Wrestling Podcasts + F4W/OBSERVER - Howsitgoingeverybodybryanalvarezhere...

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > The Hammer House: Stinger Splash Zone > Wrestling Podcasts + F4W/OBSERVER - Howsitgoingeverybodybryanalvarezhere...

«‹›1003 »

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

Alain Post posted:

NJPW winning best TV show for a loving months-old clip show was atrocious, and likely due to Talking Smack/SmackDown Live splitting votes.

NJPW PPV/big show matches presented with the AXS JR/Barnette commentary is an easy win for best wrestling tv show in my estimation, by virtue of being the best wrestling on tv.

# ? Mar 4, 2017 00:25

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 00:57

MassRafTer: May 26, 2001; BAEST MODE!!!

Alain Post posted:

NJPW winning best TV show for a loving months-old clip show was atrocious, and likely due to Talking Smack/SmackDown Live splitting votes.

Smackdown was a boring B show for half the year.

Better the clip show win since people don't have the kind of taste needed to understand the finer pleasures of CMLL.

# ? Mar 4, 2017 03:08

algebra testes: Mar 5, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

remusclaw posted:

NJPW PPV/big show matches presented with the AXS JR/Barnette commentary is an easy win for best wrestling tv show in my estimation, by virtue of being the best wrestling on tv.

Holy poo poo, this.

# ? Mar 4, 2017 05:07

mkay0: Nov 7, 2003; I crawled the earth, but now I'm higher
2010, watch it go to fire

MassRafTer posted:

Smackdown was a boring B show for half the year.

Yep. The brand split was only like four months of this year's award year

# ? Mar 4, 2017 05:17

Feels Villeneuve: Oct 7, 2007; Setter is Better.

remusclaw posted:

NJPW PPV/big show matches presented with the AXS JR/Barnette commentary is an easy win for best wrestling tv show in my estimation, by virtue of being the best wrestling on tv.

The JR commentary is bad. *puffs pipe*

# ? Mar 4, 2017 22:37

Daunte Vicknabb: Feb 22, 2005; You are already dead

There should be a worst move category this year so that the ten knuckle shuffle can win.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 08:51

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

Daunte Vicknabb posted:

There should be a worst move category this year so that the ten knuckle shuffle can win.

That one could be pretty fun actually. Too bad it hasn't existed until now because I can see an near unbroken string of multi year winners going like this.

Worst Move (The Atomic Legdrop Award)

Fritz Von Erich: Iron Claw
Abdhula the Butcher: Elbow Drop
Dusty Rhodes: Bionic Elbow
Hulk Hogan: Leg Drop (winner 1984-96)
The Rock: Peoples Elbow
Scott Taylor: The Worm
The Rock: Peoples Elbow
John Cena: FU
John Cena: 5 Knuckle Shuffle
John Cena: STFU
Wade Barret: The Wasteland
The Rock: Peoples Elbow
John Cena: Attitude Adjustment
John Cena: 10 Knuckle Shuffle

remusclaw fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Mar 5, 2017

# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:36

Beef Jerky Robot: Sep 20, 2009; "And the DICK?"

What a bad list like half of those rule

# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:44

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

Beef Jerky Robot posted:

What a bad list like half of those rule

Have you been on the internet/had conversations with the average self proclaimed hardcore wrestling fan anytime in the last 30 years? I love most all of those moves (except maybe Wasteland) , but they would win year in year out. The only time I ever stopped hearing people complain about the peoples elbow online in the late 90's early aughts is when they took some time to complain about the Worm.

Hulk Hogan won Most Overrated in 85-86, and again from 94-98. On the other hand look at best wrestling maneuver, almost every year aside from the years the Rainmaker, Diamond Cutter, Styles Clash, and Burning Hammer won is some sort of flippy/flying junior move. Observer voters have a type.

Superplex won in 82 between two Superfly splash wins.

remusclaw fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Mar 5, 2017

# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:46

Feels Villeneuve: Oct 7, 2007; Setter is Better.

