Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 31, 2015 21:06:06 GMT -5
Reigns is a recent example - cheered at house shows (and every TV taping until Smackdown) but booed at the Rumble. Years of Cena being close to universally cheered at live events but booed by a large portion of the crowd most TV tapings and by the majority of the crowd most PPVs.
Yet Cena's their biggest draw in terms of ticket sales, merchandise, endorsements, ratings mover etc they have. So is the TV taping audience their new Canada. Bizzaro world, as Lawler used to call it. It does seem as if on certain things, the TV taping audiences are different to non-televised live event audiences and also the wider public when it comes to measuring things such as Cena's 'overness' with the fan-base.
I think perhaps we might need to come to terms with the idea that TV taping reaction might not be as important an indicator when it comes to dictating their direction as it once was.
|
|
CH Punk
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Advice: Noted
Stuck in the Retro Zone
Posts: 15,570
|
Post by CH Punk on Jan 31, 2015 21:14:43 GMT -5
I think by virtue of TV tapings and PPVs costing way more than house shows (Forbes was reporting that this year's Royal Rumble was the most expensive show in a very long time and I was able to get a floor seat for $60 at the last house show I went to) you get more die-hard fans on TV. On the flip side, I seem to remember house show audiences pretty much rejecting the Daniel Wyatt angle last year and actually cheering for him, so I think it's all relative.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Jan 31, 2015 21:17:51 GMT -5
We as individuals or the board as a whole don't need to agree with that. Honestly I expect many to not.
Me personally I wrote something very similar a few days ago. At least I believe the powers that be don't view it in the same light any longer.
Right, wrong or indifferent, I feel they've got their own things they are looking at in terms of direction, and TV crowds aren't high on the priority list.
|
|
|
Post by PsychoGoatee on Jan 31, 2015 21:24:27 GMT -5
Random note, how do we know Cena is being universally cheered at all house shows? I know there are some reports and whatnot, but we get to hear the reaction to TV taping ourselves. I'd imagine Cena has gotten boos at house shows, but how notable would it have to be for us to hear about it?
And since they are doing TV tapings twice a week plus PPVs, plus it's what their large global audience is seeing and what the Network is based on, I don't agree that it'd somehow be less important than house show audiences.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jan 31, 2015 21:31:53 GMT -5
Random note, how do we know Cena is being universally cheered at all house shows? I know there are some reports and whatnot, but we get to hear the reaction to TV taping ourselves. I'd imagine Cena has gotten boos at house shows, but how notable would it have to be for us to hear about it? And since they are doing TV tapings twice a week plus PPVs, plus it's what their large global audience is seeing and what the Network is based on, I don't agree that it'd somehow be less important than house show audiences. It's not universal but the majority of house show reports you read will show that Cena is almost always the one who gets the biggest positive reaction at the house shows. It's also been shown that house shows headlined by Cena significantly do better than house shows without him
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Jan 31, 2015 21:34:12 GMT -5
Random note, how do we know Cena is being universally cheered at all house shows? I know there are some reports and whatnot, but we get to hear the reaction to TV taping ourselves. I'd imagine Cena has gotten boos at house shows, but how notable would it have to be for us to hear about it? And since they are doing TV tapings twice a week plus PPVs, plus it's what their large global audience is seeing and what the Network is based on, I don't agree that it'd somehow be less important than house show audiences. Op might have been a bit overestimating the universally cheered comment about house shows, but in my own personal experience and, as you say, the reports that are available I don't feel it's incorrect and saying that the response for Cena on the house show circuit is extremely positive. Sure some people boo but it's not people chanting "John Cena Sucks" to his music. Again no one is saying that the house show audience is more important. Personally I'm just saying that the WWE Brass is putting less stock in audience reaction then we do. I feel they have their own things they look for now and the live TV audience isn't a huge priority. Yes by all means go to the show and boo or whatever. They don't care, you bought the ticket. If you really want to hit them where it hurts don't buy tickets. <shrug>If RAW tapings are sold out what do they care. If their tapings start looking like TNA's where they are half full or worse most of the time then they'll worry.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Posts: 38,557
