Thursday, April 25, 2013

Preliminary Buyrate


> Apparently the preliminary buyrate for WM is around 1.2 million and well below the record-breaking number expected from Celebrity Tweeting (c) and Compelling Story Factor. 
>
> Thoughts?

Still nothing to sneeze at.  The record is 1.25 so it's not far off that.

169 comments:

  1. Anyone who is saying that is a disappointing number is really nitpicking. Million + at this day and age at the price of the PPV may not be a record , but is a good day at the office

    ReplyDelete
  2. Diddy = $1M BUYS

    ReplyDelete
  3. But I thought the build up was terrible and casual fans wouldn't pay to see a bunch of rematches? Somebody fucking lied to me!

    ReplyDelete
  4. And? Was their aim to finish third?

    ReplyDelete
  5. That is what I keep thinking. I get the feeling the sheets pay a source within the WWE to give them some scoops. And the source is probably hustling them and giving them some made up stories.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 1.2 was the pick that I wanted, but it was taken.
    That number will change before all is said and done, but still. Today I feel like, er, Caucasodomus.

    ReplyDelete
  7. HIGHEST GROSSING WRESTLMANIA EVER! What an abysmal failure.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't recall saying anything about it being an abysmal failure.


    And you of all people, a worldly gentleman who knows more than 95 percent of the population, that there's a difference between "gross" and "net." Or maybe you don't and I over-estimated your intelligence.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You sound bitter, man.
    It may not have set any records, but it's by no means anything near a failure.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Do they normally report the net?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Poking fun at them means I'm bitter? Hardly.


    Also, HIGHEST GROSSING WRESTLEMANIA is setting WWE's stock price ablaze.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Not so dynamic Dave be grasping at straws in this thread.

    ReplyDelete
  13. THREADJACK

    Ryder is tweeting his current won-loss record (7-3) since his little appearance change. How long before this is nixed since wins and losses don't matter

    ReplyDelete
  14. Last year it was $30 million.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I wish Dave and mar solo would.

    ReplyDelete
  16. So how much profit do they need for you to stfu?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Why would I do that when I can have fun pointing out the idiocy of parading around a press release like it's meaningful?

    ReplyDelete
  18. If they want to make some real money for Summerslam here's what they should do:

    Bring in Ole Anderson and have him beat Cena the Raw after Extreme Rules. Keep the strap on him throughout the Summer. Punk will come back at Payback in Chicago to shock Ole and that sets up the feud for Summerslam. Ole can beat someone like R Truth at Money in the Bank to keep the belt on him.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I feel sorry for your mother.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Don't be a menace Dougie..

    ReplyDelete
  21. HIGHEST GROSSING WRESTLEMANIA TITILLATES INTERNET FANS

    WWE press release excites WWE Universe

    STAMFORD - WWE (R) (NYSE: WWE) today announced that they are pleased that Internet fans reacted positively to a press release sent out announcing that WrestleMania 29, held Sunday, April 7 at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, grossed an excess of $72 million, the highest grossing event in WWE history.

    Even though these press releases are designed to grab headlines and should not be viewed as anything but self-congratulatory back-patting, WWE is still proud that its fans are swallowing the bait.

    "The WWE Universe is the backbone of our product," said WWE Chairman Vince McMahon. "Any time we can get a few of our suckers to sit around and pretend like a press release is meaningful, we view it as a win. We even got these dupes to spend $70 on matches they already saw."



    McMahon says WWE offices will continue pumping out press releases Touting (c) its successes, such as ratings compared to "To Catch A Predator" reruns, the WNBA Draft and "Diners, Drive-Ins & Dives."


    -30-

    ReplyDelete
  22. Diners, Drive-Ins & Dives! Love that show!

    ReplyDelete
  23. It really depends on how the accountants work. It could be a couple of different things.

    A. All things Wrestlemania are under the same books. This includes PPV Revenue and the Gate/merch/Access/HoF etc, plus the cost to rent the venue and the cost to pay the wrestlers.

    B. The TV PPV revenue is a separate entity. All payouts to wrestlers and the cost of the event are paid for by the "Gate" and the TShirt sales, concessions. Whatever deal they have set up.


    72 Million could very well be profit. The Cable companies will take a cut, but we don't know how many people bought the HD.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Made $72 million, paid $72,000,001 in salaries/ads/etc... FAIL. No matter what record you set.