Any year of Hulk winning Most Overrated (except maybe 1998) is hilarious.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 17:17

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

Alain Post posted:

Any year of Hulk winning Most Overrated (except maybe 1998) is hilarious.

Looking through the defunct awards, Hulk Hogan, during two of the biggest boom periods in the wrestling history, both of which he could easily lay claim to being a major part of, won least favorite Wrestler 9 times.

Awkwardly, worst manager, from 1984-1999 went to Paul Jones once in 86 and otherwise is completely shared by Mr Fuji and Sonny Onoo.

remusclaw fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Mar 5, 2017

# ? Mar 5, 2017 17:19

davidbix: Jun 14, 2016; Wow, Bix. First K.Rool, then Steve and now SEPHIROTH? Your dream game is real!

remusclaw posted:

NJPW PPV/big show matches presented with the AXS JR/Barnette commentary is an easy win for best wrestling tv show in my estimation, by virtue of being the best wrestling on tv.

But, at least taking the results listing literally, that's not the show that won.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 17:32

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

davidbix posted:

But, at least taking the results listing literally, that's not the show that won.

I honestly don't know how they order shows. During that one year where Lucha Underground had an English and Spanish language broadcast, was it listed as multiple shows or just one?

Edit: Also NJPW Japanese commentary tends to be pretty awesome all on its own, so I certainly wouldn't knock the show based on its original commentary, though I am willing to bet most of the votes for it came from people hearing it in English.

remusclaw fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Mar 5, 2017

# ? Mar 5, 2017 17:37

Beef Jerky Robot: Sep 20, 2009; "And the DICK?"

remusclaw posted:

Have you been on the internet/had conversations with the average self proclaimed hardcore wrestling fan anytime in the last 30 years? I love most all of those moves (except maybe Wasteland) , but they would win year in year out. The only time I ever stopped hearing people complain about the peoples elbow online in the late 90's early aughts is when they took some time to complain about the Worm.

Hulk Hogan won Most Overrated in 85-86, and again from 94-98. On the other hand look at best wrestling maneuver, almost every year aside from the years the Rainmaker, Diamond Cutter, Styles Clash, and Burning Hammer won is some sort of flippy/flying junior move. Observer voters have a type.

Superplex won in 82 between two Superfly splash wins.

Oh I get it it's still a list I'd get all riled up about if it was real

# ? Mar 5, 2017 19:19

Feels Villeneuve: Oct 7, 2007; Setter is Better.

remusclaw posted:

Looking through the defunct awards, Hulk Hogan, during two of the biggest boom periods in the wrestling history, both of which he could easily lay claim to being a major part of, won least favorite Wrestler 9 times.

Awkwardly, worst manager, from 1984-1999 went to Paul Jones once in 86 and otherwise is completely shared by Mr Fuji and Sonny Onoo.

I mean, "Least Favorite" is subjective so that's fine, but "Most Overrated" would mean WCW was making a huge mistake by pushing him so hard, which, up to maybe the second half of 1998, is a ridiculous idea. How much loving money did he draw for them?

# ? Mar 5, 2017 19:56

MassRafTer: May 26, 2001; BAEST MODE!!!

Alain Post posted:

I mean, "Least Favorite" is subjective so that's fine, but "Most Overrated" would mean WCW was making a huge mistake by pushing him so hard, which, up to maybe the second half of 1998, is a ridiculous idea. How much loving money did he draw for them?

Only enough to make them the biggest company in the history of pro wrestling.

I enjoyed Dave riffing on the Most Overrated winners before his defense of **** Roman.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 20:00

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

It's more a judgment on who's voting. Hogan winning least favorite is a clear indicator that the awards voters aren't or at least weren't the average wrestling fans. I don't care much for the man today, but when I was in deep Hogan was God to me.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 20:02

Feels Villeneuve: Oct 7, 2007; Setter is Better.

