AEW/ROH Finances, Ratings, etc.

[AxB]

Have you ever watched a Wrestling show with someone who doesn't like wrestling?

You should try it. See how long it takes before they say "When are they going to stop talking and start fighting?".

All of this "We need stories for the casuals" is a nonsense. People who don't watch wrestling, they might like a funny move, or something spectacular. They don't want 20 minute soliloquies, or 30 minute matches that are  5 minutes of wrestling and 25 minutes of stalling.

[just drew]

On 6/23/2024 at 2:03 PM, Craig H said:

Couple other things. First One related to this quote. This obviously isn’t a 1:1 comparison, but when Raw/WWF looked like they were on their deathbed and there were even talks about WWF potentially folding (I remember this coming up frequently enough on WOR during the Eyada days and in the newsletter), they were starting to crank out good content on a consistent basis. It’s the last time you could look at Vince’s booking and say he was consistent and stuck with what was working despite things looking bleak. He actually stayed the course. Of course they had Austin (intermittently due to injuries), DX, the Nation and the Rock, Mankind, the Hart Foundation, etc. and those legendary acts are going to help, but they didn’t lead to an immediate turnaround at the time. Even still, they stuck with what they were doing week to week. He figured out what fans loved the most or at least he had decent storylines and he kept it going.

A month of good wrestling and stories aren’t going to turn things around. Neither will 2 or 3 months, but if you stay consistent, it will turn around. Let the other company make mistakes and retake the market share that you have ceded to NXT, Raw, and SD. Basically, “It’s a problem you think we need to explain ourselves. Don’t. To anybody.”

They’re on a roll. They have something in Ospreay. They have something in Swerve. They have something in Mark. Then there’s the no brainer guys like OC, Joe, the Elite, Toni, Mone, etc. MJF, while I hated his title reign and think he’s a bit overrated, should be positioned as a featured act. Like the clip says, they need to see this thing through, for better or worse. NXT is developmental and they’re going to falter when they rebuild again. Hell, I’m the process of seeing this through, you might actually, gasp, create more fans and grow the market for all of wrestling. This would include TNA. When WWF had their best legendary talent, they were in the pits ratings wise even putting on good shows or shows better than Nitro week to week. AEW isn’t even in that dire of a situation. They just need to stay the course. Now is not the time to shake things up.

Secondly, the TV landscape is fucked up and makes no sense. Even with AEW doing their worst viewership number ever, they were still 3rd on the night. I have no idea how much of an impact Juneteenth of the Kendrick concert had, but it’s something. One of my friends out in LA didn’t specially say he and his friends were celebrating Juneteenth, but he did say this was their actual “beach day.” They do it every year on 6/19. I believe @Ace lives in the socal area so maybe he can weigh in, but is this something tied to Juneteenth? From what my friend said, the beaches they went to were all packed and they eventually had to settle on one. Then after being at the beach so day they went back to someone’s house to hang out and cook. I have no clue if one has anything to do with the other, but I don’t think you can discount 6/19 having an impact on viewership when everything was down to the point where with their worst number ever, Dynamite was still third and they’ll probably still be up high enough for the entire week. Even WBD has dismissed it. 

And related to all of that, something is amiss with TV numbers. I know folks point to it not being a good look to run large venues, but TK has mentioned in the past how they get a better deal to run those venues than smaller ones. It makes more sense financially to keep doing that then. Anyway, their live event numbers are fine, their PPV numbers are some of the most consistent buyrates I’ve ever seen, but the TV is falling off? I told the story in the past about how we were a Nielsen household and eventually I stopped it because it was way too intrusive and a pain in the ass. I don’t believe for one second that ONLY less than 600k people were watching Dynamite. I don’t believe that ONLY a couple million people are watching Raw or SD. And I know that’s how it’s supposed to work. They take a sample of the people watching and expand that to a certain number and everyone goes off of that number. It’s insane that we’re in the 2020s and everyone still relies on Nielsen as much as they do. I just don’t think it’s realistic. If it were, WWE wouldn’t consistently have record setting gates, sellouts, and merch sales and AEW wouldn’t have consistently good attendance numbers and buyrates. It just all doesn’t add up.