    (Yes, I'm 100% sure that WM made pretty good profit also, but this "highest gross ever" means JACK and SHIT. "Highest net ever" would be infinitely more impressive.)

    ReplyDelete
  25. Naw, but he could have a beard-off with Bryan and that would be cool.
    Or he could reinvent himself as Olé Anderson and manage those little Puerto Rican weiner kids.

    ReplyDelete
  26. That's actually more impressive considering the underwhelming build. WrestleMania sells itself, but you know come next February and March, we're gonna play the same IWC "gonna be below a million and Vince is gonna go nuts" dance.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I've sworn off watching that show past 10pm; if it's one of those all-BBQ episodes, my stomach starts growling like I've trekked to Mount Doom for days without food.

    ReplyDelete
  28. He shouldn't be proud. Dolph and Ryback are living proof that you get ahead with a LOSING record.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Look at the source - it's Variety. The entertainment industry only cares about gross revenues, not profits.

    ReplyDelete
  30. This thread is so bizarre.

    You have folks celebrating a high buyrate and you have other folks bemoaning it and looking for reasons why it's high. I don't get it.

    I like the business side of things for all sports and entertainment because I'm a stats geek and an accountant, it's in my nature. However, I don't give two fucks whether WWE blows away records or not, they're just numbers to ponder and review.

    Not one person here, unless you're a stockholder with a significant amount of shares, has any stake in the WWE. So, grow up people.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The fans who are bemoaning WWE's creative direction were hoping for a low buyrate, since it could herald a change in booking towards a Cena heel turn, or less reliance on older stars, pushing new stars, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  32. That's the thing, even a bad buyrate doesn't guarantee anything. Last year Vince said in a stockholders meeting that this time next year, things would be on the up and up. What did he do? Sign Brock to a ridiculous contract with barely any appearances, increase Raw to 3 hours, push the p/timers more in key parts of the card, etc. You have no way in knowing what's going to happen so arguing (and not discussing) buyrates is beyond dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I could go for some BBQ about now..

    ReplyDelete
  34. I'm predicting they jack up the price by $5 every year until they stop hitting the 1.1-1.23M buys range. They'll wanto to see what the general public's breaking point is. In 10 years, WM will be $100 and we'll pine for the days "when WM was $75 and gas was $1.50/L".

    ReplyDelete
  35. Which means Super Cena all year!

    ReplyDelete
  36. I agree 100%- we shouldn't care. But so often when people critique the product, they use ratings/buyrates to back up their points. I'm so sick of the "Vince is a millionaire who should be a billionaire" crowd that I take pleasure in news like this.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I'm cutting/pasting one of my other responses:

    "I agree 100%- we shouldn't care. But so often when people critique the product, they use ratings/buyrates to back up their points. I'm so sick of the "Vince is a millionaire who should be a billionaire" crowd that I take pleasure in news like this."

    ReplyDelete
  38. No way. They should want to increase numbers in order to see if maybe they can hook a small percentage of casuals into the show. The more people, the better the percentages.

    ReplyDelete
  39. That's not the real number. Wait until the earnings report comes out. WWE has taken a page out of boxing's book to announce a bigger number to get press and then bury the real number when it comes out.

    Boxing's been doing this for years and WWE started doing this with WrestleMania last year. They get huge pub from Variety and then no one (other than wrestling pubs) report on the real number.

    It will end up closer to a 1.0 million. Still a huge number but it's not what they're claiming today.

    ReplyDelete
  40. There's a specific fan (smark) that I hate: the one that hates the product, has their own ideas and (this is the important part) thinks the company IS SO FUCKING STUPID for not going in that direction.

    ReplyDelete
  41. So you're saying people shouldn't critique the product or just critique the product using ratings and buyrates?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Totally. I doubt one murky WrestleMania buyrate would impact the WWEs business model that much anyway, they have a lot of ways to spin it.

    As far as the number, it's pretty impressive actually. I wouldn't be surprised to see it go down, but it'll almost certainly hang above a million buys. I'll be interested to see how much a difference they new ways or ordering domestically impacted the number here and to seeing the domestic and international breakdown. I'm wondering if the numbers came down similarly or if it was weighted towards one or the other.