|
Post by fw91 on Jan 31, 2015 21:42:28 GMT -5
yeah for sure. Went to an MSG house show last year a couple a weeks before mania. Mostly kids in the crowd. Cena got a HUGE pop, not one boo
|
|
|
Post by PsychoGoatee on Jan 31, 2015 21:46:39 GMT -5
Yes by all means go to the show and boo or whatever. They don't care, you bought the ticket. If you really want to hit them where it hurts don't buy tickets. <shrug>If RAW tapings are sold out what do they care. If their tapings start looking like TNA's where they are half full or worse most of the time then they'll worry. This is interesting but kind of specific. I don't think people booing Cena are always necessarily looking to "hit them where it hurts", they just want Cena to lose and boo him like any other heel. I like Cena and often enjoy his matches, I just want him to lose, he's the de facto top heel of the company in our meta era, at least to half the TV audience. Or that's how I look at it anyway. And like they say, a huge reaction is a huge reaction, be it boos, cheers, are 50% of each. I just think for fans such as myself, whether its TV or a house show wouldn't change how I react to Cena for example. But I guess maybe more "smarks" are going to TV tapings than house shows? I guess that makes sense. Still, I know stuff like merch, ratings, sales etc are bigger factors to them than crowd reaction in general.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Jan 31, 2015 21:58:33 GMT -5
Yes by all means go to the show and boo or whatever. They don't care, you bought the ticket. If you really want to hit them where it hurts don't buy tickets. <shrug>If RAW tapings are sold out what do they care. If their tapings start looking like TNA's where they are half full or worse most of the time then they'll worry. This is interesting but kind of specific. I don't think people booing Cena are always necessarily looking to "hit them where it hurts", they just want Cena to lose and boo him like any other heel. I like Cena and often enjoy his matches, I just want him to lose, he's the de facto top heel of the company in our meta era, at least to half the TV audience. Or that's how I look at it anyway. And like they say, a huge reaction is a huge reaction, be it boos, cheers, are 50% of each. I just think for fans such as myself, whether its TV or a house show wouldn't change how I react to Cena for example. But I guess maybe more "smarks" are going to TV tapings than house shows? I guess that makes sense. Still, I know stuff like merch, ratings, sales etc are bigger factors to them than crowd reaction in general. Should have been more specific on my end. The part you quoted wasn't really directed at Cena and the reactions he gets. Was more talking about the general reaction of the TV fans towards the show as a whole. It's why I said in a previous thread, last years changes, while it made a better story in the end, didn't move the financial meter in any measurable way. It's why I still feel just going and booing or cheering or any type of reaction like that on the way to WM isn't going to get the change like it did last year. Only way that's going to happen is to hit them in the pocketbook. If people are buying up tickets, WWE is just going to do what they want this time and try to make some money off it.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 31, 2015 22:12:13 GMT -5
At house shows, people are just happy to see the wrestlers.
On TV, stories and character development plays out.
That might explain why reactions vary.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Jan 31, 2015 22:25:34 GMT -5
At house shows, people are just happy to see the wrestlers. On TV, stories and character development plays out. That might explain why reactions vary. Might be a part of it, I just think the composition of the TV Event vs House Show crowds are different now. Wants of those 2 groups are different. That's not to say one is more important than the other.
|
|
|
Post by Apricots And A Pear Tree on Jan 31, 2015 22:41:50 GMT -5
It's also been shown that house shows headlined by Cena significantly do better than house shows without him House Shows with Cena run bigger venues.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jan 31, 2015 22:49:08 GMT -5
It's also been shown that house shows headlined by Cena significantly do better than house shows without him House Shows with Cena run bigger venues. Even then, the non-Cena house shows don't sell out either so it's not a matter of "not enough room"
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Jan 31, 2015 23:40:16 GMT -5
House show audiences are different from TV audiences, which are in turn different from PPV audiences.
