Is this the reason for their superiority?

[mojmass]

It is something that I mentioned a while back it first started with the arena lights. Yes the lights. When you watch WWE show from TV you can see the crowd quite good because there is light on them. But when you watch other show like TNA or ROH or even developmental branches of WWE itself like FCW it's hard to see the crowd cause there is dark and little light.
So here is my point when you attend a show in arenas if you sit somewhere dark it's better for you but when you watch it on TV you can see the show better (or more attractive) when there is more lights. It means that WWE pay more attention to it's TV audience rather than the live crowd but other companies pay more attention to their live crowd.
There are more reasons to WWE paying more attention to TV audiences like announcing "Welcome to Friday Night Smackdown" while it is recorded on Tuesday in front of live crowd and so on, you can find more reasons if you pay attention.
So my question: Is WWE paying more attention to its TV audience the main reason for their superiority over other companies?

 

[EastCoastFan]

WWF/E has always lit the audience well at TV tapings ever since Vince took over from his father (unlike other promoters at the time, he was very production-conscious). TV tapings were well-lit to show how big and how excited the crowd was, so fans watching at home might be swayed to go to the matches when they came to town. If you went to the house shows, the only lighting was on the ring, as was the norm.

There are different schools of thought as far as lighting. Vince's, and the other which is to only light the ring and the entrance way, to focus people's attention. Even when WCW was winning in the Monday Night Wars, they usually kept the crowd in the dark.

 

[mlp420]

Not exactly. It's more of the big stage & production values in general. Most people watch the show through the audience. It's like a rock concert atmosphere. The audience is essentially cast members. They don't spend 1.5 million dollars a week on production for nothing.

 

[d_henderson1810]

Some cynics have said that the darkened arenas are to hide all the empty seats, whereas WWE always has full arenas, so they don't have to hide many seats.

No matter what you have thought of WWE over the years, whether you like or dislike a lot of what they are doing, one thing that has never seemed to wane is their set design and production values. WWE's set-up always looks A-grade, making them look A-grade by extension.

It looks ready cool when they have a PPV, and the entranceway is decorated with things to do with that theme.

I especially love to see how they set up Wrestlemania each year. When it is an outdoor arena, especially, and they have a set-up which looks really good (like WM28 last year), it looks like you are witnessing the greatest spectacle on earth.

I also love their video packages. I heard that Vince's main interest in purchasing WCW and ECW was to get his hands on their archival footage. It really adds to HoF announcements when it is accompanied by footage of their career if they fought in WCW, ECW and WWE, for example.

I remember when they had a video tribute following the death of Eddie Guerrero. It added much better not only seeing family films and Eddie in WWE, but even him coming down the aisle on WCW Nitro, with his mullet. It gives video packages more credibility, and has added much more footage they can turn into DVDs.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

When it comes to the quality of the product, some will always prefer WWE to ROH or TNA and vice versa. When it comes to the aspect of production values, certain things are expected of a wrestling company when you're on national television.

One of the more frequent criticisms I've heard in regards to TNA while they were in the Impact Zone was how "bush league" they looked based on production values. However, that had more to do with the Impact Zone itself rather than TNA. After all, there's only so much you can do on the back lot of a theme park where you're able to squeeze in a max of about 1,000 people.

For the most part, to me, production values are not nearly as important as the overall quality of the product. However, some things can make possibly a company look bad. For instance, if they have poorly functioning mics and half the people can't make out what the wrestler is saying in a promo, it looks bad. If the area where a wrestler is making his entrance is, practically, just a curtain they have to push aside, it looks a cheesy & cheap. For a wrestling company that has television programs airing both nationally & internationally, people simply don't expect them to look like they're watching an indy show.

When you go out on a date, it's reasonable that you wanna look nice. When you go to a big league wrestling event hosted by WWE, you don't expect the arena to look like a dank pit. But, if the show is good, the wrestlers are good, the feuds & storylines are interesting; then that ultimately outweighs any sort of cosmetic shortcomings you might see.

Ultimately, wrestling companies are going to cater primarily to their television audience because...well...think about it. All the people who show up to their various shows watch them on television. They like what they're watching, so they buy a ticket to go watch WWE do its thing when they come into their area.

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

This question is a little bit of a non sense in some ways, and don't get offended, it's not a personal attack. You said that WWE cares a lot more about TV audience than live audience, and of course they do, they are on television in the weekly shows that we watch. But the dynamic of an house show is completely different, half the time they don't really plan their matches step by step as you see on TV, and they don't have time pressure so they will play up the crowd a lot more, they will spend their time with them, signing stuff, giving away presents and stuff like that.

Also that formula of playing up their TV audience more than others is wrong, because ROH product is different from WWE product. They run as a cult, for a couple thousand people in the whole country, so they don't really have a lot to gain by playing up the TV audience, specially if their money resides in the live audience. Let's see, you'll watch WWE for their stars, you will cheer for someone like erm... Chris Jericho... not because he's a fantastic wrestler, but because he is a star he is a celebrity as much as any basketball player for a NBA fan. However, you'll watch ROH live because you like the wrestlers, you like their product and in spite watching them as big TV stars, you watch them as great wrestlers and if you are in company of let's say more 200 people, the wrestlers have more freedom to play up with you, they say it and it's true, it becomes more "personal".