Someone on another board did some great re-runs of the 90s Observer awards and Hogan winning "most overrated" despite being a tremendous heel and making shitloads of money was a constant running joke.

e) for fun, here's the 1997 awards
http://pastebin.com/aei34ssc

# ? Mar 5, 2017 20:03

MassRafTer: May 26, 2001; BAEST MODE!!!

remusclaw posted:

It's more a judgment on who's voting. Hogan winning least favorite is a clear indicator that the awards voters aren't or at least weren't the average wrestling fans. I don't care much for the man today, but when I was in deep Hogan was God to me.

Same, but unfortunately Big Wood needed that face run in 99 and ruined it all.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 20:04

Feels Villeneuve: Oct 7, 2007; Setter is Better.

actually just for fun i'm gonna post the other WON award reviews since they're super fun reading, especially the "bad" years like 94-95 (for me, anyway)

1990: http://pastebin.com/JXKYPBTR
1991: http://pastebin.com/4E71Bgdm
1992: http://pastebin.com/9MmDHnQB
1993: http://pastebin.com/1FPGcYHV
1994: http://pastebin.com/14Ttdpft
1995: http://pastebin.com/Y5x2yCGg
1996: http://pastebin.com/q5Hrnkut
1997: http://pastebin.com/aei34ssc
1998: http://pastebin.com/mG62whHn

# ? Mar 5, 2017 20:13

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

Alain Post posted:

actually just for fun i'm gonna post the other WON award reviews since they're super fun reading, especially the "bad" years like 94-95 (for me, anyway)

1990: http://pastebin.com/JXKYPBTR
1991: http://pastebin.com/4E71Bgdm
1992: http://pastebin.com/9MmDHnQB
1993: http://pastebin.com/1FPGcYHV
1994: http://pastebin.com/14Ttdpft
1995: http://pastebin.com/Y5x2yCGg
1996: http://pastebin.com/q5Hrnkut
1997: http://pastebin.com/aei34ssc
1998: http://pastebin.com/mG62whHn

Yeah I was just looking at the one from before and they are pretty great so far.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 20:24

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

I actually have to revise that goofy joke list anyhow. Abdullah's elbow looks like death.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:21

Benne: Sep 2, 2011; STOP DOING HEROIN

Alberto's Tree of Woe stomp would've won by a landslide last year

# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:43

Marquis de Pyro: Sep 25, 2006; Evil Prevails

Hogan definitely was overpushed though, there's a reason he had to disappear all the time when he got overexposed. He definitely should have been a focal point of the promotion, but he didn't have to make almost every show him jacking off in the ring. That said, he was still better than Kevin Nash.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:06

davidbix: Jun 14, 2016; Wow, Bix. First K.Rool, then Steve and now SEPHIROTH? Your dream game is real!

remusclaw posted:

I honestly don't know how they order shows. During that one year where Lucha Underground had an English and Spanish language broadcast, was it listed as multiple shows or just one?

Edit: Also NJPW Japanese commentary tends to be pretty awesome all on its own, so I certainly wouldn't knock the show based on its original commentary, though I am willing to bet most of the votes for it came from people hearing it in English.

It's not just the commentary.

"NJPW World Pro Wrestling" is the heavily edited half hour show that airs in late nights over the air in Japan. The show we get on AXS is a dubbed version of "NJPW World Pro Wrestling Returns," where they add the retrospective interviews months later, the main event is always uncut, and there's less editing overall. They're too different shows.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:54

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

So is it just a matter of Dave giving the show the wrong name in the awards issue? I can't imagine the award is for anything other than the American aired show on AXS.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 23:04

CVagts: Oct 19, 2009

I immediately assumed it was a reference to the AXS show.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 23:06

Sotar: Dec 1, 2009

Winner of worst finisher forever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqWudY_iViM

# ? Mar 5, 2017 23:19

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

Sotar posted:

Winner of worst finisher forever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqWudY_iViM

It would never win the award because it wouldn't be seen enough. Worst whatever awards never go to the right recipient because the worst almost never gets sufficient viewership to put them in the running.

