Eric Bischoff: "There should be less PPVs"

[AngryCenaFan]

I agree 1,000%

The product is to watered down, having so many PPV's does not allow for feuds to build up as much, and let's be honest, who the fuck wants to spend 50 bucks every month on mostly generic PPV's?

If you treat PPV, like it's special and space out each one to every 6-8 weeks it has more value, the matches are more meaningful and the consumer will be more OK with the purchase.

TNA needs to do this, WWE? Maybe not, TNA does shitty PPV buyrates they need to change for sure

 

[Jay85]

They should definitely space out the PPVs. Not only would it would it help the PPVs, but also the television programs. The shows would have to be more interesting to build on story lines.

 

[Zeven_Zion]

I'm sorry but without Sponsorship and Advertisement spots like WWE and major sports do I don't see your idea or any PPV idea working for TNA. I think Bischoff knows that deep down inside. The guy has been around for a long time he worked for AWA, WCW, WWE , he knows that the real money in sports and entertainments comes from Sponsorship and advertisement not ticket sales and ppv's. I think he just doesn't care about TNA and just going to milk it till it dies or till he can buy them for cheap.

Okay this is the second time I see you post in this thread mentioning TNA and Sponsors and how much they need them. Let me ask you this - can you list, right now, all of TNA's sponsors? No Googling, no searching around. Do you know who each and every sponsor that TNA has today as you are reading this?

See, I get that it's cool to say "Sponsors and Advertisments sell" and act like you know some crap, while in fact I'm sure you don't know jack.

The "real" money comes from sponsorships and advertisments? Cool. Prove it. Show me where you got this information from. You must've gotten it from somewhere if you're making such a statement, right? Prove to me, and everyone else, that sponsorships and ads bring in more money than ticket sales and PPV buys. Black on white, reports, whatever it is that you found - show it to us.

I hate it when the IWC talks marketing, sponsors and money and they're SO sure of what they're saying, when they base it all on theories and assumptions.

So please, show me the info. I'd like to read it and educate myself on the subject.

 

[3/4 Facelock]

I never majored in marketing by I know a few things about it from working for a corporation.

A corporation agrees to finance an event, organization, or person. The amount of money involved and the terms behind the sponsorship vary from deal to deal, but in most cases the corporation (i.e. 5-Hour Energy or Just for Men) receives tons of free, long-term advertising while the sponsored group (i.e. TNA or WWE) receives a great deal of financing.

The corporation itself benefits from increased brand recognition and the free advertising that comes with the sponsorship. Do you recall all those Slim Jim commercials that were on WWE for the longest time? TNA and the WWE benefis from the capital that is raised and is able to do things that would be impossible without such funding such as getting Floyd Mayweather or J-Woww for the $20 million or $10,000 they cost. TNA especially since a lot of their tickets are given away for free. Getting people like that can cost up to a third to half of of their PPV cash or whatever cash they got from a live event.

The fans benefits from the fact that sponsorships make tickets affordable and low enough for fans to purchase.

Look at NASCAR as an example, logos are everywhere on these cars. This increases the number of people who see whatever brand is on there. Now if the car starts winning and continues to do so the brand becomes synonymous with winning. More people start buying that product and the corporation pays more money to the organization to keep them advertising for them.

Many of the new stadiums around the country exist solely because of funds raised by corporate sponsorship of those stadiums. Even video games like Fight Night (Burger King), Blur (T-Mobile), and Mass Effect (Dr. Pepper) have sponsors which gave them money to produce to high quality games. Movies like Batman (Visa) and Demolition Man, (Taco Bell) have sponsors which help pay for productions quality and cast and crew.

Take all that and apply it to wrestling. These sponsorships help pay for talent, travel expenses, labor, production, writers, and more. Ticket sales are very important but they are only a piece of the whole pie. Not nearly enough to keep the company afloat. It's merchandising and corporate sponsorships that bring in the big bucks.

