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

jaykhunter

Just to update everyone on how this year has been for WWE on PPV

Long story short, they're going to be OVER 600,000 BUYS DOWN from 2009.

2010 WWE PPV # of Buys (Worldwide)

Royal Rumble 462,000 (up from 450,000 in 2009)
Elimination Chamber 285,000 (up from No Way Out's 272,000 in 2009)
WrestleMania 26 885,000 (down from 960,000 in 2009)
Extreme Rules 182,000 (same as Backlash 2009)
Over The Limit 197,000 (down from 228,000 for Judgment Day 2009)
Fatal 4 Way 143,000 (second lowest # PPV buys in history; down from Extreme Rules 2009's 213,000 buys)

WWE dropped The Bash completely, last year it drew 178,000 buys
MITB 165,000 (last year's NoC drew 267,000)
SummerSlam 350,000 (down from 369,000 last year)
Night of Champions 165,000 (similar to Breaking Point's 169,000 last year)
Hell in a Cell - Over 200,000*** [last year drew 300,000]
Bragging Rights - Under 150,000*** [last year drew 200,000]
Survivor Series - ~240-250,000*** [last year drew 235,000]
TLC - ??? [last year drew 228,000]

*** = preliminary number from Corporate.WWE.com

So, doing the maths :

We'll assume TLC gets the same buyrate as last year.
In the first 6 PPVs of 2010, WWE are 151,000 buys down compared to last year.
In the last 6 PPVs of 2010, WWE are 265,000 buys down compared to last year.
WWE dropped having 2 PPVs in June.

So in total, WWE are over 600,000 buys down from last year!

---

A few random notes :
WWE dropped down from 14 PPVs/year to 13 (The Bash is gone completely)
Bragging Rights was offered a day after UFC 121, featuring Brock Lesnar vs Cain Velasquez.
WWE have been taping RAW multiple times over the last few months. WWE save $600,000 each time they don't do RAW live (source : The Fight Network)
Also, to break even broadcasting a PPV, WWE must have at least 75,000 buys (source : The Wrestling Observer)

parker kent

I think this is further proof of the decline in the product. There are many reasons behind a drop in PPV buyrates but to me there are a few stand out issues. So in no particular order, here goes!

1: Loss of top stars over the past 5+ years: Steve Austin and The Rock leaving was a crippling blow. Top stars are always an essential part of great buy rates. They are not the only reason, but they are needed. Then add in The Undertaker's limited schedule and Shawn Michaels retirement, it is clear that they are major blows

2: Lack of New Stars: The new top guy in the company is extremely off putting to many who were previously watching WWE. Cena is obviously not the sole reason, but viewers who have an extreme dislike to the Cena character are less likely to watch shows that are based around him. As the face of the WWE, Cena IS causing viewers to leave. People can say that they are too afraid of ratings decreases when Cena is off air, but there has been a major decline in PPV buyrates and ratings during Cena's run as the lead face. He has to take some of the blame for that. There have been thousands of words written on the failure of the WWE to elevate new stars and the sudden pushes for Sheamus and Barrett indicate how they are grasping at straws trying to create new stars now.

3: The move towards kids: Pro Wrestling Torch had a good article the other day about how moving towards a kids based audience means that programming will move towards simple good versus evil angles. It will also mean that the audience is a TV audience and PPVs are not the centerpiece of the WWE anymore.

4: The PPVs themselves: That point brings up the actual quality of the PPVs. The build up to so many is virtually non-existent. The usual problems of gimmick based PPVs (HIAC, TLC etc) are another issue. If people do not care about feuds, they are not going to pay to see it.

5: Streaming PPVs: Many of the younger audience are going to be aware of streaming PPVs, so why pay when you can get it for free? Especially when there are very few PPVs that have "must see" matches.

6: There will be a natural decline after such an extreme peak. This happened before and it took a few years in 90s to recover and create sufficient interest for the Attitude era boom

7: Lack of credible competition for the WWE. WCW going out of business was always going to be bad news for the WWE. The Attitude era would not have happened had the NWO not occurred. Competition keeps them on their toes. Now they have none and can do pretty much whatever they want.