# ? Mar 5, 2017 23:23

DeNomolos: Jan 10, 2013; mild mannered meatspin historian

Sotar posted:

Winner of worst finisher forever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqWudY_iViM

after all this time of seeing this clip over and over, it was just now that I finally heard Dolph scream, "I don't even know what that was, ahaha!"

# ? Mar 5, 2017 23:24

MassRafTer: May 26, 2001; BAEST MODE!!!

Marquis de Pyro posted:

Hogan definitely was overpushed though, there's a reason he had to disappear all the time when he got overexposed. He definitely should have been a focal point of the promotion, but he didn't have to make almost every show him jacking off in the ring. That said, he was still better than Kevin Nash.

His contract only covered specific dates so he had to disappear a few times per year. He was just smart enough to do it during strong competition.

# ? Mar 6, 2017 02:34

GoutPatrol: Oct 17, 2009; *Stupid Babby*

Hogan winning in 94/95 makes alot of sense because WCW was in the dumps and they were losing even more money when Hogan was on a show because his contract got a large amount of PPV gross revenue when he was on the show.

# ? Mar 6, 2017 06:23

dsriggs: May 28, 2012; MONEY FALLS...

...FROM THE SKY...

...WHENEVER HE POSTS!

Alvarez with a VINTAGE rant on the booking on the B&V show

# ? Mar 6, 2017 06:42

jesus WEP: Oct 17, 2004

dsriggs posted:

Alvarez with a VINTAGE rant on the booking on the B&V show

Knowing I'll get to hear Bryan lose his mind often makes a bad PPV worth it

# ? Mar 6, 2017 09:25

OctoberCountry: Oct 9, 2012

dsriggs posted:

Alvarez with a VINTAGE rant on the booking on the B&V show

I seriously thought it was a Bryan solo show until Vinny finally spoke about 8 minutes in

# ? Mar 6, 2017 13:13

Jerusalem: May 20, 2004; Would you be my new best friends?

OctoberCountry posted:

I seriously thought it was a Bryan solo show until Vinny finally spoke about 8 minutes in

Even better, I think the first thing he says is,"And you actually liked the show more than me!"

# ? Mar 6, 2017 13:49

MassRafTer: May 26, 2001; BAEST MODE!!!

GoutPatrol posted:

Hogan winning in 94/95 makes alot of sense because WCW was in the dumps and they were losing even more money when Hogan was on a show because his contract got a large amount of PPV gross revenue when he was on the show.

Hogan shows didn't lose money and he was a huge reason the company squeaked out a profit in 1995. Until Souled Out 98, PPVs with Hogan on them did considerably more business than non-Hogan PPVs, enough to offset the revenue paid to him.

# ? Mar 6, 2017 14:03

GoutPatrol: Oct 17, 2009; *Stupid Babby*

MassRafTer posted:

Hogan shows didn't lose money and he was a huge reason the company squeaked out a profit in 1995. Until Souled Out 98, PPVs with Hogan on them did considerably more business than non-Hogan PPVs, enough to offset the revenue paid to him.

From the 1995 award issue:

quote:

After seven years in business and an estimated $30 million in losses, World Championship Wrestling turned its first profit in 1995.

