|
Post by Baby, it’s Jes outside on Jun 19, 2017 15:51:45 GMT -5
When do you think Vince etc came to this conclusion about their product/who gets pushed?
|
|
Sicho100
Hank Scorpio
Easily Confused.
Posts: 5,983
|
Post by Sicho100 on Jun 19, 2017 16:18:53 GMT -5
When the crowd turned on Cena, I guess. Because then it wasn't, "We screwed up booking the guy we were presenting as the top babyface," but, "The booking is great - hey, it's some reaction."
It's basically a defense mechanism.
|
|
Nikki Heyman
Fry's dog Seymour
EXTREEEEEME Pony Manager
✬ Believe In The Fight ✬
Posts: 24,018
|
Post by Nikki Heyman on Jun 19, 2017 16:22:19 GMT -5
When the crowd turned on Cena, I guess. Because then it wasn't, "We screwed up booking the guy we were presenting as the top babyface," but, "The booking is great - hey, it's some reaction." It's basically a defense mechanism. Crowd reactions, negative or positive, tells WWE that you are somehow invested in the product/storyline/etc. I've said it before and I'll say it again - respond with silence and it will go away. Or you go away and they will eventually get the message.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jun 19, 2017 16:37:13 GMT -5
"I hate this booking" is not a good reaction, because it's not fun.
Booing heels should be FUN, like you're participating in a show.
|
|
H-Virus
Hank Scorpio
A Real Contagious Experience
Posts: 5,980
|
Post by H-Virus on Jun 19, 2017 16:40:26 GMT -5
When the crowd turned on Cena, I guess. Because then it wasn't, "We screwed up booking the guy we were presenting as the top babyface," but, "The booking is great - hey, it's some reaction." It's basically a defense mechanism. Crowd reactions, negative or positive, tells WWE that you are somehow invested in the product/storyline/etc. I've said it before and I'll say it again - respond with silence and it will go away. Or you go away and they will eventually get the message. Except that they've already proven with Roman Reigns that they'd rather mute the crowd into silence for him than to have the crowd mercilessly booing him. Frankly, it doesn't matter how the crowds respond, because any reaction they give can be editted for future recaps and hype packages. "Oh, they're booing because Roman won? Well let's just pipe in some cheers and show a close-up from a fan celebrating from something completely unrelated that happened earlier in the night. See? Everyone loves Roman!" Let's face it, short of everyone getting out of their seats and leaving the building when something happens that they don't like, there's really no way for them to win against WWE's editting team.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 48,450
|
Post by Dub H on Jun 19, 2017 16:42:12 GMT -5
...except when it is a guy Vince doesn't like.
Then the best reaction is meaningless reaction.
|
|
Fade
Patti Mayonnaise
Posts: 38,439
|
Post by Fade on Jun 19, 2017 16:48:55 GMT -5
Cena.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2017 16:58:22 GMT -5
Even if the crowd were dead silent for his guys Vince would still plug on ahead with them. Look at Alberto.
That said, if they actually believed the, "Any reaction is good!" thing they wouldn't still be trying so desperately hard to act like people cheer for Roman Reigns.
|
|
|
Post by -Lithium- on Jun 19, 2017 17:22:18 GMT -5
Crowd reactions, negative or positive, tells WWE that you are somehow invested in the product/storyline/etc. I've said it before and I'll say it again - respond with silence and it will go away. Or you go away and they will eventually get the message. Except that they've already proven with Roman Reigns that they'd rather mute the crowd into silence for him than to have the crowd mercilessly booing him. Exactly. Them muting the fans instantly 100% destroys their bullshit narrative of "HES ALREADY THE BEST HEEL IN THE COMPANY" or w/e latest bullshit they tried to push as defense against the absolute massive failure to push Roman as top face. If the senile old man likes you, no reaction is bad enough. If he doesn't, no reaction is good enough. If Daniel Bryan got 5% of the boos that Reigns gets, he'd instantly point to that as the reason to not push him. This shit will go on until that delusional, creative cancerous idiot goes the f*** away.
|
|
|
Post by King Devitt and the Woke Mob on Jun 19, 2017 17:26:16 GMT -5
Except that they've already proven with Roman Reigns that they'd rather mute the crowd into silence for him than to have the crowd mercilessly booing him. Exactly. Them muting the fans instantly 100% destroys their bullshit narrative of "HES ALREADY THE BEST HEEL IN THE COMPANY" or w/e latest bullshit they tried to push as defense against the absolute massive failure to push Roman as top face. If the senile old man likes you, no reaction is bad enough. If he doesn't, no reaction is good enough. If Daniel Bryan got 5% of the boos that Reigns gets, he'd instantly point to that as the reason to not push him. This shit will go on until that delusional, creative cancerous idiot goes the f*** away. PREACH!
|
|
Nikki Heyman
Fry's dog Seymour
EXTREEEEEME Pony Manager
✬ Believe In The Fight ✬
Posts: 24,018
|
Post by Nikki Heyman on Jun 19, 2017 17:39:52 GMT -5
Even if the crowd were dead silent for his guys Vince would still plug on ahead with them. Look at Alberto. They teased Cena/Orton a couple of times and the dead reactions stopped all but one attempt in recent years. I just know that with the polarized responses that Cena's been getting for the last decade, he smiles because he's getting a reaction even if it's the one WWE doesn't want. I can't speak for Roman because I'm still a fan of his, for better or worse.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Jun 19, 2017 17:48:48 GMT -5
Their "any reaction is a good reaction" shit is just some public-facing bullshit meant to make it look like they're not completely failing at their jobs. I don't think it's a genuine belief at all, it's just been regurgitated for years as a talking point because they don't have any better excuse to run with in its place. If Vince viewed people mercilessly booing Roman as a good thing they wouldn't be muting the crowd or editing video packages to manipulate crowd reactions. But they do it constantly, because they want everyone to love Roman and cheer for him, and are very much not happy with a sizable audience portion rejecting him.
It's the equivalent of some kid in high school saying 'I don't care what people think of me' so often and so frequently that you're all but certain they very much do care what people think of them and are trying to influence that by making people think better of them for not caring so much.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jun 19, 2017 19:35:55 GMT -5
Vince has ALWAYS had this attitude, but before he would back off on things when the audience began changing the channel because there was an alternative wrestling product, now he's in a position where he thinks the fanbase can't leave, yelling 'You'll be back!' as they turn off his product in droves, yet here we are over a decade and a half on from the InVasion, and the WCW fanbase he chased off still haven't returned.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Jun 19, 2017 22:17:07 GMT -5
When the crowd turned on Cena, I guess. Because then it wasn't, "We screwed up booking the guy we were presenting as the top babyface," but, "The booking is great - hey, it's some reaction." It's basically a defense mechanism. Crowd reactions, negative or positive, tells WWE that you are somehow invested in the product/storyline/etc. I've said it before and I'll say it again - respond with silence and it will go away. Or you go away and they will eventually get the message. Ratings are in the toilet in terms of their historical norms. So they're losing if not money at the moment, potential money and interest. That's never good. Nine times this year they couldn't clear a 2.1 rating. I know, ratings, blah, but let's put that in perspective. Thing is, they haven't broken that plane in 7 weeks. Last year, for the entire year it was 14 times. They did half of that number in the last seven weeks alone. Again, I get it, viewers have new ways to watch. Great, but do you think that "oh but Tivo" matters to USA network? Nah, cause they're not getting ad revenue from it. So far this year, the average is 2.13. That's great compared to a sitcom, ok fine. Last year, 2.26. Going back we see 2.64 (2015), 2.95 (2014), 3.01 (2013), 3.0 (2012), 3.21 (2011). So, we go back just that far, and an entire ratings point of viewers has turned the show off and not come back. So they haven't responded with silence, they've responded by saying "hell with it, what else is on". Yet...there is no effect.
|
|
Nikki Heyman
Fry's dog Seymour
EXTREEEEEME Pony Manager
✬ Believe In The Fight ✬
Posts: 24,018
|
Post by Nikki Heyman on Jun 19, 2017 22:31:56 GMT -5
Crowd reactions, negative or positive, tells WWE that you are somehow invested in the product/storyline/etc. I've said it before and I'll say it again - respond with silence and it will go away. Or you go away and they will eventually get the message. Ratings are in the toilet in terms of their historical norms. So they're losing if not money at the moment, potential money and interest. That's never good. Nine times this year they couldn't clear a 2.1 rating. I know, ratings, blah, but let's put that in perspective. Thing is, they haven't broken that plane in 7 weeks. Last year, for the entire year it was 14 times. They did half of that number in the last seven weeks alone. Again, I get it, viewers have new ways to watch. Great, but do you think that "oh but Tivo" matters to USA network? Nah, cause they're not getting ad revenue from it. So far this year, the average is 2.13. That's great compared to a sitcom, ok fine. Last year, 2.26. Going back we see 2.64 (2015), 2.95 (2014), 3.01 (2013), 3.0 (2012), 3.21 (2011). So, we go back just that far, and an entire ratings point of viewers has turned the show off and not come back. So they haven't responded with silence, they've responded by saying "hell with it, what else is on". Yet...there is no effect. That's still a response, though - silence is also an answer. I agree what they're producing is not "Can't miss" TV, but given how many other things are available to do on a Monday Night, all of which combine in a decline of the show's ratings. But with all the other revenue streams in place now, they can let the ratings continue to drop, and if USA doesn't renew them, they put everything on the Network. Then the ratings don't matter at all.
|
|
Shai
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,507
|
Post by Shai on Jun 19, 2017 23:37:28 GMT -5
I said it on Tumblr and I'll say it here WWE isn't going to truly get better till Vince is gone from it.