    One thing that would be interesting to know is what % of the people that ordered this year, also ordered last year (or the year before). I think it'd be helpful as far as identifying if WrestleMania buys are a good general gauge for overall interest in the company or not -- if there is a big chunk of people that just buy it every year no matter what.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Well, I'll agree with the first part, hating the product and watching is silly. Having your own ideas and sometimes the company doing stupid things and dicussing other booking directions is what all fans do about all forms of entertainment.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I know I only predicted 1.0M, but I stated over and over that I would be shocked if the show did below 1.0M.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Yeah, you gotta wonder what the breaking point is or if there is one. A lot of research into PPV ordering patterns shows that the nature of purchases are impulsive and that price adjustments (either higher or lower) rarely figure into the equation. I imagine part of that is because it's sort of like a credit card using most ordering methods -- you're not on the hook to pay for it until you get your next bill.

    I did read a few articles that they pretty much universally increased the price this year in international markets too, so I imagine those were probably softer this year but they made up the difference in revenue with the increase.

    ReplyDelete
  46. How were they proven wrong on Rock leaving without giving notice? Did someone come out and say they had no plans for him after Wrestlermania?

    ReplyDelete
  47. I'm saying you can't have it both ways. You can't critique the product and point at the low ratings/buyrates and go "see? see? the product fucking sucks!" and then ignore news like this.
    I wish we all could just watch the show pretend that ratings/buyrates don't exist. Or talk about Bret Hart and not bring up how poor a draw he was. But I think we take our lead from the guys in the business. And get Ric Flair talking about Bret Hart and one of the first things he'll bring up (if not the first) is how shitty a draw Bret was, and therefore he should be dismissed.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Good points. I would like to keep the business discussions separate from the booking discussions. 1997 was a banner year for WWF creatively and for most of that year, they weren't doing so well...

    ReplyDelete
  49. Absolutely, actually the WWE has been doing it for a long time, back to the early 1990s even. They almost always announce high and do all of their press on the front end.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I only started throwing out the figures because there were a few "hahahaha! you doubters were proven WRONG!" posts. I only pointed out that, despite a record gross (which means nothing right now), the bottles aren't popping in Stamford.


    If stockholders were as overjoyed as Christopher Hirsch seems to be, then the stock price would've done more than essentially trade flat after their earth-shattering press release.


    Also, while I would like to see some change in direction (namely just feuds that make sense), I'm not deluded enough to think missing the mark on a record buyrate is going to change that. I'm more interested in pointing and laughing at their dumb social media strategy.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Scream09_HartKillerApril 25, 2013 at 3:06 PM

    Transformers makes millions - there's nothing of substance there, it's just flashy garbage that the masses eat up. Wrestlemania is Transformers.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Scream09_HartKillerApril 25, 2013 at 3:08 PM

    I mostly agree, but Wrestlemania didn't excite me and if the numbers suggested it didn't excite a lot of people than maybe next year they try something different that would excite me. In that regard, I'm actively cheering for the business to go to shit with John Cena on top so maybe someday he won't be.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Funny. I get four downvotes for pointing out that WWE's press release means garbage to Wall Street. Numbers are only meaningful when they fit the argument i guess.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Yeah, this is an important distinction.



    Using one number to justify anything for or against the direction of the company is silly to begin with, even if the number if WM. It's one single point of data (and typically the high point of the year) and doesn't represent the "state" of the company.



    Believe it or not, it is fun for some of us to just to mess with the numbers regardless of our feelings on the direction of the product.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Who up-votes Dougie? Even when he's right (a broken clock blah, blah), you are just encouraging someone who is here solely to piss people off. Why treat 1/100 of his comments as valid when the other 99 are exclusively trolling. Are you hoping that by utilizing positive reinforcement he'll give up his trolling ways? So weird.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Yeah I bet that is pretty damn close to where the actual number will end up. I thought it would slip a little under a million this year (962k is what I picked) but I guess not!


    Now I'm wondering what kind of "shockingly low" number the Observer was looking at before.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Christopher HirschApril 25, 2013 at 3:17 PM

    I just take joy in you pretending to be a fan while hating on every single thing you possibly can.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Yes, and it's a baffling stance. Bret Hart is my favorite wrestler ever, not because he sold or didn't sell tickets, but because of what he did in the ring. I love the Rock because I love his promos and matches, not because WrestleMania drew X number of buys.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Christopher HirschApril 25, 2013 at 3:18 PM

    Dynamic dave, come on down!