The profit, said to be rather small, came despite added expenses of producing a live television show weekly and in a sense even saying the company was profitable should have an asterisk beside it. As part of a large corporate structure, there are ways of putting expenses on others' books, and it is rumored that perhaps the biggest expense of all, the Hulk Hogan salary, is largely on the Turner Home Entertainment books. In addition, Turner Broadcasting now pays WCW approximately $4 million per year for its three cable television shows which obviously makes all the difference in the world as if that was done during the Bill Watts or Jim Herd eras, the company would have at least come close to profitability several years. The other key reasons the company was profitable are a major video games sale, which without it, the company even with all the changes would have still lost money this year; and the fact that the PPV money from Halloween Havoc (with the Flair-Hogan retirement match) and Starrcade in 1994 didn't come in until 1995, while the 1995 Havoc, World War III and Starrcade, which produced far less profit, will count on the 1996 books. In addition, ridding the company of big salaries, Big Van Vader, Steve Austin, Rick Steamboat and Dustin Rhodes in particular has been mentioned as a reason the company didn't lose money, although the theory behind paying someone a big salary is that they are worth that much and more in revenue coming in or they shouldn't be getting that big salary, so in theory the company if they had those performers on the big shows should have taken in more revenue as well. Lex Luger probably came in making more money than any of the above mentioned names except Vader, and there were numerous part-time additions, along with the key acquisitions of Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit, although the latter two didn't come in at anywhere near the dollar figure the guys like Austin and Rhodes were making. The company was also said to be holding off numerous other expenses and a few other additions until the first of 1996 in order to make sure it would be profitable this year, since with the Turner/Time-Warner merger, there is more pressure on the individual companies to show a profit.

Going into 1996, however, the company will be hard pressed to main that position. They will incur the costs of going live theoretically about 45 to 50 times in 1996, rather than 16 times as in 1995 (and I'd bet several of those 16 times the expenses were put off until the 1996 books), and they'll be working in a market where the PPV numbers will almost assuredly, based on recent figures, show a marked decline. For example, Halloween Havoc was down nearly 40% this year (understandable somewhat since they were coming off the Hogan-Flair retirement match, although it was a heavily hyped first Hogan-Giant meeting this year) and Starrcade revenue was probably cut nearly in half this year as compared to last year. Since September, when the two groups have started the Monday Night Wars, the leading revenue stream of producing events, the PPV shows, are into almost a free-fall which really bodes poorly for 1996. The obvious solution would be to cut back on free television, but there are many reasons, particularly with WCW being run by a television conglomerate and WWF having to keep pace with WCW on television or coming off to media buyers as the secondary group, why that isn't going to happen.

quote:

On the other hand, independent sources list both WWF and WCW shows in December of basically hitting new all-time lows. WCW Starrcade' 95 did an estimated 0.36 buy rate, the second lowest buy rate in company history (approximately 83,000 buys and $1.04 million company gross). Even WCW sources don't dispute that figure which says how bad it must have been, with the company estimated the figure at between 0.35 and 0.40, but the company taking solace somewhat in that number because it beat the WWF. In comparison, the previous year's Starrcade with the Hogan vs. Butcher main event did approximately an 0.7 buy rate, which at the time (which shows just how much this industry changes in one year) was also considered disappointing.

Sure sounds like he was on fire there.

Jan 23, 95 Observer

quote:

With the possible exception of the summer steroid trial of Vince McMahon, the biggest story of 1994 was the Hulk Hogan experiment. WCW put umpteen times more guaranteed money on the table for any wrestler in history at the feet of Hulk Hogan in order to attempt to turn around the fortunes of what was a company on life support systems.

For the past eight months, a lot has been written, mostly negative regarding Hogan and WCW. Looking back on the six months and probably close to $3 million first deal, let's really look at the situation from a number of perspectives.

Quality of the shows - This is the one category you don't need a calculator and facts and figures to evaluate. And the answer is a no-brainer. WCW's shows, both the house shows and the PPVs and Clashes in regard to show quality have gone downhill, almost to an astonishing degree. And while it can't be blamed directly on Hogan, really everything that has happened bears Hogan's fingerprints. It was Hogan's influence that loaded the shows up with ex-WWF wrestlers who couldn't wrestle and put them in pushed positions. It wasn't Hogan's fault that Rick Steamboat and Steve Austin, two of the four remaining best workers in the company when Hogan arrived were injured, but at the same time, had they not been, it's likely neither would have been featured anyway. Hogan was either directly (as in exerted his influence on the decision-making process) or indirectly (to justify his salary they were desperate for a buy rate which they only knew one way to get) responsible for one of the other remaining strong consistent workers, Flair, to get iced from the ring. The Hogan experiment has turned into a major negative as far as the quality of everything produced by WCW, be it house shows, major shows or television shows.

