(Topic Creator)5 hours ago#101
Savoots posted...
GiarcII posted...
Makes zero sense and just makes you look silly. The WWE does need improvement and we'd all like for there to be some real standards again that got people wanting to tune in every week. The ratings sinking lower and lower just shows that they need to actually try to attract viewers again, not just hold on to life long wrestling fans that will tune in regardless.
People like you are selfish because you don't realize that the show is appealing to kids to build up a future fanbase.
You only see how you don't like the show and ignore the fact that kids do, which is their current target audience.
The show doesn't appeal to kids. It's on from 8-11 or 8-10 pm on a network that doesn't cater to children at all. The average viewer is in his 50s. If this show is targeting kids, then it needs to be on at 4 pm on Nick.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
GiarcII posted...
Scorsese2002 posted...
See ya'll Monday!
Kind of a silly thing to say with so many people tuning out.
I really don't understand some of the people in this topic. wanting the WWE to do a better job somehow makes you an "anti-WWE smark"? How's that "logic" add up?
"Hey guys, I really want to see the WWE build their quality back up to what it used to be!"
"You WWE hating smark!! Get outta here with your wanting a show to actually be good!! I love me some Reigns and every fan in the audience are the ones that suck because they don't like what I like!!"
Makes zero sense and just makes you look silly. The WWE does need improvement and we'd all like for there to be some real standards again that got people wanting to tune in every week. The ratings sinking lower and lower just shows that they need to actually try to attract viewers again, not just hold on to life long wrestling fans that will tune in regardless.
If you can't see the difference of posting nothing but negative things about the company and the product, and saying "hey I wish it was better" then I feel really, really sorry for you.
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
Savoots posted...
GiarcII posted...
Makes zero sense and just makes you look silly. The WWE does need improvement and we'd all like for there to be some real standards again that got people wanting to tune in every week. The ratings sinking lower and lower just shows that they need to actually try to attract viewers again, not just hold on to life long wrestling fans that will tune in regardless.
People like you are selfish because you don't realize that the show is appealing to kids to build up a future fanbase.
You only see how you don't like the show and ignore the fact that kids do, which is their current target audience.
So kids watching Roman get booed out of the building is building new fans?? Hogan brought in kids. He was universally adored by wrestling fans. Roman isn't bringing in kids. He's making them all cringe every time they use that horrible nickname that sounds like his grandma gave him. Also, the easiest way to get kids watching wrestling is to reach their parents. Your point doesn't make any sense at all.
|
GiarcII posted...
Savoots posted...
GiarcII posted...
Makes zero sense and just makes you look silly. The WWE does need improvement and we'd all like for there to be some real standards again that got people wanting to tune in every week. The ratings sinking lower and lower just shows that they need to actually try to attract viewers again, not just hold on to life long wrestling fans that will tune in regardless.
People like you are selfish because you don't realize that the show is appealing to kids to build up a future fanbase.
You only see how you don't like the show and ignore the fact that kids do, which is their current target audience.
So kids watching Roman get booed out of the building is building new fans?? Hogan brought in kids. He was universally adored by wrestling fans. Roman isn't bringing in kids. He's making them all cringe every time they use that horrible nickname that sounds like his grandma gave him. Also, the easiest way to get kids watching wrestling is to reach their parents. Your point doesn't make any sense at all.
My kids love Roman and think it's funny when he gets booed. Kids, get this, have mind of their own and can make their own decisions.
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
The show doesn't appeal to kids. It's on from 8-11 or 8-10 pm on a network that doesn't cater to children at all. The average viewer is in his 50s. If this show is targeting kids, then it needs to be on at 4 pm on Nick.
Are you kidding me? There's tons of kids in the audience, and when I went to Raw last year, I saw plenty of kids. Goldberg even said he likes to be a Superman character for the kids, and is one of the reason he came back, and it was one of the reasons Cena has been so popular and why they never turned him heel again. GiarcII posted...
So kids watching Roman get booed out of the building is building new fans?? Hogan brought in kids. He was universally adored by wrestling fans. Roman isn't bringing in kids. He's making them all cringe every time they use that horrible nickname that sounds like his grandma gave him. Also, the easiest way to get kids watching wrestling is to reach their parents. Your point doesn't make any sense at all.
My point makes perfect sense. Reigns even said that he's there for the kids and mocks the adult fans. Kids are the ones cheering him, while bitter adult fans are the ones booing him. Jesus, WWE even partnered with Scooby Doo to make a f***ing movie with wrestlers in it. And wasn't Miz wrestling with a guy in a bear costume on Raw? It's always hilarious to me when I see adults watch something meant for kids then complain that it sucks.
