Guest Brian Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 Via Meltz's Newsletter and Goodhelmet at nmblues.com After the last investors conference, the ECW PPV estimate suddenly went from 268,000 buys to 310,000 buys. This would put the show well ahead of Hogan's return to PPV and Foley's return to PP in recent years. It would make the PPv the 3rd best selling non-major show in the last 13 months.
Precious Roy Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 why do they not have solid numbers yet?
Fökai Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 They're only estimates until the final numbers, which usually come out three months after the event.
UseTheSledgehammerUh Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 Hogan's return to PPV was at WrestleMania XXI, as advertised.
The Niggardly King Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 This seems to be the only PPV that I can recall getting so many varied guesestimations on the buyrate.
pochorenella Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 What did Royal Rumble 2005 do? I know WM21 did over a million buys, and SummerSlam did over 500,000 so for ECW ONS to come in third then the Rumble must have been less than 310,000. I have a hard time believing that.
chaosrage Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I'm pretty sure Royal Rumble is a major show.
Sideburnious Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 It would make the PPv the 3rd best selling non-major show in the last 13 months. I think that means 3rd best PPV outside the big 4.
pochorenella Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 Oh, it was NON-major show. My bad, I read it wrong. So then, I have Vengeance 2005 ahead of it. What PPV would be the other?
RedJed Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 Oh, it was NON-major show. My bad, I read it wrong. So then, I have Vengeance 2005 ahead of it. What PPV would be the other? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My guess would be New Year's Revolution. Wouldnt be surprised to see the final number even a little more than this projection at this rate.
Guest Kaedon Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I dont get why people are so concerned with buyrates. Its about the quality of the product as YOU percieve it not about how many people buy it.
Black Lushus Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 you can't sustain a PPV market, which brings in a huge chunk of much needed cash, if you don't get good buyrates, that's why it's important...
Guest Kaedon Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 you can't sustain a PPV market, which brings in a huge chunk of much needed cash, if you don't get good buyrates, that's why it's important... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Last I checked, none of us here worked for WWE Inc.
Black Lushus Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 no, but as WWE fans (for the most part) we SHOULD be concerned with buyrates because they help sustain a company we all like watching...
Guest MikeSC Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 They are still, basically, the only consistent PPV buy out there.
Guest Kaedon Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 no, but as WWE fans (for the most part) we SHOULD be concerned with buyrates because they help sustain a company we all like watching... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The only way YOU as a fan can sustain anything (one fan is kinda insignificant), is by watching and getting others to watch. Buyrates are left to those who have to boost ratings. Why waste your time with something you have absolutely ZERO control over. Its like me caring about how well Metallica records sell. I dont control it, and I dont have enough sway to significantly impact it, so I sit back and enjoy the music when I can.
Guest Fook_Theta Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 no, but as WWE fans (for the most part) we SHOULD be concerned with buyrates because they help sustain a company we all like watching... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The only way YOU as a fan can sustain anything (one fan is kinda insignificant), is by watching and getting others to watch. Buyrates are left to those who have to boost ratings. Why waste your time with something you have absolutely ZERO control over. Its like me caring about how well Metallica records sell. I dont control it, and I dont have enough sway to significantly impact it, so I sit back and enjoy the music when I can. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We have zero control over everything relating to WWE, but that doesn't stop the analytical discussions of all things WWE. Just like I have no bearing on whether my local sports team will win or not, but I still enjoy watching the games and talking about what is happening in the World of Sports. The reason I personally care to see where the buyrate is, is because the investors and WWE cares what it is. If something gets a great buyrate especially when I'm sure Vince was thinking it would tank so he could say "HA ha, ECW can't draw a fly if it was covered in shit", it's nice to know that. What it potentially means is WWE and the investors see this and will want to do it again which I would love to see. There's a demand on alternative wrestling. WWE can supply that demand. They are now more likely to do so than if the ppv only received 180,000 buys.
I like Forums Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I think many people are interested in ECW's PPV Buy rates because if has done well enough, it might warrent another ECW PPV or at some capasity more ECW-like programming. That is what some people are interested in.
