And wwe wonder why business is down ??

[AndrewTS 0]

At least Test wasn't on the show defending the WCW title, though.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

they weren't thrown together...

 

 

They were T-n-T ...they were DYNAMITE~

 

/kayfabe

[Guest Anglesault]

Test wasn't MVP, although post-SurSer he was "TEFLON TEST!~"

Mainly because they couldn't get heat to stick to him.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

doesn't that mean that he's been Teflon Test since his debut?

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Average attendance

 

Jan 2004: 4,140

 

Jan 2003: 4,730

 

(12% decrease)

 

This is from their last Quarterly Report. Unless you have something more concrete than that reflecting the state of house show business, I'll still work under the assumption that House Show business is down.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

that's January... AS (i believe) mentioned it's gone up since Eddie won the title.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

And when their next quarterly report comes out you can make that statement with something concrete behind it. However, right now the best indicator of their house show business is their last Quarterly Report.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

I was just pointing something out.... i have no stance up or down on the house show attendance... but for January ... it was apparently down.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

It was representing a 3 month period up until January 23rd. It was attendance since October. It is a much better statistic than something Meltzer reports as it uses a greater population sample (70+ events vs. 5??).

[The Amazing Rando 0]

well between October and January there wasn't much of a reason for the attendance to be up.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

And there is reason now? Wasn't Eddie still on the card during that period of time? That's the whole point of this thread, the WWE doesn't give their fans a reason to go to the house shows since they're all the same (or very similar).

 

Plus, they lowered ticket prices, so there's a reason.

 

... just sayin

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Ok than it's the wife's fought.

 

*coughfaultcough

[The Amazing Rando 0]

Fine. You win. RRR triumphs over Rando. Though I've been talking just like you... I want there to be reasons to go to house shows... I want to see fans give a shit what happens off of live tv. I want the WWE to stop doing a rinse and repeat formula for the road shows.

[Guest Brian]

The WWE definately needs to market and make their house shows feel more important, especially on the east coast where they go all the time. I for one think they'd be better off if they wrestled a few different guys once in a while, and not just use the shows to go through the motions, becasue diversifying what they are doing could help a lot.

[Slickster 0]

I agree that while back in the day (pre-Internet) you could go 'around the horn' with the same match/finish for a month or two, today's environment (Internet, much more TV, non-jobber matches every week) necessitates a rotation of matches at house shows to make them more special. In essence, a formulaic house show at every town is redundant because you're paying to see essentially the same matches you could see every week on TV.

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

BBCW, I'd consider Booker T and Rob Van Dam upper-mid carders.

[Guest hunger4unger]

I have to disagree. I went to the Newcastle show and despite no *big names* I felt I got more than my money's worth. Sure, there were no **** matches but WWE did a great job at entertaining nevertheless. It is incorrect about the same matches at all four shows - a few were changed. After Smackdown aired in the UK on Saturday, in the final two shows Heyman was selling his neck injury from Taker's tombstone. As far as business going down - WWE are getting bigger. They used to run two tours a year here in the UK - now it looks to be at least 3, with RAW returning in May and no doubt another tour later in the year. They've expanded in both Japanese and Australian markets too.

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

I attended the WWE Ruthless Aggression Tour down here in July 2003 in Melbourne, and while standard of wrestling wasn't up to SmackDown!'s Global Warning Tour the year before, the entertainment factor equalised, if not surpassed.

 

The venues for both shows are pretty much next to eachother:

 

Chris Jericho: "Last year, I came to the stupid stadium over there!" (points)

 

La Resistance: "What exactly is a wanker? Is that some kind of insult?"

 

The crowd was worked very well, and now we know the real reason that Chris Jericho Brand-jumped!

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Yep, because when there are matches that are exactly the same and have goofy endings at a house show in ENGLAND, it will kill your business every time.....

 

[/stupidthread]

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

WWE treating each market the same is stupid. At a time like this, when House Show business is down, they should be trying to fix it. They are not. Since House Shows are a key business driver and a source of income for your employees as-well-as a factor in the morale of wrestlers, it is important to get House Shows "up". So your sarcasm isn't warranted and this is a problem that gets understated both by people here and the WWE.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

WWE treating each market the same is stupid. At a time like this, when House Show business is down, they should be trying to fix it. They are not. Since House Shows are a key business driver and a source of income for your employees as-well-as a factor in the morale of wrestlers, it is important to get House Shows "up". So your sarcasm isn't warranted and this is a problem that gets understated both by people here and the WWE.

