WrestleMania 23: Revenue vs. Quality Product

[akkountent]

I will be attending WrestleMania 23 in Detroit on 04/01, and even though it's 4 months away, I'm still excited to be attending the SuperBowl of pro-wrestling events. Since this will be my first WrestleMania that I will be attending, my selfishness got the better of me in thinking that this will be the best event ever; but as I continue to read the "rumored" matches that will be taking place and headlining the event ('Taker vs Batista, Hogan vs. Show, Cena vs HHH II), I can't help but feel disappointed. I mean, for the biggest show ever, and the highest grossing event of all time, the WWE can't put out matches better than that? Yeah, it's 4 months away and the those matches I mentioned are only "rumors" and not secured in any way, but we've found out the WM plans months in advance in years past around this time so I believe that the rumored matches are probably the ones Vince and the execs will go with. From a numbers standpoint, I can't believe Vince and co. can't afford to bring back some "attitude-era" talent for one night only to help booster up the lackluster card, even if it means paying them big paychecks.

Let's quickly look at the revenue earned for WM 23; they've already stated that they've earned $4.35 million in ticket sales revenue. Let's say that WM 23 draws the same number of PPV buys as WM 22 (which is estimated to be at 925,000); @ $50 a buy that's approximately $46.25 million alone in PPV revenue. I don't know how much of that flows through to the WWE when all is said and done, but let's say at least 1/2 of it does; that means that the WWE will pull in at least $27.5 million alone in revenue for WM 23 (1/2 the PPV revenue is $23.13 million plus $4.35 million in ticket sales). Obviously there are expenses the WWE incurrs for putting on such a big event; let's just say for conservatism's sake that the expenses for putting on the show are 50% of the revenue earned; that means that the bottom line profit of the WM 23 event will be roughly $13.75 million.

I know the WWE, like any other business, looks to make as much money as possible, but you have to believe they can afford to spend an extra $3.75 million on getting some big-name products to bolster the lackluster card. I'm quite sure you can pay either the Rock, Austin or Jericho at least $1.0 million each to perform (win or lose) at the event; plus, if you get two of them, that leaves another $1.75 million to spend on big-name actors or celebrities to draw main-stream media to the event, which draws in casual fans and could draw the PPV buy-rate well above 1 million and possibly exceed the buy-rate of WM 17 (to date WM 17 has the highest rated PPV buy-rate of any WWE PPV).

Yeah, I know it's WrestleMania and I should just be thankful that I have the opportunity to attend and be a part of it, but pardon me for wanting it to be the best PPV in pro-wrestling history. I think if the WWE could just spend that little extra bit of profit on household pro-wrestling names and celebrities, that it could lead to thousands of satisfied fans, as well as draw in thousands of new fans.

[WarriorWarrior]

"From a numbers standpoint, I can't believe Vince and co. can't afford to bring back some "attitude-era" talent for one night only to help booster up the lackluster card, even if it means paying them big paychecks. "

I disagree here. He SHOULDNT be bringing them back for a one night deal. He should be building the talent he has for the future. If you are wanting to see Attitude Era stars, you should really watch an Attitude Era DVD.

[Agent P]

Or an Attitude Era VHS

[akkountent]

By bringing back the biggest draws in WWE history (ie, Rock, Austin, Jericho, etc), you can help out the new talent by making them go over the big names. For some reason, I can't believe that you couldn't pay the Rock, Austin or Jericho $1.0 million each to "job" to some of today's up and coming stars like Edge, Cena or possibly even Kennedy. Imagine a heel Jericho coming back to challenge the man who put him out of the WWE, John Cena? The build-up for that could be huge, not to mention the amount of people who would be ordering the PPV knowing an established product like Jericho will be on the card. I think that those "big draws" could push people that are on the fence about ordering the event based on the current, rumored main-event matches to actually buy the PPV. Plus, the RAW's leading up to the event would realistically draw more fans and possibly even sell-out knowing there's a chance that some of wrestlings biggest names will be there instead of the having to tarp-off the upper deck. As of now, the only thing that the WWE can do to sell out a RAW is make it a 3-hour special.

[BrianZane]

akkountent said:

By bringing back the biggest draws in WWE history (ie, Rock, Austin, Jericho, etc), you can help out the new talent by making them go over the big names.

Yeah, because that plan works EVERY time.

Cheer up, if the main events get ya down, the midcard is usually the saving grace of the show. There's probably going to be another Money in the Bank match, some ECW Title match likely involving Punk, etc. You'll enjoy the experience, just like I did at WM XIX.

[akkountent]

There's a big difference between WM XIX and WM 23:

WM XIX main events:

Angle vs Lesner - 3 out of 4 stars
HHH vs Booker - 2.5 out of 4 stars
Rock vs Austin - 3 out of 4 stars
Hogan vs McMahon - 3 out of 4 stars (it was entertaining)
HBK vs Jericho - 4 out of 4 stars (IMO)

"Rumored" WM 23 main events:

Hogan vs Big Show - do you honestly think this is gonna capture the "magic" of WM 3?
Batista vs 'Taker - can you say Sid vs. Taker at WM 13? Two, big slow men peetering out at the 8 min mark
Cena vs HHH - been there, done that
McMahon vs Foley - HBK vs. McMahon, Hogan vs. McMahon; how many guys are gonna get their revenge on McMahon?
Lashley defend the ECW title - this is the "bathroom" break match IMO

I don't think you can even compare the two.

[Jiren]

I really hope it's a good event as it's my first time going to a U.S PPV.

[akkountent]

I'm hoping it's more than a good event; I'm hoping its the best WWE PPV in history. Perhaps because i'm attending my expectations are too great.

