And wwe wonder why business is down ??

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

....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.

Rudo, your killing me here bro. I AGREE that they should be doing better business. I AGREE that it is a problem. I am not arguing that with you. I am saying that even though the fact that matches are the same(in-ring wise) at all these shows, that it isn't what's hurting business. Not enough WWE fans that go to the events are on the net reading results and things of that nature. Thus, the reason why they don't go to shows is the following:

 

-Not enough TV exposure

By this I simply mean that there is no emphasis on your individual house show. Example: Since when do you hear JR mention at the end of RAW, "Triple H sure got the best of Benoit tonight, but we'll see if he does the same at the RAW show this Saturday in Illinois". It doesn't happen. THAT is a HUGE problem.

 

Not enough emphasis on matches

They NEVER EVER tell you what matches you will see on the date of the house show that you are going to. IMO, this really hurts. I agree with Rudo on the fact that there are NO wrestlers that people want to just plain see no matter what. No Austin or DX for people to see and not care who their opponents are. So, they have to have matches that people are flocking to see.

 

Here RRR, maybe this will give to a clearer example of where I stand on this.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Dynamite, can't you see how having the same matches on the shows effects those 2 things?

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

What's a "kidman" ?

[Slickster 0]

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.

Now, I wouldn't say that they are 'getting lazy'...just go back and read all the fantastic reviews from people who watched HHH-Benoit (and possibly HBK) at house shows before WM. Those reports seem to indicate that all parties involved busted their asses in making the show better. They're not all doing the fingerpoke of doom just because they aren't on TV.

 

And another thing:

 

-Not enough TV exposure

By this I simply mean that there is no emphasis on your individual house show. Example: Since when do you hear JR mention at the end of RAW, "Triple H sure got the best of Benoit tonight, but we'll see if he does the same at the RAW show this Saturday in Illinois". It doesn't happen. THAT is a HUGE problem.

 

They don't say that because it would devalue what you just saw. "Oh, so that wasn't Benoit's last chance at the title (despite being hyped as such for the preceding two hours)? Well, that sucks. They're openly lying to us now."

 

Better to not hype the shows if there won't be any non-storyline matches on them...that way people who can't go to the show won't feel cheated for having watched Raw or SD! in the hopes of seeing finality or definite conclusions to storylines.

[Guest Burning Hammer]

As you can seehere there live attendance is on an upward swing from where it was from September of 03. It may not be above levels from January 03 but it is pretty close and the trend is upward so saying house show business is down is a tad misleading.

 

Overall they are actually a more profitable company this year than last year due to cost cutting and not having to eat the closing costs of the WWF New York situation (which was $32.9 million pre taxes). Any idea that the WWE is losing money is completely and utterly false. In the third quarter this year they profited 8.9 million and that would be the numbers without the Royal Rumble gate and buyrate figured in. Most likely they are going to do huge numbers for the 4th quarter with Mania figured in which was a giant fucking success money wise.

 

As far as the repetiveness of house shows go I don't see any reason to stop. Internet fans make up like 5% of the people at the shows. The rest of the people don't check the internet for results of a houseshow the night before in a different town. They have no idea that they will be seeing the same thing that another group saw the other night. Plus house shows are a totally different experience watching the show on tv.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

This "trend" is based on HOW many months? Or should I say weeks? Hardly comparable to the quarterly statement which had concrete figures. If anything is "misleading" it is this. Who said that the WWE is losing money? I said their live event revenue decreased. Which it did and has.

 

You see no reason to stop? How about falling attendance despite lowering ticket prices? They have to build interest in the shows and they aren't going to do that running the same programs.

[Guest Burning Hammer]

The trend I mentioned was up from September of 03 which I of course said right in my post.

 

Secondly where did you get those exact numbers? I ask because I can't find them on the WWE corporate site. The best I can do is this

(scroll down a bit to third quarter) and in this they give approximate numbers of

 

2004 Q3 average attendance 4000

2003 Q3 average attendance 4300

 

So average attendence fell by 300 people. And this is what you want them to change the entire way they do house shows for? A fall of about 7 percent? I would equate this fall with the lack of a proven draw on the house shows than the actuall format of them.

