Guest cynicalprofit Report post Posted December 11, 2002 You're fucking insane. Couldn't have said it better my self. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Hogan Made Wrestling Report post Posted December 11, 2002 All the Russo backers love to point to the "great TV ratings!" during Russo's run as a sign that it was the WWF's best period, but going beyond this markish interpretation of their business and delving a little deeper reveals this: In Russo's best year, the WWF grossed about 300 million dollars. In 2001, a year that supposedly "sucked" because of the Alliance and such, they grossed over 400 million. Russo's style might have given some high numbers on Mondays (and of course, that's the only thing the majority of the net fanbase sees since they want fast and easy to digest digits rather than earnings reports), but it didn't put the money into their pockets like 2000 and 2001 did. 2000 was easily the best year of the WWF's existence, financially and creatively. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mulatto Heat Report post Posted December 11, 2002 Agreed. Ratings are only one part of the equation. House show attendance and PPV buyrates (which are more tangible than ratings, and both of which were less than stellar in 1998 and 1999) are the other parts. BTW, that sig pic rules, as does the tOA forums. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest geniusMoment Report post Posted December 11, 2002 Well you can't expect business to go all the way up over night. It was continuing to rise when Russo left and continued to rise for the next year or two before fallling. 1998 and 1999 were the 2 most successful years for the wwf ever up to that point. Don't make yourself look like a jackass when you say he wasn't a success because he was. Just because business continued to rise after he left doesn't mean what he did should be looked down upon because ratings, merchandise sales, attendance and buyrates all went up compared to when he took over, and were continuing to rise when he left. Also your numbers are off because it was his ratings that got the wwf their television contract for smackdown which pays then an extra 450,000 a week which is added on as profit to the 2000 reports making them seem better, Russo didn't have those profit streams. Also the wwf began to branch out into other ventures and then got a great television contract with tnn paying them 500,000 a show plus advertising, with lower ratings then when Russo was in charge. If Russo was in charge they would have got the same deal and profits would have went up. Hell I don't like Russo either but don't make yourselves sound stupid by arguing he wasn't a success. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest nikowwf Report post Posted December 11, 2002 Russo in WCW. This is Russo at his most powerful, not Russo controlled by vince. Came in, short boost, then things went south. Came back, short boost (when i am saying short i mean weeks) then things went south. Company dies shortly thereafter. I think its funny everyone who wants to credit the WWE's sucess to him also wants to say that he had nothing to do with WCW's downfall. niko Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest geniusMoment Report post Posted December 11, 2002 I totally agree with everyone who says Russo helped kill WCW but sometimes I think everyone hates Russo so much they will never admit he booked some creative angles. Maybe under vinces control again he could at least create some storylines. Hell I liked WCW 2000 better then raw 2002 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