LaParkaYourCar Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 no, but as WWE fans (for the most part) we SHOULD be concerned with buyrates because they help sustain a company we all like watching... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The only way YOU as a fan can sustain anything (one fan is kinda insignificant), is by watching and getting others to watch. Buyrates are left to those who have to boost ratings. Why waste your time with something you have absolutely ZERO control over. Its like me caring about how well Metallica records sell. I dont control it, and I dont have enough sway to significantly impact it, so I sit back and enjoy the music when I can. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually watching and getting others to watch won't effect anything unless you have a Nielsen Box.
Lil' Bitch Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I don't see how they're going to do more ECW programs if they keep fucking over / pissing off ECW talent (Dudleyz).
chaosrage Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I dont get why people are so concerned with buyrates. Its about the quality of the product as YOU percieve it not about how many people buy it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hello, we care because if it ONS pulled a good buyrate, it probably means we'll get another ECW PPV.
Guest Kaedon Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 no, but as WWE fans (for the most part) we SHOULD be concerned with buyrates because they help sustain a company we all like watching... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The only way YOU as a fan can sustain anything (one fan is kinda insignificant), is by watching and getting others to watch. Buyrates are left to those who have to boost ratings. Why waste your time with something you have absolutely ZERO control over. Its like me caring about how well Metallica records sell. I dont control it, and I dont have enough sway to significantly impact it, so I sit back and enjoy the music when I can. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We have zero control over everything relating to WWE, but that doesn't stop the analytical discussions of all things WWE. Just like I have no bearing on whether my local sports team will win or not, but I still enjoy watching the games and talking about what is happening in the World of Sports. The reason I personally care to see where the buyrate is, is because the investors and WWE cares what it is. If something gets a great buyrate especially when I'm sure Vince was thinking it would tank so he could say "HA ha, ECW can't draw a fly if it was covered in shit", it's nice to know that. What it potentially means is WWE and the investors see this and will want to do it again which I would love to see. There's a demand on alternative wrestling. WWE can supply that demand. They are now more likely to do so than if the ppv only received 180,000 buys. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Im not saying you CANT, im saying I dont get why. And (guy above me) the caring of internet marks about a Pay per View wont lead to another one, enough people buying it will.
I like Forums Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 "And (guy above me) the caring of internet marks about a Pay per View wont lead to another one, enough people buying it will." Are you crazy? That's fucking why we are looking at the BUYRATES! Seeing how many people bought it can lead to a discussion about what that means for the future of ECW brand shows. Do you not understand this? You must be a gimmick.
chaosrage Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 Im not saying you CANT, im saying I dont get why. And (guy above me) the caring of internet marks about a Pay per View wont lead to another one, enough people buying it will. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ...We care about it because we want to see if there will be another one. Goddamn, you're a fucking retard. Edit: You're Kamehameha, aren't you?
Black Lushus Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 Im not saying you CANT, im saying I dont get why. And (guy above me) the caring of internet marks about a Pay per View wont lead to another one, enough people buying it will. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ...We care about it because we want to see if there will be another one. Goddamn, you're a fucking retard. Edit: You're Kamehameha, aren't you? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> starting to seem like it, eh?
4hartthreat Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 ...We care about it because we want to see if there will be another one. Goddamn, you're a fucking retard. Edit: You're Kamehameha, aren't you? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't see why anyone would care either way. ONS was nothing but a bunch of old ecw guys carrying out a wwe-style ppv. If the ecw guys can't go out there and be their old selves then what is the point? Heyman talked about a lucha style match, and a japan style match, and a hart dungeon style match, bullshit, it was all wwe "everyone wrestle the same exact way" style matches and that was not what ecw was about. Just let it die before hhh feels anymore threatened by it and does something even worse to the ecw legacy than this ppv already has. Any ppv that produces a Benoit-Guerrero match THAT bad really isn't worth revisiting anyway....
