Skip to main content

The Deal Is Done!

...and the stock is plunging as a result.  WWE didn't actually announce the real number, merely that all the TV deals put together total $200 million, which puts the value of the new deal around $160 million, or even lower than I guessed.  It's an increase, but nowhere near the double or even triple they were promising for months.  So, uh, not good.  Hopefully they don't start purging the roster now.  

Comments

  1. Now that's what I call a sticky situation!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was happy about all of this until I read the last line. I hate to see the workers suffer, especially those on the bottom of the totem pole, just because the company makes bad decisions and inflate expectations. But that's stupid Capitalism for you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Any news about if SD and RAW will be uploaded immediately to the network?


    Also, WWE seems to be overestimating a lot of their projects. First the WWE Network subscriber number now this.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Which talent is going to take the blame for this? WWE never admits fault and/or failure on a corporate level. My guess is there top 2 reasons will be "Not enough Big Show" and "that wuss who decided to go home instead of taking painkillers and jobbing to HHH."

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh, there's gonna be some firings. Hopefully it's just in the corporate end and not on the end talent end, but history says which group is probably gonna get the worst of it when they need to cut costs fast.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Stranger in the AlpsMay 15, 2014 at 6:36 PM

    I know nothing about the stock market, so I don't quite understand the impact on overall business. What I do know is that a company that raises expectations to a high level, only to have real numbers fall short of that level, need to reconsider the employment of the moron who they hired to set those expectations.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No, they're being really evasive about everything. No real numbers, no announcement of Smackdown moving or staying on Fridays, no update on the digital distribution agreements.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Makes you wonder why they even made the announcement in the first place. I'm sure they are high-fiving in the TNA locker room, though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I haven't seen ANY numbers released yet and i've checked proper sources like Deadline and Variety.


    Can i get a link?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Falling short OVER and OVER again. Someone will end up canned out of this.

    ReplyDelete
  11. It's behind the paywall on the Observer site.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yeah, a > 50% in one of their biggest revenue streams is a tragedy for everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Pretty sure it'd be hard to fire Vince, all in all.

    This is business as usual. Budgets and projections are never slashed because it shows weakness in the market and a lack of confidence in your product. Some cost-cutting measures are taken, maybe a head rolls and life carries on as usual a week later.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yes, because they were basing the loss of PPV revenues on the expectation that they'd make the money back on the TV deal. It was supposed to shift the dynamic of the business, and now it's not happening. This is very, very bad for them.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Stranger in the AlpsMay 15, 2014 at 6:40 PM

    I only imagine Vince in a board room looking over a stat sheet handed to him and saying "Are you sure? Are you positive?".

    ReplyDelete
  16. If a guy is not on TV/house shows for 1-2 years like Ezekiel Jackson, just get rid of those people and save some money.

    ReplyDelete
  17. And as noted, they didn't actually release numbers. They released a press release noting the total value of the US, UK and Thailand deals was $200 million, which works out to approximately $160M for the US deal according to Dave.

    ReplyDelete
  18. They've actually been incredibly generous with guys like Tatsu and JTG, letting their contracts roll over for years without cutting them. It's kind of out of character for them.

    ReplyDelete
  19. We appreciate you posting the info, Scott. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  20. So let me get this straight: if a company makes bad decisions (however, they think it would benefit them) and loses money because of them, they should keep every worker so no one gets fired/pinkslipped? If the wwe did that, they should keep the xfl, wbf, and wcw all running?

    ReplyDelete
  21. In fact, the press release completely downplays the TV deal, instead pushing that if they hit 1.5 million subscribers for the Network, they'll break even, and if they get 2.5 million they'll make $100 million in profits by the end of 2015. So they're REALLY trying to bury this number.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Are they really that embarrassed by not getting at least double?

    ReplyDelete
  23. I thought 1,000,000 was the break even point

    ReplyDelete
  24. Yes.
    Even Meltzer was saying that getting double would still probably cause the stock to drop

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yes, because they killed the PPV business on the expectation that the TV business would make up the lost money.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I'm not just sure. I'm HIV-Positive!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Apparently plans have changed there, too.

