WWE PPV buyrates, Sky Box Office buys/viewing rates?

Butch Cassidy

Gambra wrote: »

I've never understood this line of reasoning for SBO/UK. I don't know any parent that would let their kid watch a show that starts at 1am on a school night, esp one that costs €22 to watch.

Well I don't know if there's parents letting their kid stay up to watch them but the shows can be recorded obviously.

jaykhunter wrote: »

UFC are putting on fantastic shows and are in the biggest boom period in their company's history. Their big shows clock the best part of a million buys or more, and that happens a few times throughout the year.

I don't have figures but i'd imagine UFC are doubling WWE's PPV sales in a total. WWE gets ~210,000 per normal PPV, but UFC

Most of why WWE's PPV sales are low is that they suck :pac: I'd imagine a small portion of fans are UFC and WWE fans, and so would only choose one, but they'd probably choose UFC, as it's the more entertaining show.

Edit : Found some figures. UFC in 2009 have 6 of the 10 (domestic) highest grossing PPVs, WM25 coming in at #10.

If UFC did ~8 million buys in 2009, WWE pulled in 2.6 million domestic, 4.2 worldwide.
That's really impressive, and even more so since Brock only fought once that year (UFC 100, which got 1.6 million buys!)

UFC are in the biggest boom period of the sport's history!


Also, Brock's UFC fights have surely been bigger than any of all of his wrestling ones? It's gotta be eating up at both Vince and Paul Levesque that they never did a Triple H/Lesnar match. As Paul Heyman said in a video posted int he TNA thread, WWE have so many revenue streams it's doubtful they'll run into trouble. They could lose market share sure but they're still selling silly foam belts and incredibly expensive t-shirts.

waltersobchak

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Also, Brock's UFC fights have surely been bigger than any of all of his wrestling ones? It's gotta be eating up at both Vince and Paul Levesque that they never did a Triple H/Lesnar match. As Paul Heyman said in a video posted int he TNA thread, WWE have so many revenue streams it's doubtful they'll run into trouble. They could lose market share sure but they're still selling silly foam belts and incredibly expensive t-shirts.

Well Brock Main Evented one of the worse drawing Manias of all-time, so his WWE drawing power was hardly stellar to be honest..

jaykhunter

waltersobchak wrote: »

Well Brock Main Evented one of the worse drawing Manias of all-time, so his WWE drawing power was hardly stellar to be honest..

I don't know why that Mania (XIX) drew so badly. Maybe because all of the focus was on McMahon/Hogan, which no-one wanted to see. Or that Triple H was in full c**t mode and they didn't rally behind Booker. Or maybe it wasn't promoted well enough.

But at the time Angle and Lesnar (along with Benoit, Guerrero and someone else) were leading the best smackdown shows of it's entire run and was much better than smackdown. I can only imagine how bad the rating would be if they didn't have Lesnar there.

I wonder if there are many households that would get Sky Sports for the wrestling first of all, and not because it's an added bonus for being able to watch the footie...

waltersobchak

jaykhunter wrote: »

I don't know why that Mania (XIX) drew so badly. Maybe because all of the focus was on McMahon/Hogan, which no-one wanted to see. Or that Triple H was in full c**t mode and they didn't rally behind Booker. Or maybe it wasn't promoted well enough.

But at the time Angle and Lesnar (along with Benoit, Guerrero and someone else) were leading the best smackdown shows of it's entire run and was much better than smackdown. I can only imagine how bad the rating would be if they didn't have Lesnar there.

I wonder if there are many households that would get Sky Sports for the wrestling first of all, and not because it's an added bonus for being able to watch the footie...

In retrospect, its one of the best Mania's of the 00's especially from a wrestling standpoint, and on paper, McMahon/Hogan.. Brock/Angle.. Austin/Rock.. Jericho/HBK and HHH/Booker T should have drawn big time, but it must have been a number of factors, that contributed to its failure. Like the Brands, Raw being terrible at the time, lack of proper promotion of the storylines, also Perhaps had WWE debuted Goldberg at the PPV instead of the following Raw, that would definitely added to PPV buys imho.

Butch Cassidy

jaykhunter wrote: »

I wonder if there are many households that would get Sky Sports for the wrestling first of all, and not because it's an added bonus for being able to watch the footie...

Wrestling or UFC would be the only reason I'd get a channel. I don't do English club football and don't wanna see Ireland play some b-list team in a friendly.

jaykhunter

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Wrestling or UFC would be the only reason I'd get a channel. I don't do English club football and don't wanna see Ireland play some b-list team in a friendly.

Do you have any brothers or is your dad into sports? I'm saying I imagine the vast majority of wrestling fans start watching as kids, and their household gets Sky Sports for some another reason (football, cricket, what have you) and are introduced to wrestling as a bonus.

Butch Cassidy

I was introduced to wrestling as a kid on Sky 1/UTV . For a period there no wrestling was on Sky1 or any other "standard" Tv channel. Now at least there's some TNA at the weekends on SEtanta Ireland and about an hr of WWE on Sky1.

D2D

Just bumping this

I've just noticed that Bragging Rights is currently scheduled for October 24th, which is the day after UFC 121: Brock Lesnar vs Cain Velasquez.

WWE are prob gonna set a record low rate buys for this.

Charisteas

Dare_2_defy wrote: »

Just bumping this

I've just noticed that Bragging Rights is currently scheduled for October 24th, which is the day after UFC 121: Brock Lesnar vs Cain Velasquez.

WWE are prob gonna set a record low rate buys for this.

Unless it's the return on HHH or Taker

Who plans their PPV's first? And why would the other company want to plan a PPV in the same weekend, surely both companies are going to lose buys.

D2D

Charisteas wrote: »

Who plans their PPV's first? And why would the other company want to plan a PPV in the same weekend, surely both companies are going to lose buys.

Well, WWE usually schedule their PPV's so they never change (e.g Cyber Sunday/Bragging Rights is always on the last Sunday in October..)

Vince135792003

Charisteas wrote: »

Unless it's the return on HHH or Taker

Who plans their PPV's first? And why would the other company want to plan a PPV in the same weekend, surely both companies are going to lose buys.

With UFC being on Saturdays it effects them alot less.

Plus it seems that WWE ppvs have no effect or at the very most a marginal one on UFC ppv buy rates whereas WWE are effected alot more when running them at the same time.

jaykhunter

Dare_2_defy wrote: »

Just bumping this

I've just noticed that Bragging Rights is currently scheduled for October 24th, which is the day after UFC 121: Brock Lesnar vs Cain Velasquez.

WWE are prob gonna set a record low rate buys for this.

Well I imagine that of the fanbase that loves UFC & WWE, but can only afford to buy one PPV/month, they'll all buy that UFC PPV. Bragging Rights is hardly a PPV worth...oh......bragging about. RAW vs SmackDown matches don't draw! (And certainly not a few weeks before the Survivor Series either!!)

Butch Cassidy

Is there a historical reason why WWF/WWE always had their PPVs of a Sunday? UFC like boxing PPV cards are nearly always on a Saturday.

jaykhunter

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Is there a historical reason why WWF/WWE always had their PPVs of a Sunday? UFC like boxing PPV cards are nearly always on a Saturday.

My guess is that Sunday's prime-time for viewing figures; since most people have the day off; people can meet up and watch wrestling; after going out Friday/Saturday night (which is the worst time to have PPVs).....

.......that said UFC have their PPVs on Sat night and they're doing just fine!!!!

American Football is on on mondays. WWF put wrestling on a monday to "fill" the off-season of Football; because fans would already keep monday nights as football night. So they bear the brunt of lower ratings during football season to keep the "tradition" of sitting down and watching sports on Monday.

Charisteas

Here's some useless trivia - Summerslam used to be on PPV Monday nights, I think they changed it from about 1995 onwards.

Butch Cassidy

Weird I was actually just coming to this thread to ask a question kinda about this...


Does anyone know why wrestling PPVs are on a Sunday while other sporting PPVs are of a Saturday night? Am I naieve in thinking there has to be a complicated reason other than "so as not to compete with real sporting events held on PPV of a saturday night like boxing matches"

GTR63

How many here are renting SummerSlam its not looking good on paper.Taker & HHH not returning is a blow & i'm certain that the PPV Buy figures are going to show that(vince won't be able to blame a stale gimmick for bad SummerSlams buys like he tried to do with Survivor Series last year).Not many want to pay to see Miz,Swagger, McIntyre & any new "Main Event Talent".

steelcityblues

For the sake of good wrestling and build up, they should cut the PPVs to 6 or maybe 7 a year!

