Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

OCT WRESTLING CHIT CHAT THREAD

RIPPA

By RIPPA
in The PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING

 Share

Recommended Posts

cool arrow

cool arrow

Posted
Posted

 

So, per the quarterly,SummerSlam's domestic buyrate went from 296,000 to 185,000. Ouch.Probably explains Bryan's recent treatment.

Don't worry guys, Orton vs Big Show is gonna turn things around, you betcha!

 

 

Yes, because Orton is totes The Face Of WWE™.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kafkonia

kafkonia

Posted
Posted

 

Yeah, I remember hearing about it at the time.

 

Wrestling Sonny Siaki could be hazardous to your health.

I have no idea who Sonny Siaki is. So I googled him and watched this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMw5EaN_20Y

 

He's not very good. But what interested me was the lack of signs in the crowd. It's like one dude with a SLAP NUTS sign. That's when you know it's over.

 

Also, I was wondering whatever happened to Elix Skipper. I couldn't believe he's 45! And, sadly, a few years ago his 22 year old son was murdered. 

 

This post wasn't meant to be so sad.

 

I liked Siaki in TNA, as a poor man's Rock. He was part of the Flying Elvises!

 

Plus, his career ended because he donated a kidney to his brother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bustronaut

Bustronaut

Posted
Posted

So, per the quarterly,SummerSlam's domestic buyrate went from 296,000 to 185,000. Ouch.Probably explains Bryan's recent treatment.

Don't worry guys, Orton vs Big Show is gonna turn things around, you betcha!
 Yes, because Orton is totes The Face Of WWE™.
It's weird because around this time every year they're doing a Randy Orton storyline with whomever is WWE champ, which always ends up with him winning it, or if he's champ going into NFL season then he ends up losing it to Cena.Orton really seems to be the factor in the ratings drop, and I think Mookie would back me up on this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jaedmc

jaedmc

Posted
Posted

Well then Siaki's a rock solid cat in my book then. 

 

Was looking at Mookie's blog and thought this post was fascinating: http://indeedwrestling.blogspot.com/2013/10/winloss-records-for-wwf-champions-prior.html

 

He looks at the win percentage of all the WWE Champs(not world heavy) 6 months prior to winning the belt. Unsurprisingly, people win a lot before getting the belt tend to keep it longer. Wonder what Daniel Bryan's record looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JonnyLaw

JonnyLaw

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

I thought I read Meltzer saying that Ryback is convinced he's going to fight Goldberg at Mania 30 and they're just doing the negotiations.

That match would be so awful.

 

Honestly, if it were presented as a spur-of-the-moment thing, where Ryback calls him out at Wrestlemania & the match is just Spear --> Jackhammer, thanks for coming. I imagine it would get a big-ass pop. I'd mark, I won't front.

 

 

I don't think they'd blow the chance to have Goldberg boost a WM buyrate like that, but just imagine the pop on a Raw if they managed to keep it a surprise, and Goldberg randomly comes out through the crowd and spears Ryback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greggulator

Greggulator

Posted
Posted

Apparently Forbes thinks the next WWE TV deal could be bigger than NASCAR's 4.5 billion 10 year deal.

 

Does this make sense to anyone else?

 

Yes.

 

I wrote an article about NASCAR a few months ago. Fox and TNT inked their deal w/NASCAR when the sport was hyped as becoming the new American pastime. That didn't happen. At all. NASCAR's live attendance has completely tanked to the point where they don't announce figures anymore. (The excuse is that a lot of publicly traded companies own NASCAR venues and publishing those is advanced guidance, which is a hilariously lame excuse.) The reason for this is twofold: 1) When it was trying to become the new pastime, they put in stadiums in a lot of cities that didn't have any history of racing -- Chicago, Phoenix, LA, etc. They had some success at first but then the fad ended. In order to stage those races, though, they had to take events from elsewhere. So a lot of their small tracks in their southern core were dismissed. And that leads to 2) Their core fanbase is the white, rural/southern, working-class. This demographic was largely hurt the worst in The Great Recession -- all those Sun Belt construction jobs vanished and haven't come back. North Carolina is the essential capital of NASCAR and their blue collar job base shrunk by a giant amount and hasn't returned.Their TV ratings have completely tanked since they signed their first big deal in 2005. They're down almost 50%, in fact. But they still just signed a crazy deal despite the absolutely terrible ratings and demographics hardships.

 

And they still inked a billion dollar contract.The answer is because of programming. Fox and NBC have new sports ventures and need live programming. The WWE is a different venture in that it can place its shows on sports networks AND strictly entertainment networks. NASCAR had pretty much four competitors for its product -- and two of them, Turner and ESPN, were already soured on them -- and drew a 10-year deal. The WWE has more options for broadcasting, is live, and has a decades long history of being one of the most-watched cable TV programs. Aside from football on ESPN, Raw usually is the most watched cable show of the week. That's an historic track record of ratings that any advertiser would want. Even if the ratings aren't what they were in the 90s (or even down from a few years ago), it doesn't matter. They're usually number one every week and they can appear on either USA/Spike/NBC Sports/Fox Sports/etc. without anyone blinking an eye.