You knocked this all the way the hell out of the park. This is a fantastic answer. I have my doubts about the validity of how viewership is measured in 2024, too. 

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

2 hours ago, AxB said:

Have you ever watched a Wrestling show with someone who doesn't like wrestling?

You should try it. See how long it takes before they say "When are they going to stop talking and start fighting?".

All of this "We need stories for the casuals" is a nonsense. People who don't watch wrestling, they might like a funny move, or something spectacular. They don't want 20 minute soliloquies, or 30 minute matches that are  5 minutes of wrestling and 25 minutes of stalling.

It depends on who's talking. Is the speaker engaging? Interesting? Fun to listen to?

Or are they... well... 80-85% of the promos out there?

[RazorbladeKiss87]

On 6/23/2024 at 8:35 AM, AxB said:

All of this talk and talk and talk about a low rating, that's still higher than the half a million that WBD said they'd be happy with. It's a load of nonsense.

Do fans of soap operas go on the internet and rant and rave about how Eastenders is crushing Coronation Street, and go LOLEmmerdale or LOLHollyoaks? I don't think they do. They watch the shows they like, which is usually all of them.

I can confirm that the old ladies I work with do not view soap opera ratings the same way we view wrestling ratings. 

[AxB]

We shouldn't view Wrestling ratings the way we view Wrestling ratings. It's like saying Transformers is a better movie than Labyrinth because it made more money. Who gives a shit? Caring about US viewing figures should have died when Eric Bischoff's career in wrestling should have.

This TV show is shown in dozens of countries around the world, but it's of paramount importance that everyone invest massively in how many Americans watch it on television. Does that not strike anyone else as slightly ridiculous? Is it going to get cancelled? No? Then the rating is high enough. The fuck do I care how many advertising dollars WBD can earn from it?

[tbarrie]

7 hours ago, John E. Dynamite said:

I'm not going to say AEW "lives or dies" based around fan interest and opinion of the WWE product, but I think it's by far the biggest factor in their ebbs and flows - and I push that belief because it's the most boring answer. [...] All I know is that nobody on Earth has time for 12 hours of WWE & AEW TV content weekly, and if WWE puts out competent content they're going to have the edge over anybody.

I have to agree with this. I've said it before: the biggest problem AEW has is that WWE reputedly stopped sucking. And there's not really anything they can do about that.

4 hours ago, AxB said:

Have you ever watched a Wrestling show with someone who doesn't like wrestling?

You should try it. See how long it takes before they say "When are they going to stop talking and start fighting?".

All of this "We need stories for the casuals" is a nonsense. People who don't watch wrestling, they might like a funny move, or something spectacular. They don't want 20 minute soliloquies, or 30 minute matches that are  5 minutes of wrestling and 25 minutes of stalling.

I think this is a good point too. I don't know how many other fans are like him out there, but I'm pretty confident my Dad counts a a casual. (Lord knows he doesn't follow behind-the-scenes crap on the internet.) And he generally changes the channel when the wrestlers are yammering on. He doesn't care about the stories, he just wants to see people pretend to fight in an entertainingly over-the-top style.

[madl]

2 hours ago, AxB said:

We shouldn't view Wrestling ratings the way we view Wrestling ratings. It's like saying Transformers is a better movie than Labyrinth because it made more money. Who gives a shit? Caring about US viewing figures should have died when Eric Bischoff's career in wrestling should have.

This TV show is shown in dozens of countries around the world, but it's of paramount importance that everyone invest massively in how many Americans watch it on television. Does that not strike anyone else as slightly ridiculous? Is it going to get cancelled? No? Then the rating is high enough. The fuck do I care how many advertising dollars WBD can earn from it?

On the one hand. I actually agree with this sentiment.  Unless you have ties to one of the companies involved or work in the tv industry, you shouldn’t care so much about ratings. It doesn’t affect you as a fan and most people outside the industry have a fairly poor understanding of what goes into the ratings or what the ramifications or good or bad ratings actually are.  It’a a much more complex subject then we make it out to me, and most of the time we don’t know enough about the industry or variables to have an informed opinion.  It’s like fancying yourself a legal expert because you watched a lot of Law and Order and washed it down with a YouTube channel.

On the other hand, it seems like the “ratings shouldn’t be so important” talking point mostly gets trotted out when someone doesn’t like the rating in question and wants to divert the conversation.  

Edited June 25 by madl

[odessasteps]

People usually don’t complain when the weather is nice or they get a tax refund.

[NoFistsJustFlips]

20 hours ago, The Green Meanie said:

Maybe it's just me, but I don't need this. I'm perfectly happy seeing all of the various wrestlers and styles and such. Yes, coherent storylines (and for that matter booking) is a plus, but it's not that much of an issue for me. The folks complaining about how MJF is being booked and such are making an issue out of one that isn't there in my opinion.

This is a bonkers take to me. I 100% believe you that you prefer that. And there's nothing wrong with that at all. We all like what we like. But you can't think your opinion is the majority one. Stories and promos and conflict is what drives wrestling. When you really love the art form you can be entertained and appreciate the art of a match for the sake of a match and find things to critique and enjoy like we all do here. But the general viewing audience for wrestling overwhelmingly isn't that. It's the group that wants spectacle and conflict and story and stakes.

Bringing back arguably your top homegrown star and the former champion off of a long break due to injury just to stick him in a nothing enhancement match at his first ppv back is counterproductive at best. Nothing that's going to tank the company or anything. But it's an odd booking choice that deserves questioning. I get that not everyone enjoys dissecting the business decisions of the wrestling business, but this is the finances & ratings etc thread. This is the specific place they like all that kind of talk to be kept to lol.

[Thunder Down Under]

7 hours ago, AxB said:

Have you ever watched a Wrestling show with someone who doesn't like wrestling?

You should try it. See how long it takes before they say "When are they going to stop talking and start fighting?".

All of this "We need stories for the casuals" is a nonsense. People who don't watch wrestling, they might like a funny move, or something spectacular. They don't want 20 minute soliloquies, or 30 minute matches that are  5 minutes of wrestling and 25 minutes of stalling.

Funnily enough in my experience in those situations the non wrestling fan will just as often make light of the in ring action as guys pretending to fight in their underwear. A “funny move” to someone like that is just as likely to illicit derision as it would laughter. 

But the idea that stories aren’t needed to draw in casuals is ridiculous and a complete misunderstanding of what works in the business and it has been that way since the 50’s. Characters and stories that connect with the audience are infinitely more important than match quality. No company with TV has been successful without those two ingredients. 

[username]

Yeah trying to predict what a non-wrestling fan will dig is... tricky. In my personal experience spectacle is the safest bet but all my experiences have been with WWE so that likely skewers things a bit.

[Niners Fan in CT]

We can all talk about anecdotal evidence where this casual person liked this or that but why is WWE red hot right now?  I think it's clearly because of the characters and stories and soap opera stuff they are putting out there..    We've all seen the "RAW had 10 minutes of actual wrestling" memes that are out there but apparently that's what these much discussed "casual" fans want to see. 

And I'm not saying AEW should be that..  but I do think AEW should present more of a balance,  there's too many matches that are predictable and without stakes.  

Anyway,  the reason why "ratings talk" is important or rather why how many ad dollars WBD can squeeze out of people...  is because of this upcoming TV Rights deal.  

I think we can all agree that we WANT AEW to be doing very well financially because that will give us more AEW and it will give more wrestlers jobs that pay well and give us more options for nationally televised wrestling.  We want AEW to do well. 