Then again, i'm well aware the almighty $ will override this! :rolleyes:

Last PPV I bought was WM22, and since then I don''t regret it!

GTR63

steelcityblues wrote: »

For the sake of good wrestling and build up, they should cut the PPVs to 6 or maybe 7 a year!

Then again, i'm well aware the almighty $ will override this! :rolleyes:

Last PPV I bought was WM22, and since then I don''t regret it!

Your right.The last ppv I paid for & felt I got my moneys worth was WrestleMania XXIV(thanks Taker & Hbk).I rented The Rumble for the Rumble match,then Chamber ppv in Feb & the middle of that event was a Disgrace two Chamber matches & the rest thrown together.Then you had Mania that had quite a lot of shortcomings.
PS Love the George Costanza pic.

steelcityblues

GTR63 wrote: »

Your right.The last ppv I paid for & felt I got my moneys worth was WrestleMania XXIV(thanks Taker & Hbk).I rented The Rumble for the Rumble match,then Chamber ppv in Feb & the middle of that event was a Disgrace two Chamber matches & the rest thrown together.Then you had Mania that had quite a lot of shortcomings.
PS Love the George Costanza pic.

Thanks! I believe that the prestige of PPVs has been sorely affected, since they went with the one per month thing back in the mid 90s.

They could get away with it for several years, when you had a red-hot Austin/Rock/Angle, etc. with the more casual fans, but certainly not nowadays in this not- so-golden-age for bigtime wrestling!

Butch Cassidy

steelcityblues wrote: »

For the sake of good wrestling and build up, they should cut the PPVs to 6 or maybe 7 a year!

Then again, i'm well aware the almighty $ will override this! :rolleyes:

Last PPV I bought was WM22, and since then I don''t regret it!

When Bischoff sstarted doing 7 and then 10 PPVs a year people were telling him he'd "ruin" the PPV market. It's still bloated at 14 and they just cannot compete with UFC PPVs if you're choosing one or the other.

If there was maybe the big 4 or 5 were they guaranteed they'd be great and then smaller PPVs at half the price perhaps with transitional matches to further storylines and the odd classic thrown in then yeah that'd be deadly.

Butch Cassidy

GTR63 wrote: »

Your right.The last ppv I paid for & felt I got my moneys worth was WrestleMania XXIV(thanks Taker & Hbk).I rented The Rumble for the Rumble match,then Chamber ppv in Feb & the middle of that event was a Disgrace two Chamber matches & the rest thrown together.Then you had Mania that had quite a lot of shortcomings.
PS Love the George Costanza pic.

GTR63 wrote: »

How many here are renting SummerSlam its not looking good on paper.Taker & HHH not returning is a blow & i'm certain that the PPV Buy figures are going to show that(vince won't be able to blame a stale gimmick for bad SummerSlams buys like he tried to do with Survivor Series last year).Not many want to pay to see Miz,Swagger, McIntyre & any new "Main Event Talent".

Where are you guys renting WWE DVDs from? They have printed on the sleeves "Not for Rental" and I've never seen them in video shops.

Willie Stroker

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Where are you guys renting WWE DVDs from? They have printed on the sleeves "Not for Rental" and I've never seen them in video shops.

I think they meant buying out the ppv !

CMpunked

Surely there are multiple factors into the crazy decline of wwe ppvs.

First one that comes to mind is the wwes move to pg.
This obviously directly affects who wants to watch the ppvs, and also who is paying for them.

For example, in 2002/2003 in what could still be called the attitude era, you would have the majority of wrestling fans being at an age where the 22 euro could be given to parents to buy ppvs, or buy their own and everyones happy.
Now in 2010, as the majority of fans that the current angles get over with are kids, they obviously don't have the straightforward capabilities to acquire the money, go asking mam or dad.
And I don't know many parents that would be up for spending about €288 a year on wwe events.