8: UFC: There will be an amount of people who will not want to spend too much on PPVs per year. So the WWE will lose out when the UFC's buyrates increase, much in the same way that boxing is suffering

rossie1977

wwe increased the price of all their ppvs in 2010, the hd version of mania 26 cost $65 :eek:

all the other ppvs increased by $5 to $45

http://www.wrestlingexposed.com/headlines/12909.shtml

jaykhunter

Great list Parker, very well said. here's some thoughts i had on it.

1 : Add Batista, Triple H and Vince McMahon to the list. WWE have been milking those babies for a long time. The udder ran dry last year.

2 : WWE have very few top draws and fresh feuds with them, so business is way down. On a positive note, we can see that WWE are clearly trying to build new stars, with big pushes for Sheamus, The Miz, and Wade Barrett (Daniel Bryan is pushing himself). It'll take many years before people will actually pay to see these guys on a consistent basis when they actually lead a feud.

3 : Surely moving towards simple, clear-cut good vs evil storylines are a good thing? I look at WCW/TNA and see grey vs grey, which is not conducive for selling a feud in this day & age. Maybe you mean "2-dimensional good guy vs bad guy" feuds but sure clearly defined heels and faces do draw the best. (Save for the ultra-rare face vs face)

4 : Yep, gimmick-based PPVs are killing WWE. There's no spontaneity, and we're generally left with "oh it's this gimmick this month, so let's have that gimmick match" as opposed to a natural progression towards a gimmick match to finish a feud.

5 : I still think pirating is a relatively small chunk -- maybe 3,000 people tops. It pales in comparison to the ~200,000 that do buy a PPV. But I'm sure the pirating number is bigger than it was last year....also, the PPVs aren't worth paying for.

6 : I don't accept a "natural decline after a peak" as an excuse. If WWE continually evolved, made new stars, and didn't saturate the marketplace with a boring product they would only lose maybe 15-20% of it's fanbase, tops, not 30-50%. In order to bury WCW they buried their own product. The closure of ECW and WCW brought in tons of new talent, not to mention ROH and TNA's homegrown talent. Besides having limited stars in WWF during the early to mid 90s, the product itself was awful. Some horrible hybrid of 8-year-old neon useless programming.

7 : Definitely. No competition, no urgency to continue striving for the best. If WCW were still around, I doubt Tripper would've been given the go-ahead to bury RVD, Booker T and Kane, amongst others.

8 : Yep, a similar, fresh, better produced and focused product definitely is eating into WWE's bottom dollar. In short, "UFC are doing Pro-Wrestling better than Pro-Wrestling."

That's a good point, rossie. Buyrates might be down but thanks to the cost increase, every 9 buys in 2010 is now worth 10 buys in 2009.

jaykhunter

Bump, i didn't factor in that WWE had 14 PPVs in 2009, and 13 this year. It means that they're over 600,000 buys down this year!

parker kent

jaykhunter wrote: »

Great list Parker, very well said. here's some thoughts i had on it.
<SNIP>

Two quick points, I didn't properly expand on the good versus evil point. What I mean is that there is an over-simplification. I agree TNA have too many over-complicated stories. But the WWE has moved towards more childish feuds. It just feels like the product is being geared towards children and goofy stuff is on the increase.

Then the natural decline, I think there will always be some sort of decline after a great period. That does not excuse a terrible drop, just that it is normal for there to be peaks that are hard to follow. Plus you will have the usual issues of people having problems with guys that have replaced there personal favourites. The decline periods in wrestling are normally when new top draws are being created. Much like how in the early 90s Vince moved towards Diesel, Shawn Michaels, Yokozuna, Bret Hart, Undertaker etc. It is natural that it will take time for new guys to reach their peak.

I'm hoping that something similar is happening with CM Punk, Sheamus, Morrison, Miz etc and that some of them become genuine top level stars. Creative are to blame for this too as there is normally little thought into the future when the company is doing well. They often realise too late that they have to make new stars.

Good point about how a modern WCW would be great for guys like RVD. It would be a great place to hone a main event character too should anyone decide to jump ship too. Wrestling really misses a second big league.

reynolsg87

AND I

Originally Posted by jaykhunter
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.

I know this is an old point but just to point out myself - Wrestlemania XIX took place on March 30th 2003, about a week and a half after the US invaded Iraq, so I'd say that had a big affect on the buyrate.