 

The WWE is the only national game in town for wrestling. It's an internationally known brand. It has changed its marketing and programming to avoid controversy. It broadcasts live and has a dedicated that has followed the product for decades. The fanbase is nationwide and not dependent upon one region. And it's a product that's built-in to have its audience "grow up" with the product -- like us, you get hooked as a kid and stay with it for years. The production values of the company are amazing.

 

They're going to sign a ridiculously huge deal.  It's a great television product.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reed

Reed

Posted
Posted

People are so desperate to believe that guys like Punk and Bryan can be huge drawing stars, even when the evidence directly contradicts it. 

 

Going down 100,000 buys domestic is a pretty big deal, no matter how you want to spin it. Vince would be a shitty businessman if he just ignored it.

 

And I'm not just blaming them, since Brock has shown he's not worth the cash either. But at least he could draw huge at one point and, theoretically, could again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ace

Ace

Posted
Posted

Big draws don't generally suddenly happen in the wrestling industry. They're built up. The complaint is that WWE is doing a pisspoor job at building them. Punk's and Bryan's momentum were both killed by Triple H inserting himself into the program.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reed

Reed

Posted
Posted

Big draws don't generally suddenly happen in the wrestling industry. They're built up. The complaint is that WWE is doing a pisspoor job at building them. Punk's and Bryan's momentum were both killed by Triple H inserting himself into the program.

 

I don't see how Triple H helped, but I really don't think he single-handedly cost the show over 100,000 buys just by announcing himself as the ref.

 

Punk has had like 452 chances to be prove he can draw big and has come up short every time. Bryan hasn't had as many, but he's been in the top spot long enough (four or five months) that if there was the potential for him to deliver there, we would have seen it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ace

Ace

Posted
Posted

Neither Punk nor Bryan have ever been pushed as the #1 guy in the company. Punk was blatantly pushed as #2 behind Cena, and Bryan wasn't even the most highly pushed program leading into the PPV (That would be Triple H vs Big Show). It makes less sense blaming them for "not drawing" than it does to actually blame the bookers who have added been half-assing their pushes like they have the botched face-turns they've tried this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spontaneous

Spontaneous

Posted
Posted

I'm fine with Goldberg vs. Ryback being a squash as long as Goldberg is the one jobbing.

Yeah, I cannot see any good coming from Goldberg beating Ryback. Just pay him whatever to make Ryback look good.

 

How long is Brock's contract for? It seems like he is not the big draw they hoped him to be. He's had good matches, but they don't seem to translate well to a larger audience.

 

I am curious about this though:

SummerSlam 2013: 296,000

SummerSlam 2012: 358,000

SummerSlam 2011: 296,000

SummerSlam 2010: 350,000

SummerSlam 2009: 369,000

SummerSlam 2008: 477,000

SummerSlam 2007: 537,000

SummerSlam 2006: 529,000

 

I still think it is partially because of poor booking. Bryan went from comedy tag team champ to #1 contender really quickly. Now it is all about Show/HHH/Orton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ace

Ace

Posted
Posted

Ya know, for all the shit that TNA gets (and rightfully so) for not making new stars, WWE's been doing a pretty piss-poor job in that area too.

 

Hell, in 2012, TNA actually did it better with Austin Aries.

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

Brian Fowler

Posted
Posted

 

I'm fine with Goldberg vs. Ryback being a squash as long as Goldberg is the one jobbing.

Yeah, I cannot see any good coming from Goldberg beating Ryback. Just pay him whatever to make Ryback look good.

 

How long is Brock's contract for? It seems like he is not the big draw they hoped him to be. He's had good matches, but they don't seem to translate well to a larger audience.

 

I am curious about this though:

SummerSlam 2013: 296,000

SummerSlam 2012: 358,000

SummerSlam 2011: 296,000

SummerSlam 2010: 350,000

SummerSlam 2009: 369,000

SummerSlam 2008: 477,000

SummerSlam 2007: 537,000

SummerSlam 2006: 529,000

 

I still think it is partially because of poor booking. Bryan went from comedy tag team champ to #1 contender really quickly. Now it is all about Show/HHH/Orton.

 

 

So it did nearly an identical number to 2011, after 2012 halted the downward slide.

 

Maybe it's just a case that they hadn't killed off Brock's drawing power yet, and he pushed the show up last year, but has fallen off this year?  Cause you take 2012 out of there, and 2013 manages to hold steady with 2011, after years of steady drops.

 

*shrug*

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...