    ReplyDelete
  28. One thing I miss from 411 was JP Prag breaking down numbers like this

    ReplyDelete
  29. Name-calling, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  30. I wonder if they got offers from any other networks and NBC Universal matched it.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Mookie should have something up soon and I'll link it when he does.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Sheesh. They must've really banked on this, or told all their investors that they'd get more.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Ouch. So they have just over 1/3 of their required subscribers to break even AND they have the renewal coming up in a couple months where people will probably drop. Do I smell a price increase?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Here is another update from Meltzer:

    "The stock at 6:50 p.m. Eastern time, less than two hours after the close of the market, was down to $15.31 per share.

    The company in theory dropped 23 percent in value since the NBCU deal was announced."

    ReplyDelete
  35. If they needed a 100% increase, then yeah, it's not great at all.

    ReplyDelete
  36. When they reported their first quarter results recently, they gave a $40.6 million figure for their tv rights, presumably that's a worldwide figure.



    So basically they barely even got a raise from NBC. Oh and Thailand? What a random tv deal to throw in there, what about the Canadian rights?


    With Sportsnet getting the NHL and planning near blanket coverage in addition to still having MLB and some NBA coverage i wonder if WWE is safe even on Sportsnet 360. With TSN expanding to a comical 5 networks this fall, would they be interested in WWE again? With 5 channels they can actually guarantee airing Raw live this time around and they'll be desperate to add some guarantee ratings anchors.

    ReplyDelete
  37. No I mean CM Punk will get blamed.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Vince all but guaranteed a doubling of their fees or he'd let the investor who posed the question put him in a "hammerlock".

    ReplyDelete
  39. That's exactly what happened. No hard info, but Meltzer kind of hinted that Fox Sports made an offer and NBCU matched it.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Absolutely, you won't see this stuff anywhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  41. NBCU is probably glad then that Fox Sports didn't offer that much.

    ReplyDelete
  42. The 1.5 million is the number to break even with the COMPLETE 100% collapse of the PPV market.


    That collapse IS coming, but it's not here yet so they have some time. 400K US Mania buys attests to that.

    ReplyDelete
  43. When it was the Score WWE owned a not-insignificant portion of the station, but I don't know if Rogers bought them out of it when it changed hands.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Tomorrow could be a bloodbath.

    ReplyDelete
  45. WWE could easily cut 25-30 WWE/NXT guys and no one would notice.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Which again is why it's SO stupid to basically throw away the PPV business like they have. September - January has been a total wasteland and it's just flushing money down the toilet for no reason.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I was simply talking about the stock.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Dont worry... I got it.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Oh. You think it'll take a major hit?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Nearly every black guy has been kept on for the past few years since the michael hayes incident.

    ReplyDelete
  51. And if they get 40 million subscribers they'll all be taking golden showers!


    And if I get a 10,000% raise at my next review, I'll buy the whole lot of you!

    ReplyDelete
  52. Honestly, I'd consider <$10 in play. If there's a major sell-off early, it could snowball.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Most of them have jobbed to Rusev, by now.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Vince, who never makes outrageous and bombastic statements, especially pre-IPO (e.g. 93,000)? The same guy who told an analyst he could put Vince in a hammerlock if it didn't at least double? Part of the same company that produced the survey suggesting there were 40 million (perhaps not that absurd of a number) people with an affinity for WWE in the US?


    Apologies if I missed the sarcasm in your post.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Scott gets off on shit like this.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I think there will be investors that will be paying attention to the Observer's interpretations of the deal, and are selling off as a result.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Well, I guess they just wanted something out during NBCU's upfronts, even if all of the details haven't been worked out. Once the rumor mill about making an announcement today started earlier this week, both probably felt pressure to announce something today.

    ReplyDelete
  58. The company finances are fine.


    It is only the stock price (actually, futures betting on the stock price tomorrow) that have fallen.


