Welfare Willis
Crow T. Robot
Pornomancer 555-BONE FDIC Bonsured
Game Center CX Kacho on!
Posts: 44,259
|
Post by Welfare Willis on Dec 22, 2017 2:11:57 GMT -5
Here we go again with people putting out happy fantasies of Disney buying more things and owning more of the world. Twilight Zone. If Vince sells the company to anyone it has to be Comcast. WWE is has a long standing position in a lot of their programming. Disney isn't going to put WWE on Disney Channel or Disney XD and damn sure not on ABC or ESPN. 2) TV ratings value. WWE gives you 5-7 hours a week of TV that'll get good ratings. Even falling, WWE ratings are so high that in the last deal, USA would have instantly fallen from #1 cable network to #4 if WWE left them. As sports television continues to splinter and splinter off, and TV rights deals splinter and splinter off, locking up WWE for ESPN is a valuable asset for them...especially if Disney chooses to forsake the NFL because it's too expensive like rumors are in their next deal, giving them the perfect replacement for Monday Night Football. I can't imagine the amount of laughter from people if the announcement was made that Monday Night Football was being replaced with Phony Wrestling. Just ruin my dreams of Roman Reigns, Disney Princess why don't you!đĄ
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Dec 22, 2017 2:25:12 GMT -5
Wrestling is Vince's life-why bother selling it now-he's too old to spend the money he already has To guarantee that his grandchildren and great-grandchildren are financially set for life.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Dec 22, 2017 2:46:54 GMT -5
Disney has no need for WWE footage. They have one of the largest archives in the world in terms of footage, even more so if the Fox deal is completed. Disney still has stuff of its own that they haven't gotten around to putting out there again since original airings or releases, now they're going to have a massive new toybox in the Fox stuff to play in.
They aren't going to want a brand/franchise whose most recognizable character is a scandal-clad racist, has a massive headache going on in terms of things like CTE and footage royalty rights (those wouldn't go away with a buyout, they'd get exponentially bigger), has been plagued with scandals, murderers, child murderers, child molesters, drugs, early deaths, career-ending injuries, and has a past bursting with on-screen racism, sexism and homophobia.
Then we go to where WWE had their most profitable year ever last year (something like $400 million), yet only netted $20 million. Those aren't the kinds of return on investment that the Mouse would have any interest in. There would be union issues, as well.
Disney will never buy WWE.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Dec 22, 2017 3:37:42 GMT -5
Disney has no need for WWE footage. They have one of the largest archives in the world in terms of footage, even more so if the Fox deal is completed. Disney still has stuff of its own that they haven't gotten around to putting out there again since original airings or releases, now they're going to have a massive new toybox in the Fox stuff to play in. They aren't going to want a brand/franchise whose most recognizable character is a scandal-clad racist, has a massive headache going on in terms of things like CTE and footage royalty rights (those wouldn't go away with a buyout, they'd get exponentially bigger), has been plagued with scandals, murderers, child murderers, child molesters, drugs, early deaths, career-ending injuries, and has a past bursting with on-screen racism, sexism and homophobia. Then we go to where WWE had their most profitable year ever last year (something like $400 million), yet only netted $20 million. Those aren't the kinds of return on investment that the Mouse would have any interest in. There would be union issues, as well. Disney will never buy WWE. I was going to reply to another post with all this in longer form (including a scenario where âNXT in Walt Disney Studiosâ could go quickly wrong) but this summarises it better than I could.
