Wrestlemania failed on every level from a fans perspective.
- Thread starter Sedated
- Start date
- Status
ProWrestlingFan
Championship Contender
Wrestlemania 27 drew one of the highest buyrates because of Rock. Wrestlemania 24,25 and 26 didn't and they all had Cena wrestling for the WWE Championship.
4 years in a row of declining ratings prove other wise.
See the part I bolded? That's what you need to get through your thick fucking skull.
If you want to have this discussion I'll play along. You're going to have to bring a lot more to the table than just this though.. like multiple years of total revenue with Cena at the Helm and multiple years of revenue before Cena was at the helm.
ProWrestlingFan
Championship Contender
Wrestlemania 20 did 1,007,000 PPV buys without Cena in the main-event.
Fire Marshall Bill
Let me show ya somethin!!!
Everyone in this thread should be red repped simply for even arguing this beyond a few posts. Well except NorCal because I don't want him reaching through my computer screen.
This would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad. Frankly I'm disappointed some of you are even wasting your time.
Some people will never change their opinions, no matter what.
Stereotypes are based on reality people, and there's a few people here who define the IWC stereotype.
This would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad. Frankly I'm disappointed some of you are even wasting your time.
Some people will never change their opinions, no matter what.
Stereotypes are based on reality people, and there's a few people here who define the IWC stereotype.
I find it amusing how Sedated will never address my posts, since they continually prove him wrong. He silently acknowledges he was wrong because he's now moved on to talking about PPV buys (which will prove him wrong again), but he won't have the decency to admit it.
I posted them weeks ago.
What you'll see is a PPV business which stayed fairly consistent from 2005 until 2009, which was when the financial crisis hit (October 2008) and the economy collapsed. From 2009 to 2011, you'll see the PPV business stay roughly the same until last year when they experienced a huge boost in both buys and revenue.
And yes, this IS with streaming and piracy.
Yes, how dare people like us use the truth when discussing things.
I posted them weeks ago.
What you'll see is a PPV business which stayed fairly consistent from 2005 until 2009, which was when the financial crisis hit (October 2008) and the economy collapsed. From 2009 to 2011, you'll see the PPV business stay roughly the same until last year when they experienced a huge boost in both buys and revenue.
And yes, this IS with streaming and piracy.
I find it amusing how Sedated will never address my posts, since they continually prove him wrong. He silently acknowledges he was wrong because he's now moved on to talking about PPV buys (which will prove him wrong again), but he won't have the decency to admit it.
Yes, how dare people like us use the truth when discussing things.
I posted them weeks ago.
What you'll see is a PPV business which stayed fairly consistent from 2005 until 2009, which was when the financial crisis hit and the economy collapsed. From 2009 to 2011, you'll see the PPV business stay roughly the same until last year when they experienced a huge boost in both buys and revenue.
And yes, this IS with streaming and piracy.
Why would you assume I follow your posts or even this forum enough to know that you posted this shit weeks ago?
If these are only numbers from 2005 onward we're going to need numbers from before that point as well to really get anywhere. Going to check it out now though.
Edit: I usually don't address your posts because I think you're a jackass and such a huge Cena mark and there is zero point to engaging you in conversation/debate so I just ignore you. Also I'm not the one who moved on to buyrates, but I've learned all about you and your problem reading by now. It was actually you who claimed the ratings didn't mean anything because we didn't know how ratings would be with out Cena, I then proved that ratings stayed consistent with him gone and you buried your head in the sand on it.
FunKay the Inevitable
People Like Me, We Don't Play
Actually WrestleMania 24 and 27 drew roughly the same buyrate. Yes and the Rock had had confrontations with whom leading up to Mania 27? Oh that's right, John Cena, that fella' who has wrestled in the main event of the two largest drawing PPV's in wrestling history. Also the dude whose WrestleMania appearances drew larger total buys than the majority of the Rock's.
I am not talking about ratings and nor did I mention them. I was talking about buyrates, which would equate to more money as Cena has brought in bigger buyrates overall than Rock did in his tenure. Therefore Cena brought in more money. Or because I didn't 'live through that' mean that I wouldn't know anything about Rock's Attitude Era years?
Poop Master Flex
Mid-Card Championship Winner
So? This isn't if others can draw as well (not to mention the WM 20 card on paper was absolutely stacked) this is if Cena can in fact draw, and he can. Every WM he's main evented he's only come short of 1 million buys once, and the one he wasn't he was short by 25, 000 buys. Why did WWE go back to him after 3 years of him not main eventing Mania?
Also does anyone think the declining rating maybe because of everything else on RAW. As pointed out earlier Cena cant do 3 hours straight yet his segments always gain viewers. If all you got is rqtings declined that's a bad reason. Before Benoit did what he did the ratings were rising, after his incident they almost immediately tanked, that's no coincidence. Frankly most draws would fold under that pressure yet Cena still made them money.
Those numbers were put out by the WWE, and confirmed by ESPN, the Torch, and various MMA website (because MMA fans couldn't believe that Cena was that big of a draw). Those are the only numbers available as of right now.
You're the head of a company, would you really want to piss away a guy that is bringing you in over 100,000,000 a year?
I never said you should have assumed. I'm just saying I posted them weeks ago. You really do have your panties in a bunch about being wrong, don't you.
You'll find a wealth of information there.
Yes, it sure is awful to have to address truth and facts.
By the way, you've called the other people jackass and/or stupid and/or Cena marks, yet you still respond to them. No, you don't reply to me because I prove you wrong.
No, I said looking at ratings is a complex equation and does not prove anything about one person.
You provided a very limited set of data, there's a big difference between that and proving something. You don't seem to understand the concept of trends very well.
I never questioned if that was legit or not, it just doesn't mean anything on its own.