    ReplyDelete
  60. You're basing an assumption on conjecture. The only hard figure we have is $72 million and the $68 million (or whatever) for last year's Mania. Unless they paid Brock Lesnar $5 million for this one match, how would that not be a more profitable show?

    ReplyDelete
  61. You're almost as terrible. You're celebratings as if you just got a check for $72 million.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Yeah, I think the interests of a fan and an interest in the numbers are and should be two separate things. Maybe Bret Hart wasn't the highest drawing guy ever, but that shouldn't impact his stature in the eyes of fans who enjoyed his work or be used as ammunition to deride him for fans who didn't.

    ReplyDelete
  63. You're kidding right? For months the usual cranks were saying how nobody (NOBODY!) was going to buy this show. This makes them look like fools. Yet they're still trying to say they were right.

    Just more evidence that the people here that think they represent the audience, absolutely do not.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Bet you've never once been invited to a party.

    ReplyDelete
  65. I'm not disagreeing with your argument, and I'm not one of the downvoters.
    You're absolutely right that it's the net that matters, and not the gross.
    We can't tell yet just how much of a success, OR a failure this is, and you seem extemely eager to jump on it as a failure. Unless their overhead is way out of proportion this year as compared to last year, then it will probably settle at a respectable level.

    ReplyDelete
  66. He makes what I think are valid points more often than he is given credit for, and sometimes he makes me laugh when he is just trolling.
    So that's why I upvote him, sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Sure and the usual suspects (a-hem) are always here claiming how great the show is even when the numbers are going in the other direction. This is why I find it juvenile to celebrate OR critique the number in either direction.

    The WWE itself disputes your point of who the audience is and isn't. I'm pretty sure I've linked you to their website before...

    ReplyDelete
  68. I admit, I was a bit happy to see the number, but only because I'm tired of a few people here and elsewhere piling on Rock and saying he's not a draw anymore while ignoring any numbers to the contrary.


    But yeah, ultimately who cares other than WWE? I'm certainly not happy I'm stuck with John Cena vs. Heel Ryback.

    ReplyDelete
  69. And there he is, kids, as if to prove my point. This is the kind of man you want to applaud. A guy who gets off on anonymously antagonizing people online.



    Think about that. For anyone who isn't a troll, imagine the kind of person who actually spends any of their time getting off that. Guaranteed it's considered a documented psychological disorder inside of 15 years. So give him an up-vote.

    ReplyDelete
  70. There are weirder things to get off on. Didn't the Hulkster once cut a promo explaining how wrestling Hercules really turned him on, brother?

    ReplyDelete
  71. You're picking the outlier in this case. Dougie gets bashed and down voted more than anyone in this blog. Sure, he wears that like a badge of honor, but it's still so.

    ReplyDelete
  72. The Rock may still be a draw if these numbers hold up, but we can agree that it's time for him to call it a career.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Exactly what I was going to post elsewhere. I'm also rooting against them until things change.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Wrestlemania has kind of come full circle. It was pitched as a "showcase of WWF and wrestling" then became the End of the Road of sorts for year long/major storylines. Now its back to being more of a showcase of the product and celebration of wrestling.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I realize you're joking, but that's actually less weird, because homosexuality or bisexuality is a perfectly fine explanation. Getting off on anonymously angering strangers is far weirder.

    ReplyDelete
  76. All the more reason why it's bizarre for him to ever receive up-votes. What does it take for one to completely discredit himself, and render any comment of theirs automatically invalid? If someone makes one reasonable comment out of ten, and the other nine are explicitly trolling, why give any credence to the one?

    Anyway, as they say in talk radio, I'll "hang up and listen to your response". I think I've analyzed this subject more than enough for a lifetime.

    ReplyDelete
  77. As I recall, he "left without telling wwe, no one knows why" was the story according to Meltzer. THE INTERNET (including some folks on this here blog) say its because he's unhappy about jobbing, doesn't want to get laid out by Brock, doesn't want to be booed, and now Rocks a dick. It then turns out he's LEGIT injured, which is why he left. So in conclusion, Meltzer was wrong because none of the reasons THE INTERNET made up for Rock being gone were true. See how that works?

    ReplyDelete
  78. I don't care about the number at all. I only care that it makes the know-it-alls that said nobody was going to pay for it look like fools. I didn't pay for it. I haven't seen it. I probably won't. But it just thrills me when 'nobody wants to see this' gets knocked right on its arse.