|
|
|
Post by The Thread Barbi on Dec 22, 2017 3:49:39 GMT -5
Disney has no need for WWE footage. They have one of the largest archives in the world in terms of footage, even more so if the Fox deal is completed. Disney still has stuff of its own that they haven't gotten around to putting out there again since original airings or releases, now they're going to have a massive new toybox in the Fox stuff to play in. They aren't going to want a brand/franchise whose most recognizable character is a scandal-clad racist, has a massive headache going on in terms of things like CTE and footage royalty rights (those wouldn't go away with a buyout, they'd get exponentially bigger), has been plagued with scandals, murderers, child murderers, child molesters, drugs, early deaths, career-ending injuries, and has a past bursting with on-screen racism, sexism and homophobia. Then we go to where WWE had their most profitable year ever last year (something like $400 million), yet only netted $20 million. Those aren't the kinds of return on investment that the Mouse would have any interest in. There would be union issues, as well. Disney will never buy WWE. Precisely, I have said before that Disney makes more profit off a single movie like Frozen than WWE have in the last ten years combined.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2017 4:17:38 GMT -5
At least one McMahon might be considering selling something. *shoots sideways glance at Shane* APPLAUD THIS MAN
|
|
|
Post by Tessmachers-Ass-Fan on Dec 22, 2017 6:17:38 GMT -5
Denver Broncos!
|
|
|
Post by sfvega on Dec 22, 2017 8:06:42 GMT -5
With most of those, especially Marvel, Lucasfilm, The Muppets etc, there are at least things they can use to promote other products, make merchandise and use in theme parks. Muppets on Dancing on Ice etc. The only things WWE genuinely own are footage, gimmicks and names. Thatâs it. They donât own likenesses, they donât own anything with real substance to it. Thereâs no Iron Man or Hulk to promote in theme parks, just names of things they kinda sorta own. Theyâre not going to change Space Mountain to Survivor Series or Magic Kingdom to WrestleMania so most of what WWE owns is useless to them. Youâre not going to see John Cena costumes in Disneyland because, well, John Cenaâs a dude. They may own the name but they donât own the guy. And WWE films is just that. Films. Sure, they could use the growing film library but again, thatâs it. They can brag that they have part ownership of Surfs Up 2 for some reason. Also, as Plat mentioned, one bad PR story about the purchase and the deal goes kaput because all eyes will be on Disney wondering why the heck they brought this company with these skeletons. Shareholdersâd hate it really damn quickly. On the other side, what WWE does have: 1) The footage is much more viable than you think. Pretty much ALL the pro wrestling footage that matters is a big thing...and continuing to get those things is a value to Disney, especially from the second part: 2) TV ratings value. WWE gives you 5-7 hours a week of TV that'll get good ratings. Even falling, WWE ratings are so high that in the last deal, USA would have instantly fallen from #1 cable network to #4 if WWE left them. As sports television continues to splinter and splinter off, and TV rights deals splinter and splinter off, locking up WWE for ESPN is a valuable asset for them...especially if Disney chooses to forsake the NFL because it's too expensive like rumors are in their next deal, giving them the perfect replacement for Monday Night Football. 3) Wrong, there IS something WWE can offer Disney for their theme parks...isn't there a kind of really big part of the WWE that's based in Orlando, Florida as we speak? You won't get name changes for Space Mountain or Magic Kingdom, and you won't get John Cena costumes in Disneyland...but you ABSOLUTELY would get "NXT tapings move from Full Sail to a soundstage on the Disney/MGM Studios grounds like WCW had with Worldwide"...which leads to more admissions to Walt Disney World by the people who'd go to Disney once a month just to see NXT." They already cannibalized their PPV and a lot of their DVD/Blu sales to the Network. It would be weird for a company to pay billions to acquire it and also cannibalize their TV rights deal money by not letting them outsource it. On one hand ESPN gets easy ratings for that timeslot, but that TV money goes a long way to making the standalone business profitable given the gigantic cost of producing their product. I mean Disney is big enough to eat some cost, but it would be a very weird (or bad) business decision to pay out the ass for a business and then fudge the numbers of said business.
|
|
Fauxnaki
Unicron
0 Followers Club
Posts: 2,861
|
Post by Fauxnaki on Dec 22, 2017 9:54:15 GMT -5
Please not Disney Please not Disney Please not Disney Please not Disney Please not Disney Please not Disney Please not Disney Please not Disney
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Dec 22, 2017 11:04:38 GMT -5
On the other side, what WWE does have: 1) The footage is much more viable than you think. Pretty much ALL the pro wrestling footage that matters is a big thing...and continuing to get those things is a value to Disney, especially from the second part: 2) TV ratings value. WWE gives you 5-7 hours a week of TV that'll get good ratings. Even falling, WWE ratings are so high that in the last deal, USA would have instantly fallen from #1 cable network to #4 if WWE left them. As sports television continues to splinter and splinter off, and TV rights deals splinter and splinter off, locking up WWE for ESPN is a valuable asset for them...especially if Disney chooses to forsake the NFL because it's too expensive like rumors are in their next deal, giving them the perfect replacement for Monday Night Football. 3) Wrong, there IS something WWE can offer Disney for their theme parks...isn't there a kind of really big part of the WWE that's based in Orlando, Florida as we speak? You won't get name changes for Space Mountain or Magic Kingdom, and you won't get John Cena costumes in Disneyland...but you ABSOLUTELY would get "NXT tapings move from Full Sail to a soundstage on the Disney/MGM Studios grounds like WCW had with Worldwide"...which leads to more admissions to Walt Disney World by the people who'd go to Disney once a month just to see NXT." They already cannibalized their PPV and a lot of their DVD/Blu sales to the Network. It would be weird for a company to pay billions to acquire it and also cannibalize their TV rights deal money by not letting them outsource it. On one hand ESPN gets easy ratings for that timeslot, but that TV money goes a long way to making the standalone business profitable given the gigantic cost of producing their product. I mean Disney is big enough to eat some cost, but it would be a very weird (or bad) business decision to pay out the ass for a business and then fudge the numbers of said business. Not to defend the idea of Disney buying WWE because I don't think it's going to happen, but the thing about TV rights is that if a broadcaster were to buy WWE and put it on their own network, instead of being paid a fee for the rights they would instead be receiving all of the ad money that the show generates. USA Network is paying a lot to WWE for the rights to air Raw, yes, but they're still turning a profit off of the exclusivity by selling ad time during the show they own the rights to air. If in this scenario Disney bought WWE and put it on ESPN, they'd be replacing "money we get paid by the network who airs us" with "money we get paid selling ad time on our show we own". It's why networks crave successful shows they own and produce.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 38,900
|
Post by fw91 on Dec 22, 2017 11:13:15 GMT -5
Donât want to get political, but you guys think that Trump called up Vince at like 3am and double dogged dared him to relaunch the XFL and taunted him with several âyou wonâtââs before he agreed? Vince would never turn down a double dog dare from the POTUS
|
|
chrom
Backup Wench
Master of the rare undecuple post
Posts: 84,551
|
Post by chrom on Dec 22, 2017 11:14:13 GMT -5
WWE Stocks have started dropping ever since this started.
|
|
|
Post by sfvega on Dec 22, 2017 11:31:13 GMT -5
They already cannibalized their PPV and a lot of their DVD/Blu sales to the Network. It would be weird for a company to pay billions to acquire it and also cannibalize their TV rights deal money by not letting them outsource it. On one hand ESPN gets easy ratings for that timeslot, but that TV money goes a long way to making the standalone business profitable given the gigantic cost of producing their product. I mean Disney is big enough to eat some cost, but it would be a very weird (or bad) business decision to pay out the ass for a business and then fudge the numbers of said business. Not to defend the idea of Disney buying WWE because I don't think it's going to happen, but the thing about TV rights is that if a broadcaster were to buy WWE and put it on their own network, instead of being paid a fee for the rights they