's either too much of him or not enough. Whatever it is... it's his fault.

Seriously though why would a half savvy american fan go to a house show? I'd save my money and do a PPV.
Many decent sized cities in North America don't have live shows or ppvs for either raw or smackdown. Take Salt Lake city, Vancouver, Bakersfield, actually any city in Canada other than Toronto, Omaha, Des Moines, Spokane, and many more. House shows could be an option for these people.
 
41 - 60 of 65 Posts
Top