    ReplyDelete
  79. I notice you never disputed my assertion that you've never been invited to a party.

    ReplyDelete
  80. As Rock said in his interview with Rosenberg, "Where the FUCK do they come up with this shit?"

    ReplyDelete
  81. Teach me how to Dougie.

    ReplyDelete
  82. I do not agree. I enjoy his promos more than anyone on the roster short of Punk.


    And I still want to see him wrestle a younger guy like Ziggler or Bryan.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Well sure, but I'd say getting off on a guy claiming to be a Greek god putting you in a full nelson and trying to take your spot is kind of weird.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Have you seen Rock's interview with Rosenberg?

    ReplyDelete
  85. I should clarify. There's nothing wrong with thinking the company is doing something wrong and having your own ideas on what they should do. I do this all the time, and most of us here do as well. But it's the people that act like their ideas would make the WWE more money (the entire point of the wrestling business) and therefore Vince/Steph/HHH/etc are morons for doing things their way.
    You can argue that your idea is better from an entertainment standpoint. I hate the guys who argue from a *business* standpoint and act like it's a no-brainer that their ideas would make more money than the ones currently used. The people who think the product should be catered exclusively to them (males aged 18+), ignoring the millions of children and women that are also fans.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Bob Ryder has started wrestling? TNA pay must be even worse than I thought!

    ReplyDelete
  87. Christopher HirschApril 25, 2013 at 5:02 PM

    I'm a fan of the company and like to see them do well, sue me.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Christopher HirschApril 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM

    Do you like sports? When your favorite team does well, are you happy?

    ReplyDelete
  89. In the great words of Comic Book Man:

    Dumbest.Analogy.Ever.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Christopher HirschApril 25, 2013 at 5:08 PM

    Well flair4dagold said so, he's the authority I guess. I'll stop being happy. I'll just wish for the business to be how it was in 97, that's the ticket!

    ReplyDelete
  91. WWE aspires to be mindless entertainment as a business decision. If they make people think too hard or inspire too much devotion, then they will be turning people off to the product.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Authority on what? You made a terrible analogy. You compared the WWE - the company - to an individual sports team. The proper comparison is WWE to the NFL or the NHL or the NBA...see how that works? And I love sports and I'm very happy when my teams WIN, but I don't give a fuck about their financial state or the financial state of any league.

    ReplyDelete
  93. i was close... im hoping it finals out in the 1.1 range.

    ill be happy if it does. even though itll never be 1.1 on the nose.

    i wont be as insufferable.

    yall gotta understand that being in the middle east, i dont have yall luxuries. all i have is this blog/facebook/skype to connect to the outside world.

    this is my primary form of entertainment.

    i apologize, if im getting on peoples nerves. im goin on vacation pretty soon back to the states so itll be a break from me.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Yeah, it's only greatest television wrestling has ever produced, fuck that noise.

    ReplyDelete
  95. dougie did a face turn...


    you didnt know?

    ReplyDelete
  96. There's a reason Big Bang Theory/2 and half Men get like 5 times the viewers of 30 Rock/Arrested Development

    ReplyDelete
  97. I don't know where you fall in the debate, but I often compare WWE to a tv show. I used to love The Office, then it started to suck IMO so I stopped watching it. I use this when the argument of "if you hate it why do you watch it" comes up. The counter-argument is often to compare it to supporting a sports team, and that usually gets a lot of support on this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Comparisons to a sports team makes no sense to me. Comparing specific wrestlers to other athletes work, but you have to judge Raw as a tv show.

    ReplyDelete
  99. TV show comparison is my go-to as well.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Yes sir, agreed.

    ReplyDelete
  101. They always like to compare themselves to other tv shows when it suits them. But judging a show on ratings(or buyrates for a ppv) rather than entertainment is mind numbing.

    ReplyDelete
  102. And the concept of celebrating with such fervor is hilariously sad to me.

    ReplyDelete
  103. I have a stake. I wanna win that damn Buy-rate prediction poll! C'mon 1.28!