D2D

reynolsg87 wrote: »

I know this is an old point but just to point out myself - Wrestlemania XIX took place on March 30th 2003, about a week and a half after the US invaded Iraq, so I'd say that had a big affect on the buyrate.

Erm.... how does a US InVasion (sorry, force of habit) of Iraq affect a PPV buyrate??

jaykhunter

Thanks for the point of information, but...

Did you find that excuse out on Planet Hogan!

Machismo Fan

I actually think WWE doing a good number for Survivor Series (at least relative to last year) is a bad thing. Considering the show was alright overall, the main stip. that sold the show wasn't adhered to in the slightest and the Raw the night after was much more buzzworthy - I'd feel very annoyed if I payed for that show. It most likely hurt consumer sentiment even further.

jaykhunter

I'm sure WWE will see the backlash of reneging on the Survivor Series stipulation with a poor TLC buyrate, and deservedly so.

edit : The Nexus storyline following SSeries really killed my cautious optimism I've had for the last while. Barrett turned from an uber-smart heel into the village idiot, after vowing to never give Cena his job back despite him terrorising the nexus, he does just that 3 weeks later, only if he faces Cena in a fair match. Which he loses clean. Arrgh!!!! lol

reynolsg87

Haha no, I'm far from a Hogan mark. You just need to remember that ALL anybody did in the US for those first few weeks was focus on the war so I'd say it had a definite affect on the buyrate. I heard it only did 550,000 or something in that region.

I mean Angle/Lesnar, Rock/Austin & Mcmahon/Hogan on paper should do a lot more buys than Benoit/HHH/Michaels, Angle/Guerrero & Goldberg/Lesnar.

Who knows for sure though?

jaykhunter

Update from today's conference call on PPV buys

2010 WWE PPV # of Buys (Worldwide)

Royal Rumble 462,000 (up from 450,000 in 2009)
Elimination Chamber 285,000 (up from No Way Out's 272,000 in 2009)
WrestleMania 26 885,000 (down from 960,000 in 2009)
Extreme Rules 182,000 (same as Backlash 2009)
Over The Limit 197,000 (down from 228,000 for Judgment Day 2009)
Fatal 4 Way 143,000 (second lowest # PPV buys in history; down from Extreme Rules 2009's 213,000 buys)

WWE dropped The Bash completely, last year it drew 178,000 buys
MITB 165,000 (last year's NoC drew 267,000)
SummerSlam 350,000 (down from 369,000 last year)
Night of Champions 165,000 (similar to Breaking Point's 169,000 last year)
Hell in a Cell - 210,000 buys (last year drew 283,000)
Bragging Rights - 137,000 buys (last year drew 181,000) (the day after UFC 121 Lesnar Vs Velasquez)
Survivor Series - 244,000 buys (last year drew 235,000 buys)
TLC - 195,000 buys (last year drew 228,000)

---

So doing the maths from 2010 to 2009 :
Rumble : +12,000
EC : +13,000
WrestleMania : -75,000
April PPV : same
May : -31,000
June : -70,000
July - WWE dropped the Bash : -178,000
July PPV : -102,000
SummerSlam : -19,000
September PPV : -4,000
Hell in a Cell : -73,000
Bragging Rights : -44,000
Survivor Series : +9,000
TLC : -33,000

---

WWE are down 595,000 buys from 2009 i.e. almost 600,000 buys down from last year! :eek:

parker kent

Those numbers pretty clearly show that people are protesting about the WWE with their feet. How they cannot see that people are not happy (other than kids in Cena t-shirts), I really do not know.

parker kent

Good reaction piece to the financial figures released by the WWE.

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/wadekellerdotcom/47628.shtml

There are a lot of headlines coming out of today's WWE financials for Q4 2010 and Vince McMahon's conference call. Here are some of my thoughts...

-Alarming drops in PPV buys from 2009 to 2010. I was outspoken against the price raise from $39.95 to $54.95 (for HD, which most people consider standard viewing now, especially those who can afford PPVs regularly). Even a $5 price raise for non-HD to $44.95 I thought was going to do damage. I think it did. There are other factors, including online illegal pirating of PPV feeds, that is eating into the numbers, but the economy is not a great excuse. The economy was worse in 2009 than 2010. How bad were the numbers? Hell in a Cell dropped 25 percent. Bragging Rights dropped 25 percent. TLC dropped 10 percent. Only Survivor Series went up, from 235,000 to 244,000.