would instead be receiving all of the ad money that the show generates. USA Network is paying a lot to WWE for the rights to air Raw, yes, but they're still turning a profit off of the exclusivity by selling ad time during the show they own the rights to air. If in this scenario Disney bought WWE and put it on ESPN, they'd be replacing "money we get paid by the network who airs us" with "money we get paid selling ad time on our show we own". It's why networks crave successful shows they own and produce. No ad revenue is going to replace TV rights deals, especially when ESPN has a lot of set ad sponsors. A) ESPN (Disney) gets the ad revenue from that spot regardless. Yes, they would make more from a higher rated show's ad revenue, but it is still a net loss. B) A lot of the advertisers ESPN has are set anyway. If you watch the network, they run essentially the same commercial break all day. So while WWE brings some toy advertisers and such, a lot of it would stay the same. And C) It's a zero sum game. You're losing X amount of money from USA and adding essentially "free" high-rated content and a slightly ad revenue increase for ESPN. But you're also paying billions of dollars for it. So yeah, it doesn't add up. Any money you save from paying another program to take that timeslot and any added ad revenue isn't going to be enough to make up for those hefty rights fees. And that is a net loss year over year, before you take into acount the major cost of acquisition. You could make an argument that being on ESPN could allow them to crosspromote easier and try to grow the WWE's market. But from a plain black and white numbers standpoint, it simply doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Dec 22, 2017 12:29:33 GMT -5
Not to defend the idea of Disney buying WWE because I don't think it's going to happen, but the thing about TV rights is that if a broadcaster were to buy WWE and put it on their own network, instead of being paid a fee for the rights they would instead be receiving all of the ad money that the show generates. USA Network is paying a lot to WWE for the rights to air Raw, yes, but they're still turning a profit off of the exclusivity by selling ad time during the show they own the rights to air. If in this scenario Disney bought WWE and put it on ESPN, they'd be replacing "money we get paid by the network who airs us" with "money we get paid selling ad time on our show we own". It's why networks crave successful shows they own and produce. No ad revenue is going to replace TV rights deals, especially when ESPN has a lot of set ad sponsors. A) ESPN (Disney) gets the ad revenue from that spot regardless. Yes, they would make more from a higher rated show's ad revenue, but it is still a net loss. B) A lot of the advertisers ESPN has are set anyway. If you watch the network, they run essentially the same commercial break all day. So while WWE brings some toy advertisers and such, a lot of it would stay the same. And C) It's a zero sum game. You're losing X amount of money from USA and adding essentially "free" high-rated content and a slightly ad revenue increase for ESPN. But you're also paying billions of dollars for it. So yeah, it doesn't add up. Any money you save from paying another program to take that timeslot and any added ad revenue isn't going to be enough to make up for those hefty rights fees. And that is a net loss year over year, before you take into acount the major cost of acquisition. You could make an argument that being on ESPN could allow them to crosspromote easier and try to grow the WWE's market. But from a plain black and white numbers standpoint, it simply doesn't make sense. USA Network would not pay WWE the money they do if they could not profit off of their presence on their channel. No network is going to sign a contract to pay for rights that cost more that they can make selling ad time. If a show does underperform, it usually gets canceled because networks often only commit one season at a time to a program for that very reason. If Comcast bought WWE, they would keep Raw on USA network, not have to pay for the rights anymore, and still keep all their ad revenue. Yes, it costs money for WWE to run TV, but if WWE were running a major loss because of Raw they also wouldn't be running Raw. The numbers don't make sense because you're applying a math to it that wouldn't allow for even what WWE or its TV deals right now to be sustainable.
|
|
|
Post by sfvega on Dec 22, 2017 18:33:17 GMT -5
No ad revenue is going to replace TV rights deals, especially when ESPN has a lot of set ad sponsors. A) ESPN (Disney) gets the ad revenue from that spot regardless. Yes, they would make more from a higher rated show's ad revenue, but it is still a net loss. B) A lot of the advertisers ESPN has are set anyway. If you watch the network, they run essentially the same commercial break all day. So while WWE brings some toy advertisers and such, a lot of it would stay the same. And C) It's a zero sum game. You're losing X amount of money from USA and adding essentially "free" high-rated content and a slightly ad revenue increase for ESPN. But you're also paying billions of dollars for it. So yeah, it doesn't add up. Any money you save from paying another program to take that timeslot and any added ad revenue isn't going to be enough to make up for those hefty rights fees. And that is a net loss year over year, before you take into acount the major cost of acquisition. You could make an argument that being on ESPN could allow them to crosspromote easier and try to grow the WWE's market. But from a plain black and white numbers standpoint, it simply doesn't make sense. USA Network would not pay WWE the money they do if they could not profit off of their presence on their channel. No network is going to sign a contract to pay for rights that cost more that they can make selling ad time. If a show does underperform, it usually gets canceled because networks often only commit one season at a time to a program for that very reason. If Comcast bought WWE, they would keep Raw on USA network, not have to pay for the rights anymore, and still keep all their ad revenue. Yes, it costs money for WWE to run TV, but if WWE were running a major loss because of Raw they also wouldn't be running Raw. The numbers don't make sense because you're applying a math to it that wouldn't allow for even what WWE or its TV deals right now to be sustainable. Lol, that is the exact reason ESPN is in such bad shape right now. USA Network makes 100% off of commercials on Raw. They also pay for rights fees. ESPN is owned by Disney, and already makes money off of commercials ran from that timeslot. They would pay no rights fees. So what you need to understand is that a (hypothetically) 25-30% increase in the ad revenue from that time slot would not make up for a 100% drop in rights fees. This isn't all found money, ESPN/Disney already has that ad money in their bottom line today. Someone already mentioned that WWE's net take for the last year was only 20 million. Now they don't disclose how much rights fees are per year, but you have to assume it is well over that. So to eat that money AND the billions of dollars to acquire WWE for a percentage increase in ad revenue seems like COMPLETELY bad business. For the math, if you say Raw and SD make 1.7 mil in ad money per week (according to an article on PW Torch.....I know, I know), a 30% take on that (the increase over just like a small time college basketball game for instance, whatever would run in that slot) over a year would be roughly 26.5 mil a year. TV revenue for WWE in the US made a little over 150 mil a few years ago and a large portion of that is the USA deal. So what we can deduce from these rough numbers is that there is a chance that USA pays more for rights than they get in ad revenue. Even if USA made as much money as two Raws in ad revenue (est 104 mil). What it boils down to is how much you think of that US TV revenue is USA's rights deal? It is a majority, for sure. If it is 3/4ths, that is already 116+ mil. A 30% take on their ad money on 104 mil is 31+ million. Now these are estimates, but that math just from a base level isn't good. Even if USA's deal only accounts for 1/2 of that, which doesn't stand to reason at all, that would still be over double the take on 30% of total ad money. I didn't imply running Raw was taking a loss at all, much less a major loss. That is a strawman, I shall call it Braun Strawman. I merely stated that it is a high operating cost. When you have high operating costs and a low net, that guaranteed big money every year for rights is a big deal. Especially compared to usually fluctuating ad revenue. The rights deal getting done with USA a few years ago was a big deal on here in terms of how financially viable the company was with the new Network dynamic.
|
|
|
Post by The Barber on Dec 23, 2017 10:22:17 GMT -5
If WWE is so popular, then why is the USA network the only one not to cancel WWE programming? Do they know someone in the corporate offices of USA? Hmm...
|
|
|
Post by Slammy Award-Winning Cannibal on Dec 23, 2017 12:40:06 GMT -5
Wrestling is Vince's life-why bother selling it now-he's too old to spend the money he already has To guarantee that his grandchildren and great-grandchildren are financially set for life. Vince is a billionaire. I think theyâll be fine.
|
|
|
Post by evilone on Dec 23, 2017 14:01:24 GMT -5
Don't want to disappoint you here but one of the favorite attributes of obsessive compulsive psychopaths is they would rather ruin their own creation than let someone other than them run it for them. In other words no one knows better than him and others would just waste it. If you think Vince McMahon story would end anything different you would be wrong. It could have ended on different note if God forbid something had happened to daddy Mac prior to today. Since thank God it did not there is no way in hell he just gives his controlling stake to his kids like normal human being would do.
|
|
|
Post by AJ Smudgico on Dec 23, 2017 14:56:30 GMT -5
What teams are for sale? DEAR VINCE PLEASE BUY BOTH NEWCASTLE AND SUNDERLAND AND FORM A SUPERCLUB. I'd say buy West Ham to take it away from our current owners, but can't imagine progress or that his eccentric changes would appease fans I'm now panicking
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 23, 2017 14:59:48 GMT -5
Nothing involving Sunderland will ever be super.
|
|