Television ratings - As we will see later this issue, this has to be considered a slight negative. Forget comparing the ratings for the early months of the year before Hogan with those after Hogan (they were better before he got there, but that's largely seasonal variation) because that's unfair to Hogan. Ratings are always better on TBS earlier in the year because of the lack of football competition. But if we look at May-to-December, when Hogan began appearing on WCW shows, and compare it to the same period one year ago, we find per show ratings declined by a small (about five percent) margin. Syndication declined even more. The addition of Hogan wasn't enough to keep the syndicated shows in strong time slots come the start of the fall season. The Hogan name wasn't enough to get station managers to give WCW stronger time slots in new markets which is what they believed his name value would be very important in doing. Overall, for all the money paid to him and all the influence it was believed he'd have business-wise, this has to also be a negative, probably a strong negative. In fact, this Hogan experiment and paying for more recognizable commentators has proven beyond any doubt that it's building up to marquee matches that move the ratings, and even then only for one show. The consistent ratings seem more based on overall interest in wrestling itself, which one person, no matter how big a star they may be, can't change.

Clash ratings - Hogan appeared on three Clashes, all of which increased their ratings over the shows of the previous year. On his debut Clash, it drew a poor 3.0 rating, but still beat out the 2.6 the year before for Ric Flair's first match after returning from the WWF. The second show, the television match against Flair, drew a 4.5 as compared to a 3.7 for the Clash during that time slot the previous year. It was the largest number in a few years and the match itself was the most watched wrestling match ever on cable television in the United States and most widely viewed match of any kind in the U.S. in a few years. His third appearance in the six-man still beat out the previous year's mark by a 3.6 to 3.3 level. Hogan earned $300,000 for each of those shows. So while he undeniably increased ratings, and significantly when it came to the second appearance, were those ratings increases worth $300,000 in selling commercial time? Because of the second show, give this a slight nod in Hogan's favor.

House shows - Hogan only worked six house shows in the United States and one European tour. While no shows did capacity business, Hogan's name was the main reason WCW was able to sell the European tour for a reported $125,000 per night. Within the United States, the six shows Hogan appeared on averaged $52,000. Hogan's cut--25% off the top or $10,000 guarantee would come out to about $81,000. Was he worth the extra money? In Europe, it doesn't matter what he actually drew, it was his name that sold the tour and from a WCW perspective it was the biggest money guarantee for a tour they had ever had. On the U.S. scene, the Anaheim and Orlando shows were stiffs but in the other four cases (Oakland, Salt Lake City, Minneapolis and Chicago) they were clearly a success. This category is a definite plus for Hogan. In fact, WCW at least apparently would be far better off when it comes to running shows if Hogan were to a agree to work more dates in 1995. If Hogan were to agree to that, it would be a major plus.

Merchandising - Make no mistake about it. Hogan sells merchandise and probably will continue to be the No. 1 merchandise seller of any wrestler in the United States for the next ten years. While we don't have a percentage of WCW's overall merchandise sales that are Hogan related, I'd be willing to bet it's 70 to 80 percent. And while there are funny things in the way Hogan's percentage is paid out that may make it look good on paper for one division of WCW, Hogan's percentage of merchandise is so high that in reality the company hardly makes money off it. For the company's bottom line, this is not as major a positive as you'd think but it's not a negative. Like every category, they're all a positive for Hogan because he and his advisers cut themselves such a sweet deal.