The average American consumer is an entitled baby who cries when they can't get what they want.
|
Savoots posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
The show doesn't appeal to kids. It's on from 8-11 or 8-10 pm on a network that doesn't cater to children at all. The average viewer is in his 50s. If this show is targeting kids, then it needs to be on at 4 pm on Nick.
Are you kidding me?
There's tons of kids in the audience, and when I went to Raw last year, I saw plenty of kids.
Goldberg even said he likes to be a Superman character for the kids, and is one of the reason he came back, and it was one of the reasons Cena has been so popular and why they never turned him heel again.
GiarcII posted...
So kids watching Roman get booed out of the building is building new fans?? Hogan brought in kids. He was universally adored by wrestling fans. Roman isn't bringing in kids. He's making them all cringe every time they use that horrible nickname that sounds like his grandma gave him. Also, the easiest way to get kids watching wrestling is to reach their parents. Your point doesn't make any sense at all.
My point makes perfect sense.
Reigns even said that he's there for the kids and mocks the adult fans. Kids are the ones cheering him, while bitter adult fans are the ones booing him.
Jesus, WWE even partnered with Scooby Doo to make a f***ing movie with wrestlers in it.
And wasn't Miz wrestling a guy in a bear costume on Raw?
It's always hilarious to me when I see adults watch something meant for kids then complain that it sucks.
Yeah, wrestling was marketed to adults just a decade ago. I find it hilarious that you actually believe that wrestling is only marketed to kids. Also, kids aren't watching. Rating keep sinking and they are tuning out more than adults. Wrestling audiences are getting older, not younger. You haven't made a single correct point yet.
|
GiarcII posted...
Savoots posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
The show doesn't appeal to kids. It's on from 8-11 or 8-10 pm on a network that doesn't cater to children at all. The average viewer is in his 50s. If this show is targeting kids, then it needs to be on at 4 pm on Nick.
Are you kidding me?
There's tons of kids in the audience, and when I went to Raw last year, I saw plenty of kids.
Goldberg even said he likes to be a Superman character for the kids, and is one of the reason he came back, and it was one of the reasons Cena has been so popular and why they never turned him heel again.
GiarcII posted...
So kids watching Roman get booed out of the building is building new fans?? Hogan brought in kids. He was universally adored by wrestling fans. Roman isn't bringing in kids. He's making them all cringe every time they use that horrible nickname that sounds like his grandma gave him. Also, the easiest way to get kids watching wrestling is to reach their parents. Your point doesn't make any sense at all.
My point makes perfect sense.
Reigns even said that he's there for the kids and mocks the adult fans. Kids are the ones cheering him, while bitter adult fans are the ones booing him.
Jesus, WWE even partnered with Scooby Doo to make a f***ing movie with wrestlers in it.
And wasn't Miz wrestling a guy in a bear costume on Raw?
It's always hilarious to me when I see adults watch something meant for kids then complain that it sucks.
Yeah, wrestling was marketed to adults just a decade ago. I find it hilarious that you actually believe that wrestling is only marketed to kids. Also, kids aren't watching. Rating keep sinking and they are tuning out more than adults. Wrestling audiences are getting older, not younger. You haven't made a single correct point yet.
Kids aren't watching? Prove it
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
GiarcII posted...
Yeah, wrestling was marketed to adults just a decade ago. I find it hilarious that you actually believe that wrestling is only marketed to kids.
Yeah, this isn't a decade ago, this is 2017. I said that kids are currently WWE's target audience. GiarcII posted...
Also, kids aren't watching. Rating keep sinking and they are tuning out more than adults.
Where's your proof of this? Are there stats that show kids of a single digit age tuning out? GiarcII posted...
Wrestling audiences are getting older, not younger.
Yeah, which is why I said they're trying to create new fans by appealing to kids. GiarcII posted...
You haven't made a single correct point yet.
I have. You're just too delusional to notice it.