-Even with the price raise, PPV revenues dropped from Q4 in 2009 to Q4 in 2010, from $16.3 million to $13.8 million. If WWE is willing to take another step back in order to rebuild their PPV audience, a price drop is in order. I just don't think - as the DVD industry recently and the CD industry before that found out - people are willing to pay such high prices. It looks like price gouging. In the long run, for PPV to survive, WWE has to lead the way in dropping the price. I'd even argue for a drastic drop to $24.95. Rebuild that base in a couple years go back up to $34.95 and stay there.

-If they dropped the price of PPVs, PPV revenue figure would likely drop for at least a year, but I believe it would give them a better chance to avoid the complete disappearance of PPV as a major revenue source in the long-run. The erosion can be reversed with reasonable pricing, as interpreted by a fanbase that has so many cheap or free choices now compared to just 3-5 years ago.

-House show revenue was also down 15 percent in the U.S. and 11 percent overseas, which is one piece of evidence that passion for the product in general has also sagged overall.

-In his report at PWTorch earlier, one big fact James Caldwell pulled from all of the data is that in 2007 WWE reported 2.1 percent more PPV revenue compared to TV rights revenue, whereas in 2010 WWE reported 44.7 percent more TV rights revenue than PPV revenue. That's a big flip, and it's one of the reasons WWE continues to push so hard to pop big TV ratings even sometimes at the expense of PPVs. I think it's a false choice as there are ways to sustain TV ratings strategically and more efficiently than just giving away big name match-ups every week, sometimes on short notice. But that's another editorial for another day.

-Otherwise a lot of the revenue categories were relatively steady. The biggest drop was DVD sales, down $4.6 million (44 percent), but licensing revenue was up $4.3 million to offset it.

-It'll be interesting how the WWE Network develops. The future may be along these lines for many entities, including the NFL and even Oprah with her own themed-network. The "middle-man" such as USA Network may be less important as the TV landscape changes and the way people access shows changes, with moves toward Hulu, Netflix, and OnDemand programming. It could be a great channel for pro wrestling fans, given WWE's incredible library of wrestling shows it owns from past decades of WWF and then-competitors. Being able to watch, sequentially, many past pro wrestling shows, past PPVs, the original Tough Enoughs, house shows from Boston Garden and MSG, Tuesday Night Titans, the 24/7 Roundtables, and more could fill considerable time, although it's likely they'd branch out beyond just pro wrestling shows on a WWE network with some reality-style shows, combat-themed game shows, and movies that match their action-adventure targeted demographics.

-Vince McMahon talking about a new-star initiative being on display at WrestleMania makes me think Undertaker will be facing Wade Barrett, not someone from the outside. Barrett, even in losing, would benefit from being in such a high-profile angle and match. If they go with Triple H vs. Undertaker, it makes short-term business sense, but it might be a lost opportunity to elevate someone else. Barrett is ready, I believe, for that lofty position. Having C.M. Punk, Miz, and Alberto Del Rio opposite established stars Randy Orton, John Cena, and Edge, will further cement McMahon's comments that WM is going to be used as a tool to elevate new stars. When asked to name the next potential Cena, McMahon included Orton on his list along with Del Rio and Miz. Orton is more of the Cena generation than Miz is, and Orton has probably peaked as a draw. He just doesn't seem to have much beyond what we've seen. My judgment might be clouded by his half-hearted house show performance against Miz that I saw last Friday night at Target Center in Minneapolis. It must be a bit of a letdown to Dolph Ziggler, Drew McIntyre, Cody Rhodes, C.M. Punk, even Wade Barrett that McMahon doesn't list them along with Del Rio and Miz.

jaykhunter

I'd have to imagine that CM Punk just slipped Vince's mind, as he's the focal point of RAW these days. That and seeing Cena-Orton headline PPVs for the last 4 years, Orton's name immediately springs to mind.

I used to think Orton had a long career ahead of him, as well as his wrestling being very safe...problem is, he's been over-used these last few years, and is made of glass!

