Guest rawmvp Report post Posted July 1, 2005 http://corporate.wwe.com/investors/documen...Drivers_021.pdf The buyrate has been confirmed to be in the 270,000 range, which is lower than last year's Bad Blood, and much, much lower than the original 800,000 estimate. I wouldn't look for the ECW brand to be revived after this... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest QUP2CME Report post Posted July 1, 2005 And everyone comes flying back down to earth with a thud. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jericholic82 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 why surprised? I mean the wwe involvement alone turned off alot of people. plus the dvd coming out 2 weeks later made a lot of people like myself wait for it. They should be happy it wasnt a total flop, it coupled with the dvd sales will make some sort of money right? Besides ECW is dead and gone and this was the last hurrah for the fans and wrestlers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iliketurtles 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 800,000 my ass. I hope it's now confirmed to everyone you can't take estimates within 24 hours seriously. Well, it was a good reunion show. I think it would be intresting to see them do a couple more shows down the line, maybe even a ECW tour of sorts, but definately since it didn't hit at least 500,000, I doubt ECW will take over at all anytime of brand (specifically SD) in the future. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Good thing WWE hedged its bets on Smackdown in the lottery. I still don't know what's going to happen to that show though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iliketurtles 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Yeah, Smackdown is still in deep shit anyways come the fall. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Thia number is both good and bad. The number is low but they probably didn't spend as much as they would have on Bad Blood, The PPV was a breath of fresh air and hopefully the DVD will be a best seller. 270,000 range... that sucks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vanhalen 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 HAHAHAHAHAHA 800,000 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaosrage 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 http://corporate.wwe.com/investors/documen...Drivers_021.pdf The buyrate has been confirmed to be in the 270,000 range, which is lower than last year's Bad Blood, and much, much lower than the original 800,000 estimate. I wouldn't look for the ECW brand to be revived after this... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I can't see why not. That's still a pretty good number. I mean, it did better than Judgment Day and a lot of other WWE PPVs this year and last year. If it has more buys than Vengeance too and it probably will, then a dead company which used to get .7 ratings weekly while it was alive brought back with no card, no storylines, and very little hype made Vince more money than either Raw and Smackdown PPV. Meltzer said 300,000 would be a major success. Another thing, if you look at the chart right below that, you can see it's just an initial estimate. It always turns out to be more. For example, last year's Bad Blood initial estimate was lower than ONS. In fact just compare the circles on the second PPV chart. 275,000 doesn't seem so bad now, does it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Prime Time Andrew Doyle 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Where did the 800,000 buys talk come from. Either somebody was playing a practical joke, or somebody got mixed up when calculating the orignal estimate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDH257 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 http://corporate.wwe.com/investors/documen...Drivers_021.pdf The buyrate has been confirmed to be in the 270,000 range, which is lower than last year's Bad Blood, and much, much lower than the original 800,000 estimate. I wouldn't look for the ECW brand to be revived after this... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's almost exactly how the guy who's name is apparently not supposed to be mentioned on this board reacted. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Adam 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 That's really, really ghey. Fucking ghey. Terrible. Awful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silence 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 The WWE Crusaders' involvement wasn't necessary, anyway. Now RVD definitely has even more reason to be pissed about that. Stone Cold's involvement was pointless, too. Yeah, he was in ECW at one point, but the Stone Cold character is WWE alumni, and Austin's been played-out and overexposed for so long. It's too bad TNA wouldn't let Raven show up at ONS, since he was a major ECW star during the mid-90's. Benoit and Eddie should have had different opponents, since they never had a series of matches against each other in ECW, and Eddie doesn't seem to be on good terms with Benoit anymore to the point of giving him a bad match. Aside from all of that, I still liked ONS, but there were so many things on the PPV that probably led to the underwhelming buyrate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fro 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 http://corporate.wwe.com/investors/documen...Drivers_021.pdf The buyrate has been confirmed to be in the 270,000 range, which is lower than last year's Bad Blood, and much, much lower than the original 800,000 estimate. I wouldn't look for the ECW brand to be revived after this... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Um, there is no buyrate for One Night Stand in those numbers. That's the Backlash buyrate that is 270,000. There's no numbers listed for May, let alone June (when ONS happened). And considering if you look at the legend where they plot out the buyrates, the estimates are as of April 30th. It'd be pretty hard to estimate a One Night Stand buyrate on April 30th. Please read the PDFs before you agree with anyone who posts this kind of crap. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ransome Report post Posted July 1, 2005 http://corporate.wwe.com/investors/documen...Drivers_021.pdf The buyrate has been confirmed to be in the 270,000 range, which is lower than last year's Bad Blood, and much, much lower than the original 800,000 estimate. I wouldn't look for the ECW brand to be revived after this... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Um, there is no buyrate for One Night Stand in those numbers. That's the Backlash buyrate that is 270,000. There's no numbers listed for May, let alone June (when ONS happened). And considering if you look at the legend where they plot out the buyrates, the estimates are as of April 30th. It'd be pretty hard to estimate a One Night Stand buyrate on April 30th. Please read the PDFs before you agree with anyone who posts this kind of crap. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I admit that the chart is a little hard to read, but as I understand it, ECW One Night Stand occurs in Fiscal Year '06 under the name Bad Blood (ie, the blue dot). In which case, the 270,000 estimate *is* correct, based on this chart. Of course, they have admitted that the number is based only on initial estimates and generally the buyrates go up. I don't think people here would be so disappointed unless the (apparently) bogus 800,000 number had been propagated. Perhaps it signifies that ONS will not bring about widespread changes to the industry, but that doesn't change the fact that ONS was an aesthetic success and a supremely entertaining nostalgia trip. ECW may not cater to the mainstream, but I still feel WWE should be praised for throwing ECW's small (yet vocal) fanbase a 'bone'. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pochorenella 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Let the bitching commence on how WWE's involvement on the ECW PPV caused this HUGE show to get below 300,000 buys. Really, who truly expected a brand that never got great PPV buys to all of a sudden get WrestleMania-like numbers? Nostalgia alone can't be a helping factor. Of course it was gonna bring more buys than ever before, but now that it didn't do 500,000 or whatever number some idiot let out you can't seriously put the blame on Steve Austin appearing or JBL doing a promo on the show. If anything, all the promotion on RAW and SD! helped get more awareness on the show. At least that's my take. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bob_barron 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Hahah, that's really funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest jumpingbombangel Report post Posted July 1, 2005 And everyone comes flying back down to earth with a thud. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I did that the day *after* the PPV. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Exslade ZX 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Lol, it's funny, everyone's saying the Crusader involvement is what caused a lower buyrate...but the only thing that anyone's really been talking about involving the PPV was the WWE involvement. What else? That, and for a short while people talked about the Awesome/Tanaka match..and that's about it. Seems like the WWE involvement was/is the most talked about thing, and is the reason other people are watching/buying the PPV, or DVD. (And I don't mean in the bad way.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jericho2000Mark 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Didn't Bad Blood last year only do like 250 000 buys? Didn't the Torch come up with the 800 000 buys figure? What was the last thing they reported first that actually came true? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cabbageboy 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 That chart was really weird, you're telling me that the Backlash listing was actually the ECW listing? I dunno. Has this actually been reported on another website? As in Meltzer, Scherer, etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest M. Harry Smilac Report post Posted July 1, 2005 We'll probably never get the true figure anyways. They stopped releasing the numbers for the Rise & Fall dvd after it got within 5,000 copies of #1 as they didn't want ppl to know their #1 selling dvd of all time is a dvd based on another company. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ronixis Report post Posted July 1, 2005 *BUZZER* Hold your horses. Look at the chart again. The ones that are on the left- are the 2004 events. Bad Blood had Byrate of 270,000 back in 2004. Has anyone taken a Course in Accounting Before? Wow... The last PPV they got info for is Backlash 2005. The next PPV is Judgment Day and then ONS which still hasnt not seen its buyrate numbers come in as Mrs McMahan has stated. They dont KNOW yet! LET NOT YOUR HEARTS BE TROUBLED! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Exslade ZX 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Here's the chart. See at the bottom..06 fiscal year. It's dark blue. See where the chart is dark blue. From April to June. And the Bad Blood 06, aka ONS is on the chart. It's there. And it's below last years. Hey, it might not be right, but fact is, it is on the chart... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Where's Backlash's buyrate? Maybe no one bought it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Where's Backlash's buyrate? Maybe no one bought it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> On the far right. It actually got a better buyrate than ONS. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pochorenella 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Hahah, that's really funny. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Which part? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JoeDirt 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 I'm sure ONS got close to 270,000, but isn't the number here just an estimate? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karc 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Where's Backlash's buyrate? Maybe no one bought it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> On the far right. It actually got a better buyrate than ONS. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> By a hair, which should be a sign to certain people that the Wrestlemania buyrate was due to certain factors un-related to the brands. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zetterberg is God 0 Report post Posted July 1, 2005 Linda McMahon has stated that this is simply the figure they're budgeting for. I'm afraid what you have here is piss-poor journalism Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