I, as a wrestling fan hates how wwe builds feuds these days and how they draw out the feuds that I don't care for and thought that was over at the last ppv, and the ones that seem in anyway interesting gets 3 weeks to build. And that includes 1 match, 1 promo and 1 tag team where the two wrestlers in question have to team up.

I only buy manias these days, I don't see any point in these match themed ppvs either.
A ppv full of 4 way dances are going to make me unsurprised when they pull a big finish in the main event.

Butch Cassidy

CMpunked wrote: »

Surely there are multiple factors into the crazy decline of wwe ppvs.

First one that comes to mind is the wwes move to pg.
This obviously directly affects who wants to watch the ppvs, and also who is paying for them.

For example, in 2002/2003 in what could still be called the attitude era, you would have the majority of wrestling fans being at an age where the 22 euro could be given to parents to buy ppvs, or buy their own and everyones happy.
Now in 2010, as the majority of fans that the current angles get over with are kids, they obviously don't have the straightforward capabilities to acquire the money, go asking mam or dad.
And I don't know many parents that would be up for spending about €288 a year on wwe events.


I, as a wrestling fan hates how wwe builds feuds these days and how they draw out the feuds that I don't care for and thought that was over at the last ppv, and the ones that seem in anyway interesting gets 3 weeks to build. And that includes 1 match, 1 promo and 1 tag team where the two wrestlers in question have to team up.

I only buy manias these days, I don't see any point in these match themed ppvs either.
A ppv full of 4 way dances are going to make me unsurprised when they pull a big finish in the main event.

I think you've mistaken the move to TVPG there. Part of the reason I think they altered their product content to be more kid/family friendly is the competition with UFC - WWE don't wanna compete with them so they don't try. They're marketing directly at the pre-teen audience and they don't care about the 17+ market because they see that as unwinable due to UFC. I'm just making assumptions here but I think that's the reason there. They probably have a better chance of getting kids to bug their parents to buy the PPVs than enticing the 17+ market in buying them.

Don't forget: WWE's main market is the USA where PPVs have always been erm.. pay-per-view! I suppose the reason I started this thread was to see if anyone knew what the buyrates are like for Ireland/Britain. I wonder do they care at all about this market and/or would they go back to the previous Sky Sports deal if the Sky Box Office was somehow loss making. Though I don't know how it couldbe loss making as even 1,000 people buying a PPV on Box Office is 1,000 more than would watch it on Sky Sports "for free" and the live PPVs don't have any breaks so I don't know if ad revenue is a factor there.

niceguy_182002

hi i stay in UAE can anyone tell me do i have to apply for visa first and if i get the visa than only i shd buy wrestlemania 27 travel pakage?as its not refundable.

Butch Cassidy

Wrong forum pal. Try the Pro Wrestling travel forum and then the North American forum
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1386

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1183


You don't need a visa for a short holiday stay to the USA no. At least I don't think, there's an agreement or something between Ireland and USA....

CMpunked

Bring back channel 4 ppvs I say! :P
I remember watching mania x-seven and no one else had the balls to watch it so I was the only one who saw it.
Needless to say I was a walking dirt sheet the next day in school.

Sorry, off topic. :rolleyes:

I can't imagine there's much ad revenue made off free ppvs, like as far as I can remember (it's been a while).. The only ads on are for sky based programmes?

D2D

Source: PWInsider

Here is an interesting breakdown of the top 10 lowest domestic PPV buyrates in company history. It is interesting to note that seven out of the 10 events all come in from 2009.

Bottom 10 WWE PPV buyrates of all time (numbers are domestic)

1. ECW December to Dismember (2006): 52,000 buys.

2. Fatal Four Way (2010): 82,000 buys.

3. Cyber Sunday (2008): 92,000 buys.

4. Extreme Rules (2010): 105,000 buys.

5. Breaking Point (2009): 105,000 buys.

6. Bragging Rights (2009): 105,000 buys.

7. Over the Limit (2010): 113,000 buys.

8. The Bash (2009): 114,000 buys.

9. No Mercy (2006): 114,000 buys.

10. Backlash (2009): 116,000 buys.

CMpunked

52,000?!

There could have been more than that sitting in the arena!