    For all of Vince's successes in building WWE into a virtual monopoly in the world of professional wrestling, he is a terrible CEO of a publicly traded company. Overpromise and underdeliver is the stuff of pump-and-dump pink sheet stocks.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Who has two thumbs and predicted 160? This guy.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I'm just wondering, was the late selling the majority, or only the beginning? I don't think they'll plummet to an all-time low, but a 52-week low is possible.

    ReplyDelete
  61. What site is that again? I'd like to look over some of his previous breakdowns and numbers one more time.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:05 PM

    " I'm sure they are high-fiving in the TNA locker room, though."


    unless they're all like cena's sister or bad new's brown daughter

    ReplyDelete
  63. Does... does this mean TNA won?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Um... no? Although I guess being "safe" for now on Spike could be considered a "win"...

    ReplyDelete
  65. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:06 PM

    "If a guy is not on TV/house shows for 1-2 years like Ezekiel Jackson, just get rid of those people and save some money."


    bye-bye, linda!!!

    ReplyDelete
  66. Haven't received any texts from the fan club yet

    ReplyDelete
  67. Their 52 week low is $8.96 according to my stock app. If they hit that, Titan Towers will look a lil something like this tomorrow.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNCwb5yoQtw

    ReplyDelete
  68. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:07 PM

    EVERYTHING IS FINE

    ReplyDelete
  69. But... maybe they can't afford the text-messaging fees?

    ReplyDelete
  70. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:07 PM

    and jobber

    ReplyDelete
  71. THE PTA HAS DISBANDED

    ReplyDelete
  72. Fan club is pay to join

    ReplyDelete
  73. Then they *definitely* can't afford the text-messaging fees!

    ReplyDelete
  74. They'll send the texts out 2 months late

    ReplyDelete
  75. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM

    "Can i get a link?"

    nope, but here's an amen

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7cUsYXa4yw

    ReplyDelete
  76. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:09 PM

    are wwe ppv's permanently on the network in the US still a thing then?

    there's no way they could ever switch back the traditional model now that that pandora's box is open

    ReplyDelete
  77. Jobber was being a smart-ass.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Could always increase the sub. price to $12.99 or so.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:10 PM

    "Do I smell a price increase?"


    that's been talked about since the launch of the network

    ReplyDelete
  80. Also, minus smiling Vince.

    ReplyDelete
  81. http://variety.com/2014/tv/news/wwe-closes-deal-to-keep-raw-smackdown-on-usa-network-syfy-exclusive-1201181154/


    This says WWE doubled it.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:12 PM

    hermie sadler just showed up in asylum!!!

    ReplyDelete
  83. “Over the past six months, the company has negotiated television
    distribution agreements in the U.S., U.K. and Thailand, and is in the
    midst of discussions regarding the distribution of WWE content in
    India,” it said in a statement. “The company estimates that it will
    increase the average annual value of these key television agreements to
    approximately $200 million, representing an increase of more than $90
    million, that is nearly three times the increase achieved in the
    previous round of negotiations.

    “Management believes that the new agreements more fully reflect the
    value of WWE content, including significant first-run hours, a
    passionate and loyal fan base, and 90% ‘live plus same day’ viewership,
    in the U.S., which makes WWE content, like sports, ‘DVR-proof,’” WWE
    said.

    ReplyDelete
  84. That was just speculation from this morning.

    ReplyDelete
  85. No, it says Wall Street analysts BELIEVED the figure was doubled as of around 10am this morning.

    ReplyDelete
  86. ... so being off of Spike would be a "win"? Damn.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Or two-tier it: $9.99 (or more) for all but "special events", and $19.99 (or more) to add the events.


    (Semi-random numbers)

    ReplyDelete
  88. That's possible They could do like a Bronze, Silver, Gold package

    ReplyDelete
  89. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:17 PM

    i wonder if wwe has more value overseas than it does in the us

    ReplyDelete
  90. High fiving about what? The ramen noodles they have to eat for dinner?

    ReplyDelete
  91. They run shows overseas, but have never truly penetrated any of those markets. Not in recent years, at least...

    ReplyDelete
  92. Really, NBC wasn't hot to pay up for that Kane/DBry angle?