[TheVileOne]

The closest thing AEW had to a Stone Cold-like talent or rise was MJF. He had a meteoric rise, and AEW leaned into that whole worked shoot thing of him being a disgruntled worker. Except they did that angle with MJF. They made him the champion. He had his run and they did all they can with it for like a year, and it ran its course. And now MJF has significantly cooled off as well. So they did stay the course with MJF, and it worked for a little while, but it didn't push AEW to a higher level. Clearly, MJF and Punk were going to pick up where they left off when MJF came back. That got re-worked too, and I think AEW re-worked that well enough under the circumstances. 

They invested heavily in Undisputed Kingdom, but once it became clear that Adam Cole was hurt and couldn't really carry anything out there, they really needed to pivot or re-work that angle. 

[HarryArchieGus]

I often wonder how these Collision shows/pitiful ROH tapings, and previously the Live Rampage/Dark Squash Marathons, have effected ticket sales. I've attended both. It probably goes without saying, but these tapings and Collisions are nowhere near as satisfying as a Dynamite (or more obviously a PPV). The Rampage/Dark Squash marathons felt particularly damaging. The less star-powered Collisions and long ass lifeless ROH tapings just drain the crowd. It'd be interesting to see some numbers surrounding how many of those in attendance came back the next time around. 

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

15 hours ago, AxB said:

We shouldn't view Wrestling ratings the way we view Wrestling ratings. It's like saying Transformers is a better movie than Labyrinth because it made more money. Who gives a shit? Caring about US viewing figures should have died when Eric Bischoff's career in wrestling should have.

This TV show is shown in dozens of countries around the world, but it's of paramount importance that everyone invest massively in how many Americans watch it on television. Does that not strike anyone else as slightly ridiculous? Is it going to get cancelled? No? Then the rating is high enough. The fuck do I care how many advertising dollars WBD can earn from it?

It's a United States-based promotion that runs 95% of their shows in the United States, so I would imagine how many Americans watching the show would be some value to them.

With regard to caring about advertising dollars, the reason WCW got taken off TV even though it was a top-five show in cable is because ad execs couldn't get anyone to buy time for it. If people wanted to advertise on wrestling, there was another product with triple the viewership in the WWF. Ad execs already see wrestling as a lower class thing anyway, because the stigma that wrestling is only watched by illiterate yokels still exists, so at that point you need to hinge your hopes on viewer retention. With WCW airing their primary show directly against the WWF, there wasn't nearly as much retention during the shows because of people flipping back and forth. That's also a big part of why the picture-in-picture breaks exist in most sports/wrestlings shows now, to maintain viewer retention.

If you want AEW to continue as a viable TV product, then you should absolutely care about how much ad revenue WBD can draw from it. The question is whether there will even be such a thing as a "viable TV product" in a couple of years.

Cable is dying. There's no two ways around that. If all AEW is focused on is traditional TV, then they're completely screwed.

Honestly, the best move for them could be to split from WBD and use Triller exclusively. If they can't find a traditional cable home that also offers them streaming, then they should go the route that gives them the most flexibility on streaming, and that's either Triller or establishing a YouTube paid service/Primetime channel.

[Technico Support]

10 hours ago, username said:

Yeah trying to predict what a non-wrestling fan will dig is... tricky.

Absolutely.  Years ago, we went to a ROH TV taping with a friend of mine and his wife, both non-fans.  It was a marathon show and my buddy, who is a more laid back, inquisitive type, dug the entire thing.  His wife, a more reserved and dare I say uptight person, was really pissed off and wanted to go maybe two hours in.  Davey and Eddie were tearing down the house and she was like a raccoon in a trap gnawing its foot off, desperate to escape.  My point is, non-fans will all react differently, depending on the individual.

