WrestleMania buy rate

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Wow, Angle/Benoit didn't effect the RR buyrate? So, I guess the promoting of Angle/Benoit all over SmackDown for those 4-5 weeks, when SmackDown did considerably better than Raw ratings-wise, and the hype over the 'net (which is a decent bit of the audience) for how good Angle/Benoit would be...well, I guess that didn't matter. Nope, because the show that got lower ratings, Raw, promoted the hell out of HHH/Steiner...

 

<Jon Lovitz> Yeah, that's the ticket. </Jon Lovitz>

[Guest bob_barron]

Did they ever say "Sold-Out Safeco Field?" I don't think they did, and you know they would have if they could.

 

EDIT: And Bob, you can bet your ass that the buyrate for the Rumble would have been MUCH lower if that Angle/Benoit match hadn't gone on. You make it sound as if you can attribute ALL of the buys to Steiner/Trips and the Rumble match. While the Rumble match always draws very well (and with good reason, I love it too), you can't totally discount the Smackdown side of things.

You can when Benoit v. Angle gets almost no hype at all. ALL the ads for the Rumble centred around the Rumble match, the stuff involving Brock and HHH v. Steiner.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

"I think..." "I think..." "I think..."

 

Barron, all I can say is what you THINK is not necessarily true. Especially when you can't really back it up.

 

I'm beginning to believe what AS observed about you in that other thread.

 

Anyway, if fans truly prefered wrestling (due to the ratings of ONE segment), I would THINK they would notice that the two best wrestlers in the company were having a title match, and would buy the PPV accordingly. Benoit won the #1 contenders' match more than three weeks before the Rumble, that is plenty of time.

[Guest CanadianChick]

Did they ever say "Sold-Out Safeco Field?" I don't think they did, and you know they would have if they could.

 

EDIT: And Bob, you can bet your ass that the buyrate for the Rumble would have been MUCH lower if that Angle/Benoit match hadn't gone on. You make it sound as if you can attribute ALL of the buys to Steiner/Trips and the Rumble match. While the Rumble match always draws very well (and with good reason, I love it too), you can't totally discount the Smackdown side of things.

You can when Benoit v. Angle gets almost no hype at all. ALL the ads for the Rumble centred around the Rumble match, the stuff involving Brock and HHH v. Steiner.

But Smackdown was hyping the hell out of it. You can't disregard that.

[Guest bob_barron]

Wow, Angle/Benoit didn't effect the RR buyrate? So, I guess the promoting of Angle/Benoit all over SmackDown for those 4-5 weeks, when SmackDown did considerably better than Raw ratings-wise, and the hype over the 'net (which is a decent bit of the audience) for how good Angle/Benoit would be...well, I guess that didn't matter. Nope, because the show that got lower ratings, Raw, promoted the hell out of HHH/Steiner...

 

<Jon Lovitz> Yeah, that's the ticket. </Jon Lovitz>

The ratings for RAW were better then the ratings for Smackdown! leading up to the RR-

 

12/16/02 3.5 (3.3,3.6)

12/23/02 3.3 (3.0,3.5)

01/06/03 3.6 (3.5,3.7)

01/13/03 3.9 (3.8,4.0)

 

12/19/02 3.3

12/26/02 3.4

01/02/03 3.4

01/09/03 3.4

01/16/03 3.4

 

Most of the hype on Smackdown! was about Brock Lesnar and the RR match

[Guest CanadianChick]

Cable and network rating are different Bob. So really, both the shows had the same amount of audiences and Smackdown had more audience on some of those weeks.

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

Once again, more people watch Smackdown because network ratings are higher than cable ratings. You're spinning like WWE does, insisting that Raw gets more viewers and shit to justify and dumb crap they might do when it DOESN'T.

[Guest bob_barron]

Barron, all I can say is what you THINK is not necessarily true. Especially when you can't really back it up.

 

Given the history of the RR buyrate being above average- I think I can back it up.

 

I'm beginning to believe what AS observed about you in that other thread.

 

How am I defending Vince McMahon by saying Benoit v. Angle didn't have an affect on a buyrate. And if you read what I said in another thread you would see that isn't the case at all.

[Guest Rob Van Dam]

Thirteen people ordered Wrestlemania. Out of NINETEEN shows, Only ONE has been worse. That is a terrible, terrible failure. No other way to look at it.

Wrestlemania wasn't on pay per view it was on closed circuit tv, get it right next time, you disgruntled mark.

[Guest bob_barron]

Once again, more people watch Smackdown because network ratings are higher than cable ratings. You're spinning like WWE does, insisting that Raw gets more viewers and shit to justify and dumb crap they might do when it DOESN'T.

I'm not justifying anything. Did I say I enjoyed HHH v. Steiner or thought it was a good match? No. But I do believe that it and the Rumble match were the reasons for the high buyrate and that Angle v. Benoit did nothing to help the buyrate

[Guest the pinjockey]

The Rumble match itself draws in the fans, HHH/Steiner was a complete joke by the time the PPV came around after posedowns/arm wrestling/ and bench press contests. The Rumble match is what brings the fans and I would bet Angle/Benoit brought in a tenth or two of wrestling fans.