    ReplyDelete
  93. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:21 PM

    "hhh met with the locker room this afternoon and told everyone that in order to maximize their earnings, talent will have to spend 4 months out of the year touring europe and asia

    he added that business is down right now, and it's expected that talent will cover travel and lodging costs themselves"

    ReplyDelete
  94. Your_Favourite_LoserMay 15, 2014 at 7:24 PM

    the drop is stock is proof that dbry and roman reigns are best for business. with dbry on the shelf and reigns roughed, investors panicked and sold

    ReplyDelete
  95. Moral of the story : A company with a 95% plus market share monopoly, that's profitable year on year for over 15 years, is obviously a very BAD INVESTMENT.

    ReplyDelete
  96. I'm sure you're trying to be witty or whatever you call what you're trying to do but you do really understand that wrestling angles had zero to do with it right

    ReplyDelete
  97. theJawas requests that you all rise, and respect his singing of the Soviet National Anthem.

    ReplyDelete
  98. No, you're wrong. Wrestling angles have a lot to do with rights fees.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Steven's about to walk into the Lion's Den.

    ReplyDelete
  100. I'm sure you're trying to be anti-smark or whatever you call what you're trying to do but you do really understand that quality has a lot more than zero to do with it right?

    ReplyDelete
  101. ... so NBC paid for what, then? Is the WWE getting totally out of "wrestling"? Will they become "World Entertainment?" John Cena and Daniel Bryan in a new "Bosom Buddies"?

    ReplyDelete
  102. Obviously this just means they have to double down on more John Cena.

    ReplyDelete
  103. And in the arena!

    ReplyDelete
  104. So I know I'm just a gimmick or I'm just not as insightful as you fine folks when it comes to.........This business. But why is it that when someone says something logical like Cena's merchandise numbers making it so he can't be a heel or that Bryans merchandise and house show numbers are much lower than Cena or even any thing else to do with the business side of things the people on here either blame the wwe for shitty merchandise for bryan even though it's widely reported the guys are free to come up with their own stuff. Or you guys say "I don't care about the business I don't have any WWE stock I just want to be entertained by the things and people that entertain me. Yet we are over 100 posts in this thread about something you all claim to not care about. No wonder you guys bitch about "the product" you can't figure out what makes you happy or even what you want. One minute the WWE business side is irrelevant and the next you're all speculating about it. I would expect this from women being all indecisive, hypocritical and overall whiny but I expected more from the mothers basement dwellers of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Only when they foolishly overstate how much money they will make.

    ReplyDelete
  106. They paid for the 4 million viewers they get every week no matter if it's D bry vs. Kane or the build up to wrestlemania. Wrestling fans watch no matter the product and no matter who is on top. So yeah this has nothing to do with Dry vs. Kane or any other angle. But hey that's not near as fun as making this about how miss treated poor D Bry is with these shitty angles he's stuck with!

    ReplyDelete
  107. WorldGoneWild PhotosMay 15, 2014 at 7:57 PM

    NXT is my fav. part of WWE right now, and I know I'm alone.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Stranger in the AlpsMay 15, 2014 at 7:58 PM

    No no, not necessary. I'm just assuming that Vince is surrounded by people who do these things for him, and he is just going on what his Yes men tell him. I'm not on a board of directors and don't even pretend to know the inner workings of these things. All I do is watch TV.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Again take your favorite angle over the last decade then take your least favorite I bet the number of viewers are the same so again I'm right. Seriously guys do you display this level of delusion and ignorance to everything in life or just to the world of sports entertainment?

    ReplyDelete
  110. To me, the real question is this: how much more money would WWE have gotten if Hogan walked out of Mania 30 as champion? How many more people would've signed up for the Network based on the extra publicity from Hogan pinning Orton on news reports all over the world would?

    Even if you don't agree with me, expect WWE to lean on their tried-and-true moneymaking part-timers even more. They need the goodwill buzz from drifted fans.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Can't wait to see Cole shill the price increase!