The more successful the company is, the more viewers watch it. The more viewers watch, the more different corporations vie for advertisement time on the program. The more they vie for time, the more money they offer. This is why it costs millions of dollars for 30 seconds of ad time during the Superbowl. Everyone is watching it.

My knowledge of all this is very basic and probably comes off as such, but in a nutshell that's how it works.

 

[Zeven_Zion]

I never majored in marketing by I know a few things about it from working for a corporation.

A corporation agrees to finance an event, organization, or person. The amount of money involved and the terms behind the sponsorship vary from deal to deal, but in most cases the corporation (i.e. 5-Hour Energy or Just for Men) receives tons of free, long-term advertising while the sponsored group (i.e. TNA or WWE) receives a great deal of financing.

The corporation itself benefits from increased brand recognition and the free advertising that comes with the sponsorship. Do you recall all those Slim Jim commercials that were on WWE for the longest time? TNA and the WWE benefis from the capital that is raised and is able to do things that would be impossible without such funding such as getting Floyd Mayweather or J-Woww for the $20 million or $10,000 they cost. TNA especially since a lot of their tickets are given away for free. Getting people like that can cost up to a third to half of of their PPV cash or whatever cash they got from a live event.

The fans benefits from the fact that sponsorships make tickets affordable and low enough for fans to purchase.

Look at NASCAR as an example, logos are everywhere on these cars. This increases the number of people who see whatever brand is on there. Now if the car starts winning and continues to do so the brand becomes synonymous with winning. More people start buying that product and the corporation pays more money to the organization to keep them advertising for them.

Many of the new stadiums around the country exist solely because of funds raised by corporate sponsorship of those stadiums. Even video games like Fight Night (Burger King), Blur (T-Mobile), and Mass Effect (Dr. Pepper) have sponsors which gave them money to produce to high quality games. Movies like Batman (Visa) and Demolition Man, (Taco Bell) have sponsors which help pay for productions quality and cast and crew.

Take all that and apply it to wrestling. These sponsorships help pay for talent, travel expenses, labor, production, writers, and more. Ticket sales are very important but they are only a piece of the whole pie. Not nearly enough to keep the company afloat. It's merchandising and corporate sponsorships that bring in the big bucks.

The more successful the company is, the more viewers watch it. The more viewers watch, the more different corporations vie for advertisement time on the program. The more they vie for time, the more money they offer. This is why it costs millions of dollars for 30 seconds of ad time during the Superbowl. Everyone is watching it.

My knowledge of all this is very basic and probably comes off as such, but in a nutshell that's how it works.

That explains it pretty well. Thanks for the info. Wasn't 5 Hour Energy sponsoring TNA at one point? I remember that they had their logo on the mat, along with others. I thought that was really cool looking to be honest. Made it feel more sportsy.

But, it's really not up to TNA to get more sponsors. It's a two way deal. Perhaps TNA is not big or important enough to be sponsored. That's why they should focus on PPV sales, ratings and all that crap. Let them come to you. But who knows. For all we know TNA could be sponsored pretty darn well.

On topic now - I like the idea of fewer PPVs for TNA, not WWE. WWE's buyrates are lower but I'm sure they still make a crap load of money.

TNA is in the perfect position to start a trend as someone said. They need this, the 12 PPV thing is clearly not working for them because it's safe to say that TNA's PPV are actually worse than iMPACT. They seem rushed, neglected and they don't mean squat because TNA is booking long term. Feuds do not end at a TNA PPV, they continue, and that's not a pay off. That is why they don't need 12 PPVs, they can have 4 and work with it. Have 4 PPVs with big, story driven storylines inbetween the PPVs which must be ran in an arena to make them feel even more special, and see what happens. Can't be worse than it is now.

It's a great move to show the wrestling world that you've got balls and that you're really working to not only change your company but the business in general. I hope TNA takes this into consideration, I don't see how they can't benefit from this. It could hurt them financially, but the money they make with PPVs can be easily made through iMPACTs on the road.