He could really do with leaving for TNA for 2-3 years

Charisteas

jaykhunter wrote: »

WrestleMania 26 885,000 (down from 960,000 in 2009)

Wrestlemania 23 = 1,200,000
Wrestlemania 24 = 1,058,000
Wrestlemania 25 = 960,000
Wrestlemania 26 = 885,000

With a decline 4 years running, any early predictions for this years Mania buyrate? Or is it too early to take a guess?

Some factors to consider -

Most of the top matches have already been made now, obviously with the money-maker being Undertaker Vs. HHH. Remains to be seen how many fence-sitters will want to pay for a card with the two title matches featuring rookie main-eventers Miz and Del-Rio.

Also remains to be seen exactly what role The Rock will play at Wrestlemania on top of hosting (rumours of being special guest in the Miz/Cena match) and what roles, if any, Michaels and Austin will have.

There is still just about enough time to lure in a celebrity or two to slightly up the ratings, which has worked in the past with Mayweather and Trump bumping buyrates to over a million each.

There is also a factor of the PPV being available to purchase in more countries, i'm not sure about this, but I know that they have just signed a TV deal in Brazil (a massively populated country) and launched a new Polish website.

jaykhunter

^^^ Should've answered this earlier really, lol.

My "playing it safe" prediction is a bottom of 850k and ceiling of 950k.

I think the Rock's inclusion has duped a lot of casual/non-fans into thinking it's gonna be Rock Cena. That's how they've been pushing the last 2 months of RAW and from what i've seen, it's worked. Snooki might hook a few buys thanks to the publicity.

I know Elimination Chamber was horrific (191,000 buys) but I think having a poorly performing Feb show would help Mania ("I didn't buy that one, we have money/i'd like to see a WWE PPV/I'll buy it since we didn't last time"). I keep thinking of 2003 where No Way Out (Rock & Austin return -- my how times have changed :P) where NWO got 500,000 and WMXIX did 560,000. But if they put on a crap show like NWO 2006 (218,000), Mania gets focus and 975,000!)

Where i'm digressing to is that WWE have successfully hoodwinked the casual audience into thinking Rock/Cena. There's a "hardcore Mania buying crowd who buy every year" of maybe 750,000 so I think they've done it. Kinda.

Final guess, 925,000. Better than last year but somewhat disappointing.

What do you reckon?

jaykhunter

Oh just to update people

Estimated/Reported so far 2011 WWE PPV buyrates :
Royal Rumble : 449,000 (down a little bit from 462,000 in 2010)
No Way Out : 191,000 :eek: (fell off a cliff! last year's 272,000)

jaykhunter

Viewing figures for March 3's iMPACT, and the following week's RAW and SmackDown.

TNA iMPACT! on ChallengeTV
Total 163,000

WWE RAW on Sky Sports
Total : 242,000
Breakdown : 154 (live) + 41 (Thursday replay) + 47 (Friday replay)

WWE SmackDown on Sky Sports
Total : 186,000
Breakdown : 150 (Friday) + 36 (Saturday replay)

The week prior sees RAW on 235,000 total, SD! with 137,000, and iMPACT! with 164,000 (highest all time rating)

Source : http://www.pwinsider.com/article/56284/updated-wwe-and-tna-uk-ratings-from-the-last-few-weeks.html?p=1

So from these UK figures we see iMPACT battling SmackDown (so legitimately they can say some weeks that they beat SmackDown) but get about 65% of RAW's Ratings.

Machismo Fan

May as well throw this here: http://www.pwinsider.com/ViewArticle.php?id=57541

The return of Dwayne Johnson and the decision to use Jersey Shore star Snooki paid off big-time for WWE as Variety is reporting that the company's flagship PPV scored one million buys.

Final numbers are not yet in, but the trade publication noted that buys are up 30% in North America and up to 15% overseas, according to the company.

Wrestlemania 26, featuring Shawn Michaels' retirement, generated 885,000 orders.

Wrestlemania 25, headlined by Randy Orton vs. Triple H and the first Undertaker vs. Michaels classic, scored 960,000 buys.

The Variety piece also credited WWE's marketing leading into the PPV as a factor, as the company smartly had their performers all over different television show for appearances, ranging from talk shows to the "Cake Boss" reality show.

rossie1977

if those numbers are correct and domestic buys are up 30% and overseas up 15% then mania27 did about 1.1 million buys

Rjd2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iMATYbejXM

BUYS.