Promotional potential - When WCW used to come to town, the local media would yawn. Now with Hogan they have someone who can get on the hottest radio station and get a story in the local newspaper about the WCW event. This gets the WCW name over and can get shows over. This has worked on the major shows in getting interest in the city, but since Hogan doesn't work many house shows, it hasn't been the plus it could be for the company. Really, whatever positives having Hogan as part of the team as far as helping the WCW name is, and there are some, should be reflected in an increase in ratings, which didn't happen, and in the house show and PPV category, which did but maybe not to the level necessary.

PPV shows - When it gets right down it, everything other category is small change. Everyone knew this was a deal based on what they believed to be potential PPV revenue drawn with Hogan on shows. Could Hogan turn the corner. Bottom line. After three shows we have these results. First show was an unqualified but also expected success. He pulled his salary weight and then some. Only Hogan's worst critics didn't expect the first match on PPV with Flair to be the biggest PPV show in company history. Second show, while it did just as well, because of the financial stakes in putting it together, both in getting rid of Flair and in giving Flair two more years of an extension to get him to do the job, in no way can that buy rate be considered a success. The third show, Starrcade, was a failure. Not a major failure, but when you factor in Hogan's cut (an estimated $440,000), a failure nonetheless. The show did better than last year's Starrcade, but in Hogan's pay and added advertising and promotional money spent this year as opposed to last year and it was probably not even close to as profitable an event overall even though as an event it grossed nearly 25% more money. Hogan vs. Butcher with a relatively weak storyline and very weak interviews outdrew last year's Flair vs. Vader match by some 25,000 buys. That's impressive when you remember last year's match had Flair's career at stake and had some of the best interviews in years building it up. If nothing else, the fact Hogan with a poor opponent with no name value outdrew Flair-Vader with a great build-up and great interviews speaks volumes for Hogan's drawing power today (both shows had virtually nothing of substance underneath so the undercard isn't a factor in either case). The only question is if he's tremendous enough to be worth 25% off the top. At this point the answer seems to be with a great opponent (Flair) he might be and with a weak opponent (Butcher) he isn't. Vader will provide some interesting answers in February. We can estimate that even though the company's revenue from the three PPV shows was much higher than for any three PPV shows in 1993 or any other year for that matter, the profit margin when everything is taken into account (and not with funny number jumbling) was less than before Hogan. Not by a lot, but less. Mild negative because this was the category that needed to carry the brunt of the salary, but less of a negative than I'd have speculated six months ago.

So was the first six months a good move? The only way one can say it was is if one was to believe that WCW was going to do far worse in 1994 and 1995 than it did in 1993. If that was the case, then he not only maintained interest in some categories but increased purchasing power interest. He kept revenue from falling and even in some circles increased it a little, although not quite enough to justify the salary, but based on the PPV increases, his salary is not outrageous and if he is overpaid, it's only by very little. On the other hand, he painted WCW into a corner to where losing him would be almost the guaranteed downfall of the company now. Hogan played his own cards close to perfectly. Although again, everyone knew that six months ago when the contract was signed. If anything, his drawing power is slightly more than most going in thought but less than those who made the offer thought since he didn't generate quite what WCW needed to make the deal pay off as a positive for their bottom line. Did WCW get taken in this poker game? Not for a ride, but maybe a little. And they have to keep playing because they have no alternative so the potential is there to be taken for a ride when all is said and done, or to still come out ahead of the game. Verdict overall on the first six month contract. Very slight negative. Verdict on the scene overall for the long-term. It looks to be a bigger negative because they played right into Hogan's hands in putting the two-year deal on the table, and the novelty has worn off. In hindsight, the Flair feud was totally bumbled due to Hogan's ego and this time both Flair and Hogan have nobody else to blame for it and no way to come back to it and do it correctly. Maybe, with Randy Savage and whomever else jumping (and I'll almost guarantee there will be plenty of others before this is said and done) they'll nudge interest up. But will they spend too much money to get others? There are no other Hulk Hogan's in this country where their name value alone in appearing on a house show or a PPV will lead to any kind of an increase in revenue. That includes Undertaker, Bret Hart, Lex Luger and/or the return of Ric Flair.