    ReplyDelete
  104. "I don't give a fuck about their financial state or the financial state of any league"
    I don't know, most fans *do* care about their teams' financial state, cause if they get in trouble they may move.
    I form an emotional attachment to a lot of the wrestlers that work for WWE. Yeah it's stupid (I don't *really* know them), but it's tough watching them in out of character interviews (or in character stuff like the Youtube shows) and not root for them to succeed. So if the company makes more money I figure (maybe naively) the guys and girls I like will make more too.

    ReplyDelete
  105. I think it has to do with throwing it in the face of "smarks" or whoever doesn't like the shows. But guess what? Raw will still be terrible next week. And the week after that.


    Enjoy that buyrate and the worst television show in the history of the medium.

    ReplyDelete
  106. I really think most of the "hahaha YES!" reactions are, like Dougie and CHirsch have said, in response to the people who smugly predicted a low number cause "no one would pay for this shit".

    ReplyDelete
  107. Most teams move because greedy owners want the city to give them huge tax breaks and free stadiums and there's always a sucker city willing to do so. The financial state of the league is more important since there's usually revenue sharing of some kind, hence why that analogy works better than an individual team although not as well as a TV show.


    Fans get to wrapped up over what players make and what they get paid when really, even if they're season ticket holders, in the grand scheme of things, they don't contribute that much.

    ReplyDelete
  108. I'm not naive to that, specially from Dougie. He loves to get folks riled up, it's his gimmick. However, I don't recall either one really selling the fact that there would be huge buys before the show. It's a lot easier playing monday morning QB.

    ReplyDelete
  109. I take it on a case by case basis. I don't look at who posted the comment but rather what the comment said.


    The only time I've commented Dougie was on the comic post. It was a legit response so I didn't thumbs down him.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Wrestling is such a unique beast, though. You're right in that we pay too much attention to the financials, but (as I mentioned in another post) we really do take our cue from the people in the business.
    It's *all* about making money. Sure you can say the same thing about movies/tv, but at least having a critically acclaimed film that wins oscars has shown to produce a box office bump. Wrestling doesn't have that. Guys like Meltzer (and Scott to a lesser extent) have tried to create it, but ultimately it doesn't mean shit what won "MOTY" in the Observer.
    I think fans in sports caring about salaries and other money matters is more about jealously and frustration (in regards to high ticket prices). In wrestling it's the way we've been taught to value individual wrestlers *and* companies.
    I don't know if I've made the point I'm trying to make. I feel like its in my head but I just can't get it out artfully.

    ReplyDelete
  111. I understand what you're saying and don't misunderstand me, I love talking the business side of things in pro wrestling. I also can separate wrestlers into "best draw", "best technician", "best promo", etc. For me though, even when I don't like the overall direction of the company (or vice versa), I separate that from the financial side because many times, they don't jive with each other.

    ReplyDelete
  112. Old people only watch CBS?

    ReplyDelete
  113. 1.2 is too vague. Let's add a 0.05 at the end of that number and we can bask in my Dagodamus prediction skills!

    ReplyDelete
  114. You're not causing me any bother.

    ReplyDelete
  115. What a mark.

    ReplyDelete
  116. well, but we would know the things that would NOT be happening.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Things I didn't see mentioned here (mind you I quickly browsed through the thread):


    Availability.


    For the first time in history, you could order Wrestlemania from your smartphone, tablet, and XBox 360. That's huge.

    ReplyDelete
  118. I don't give a f... if the WWE makes more money or less. I want to see shows that entertain me.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Meh, we all go through phases.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Yeah, but do the people who get refunds because the stream fucked up count? Even though I doubt it was a significant enough number to make a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  121. It's what they leave on in the background in nursing homes. That has to count for at least 2-3 million viewers.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Does Cena vs Taker beat the record next year?

    ReplyDelete
  123. cabspaintedyellowApril 25, 2013 at 7:42 PM

    Wrestlemania: Celebrating Wrestling By Leaving Dudes Off the Show since 2003

    ReplyDelete
  124. cabspaintedyellowApril 25, 2013 at 7:46 PM

    I think more of us are bemoaning it because we had a dog in this fight. Where's nwa88 with the numbers?

    ReplyDelete
  125. You think a bad buyrate would reduce Cena's role? No.

    ReplyDelete
  126. "Where the fuck does this shit come from?"