[Kevin Wilson]

1 hour ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

Honestly, the best move for them could be to split from WBD and use Triller exclusively. If they can't find a traditional cable home that also offers them streaming, then they should go the route that gives them the most flexibility on streaming, and that's either Triller or establishing a YouTube paid service/Primetime channel.

I like that idea in theory but I don't think as a country we are quite ready yet (if we ever will be). With their budget there just isn't a realistic way they could make $70 million a year doing their own thing (last estimate I saw had WBD currently paying $68 mil a year for all three shows). At even $15 a month (which how many fans are dedicated enough to pay that) they would need 380,000 monthly subscribers on Triller or with a dedicated streaming channel to make that money back (that doesn't even take into account the provider's cut, or the fact AEW wants a much higher number from WBD then what they have now). I don't think there is any production at that level that survives just on their own streaming service/paid channel setup, everyone is tied to a broadcaster or major streaming deal. They'd have to really shrink their budget to make that work and would effectively end their run as a major wrestling promotion, they'd basically be TNA in regards to reach.

Now if they could do some type of hybrid deal that would be best case, the streaming situation is difficult to predict as people are starting to revolt from overpaying for streaming packages, we are in a weird place right now and my gut its going to get worse before it gets better as services are getting more and more expensive.

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

27 minutes ago, Kevin Wilson said:

I like that idea in theory but I don't think as a country we are quite ready yet (if we ever will be). With their budget there just isn't a realistic way they could make $70 million a year doing their own thing (last estimate I saw had WBD currently paying $68 mil a year for all three shows). At even $15 a month (which how many fans are dedicated enough to pay that) they would need 380,000 monthly subscribers on Triller or with a dedicated streaming channel to make that money back (that doesn't even take into account the provider's cut, or the fact AEW wants a much higher number from WBD then what they have now). I don't think there is any production at that level that survives just on their own streaming service/paid channel setup, everyone is tied to a broadcaster or major streaming deal. They'd have to really shrink their budget to make that work and would effectively end their run as a major wrestling promotion, they'd basically be TNA in regards to reach.

Now if they could do some type of hybrid deal that would be best case, the streaming situation is difficult to predict as people are starting to revolt from overpaying for streaming packages, we are in a weird place right now and my gut its going to get worse before it gets better as services are getting more and more expensive.

Here's the thing to consider:

I think WBD not putting AEW on Max by now is a lot more worrying than is being let on. They've been working on doing live sports and events for close to a year now - heck, even this week's presidential debate is going to be on it - but AEW has never been included. Either that means they don't see AEW as a viable option for streaming, or something in the relationship is preventing AEW from going onto Max.

With that said, they are in a difficult spot. Their TV options are slim, and they need some form of streaming component. WBD is their best option to provide both, but AEW believes they're getting lowballed in negotiations. NBC/Universal is out. Paramount's a mess. Disney is likely not an option. Who do they really have aside from WBD? They're not exactly in a great position for negotiation. They would have been prior to WWE locking down their rights earlier in the year. Now, the field's very narrow.

So then what? Do you take the lowball offer that might not even have streaming, or take the risk by going into business with exclusive streaming? If not rolling their own via Triller/YouTube, then Amazon? Who knows?

Realistically, we may be in a world where they may not have the option but to go into exclusive streaming, considering how the market has evolved.

[Kevin Wilson]

7 minutes ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

Here's the thing to consider:

I think WBD not putting AEW on Max by now is a lot more worrying than is being let on. They've been working on doing live sports and events for close to a year now - heck, even this week's presidential debate is going to be on it - but AEW has never been included. Either that means they don't see AEW as a viable option for streaming, or something in the relationship is preventing AEW from going onto Max.

With that said, they are in a difficult spot. Their TV options are slim, and they need some form of streaming component. WBD is their best option to provide both, but AEW believes they're getting lowballed in negotiations. NBC/Universal is out. Paramount's a mess. Disney is likely not an option. Who do they really have aside from WBD? They're not exactly in a great position for negotiation. They would have been prior to WWE locking down their rights earlier in the year. Now, the field's very narrow.