 

Also in the last few months according to the Observer, Figure Four, Torch and others live show attendance has been up with even a few legit sell outs. I'm sure this will be reflected on the Q4 reports but until then are we supposed to ignore data coming in that shows an upward swing in live attendance when having a discussion about live attendance? That just seems hard headed and asinine.

 

The general business comments were not directed toward you at all nor were they labled as such. There is this general idea that the WWE doesn't make money but is losing money which is false.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Dynamite, can't you see how having the same matches on the shows effects those 2 things?

Rudo, I would imagine the two reasons I gave would be the reason why they "have" to have the same matches at house shows right???

 

They don't say that because it would devalue what you just saw. "Oh, so that wasn't Benoit's last chance at the title (despite being hyped as such for the preceding two hours)? Well, that sucks. They're openly lying to us now."

 

Better to not hype the shows if there won't be any non-storyline matches on them...that way people who can't go to the show won't feel cheated for having watched Raw or SD! in the hopes of seeing finality or definite conclusions to storylines.

 

But that is the thing HFP, it's not devaluing what you just saw. It makes EVERYTHING they do important then. They could add a portion to Heat/Velocity, or one of it's other shitty weekend shows and use that time to push the house show circuit more. They could use those to carry over to what they are doing on TV, and make it so people want to know what happened on the house shows. They could then record the house shows and sell them, or put them on PPV in monthly packages. This, if done correctly could change the face of the business. Instead they would rather keep it the way that it is, and in turn make it so hardly anyone wants to go to a house show anymore.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

So average attendence fell by 300 people. And this is what you want them to change the entire way they do house shows for? A fall of about 7 percent? I would equate this fall with the lack of a proven draw on the house shows than the actuall format of them.

 

Actually I was looking at this one:

 

Average attendance

 

Jan 2004: 4,140

 

Jan 2003: 4,730

 

(12% decrease)

 

Which I stated on Page 2.

 

House Show attendance has been falling for *years*, so this is not an isolated number, infact, IIRC they were once at 10,000 so 4000 seems pretty low, doncha think? Something should change.

 

Also in the last few months according to the Observer, Figure Four, Torch and others live show attendance has been up with even a few legit sell outs. I'm sure this will be reflected on the Q4 reports but until then are we supposed to ignore data coming in that shows an upward swing in live attendance when having a discussion about live attendance?

 

Yep. That's exactly it.

 

"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."

 

Again, page 2.

 

That just seems hard headed and asinine.

 

No, it's smart. 3 months (or 1 quarter) is better reflective of the current state of the product; be that ratings, ticket sales, buyrates, etc. Why do you think they have Quarterly Reports? To just pick a few dates is silly, what if they fall again? It wouldn't be balanced.

 

The general business comments were not directed toward you at all nor were they labled as such. There is this general idea that the WWE doesn't make money but is losing money which is false.

 

However, they *are* making _less_ money. Revenue is down almost all across the board, so "business is down" is accurate.

[Guest Burning Hammer]

Business being down is not acurate since their profit is up from last years quarter for Q3. There net income for quarter 3 is 8.852 million compared to a 16 million dollar loss the year before. Looks to me like that is a 24 million dollar swing in the positive direction for the bottom line. They are also up in the 9 month trend with a 28.652 million dollar profit compared to a 15.075 million dollar loss the year before. That is an impressive swing in business and you can look at their Q3 release to share holders here (once again scroll down a bit to get to the quarter 3 release).

 

Once again where did you get those live attendance numbers from? They aren't on their corporate site so I'd appreciate it if you could tell me where you found them.

 

Live attendance was at 10,000 when they had actuall house show draws with Steve Austin, Rock, and Mick Foley. Live attendance fell because: 1. They didn't make any new viable draws when the old draws left and 2: the wrestling fad ended. It had nothing to do with the format of their house shows and continues to have nothing to do with that.

 

Quarterly reports are great but to ignore short term trends is extremely short sighted when discussing how business is doing or is going to do. For example if Eddie Guerrero is drawing a lot more fans and then gets hurt and live attendance takes a large tumble that will not be reflected in a quarterly report. It will look like they are holding steady or slipping in live attendance when in all actuality they were on an upswing because of Guerrero.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

You're talking about profits and income, not revenue. That could be because of less money going out (less costs (which it is)) rather than more money coming in. The consumer is spending LESS money on almost all areas of business, there is little-to-no growth there, business is down. What was this about misleading?