    ReplyDelete
  112. I did live in my Mother's basement until I was 21.


    And then she showed up to my workplace to tell me that she'd sold the house and that the new house would only be big enough for 1 fewer person.


    Since then, I haven't lived in my Mother's basement.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Just like Netflix!...but more expensive!

    ReplyDelete
  114. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympics_Triplecast

    ReplyDelete
  115. I would watch every show and attend every event if hogan was champion and I'm not joking. My all time favorite wrestler and it's not even close. I'm all in let's set up an Internet petiton I hear those work.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Sorry about that me and your mother felt it was time for you to fly from the nest or....leave the basement as it were. No hard feelings kiddo.

    ReplyDelete
  117. TNN bid big on RAW because of the Kurt Angle-HHH-Stephanie love triangle and because of how heated the crowd was for the 10-Man Tag.

    ReplyDelete
  118. sexism and an anti-smark gimmick. He's the total package!!!

    ReplyDelete
  119. Here is a few Cena numbers for you, price of PPV when he started on top: 40 bucks. Price of PPV now, 10 years later with him still on top: 10 bucks.

    ReplyDelete
  120. I retreated from society for a little while and lived in an isolated mountain cabin.


    I relate the story Steve, because it made a man of me. I learned to be independent, self sufficient, and generally a respectable member of society.


    What's your story Steve? What turned you into a steaming pile of douche?

    ReplyDelete
  121. I can't imagine anyone who owns significant shares of WWE stock has any fucking clue what the Observer is.

    ReplyDelete
  122. You don't really think the people who negotiated this deal on behalf of NBC weighed in on the Kane angle and let it affect their decision do you? LMAO that was just a joke, right?

    ReplyDelete
  123. The local cable provider says otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Hey, if you want to grossly overpay, feel free.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Yep. I fully expect Cena to become the new champion now that Bryan is out of the picture for a while. Just like they hot shotted the title back onto Cena when they could've done Rey Mysterio-Cena @ SummerSlam for a good buyrate.

    ReplyDelete
  126. I admit to not being a financial guy so I don't understand why this would hurt so much. Did WWE overspend or something? This is worth more than the last deal, but not as much as they were expecting, still doesn't explain the 'sky is falling' atmosphere surrounding this.

    ReplyDelete
  127. I'm seeing a lot of jokes about more Cena or giving the belt to Hogan and a discussion about whether angles matter to network execs. Ultimately it is an interesting discussion. I think wrestling companies have to balance these philosophies. I think network execs may enjoy an angle now and then, hear a good buzz, etc. but ultimately they care a heck of alot more about numbers than how those numbers appear. As long as you don't give them reason to get pissed about content (advertiser or viewer complaints) then if 2 hours of Kane beating Bryan down gets 4 million viewers, then great.


    At the same time execs know certain names. We saw this a lot with TW and WCW. It's joked about that the only person Ted Turner really knew when he bought WCW was Flair. It's been said that NBC demanded that Savage and Hogan get featured to make a deal happen in 99 (ultimately it didn't anyway as the NBA lockout ended). Big names past their prime can generate publicity and they can appease execs with little knowledge of wrestling. Bischoff says that regardless of the cost of Hogan and whether he moved ratings and buyrates, his mere name opened up doors for licensing and advertising that they never had before. But as we saw with Hogan, it pissed off some old time fans. More Cena or Hogan as champ would be the same type of thing. Would the goodwill of execs or the extra publicity be worth pissing off a segment of your fanbase? Might be, might not.

    ReplyDelete
  128. WWE is attempting to replace ppv revenue from transferring customers to the Network. Currently, regardless of the Network both major satellite companies no longer carry WWE ppvs. In order to replace all the ppv revenue from 2013, WWE would have to have 1.5 to 1.6 million subscribers averaged for a year. They currently have approximately 667k before the first renewal period. They were hoping to make a bunch more of TV rights because live sports is one of the few things on TV that is somewhat DVR proof. WWE tried to sell themselves as live sports.