[Guest Lord of The Curry]

It's still way too early to determine the buyrate. These are all just preliminary numbers.

 

And Angle v. Benoit wasn't really the main selling point of the RR and I don't think it affected the buyrate at all

Yeah, because fuck knows that good wrestling doesn't sell PPV's anymore.

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

And while I'm annoyed, make you damn sig smaller. No one cares about ALL THREE of your favorite teams.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

Barron, all I can say is what you THINK is not necessarily true. Especially when you can't really back it up.

 

Given the history of the RR buyrate being above average- I think I can back it up.

 

I'm beginning to believe what AS observed about you in that other thread.

 

How am I defending Vince McMahon by saying Benoit v. Angle didn't have an affect on a buyrate. And if you read what I said in another thread you would see that isn't the case at all.

Mania has a history of having the best buyrate of the year, but that isn't the case this year.

 

You're in theory defending Vince's decision to have a rematch of HHH/Steiner at No Way Out, when it should have been dropped.

 

I still don't know how Angle/Benoit did NOTHING to help the buyrate. Explain.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Which is mostly wrong, as SmackDown's audience is larger (as others have pointed out, network ratings are much different than cable ratings, as a 3.3 for a network would be in the higher 3s/low 4s for cable), and Angle/Benoit was hyped all over SmackDown.

 

Do the math. Everybody that saw the Rumble, marks and smarks alike, said Angle/Benoit was awesome. The hype for Angle/Benoit was big all over SD. SD's audience was/is larger than Raw's.

 

Or you can stick your fingers in your ears, turn your back to the facts, and go "NO, NO, NO, I'M NOT LISTENING, NAH NAH NANA NAH!"

[Guest bob_barron]

I thought at No Way Out they should've done a 3-way with HHH v. Jericho v. Steiner. They booked themselves into a corner by booking a DQ finish.

 

I don't think it did anything for the buyrate because the main event is what sells a Pay Per View. Look at Wrestlemania XIII for example.

 

I don't think Benoit v. Angle was hyped as being one of the main matches of the show. It was 3rd on the totem pole

[Guest bob_barron]

Everybody that saw the Rumble, marks and smarks alike, said Angle/Benoit was awesome.

 

I don't understand what you're trying to saying there.

 

The hype for Angle/Benoit was big all over SD. SD's audience was/is larger than Raw's.

 

I don't really know network-cable ratings that well so if I'm wrong there I'm wrong. But in all the commercial ads for the Rumble, the HHH v. Steiner "dream match" and the Rumble match were giving the most hype and were sold as the top two main events of the show. The hype on Smackdown! was split between the stuff involving Brock Lesnar and Benoit v. Angle.

 

Benoit v. Angle was an awesome match but I don't think it affected the Rumble buyrate. The Rumble match as it always is was the big drawing point for the Rumble and Triple H v. Steiner was hyped just as much

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Royal Rumble always draws a good buyrate because of ONE match. That being the Rumble match.

 

I've been around enough marks to know that Funaki/Nathan Jones could main event the undercard. As long as the Royal Rumble is there, they will order the show. It is the one single match that is looked forward to a year in advance. I don't mean that it will draw a bigger buyrate than Wrestlemania most of the time, simply that it is so incredibly easy to book and you will get a strong buyrate anyways. During the Dark Ages Royal Rumbles would always draw decent buyrates. Even when Shawn & Diesel were running the show.

 

Wrestlemania needs to rely more on the actual card. Usually, the WWF is pretty good at this. Hogan/Rock was a match that most people wanted to see, even though most smarks didn't. Few people wanted to see Hogan/Vince, and thus the buyrate falls. Rock/Austin was the other main event match, but this current audience has already seen that many times. Kurt/Brock wasn't hyped enough, so we don't know how well it would have drawn. Bret/Austin was fantastic at XIII but didn't draw shit because Taker/Sid was percieved (and in this case was literally) the main event. The same thing may have happened to Kurt/Brock.

 

With Rock & Austin leaving, WWE is in real trouble next year. Brock pretty much has to be in the main event (unless he really flops), but finding an opponent will be difficult.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

I don't think it did anything for the buyrate because the main event is what sells a Pay Per View. Look at Wrestlemania XIII for example.

 

I don't think Benoit v. Angle was hyped as being one of the main matches of the show. It was 3rd on the totem pole

1) No one knew what the Mania main event would be beforehand. FYI, it wasn't Hogan/Vince which you're blaming for Mania's poor buyrate. Also, recall that Angle/Benoit came AFTER HHH/Steiner.

 

2) Yet it was hyped. Plain and simple. Are you no longer saying that it was not hyped?