The average American consumer is an entitled baby who cries when they can't get what they want.
|
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/04/22/In-Depth/~/media/BC4362F7D0374A958BB4EFF7C42B14C9.ashxhttp://i61.tinypic.com/33a9b1l.pngAgain, wrestling fans are getting older, not younger. Quit spitting your wrong opinion like its fact then having the gall to call other people delusional. You are wrong and your points are incorrect.
|
"surveys more than 200,000 people age 18 or older" Lmfao, get this nerd outta here
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
(Topic Creator)4 hours ago#111
You can also tell that wrestling isn't clicking with kids by looking at the toys. At least half of the figurines are classic people because most toy buyers now are older collectors. If kids were into the product there would be less legacy stuff and more stuff based on modern product. Also the best way to appeal to kids is to appeal to late teens. Everyone wants to be 18-21 so appeal to that demo and you get everyone.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
I was just in Walmart two days ago with my son and half the wwe toys are current era figurines on the shelf, a quarter of them are legacy era stuff and the rest are the random popo or whatever crap
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
Dynedux posted...
"surveys more than 200,000 people age 18 or older"
Lmfao, get this nerd outta here
Guy on pro wrestling board on a gaming website calls someone else a nerd while aggressively attacking anyone who disagrees that the WWE is amazing. Let that sink in.
|
(Topic Creator)4 hours ago#114
Dynedux posted...
I was just in Walmart two days ago with my son and half the wwe toys are current era figurines on the shelf, a quarter of them are legacy era stuff and the rest are the random popo or whatever crap
I'll venture down the toy aisle from time to time to get my dog stuffed toys, and I'll check out the wrestling stuff. The big things now are Hasbro-style figures (which are entirely a legacy product) and then the figures themselves, which are 50/50 in each collection old and new. But a lot of stores just carry a lot of HHH, Austin, Rock, etc.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
I've skipped nearly all the posts in this topic, but given what I'm seeing of some of the last few posts, I'm guessing there's some bickering going on, and honestly, I don't see the point of it. The bottom line is, people are becoming less and less interested with watching WWE, live, for one reason another. Whether those people are kids, teens, or adults, that doesn't matter so much, because people in general are just less inclined to watch. The most likely causes of this are WWE's poor creative direction, along with viewer fatigue. As it pertains to the product, the writing is dull and boring, it almost never feel like anything "happens", and in the case of Raw, it typically feels like the writers are literally making it up as they go along every week. Not to mention, people are a bit disenchanted with watching 5+ hours a week of WWE, especially when the product is so dull, and when you can easily just watch the good bits on YouTube, what's the point of sitting through hours of a product that's less interesting just to see it live? Now, as for the demographic, obviously WWE wants to try to hit every demo. But a television show airing prime time on a non-children's cable channel should generally be going for the "18-34" demographic. So, it's kind of silly for anyone to assert that wrestling is and should be a "children's show", given that it's not broadcast as such.
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Savoots posted...
GiarcII posted...
Makes zero sense and just makes you look silly. The WWE does need improvement and we'd all like for there to be some real standards again that got people wanting to tune in every week. The ratings sinking lower and lower just shows that they need to actually try to attract viewers again, not just hold on to life long wrestling fans that will tune in regardless.
People like you are selfish because you don't realize that the show is appealing to kids to build up a future fanbase.
You only see how you don't like the show and ignore the fact that kids do, which is their current target audience.
The show doesn't appeal to kids. It's on from 8-11 or 8-10 pm on a network that doesn't cater to children at all. The average viewer is in his 50s. If this show is targeting kids, then it needs to be on at 4 pm on Nick.
Who's to say the little turds would even watch it? They'd be crying out for about their usual 104 episodes Spongebob OverratedPants instead. Damn kids...
I'll get back up for good this time and I ain't comin' down...
|
GiarcII posted...
Again, wrestling fans are getting older, not younger. Quit spitting your wrong opinion like its fact then having the gall to call other people delusional. You are wrong and your points are incorrect.
Are you being intentionally obtuse? My point is that WWE is making kids their target demographic to create new fans, which is why you have the things on shows that I listed before. Such as Miz wrestling with a bear on RAW or Reigns doing it for the kids, same as Goldberg. Because fans like yourself are getting older, they have to create new fans in kids. How is this so hard for you to understand?
The average American consumer is an entitled baby who cries when they can't get what they want.
|
You would honestly think after nearly 120 posts, this topic would have gone somewhere but it hasn't. It's just a full circle of unnecessary arguing over something that isn't really that much of a big deal.
MUFC- The Religion.
Miami Dolphins: The 1 in 31-1
|
(Topic Creator)3 hours ago#119
Savoots posted...
GiarcII posted...
Again, wrestling fans are getting older, not younger. Quit spitting your wrong opinion like its fact then having the gall to call other people delusional. You are wrong and your points are incorrect.
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
My point is that WWE is making kids their target demographic to create new fans, which is why you have the things on shows that I listed before.