Also I never said they should fire him or "piss him away", it's time to try some new things though, it's been time to try some new things for a long time with him.
So now you're telling the WWE how to make the most money in the pro wrestling business.
I sure am glad you came along, you've been great for laughs.
The 32 year old Smark in me sees the same thing you do, but you have to realize why they don't. Cena still has 4 to 5 good years left of being a face. Why not milk that bad boy for all it's worth. If he's making you that much money, he's obviously doing something right. I get the battle cries of the adult males, but Cena isn't for the Adult Males. He's a merchandising machine that has sustained the WWE since the Benoit Crisis. The WWE is completely different then what it was in 2007. They tried the ECW thing, they tried to cling to the Attitude Era, and it simply wasn't working.
In 2010 the WWE made a total of 477 Million (which the WWE claims Cena is responsible for $106 million).
In 2011 the WWE had a total revenue of 483.9 Million, that's with Rock's involvement at Mania 27. That's a difference of 7 Million with Rock.
We still don't have the 2012 numbers, which are due out any time now.
Let's see here...
There's no net income for anything before 2003.
Merchandising really hasn't changed much.
Live events revenue seems to be up while attendance is down. With out Net Income it's pretty meaningless though.
The PPV buyrates I'll look over later because there's a lot of years and PPV's and what not and I'm running low on time I can spend here with this crap atm.
All in all it doesn't look like any of this information proves anything one way or another but I'll look at it a little more in depth when I have more time.
I think you're an even bigger jackass than they are. I'm usually pretty generous with the crap I'll bother to respond to and yet I ignore a lot of what you post hmmm
That's not what you said, someone else wanted to get in depth about the ratings, killbot or some shit, so I did and then you went "We don't know how the ratings would be with out Cena though!" So I showed you what they would be - and that's exactly the same for that time period. Is it 1000% foolproof? No. They are still facts though.
See above
Because WWE wasn't public, they didn't need to declare this information. Same reason we don't know about TNA's net income.
Yes it has, in terms of merch revenue.
Note ticket price changes and the number of events run.
Because you haven't got an answer.
1) How can anything be 1000%? That would mean 1000 parts out of every 100.
2) One of the things Sly has said several times, in this thread and previously and I've demonstrated by making graphs from his data is that individual ratings are pretty fucking meaningless. However, if you gather the data from multiple of shows over a period of time you can have a look at the trends. If you look over a short period of time (say, one month compared to another month) you can get misleading results because of how much the data varies. This can lead to incorrect conclusions like Benoit not having a long term effect on WWE because 2 months later ratings were where they were 1 month before the murders, even though if you look at the ratings over a 6 month period, and 2008 onwards the ratings are indeed noticably lower than they were in the first 6 months of 2007.
You can't pin 2011 as an entire year on The Rock just because he was involved in a very small portion of it.
The honest to God truth of the matter is almost nobody in wrestling is a true draw. Hogan & Austin are probably the only two, everyone else though? Not really. Wrestling has an extremely loyal core fan base that will continue to watch it no matter how pissed off we get.
I don't want to speak for everyone but I'm sure a lot of us were all born into wrestling. Many of us likely had people in our family who had us watching wrestling from a very young age and now 20-30 years later here we are, blessed and cursed with some weird desire to keep tuning in no matter how much we want to throw the remote control through our TV screens at times.
I suffered through horrible wrestling in parts of the 90's. I suffer through crappy wrestling now...I've just watched this shit for too many years, it's just part of me now.
Anyway, my point was that Hogan and Austin were probably the only two true draws ever. Everyone else draws on smaller levels, it's more about a solid overall product than it is about one specific person except in some very special cases and even those special cases need some support. Wrestling is a team effort.
Cena is not one of these special cases. Is he some form of a draw? Of course he is, he's niche though. He's the same kind of draw that HBK, Hart, Taker etc. etc. etc. were. So why the fuck is he treated like he's an Austin or Hogan level draw? Hell, he gets treated a lot better than Austin got treated by Vince lol. When I hear the word draw I picture Hogan and Austin, I don't picture Bret Hart for as much as I loved him as a kid. He's also just not that good compared to almost any Main Eventer from before his own era.
Maybe we have slightly different definitions of the word draw, I think of it as someone who's able to draw in new business and take the company further. I don't consider it to be you got the usual amount of business or slightly less business so that makes you a Draw.
Anyway, I have to get going for now.
Stopping This Thread In Two Statements
1) Just because John Cena doesn't draw you, doesn't mean he doesn't draw.
2) The question of whether John Cena is being used to the best of his drawing capacity is entirely separate from the discussion of if he is currently the WWE's best draw.
It's nice outside. I'm gonna go throw some frisbees.
That's just fucking dandy but that doesn't help us to make comparisons now does it?
All in all it's pretty steady from 1999 - 2012.
k? No shit?
or I think he's a jackass. I'm getting pretty tired of you too.
1. I typed an extra 0. Hang on just a moment while I get the nails and hammer. Are you this desperate to make a point?
2. You're still clinging to ratings that show a 4 year decrease in ratings while Cena is the captain of the ship. Blame it on benoit if you want. Blaming Benoit for 2012's ratings is beyond silly but if it makes you feel better about the product you have at it.
This is seriously my last post for now.. honest.
Fire Marshall Bill
Let me show ya somethin!!!
This thread makes me want to get a sig that's just a picture I drew of the word "ratings."
BaconBits
WZ Czar of Steaks
Hippie. Stop hanging out with Todd.
One Punch Doug Crashin
I AM INVINSIBLE!
This thread is now about Cheese. Why? because this thread failed on so many levels. The Original Poster is a fucking idiot Cena hater who deserves to be in the prison.
- Status