[Guest bob_barron]

1)Hogan v. Vince was given ALL the hype for the show. Look at the Wrestlemania programme, the DVD, the Wrestlemania 3rd degree special, the fact that they used Piper, Costas, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bobby Heenan and Jessie Ventura to sell the match.

 

So- Jericho v. HHH was after Hogan v. Rock.

 

2)It was hyped. But every PPV match gets hyped. What I am saying it that was not hyped to the level of the two other matches and thus didn't really effect the buyrate

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

1)Hogan v. Vince was given ALL the hype for the show. Look at the Wrestlemania programme, the DVD, the Wrestlemania 3rd degree special, the fact that they used Piper, Costas, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bobby Heenan and Jessie Ventura to sell the match.

 

So- Jericho v. HHH was after Hogan v. Rock.

But it wasn't the main event. The main event is the last match of the show. So do not use that term for matches like Hogan/Vince, Hogan/Rock or HHH/Steiner. It's not correct.

 

2)It was hyped. But every PPV match gets hyped. What I am saying it that was not hyped to the level of the two other matches and thus didn't really effect the buyrate

 

All you're doing is making a guess from what you want to believe. So be it.

[Guest bob_barron]

1) Funny- I didn't know the main event of Survivor Series 91 was LOD/Bossman v. Natural Disasters/IRS.

 

There have been times when the main event of a show was not the last match.

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

WrestleMania buy rate

2nd lowest ever

 

 

...

 

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

No RVD No buryrate bitch!!!!!!

 

Armageddon was the lowest non major event in a long time...and Mania bombed!

 

HAHAHAHAHA

[Guest CanadianChick]

WrestleMania buy rate

2nd lowest ever

 

 

...

 

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

No RVD No buryrate bitch!!!!!!

 

Armageddon was the lowest non major event in a long time...and Mania bombed!

 

HAHAHAHAHA

Hath no fury like a RVD fan's scorn. T'is true.

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

You DO realize they'd make not that connection, but they'd instead say that buyrates are hurting because Bradshaw has been injured or something?

[Guest AndrewTS]

I'm sure he made a profit.

 

Another thing you have to consider. How many of those people ordered because it was Mania? Of those thirteen, if six had no real interest and just bought on the name, they are screwed.

AS has a point. Remember that Wrestlemania has tickets on sale well in advance. At the time they went on sale, the only match even hinted at was Angle vs. Lesnar, and only the smarks really knew about that.

 

Plus that fued was booked retardedly, no one gives a shit about Hogan-Vince, and the rest was all foregone conclusions.

 

People bought those Mania tickets because it was Mania. If Vince can't sell out WM next year--well, he's fucked.

[Guest Mulatto Heat]

OK Barron, I'm going to go on a different route.

 

Do you think Angle/Lesnar received insufficient hype? When considering your answer think about how the match was teased back in July, and promoted as "the greatest match of all time" starting in December with the autograph skit just before Armaggeddon. How about HBK/Jericho with the video packages and the run-ins and the promos? Those two matches were very much wrestling-based - so how exactly do you think it translated to the low Mania buyrate among the fans that "want more wrestling"? Did Hogan/Vince have something to do with it? Was there a large portion of the fanbase that thought "oh, I'd get that Angle/Lesnar match as it is probably going to be the best wrestling match of all time, but since they're also putting on Hogan/Vince, I'm not going to"?

[Guest AndrewTS]

The hype for the Rumble was around a 60 minute battle royal and HHH v. Steiner- two wrestling matches, one a "dream" match.

Who the hell considers HHH vs. Steiner a "dream" match?!

 

The Rumble itself always sells the show pretty well, unless there is a really shitty undercard.

 

I loved the Rumble 03 for the Rumble itself and Angle-Benoit. However, I noticed how much the crowd lost interest when Jericho was dumped, because then they knew who would win.

[Guest The Son of Sting]

The main event is the match a PPV is sold on,not the match that goes on last.

[Guest AndrewTS]

OK Barron, I'm going to go on a different route.

 

Do you think Angle/Lesnar received insufficient hype? When considering your answer think about how the match was teased back in July, and promoted as "the greatest match of all time" starting in December with the autograph skit just before Armaggeddon. How about HBK/Jericho with the video packages and the run-ins and the promos? Those two matches were very much wrestling-based - so how exactly do you think it translated to the low Mania buyrate among the fans that "want more wrestling"? Did Hogan/Vince have something to do with it? Was there a large portion of the fanbase that thought "oh, I'd get that Angle/Lesnar match as it is probably going to be the best wrestling match of all time, but since they're also putting on Hogan/Vince, I'm not going to"?

Angle/Lesnar and HBK/Jericho were both matches that the fans never saw before, but Angle/Lesnar was a foregone conclusion and the fued was booked terribly. No intrigue at all--all the marks new Lesnar was going over.

 

HBK is not a draw as we'll seen before, and he's only had 1 1/2 TV matches, so the fans probably had no reason to really care about it.