If ROH or any other small company had a show, on the USA Network, in their prime time space, they would work a lot more for their TV audience. It's just like that, if you reach a level of being able to play with the TV audience in spite of the live audience than you know you are successful and WWE reached that, aswell as TNA. In my mind, it's just business.

 

[Zeven_Zion]

I don't think it's THE reason, but it is part of the reason. WWE has better production value by default. It looks amazing and for casual fans that equals a better product. You really have to think outside the box to get into TNA as a casual fan I believe. Then you can tolerate all the production shortcomings.

Not to say TNA has bad production values. They're fine. But WWE makes them pale in comparison.

Now, are production values THAT important? Eh, I wouldn't say so. Maybe perception wise but it's not a make it or break it situation. WCW sort of proved that wrong. WWF had all the sets and all those things and Nitro always looked plain and cheap to me. No giant screens, no particular design until later on. In any case, it wasn't as good.

Still, they beat the WWE. So I suppose content is king at the end of the day but it wouldn't hurt to make your show look sweet. TNA being out of the IZ has been just awesome so far. It does make a difference. A positive one.

It'll be interesting to see what TNA could do, design wise, if they end up with more funds in the future. Every company has its own "look" and style and we're so used to WWE's glossy, flashy style. I always wanted to know what TNA would do if they had WWE's money.

That's why WCW was cool to me. It was like the WWE but it wasn't. Actually, part of WCW's charm was the fact that it was kinda cheap and plain. Same goes for the WWF. WWF's style at the time was more gritty, more "real". I miss that in wrestling. I miss when the pyro was kinda sloppy and the smoke would be freaking everywhere.

I think Vince is taking away a bit of wrestling's charm when he tries to have everything be flawless. Less is more sometimes. ESPECIALLY in wrestling. With the WWE at times it's rather desperate when you see them go balls out with the production values and then the show stinks up the joint. Makes ya feel like all they got are spotlights and pyro with no content to match the beauty of their arenas.

It's as if Shawn Michaels int he 90's looked as flashy as he did, but had the talent of freakin' Zach Ryder. Yeah, you look good but you can't do jack shit. On that note, WWE is overdoing the flashiness I noticed. Everyone has peculiar ring gear and trench coats and this and that. Tone it down, flashiness is supposed to accent the exceptional talents of someone, not replace everything.

 

[Swarles Barkley]

WWF had all the sets and all those things and Nitro always looked plain and cheap to me. No giant screens, no particular design until later on.

Actually, part of WCW's charm was the fact that it was kinda cheap and plain.

This is what Nitro's stage looked like in 1996 (which was well before the WWF debut the Titantron and not at all what I would "later on"):

Does that look "cheap and plain" to you? Nitro went with the glitz well before Vince did. Vince only started using a ramp, stage, etc. to keep up with WCW. It wasn't until 1997 when Vince finally introduced the Titantron and all the accompanying stuff.

 

[Azane]

Being in the crowd where the lights shine sucks.

You can't see better, you have to shield your eyes from their audience lights, and it's honestly blinding.

I've sat in the nosebleed and the floor seats, and it's REALLY bad in the higher seats.

From a TV standpoint, I liked it better when the audience was just naturally lighted, before the Red/Blue lights they use for Raw and Smackdown that honestly hurt the atmosphere for me.
From the live standpoint, I loved being in a more dark area.

Lose/Lose in both situations for me.

 

[JoeFromTomsRiver]

This question is a little bit of a non sense in some ways, and don't get offended, it's not a personal attack.

Yes it is nonsense. And I don't think you need to do a preemptive apology for "offending" anyone for saying that. Lets start a thread about the colors of the ring ropes next.

 

[I Heart Cena]

Well, the WWF has lit the crowd less over the years. In the Attitude Era, the crowd was much more lit than it is now. i wish they'd go back to that, and use all arena lights like in basketball games. But lighting isn't the reason for superiority, the reason is the production values.

From a TV standpoint, I liked it better when the audience was just naturally lighted, before the Red/Blue lights they use for Raw and Smackdown that honestly hurt the atmosphere for me.
From the live standpoint, I loved being in a more dark area.

Lose/Lose in both situations for me.

Co-sign 100%. I can't stand the red and blue lights, it makes it feel like you're at a kids' junior high party in his parents' basement.

They need to go back to using the arena lights like in the Attitude Era.

 

[mojmass]

Yes it is nonsense. And I don't think you need to do a preemptive apology for "offending" anyone for saying that. Lets start a thread about the colors of the ring ropes next.

Nice job showing your true self by disrespecting your own wisdom next time read the thread completely, it has nothing to do with the color of the rings ropes and the lights that I mentioned, the question is in the end and I asked is WWE paying more attention to TV audience the reason for their superiority or not.

 

[akathelaw]

WWE exports their TV show around the world. The TV audience is the largest viewer base, so they're most important.