Is Cost Cutting Driving WWE Decisions?

[THTRobtaylor]

Meltzer is at it again... this time however, his report that WWE is worried about its profits for this year, after promising stellar numbers after last year actually seems to be somewhat accurate.

With talk of a new re-distribution of talent, shows being cancelled and production values on shows being reduced, notably in the pyro usage...and of course the possibility Brock could be leaving sooner than planned for a UFC bout all do lend themselves to trying to save money...and some of the decisions WWE is making.

The biggest saving would be Brock... let's face it, the experiment with him as an absent champ has failed and is costing a shit ton of money, in terms of Brock's money but the dwindling ratings from not having the belt present. Of course, if he goes to UFC AS WWE Champ and can win against Jones, it does potentially lead to some money coming in. BUT...

Brock is also associated with a drugs test fail in his last fight, publicity that WWE doesn't want. So the easiest way to trim money and raise profits at the moment is probably to let him leave... when he loses (he will) he will want to come back, and WWE can negotiate a more favourable deal.

In terms of booking however, it seems to be not just Brock that is being shaken up... Cena being put against Jinder Mahal seemingly is a way to get a bankable champion on at least one of the brands. That's not to say Jinder is failing, but bottom line is no onee RAW Fatal Fourway for Summerslam is proven as a draw other than Brock... if he IS going then they need to switch the "rookie champ" to RAW and have the established one on SD.

However it does appear they have a plan in mind... IF the Shield do reuinite, for example winning the tags and helping Reigns end Brock's tenure on the night...then it's conceivable the merch goes up on RAW and while Reigns alone couldn't sell, as part of a reformed Shield, he might work for a while.

Canceling the shows from the Network seems counter productive in some ways as the content is important in justifying the price-tag. One thing WWE might be trying to do is to add some value back to their TV offering for the next deal or negotiations with TV even now like...

"Oh you liked Talking Smack...well give us the extra hour and we'll do it for x per year extra..."

For WWE to pay for it and air it, it's expensive... if USA pay for and air it, then it's cheap.

One change that seems to be coming is they have gone VERY quiet on the UK TV show as well... to the point where the next defence is against an established WWE star in Jack Gallagher... is this where they put the belt on him, move him to Smackdown and have the belt defended like the old European belt? Certainly cheaper than a UK TV show.

WWE as a traded company, really HAS to get this profitability up, as if they don't and the rough numbers Meltzer mentioned are remotely accurate... that's when companies do go start to lose investors quickly...

Do you think this might be the real reason there seems to be so much change right now? or have they worked out that the product isn't right?

 

[Snugglebites]

I don't buy this myth that the ratings are down because Lesnar (as champion) isn't showing up much. When the Internet golden boys, Owens & Styles, were holding the main two belts, the ratings weren't exactly that much better, even had a record low. It's much more than 1 man not appearing often.

But let's just get the title off Lesnar and go back to blaming creative, writing, booking, NFL, NBA, Baseball, PG, Vince, Dunn, Roman and it's just that time of year.

 

[Jeff Deliverer of Mail]

I can't see how it could cost less to have an LED ramp to the ring with LED side canvas on the ring with LED ringposts. On the flip side, they probably need to get the money back WWE spent on the absolutely insane Wrestlemania set, god only knows how much that amusement park and giant ramp cost.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Canceling the shows from the Network seems counter productive in some ways as the content is important in justifying the price-tag. One thing WWE might be trying to do is to add some value back to their TV offering for the next deal or negotiations with TV even now like...

I can see why WWE would want to cut down some shows. I wouldn't mind WWE cutting down their programs like Holey Foley or that Animated Show. Both really add nothing to the product and are expensive to produce.

I would think Podcasts would be the cheaper shows to produce so I was shocked to see them cancel the Stone Cold Podcast. I think if you told fans that they can have Austin a podcast talking to wrestlers and personalities and having his inputs on the industry would be a huge incentive for fans to subscribe the network.

There was also a show where Corey Graves goes to locales in when on the would travel on the road. And I thought that was a good idea too and, I assume, cheaper to produce than Holey Foley, an Animated Show, or Legends House.

Heck why doesn't the WWE release their XFL and WBF Library?

 

[THTRobtaylor]

I guess in Austin's case, it cost too much to do it in money to him... and once they'd done Shane and Vince, who else can they really get?

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

I guess in Austin's case, it cost too much to do it in money to him... and once they'd done Shane and Vince, who else can they really get?

If you dd a monthly thing the show can last a long time. I mean Kurt Angle just returned to the company that's one guy there.

 

[Psykohurricane55]

Let's face it, the Lesnar excuse that a lot of fans have use for the declining ratings is just that an excuse. I'm sorry to say this, but when Owens was universal champion, the ratings we're at almost the same level as they are when lesnar isn't on the show. In fact the only time the Raw ratings we're up during the whole Owens titles reign was when Goldberg or Lesnar we're on the show. So the Problem isn't really the fact that Lesnar isn'T there on a regular bases. It's bigger then that.

The fact of the matter is this, Right now, the main problem is the fact that both Raw and Smackdown are so micro manage that it doesn't create compelling character. Right now, when i watch Raw, outside, Lesnar, Joe, Strowman and Reigns, i couldn'T cares less about what going on with the rest of the characters and that's a problem when you're trying to hook somebody to watch a 3 hour tv show. You have to get compelling stories and characters and you don'T get that on Raw and that's the same problem they sometimes have on smackdown.

So they need to cut some stuff so that they can get a better bottom line at the end and i makes senses. They already too much crappy programming on the network lately, a easy way to fix that would be to use more of the back library to fill in the schedule every week. Between that and some of the less expensive show they already have, you can actually have a decent schedule on the network that would cost less then nothing to produce. If you put air old episode of Nitro on mondays, Old saturday night's main event on saturday and continue with those old friday theme ppv and shows, you got alot of programming for almost nothing and fans love watching old wrestling anyway.

That's could be one solutions. Also you could trim down the roster a little bit, their so many wrestlers that are under contract on both the NXT and WWE rosters that are doing almost nothing at the moment that i would be a better solution to just let them go and wrestle elsewhere.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

If you dd a monthly thing the show can last a long time. I mean Kurt Angle just returned to the company that's one guy there.

Austin recently spoke on it and said they "contracted for 12 and did 12" so that is pretty much code for "they don't want to pay what I want..."

Angle would be possibly interesting, but it wouldn't work while he's doing the Jordan story... perhaps afterwards.

There ARE others, but they would be niche... I'd LOVE to see an Austin and Cornette podcast for example, or even pay Jim to "go off" on some talents to create heat for them. Talking Smack on Crack if you like...

There is an element though of WWE protecting themselves with less exposure to podcasts... only takes one inappropriate story or tale, particularly in light of concussion lawsuits etc and things get messy, just like Hogan on Arsenio... As much as it might be reducing costs, it's also reducing risk.