    ReplyDelete
  129. The sky falling makes sense now. That's a hell of a lot of lost revenue. Any idea why they didn't get as much on the tv deal? The it's just rasslin can't be all there is to it.

    ReplyDelete
  130. It's mainly because a fair number of people inflated WWE stock off of (unrealistic?) expectations... and now that WWE's "underperformed" in not getting what those speculators were hoping for, a LOT of them are jumping right back out.


    Remember Vince being a billionaire? Not anymore, and probably not anytime soon with the hit the stock's taking and going to take.

    ReplyDelete
  131. that's the million dollar question. I'm sure there are all kinds of things. DVR numbers, how much they think they can recoup from advertisers, expectations of lost subscribers due to "cutting the cord", how it is as a lead-in for other shows and if you can advertise other shows in WWE programming and have it work, abilities to cross merchandise and cross brand, etc. Ultimately wrestling continues to lag far behind in ad dollars for similar ratings to more "prestigious shows." We can argue until we are blue in the face if that is correct or accuate but it is fact for the TV game. Rumors also say NBC, who owns a significant part of the ppv market through comcast (or rather comcast owns NBC) was pissed about that as well.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Not enough demand for their product. Sure, they can bring in solid ratings, but I bet the ad rates are poor compared to other shows.


    (MAKING UP NUMBERS, JUST FOLLOW THE LOGIC)


    I'm willing to bet there are cable shows that get half of WWE's ratings, but because of how the ratings "skew" (more "desirable" groups watching the lower show) the ad rates attached to those ratings are higher, possibly high enough to offset the higher rating that WWE gets.

    ReplyDelete
  133. This makes sense.

    ReplyDelete
  134. absolutely. The numbers for golf are atrocious compared to many other things, but golf gets premier ad dollars from high end companies like Lexus, Mercedes, insurance, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  135. At least two different ways to look at things.


    1- The sky is somewhat falling for the stock (at $15.20 after hours, a roughly 50% drop from 2 months ago)...depending on when you invested (it's still 60% up from a price around $9 a year ago). It's not clear what drives investors, but my opinion is that the stock got inflated because (1) WWE anticipated at least doubling its US TV rights deal and (2) WWE Network, particularly with inflated expectations about subscriber counts. Neither happened, so the short term investors/speculators bailed, hammering the stock.


    2- The deals aren't necessarily bad for the health of the company in the future...unless WWE spent like it thought its internal projections were actually going to be met. I don't know enough about the numbers to know if that's the case with WWE.

    ReplyDelete
  136. That's why I could see this stock staying level (HIGHLY unlikely, but maybe the speculators have washed out), or bottoming out tomorrow. Or anything in between.


    Fuck, a "WWE Stock Price" guessing game would probably get evenish odds all between $9 and $15.

    ReplyDelete
  137. I believe NBCU was pushing for the McMahons to become more involved on TV in the last year or so, so that thinking still exists. Of course, if you had pitched Hulk Hogan to an exec in the early 80s (assuming he didn't follow the AWA, of course), you would have gotten a lot of people wanting Bruno to get the title back.

    ReplyDelete
  138. We talk about this in the live thread sometimes but has the WWE ever tried developing a block of programming around Raw? Not just a lead-in but a scripted show that fans might actually stick around for? I don't know what that would be but I don't think they ever produced anything for USA

    ReplyDelete
  139. tough enough was a lead in to Raw. Not exactly scripted (although not unscripted either).

    ReplyDelete
  140. How did that do? I admit I never actually watched an episode

    ReplyDelete
  141. Vince will be back on RAW in the next two weeks. Guaranteed!

    ReplyDelete
  142. WWE fans have a rep of watching Raw but only Raw, regardless of what USA has put around it. I'm not necessarily sure a wacky sitcom produced by WWE (even featuring WWE stars) would do that well, and would you really want a 4th hour of WWE content on Monday (whether the additional hour was wrestling or not)?

    ReplyDelete
  143. Another possible reason nobody else wanted WWE too badly. And probably a "hidden" reason WWE went to three hours at USA's request.