 

[MEGAFAN420]

I agree with Bischoff, especially as far as TNA is concerned. TNA should reduce it to 6 per year and heck, charge $14.99 instead of the ridiculous normal price. I can see buy rates going much higher. You may even make more money because even poor sap wrestling fans can give up $14.99 every other month. And, Bischoff.. build your damn storylines!!!!

I remember when Vince started the "In Your House" PPVS back in the mid 90's. He charged $14.99 so that everyone could afford it. They even gave a WWF fan an actual house to live in! I think Diesel was the champ at the time? We bought all the "In Your House" PPVS because they were affordable!

I want to see WrestleMania, but for $54.99 or so? The economy sucks! That is a week worth of groceries for me! Also, I hate when they advertise "Backlash, or the next PPV" during Wrestlemania! At least get Wrestlemania over with first! Every RAW before WM is all talk and about 15 minutes of actual wrestling. At least Vince knows how to "save" the action for WM!

***Nice Pic Of Jericho and Ralfus***

 

[montkvsting]

I agree with Eric Bischoff that there should be less PPVs. Pay Per Views in the past were a big thing because there were one every two months. You had time to build someone up or to build upon a feud between two wrestlers. I believed then and now that WWF and WCW should have kept their Supershows, Clash of the Champions and Saturday Night Main Event. Those shows provided pay per view quality matches for free. Had they kept those two shows, I don't believe that WCW or WWF would have increased their PPVs number. Today, PPVs aren't that special anymore, with the exception of Wrestlemania. If I missed this month's PPV, I will just watch the one next month.

 

[Rayne]

It's a mixed bag here. Would six PPV's per year sell more total then 12 PPV's a year? Would twice the audience (or three times if you went quarterly) buy the PPV's if there was that much more time to properly develop feuds?

For TNA: All indications are that their PPV's are doing abysmally. Have you ever heard anyone from TNA PR talk about their PPV viewership? These are people that do backflips over a 0.1 increase in a show-to-show rating. If there was something to brag about there, they'd be using that for publicity. So for TNA, Eric Bischoff definitely has a point. TNA would do a lot better for themselves spending a couple of months building up the storylines and convincing people to buy, rather then having a regular PPV schedule and expecting people to tune in. There appears to be a very large portion of the TNA audience that isn't buying the PPVs. (Most of the audience for any wrestling organization doesn't buy the PPV's, the proportion appears greater in TNA though.) TNA doesn't have as many people buying PPV's "just because" as the WWE does, which is why we get the occasional abortion like "Hardcore Justice".

For the WWE: I think that the resulting feuds from having less frequent PPV's would draw in more viewers per pay-per-view, but would result in less buys overall. I think the price point for the PPV to make up for that would have to be set at a level that would start turning off people from ordering it. $60 Wrestlemania (and $50 Summerslam) work because they aren't every couple of months. Is there a level at which the price could be set AND enough extra buys would result to push the overall profit higher? I don't think that kind of audience exists in wrestling right now. Less PPV's would make for more intense feuds, but I don't think those more intent feuds would draw in the viewers to make that fundamental change to PPV schedules worth it.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

If PPV's are making WWE and TNA money (which I know they do in WWE, not so sure for TNA), then they are not going to be scrapped, it would be a stupid business decision.

But I do think that by reducing the number, you would get more fans buying every one, rather than some buying a PPV one month, missing a few and then buying another. Instead of having 40% of regular PPV buyers buying a PPV in September, and 45% buying one in November etc, you would get nearly everyone buying a PPV 4 times a year, with these Super Shows seeming much more desirable and a "Must See".

Plus, it would improve the product as storylines could be drawn out, with anticipation for the title match growing by the week, instead of a match being set up 2 weeks before the PPV and having little or no time to build the feud to a climax.

It would be better for the fans, better for the product, but the big thing that will make the final decision is this- Is it better for the finances of the company? If the answer to this is no, then this discussion is over and monthly PPV's are here to stay.