 

I got them on the quarterly report emailed to me. It's under:

 

Item 2.

 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

Well Gee, they just need to create a new fad! That's the answer! Why bother to CHANGE anything, just make another boom with new stars that the fans will come in droves to pay for... do you know how stupid that sounds, business wise? I'm not saying that being Hot didn't help House Show business, because lord knows it did. But wrestling stopped being "hot" 3/4 years ago. The reason Fans aren't going to house shows is because there is no real reason to. Having the same show over and over and over again with little differentiation or little effect on the TV product doesn't help that. They have to, in one way or another, make House Shows seem important.

 

There are things that can be changed that are house show-specific and they simply aren't changing them.

 

Short Term trends can be just that, however. The WWE's ratings picked up at the end of last summer with Kane going strong - then MNF came and the WWE was back in the 3's. The sample of just a few weeks isn't large enough, or concrete enough to say "attendance is up" or "attendance is down". It's a fundamental principle in statistics that the larger the sample, the better - more balanced - results. My source has 70+ live events, and this "Eddie Guerrero is raising Attendance" claim has _how_ many? I seriously doubt it's 70.

[Guest Burning Hammer]

Clearly Guerrero hasn't main evented 70 live event shows but to ignore what he has done since becoming champion because it isn't in a quarterly report is foolish.

 

Yes revenues are down but profits are up. I took your quote of

However, they *are* making _less_ money. Revenue is down almost all across the board, so "business is down" is accurate.

to mean that they were not being profitable which is wrong. I guess it all depends on your definition of making money. I see making money as the company profiting from there business and not losing money. They are clearly very profitable this year compared to last year. I wouldn't be surprised to see their Q4 revenues make up the difference and bring this year pretty much into even with last year.

 

 

As far as house show attendance they need a hot draw. Not by creating a fad but a guy who wrestling fans will pay to see. They have tried changing house shows around. They have Coach doing the heel GM shtick for the night, they dim the lights and have more of a tv lighting set up, they run more tv like angles at the house shows to set up the matches but none of these improvements have helped to raise the quarterly attendance markers. Making the matches more unpredictable isn't going to help either since the majority of the people attending the house shows have no idea who is going to be wrestling whom on them. Let alone what the finish of the match is going to be.

 

I would also argue that people who go to house shows don't care if they are of any importance. They just want to go and see the guys they like on tv wrestle. In the older days of wrestling when kayfab was still intact yeah a house show needed to feel important but now with wrestling firmly in the entertainment sector this is not necessary. No live show of Miss Saigon ever fails to draw people into the theater because they know what is going to happen. It still draws because people know what is going to happen and they like the story, the music and everything else that goes hand in hand with attending the theater. Wrestling has become the same way. I know that no titles are going to change hands, I know what is most likely going to happen but I still want to go see Eddie Guerrero wrestle because I like him and I like it when he wins on TV.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I wouldn't be surprised to see their Q4 revenues make up the difference and bring this year pretty much into even with last year.

 

Wasn't that Wrestlesomething XX this Quarter? I wouldn't be surprised either. They, however, might miss the attendance since for the past 3 manias they've done domes and considerably downgraded w/ MSG. However, I suspect the Japan tour w/ Saitama selling out would compensate.

 

As far as house show attendance they need a hot draw. Not by creating a fad but a guy who wrestling fans will pay to see. They have tried changing house shows around. They have Coach doing the heel GM shtick for the night, they dim the lights and have more of a tv lighting set up, they run more tv like angles at the house shows to set up the matches but none of these improvements have helped to raise the quarterly attendance markers. Making the matches more unpredictable isn't going to help either since the majority of the people attending the house shows have no idea who is going to be wrestling whom on them. Let alone what the finish of the match is going to be.

 

I'm talking about a major overhaul of the House Show system. That means getting cards out well in advance; you can't do that successfully by having the same line up on each show. Those "improvements" are superficial and are hardly enough to make the show important to the fans. And I doubt they dim the lights to make it more TV-like; they probably just don't want the wrestlers to see how a 8000 seat building is half-empty.