The level of importance of televised events, as well as the ticket prices, have a very different effect on which fans show up, and where in the arena they will be situated.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Jan 31, 2015 23:47:09 GMT -5
House Shows with Cena run bigger venues. Even then, the non-Cena house shows don't sell out either so it's not a matter of "not enough room" Don't think Cena's sell out either. Outside of the RAW's in the build to and Post Mania, WWE doesn't sell out their arena all that much.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Jan 31, 2015 23:59:08 GMT -5
Even then, the non-Cena house shows don't sell out either so it's not a matter of "not enough room" Don't think Cena's sell out either. Outside of the RAW's in the build to and Post Mania, WWE doesn't sell out their arena all that much. Right which leads back to the original point though. Cena on the card at the house show means better business hence the need for the bigger arena. I mean why book the smaller arena and leave some people unable to go, and from what we've found out recently, the bigger arenas are usually cheaper. Win/win really when he's on the card.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Feb 1, 2015 0:02:17 GMT -5
I think it's more just the nature of the crowd make-up and their locations. These big outbursts don't happen at every TV show or even some of the PPVs. It's most often the Chicago, Philly and New York/Jersey crowds that are most notorious for this, as well as are the Mania and post-Mania Raw crowds, due to the crowd influx those two events bring.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Feb 1, 2015 0:08:28 GMT -5
Don't think Cena's sell out either. Outside of the RAW's in the build to and Post Mania, WWE doesn't sell out their arena all that much. Right which leads back to the original point though. Cena on the card at the house show means better business hence the need for the bigger arena. I mean why book the smaller arena and leave some people unable to go, and from what we've found out recently, the bigger arenas are usually cheaper. Win/win really when he's on the card. But using a Roman or a Bryan or Seth or anyone new to the scene and comparing them to 14/15 Cena is not fair as was the point that Cena shows do better than others. You're taking someone with 10 years on top and being given every advantage in that time as a top draw and asking why the new guy cannot do the same. Of course Cena is going to out draw them at this point, he had 10 years of the machine pushing him as the guy to see. You give one of the new people that time, that push and training they could do it to. People are looking for complete overnight success to explain why someone does or doesn't work and ignoring everything outside that.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Feb 1, 2015 0:17:43 GMT -5
But you need to compete "overnight" - that's the way it works. A studio doesn't give a guy a run of eight movies to see if he's a box office attraction. You either hit the road running, or you hit the road. If Reigns isn't a big a draw as they want him to be he'll be treated like everyone else and pushed aside and focus will turn to the next guy who can. If Cena wasn't getting pretty much instant returns at the gates then he'd never have got a decade on top either.
It's cut throat but I don't think the window of opportunity for anyone is open that long before they want to see a return. If you don't provide it then they'll still keep you but they ain't centre-piecing you
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Feb 1, 2015 0:19:04 GMT -5
Right which leads back to the original point though. Cena on the card at the house show means better business hence the need for the bigger arena. I mean why book the smaller arena and leave some people unable to go, and from what we've found out recently, the bigger arenas are usually cheaper. Win/win really when he's on the card. But using a Roman or a Bryan or Seth or anyone new to the scene and comparing them to 14/15 Cena is not fair as was the point that Cena shows do better than others. You're taking someone with 10 years on top and being given every advantage in that time as a top draw and asking why the new guy cannot do the same. Of course Cena is going to out draw them at this point, he had 10 years of the machine pushing him as the guy to see. You give one of the new people that time, that push and training they could do it to. People are looking for complete overnight success to explain why someone does or doesn't work and ignoring everything outside that. I don't disagree with any of that. I'm just following up on the whole Cena performance on house show thing. Was brought up, near as I can figure, that a reason he drew better was because of the bigger arenas on his shows. Well there's a reason for that is all. Guy just draws. They can go with a full small arena or go with a bigger one, have some empty seats but sell more and in the long run pay less to rent it. Guess it's kind of OT we are talking about but that's where I was going with it. Actually don't know how we got on the Cena house show draw thing but whatever. My thing is looking at last year and giving the fans the Bryan feel good moment and it didn't move the needle. Matter of fact (and I'm not relating the 2 at all it's a total coincidence) they had one of their worst financial years of all time, at least since it's gone public. So they think if they do what they did last year it's not gonna pop the finances, they are going their way with it now. Live crowds reactions are a part of that decision. Right or wrong I think it's a much smaller part than it's been in past years. They've got ratings, focus groups, surveys, Q ratings, supposed independent testing. Things all entertainment companies are using nowadays. The yay/boo thing didn't work out last year. Try something different.
|
|