 

[Kizzo]

It wouldnt work in TNA, but it'll be a good return in the WWE:

The 'E' should bring back the alternating ppv's. One month for RAW, the other for SmackDown. That way, while SmackDown's storylines are coming to their ppv worthy matches so to speak, RAW can have time to build up their storylines, and vice versa. I thought it was really enjoyable to watch WWE like that, because when a RAW ppv was coming up, you would pay more attention to RAW, and when a SmackDown ppv was coming up, you would pay more attention to SmackDown.

It wouldn't work in TNA, because its only one show, but maybe they can have a ppv every other month also.

The alternating PPV was one of the high points of the brand split. It was a bold and innovative idea. And it worked perfectly for WWE because of their roster size (which is still large). I know WWE canned the idea because they wanted to increase buy rates, but the reverse has happened.

Also this has hurt storylines and the allure of the brand split. Both of the brands can't have a proper conclusion to their storylines or enough of a focus when you have the other brand on the PPV show as well. It looks very sloppy and disorganized.

Big mistake by WWE to get rid of the brand focused PPVs. Because with the original idea you killed two birds... you technically reduced the amount of PPVs, and brought more meaning to the big 4 shows.

RAW would get Backlash, Vengeance, Unforgiven and Armageddon
SD would get No Way Out, Judgment Day, No Mercy and Over the Limit.

Great idea!

 

[deforty]

I agree they need to cut down on the PPV's. Maybe down to 6 or 5 a year with some well thought out story lines that play out over this time and as one PPV ends it will start a new set of stories. I think they could have a few story lines play out for 6 months which will draw and some end every PPV along with the story-lines being cohesive and overlapping.

for example purposes only: Lets say UT plans on retiring next Wrestlemania start the retirment Angle after this WM with hints that he is losing his powers (it could be due to the damage HHH does to him at this WM) and have some people start attacking him thinking that they can take advantage of this and lead it up to WM with his final showdown. And please not the Ric Flair story of if you lose you retire crap. Just one of him seeming to lose his powers allowing younger stars to get a small rub off of Taker, but eventually him winning at WM to keep the streak alive.

Another example: Pope and Samoa Joe could continue their fight until this PPV and have an attack on Joe by the person who Kidnapped him (masked preferably so as not to reveal this person right away) setting up the next fued but this must be after a clean win/lose by Joe at the PPV, thus setting up the next storyline and they could draw it out for two months on who it might be allowing for the closure of this storyline and creating interest in it also.

Simple but i think it could work. Knowing TNA they would screw them up anyways.

 

[MB1025]

Bischoff is right but he only answers the easy part of the question. The part that requires balls and a vision is the tricky part. That is how do you replace that revenue stream? I am sure he has ideas but short-term you have to think changing the model is going to cost money. The reason it takes balls is that you have to be confident that in the long run your plan can make the short-term losses worth it. While I personally agree with him I do not have enough confidence in any idea that I have heard to think it is worth the risk. It is catch 22 though because the more a company waits, the more what Bischoff describes as the "longer term viability" becomes a bigger issue.

Here is what I would do.

February - Genesis
April - Lockdown
June - Slammiversary
August - Destination X
October - Bound for Glory
December - Final Resolution

Those are your 6 big PPV's even when you have a 12 PPV line up. 2 of these you have taken on the road for a few years now. This may allow them to be able to take these to smaller venues when you have 2 months of build up. Now with 2 months of build up more people will invest into the PPV because you can slowly build to each PPV with your story. Not only that, but you can properly build the entire card instead of 3 matches.

 

[shattered dreams]

Now with 2 months of build up more people will invest into the PPV because you can slowly build to each PPV with your story. Not only that, but you can properly build the entire card instead of 3 matches.

Would you be willing to risk going out of business on that idea? More people might invest but significantly more? I have my doubts. Hyped impacts that are built up to well do not do that much better than a normal impact and watching those does not even cost any extra money. I just have a hard time seeing them make up the money from losing 6 sources of income just by putting out a possibly better quality product for the other 6. There has to be something else involved. The one caveat is if TNA is not making anything on some of the smaller PPV shows then this might have a chance of working. I just think unfortunately it isn't that simple or they would have done it a long time ago.