So then what? Do you take the lowball offer that might not even have streaming, or take the risk by going into business with exclusive streaming? If not rolling their own via Triller/YouTube, then Amazon? Who knows?

Realistically, we may be in a world where they may not have the option but to go into exclusive streaming, considering how the market has evolved.

These are reasons why I think they'll take WBD's offer, even if its not what they want. If WBD is offering 100 mill a year (a number I made up, but would be seen as a big disappointment) for five years, there is no other way they are making 100 million a year on their own. Not with their own paid streaming, triller, Amazon channel, or anything else, that's a ton of money. Then they can re-visit in five years to see what the landscape is then. Getting... 1.2 million-ish viewers a week between their three shows may not be where they wanted to be after five years but WBD is still their best chance right now of growing the number, disappearing into the abyss of 'streaming service only' will just hurt them right now.

I just don't think they can afford to take the risk of exclusive streaming. They are too big of a company now, I think I saw an estimate that they pay 68 mil a year just in employee/wrestler contracts. Nevermind all the other things they pay for, with their current popularity I can't see any scenario they'd be able to make that on their own to even cover basis costs, they'd have to severely shrink and it would be the end of AEW as we know it. So that's why I think they wouldn't do that, at this stage taking the guaranteed money (even if its less than they want) is better than experimenting into something no large company has ever done before (going exclusive streaming on their own).

[Serious Darius Bagfelt]

Khan would be a fool to not take what WBD is offering. His product is trending the wrong way right now. Take the offer then start running this promotion like a business not a rich kid passion project. Hand the reins of the B and C shows to someone else. Let the roster get to a normal manageable size. Figure out if ROH is something viable on its own or a reason for people like Mike Bennett to walk around with a belt on his shoulder 

[Phantom Lord]

I think ROH could be viable for them as a training ground for indy wrestlers who need seasoning before getting that all elite graphic. But they need to streamline those shows. Some go 2 hours and on and on.

 

[Kevin Wilson]

Rampage and Collison ratings are in, both are about the same as last week. 429K / .14 for Collison. So all AEW fans didn't suddenly fly the coop this week although it doesn't make Dynamite's ratings drop any easier to explain.

[AxB]

Isn't Juneteenth basically Thanksgiving for African Americans? Because when Smackdown was on Thursdays. the Thanksgiving night show would usually draw more flies than eyeballs.

[HarryArchieGus]

23 hours ago, AxB said:

We shouldn't view Wrestling ratings the way we view Wrestling ratings. It's like saying Transformers is a better movie than Labyrinth because it made more money. Who gives a shit? Caring about US viewing figures should have died when Eric Bischoff's career in wrestling should have.

This TV show is shown in dozens of countries around the world, but it's of paramount importance that everyone invest massively in how many Americans watch it on television. Does that not strike anyone else as slightly ridiculous? Is it going to get cancelled? No? Then the rating is high enough. The fuck do I care how many advertising dollars WBD can earn from it?

Absolutely. That doesn't read to me as not caring if the show does well enough to secure a TV deal and a modicum of viewership. Beyond that yeah 'the fuck do I care...?' The movie example is what I often think of. It's very rare that the movies or music I love are anywhere near the top earners. Curious, beyond sustainability, is there anybody out there that actually truly cares about metrics/earnings for their favorite music, movies or whatever the hobby? 

[AxB]

I mean, with music a lot of 90s rock fans liked to play the "I liked this band before it was cool" card, implying that they were disappointed that the band was big now.

We need more of that in Wrestling. Boast about how you saw such and such a Wrestler who is on TV now, back when they were wrestling in front of 3 people and a dog. Or go to those 3 people and a dog shows, and then go online and put over the wrestlers that were on there (if they were any good), so you can be seen to assist in their rise.