Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

OCTOBER 2019 WRESTLING CHAT.


Recommended Posts

Just for the record, FX is owned by Disney now, so that's not an option.

The Fox deal is for five years. I assume Fox does have an early out clause at some point, but I highly doubt it's cheap.

Edited by Brian Fowler
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, BurningBeard said:

Bloody hell lads, it's only been two weeks since they debuted!

Yeah, but clearly Fox is only going to be able to tolerate having the highest rated Friday night show amongst the key 18-49 demographic for so long!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JonnyLaw said:

Yeah, but clearly Fox is only going to be able to tolerate having the highest rated Friday night show amongst the key 18-49 demographic for so long!

But can WWE’s 18-49 demo afford a bottle of Miller(The Champagne of Beers)? Let’s be honest, probably not. So who can afford FOX’s ad prices that fit that demo? Cobra Malt Liquor would be in the perfect price range of WWE’s 18-49 demo, but they can’t afford those ads.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Meltzer from the radio show this morning (covering a bunch of stuff from the last few pages)

- Dave reminds folks (regarding the Kanellis situation) that the same exact thing just happened with Peyton Royce and Shawn Spears and Royce encouraged Spears to leave since he was so miserable. And in Maria case - WWE is always going to be the best option for her.

- Dave said he doesn't think Bischoff was a scapegoat for the "bad ratings" more this was always bound to happen fairly quickly because Bischoff was just a bad hire to begin with. Basically - Bischoff either had nothing but bad ideas or no ideas and that was the biggest deciding factor.

- He seriously doubts Bischoff thought this was going to be a long term gig

- Fox is not getting rid of Smackdown anytime soon (and might not ever no matter the ratings)

- Dave brings up that he spoke to Jake Hager for awhile yesterday and he (Hager) is very high on the "no house shows" model that AEW is using. Hager's argument is that because it will eliminate the grind on the road, their TV matches will be way better. (This came out of Dave saying that while the WWE acknowledges that house shows are down, it is such a small part of their business now)

- The WWE is definitely trying to start NXT Japan. They have been going around trying to buy Japanese promotions. He specifically states that they tried to buy NOAH. So far all their offers have been rejected. He says that they are trying to get "two big names everyone has heard of" to be the trainers but he wouldn't say them since he wanted to confirm it first (So the report of Meiko and Sekimoto clearly is true)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really want to see if NXT Japan will run a big show in Tokyo the first week in January to get people in town for WK the way U.S. companies and last year New Japan uses WrestleMania week.

It would just be funny to see them in the indie role.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meltzer noted that the WWE in Japan is going to be a real challenge because like Mexico - the WWE fans in Japan want to see the WWE.

They don't want to see what is basically "your country's wrestling only watered down" (that is me paraphrasing Dave's thought)

So basically they want to see RAW or Smackdown not NXT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RIPPA said:

Meltzer noted that the WWE in Japan is going to be a real challenge because like Mexico - the WWE fans in Japan want to see the WWE.

They don't want to see what is basically "your country's wrestling only watered down" (that is me paraphrasing Dave's thought)

So basically they want to see RAW or Smackdown not NXT

I can also see politics playing a big role too. If they can't outright buy Japanese companies, what is stopping someone from blocking buildings in Japan like WWE did here for years? I think everyone is fine with them running house shows in Japan every year. Running shows there regularly is entirely different matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RIPPA said:

- Dave reminds folks (regarding the Kanellis situation) that the same exact thing just happened with Peyton Royce and Shawn Spears and Royce encouraged Spears to leave since he was so miserable. And in Maria case - WWE is always going to be the best option for her.

This stuff is really confusing, since they're willing to let some guys go (Dustin, Spears) but keep others and add time to their contracts (Revival, Harper). It's yet to be seen what they'll do with Mike Kanellis, but I suspect they'll cut him like he wants if Maria is staying, who they clearly see more value in, just like they do with Peyton Royce. Which is another head scratcher, in the sense that if they're keeping guys that want out because they see their worth outside WWE... why not capitalize on the potential you see for them on the outside and try to make them have potential inside WWE and make them happy again?

This company is so weird. Granted I've never been with a company where I sign a contract for X amount of years, maybe a lot of people haven't, or maybe I'm applying morals to a situation where it's capitalism and corporate entities versus human nature, but if someone is unhappy, don't make them even more unhappy by making them stay longer. They might be getting paid to stay at home, and that's great, or get a temporary push to boost their morale in the short term, but you'd think a company with as many resources and different branches of their product would do everything imaginable to keep their employees independent contractors happy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Casey said:

This stuff is really confusing, since they're willing to let some guys go (Dustin, Spears) but keep others and add time to their contracts (Revival, Harper). 

I'm guessing it has a lot to do with what sort of mood Vince is in that day and how much you piss him off.

Regarding the Fox deal, wasn't the issue with the CW that, even though ratings and demos were fairly good, ad revenue was soft because advertisers didn't feel like viewers were purchasing the products and thus didn't want to buy time during the show (which is industry code for "right age-group, wrong income bracket")?  That's kinda how I remember it.

I'm assuming after being unceremoniously dumped by the CW, the WWE tried to get some sort of contract language that would make it difficult/financially unfeasible for Fox to cancel them prematurely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's worth considering that Smackdown was originally a pre-CW, pre-merger show on UPN, where you could see how it might fit into the programming. The CW post-merger is just chasing a totally different set of demos, which also probably was a big part of it. 

Fox is a different beast because they care about things like live sporting (or sporting-adjacent) events that viewers would rather see when they happen as opposed to DVR'ing them or waiting for the whole season to drop on Hulu to binge or whatever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually ROH uses their YouTube channel for old matches, to advertise their subscription service. But they put the Taven vs Rush World Title match up on there right soon after it happened. Any thoughts as to why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone is expecting FOX to get rid of Smackdown immediately but two weeks in and you can see the trajectory.  Lost a million viewers last week and it was a draft show which are usually strong.   I'd expect the number to fall further this week and we don't know what the floor is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Casey said:

 Which is another head scratcher, in the sense that if they're keeping guys that want out because they see their worth outside WWE... why not capitalize on the potential you see for them on the outside and try to make them have potential inside WWE and make them happy again?

The problem there is twofold: 

1) The WWE roster is too good right now. Like, everyone on the roster, top to bottom, is just good enough, and the indies are just hot enough with enough landing places for talent, that even the very worst people on the roster have a fighting chance to make WWE rue the day they let those guys walk away. 

2) Despite that, ultimately it goes down to even if everyone in the world has a Ph.D, the world will still need garbagemen. WWE has a really good roster filled with talented performers...but they still need someone to be the jobbers too. No matter how much talent you bring in, SOMEONE has to lose to all that talent- and eventually with a roster like this, it's going to be good talent losing these matches. If you capitalize on the potential for someone unhappy, then you have to make someone else be the jobber to lay down for that person, and then that new jobber will be unhappy, and it becomes musical chairs until you're either back to square one with the first unhappy people or you find someone willing to be the jobber. 

Even if you say "well, bring back jobber squashes", that helps at the beginning, but eventually you need a name vs. name match some time, and then you'll have to have the same decision of where they are on the totem pole. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to Mike Kinnellis, if the guy is going to be miserable for the next five years, why not just let the guy go?  It's not like the guy has so much untapped potential that a company like AEW would benefit off of WWE's loss.  This guy isn't going to be a main guy in too many major places around the world.  To me, it seems like the guy just wants to work more, so I say let him do it.  Like others have said, if they want they can keep Maria around because it's clear she has always been the focus since they returned.  Let him go and have fun working for ROH or Impact or MLW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...