    ReplyDelete
  127. Since a vast majority here picked the butyrate to easily eclipse 1M I have no clue who you are pounding your chest at.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Don't hate because you didn't have the foresight nor foreskin to guess 1.25 like I did.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Fuck the rock??? I think not my friends, he's the biggest draw of all time. I bought the show to see punk vs taker so I hope those guys get a nice slice of that 72 mil. But I'm glad the rock showed he still sells ppvs

    ReplyDelete
  130. dagodamus?!?!


    Im so over.

    ReplyDelete
  131. i dont think so but ill be in attendance and dvr-ing the PPV


    WOOOOO!!!

    ReplyDelete
  132. And John Cena is Shia LeBoef-whateverthefuckhisnameis.

    ReplyDelete
  133. It's still a "buy", even if the buy is refunded. The refund is recorded separately as an expense.

    ReplyDelete
  134. The hell? Dubai has per capita luxury than anywhere else on the planet!

    ReplyDelete
  135. im not there bro...

    ReplyDelete
  136. The aim was to make money, brother.

    ReplyDelete
  137. That's what I figured.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Exactly, this makes a lot of sense to me too. You like certain wrestlers and maybe you like the product that a particular organization is giving you at the time -- but blind allegiance or hate for the organization itself seems really odd to me.

    Having said that -- wrestling fans acting that way are nothing new, you saw it on RSPW way back in the old days (especially the posters posting from AOL) with people taking great joy or feeling complete frustration for one organization outperforming the other and being total homers (or stans as the kids call it these days). I remember people used to start fake rating threads during the big Monday Night Wars and post fake ratings, saying Raw ended Nitro's streak and then Nitro ended Raw's streak, usually followed by lots of explanation points.

    The comparison to sports is kind of interesting though, because I totally don't get the whole 'support the team, not the players' thing. I view them like TV shows too really



    I'm not really a sports guy and the only sport I follow really closely is professional basketball, but to me it's sort of the same thing -- I watch the particular teams I like, that have the kind of makeup and play the kind of game I enjoy.



    When that team stops producing the kind of style I like or gets a bunch of new players, I move on. I don't keep watching because it's "my city" or my favorite city. That upsets some people and you get called a 'bandwagoner' or whatever, but I just come back to Jerry Seinfeld and his whole bit about sports and homerism -- how you're basically cheering to see the clothes of favorite town's team, beat the clothes of the other town's team. I'd rather always be enjoying whatever I'm watching, and I don't feel any special affinity for a particular city.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Well, just saying that you're in the Middle East doesn't imply a lack of luxury anymore than being in America implies having it.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Agree 100%. There is very little correlation in entertainment it seems between popularity and quality and it's important to separate it.

    For me, WrestleMania 29 was a pretty mediocre show that seems to have done a great number.

    ReplyDelete
  141. luxuries are subjective.


    Your thought of luxuries and mine greatly differ im sure.


    Because you can take a bath.
    I cant.


    You can goto McDonalds
    I cant.


    You can drive your car (if you have one)
    I cant.


    You can goto an ATM and pull out money.
    I cant.


    Are you following me?

    ReplyDelete
  142. It's too early to call as they'd say in the election season. We'll probably get a few more preliminary numbers that are closer to the real thing, but we're going to be waiting until the fall for the final number.


    Part of the issue is that the preliminary numbers are not like counted votes -- the national buys are only estimates in the early going, because they are calculated as a ratio of buys to customers by each market and then they extrapolate that number to the nationwide PPV population. So if a hot WWE market comes in first (say the biggest cable company in New York City), the number will be skewed high right off the bat. The opposite is true too -- if you get a softer market in first, it will skew the number low. That's why Meltzer was saying it'd be a very low number at first, because the markets that came in first were not the hottest of areas. Eventually all the largest markets come in and the number stabilizes and then smaller markets trickle in, but don't change the average much. They eventually tally all of the buys up and we get the final number.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Except for the McDonalds part

    ReplyDelete
  144. Well whether he is legit injured isn't really the whole story. Hasn't it been reported for a while that he was planning on doing another program for next year's Wrestlania?

    And if that was the plan and he was scheduled for the next night's Raw, injured or not, still kind of a dickish move to leave town and not tell WWE anything. I'm not saying he should have gone to Raw injured but he could have at least talked to someone.

    I'm also not saying any of this is fact. I'm just saying Rock being legit injured doesn't necessarily means Meltzer info was wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  145. Yes. I'm just saying that I don't know you or what you are doing. All I had to go off was you saying that you were the Middle East, and that in itself doesn't tell me of your lack of luxury.


