#2 Posted on 22.2.02 1029.05 Reposted on: 22.2.09 1032.05
From the article:
The Stamford, Connecticut-based company said it plans to introduce more live events and bring more branded merchandise to market, building on the sellouts and response it has gotten from fans at its events.
"This will pave the way for additional pay-per-views and television programming opportunities. The combination of our inherent creativity and the depth of our talent roster has provided the momentum for a successful extension of our brands," said World Wrestling Federation Chief Executive Linda McMahon in a statement
Additional PPV and TV deals? What the hell? I don't want to pay for all the PPVs they have NOW, I don't want more.
Since last post: 3973 days Last activity: 3956 days
#3 Posted on 22.2.02 1034.29 Reposted on: 22.2.09 1043.36
Originally posted by JaguarAdditional PPV and TV deals? What the hell? I don't want to pay for all the PPVs they have NOW, I don't want more.
Agreed. I would much rather the WWF went back to only the big 5 PPV's (WM, KOTR, Summerslam, Survivor Series, and RR) and build up great storylines and matches to each of them using their free shows, even if it meant charging a little more jack.
Since last post: 1627 days Last activity: 1627 days
#4 Posted on 22.2.02 1126.43 Reposted on: 22.2.09 1129.03
The problem also, in my opinion, lies it too much TV time as well. We've already lost the luster of DREAM tag-team match-ups, and fantasy one-on-one matchups. Once the fire burns out on the nWo, and it will, we will have seen every mainstream wrestling matchup possible. Unless they plan on kicking it up to the future of the WWF (Randy Orton, Maven, Rob Van Dam, Brock Lesner, etc...) we will be even more BURNT OUT than they are now.
Since last post: 3342 days Last activity: 2711 days
#5 Posted on 22.2.02 1232.18 Reposted on: 22.2.09 1237.54
Well, I think we knew there was a decline in revenues. Is anyone a subscriber to the Wall Street Journal? Apparently, they did a sizable article, and Linda was pretty up-front with them... I would really love a summary.
Since last post: 4660 days Last activity: 4628 days
#7 Posted on 22.2.02 1723.14 Reposted on: 22.2.09 1728.56
Right. As reported on my newsboard Linda was on "Your World" with Neil Cavuto discussing the report. She stated that the nWo angle was apparently bringing back the target young teen market AND also let everyone know that the WWF's profits were on an upswing towards the end of the quarter.
WWFE is a very profitable business guys. All markets went South with the recession. Now the economy is rebounding and the WWF is as well.
This is a non story. For the news report on Linda's interview hit my newsboard at the link below.
#8 Posted on 22.2.02 1953.44 Reposted on: 22.2.09 1959.02
Remember that the market is alot less flooded than it was two years ago (WWF, WCW, ECW). Only the WWF was making money, yes.
The idea is that after the split, the WWF figures that people will favor 1/2 of their total product, and will buy the PPVs they favor. They're also hoping that the alternate product will draw new fans who are not interested in the current WWF. Also there are some people (the same people who bought WWF, WCW, and ECW shows, that will buy both PPVs.
Sooo...In effect their chansing that not everybody will buy all their shows, but some people will buy some of the shows.
If you're thinking that it's just the current roster running two PPVs a month, it sounds bad, but it isn't. Well...It is...But it isn't.
And in a time when so many businesses are losing money faster than should be possible, the WWF is actually still making money, which is awfully impressive.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE