The Art of the Return (and why 'surprises' are actually bad for business)

[CleverName51]

One of more common complaints about the current product compared to the past is the lack of surprises/shocking moments that defined the Attitude Era and how the current product is predictable.

This thread is going to address one specific part of shocking moments, specifically returns and the art of pulling one off the right way.

Vince McMahon is a businessman first and foremost, he only cares about money, we know all know this. This concept will drive many of the ideas in this thread.


We talk about how there are no longer surprise returns (save the Royal Rumble). And there's a simple reason for that. Money.

When a return is announced 3-4 weeks in advance, a'la Cena vs Jericho in 2009 or with vignettes, the intent is to get people to think, "hey, Superstar X is coming back that night...I should totally watch Raw" and this will hopefully translate into a higher tv rating, which means more advertising dollars, which means more money into VKM's pocket/bank account

Making the live crowd pop for a surprise on the other hand doesn't do that. For one, there's a limited amount of seats in an arena (10-12K for Raw, PPVs in larger venues can bring 20-25 and Wrestlemania at an outdoor football/baseball stadium can usually draw 55-75K people)

The thing is, those people who bought tickets are already at the venue, they've already "paid up" for the show that was advertised. There's no need to swerve/surprise return someone for the sake of it. The live crowd is limited to the live crowd, the TV/PPV buyrate is FAR LARGER as just about anyone in the world can buy a PPV or watch a show on TV

Now obviously, you need some surprises, if you don't entertain a live crowd, they won't come back OR watch on TV, so obviously the goal is about finding a happy medium.

The perfect example of the "happy" medium. 2-21-11

Those "smokey cabin" skits had EVERYONE wanting to watch Raw on 2/21/11 to see if they were talking about Sting, the Undertaker or both. Even after one of the skits revealed that 'Taker was returning that night, people still wanted to tune in to see if Sting would be there....and whether you thought Sting would be there or it was Taker alone, you got one hell of a surprise as HHH showed up.



An example of a "surprise" the flopped: 2010 Royal Rumble, Edge

As we all saw with Edge's 2010 return/face turn, it flopped massively, sure Edge got a HUGE audience pop, but as time showed, his face turn flop left much to be desired. And, had it not been for the fact that Wrestlemania sells itself, this probably would have lost WWE a lot of money. (granted, since WM26 had a terrible buyrate, it probably did)


Finally, a pure surprise that worked: The Debut of Original Nexus.

8 NXT rookies take over. And, with the exception of Daniel Bryan messing up and getting himself suspended had a VERY good run at the top. They were over as heels and selling merch. Booking from SummerSlam 2010 on left a lot to be desired, but otherwise, this was a shocking moment that worked beautifully.

So now, the questions...

1. How do you balance the need for surprises, with regards to debuts/returns with the need to make money/be profitable?

2. Should more returns/debuts be advertised with little skits like Undertaker's 2/21/11 Cabin in order to at least plant the idea of "something big is happening"?

3. How do you balance the wants of the live crowd (making them pop) with the needs of the company (TV ratings/PPV buys) with regards to advertising returning superstars?


For me,

1. For the biggest of the big name stars, like Cena/Orton/Taker currently or Rock/Austin/Flair/Hogan (if the last 2 ever return) outright promote the hell of those shows with "see (name) on this night" those 7 people are the biggest names in wrestling today, just knowing they will be on the show will make people watch

2. Yes, the best part about a "mystery" is that it makes people think, "I want to know who it is, and what they are going to do." Also, like 2/21/11 it makes people guess, and then everyone wants to see if their right. It's like reading a murder mystery novel or watching a crime drama tv show, once the murder occurs, you start guessing who did it, then you keep watching to see if you're right.

3. I would use big moments between established stars or "feel good moments" too. For instance moments like HBK's first WWF title at WM12, or Foley winning the WWF title on Raw in January 1999, or more recently, Edge and Christian celebrating when Christian won the WHC for the first time. Basically, in short, I'd use returns to draw PPV buys/TV ratings and results in the booking to make the live crowd pop.

 

[martymcfly]

Interesting thoughts. Not to be nitpicky but I didn't really see why you consider surprises to be "bad for business", as alluded to in the title of your thread. To me, bad for business would indicate that people actually lose interest, stop watching, stop buying tickets, etc. as a result of a surprise return and I don't really see that happening. It may not increase business but to be bad for business, I don't see that.

I also would have to disagree about edge's return being a flop. Obviously, I don't have any statistics to back it up, but I would be surprised to discover that interest in watching the next smackdown did not increase for anyone after he returned. Sure, maybe his run as a face wasn't all that great, but the return itself I would argue did some good for business. Plus, as you said, the royal rumble is an exception in itself in that it is often the place for surprise returns.

1. How do you balance the need for surprises, with regards to debuts/returns with the need to make money/be profitable?

I think they have a pretty good balance, actually. There aren't really a huge number of surprise returns in any given year, but them redebuting on a raw or smackdown show I think is a good way to do it. Especially if it is a wrestler that you like that you know is supposed to be healed up around now, you may be more likely to tune in, wanting to see that individual's return.

2. Should more returns/debuts be advertised with little skits like Undertaker's 2/21/11 Cabin in order to at least plant the idea of "something big is happening"?

No, I don't think those skits really did much as far as garnering interest. I also find it interesting that you considered these skits a success and edge's return a flop. To be honest, finding out that these skits was only for the undertaker was a disappointment in itself, and it really was not much of a return before he vanished yet again.

3. How do you balance the wants of the live crowd (making them pop) with the needs of the company (TV ratings/PPV buys) with regards to advertising returning superstars?

This reads to me as pretty much the same as question #1. I think in the end though, the best way to deal with it depends on the level of caliber and interest in the returning wrestler, and I think the WWE already has a pretty good handle on it. For someone huge (Cena, orton, edge), it made sense to have it be a complete surprise. For someone lower on the totem pole, they usually go with a quick vignette or just a quick announcement that the person will return next week is sufficient.

 

[gazzatticus]

One thing that does help now a days is twitter and facebook you see something on there people will turn on and will no straight away its like world wide word of mouth so a suprise can now work straight away and make people tune in look at the Rock returning was all over twitter in seconds made people tune in straight away.

 

[bigbootydaddyV]

I agree that you have to find a happy medium between the two. On the one hand, there is money to be made from increased ratings of hyping up a return, on the other hand, the hope for a surprise return will always keep people tuning in. I think a lot of it has to do with what kind of return you are going to have. For instance, the Undertaker was just coming back to come back, not to attack someone or anything, and so it was worth hyping his up to gain some ratings (the whole sting thing was just a lucky/unlucky break due to social media). HHH on the other hand, made for a good surprise that night against Taker as he came out to challenge him and hyping his return wouldn't have brought as many viewers since a HHH appearance or return is hardly anything special compared to Taker. Some returns just work better as a surprise, look at JOMO, would any one have really cared if he was hyped for 3 weeks to come back and face truth, or was it better him just coming out and attacking truth after we damn near forgot about him. Not only did it create more excitement for Jomo (shortlived as it was) but it also created excitement for the HHH era, now people are wondering, who will come back next, maybe this week someone will show up, damn i've got to tune in. It's the surprise aspect that makes a lot of returns work, not the hype, lot of guys won't attract a handful of viewers if hyped up, but the chance for surprise (whether this one was good or not) will keep viewers tuning in.

 

[maxparrott]

I agree with a lot of the points you make, and think a balance does need to be reached. But, I think you're looking at it a bit backwards. You're saying that surprise returns are bad for business because you lose the potential ratings bump that hyping the returns would have created. Which is true, but only for that one night. And even then, only in a very limited number of cases. JoMo coming back, even if hyped through the roof, wouldn't have increased ratings in a noticable way. Casual wrestling fans don't care about JoMo. Casual wrestling fans know who Hogan is, who the Rock is, who Stone Cold is, maybe even Cena, Orton, and Taker. But really, that's about it. When you talk ratings you're talking millions of people. If JoMo's return was hyped like crazy, you may get a few thousand extra people watching. Not nearly enough to move even a decimal point in the ratings world.

