Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 2:31:52 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that the WWE is the most profitable it has ever been right now. I find that hard to believe. I was a kid when Hulkamania went wild in the 80s, and was already a huge wrestling fan by the time the second major wrestling boom hit in the late 90s. Kids that used to make fun of me for liking wrestling did a total 180 and jumped on the wrestling bandwagon because it was the 'cool' thing at the time. Wrestling T-shirts could be seen everywhere, to the point that even stores that specialized in rock band merchandise stocked up on wrestling merch. I don't see any of that stuff happening any more. WWE may be doing well, financially, but its hard for them not to when they've virtually monopolized nationally televised wrestling in the United States and Canada. My friend and I hate the current WWE product; the only reason why WWE has received any money from us over the last 7 years is because the monopoly owns a vast tape library and occasionally publishes some retrospective and/or biographical DVDs worth buying. Exactly. WWE most likely won't be going out of business soon, but WWE and wrestling as a whole defenitly isn't going through a boom. In the 90s boom, everybody watched everything and it was everywhere. WWF and WCW were at the top of the ratings nearly every week. Wrestlers were on the cover of publications such as TV Guide and The Rock even hosted SNL. Wrestling was everywhere and you couldnt escape it. Hell, even old women knew who Stone Cold was because he appeared on Regis. You could walk into a mall or somewhere and see 20 Austin 3:16 shirts and people doing crotch chops and saying "Suck it!". Right now is a VERY different situation from that. |
|
|
|
Post by Package Piledriver on Jun 23, 2013 2:48:58 GMT -5
I find that hard to believe. I was a kid when Hulkamania went wild in the 80s, and was already a huge wrestling fan by the time the second major wrestling boom hit in the late 90s. Kids that used to make fun of me for liking wrestling did a total 180 and jumped on the wrestling bandwagon because it was the 'cool' thing at the time. Wrestling T-shirts could be seen everywhere, to the point that even stores that specialized in rock band merchandise stocked up on wrestling merch. I don't see any of that stuff happening any more. WWE may be doing well, financially, but its hard for them not to when they've virtually monopolized nationally televised wrestling in the United States and Canada. My friend and I hate the current WWE product; the only reason why WWE has received any money from us over the last 7 years is because the monopoly owns a vast tape library and occasionally publishes some retrospective and/or biographical DVDs worth buying. Exactly. WWE most likely won't be going out of business soon, but WWE and wrestling as a whole defenitly isn't going through a boom. In the 90s boom, everybody watched everything and it was everywhere. WWF and WCW were at the top of the ratings nearly every week. Wrestlers were on the cover of publications such as TV Guide and The Rock even hosted SNL. Wrestling was everywhere and you couldnt escape it. Hell, even old women knew who Stone Cold was because he appeared on Regis. You could walk into a mall or somewhere and see 20 Austin 3:16 shirts and people doing crotch chops and saying "Suck it!". Right now is a VERY different situation from that. I still see a cena shirt every so often either worn by a fat guy or a young child but it's way less often than it was when i was a child. |
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jun 23, 2013 3:31:17 GMT -5
It'll never happen again, and day by day it becomes less likely. The more guys who get brought into the business through WWE's developmental program the more cookie cutter nobodies we're going to get down the pipeline. We'll be stuck with a hundred interchangable parts just going through the motions. WWE considers itself more than a wrestling company now. So we'll see more straight to DVD movies and reality shows using "sports entertainment TV" as nothing more than a vehicle to get them to do something outside the relm of "wrestling" Honestly, WWE becoming an "entertainment" company isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as it's clear that all the movies and reality shows are just "side projects" and that the wrestling product comes first. |
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,308
|
Post by Sam Punk on Jun 23, 2013 8:10:24 GMT -5
Cena, Austin, or Hogan?!? Cena isn't even in the same league as Austin or Hogan. In all the years that WWE has shoved Cena down our throats, wrestling's popularity has been in a decline, not a boom. I'm pretty sure that the WWE is the most profitable it has ever been right now. Have you factored in inflation? |
|
CM Dazz
King Koopa
Chuck
Posts: 10,475 
|
Post by CM Dazz on Jun 23, 2013 10:48:32 GMT -5
If I didn't know better, I'd assume that was a pic from an Indie show. Two old guys trying to hang on to their past glory. All that's missing is a "Doink". |
|
CM Dazz
King Koopa
Chuck
Posts: 10,475
|
Post by CM Dazz on Jun 23, 2013 10:53:24 GMT -5
That may have been true a few years ago, but the current NXT roster is anything but cookie cutter.
|
|
|
|
Post by TK The Friendly Robot on Jun 23, 2013 12:27:40 GMT -5
I think it will happen again however it won't be one or two guys that usher it in, it will take a whole cohesive roster with the right promoter behind them to make it happen. Obviously there will be the megastars from that crop but what I'm getting at is that it's going to have to be a perfect storm for it to happen again and I truly believe it will, there's rises and falls in everything and wrestling will rise again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Savage Gambino on Jun 23, 2013 13:55:57 GMT -5
I don't think there's any one guy who could bring about a "boom period", nor any one storyline, nor any one roster, nor any one promoter. Ushering a "boom period", like the one we saw in the Attitude Era, was being in the right place at the right time, capturing the spirit of the time. You could have the most talented roster in the world, acting under the most talented booker in the world, with the best creative team in the world, and if it doesn't have that spark, that one thing, intangible at it is, that just catches the world by storm, it won't make any difference.