Such as Miz wrestling with a bear on RAW or Reigns doing it for the kids, same as Goldberg.
Because fans like yourself are getting older, they have to create new fans in kids. How is this so hard for you to understand?
Kids don't watch. That's the point. And being kiddy doesn't even appeal to kids.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
Despite all my rage I'm still just a rabbit in a cage
XBL Gamertag: ninjarabbitmega
|
BaronNugget posted...
You would honestly think after nearly 120 posts, this topic would have gone somewhere but it hasn't. It's just a full circle of unnecessary arguing over something that isn't really that much of a big deal.
All that's missing is the parental insults, death threats and borderline racist slurs that one of these things breaks down into.
I'll get back up for good this time and I ain't comin' down...
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Savoots posted...
GiarcII posted...
Again, wrestling fans are getting older, not younger. Quit spitting your wrong opinion like its fact then having the gall to call other people delusional. You are wrong and your points are incorrect.
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
My point is that WWE is making kids their target demographic to create new fans, which is why you have the things on shows that I listed before.
Such as Miz wrestling with a bear on RAW or Reigns doing it for the kids, same as Goldberg.
Because fans like yourself are getting older, they have to create new fans in kids. How is this so hard for you to understand?
Kids don't watch. That's the point. And being kiddy doesn't even appeal to kids.
rofl
|
GiarcII posted...
Dynedux posted...
"surveys more than 200,000 people age 18 or older"
Lmfao, get this nerd outta here
Guy on pro wrestling board on a gaming website calls someone else a nerd while aggressively attacking anyone who disagrees that the WWE is amazing. Let that sink in.
Please quote where I said wwe is amazing. Go ahead I'll wait. Lmfao, f***ing nerds these days
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion. Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
Dynedux posted...
GiarcII posted...
Dynedux posted...
"surveys more than 200,000 people age 18 or older"
Lmfao, get this nerd outta here
Guy on pro wrestling board on a gaming website calls someone else a nerd while aggressively attacking anyone who disagrees that the WWE is amazing. Let that sink in.
Please quote where I said wwe is amazing. Go ahead I'll wait.
Lmfao, f***ing nerds these days
lol listen to you go. You laugh because you don't understand how polls work and just love insulting anyone who doesn't think the WWE is great. Then you keep using the word "nerd" in the most hilariously ironic way possible. Look, you came in here specifically to undermine the the fact that viewership is down. I don't know how you benefit from a worse product that attracts less people, but you sure seem committed to telling them that everything is a-ok and that there's nothing at all wrong with large chunks of the audience tuning out. I really don't understand your vitriol here. It's like you love a worse show that's aimed at people who aren't watching anyway and you would just love it if it becomes less and less popular. I really, really don't understand where you're coming from or your anger towards anyone who want's to see the WWE improve. It seems as nonsensical as your hilariously ironic insults.
|
GiarcII posted...
Dynedux posted...
GiarcII posted...
Dynedux posted...
"surveys more than 200,000 people age 18 or older"
Lmfao, get this nerd outta here
Guy on pro wrestling board on a gaming website calls someone else a nerd while aggressively attacking anyone who disagrees that the WWE is amazing. Let that sink in.
Please quote where I said wwe is amazing. Go ahead I'll wait.
Lmfao, f***ing nerds these days
lol listen to you go. You laugh because you don't understand how polls work and just love insulting anyone who doesn't think the WWE is great. Then you keep using the word "nerd" in the most hilariously ironic way possible.
Look, you came in here specifically to undermine the the fact that viewership is down. I don't know how you benefit from a worse product that attracts less people, but you sure seem committed to telling them that everything is a-ok and that there's nothing at all wrong with large chunks of the audience tuning out. I really don't understand your vitriol here. It's like you love a worse show that's aimed at people who aren't watching anyway and you would just love it if it becomes less and less popular. I really, really don't understand where you're coming from or your anger towards anyone who want's to see the WWE improve. It seems as nonsensical as your hilariously ironic insults.
That's a lot of text not quoting where I said wwe is amazing So again I say, quote a post I said it was amazing. I'll wait.
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
Savoots posted...
GiarcII posted...
Again, wrestling fans are getting older, not younger. Quit spitting your wrong opinion like its fact then having the gall to call other people delusional. You are wrong and your points are incorrect.
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
My point is that WWE is making kids their target demographic to create new fans, which is why you have the things on shows that I listed before.
Such as Miz wrestling with a bear on RAW or Reigns doing it for the kids, same as Goldberg.