 

[MB1025]

Would you be willing to risk going out of business on that idea? More people might invest but significantly more? I have my doubts. Hyped impacts that are built up to well do not do that much better than a normal impact and watching those does not even cost any extra money. I just have a hard time seeing them make up the money from losing 6 sources of income just by putting out a possibly better quality product for the other 6. There has to be something else involved. The one caveat is if TNA is not making anything on some of the smaller PPV shows then this might have a chance of working. I just think unfortunately it isn't that simple or they would have done it a long time ago.

What TNA needs to do and I hope they are is look at house show attendance in every area. The reason TNA did so well in Fayettville for Impact is because their house shows are always strong there. If TNA promotes their PPV's in areas where they usually do well for house shows then you will get larger audiences to show up like they did by getting an extra 2500 people in NC just because it was an Impact and not a house show.

To add to this if they are not fully ready to actually go on the road for a few years what they should do is have the same event in the same arena every year. For example. I would do Slammiversary in Fayettville every year. That way you build your audience and you know ticket sales will be strong each year. Keep BFG at Daytona Beach because you know it will draw like this past year. Keep your Impacts and PPV's in your strong areas and build audiences around the states through TV and house shows.

The key is. Even though Impact wasn't the greatest wrestling show this past week people who don't usually watch or do and don't enjoy it liked it just because it felt big league and everything got a reaction so it came off better than it usually would. That is a very important way to get people interested in your product.

 

[Lucha-Libre is wrestling]

Okay this is the second time I see you post in this thread mentioning TNA and Sponsors and how much they need them. Let me ask you this - can you list, right now, all of TNA's sponsors? No Googling, no searching around. Do you know who each and every sponsor that TNA has today as you are reading this?

See, I get that it's cool to say "Sponsors and Advertisments sell" and act like you know some crap, while in fact I'm sure you don't know jack.

The "real" money comes from sponsorships and advertisments? Cool. Prove it. Show me where you got this information from. You must've gotten it from somewhere if you're making such a statement, right? Prove to me, and everyone else, that sponsorships and ads bring in more money than ticket sales and PPV buys. Black on white, reports, whatever it is that you found - show it to us.

I hate it when the IWC talks marketing, sponsors and money and they're SO sure of what they're saying, when they base it all on theories and assumptions.

So please, show me the info. I'd like to read it and educate myself on the subject.

All I have to say is look at WWE, MLB, NFL, NHL, NASCAR, NCAA, Boxing, MMA, UFC and many more will tell you where their real money comes from. So because I voice a true fact about sport business 101 & I'm a TNA hater or basher? To be honest I would love to see them do well, but I'm not a hypocrite like most fans and people like MR. Bischoff. So you judge my statement that was based on the facts on how sports and entertainment makes its money. I didn't have to Google it like you stated, but maybe you should use Google to research before you judge or condemn people over a script TV show. I didn't knocked the idea you 1st posted, I just simply try to show why it wouldn't work right now, that doesn't mean it was a bad idea. Now if Bischoff and Russo weren't so lazy in producing better scripts and marketing their product better, maybe they would have a lot of Sponsors and Corporations knocking on TNA doors. I hope you don't take this post the wrong way because its not intended for that.
P.S. Someone else wrote a great explanation on what I thought I explain to you clearly, hope you read it because its a lovely piece of on Sports & Entertainment Business Management 101.

 

[Lucha-Libre is wrestling]

I never majored in marketing by I know a few things about it from working for a corporation.

A corporation agrees to finance an event, organization, or person. The amount of money involved and the terms behind the sponsorship vary from deal to deal, but in most cases the corporation (i.e. 5-Hour Energy or Just for Men) receives tons of free, long-term advertising while the sponsored group (i.e. TNA or WWE) receives a great deal of financing.