    Likewise, if I were in the middle of Alaska, I may not be able to do any of those things you accused me of being able to do.


    Are you following me?

    ReplyDelete
  146. Thank your for that. Watched the interview. I take back what I said. Rock is OK in my book.

    ReplyDelete
  147. If the lesser PPVs start doing really hard numbers, you might see that.

    ReplyDelete
  148. I'm a fan of the rock and I like seeing that he still moves the needle. I thought the build sucked and the main event wasn't as good as last years but I like seeing rock pop a buy rate. Even if mania did like 700k buys it wouldn't have made any kind of change so its not like a low buy rate would achieve anything for a fan.

    ReplyDelete
  149. You haven't seen/won't watch wrestlemania???

    ReplyDelete
  150. Hate every single thing I possibly can? Are you capable of making an argument that doesn't involve creating arguments I never made?

    ReplyDelete
  151. Again, you have to make something up that I've never said. It's really sad. If Dougie wasn't busy feeling bad for my mother I'd ask him to feel sorry for you.

    ReplyDelete
  152. Wait, by smugly predicting a low number do you mean "the great majority picking over 1 million?" Because that's not a low number and it's probably close to what the final tally will be.

    ReplyDelete
  153. If anyone thought The Rock wasn't a draw they are as dumb as anyone who celebrates press releases.

    ReplyDelete
  154. so are you. when you are talking about booking a venue, advertising costs, security costs, travel (definitely more expensive than last year), cost of pyro and misc. decorations, talent, and a million other expenses (even gas for the trucks to carry equipment), an increased cost of 5 million is very possible, particularly with the known higher talent cost. so saying it was or wasn't more profitable is an assumption or conjecture on both sides. We simply don't know the expense side of the issue, although my gut feeling says that costs very easily may have been up 5 million. If I had to guess, i would say this year's show was minimally more profitable, maybe in the six figures more, but not seven figures. And for that WWE has to decide if the investment was worth it. Did the card irritate others backstage? Did it hamper future booking? Time will tell

    ReplyDelete
  155. it is also important to note that each year the number of homes worldwide that can purchase the show increases, thus making it easier to place high on the list of total buys.

    ReplyDelete
  156. yes WM is a self-sustaining enterprise, which makes you wonder if it is worth it to keep bringing in old talent that is costly and stunts the growth possibilities of year around performers. Second, the the number of buys usually drops from the initial announcement, so I don't foresee any records, though it certainly was not the disaster that some said it would be or even hoped it would be. Fourth, as I mentioned elsewhere, if the number of households who can purchase the show keeps growing worldwide each year, the number of buys will continue to rise in raw numbers. Simply more opportunities.

    ReplyDelete
  157. you are too kind with 1 out of 10. More like 1 out of 20. He's an intelligent guy. You can tell. He simply wants to piss people off and work his gimmick. He's far from alone though. As long as I've been on the internet, there are those that get some weird pleasure out of trying to troll others. Not sure it is much different than the bully in school that calls people names or knocks books out of your hand from behind. Just pathetic either way.

    ReplyDelete
  158. you just described a lot of people in a lot of fields. Sports fans spend an inordinate amount of time talking to each other or a talking head about knowing better than the GM and the coach about how to win. People spend an inordinate amount of time tossing out their plans to improve the economy, save the middle east, end dependence on foreign oil, bring back jobs, cure the gay, etc. I can't speak for other nations (other than English soccer fans, who also do the same thing), but Americans display a shocking arrogance about their ability to solve problems experts can't, and make more money than those who run businesses, and win more games than the experts in that field. Heck, just go to the news about George Soros investing in JC Penney or Johnson getting fired as CEO recently and see how many people posted to tell JCP how to bring the company back from the brink. We are all self-declared experts. I do it as well. I think it is human nature, so I don't really criticize the concept of "everyman experts" but rather debate their points as my own "everyman expert."

    ReplyDelete
  159. um you would celebrate the wrestler who won the match. Being excited about this buyrate would be like being a fan of the Raiders last year and celebrating that the NFL put on a great superbowl with high ratings. Celebrate the performer/performers, not the league.

    ReplyDelete
  160. I'm actually ok with either of those.

    ReplyDelete
  161. And why Community languishes despite it being amazeballs

    ReplyDelete