Because fans like yourself are getting older, they have to create new fans in kids. How is this so hard for you to understand?
Remember when the Gobbly got booed out of the building? Even kids don't like that crap.
Man is like a piece of cheese...
|
(Topic Creator)3 hours ago#128
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
Expansion costs money and WWE has few rich markets into which to expand. Actually they don't have any. Expansion into the third world won't generate the $140m that the TV deal is overpriced by.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
Expansion costs money and WWE has few rich markets into which to expand. Actually they don't have any. Expansion into the third world won't generate the $140m that the TV deal is overpriced by.
Guess we'll see by the end of 2020 won't we
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
Expansion costs money and WWE has few rich markets into which to expand. Actually they don't have any. Expansion into the third world won't generate the $140m that the TV deal is overpriced by.
its comments like this that make it obvious you are just trolling at this point
|
Him? Trolling? NO WAI
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
WWE's profit margin is at an all-time low, fewer people than ever are watching and attending events with the fanbase getting older while not attracting new fans, and the Network has been a huge money pit so far and there's not a reason to be worried? Because I am not noticing a downward spiral that's been going on since WM XXX?
Despite all my rage I'm still just a rabbit in a cage
XBL Gamertag: ninjarabbitmega
|
ninja rabbit posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
WWE's profit margin is at an all-time low, fewer people than ever are watching and attending events with the fanbase getting older while not attracting new fans, and the Network has been a huge money pit so far and there's not a reason to be worried? Because I am not noticing a downward spiral that's been going on since WM XXX?
Reason to be worried? No. Don't you think it's ironic the only people that are worried are people on the internet? Not, say, the people running the company? Not the stock holders, no one else? Yeah, the people on the internet are probably right. Vince is really done for this time! People have been parroting this tired ass argument for nearly 15 years, at the base of the argument is always "they'll be out of business in X years at this rate"... And wouldn't you know it, they're still in business. Expanding their business. The wwe will always be fine.
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
(Topic Creator)2 hours ago#134
Master Alien posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
Expansion costs money and WWE has few rich markets into which to expand. Actually they don't have any. Expansion into the third world won't generate the $140m that the TV deal is overpriced by.
its comments like this that make it obvious you are just trolling at this point
Meltzer reported that the deal is overpriced and is only worth $60m. I think he's right because USA expected ratings to go up when that deal was signed, and instead they've plummeted. So WWE has to make up that revenue. Expansion is a way to generate money long term but not short term because it takes investment. Investment takes money. There's also the question of how do they invest? India isn't going to make them money for 50 years. China would take 20+ years and getting on TV there is a pain. Europe has little interest in wrestling.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
ninja rabbit posted...
WWE's profit margin is at an all-time low, fewer people than ever are watching and attending events with the fanbase getting older while not attracting new fans, and the Network has been a huge money pit so far
Where are you getting all this from?
The average American consumer is an entitled baby who cries when they can't get what they want.
|
(Topic Creator)2 hours ago#136
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
WWE's profit margin is at an all-time low, fewer people than ever are watching and attending events with the fanbase getting older while not attracting new fans, and the Network has been a huge money pit so far and there's not a reason to be worried? Because I am not noticing a downward spiral that's been going on since WM XXX?
Reason to be worried? No.
Don't you think it's ironic the only people that are worried are people on the internet? Not, say, the people running the company? Not the stock holders, no one else? Yeah, the people on the internet are probably right. Vince is really done for this time!
People have been parroting this tired ass argument for nearly 15 years, at the base of the argument is always "they'll be out of business in X years at this rate"... And wouldn't you know it, they're still in business. Expanding their business. The wwe will always be fine.
There have been shareholder suits against WWE over them inflating earning potential.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Master Alien posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
Expansion costs money and WWE has few rich markets into which to expand. Actually they don't have any. Expansion into the third world won't generate the $140m that the TV deal is overpriced by.
its comments like this that make it obvious you are just trolling at this point
Meltzer reported that the deal is overpriced and is only worth $60m. I think he's right because USA expected ratings to go up when that deal was signed, and instead they've plummeted. So WWE has to make up that revenue.
Expansion is a way to generate money long term but not short term because it takes investment. Investment takes money. There's also the question of how do they invest? India isn't going to make them money for 50 years. China would take 20+ years and getting on TV there is a pain. Europe has little interest in wrestling.
Vince is done for this time!