Rudo, it is warranted. Not because business is down...but because of the reason given. House shows are down simply because there is no importance there. They are only advertised as "live events" and nothing else. The cards for them are never announced on TV, or ever have any signifigance to the storylines or ANYTHING on TV. Thus, they are rendered as "pointless" by the masses. That is the reason why business is down, also the reason is that anyone who goes to a house show once knows that the action is really toned down. This creates the "I'm never going to pay to see that shit again" attitude and for what people pay to go to house shows, I don't blame them.......

[Guest MikeSC]

WWE treating each market the same is stupid. At a time like this, when House Show business is down, they should be trying to fix it. They are not. Since House Shows are a key business driver and a source of income for your employees as-well-as a factor in the morale of wrestlers, it is important to get House Shows "up". So your sarcasm isn't warranted and this is a problem that gets understated both by people here and the WWE.

RRR, house shows have ALWAYS been handled that way, from way back in the territory days.

 

Just because the internet is available is not going to change that.

 

Heck, watch Cornette's shoot from 2000 where he discusses, in depth, doing the circuits and doing the same matches in all of the circuits, with different spots in each.

 

I doubt the matches here were spot-for-spot copies of the other matches.

-=Mike

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Rudo, it is warranted. Not because business is down...but because of the reason given. House shows are down simply because there is no importance there.

 

And you don't think every match being the same isn't a factor in that? Why should people go out and see something they'll see on TV? Or why should they see something that won't affect TV?

 

 

--------------------

 

RRR, house shows have ALWAYS been handled that way, from way back in the territory days.

 

Hmm... somehow you've gotten the impression that I buy the "It's always been this way, so it isn't wrong" approach. I don't. In case you haven't noticed, Wrestling hasn't been run by the brightest-of-folk, so maybe their methods have been flawed. House Show business needs to change, they need to do something about it, waiting for a turn around in general business isn't going to cut it.

[AndrewTS 0]

Once in a while they'd have a title change hands on a house show, but the last time they had that happen was Edge beating Jarrett in 1998/1999, I think.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Christian and Booker T had a title change, didn't they?

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Rudo, it is warranted. Not because business is down...but because of the reason given. House shows are down simply because there is no importance there.

 

And you don't think every match being the same isn't a factor in that? Why should people go out and see something they'll see on TV? Or why should they see something that won't affect TV?

Rudo, go back and read my post. You are arguing a point with me that I agree with you on. I think the reason why business is bad for house shows is simply what you said....except for the matches being the same.

[AndrewTS 0]

Christian and Booker T had a title change, didn't they?

Oh yeah, when it was originally thought Booker's career was over. I forgot about that one. However, that was more out of necessity than trying to increase interest in the house shows.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

....except for the matches being the same

 

And that's what I'm arguing. Having the same matches over and over and over again doesn't help when business and interest is down. It's counter-productive. They could get away with it in a peak because people wanted to see guys like Austin and DX, or the show in general because it was hot, but they don't really have that now. There are so many things they could do with house shows that they don't care to do because they don't see it as important. They are too focused on increasing TV ratings because they assume that once interest in TV has gone up people will go to the shows; but why would people now go to the shows if they can see it on TV? They are drawing less than 5000 fans to their shows; UFC draws more, TKO draws more. Now, if you can make the case that they run shows once every 3 months, but they don't have television either. The WWE shouldn't be doing these numbers with the resources they have and this is a very important issue that is being overlooked and brushed aside by sarcastic remarks like the one you made.

[Guest Goodear]

House show matches being the same as another house show from the next state over is not an actual concern regarding the nature of the house show business. Why would it? Only a miniscule fraction of people would even know the results of the prior match up, much less a move by move description.

 

Nope, the long lasting effect here is actually due more to the quality of matches people get to see on free television more than anything else in my view. Used to be, the only place you could see Hulk Hogan actually in a match was either on Saturday Night's Main Event (which was like four times a year), PV, or at your local arena. Now a days, you've not only seen the workers go for extended periods but have also probably seen the same match ups on television a dozen times as well. Basically paying to go to a house show is like paying to go to RAW without having to sit through as many commercial breaks. Its any wonder people stay at home.

[Guest Brian]

Part of that is because they go through the motions every weekend. They're running the same matches and getting lazy, and there's not enough variety in who or how they work.