Ushering a new boom period, in this day and age, would take nothing short of the stars in alignment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 16:11:19 GMT -5
I don't think there's any one guy who could bring about a "boom period", nor any one storyline, nor any one roster, nor any one promoter. Ushering a "boom period", like the one we saw in the Attitude Era, was being in the right place at the right time, capturing the spirit of the time. You could have the most talented roster in the world, acting under the most talented booker in the world, with the best creative team in the world, and if it doesn't have that spark, that one thing, intangible at it is, that just catches the world by storm, it won't make any difference. Ushering a new boom period, in this day and age, would take nothing short of the stars in alignment. I would rather have what you just described instead of a boom period. Give me great booking, compentent bookers/writers, and an immensely talented roster any day over bandwagon fans who act like they're the worlds leading expert on *insert wrestler/s here* all of the sudden. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 16:44:25 GMT -5
I hate to say it, being such a huge fan, but he falls into the "HBK/Bret Hart" tier of being one of the best, but not having the right amount of "it" like a Cena, Austin, or Hogan. Cena, Austin, or Hogan?!? Cena isn't even in the same league as Austin or Hogan. In all the years that WWE has shoved Cena down our throats, wrestling's popularity has been in a decline, not a boom. Truth. People try to put Cena on the Hogan/Austin/Rock level of drawing power and it-factor. Cena's one of those "lowly" Bret/HBK types too. |
|
|
|
Post by eDemento2099 on Jun 23, 2013 16:56:45 GMT -5
... but with a lot less technical ability. The one thing Cena definitely has going for him is his physique. To me, he's basically the new Batista.
|
|
|
|
Post by celticjobber on Jun 23, 2013 17:47:22 GMT -5
I think the popularity of UFC has hurt the chances of another boom period for pro wrestling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 18:16:39 GMT -5
I think the popularity of UFC has hurt the chances of another boom period for pro wrestling. I always see this proposition whenever the subject matter is brought up and quite frankly, I don't buy it. In the two previous booms, wrestling faced very fierce competion from other sports, most prominetly basketball and boxing. You had guys like Hulk Hogan and Steve Austin going up against arguably the greatest and most well known basketball player in Michael Jordan and wrestling wasn't affected at all. |
|
|
|
Post by KobashiChop on Jun 23, 2013 19:03:35 GMT -5
To me, Cena is the new Triple H. He is the guy who is great, and history will be kind towards him. But he is gonna be the guy, who the WWE will tell you was an icon of his time. That he was on the level of The Rock, or Hogan etc. He is HHH. Even has the ability to put out a crappy show opening 20 min promo too. As well as the absurd number of title reigns.
As for drawing money, Cena has international shipping on merch and touring, TV every week, PPVs every month, the DVD market, music and video downloads on demand, the current gen video game industry etc.
He has so many more tools from which to draw in money for the company. Of course he will have made big money. I honestly can believe he has drawn more money than Hogan, Rock or Austin. But he has had more time as the face of the company than Rock/Austin combined, and the current business model is just set up to expand further than it possibly could've in Hogan's era. Doesn't make him as big of a name though. Despite all this, Hogan and Austin made wrestling cool. Cena hasn't done that. He is the antithesis of cool.
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Jun 23, 2013 19:10:21 GMT -5
I think Cena is a lot more Rock/Austin than he is HBK/Hart
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 20:23:23 GMT -5
I think they had it with CM Punk and they let it slip away because they didn't see immediate results.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Jun 23, 2013 23:10:35 GMT -5
It won't happen without real competition. Right now you have one mindset controlling the big market. The closest thing you'll get is Cena.
|
|
|
|
Post by Evilution E5150 on Jun 23, 2013 23:30:03 GMT -5
Colt could give us a Boom Boom Period
....i'll show myself out
|
|
|
|
Post by Package Piledriver on Jun 24, 2013 3:13:35 GMT -5
To me, Cena is the new Triple H. He is the guy who is great, and history will be kind towards him. But he is gonna be the guy, who the WWE will tell you was an icon of his time. That he was on the level of The Rock, or Hogan etc. He is HHH. Even has the ability to put out a crappy show opening 20 min promo too. As well as the absurd number of title reigns. As for drawing money, Cena has international shipping on merch and touring, TV every week, PPVs every month, the DVD market, music and video downloads on demand, the current gen video game industry etc. He has so many more tools from which to draw in money for the company. Of course he will have made big money. I honestly can believe he has drawn more money than Hogan, Rock or Austin. But he has had more time as the face of the company than Rock/Austin combined, and the current business model is just set up to expand further than it possibly could've in Hogan's era. Doesn't make him as big of a name though. Despite all this, Hogan and Austin made wrestling cool. Cena hasn't done that. He is the antithesis of cool. Cena is way better than triple h |
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jun 24, 2013 3:31:05 GMT -5
Someone should photoshop that Cena MiTB pic with all the titles.
|
|