Does this sound like really changed business around?

# ? Mar 6, 2017 15:59

rare Magic card l00k: Jan 3, 2011

GoutPatrol posted:

From the 1995 award issue:

Sure sounds like he was on fire there.

Jan 23, 95 Observer

Does this sound like really changed business around?

Meltzer was arguing in 1993 that PPV was a dead medium, so if you believe what he says, then yes, Hulk Hogan changed business by reviving PPV for all of wrestling.

# ? Mar 6, 2017 16:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 00:57

GoutPatrol: Oct 17, 2009; *Stupid Babby*

rare Magic card l00k posted:

Meltzer was arguing in 1993 that PPV was a dead medium, so if you believe what he says, then yes, Hulk Hogan changed business by reviving PPV for all of wrestling.

Gonna need a quote for that one.

Edit: Jan 24 94 Observer

quote:

Despite all the emphasis on house shows these moves indicate, it is still PPV revenue that is going to be the main revenue source in this country of presenting live events. In 1993, WCW drew about $7.56 million on seven PPV events as opposed to around $3 million on more than 300 house show dates. While estimated profit is haphazard, the PPV shows probably did $2.5 million in profit while the house shows certainly lost a lot more than $2.5 million. WWF was a little more balanced, drawing about $16.1 million on five PPV dates and another $19 million on about 400 or so house show dates. Of course the cost of gambling in the PPV arena are higher. UWFI, which ran a 1:50 PPV show (as opposed to more than two hours for WWF and WCW) on tape rather than live, had built in costs in excess of $850,000. Even if the figure is slightly lower for WCW, and based on higher production costs, at least as much advertising, going live and a longer show, if anything it should be a higher break-even. That means if buy rates fall to consistent 0.3 to 0.4 level, the profit margin in that medium would be gone. If what they tell us about technology changes is accurate, in not too many years, many cable systems will be carrying 500 stations. Despite the belief of many that pro wrestling is already overexposed on television, with 500 stations in a market, that is going to mean a lot more pro wrestling, in terms of variety, on television in years to come, not less, despite inevitable ratings declines that will occur. The apparent success of the different and unknown UWFI on PPV and ethnic regional success AAA has already had in the U.S. has opened the eyes of several international promotions on running in the United States on PPV where an 0.5 buy rate is worked right can be profitable. The idea of an international promotion trying to put together a U.S. tour, with the exception of AAA or EMLL on a regional basis, would be a waste of effort when PPV is the only way it can bring a return on the investment. The potential drawing power of AAA on PPV is a question mark to be sure, particularly on a national basis, however dismissing it outright would be ignoring a very important fact. Traditionally, in the United States, it has been the heavyweights in boxing that were the biggest draw. Occasionally, with the most recent example being when Ray Leonard was in his prime, a middleweight fighter captures the nation's fancy and becomes boxing's top draw. Right now boxing is the No. 1 sport on PPV in the United States as far as biggest grosses, however wrestling is No. 2, and still a more consistent product. The biggest draw on PPV in the United States today among boxers, wrestlers, or even Howard Stern fans, is Julio Caesar Chavez, a lighter weight boxer whose appeal is largely ethnic. His success says that dismissing AAA's chances on PPV because "Mexicans don't have the money to buy PPV" or because it is too ethnic in appeal is ignoring the obvious. Chavez vs. Pernell Whitaker outdrew Holyfield-Bowe by a wide margin.

Sure sounds like he says PPV is dead

GoutPatrol fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Mar 6, 2017

# ? Mar 6, 2017 16:06

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > The Hammer House: Stinger Splash Zone > Wrestling Podcasts + F4W/OBSERVER - Howsitgoingeverybodybryanalvarezhere...

«‹›1003 »