The corporation itself benefits from increased brand recognition and the free advertising that comes with the sponsorship. Do you recall all those Slim Jim commercials that were on WWE for the longest time? TNA and the WWE benefis from the capital that is raised and is able to do things that would be impossible without such funding such as getting Floyd Mayweather or J-Woww for the $20 million or $10,000 they cost. TNA especially since a lot of their tickets are given away for free. Getting people like that can cost up to a third to half of of their PPV cash or whatever cash they got from a live event.

The fans benefits from the fact that sponsorships make tickets affordable and low enough for fans to purchase.

Look at NASCAR as an example, logos are everywhere on these cars. This increases the number of people who see whatever brand is on there. Now if the car starts winning and continues to do so the brand becomes synonymous with winning. More people start buying that product and the corporation pays more money to the organization to keep them advertising for them.

Many of the new stadiums around the country exist solely because of funds raised by corporate sponsorship of those stadiums. Even video games like Fight Night (Burger King), Blur (T-Mobile), and Mass Effect (Dr. Pepper) have sponsors which gave them money to produce to high quality games. Movies like Batman (Visa) and Demolition Man, (Taco Bell) have sponsors which help pay for productions quality and cast and crew.

Take all that and apply it to wrestling. These sponsorships help pay for talent, travel expenses, labor, production, writers, and more. Ticket sales are very important but they are only a piece of the whole pie. Not nearly enough to keep the company afloat. It's merchandising and corporate sponsorships that bring in the big bucks.

The more successful the company is, the more viewers watch it. The more viewers watch, the more different corporations vie for advertisement time on the program. The more they vie for time, the more money they offer. This is why it costs millions of dollars for 30 seconds of ad time during the Superbowl. Everyone is watching it.

My knowledge of all this is very basic and probably comes off as such, but in a nutshell that's how it works.

Thank You for posting this lovely piece on Sports & Entertainment 101. For a minute there I thought I was the only person here that understood how TV & Sports make their real money. I'm glad I found another fan out there that does his research before judging and criticizing people.

 

[MB1025]

All I have to say is look at WWE, MLB, NFL, NHL, NASCAR, NCAA, Boxing, MMA, UFC and many more will tell you where their real money comes from. So because I voice a true fact about sport business 101 & I'm a TNA hater or basher? To be honest I would love to see them do well, but I'm not a hypocrite like most fans and people like MR. Bischoff. So you judge my statement that was based on the facts on how sports and entertainment makes its money. I didn't have to Google it like you stated, but maybe you should use Google to research before you judge or condemn people over a script TV show. I didn't knocked the idea you 1st posted, I just simply try to show why it wouldn't work right now, that doesn't mean it was a bad idea. Now if Bischoff and Russo weren't so lazy in producing better scripts and marketing their product better, maybe they would have a lot of Sponsors and Corporations knocking on TNA doors. I hope you don't take this post the wrong way because its not intended for that.
P.S. Someone else wrote a great explanation on what I thought I explain to you clearly, hope you read it because its a lovely piece of on Sports & Entertainment Business Management 101.

The only problem with your post is that TNA doesn't have sponsored PPV's and to add to that they never mention any adds during it. So TNA would not lose out on any sponsorship. This is how this works for TNA.


1. 3/4 of their roster is on a pay by appearance. I don't know if that means if they are on TV or if they get paid just for showing up to the building. They would cut back spending on that.

2. They would have time to build their entire card instead of 3 matches for the PPV. This in turn will get more people interested.

3. The titles and feuds would mean a lot more because you have time to build the feuds and in turn that would make the titles mean that much more because the feud would be better written.


IMO TNA needs to take a step back in order to go forward. Cut the PPV's in half. If their company grows like they want it then think about bringing them back, but for now, with only 2 hours of TV, take the extra month to build.

People don't realize that WWE has so much TV and for a while now have been sending wrestlers to both Raw and SD to keep building their feuds. TNA can't do that.

 

[EStreet]

Wrote a post about this exact topic a while back and got roasted for it. Interesting he says it. Wrestling needs to give it a "must-see" factor and less PPVs do that for people who now feel they aren't missing 1 of 12 but 1 of 4/6