D2D

Link

In WWE's most recent monthly business report, the preliminary estimate for Wrestlemania 27 was 1,042,000 buys worldwide. WWE had stated recently that the show was estimated at drawing more than one million buys, while other sources reported the same.

Source: PWInsider.com

Rjd2

Dare_2_defy wrote: »

Link

In WWE's most recent monthly business report, the preliminary estimate for Wrestlemania 27 was 1,042,000 buys worldwide. WWE had stated recently that the show was estimated at drawing more than one million buys, while other sources reported the same.

Source: PWInsider.com

Good numbers, however net year we will have Cena v Rock the Mania 2007 record could be smashed. Lets not forget you will have Taker going for 20-0 and maybe Rey v Cara which should eat up some Hispanic buys. Maybe even to top it off get Austin back for one more match?

However they better not forget they have PPV'S before that though..:pac:

Charisteas

Rjd2 wrote: »

Good numbers, however net year we will have Cena v Rock the Mania 2007 record could be smashed. Lets not forget you will have Taker going for 20-0 and maybe Rey v Cara which should eat up some Hispanic buys. Maybe even to top it off get Austin back for one more match?

However they better not forget they have PPV'S before that though..:pac:

Austin Vs Tough Enough winner

jaykhunter

Charisteas wrote: »

Austin Vs Tough Enough winner

OK but you have to tell CM Punk his match with Austin is off!

Charisteas

jaykhunter wrote: »

OK but you have to tell CM Punk his match with Austin is off!

CM Punk will be long gone by next WrestleMania!

Ok so lets book Austin Vs Luke, and maybe get Jeremiah Vs Brock Lesnar in an MMA style match; ratings or not?!

jaykhunter

While WWE has yet to release the buy number for last month's Over The Limit pay-per-view event, the Wrestling Observer Newsletter reports that the show is estimated to have garnered 65,000 buys in the United States (based on trending patterns as well as actual cable reports).

Should this number hold up, it would be WWE's least watched pay-per-view event in nearly five years. The 2006 pay-per-view event December To Dismember drew approximately 90,000 pay-per-view buys, with 55,000 of them domestic—the lowest buyrate in company history.

To show the accuracy of trending numbers, they would have indicated 90,000 for TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs (real number was 101,000), 260,000 for Royal Rumble (real number 264,000), 160,000 for Elimination Chamber (real number 136,000) and 630,000 for WrestleMania XXVII (real number 617,000).

Over The Limit was headlined by John Cena vs. The Miz, Michael Cole vs. Jerry Lawler, and Randy Orton vs. Christian.

The final tally will be roughly double that; i.e. 120,000 worldwide, give or take 10,000.

My reaction : Yes. They deserve it for churning out the same ****. We've come to accept "Backlash" to have the same matches as WrestleMania, but fúck me, OTL had the same matches again. Storylines don't have a start, middle and end; they just peter out long after people stopped caring.

Like the heel Michael Cole storyline; which should've ended at Mania but they "got" two more months out of it. Ultimately Vince is to blame and need only to look in the mirror, and who the champions are, when looking to why fans are sick of WWE's shít.

That said, I think Truth is doing great and i hope the undoubtedly low buyrate CP will get doesn't deter this guy from his mic time. It's on fire right now.

Rjd2

jaykhunter wrote: »

The final tally will be roughly double that; i.e. 120,000 worldwide, give or take 10,000.

My reaction : Yes. They deserve it for churning out the same ****. We've come to accept "Backlash" to have the same matches as WrestleMania, but fúck me, OTL had the same matches again. Storylines don't have a start, middle and end; they just peter out long after people stopped caring.

Like the heel Michael Cole storyline; which should've ended at Mania but they "got" two more months out of it. Ultimately Vince is to blame and need only to look in the mirror, and who the champions are, when looking to why fans are sick of WWE's shít.

That said, I think Truth is doing great and i hope the undoubtedly low buyrate CP will get doesn't deter this guy from his mic time. It's on fire right now.

Was their a UFC PPV that weekend? That will always eat into business no matter how good the show. However that number is still dire.

With this and falling WWE stock numbers and poor house show attendances, Vince has to be worried.

Also all Buys have been down this year except Mania which done great numbers, no wonder Vince dedicated a Raw to him..:pac:;)