Ravenbomb Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I don't see how they're going to do more ECW programs if they keep fucking over / pissing off ECW talent (Dudleyz). <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
RedJed Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 ...We care about it because we want to see if there will be another one. Goddamn, you're a fucking retard. Edit: You're Kamehameha, aren't you? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't see why anyone would care either way. ONS was nothing but a bunch of old ecw guys carrying out a wwe-style ppv. If the ecw guys can't go out there and be their old selves then what is the point? Heyman talked about a lucha style match, and a japan style match, and a hart dungeon style match, bullshit, it was all wwe "everyone wrestle the same exact way" style matches and that was not what ecw was about. Just let it die before hhh feels anymore threatened by it and does something even worse to the ecw legacy than this ppv already has. Any ppv that produces a Benoit-Guerrero match THAT bad really isn't worth revisiting anyway.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm missing it where the ONS ppv tarnished the ECW legacy AT ALL. If anything it honored the legacy of ECW and for pretty much any ECW fan, left them VERY satisfied as it was a unique night overall. Sure the matches should have/could have been better - and dont give me that "WWE style" shit - it was more that the guys were limited on time and as such, the matches werent as good as they should have been. The agents werent forcing the wrestlers to work a certain "WWE style". Plus Eddy was well known to have not been in a good mood for whatever reason and basically wasnt cooperating in that match as well as he should have been. With that said, this might be worth a whole new thread, but I dont think WWE will give the show any sort of justice whatsover a second time. Plus Heyman will likely be gone by next June. Overall its just a bad idea to revisit a second time with the politics involved right now (the stranglehold on ECW talent not employed by WWE, possibly no Heyman, backlash from WWE on the effects/aftermath of the first ONS, etc).
4hartthreat Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I'm missing it where the ONS ppv tarnished the ECW legacy AT ALL. If anything it honored the legacy of ECW and for pretty much any ECW fan, left them VERY satisfied as it was a unique night overall. Sure the matches should have/could have been better - and dont give me that "WWE style" shit - it was more that the guys were limited on time and as such, the matches werent as good as they should have been. The agents werent forcing the wrestlers to work a certain "WWE style". Plus Eddy was well known to have not been in a good mood for whatever reason and basically wasnt cooperating in that match as well as he should have been. With that said, this might be worth a whole new thread, but I dont think WWE will give the show any sort of justice whatsover a second time. Plus Heyman will likely be gone by next June. Overall its just a bad idea to revisit a second time with the politics involved right now (the stranglehold on ECW talent not employed by WWE, possibly no Heyman, backlash from WWE on the effects/aftermath of the first ONS, etc). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How the hell did a ppv built around JBL and Kurt Angle bashing ecw honor the legacy of ecw in any way? The whole show was about them. Their arrival, their reaction to the show, and then their getting involved in the show by brawling with the ecw guys. If ecw was all about JBL and Kurt Angle then I must have watched a different ecw than you did.
RedJed Posted October 18, 2005 Report Posted October 18, 2005 I'm missing it where the ONS ppv tarnished the ECW legacy AT ALL. If anything it honored the legacy of ECW and for pretty much any ECW fan, left them VERY satisfied as it was a unique night overall. Sure the matches should have/could have been better - and dont give me that "WWE style" shit - it was more that the guys were limited on time and as such, the matches werent as good as they should have been. The agents werent forcing the wrestlers to work a certain "WWE style". Plus Eddy was well known to have not been in a good mood for whatever reason and basically wasnt cooperating in that match as well as he should have been. With that said, this might be worth a whole new thread, but I dont think WWE will give the show any sort of justice whatsover a second time. Plus Heyman will likely be gone by next June. Overall its just a bad idea to revisit a second time with the politics involved right now (the stranglehold on ECW talent not employed by WWE, possibly no Heyman, backlash from WWE on the effects/aftermath of the first ONS, etc). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How the hell did a ppv built around JBL and Kurt Angle bashing ecw honor the legacy of ecw in any way? The whole show was about them. Their arrival, their reaction to the show, and then their getting involved in the show by brawling with the ecw guys. If ecw was all about JBL and Kurt Angle then I must have watched a different ecw than you did. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ECW was all about standing up to the "big boys" and being defiant so in that respect, again, I dont see what the big deal was since the whole point of that was to have them get squashed by the ECW guys at the end of the show. Again, that was honoring their legacy, be it in a back asswards way, but it still was. I'll just say this much, as an ECW fan, and going into it not thinking it was going to overall be done right, I came out of it very satisfied as I think most in general did too.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now