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Jun 20, 2017 0:15:12 GMT -5
Ratings are in the toilet in terms of their historical norms. So they're losing if not money at the moment, potential money and interest. That's never good. Nine times this year they couldn't clear a 2.1 rating. I know, ratings, blah, but let's put that in perspective. Thing is, they haven't broken that plane in 7 weeks. Last year, for the entire year it was 14 times. They did half of that number in the last seven weeks alone. Again, I get it, viewers have new ways to watch. Great, but do you think that "oh but Tivo" matters to USA network? Nah, cause they're not getting ad revenue from it. So far this year, the average is 2.13. That's great compared to a sitcom, ok fine. Last year, 2.26. Going back we see 2.64 (2015), 2.95 (2014), 3.01 (2013), 3.0 (2012), 3.21 (2011). So, we go back just that far, and an entire ratings point of viewers has turned the show off and not come back. So they haven't responded with silence, they've responded by saying "hell with it, what else is on". Yet...there is no effect. That's still a response, though - silence is also an answer. I agree what they're producing is not "Can't miss" TV, but given how many other things are available to do on a Monday Night, all of which combine in a decline of the show's ratings. But with all the other revenue streams in place now, they can let the ratings continue to drop, and if USA doesn't renew them, they put everything on the Network. Then the ratings don't matter at all. The problem with that theory is that those revenue streams are nowhere near enough to match the year on year growth they get with USA (even people like Meltzer have said that one of the reasons they can afford to be lax is because the revenue grows year after year so if other stuff drops, that'll still turn them a profit every year) so if they get dropped before they could grow those more than they are now, it'll be a complete disaster getting them on the Network. And if they think ratings are bad now, imagine going from at least 3m a week to just under half that because that's going to happen as long as people aren't going to the Network as much as they are. They're not even going to Hulu because if they were, WWE would be shouting that from every rooftop they can find. They're hemmoraging viewers but don't care right now because guaranteed money is there.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Jun 20, 2017 3:19:55 GMT -5
WWE is trying to stem the bleeding with the fact their other revenue streams are up but if they lose TV then that won't be worth shit; television is still their main source of advertising for the Network, for their merch, for live events... Even their whole thing about in-show advertising like with their KFC deal (which on a structural level is really amazing for WWE to have because it's something that very few other forms of media can so seamlessly allow while also not breaking the bank for a company to do it) hinges on a lot of people viewing their show, and you'd better believe that when WWE is talking revenue streams they're talking about their more proactive roles in seeking big money sponsors to pay them directly. Just because WWE doesn't take week to week ratings directly to the bank doesn't mean they can let them slide.
They're not experiencing growth so much as they're squeezing everything they can from a dwindling audience, and that's not going to be sustainable for them.
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Jun 20, 2017 3:44:21 GMT -5
When the crowd turned on Cena, I guess. Because then it wasn't, "We screwed up booking the guy we were presenting as the top babyface," but, "The booking is great - hey, it's some reaction." It's basically a defense mechanism. Crowd reactions, negative or positive, tells WWE that you are somehow invested in the product/storyline/etc. I've said it before and I'll say it again - respond with silence and it will go away. Or you go away and they will eventually get the message. People have been going away, and there's more evidence to the contrary that they're getting the message.
|
|
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Jun 20, 2017 4:02:50 GMT -5
Ratings are in the toilet in terms of their historical norms. So they're losing if not money at the moment, potential money and interest. That's never good. Nine times this year they couldn't clear a 2.1 rating. I know, ratings, blah, but let's put that in perspective. Thing is, they haven't broken that plane in 7 weeks. Last year, for the entire year it was 14 times. They did half of that number in the last seven weeks alone. Again, I get it, viewers have new ways to watch. Great, but do you think that "oh but Tivo" matters to USA network? Nah, cause they're not getting ad revenue from it. So far this year, the average is 2.13. That's great compared to a sitcom, ok fine. Last year, 2.26. Going back we see 2.64 (2015), 2.95 (2014), 3.01 (2013), 3.0 (2012), 3.21 (2011). So, we go back just that far, and an entire ratings point of viewers has turned the show off and not come back. So they haven't responded with silence, they've responded by saying "hell with it, what else is on". Yet...there is no effect. That's still a response, though - silence is also an answer. I agree what they're producing is not "Can't miss" TV, but given how many other things are available to do on a Monday Night, all of which combine in a decline of the show's ratings. But with all the other revenue streams in place now, they can let the ratings continue to drop, and if USA doesn't renew them, they put everything on the Network. Then the ratings don't matter at all. If they go all network then they are as good as done creating new fans. I came back into wrestling in 2002 flipping channels and seeing Rock and Hogan facing off in the ring. From then to a few years ago I spent an ungodly amount of money on wrestling. Never would have happened if I had to download a special app just to see whats what. Look at the comic book industry for long term effects. They started focusing on the direct market (comic book stores) over the newsstand because the direct market books were more profitable. Now when the characters are bringing in billions at the box office the books struggle to sell 50,000 copies to an increasingly shrinking older fanbase because the only place to get them is specialty stores.
|
|