[JMA]

I'd like to see what WWE would do if ALL of the Attitude Era stars left the company (that includes Triple H). They might be forced to do something new then, like when the the eighties stars left for WCW.

[seanwalsh]

akkountent said:

I'm hoping it's more than a good event; I'm hoping its the best WWE PPV in history. Perhaps because i'm attending my expectations are too great.

If anything........just BEING THERE is gonna be great.

I've been to a couple WWE events in the last few years here in Boston, and while the cards weren't all that hot (they were fun, and seeing the show live vs. on TV is quite a difference), the vibe in the arena was really something else.

So WrestleMania, at Ford Field in Detroit........yeah, just that alone is worth going for...

[Johnny Danger (Godz)]

The thing about it being the "biggest show of all time" and having lame matches...I felt the same going to WrestleMania 20 "Where it all begins again" in MSG of all places with no Hogan, Piper, Savage, etc. Most of the matches sucked (Both tag title matches) had already been done (Taker/Kane) or just didnt have a 'Mania "feel" to them (Angle/Eddie and the three way, though both turned out to be great matches)

[WarriorWarrior]

akkountent said:

There's a big difference between WM XIX and WM 23:

WM XIX main events:

Angle vs Lesner - 3 out of 4 stars
HHH vs Booker - 2.5 out of 4 stars
Rock vs Austin - 3 out of 4 stars
Hogan vs McMahon - 3 out of 4 stars (it was entertaining)
HBK vs Jericho - 4 out of 4 stars (IMO)

"Rumored" WM 23 main events:

Hogan vs Big Show - do you honestly think this is gonna capture the "magic" of WM 3?
Batista vs 'Taker - can you say Sid vs. Taker at WM 13? Two, big slow men peetering out at the 8 min mark
Cena vs HHH - been there, done that
McMahon vs Foley - HBK vs. McMahon, Hogan vs. McMahon; how many guys are gonna get their revenge on McMahon?
Lashley defend the ECW title - this is the "bathroom" break match IMO

I don't think you can even compare the two.

The Austin Rock match at Mania 19 was the THIRD meeting between those 2 at a Wrestlemania and was still good. So saying "been there done that" about Cena HHH might not be true. How do you know Cena will be champ? How do you know he will be face?

[akkountent]

"How do you know Cena will be champ? How do you know he will be face? "

That's why I labeled those matches to be "rumored".

As far as Austin vs Rock goes, their first encounter was alot better than the first encounter between Cena and HHH, to say the least. WM 15 generally sucked, but the only saving graces were HHH vs Kane and Austin vs Rock (minus the M. Cole "giveaway").

[Cousin Judge]

It's always a difficult balance. Like it or not some people will buy WM if their all time favourite is on the card so WWE must take notice of that, after all a fanbase is a fanbase whether it's old, current or new. Wrestlemania has in my opinion been trading these last three years on it's name. I ordered 20 for the hype, I ordered 21 because "it was bound to be better than last year" and I didn't order 22 at all because it didn't seem like a Wrestlemania in the build up. It's a showcase of the year and in your showcase you display your best assets. If you stick Rock and Austin on a card sure they're not going to be there the next night on Raw, but at least you've enticed people to watch the show where they might become interested in those that will be.

You cannot put up people like CM Punk, Lashley and MVP and hope that the big audience will take a punt and buy the show because it won't happen. You need to bring people in with names and that means having Austins, Rocks and Hogans on the card. People often mention how they should be building for the future but by having these older guys on the card that is exactly what they're doing. If nobody is buying the PPVs then who's going to notice the 'future' stars in the first place?

When you have a weak roster as WWE has you need big names to bolster it. In the past a post-Raw Wrestlemania would increase from the previous week. The Raw after WM17 was up 1.0 from the previous week, for WM 18 it was up 0.8. Sharp increases to say that if the card was good, people will stick around. This year at Wrestlemania there was no marque matches. There were no special attractions. It was a make-do card using what WWE already had at their full time disposal and no more. The Raw following Wrestlemania was DOWN .01 from the previous week. Now a 0.1 in ratings is hardly a drop in the ocean but considering that it's virtual tradition for there to be a reasonable surge in ratings after a Wrestlemania it proves that people didn't stick around, that they're weren't interested. In other words the buyrates for Wrestlemania 22 came from the existing fanbase. With the UK's PPV buys counted in with that too these days the US audience (on which the TV ratings are based) were probably less interested in that Wrestlemania than any other Wrestlemania of a generation.

So you really do NEED the big names, it's for the long term good of the company. WWE didn't receive a big boost from this years Wrestlemania because it wasn't a spectacular, it didn't have Mr Casual diving for the phone, in fact as a die-hard wrestling fan of over 20 years I was completely unconcerned about the event, not one time was I even remotely tempted to purchase and I didn't and no matter how good the quality of the matches were I am still to this day glad that I have not seen it and I think that feeling was widespread among even WWE's most casual of PPV buyer. If I want to see great wrestling then fine, but this is Wrestlemania, give us something SPECIAL.

Furthermore I think if you pay the ridiculously over inflated ticket prices to attend such an event I think you deserve a little bit more than just a "good ppv".

[algertman]

thedude said:

"From a numbers standpoint, I can't believe Vince and co. can't afford to bring back some "attitude-era" talent for one night only to help booster up the lackluster card, even if it means paying them big paychecks. "

I disagree here. He SHOULDNT be bringing them back for a one night deal. He should be building the talent he has for the future. If you are wanting to see Attitude Era stars, you should really watch an Attitude Era DVD.

Then why continue to job them out to Dx?