    ReplyDelete
  144. I think the foolish part was going public in the first place. Doesn't really fit their business, and lots of very profitable, large business are held privately. No shame in it.

    ReplyDelete
  145. That is a tough sell though. Thinking about it, I doubt many of us have the same interest outside of wrestling so finding something to make us all stick around would be difficult.

    ReplyDelete
  146. didn't seem foolish at the time when it made Vince a billionaire.

    ReplyDelete
  147. For like six months.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Looks like the 2011 season with Stone Cold averaged 2.75M viewers (at a time when Raw averaged 5.21M and was not 3 hours). Not sure why it was cancelled/not renewed.

    http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/12/12/usa-dominates-landscape-with-unprecedented-six-straight-years-as-1/113512/

    ReplyDelete
  149. The Immortal Hoke OganMay 15, 2014 at 8:58 PM

    "Hopefully they don't start purging the roster now."

    In other news, WWE officially signs "Prince Devitt". Whoever the fuck that is...

    ReplyDelete
  150. Ah the 'ole WWE binge 'n purge. The snake just keeps eatin' it's own tail.

    ReplyDelete
  151. Devitt is one of the best wrestlers in the world. He can do 5 star matches in his sleep.

    ReplyDelete
  152. The Immortal Hoke OganMay 15, 2014 at 9:02 PM

    I'm sure he's very good. I just don't see many WWE fans knowing who he is. I hope they let him be something special and don't make him "earn it" for years because they seem him as some indy-level geek.

    ReplyDelete
  153. So I don't feel like reading this thread all the way, but does this new deal at ALL give WWE the option of putting Raw and Smackdown live on the Network as well?

    ReplyDelete
  154. For what they got, I bet the answer is NO.

    ReplyDelete
  155. The Immortal Hoke OganMay 15, 2014 at 9:05 PM

    I think this could get really ugly in the not-so-distant future. I just don't see the WWE Network maintaining subscriptions. Eventually, fans are going to get all the available pro-wresting content worth seeing. You can only watch Wrestlemania 17 or Bash '89 so many times before the $120+ a year becomes better spent elsewhere (for a lot of fans anyway). The novelty will wear off once all the Clashes and other gems are released for consumption. In, say, two years, do you all see yourselves re-upping in perpetuity? I just don't see the Network being sustainable, even if it does really well the first couple years or so. The problem is, you can't unring that PPV bell and there could potentially be a BIG windfall of revenue if the Network doesn't sustain itself for the long haul.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Viewership went down the last time Hogan was champion in the WWE.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Make that on money this week.

    ReplyDelete
  158. WWE fans have known every indy star that comes through.

    ReplyDelete
  159. It was some cunt higher up at USA network. Can't remember her name.

    ReplyDelete
  160. Bonnie Hammer.


    She also demanded Cena be brought to Raw and drop the rapper gimmick.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Geez, that was longer than a worst in the world post.

    ReplyDelete
  162. Haha, suck it Farva. Enjoy 5th place.

    ReplyDelete
  163. This is an interesting point. Based on 24/7, you have around 200k fans that love the old stuff and are willing to pay for it. I don't think their "reality TV shows" are going to generate more subscribers either. I think the big fear is that they value this "original content" over the archive and end up driving off the true diehards that want more vault stuff and then they've got a problem.


    It'll be interesting to see how things play out after the first subscription period ends and people have to renew around August.

    ReplyDelete
  164. Congrats, gonna be fun seeing you 2 try to avoid jobbing to me.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Sure Steve, sure.

    ReplyDelete
  166. I think the WWE should cease being a publicly traded company. Would that really hurt it? I guess they'd have to buy up all of the stock that has been sold to the rest of the market, but wouldn't it just be better in the long run?

    ReplyDelete
  167. ARRRRGH THE BARBARIANMay 15, 2014 at 9:19 PM

    $0? Considering he's north of 60 and can't take a bump?

    ReplyDelete
  168. For me, it really comes down to how much I spent on PPV's. I always purchased WrestleMania and the Royal Rumble, and USUALLY got at least one other show (typically SummerSlam and/or Money in the Bank). So as long as it stays within the range of $120-$140, it'll be worth it just because I'll get those shows PLUS every other show. If they ever dumped the PPV's, or even just WrestleMania, I probably wouldn't re-up.