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
WWE's profit margin is at an all-time low, fewer people than ever are watching and attending events with the fanbase getting older while not attracting new fans, and the Network has been a huge money pit so far and there's not a reason to be worried? Because I am not noticing a downward spiral that's been going on since WM XXX?
Reason to be worried? No.
Don't you think it's ironic the only people that are worried are people on the internet? Not, say, the people running the company? Not the stock holders, no one else? Yeah, the people on the internet are probably right. Vince is really done for this time!
People have been parroting this tired ass argument for nearly 15 years, at the base of the argument is always "they'll be out of business in X years at this rate"... And wouldn't you know it, they're still in business. Expanding their business. The wwe will always be fine.
There have been shareholder suits against WWE over them inflating earning potential.
And what came of that? Nothing? Gotcha
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
(Topic Creator)2 hours ago#139
Dynedux posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
WWE's profit margin is at an all-time low, fewer people than ever are watching and attending events with the fanbase getting older while not attracting new fans, and the Network has been a huge money pit so far and there's not a reason to be worried? Because I am not noticing a downward spiral that's been going on since WM XXX?
Reason to be worried? No.
Don't you think it's ironic the only people that are worried are people on the internet? Not, say, the people running the company? Not the stock holders, no one else? Yeah, the people on the internet are probably right. Vince is really done for this time!
People have been parroting this tired ass argument for nearly 15 years, at the base of the argument is always "they'll be out of business in X years at this rate"... And wouldn't you know it, they're still in business. Expanding their business. The wwe will always be fine.
There have been shareholder suits against WWE over them inflating earning potential.
And what came of that? Nothing? Gotcha
Complaint hasn't been dismissed as far as I can tell.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
Well I'm sure Meltzer has the scoop
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
|
Dynedux posted...
Well I'm sure Meltzer has the scoop
What does this have to do with anything? It's like you didn't have a response for what he said and tried to change the subject. That's weird. Don't do that.
"Why would anyone stop baiting their weasel?" GuideToTheDark
3DS FC 0817-4942-4831
|
AndreLeGeant posted...
Master Alien posted...
AndreLeGeant posted...
Dynedux posted...
ninja rabbit posted...
Ratings matter because WWE gets the plurality of their money from USA and if tv revenue went down 25% then WWE would be losing money. Yes their gross revenue is at an all-time high but so are their expenses thanks to the Network.
And their expansion is at an all time high. If wwe somehow lost money from their TV deal they'd adjust accordingly and still pull a marginal profit while maximizing expansion.
Like all these chicken littles assume that if wwe were to get less money they'd just continue to spend at their current rate and go bankrupt. There's a reason you people don't run companies.
Expansion costs money and WWE has few rich markets into which to expand. Actually they don't have any. Expansion into the third world won't generate the $140m that the TV deal is overpriced by.
its comments like this that make it obvious you are just trolling at this point
Meltzer reported that the deal is overpriced and is only worth $60m. I think he's right because USA expected ratings to go up when that deal was signed, and instead they've plummeted. So WWE has to make up that revenue.
Expansion is a way to generate money long term but not short term because it takes investment. Investment takes money. There's also the question of how do they invest? India isn't going to make them money for 50 years. China would take 20+ years and getting on TV there is a pain. Europe has little interest in wrestling.
lmaooo my dude cited meltzer.
|
(Topic Creator)1 hour ago#143
Not citing him so much as using him for corroboration. He's right on the dollar amount because you can look at what networks pay for other shows.
I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't do drugs. I am your sXe hero.
They should build a mosque in mecca. Right next to the dome of the rock. -- Lord Sideous
|
I'll add a little more kindling to this fire. Smackdown's audience was down 277,000 from the previous week and they didn't even have to worry about going against the NBA finals. This was also a their last show before Money in the Bank.
Following near-record low ratings for Monday Night Raw the night before, WWE got more bad news in the form of Tuesday's SmackDown numbers.
The show did just 2.072 million viewers, the second lowest number since the brand split last July. It beat only the November 8th episode, which went up against presidential election coverage on both cable and network TV.
Unlike most weeks where SmackDown is at or near the top of cable viewership, the show was just 13th on cable for the day in terms of total viewers. It was second in the 18-49 demo with a 0.63 rating, trailing only a new edition of "30 for 30" on ESPN.
Viewership was virtually identical to the SmackDown number from one year ago this week, which was 2.073 million. The bad news there is that show aired via tape delay and went up against game six of the NBA finals.
http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-smackdown-ratings-plummet-despite-no-nba-competition-237266
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Public Comments