 

I would also argue that people who go to house shows don't care if they are of any importance.

 

Of course, people who go to house shows _now_ probably go because they are hardcore fans or they're families who can't afford TV tapings or they're just desperate for whatever wrestling they can get (since WWE's method of compensating is going to areas with a wrestling drought). The objective, however, isn't getting the people who go see House Shows *now* to the arenas, it's to get (a)The people who pay to see TV/PPV tapings and (b)People who buy PPVs, and (c ) People who watch the TV show, to go.

 

They just want to go and see the guys they like on tv wrestle. In the older days of wrestling when kayfab was still intact yeah a house show needed to feel important but now with wrestling firmly in the entertainment sector this is not necessary.

 

TV tapings, you might get away with that, but House Shows are 90% wrestling so people are going there to see matches.

 

No live show of Miss Saigon ever fails to draw people into the theater because they know what is going to happen. It still draws because people know what is going to happen and they like the story, the music and everything else that goes hand in hand with attending the theater.

 

What does Miss Saigon draw, anyways?

 

Wrestling has become the same way. I know that no titles are going to change hands, I know what is most likely going to happen but I still want to go see Eddie Guerrero wrestle because I like him and I like it when he wins on TV.

 

And I don't go because I know the wrestling I could buy on tape or see on TV will be better than being there live AND I would rather go to a TV taping or better yet, a PPV, where something important is bound to happen and I can say "I was there". Why do you think PPV's outdraw TV tapings and TV tapings outdraw House Shows? Importance, maybe?

[Guest Burning Hammer]

Why do you think PPV's outdraw TV tapings and TV tapings outdraw House Shows? Importance, maybe?

 

Like this is suddenly going to change? House shows will always be at the bottom of the importance food chain no matter what they do with them since they make the most money off the PPV's and TV tapings and put more emphasis on them accordingly.

 

Wasn't that Wrestlesomething XX this Quarter?

 

Well yeah but my point is it should outdo Q4 from last year which had Mania 19 on it making up the revenue gap that is already there.

I agree with you on the attendance thing for Q4.

 

 

Of course, people who go to house shows _now_ probably go because they are hardcore fans or they're families who can't afford TV tapings or they're just desperate for whatever wrestling they can get

 

How is this any different from a few years ago? House show system was still the same but people went to see Austin or Rock or Foley. Now they don't have that guy to bring the people in it has nothing to do with how the house show system is run. The people watching still like the TV but not enough to shell out money to go to a live show.

 

TV tapings, you might get away with that, but House Shows are 90% wrestling so people are going there to see matches.

 

Yeah they are going to see matches and matches are entertaining for the fans. I'm talking about drawing wrestling fans not casual fans. There are enough wrestling fans out there to get above 7,000 and these people (obviously) enjoy the wrestling part of the show. Getting the cards out ahead of time isn't going to help attendance. I don't care if I know for a month in advance if the Raw house show is main evented by HHH vs Benoit I'm most likely going to go to see Benoit because I like Benoit as champion. Doesn't matter to me who he is wrestling.

 

 

What does Miss Saigon draw, anyways?

Ah clearly showing your lack of culture . Miss Saigon is one of the longest running and best drawing broadway and off boadway musicals in history. Not to mention it is also much more expensive to go see Miss Saigon than a wrestling show ($50-$200 depending on where you see it). Currently there is a touring group of Miss Saigon which hits Detroit next month. If you can you should try to catch it its good.

 

 

And I don't go because I know the wrestling I could buy on tape or see on TV will be better than being there live AND I would rather go to a TV taping or better yet, a PPV, where something important is bound to happen and I can say "I was there".

 

And a fan like you will never be one to regularly attend house shows. I myself rather attend a house show. The matches are longer and typically better than what you get on a tv taping (in my exprience). I can sit close, take lots of nice pictures and have constant quality wrestling in front of me (this is more true for Smackdown! house shows than Raw). A tv taping on the other hand sucks. To many breaks in the action, not enough wrestling for the amount I paid, and most likely I'm sitting farther away from the action making it tougher to follow and also makes my photos suck. Plus watching it on TV gives you the best seat in the house for free so why go to a taping? PPV's of course are the best to go to as long as you don't go to one that sucks and can afford good tickets.