On the other hand, if you have surprise returns on Raw, and add a general element of unpredictability to the show (as the Punk storyline has lately), maybe, over time, more casual fans will start watching. Word of mouth, general media attention, and a more entertaining product will grow the fan base for the WWE. Not just for one night, but long term. A one time ratings peak is great, and if somebody like Hogan came back to WWE you'd get it, but more unpredictability will get more people watching long term.

Just don't take it too far, and therein lies the real balancing act. Too many swerves and surprising returns gets confusing, and they are less impactful each time. TNA, IMHO, overdoes it (Russo?), and it makes the swerves, returns, takeovers, power shifts, ect., all just seem kind of silly.

 

[shanezam203]

Real good points, I have to agree. Having a surprise return of Bret Hart on Raw would be HUGE for me; but it doesn't bring in any more money that night.

IF we get hooked on them as an audiance and watch LIVE because of them and order PPV's because of them, it will become part of the norm... So I agree building up a return of the Rock, Austin or Taker weeks out will bring in more money; I have to say that A surprise here and there is also Important to the produect so it doesn't get stale.

Edge can make an appearance on Raw and there is a Surprise factor; booking it 2 weeks out to ME wouldn't draw much more money/ viewers. Undertaker returning at a PPV or a Raw, similar for me without the notice... The balance is important.

S

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

Unless you have insider knowledge into how the WWE's finances operate, every we say is total speculation. That being said, the following is really just my own opinion...

Ratings sway so very little. A 2.9 is considered low, while a 3.4 is approach the very high end. For the most part, things fluctuate between those numbers depending on the PPVs that just happened, the PPVs coming up, and yes, if a big name is set to return. I don't think ratings are necessarily the end all be all that shows how the product is doing. They are a single number that basically tells the shareholders how things are going, and influences stock sales, but doesn't really reflect things like venue and merchandising, along with advertising and outside promtion. Just like Michael Jordan, who made 50x the cash in promotions than for actually playing the game, the WWE doesn't make the bulk of their money depending on what the ratings say. Again, that's just my slightly educated opinion, and I could be totally off base.

But I also don't think what is necessarily "best for business" is best for the product. For example, the CM Punk angle is the hottest, most talked about feud in years, and regardless of whether the ratings show it or not, the product is fantastic...sort of. If you don't take into account that there is virtually nothing going on in the midcard for Raw, the product is great... You also may be forgetting that the Attitude Era saw some of the highest rated shows of all time, so maybe constant swerves and surprises isn't actually bad for business...

When the Rock came back, it was an amazing moment, because nobody was actually 100% sure it was going to be him. There was still a chance it could have been somebody like Austin, or even J-Biebs. When Jericho came back, I was excited but the month of build-up was blatantly obvious, and took away from the shock factor. I don't think surprise talent appearances are bad for business at all. They may not boost the ratings as much, but nothing really does these days anyway... Focus on what's best for the product, not what's going to raise that pointless little number by half a percent...

 

[hollowpoint]

The answer to all of your questions come down to a couple of variables that have to be taken into account before deciding how to make a return for a Superstar because it's hit or miss.

The Superstar - it matters who it is. Someone the likes of The Undertaker or someone the likes of say...Chavo Guerrero. One is an icon and one is a veteran jobber. The way Undertaker was announced last year was cool, but the surprise of HHH was even better. Undertaker didn't have a real enemy at the time so without HHH showing up, Undertaker's return would've been pointless.

The reason he left - Again, since UT has been gone and comeback so many times I have to use him as an example. Before WM, he was supposedly buried by Kane and sent to hell never to return, but somehow, they neglected to mention that fact during his comeback because of the double comeback.

The business side - How much more of a difference does it make that they announce it or not? If anything it increases the ratings for the following weeks tv. The Royal Rumble is always a great platform to make a surprise return because it's gonna sell itself. Same with WrestleMania. The only exception to that rule was this recent WM because of the lackluster card, they made The Rock, guest host which sent the buy rates through the roof. Amazing since he didn't even wrestle, but you don't really need him to in this case.

I rambled a bit but the point I was getting at was you don't hurt yourself as long as you are doing both because you need to please the crowd and the people watching around the world. It's one of those balancing acts the WWE has been so good at doing.