    ReplyDelete
  169. I don't know tons about financials of publicly traded companies, but I do know this. It doesn't matter how much the deal is for, it matters how the deal stacks up to what they thought it would be. They could have bumped it up to $1 billion dollars a year, but if Vince projected they would get $1.5 billion, the stock would have dropped.

    ReplyDelete
  170. ARRRRGH THE BARBARIANMay 15, 2014 at 9:20 PM

    I'm guessing this is the last time they'll let the "Did You Know?" people do their negotiating

    ReplyDelete
  171. He had a sex tape and no one cared. A SEX TAPE! That's the thing that made Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton famous!

    ReplyDelete
  172. Why did no one believe me when I was saying all that in February?

    ReplyDelete
  173. Yeah, it'll always be worth it for me too just to watch all the PPVs, and (hopefully) have a single repository for any show, documentary, and/or other release at my fingertips. We're a minority here, for sure, but as long as these 2 conditions are met, I'm a lifer.

    ReplyDelete
  174. Where can you buy a single WWE PPV for $10?

    ReplyDelete
  175. You're fine just because you called it "this business"

    ReplyDelete
  176. slightly oversold. I'd say the stock stabilizes around 17-18.

    ReplyDelete
  177. Is somebody sad? Did I hurt your mountain manly man feelings? Poor guy ill.be more sympathetic to your basement dwelling ways in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  178. Dude don't look at sex tapes for the dudes.

    On the other hand, if the Bella Twins released a sex tape with both of them in it...

    ReplyDelete
  179. After doing an edition of WOL from a WCW show once, Meltzer said he totally understood why executives who weren't knowledgeable about wrestling were so influenced by Hogan. Basically, the pop Hogan got at that show was so enormous that anyone just casually watching would assume that Hogan had to be the top star.

    ReplyDelete
  180. That's absolutely what I expect them to eventually do. The model has been used by a lot of pay sites, so it's already out there. Honestly, I think they should have done it that way from the beginning.

    ReplyDelete
  181. I can't imagine I won't be renewing my subscription for years to come, assuming they don't get crazy with the monthly fee. I can't speak for anyone else, and certainly not casual fans, but it's worth it for me to be able to watch whatever ppv randomly pops in my head on a given morning.

    I think there's still a good chance that the network will be fine long-term. More and more, people are demanding to be able to watch/listen to whatever they want right fucking now, and I think this is the natural next step in WWE providing entertainment to its fans. People are sometimes slow to come around on new technology like this, and there are always the people who let others try out new things like this, before jumping in themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Yeah, that was a big deal for me, too.

    ReplyDelete
  183. No Steve, I DON'T live in the basement. I'm not even in the basement as I type this.


    That was the whole meat of my first post.


    Try and keep up Steve.

    ReplyDelete
  184. *jumps out of window*

    ReplyDelete
  185. Jef Vinson (Homewreckers Inc™)May 16, 2014 at 6:50 AM

    "Hopefully they don't start purging the roster now."
    Aren't they overdue for their year run of firings?

    ReplyDelete
  186. Jef Vinson (Homewreckers Inc™)May 16, 2014 at 6:50 AM

    LOL. I knew it was a matter of time.

    ReplyDelete
  187. Jef Vinson (Homewreckers Inc™)May 16, 2014 at 6:53 AM

    How will that translate to the WWE style when he becomes Willis McHammerhead or whatever the WWE name generator comes up with?

    ReplyDelete
  188. Maybe that's the plan. Inflate their projected numbers, drive the stock down, buy it all back up.

    ReplyDelete
  189. I can't wait to see Bryan do the dance of joy.

    ReplyDelete
  190. Well if worst comes to worst, wouldn't they just shift ALL of their non-WWE Network content to the Network?


    You wanna watch Raw and Smackdown? Fine, but it's gonna cost you 10 bucks a month.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment