Vince McMahon & "The Audience of One" Philosophy

[only1soe]

I agree that vince is not the power house he once was, but my point eariler was that it was his vision that brought him to the dance. He can take the blame or credit for hiring the wrong or right person. He takes the credit and goes to the bank for listening to Russo during the attitude era but what has Russo become since?

This is a never ending market and the top dog and always be trashed talked. Vince and WWE will be on top for a long time. The only thing that may change that is some idiot taking over after Vince passes away. You want to start a topic on here? What happens to the WWE when vince is gone? How bad would it suck then.

 

[Slyfox696]

Well, I don't think I am, Sly because the numbers don't lie. And if you stick up for today's product, and Vince offering one universal product, then I think you are the one who is wrong. But let's continue and we'll take it as we go.

I agree. The numbers don't lie. Which is why your argument is silly.

Okay, it seems like the only way to back those with this mentality into a corner is to do this.

A rating is just a number, right? Ratings fluctuate depending on the audience. So let's do this.

1) True or False? The wrestling fanbase of today is larger than the wrestling fanbase of the Attitude Era?

2) True or False? The wrestling fanbase of today is larger than the wrestling fanbase of the Post-Attitude Era? (2001-2006)

You're making this too simple. No, the audience today is not as large as it was during the Attitude Era, no one will argue that. But the Attitude Era WASN'T a great long-term company direction, merely a great short term one. What sold the Attitude Era was sex and shock TV, not professional wrestling. And as I said before, those fans all left when the next fad hit, and the WWE's audience was cut in half.

I think you are putting the cart before the horse with the "higher ticket price" argument. Why did Vince raise ticket prices, to begin with? Could it be because of declining attendance, and the fact he had to make up for the lost revenue?

LOL, no it's because of the laws of supply and demand. Have you never had an economics class? Vince looks for the very PEAK of the graph where he can make the most money. He raises ticket prices because he feels that while he may lose a view customers, the revenue brought in by the extra money per ticket will not only offset the price, but also still benefit the company.

Let's examine the average attendance over the years from the information you posted, as well as consider the number of events ran each year, and ticket prices, as well, and determine how that affected attendance:

Data went here


Objective Conclusions that can be drawn from this:


Generally speaking, the greater # of shows ran, with the highest avg ticket price, produces the lowest attendance: 2005


Generally speaking, the fewer # of shows ran, with the lowest avg ticket price, produces the highest attendance: 2000

Attendance has increased in the last two years, however I point to that being due to WWE reducing the travel schedule in North America by approximately 100 events per year, and thus not running as many shows in the same market each year. [/quote]I'm sure you feel like you're making a point here, but I'll be damned if I see what the hell you are talking about.

As someone who has studied and followed the business for 2 decades, and has purchased 90% of the WWE PPV's from 1990 through 2006, yes I most definitely feel I do have that right, and have earned it.

Sorry, you don't. You're only one person, and just because something doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean the quality of it is any less.

You need to put your ego in check. It has no business in this conversation.

Don't make it sound like I haven't paid tons of money to this company, to earn my spot to critique it, as this company has made thousands and thousands of dollars from me.

You don't have to pay money to critique it, that's silly. But when your critique flies in the face of popular opinion, then no one really gives a damn. As long as the WWE is highly successful, why do they give a fuck what you think?

However, if today's fans want to call the product I enjoyed "crap", which many do, then I feel I have the right to do the same. This is my opinion, and I am entitled to it, just as I feel you are entitled to yours.

Great.

And if I, and many many others, feel like it is enjoyable, then trying to say that Vince only books for himself is a completely ludicrous idea, especially when the WWE does so well financially.

None of that is rocket science. My point is that it is easy to manipulate profitability. Imagine if Vince tried to do those same cost-cutting measures back when he did have higher attendance and buys.

He did...what's your point?

Because he busts his ass. He stays in the Main Event because he currently sells the most merchandise, and let's be frank ... Vince shoved him down everyone's throats. Vince kept the title on Cena for a year, despite him being the Most Unpopular Top Face in WWE history and was getting a very large amount of boos in arenas across the country.

LOL, you just don't get it do you?

John Cena doesn't stay in the main event because he was shoved down people's throats, he stays in the main-event because he is the most entertaining worker on the roster. Whether you buy a ticket to hate him or buy a ticket to cheer him, you are still buying a ticket to see him. And when people pay their ticket to see him, for him to entertain them (whether that be to cheer or boo), then Vince McMahon keeping him in the main-event IS giving the fans what they want.

It amazes me how you seem to struggle with the business side of wrestling so much.

Certainly not because Vince was listening to the fans. Vince had DX glowsticks that needed to be sold. I certainly didn't hear fans demanding a DX reunion.

Then you didn't watch WM 22, and the incredible pops HBK and HHH got when they did the DX chops. And you did hear the "DX DX DX" chants on Raw for the month or two building up to the reunion.

Seriously Sidious, that's the best you got? That Vince had DX glowsticks from 10 years ago he wanted to sell, and that's why he put them back together? Are you really offering that completely unrealistic opinion?

Because given the pending retirement of Shawn Michaels, Undertaker, and Batista, Vince is being forced to create new Main Event stars. It's pretty clear that Vince does not have a lot of faith in Jeff Hardy, given Hardy's track record ... thus he only gave him the title for a month.

Care to take wagers on whether or not Jeff is going to take the title from Edge at Judgment Day?

But why Jeff? Why not Chris Masters? Why not Kozlov? Why not Nick Dinsmore? Why not Chris Harris?

Because the fans want Jeff Hardy, not any of those other guys. And by putting Hardy in the main-event, he's giving the fans what they want.

He won the titles essentially as a Bait and Switch on the part of McMahon and an investment into the ECW Brand. Vince obviously knew that RVD was essentially the face of the old ECW. He lured the fans in, and gave the title to the Big Show shortly thereafter.

Regarding his WWE Title win, how long did RVD have it for? Less than a month.

June 11, 2006 to July 3, 2006, where he lost it back to one of Vince's favorites. Edge. He won the title to get a good pop from the fans at One Night Stand, and as an investment into that Brand.

But the fact that he kept it for less than a month ... just like Jeff Hardy, only to lose it back to Edge (also like Jeff), speaks volumes.

You can't honestly be this ignorant. RVD didn't lose the titles because it was a "bait and switch", he lost them because he got busted pot and drug paraphernalia. Everybody knows that, and I feel kind of insulted that you would pass that bullshit off as an argument.

RVD, by ALL accounts, from dirtsheet writers to people from actually in the WWE, was going to be a long-term ECW champion. RVD fucked that up, not a bait and switch by McMahon.

Here, you have one of the most over performers on the roster, and his World Title Reigns were both for less than a month, ironically enough (sarcasm) when WWECW was just getting off the ground.

Yeah, good point. That's what the WWE needed less than a year after Eddie Guerrero's death and in the midst of a probe from Congress, due to a lack of drug testing...a guy who gets busted for drugs.

Yes, THAT would have gone over well in mainstream media and in front of Congress. Honestly Sidious, if you're going to keep babbling bullshit to these levels of ridiculousness, you can consider this the last post I make on this subject.

Get real. You're better than this.

Why wouldn't he be? Vince needs wrestlers, doesn't he?

Additionally, Rey brings in Hispanic viewers and sells masks on behalf of the company.

Why would Vince get rid of him if he makes money?

Umm...exactly??

That's my whole point. People want to watch Rey Mysterio, especially children and Hispanic viewers, so Vince books him high on the card, to give people a reason to watch his shows.

At this point, do you even know what your point is? Because you keep making mine.

Yes, and trying to tell older adults that they should like the exact same thing that a kid likes is unrealistic in the year 2009.

Yes, because kids generally like the idea of a heavily tattooed man physically assaulting a woman and kissing her in front of her husband. Children using get real involved with that.

Here is an overview of who is watching WWE, taken right off the WWE Corporate site:

So my question, given that 58% of Vince's audience is aged 18-49 is, "Why are you not aggressively going after this audience, by tailoring a program to them?"[/quote]Why do that when those people are already watching?

That's what I said earlier. Those fans are HOOKED. They are going to watch wrestling, no matter what. However, the WWE is building a NEW audience. You hook them when they are young, and continue to build your audience that way. Pretty certain I already said this.

It is the interests of the 18-49 year olds that should be made the priority. Not the other way around.

They are a priority. Just like fans of women wrestlers are a priority, Hispanics are a priority, blacks are a priority, children are a priority, women are a priority, the people of India are a priority....

As I said before, the most you post, the more you keep proving MY argument.

I have yet to hear a compelling reason why WWE needs to target the same audience on each of the 4 shows, and have them all watch those shows. For what purpose? Why not use those outlets, to target different demos by tailoring your programs to each of their interests, thereby duplicating the formula for success in the wrestling boom period?

Because it kills your live event attendance, and can hurt your overall business.

Let's say Smackdown comes to my hometown. Who's going to go? Not the older fans, because they don't watch Smackdown. But...then who's left, because the younger audience can't go on their own. Or, maybe Raw comes to my hometown...you think you can get 8000 18-49 year olds to come to a wrestling show? Good luck.

And let's discuss PPVs. PPV time comes up...I'm a fan of the ECW brand. Am I going to pay $40 to watch a show with only two matches that I'm interested? Of course not.

Trying to separate the shows like that is completely foolhardy. Why would you want to kill your own audience by splitting them into different shows? That's stupid.

Vince did not listen to his audience when he kept John Cena as champion for a year, when clearly the audience was overwhelmingly booing him during that time period.

Sure he did. The problem is the audience is too stupid to realize it.

Yeah, Cena got heavy boos for a year or so...and at the same time, ratings climbed, PPV buys climbed, merchandise monies climbed, and live event attendance climbed.

But fans don't get that. They think because they bought their ticket to boo Cena, then obviously Vince didn't listen to them. But he DID listen to them...by putting Cena out there every night, he ensured more and more people would buy tickets to come watch him perform.

You have to be able to look at the big picture. And you really seem to be struggling with that right now.

Vince is not listening to the audience today, when there are a large number of complaints about the direction of the toned-down product. Jim Ross even acknowledged it in his column that there are a lot of complaints.

And as people complain, the money keeps rolling in.

Vince did not listen to his audience when he made Bobby Lashley and The Big Show the faces for that particular Brand.

He didn't? If you go back and look, I bet you'll see that ratings only start to REALLY drop when Lashley and Big Show LEFT ECW. Go ahead, and look.

Vince does not listen to his fanbase when he essentially tries to tell them what to think, by having security audit the fan made signs that are brought into the arena.

Signs that ruin the show for other people don't deserve to be there.

Vince did not listen to his fanbase when the overwhelming feedback to Randy Orton's psychotic character was positive, so he reversed course, and turned him into another run-of-the-mill heel.

A "run of the mill heel"? Are you fucking kidding me? Orton is THE top heel in the company, no question. The guy gets mega heel heat.

What was Vince supposed to do? Allow Orton to go face, and then have NO ONE to feud him with? When will people learn that wrestling sells based on Face vs. Heel, Good vs. Evil?

Vince does not listen to his fanbase when they ask for more prominence to be placed on the Mid Card.

LOL!!!

When has this happened? When has any fan said, "No, I don't want Cena, HBK, Jericho, Orton and Edge to wrestle on my house show, I want Snitsky and Primo Colon!"?

When did that happen? That's ludicrous. Main-event is what sells, not the midcard, no matter how much the IWC bitches about it.

Vince does not listen to his fanbase when they ask for more Tag Teams and and a greater effort placed on the Tag Team Division.

Because the fanbase DOESN'T ask for that. How do I know this? Because Tag Team wrestling DOESN'T SELL! You use 15 people bitching about it on a wrestling forums to say that an entire fanbase complain about it. But, the overwhelming majority don't give a damn about Tag Team wrestling, never have.

Tag Team wrestling has NEVER sold regularly. Tag Team wrestling was used to give guys experience and exposure to the audience, that's it. But now, with 6 hours of TV programming a week, why bother with Tag Teams when it is the Singles Superstars that sell shows?

Vince does not listen to his fans when they ask for more sexuality from the Divas, compared to what we've seen over the past couple years (for obvious reasons).

LOL again! Seriously, this list is piss bucket.

How much more sexuality is possible? The only thing that we HAVEN'T seen from professional wrestling is full-out hardcore porn.

Vince did not listen to his fans, who wanted to see Cena vs Orton and Triple H vs Edge at Wrestlemania.

Umm..what? Who the fuck said that? 3 people on the Internet?

I could go on and on.

I would just like you to make one valid point.

"HIGHLY" visible in Mainstream Media? Vince is regarded as a joke, in most Mainstream Media. He should receive more respect than he does, but let's be honest here. Vince is not HIGHLY visible in Mainstream Media.

Bullshit.

His wrestlers appear on talk shows, in advertisements and in movies (even ones that he doesn't own). Anytime there's a fight that breaks out, commentators also reference the WWE. The Benoit thing was front page on ESPN.com, Colin Cowherd references Vince McMahon on a semi-regular basis, and there are very few people who DON'T know what the WWE and Vince McMahon is.

That completely bomb and are regarded as jokes.

And are still purchased by theaters to be shown on screens.

By who's standards? Yours? Greatest company of Entertainment in the HISTORY of the United States is a pretty tall claim. Which I think you will have difficulty supporting if you want to argue it as Fact, as opposed to simply your opinion. If I would go out in public and speak to 50 random people, and ask them "who is the Greatest Entertainment Company in the history of the United States", I seriously doubt WWE will be at the top of more than 2 people's lists, if anyone at all.

Find me another entertainment company that has 6 hours of ORIGINAL programming on TV every week, can entice people to pay $40 to watch a show every month which really isn't much different than what they get on free TV, and can still take their show on the road with live events that regularly draw 6500 people.

I would love to see the entertainment company which services as many in the US and around the world, and does it as often as the WWE does, with completely original shows every single night.


Find me an entertainment company that can do what the WWE does, and then maybe we can discuss my statement.

On the contrary, that is NOT what I am looking for.

Again, the question is in the Execution of HOW to appeal to each of those audiences. Vince took the wrong route, as far as I'm concerned, and again I point to ratings, buyrates, and attendance to support my opinions.

False.

Your original contention was that Vince books his shows for an Audience of One, which was for his own amusement. Now you are trying to say that not only is that not true, but he does book for a large variety of audiences...you just disagree with the manner that he chose to do it.

Like I've said a few times already, you have completely lost sight of your argument, and the more you post, the more you prove your original stance, that Vince only books for his own amusement, completely false.

I'm actually disappointed in you Sidious. I thought you'd do a better job of debating than this. But over the course of only two posts, you have completely proved you own original contention false, and have come over to agree with me.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I agree. The numbers don't lie. Which is why your argument is silly.

First of all, before we continue, spare me your pompous, arrogant tone in your post, Sly. Spare me, "the more you post, the more you prove my point" and "I thought you understood this was a business" bullshit. And spare me the "I'm disappointed in you, Sidious."

I respect you as a poster, a Mod, and as a person .... but the tone of that post is completely insulting and disrespectful. I feel like I try to make points and back up my points, whether you agree or not. But when you disagree, you include insults and put downs in your post. If I don't insult you, which I don't feel I did at any time (correct me if I'm wrong, as I only felt we were debating points), then could I ask you the courtesy not to attempt to insult me?

All too many Moderators on Wrestling Forums have this "I'm a Mod. I am God. My opinion is God. I expect you to respect me, but I don't have to respect you back, because I'm a Mod" arrogant approach to Moderating. I thought you would be above that kind of thing. But you proved me wrong.

You're making this too simple. No, the audience today is not as large as it was during the Attitude Era, no one will argue that. But the Attitude Era WASN'T a great long-term company direction, merely a great short term one.

No, I'm not making this "too simple". You are the one who is making this "too complicated".

What sold the Attitude Era was sex and shock TV, not professional wrestling.

And what's wrong with that? Why eliminate that style of programming altogether, from the fans who want to see it? The answer is not changing the content of all of your programs. Rather, the answer is still offering a program reflecting that style of programming, but then offering Family-Style programming, like WCW offered ... and Niche-based programming like ECW offered.

If the wrestling industry was at its peak when all 3 companies were in existence, and all were relatively successful .... why would you not duplicate that same formula?

Vince has sent half of his audience away because he did not have a replacement for Austin and The Rock to take over. Cena wasn't ready yet, and when he finally was, and they were grooming him as the lone rapper ... then they take that away from him ... removed the only thing compelling about his character, shoved him down the throats of WWE fans .... and hence the fans turned on him ... and eventually turned on WWE as well ... and bolted.

And as I said before, those fans all left when the next fad hit, and the WWE's audience was cut in half.

The fans left because The Rock and Steve Austin left ... who were two of the most popular stars in WWE history ... and Vince closing down all of his competition, while not offering them product alternatives to give the viewers a choice to turn to, in case they got bored by WWE programming. Vince took away those choices, and never bothered replacing them.

LOL, no it's because of the laws of supply and demand. Have you never had an economics class?

Don't insult me. Yes, I have taken an Economics class.

The problem is that Vince helped remove the demand from the customers.

Vince looks for the very PEAK of the graph where he can make the most money. He raises ticket prices because he feels that while he may lose a view customers, the revenue brought in by the extra money per ticket will not only offset the price, but also still benefit the company.

Actually, if you examined the WWE's bread and butter ... the PPV data, he is not making as much money in PPV's today, even with the increased price and lost customers, as he was making when the price point was $34.95 and there were more customers.

Again, Vince essentially told his customers to "Go Away" without having another superstar to take over for The Rock and Steve Austin. Triple H by himself wasn't cutting it, and never will. Edge by himself wasn't cutting it and never will. John Cena isn't cutting it. And I think he has reached his peak as far as being a draw.

And he is still telling his customers to "Go Away" today, by only offering the one universal product.

Will he continue to get by okay? Sure. He just isn't bringing in the numbers he could be doing, if he adopted a different strategy to attract fans who spend money.

Sorry, you don't. You're only one person, and just because something doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean the quality of it is any less.

I do have the right to my opinion, and being a fan of the product for 2 decades, yes I have the right to my opinion, just as much as anyone else. You don't like or want to respect my opinions, then put me on "Ignore".

You need to put your ego in check. It has no business in this conversation.

The only one I've seen with an Ego and Arrogant tone here is you, to be honest. I don't feel I am being nasty, but rather simply stating my opinions and supporting those opinions. Your post, however, has an extremely nasty and spiteful tone to it.

You don't have to pay money to critique it, that's silly. But when your critique flies in the face of popular opinion, then no one really gives a damn. As long as the WWE is highly successful, why do they give a fuck what you think?

Well, WWE is successful. I wouldn't call it "highly successful", but they are successful. Vince didn't seem too pleased with his company's performance at the Shareholder's meeting, and nor did some of his shareholders who spoke.

Now, as far as "no one really gives a Fuck about what fans think". That much is pretty evident, and actually points to my post about the "Audience of One". And just a side note, don't make me out to be the one who created that Philosophy. "The Audience of One" claim has been around for about 2 years now and apparently former Writers and those who work in the business agree with it. You can have a disagreement with the Wrestlezone Reporters, however that story about Vince having this mentality was reported right here on the site.

Great.

And if I, and many many others, feel like it is enjoyable, then trying to say that Vince only books for himself is a completely ludicrous idea, especially when the WWE does so well financially.

Vince isn't doing as rosy financially as you may want to badly believe he is doing. He is no where near a Billionaire anymore, like he once was, when he offered great programming.

That's another interesting point.

You want to claim WWE is so successful. But now, it was most recently reported that Vince's own Net Wealth from his 60% of Company Stock puts him at approximately $600 Million. Do you want to blame that 100% on the economy, or bad business decisions?

If Vince is doing so well financially, like you want to claim, he should still be relatively close to being a Billionaire still, shouldn't he?

He did...what's your point?

My point in Manipulating numbers is that you want to solely point to profitability as proof positive and justification that WWE is on the right track. My point of view is that his current strategy is doing long-term damage to the business by driving fans away, who would otherwise be paying money if they had programming that still matched their interests.

Well, what if we manipulated some numbers back in the Attitude and Post Attitude Eras? What if we did some additional cost-cutting, raised a few more ticket prices, PPV Prices, etc.? Then, we would have blown the company's profitability through the roof during those times, as well.

Just because one is "profitable today", does not necessarily mean that a good long term strategy is in place and that damage isn't being done to the business.

I have never seen as many upset fans at the product since the IWC was formed, than today.

LOL, you just don't get it do you?

Watch the nastiness. Uncalled for.

John Cena doesn't stay in the main event because he was shoved down people's throats, he stays in the main-event because he is the most entertaining worker on the roster.

I don't think I ever denied that he was entertaining. However, he got to the position he did by being shoved down people's throats.

He was over fine as the Rapper, and I thought was over Great with the audience. So, they took the Rap Gimmick away, and gave him this bland one ... combined with a monster push in which he was "shoved down people's throats" (because Vince had no other stars) ... and essentially Cena became the most unpopular Top company babyface in WWE history.

Whether you buy a ticket to hate him or buy a ticket to cheer him, you are still buying a ticket to see him. And when people pay their ticket to see him, for him to entertain them (whether that be to cheer or boo), then Vince McMahon keeping him in the main-event IS giving the fans what they want.

Who says that today's fans are paying to see John Cena, and not the WWE product, as a whole? I don't think fans are paying just to see John Cena, like you may want to believe.

It amazes me how you seem to struggle with the business side of wrestling so much.

LOL. I'm not struggling.

If the company is profitable, but is still putting out a shitty product, then they are going to be called on it. I am not going to come on here and ONLY look at the product from a profitability standpoint.

In other words, if the company is putting out a very sub-par product, but still doing okay financially ... I am not going to give my opinion that "creatively-speaking, I find the product to be good", when I don't.

The fact of the matter is that only by raising PPV prices, Merchandise Prices, and ticket prices, is WWE doing as well as it is. That is a fact.

And truly, if the company can put out a shitty product, and the fans still want to give the company money ... but complain about it .... then more power to WWE.

I, on the other hand, have paid enough money over the years, and will complain about the product, as long as I don't find it enjoyable. The bottom line is that I am still a fan of the wrestling business, and the WWE during certain periods ... however I am not in the least impressed with today's product, whatsoever.

Seriously Sidious, that's the best you got? That Vince had DX glowsticks from 10 years ago he wanted to sell, and that's why he put them back together? Are you really offering that completely unrealistic opinion?

I heard of zero fans demanding a return of DX, back then. None. So your argument that "Vince listened to the fans, because they were demanding a return of DX" is unfounded.

Vince put DX together to sell merchandise (hence why there were so many promos of them on TV pushing their merchandise ... that they had to clear out from the warehouse), and because perhaps from a Creative standpoint, he wanted to put them together on TV again. That had zero to do with fan input.

But why Jeff? Why not Chris Masters? Why not Kozlov? Why not Nick Dinsmore? Why not Chris Harris?

Because, Vince is not as impressed with Masters, Kozlov, Dinsmore, and Harris. Dinsmore was the only remotely decent wrestler out of those 3. Vince pushed him. Got what he could out of him, and called it quits.

But you didn't address my point. If the fans wanted to see Jeff Hardy get a push, and he was getting great cheers, why did Vince give him a title reign of less than a month ... if he always "listens to the fans"?

Because the fans want Jeff Hardy, not any of those other guys. And by putting Hardy in the main-event, he's giving the fans what they want.

Again, the fans spoke that they wanted Jeff Hardy. So how does Vince reward them? By giving Jeff less than a one month title reign. Until he decided to give the title back to Edge, once again. Was that what the fans wanted to see, Sly?

Because it kills your live event attendance, and can hurt your overall business.

No, sir. History has proven that when the competition was eliminated and those very same product alternatives were eliminated ... that this is actually what hurt the overall business.

Plus, by reaching out and targeting more viewers by offering them more programming alternatives, I fail to see how that is "killing your live attendance". I thought WWE and WCW co-existed quite well. And I am willing to be that fans were attending both shows, as well. Same mentality applies here.

Let's say Smackdown comes to my hometown. Who's going to go? Not the older fans, because they don't watch Smackdown. But...then who's left, because the younger audience can't go on their own. Or, maybe Raw comes to my hometown...you think you can get 8000 18-49 year olds to come to a wrestling show? Good luck.


And let's discuss PPVs. PPV time comes up...I'm a fan of the ECW brand. Am I going to pay $40 to watch a show with only two matches that I'm interested? Of course not.

Your argument is 100% invalid. Why? Very simple. Because this experiment was already done before and it was called WWF, WCW, and ECW ... which all co-existed at the exact same time, and all of which did well. Heyman didn't have the degree of financial exposure that Vince or Bischoff did, but he did very well with what he had and had a good run.

As far as ECW goes, thinking in terms of the ECW today, no ... nobody would pay to see that show on PPV by itself. However, I would attempt to get that Brand standing on its own as either a Hardcore or Cruiserweight product. If that wouldn't be a large enough draw as a PPV standing on its own, the matches would be incorporated into the Raw and Smackdown PPV shows.

Trying to separate the shows like that is completely foolhardy. Why would you want to kill your own audience by splitting them into different shows? That's stupid.

I'm not sure if that's stupid or someone has a comprehension problem.

You aren't "splitting the audience". You are actually going out and attracting a larger audience for each of the shows, and gaining viewers.

Furthermore, you are expecting there to be a lot of viewers who will still watch not just one, but two or three shows. For example, a 37 year old adult with a child watches Raw on Monday by himself. On Friday night, he also watches Smackdown with his child.

Sure he did. The problem is the audience is too stupid to realize it.

Ah, so it's the audience's fault. I think I see how it works with you. It's never Vince's fault. You come off as a blind, loyalist Vince mark. Vince is always right and the Audience is always wrong. Pompous attitude if there ever was one.

Again, point shown that Vince did not listen to the audience.

When did that happen? That's ludicrous. Main-event is what sells, not the midcard, no matter how much the IWC bitches about it.

Well, if the Main Event does not sell, you need a strong Mid-Card to make up for it, and therefore must offer other alternatives to keep the customers happy.

Keep in mind that during the WWE's most successful period in the Attitude Era, the Mid Card was at one of it's peaks. Because Russo gave virtually everyone a storyline to be involved in ... which kept viewers interested.

If you had a stale main event, at least there were other interesting mid card matches and tag team matches going on.

WWE can not say the same today. If nobody is interested in the Main Event, then they are shit out of luck, since there is basically no emphasis on the mid card, at all. And that's a shame. Because WWE is the one responsible for telling their fans that the Midcard doesn't mean a God damn thing. And like a good little zombie, you get the mindless dribble shoved right down your throat.

Because the fanbase DOESN'T ask for that. How do I know this? Because Tag Team wrestling DOESN'T SELL! You use 15 people bitching about it on a wrestling forums to say that an entire fanbase complain about it. But, the overwhelming majority don't give a damn about Tag Team wrestling, never have.

So the Mid Card doesn't sell. And Tag Teams don't sell. That's funny, because for many, many years I always thought it was the entire product together, as a whole, that sold the audience and helped build interest in the overall package. But today, that apparently is not the case.

So, if Tag Teams and the Mid Card does not sell, then why don't we do away with Tag Teams, altogether? Let's just take the next step and completely do away with them, since they are essentially useless ... and there apparently would be no harm in doing so, since they don't matter?

Furthermore, why don't we take this approach with the Midcard from now on. Let's book Judgment Day with that philosophy in mind.


Since Tag Teams and the Midcard does not matter, here is the card:



Batista vs Randy Orton
Edge vs Jeff Hardy
Kung Fu Naki vs Jamie Noble
Goldust vs Brooklyn Brawler
Ricky Ortiz vs Zack Ryder
Santina Marella vs Rosa Mendez
Hacksaw Jim Duggan vs Chavo Guerrero
Jesse vs Dolph Ziggler



Let's see how well that show sells, since the rest of the card "doesn't matter".

Tag Team wrestling has NEVER sold regularly. Tag Team wrestling was used to give guys experience and exposure to the audience, that's it. But now, with 6 hours of TV programming a week, why bother with Tag Teams when it is the Singles Superstars that sell shows?

Again, you dodged the argument.

I see fans all over the Net demanding a resurgence of Tag Team wrestling, and Vince won't give it to them. And even Jim Ross in his column acknowledged fans asking for a resurgence of the Tag Team Division. So it has to be somewhat significant.

Another example of Vince not listening to his audience.

The fact that you now have 6 hours of programming is certainly not an argument in favor of doing away with it. Rather, it is an argument even more so IN FAVOR of it. Because of variety.

Didn't you claim that WWE offers "tremendous variety"? I say that this claim of yours is complete, 100% Bullshit. And in this case, there is very little variety even in the matches.

LOL again! Seriously, this list is piss bucket.

Pretty much what I think of your attitude.

How much more sexuality is possible? The only thing that we HAVEN'T seen from professional wrestling is full-out hardcore porn.

Dodging the point made. The WWE's primary Demo is 18-49 year old Men. Do you think this group wants to see more sensuality from the Divas or Less sensuality? Do you think this group wants to see the Divas in Playboy, or are they saying "No, I don't want to see Kelly Kelly or Melina in Playboy?"

Vince is not listening to the audience. You wanted ONE example. You got several.

I would just like you to make one valid point.

I've already made several. Poke your head in the sand as long as you like, though.

His wrestlers appear on talk shows, in advertisements and in movies (even ones that he doesn't own). Anytime there's a fight that breaks out, commentators also reference the WWE. The Benoit thing was front page on ESPN.com, Colin Cowherd references Vince McMahon on a semi-regular basis, and there are very few people who DON'T know what the WWE and Vince McMahon is.

How much positive coverage and respect do you see the WWE receive, compared to actors, actresses, and sports franchises like the NFL, MLB, NBA, and UFC.

Commercials? What commercials? The one Mach 3 commercial played over and over and over again on WWE TV?

The Benoit thing? Did that get positive coverage and present the business in a positive light? Or was the coverage overwhelmingly Negative and Present the business in a Negative Light? Anytime the WWE can be bashed at the first instance of a story, it will be done.

Positive coverage? Not so much.

Vince does not have the respect of a clear, overwhelming majority of the Entertainment Industry.

And are still purchased by theaters to be shown on screens.

Doesn't mean it is successful and isn't regarded as a laughingstock in the industry.

Find me another entertainment company that has 6 hours of ORIGINAL programming on TV every week, can entice people to pay $40 to watch a show every month which really isn't much different than what they get on free TV, and can still take their show on the road with live events that regularly draw 6500 people.

I would love to see the entertainment company which services as many in the US and around the world, and does it as often as the WWE does, with completely original shows every single night.

Put on Original Programming each week? Well, I guess that is a topic for discussion, because when I do tune in, I feel like I am watching the exact same show every single week. So what good is bragging about "original programming" if you put very little effort into it, and the product becomes bland and stale? Which from many accounts, it is today?

Every entertainment market is different. Different operations. Different methods of obtaining revenue. Different ways to streamline expenses. No one industry is going to be exactly alike.

It seems like what you are looking for is for someone to simply say "I respect the wrestling business and what Vince does." Forgive me for saying so, but this is the mentality of a Vince mark. And any deviation, other than blind loyalty to the product at all times, you take exception to. And I find so many blind-loyalist fans like this online, it isn't even funny.

However, your claim that WWE is the Most Successful Entertainment Company in the history of Entertainment is erroneous. And you know that. Hence, of course, why you had to add on the part where "they produce 6 hours of original programming each week, $40 PPV's each month, etc."

Find me an entertainment company that can do what the WWE does, and then maybe we can discuss my statement.

There aren't too many "wrestling companies" around these days. I would have had less a problem if you stated "wrestling company", but since you want to argue that the WWE is "the most successful Entertainment Company in history", and you wanted to be the one to make the boastful claim, I want to see how you justify your opinion as it being the "most successful".

I want to see a side by side comparison of WWE's numbers, and the numbers of other Entertainment Companies such as UFC, top Movie Studios, places like Disney and Universal Studios, and others ... and support your original claim that WWE is the Most Successful Entertainment Company in history.

Your original contention was that Vince books his shows for an Audience of One, which was for his own amusement. Now you are trying to say that not only is that not true, but he does book for a large variety of audiences...you just disagree with the manner that he chose to do it.

My contention is that Vince puts out a product that is suitable for all audiences. However, what I feel he does, as I elaborated on earlier, is that he puts himself in the mindset of a fan, and he goes from there. When he goes to write Raw, he tells himself "I am a fan of PG Television. And here is what I want to see." Then, he takes it from there. Vince, is the fan. And as long as his product does remotely well, then he feels he is justified.

He is not truly concerned about any potential negative feedback, until he sees his numbers drastically slip and is forced to make changes.


Below I have posted Paul Heyman's Column where the Audience of One Philosophy was reported on.

Paul Heyman sat on the Creative Team, and ran a wrestling company himself, so I respect his opinion. Give it a read.



http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/wrestling/heyman/article1710982.ece


After you are done, since you like insulting people and debating so much, what I challenge you to do Sly is comprise a rebuttal, post it here so we can see it, and then send it over to Paul Heyman as well as Mark Madden ... since you obviously don't respect their opinions. Because both of them testify to it.

Essentially, what you have done is called their claims to this bullshit, so I want to see you debate them on this, tell them how wrong they are, and we'll see what happens, Big Man.

Like I've said a few times already, you have completely lost sight of your argument, and the more you post, the more you prove your original stance, that Vince only books for his own amusement, completely false.

I never stated that Vince "only books for his own amusement". I stated that based on reports that I believe are legitimate based on what I see on my TV screen, that "Vince books for the Audience of One". He puts himself in the mindset of being a wrestling fan, and goes from there. He gives pushes to people who he wants to give pushes to and who he feels deserves them. He gives titles to his favorites "John Cena, Edge, and Triple H", and he knows his base is going to buy no matter what. Again, good for him.

As I said earlier, if he can put shit on TV, lose fans, raise prices to make up for the lost fans by relying on his base (who buys no matter what), then more power to him.

I only hope the product continues down the path it currently is. I consider it somewhat of an experiment. Because I want to see what the threshold is for a couple things. Those being

1) how long Vince's base will tolerate mediocrity
2) what Vince's threshold is in how many fans he has to lose, before he finally concedes and makes changes.

BTW, ECW scored it's first rating below a 1.0 this week, as you probably noticed was reported.

Yep. WWE is doing a great job keeping those fans interested. As I said, I only hope this downward spiral continues across the board, because the more it does, the more it proves you wrong.

I'm actually disappointed in you Sidious. I thought you'd do a better job of debating than this. But over the course of only two posts, you have completely proved you own original contention false, and have come over to agree with me.

I'm actually more disappointed in your juvenile attitude as a poster and Moderator, in someone who is supposed to set the example, more than anything else from your post.

For the record, no you didn't make your case with me. Wrestlezone itself has reported that its sources within WWE have testified to the "Audience of One" philosophy that Vince has. So if you want to dispute the validity of a story that was reported on this very site, then feel free to do so.

Also, I anxiously await your rebuttals to both Paul Heyman's article listed above and Mark Madden's latest column. Don't forget to post the articles on here.

...........

One other thing. As far as I'm concerned, this little "debate" is over. I have no desire to interact with people who are rude and disrespectful on forums. I have been baited before elsewhere, and have been warned for taking the bait, and I am not going to do so again.

I felt like I treated you with respect in my original posts to you, however you responded like an egotistical, pompous, arrogant prick. Feel free to respond if it makes you feel big, but I have no desire to interact with you in the future, after your last post.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

This is just a ridiculous argument. How can you all of a sudden be saying that now when that has been the format for wrestling shows for years.

Very simple. We all accept that times have changed, given what the Internet has done to wrestling and the concept of Kayfabe being all but dead. Times have changed in this regard, as well.

And I point to the elimination of WCW and ECW as far as when the interest in wrestling began dying. What they offered was true product alternatives, and the entire wrestling audience was enormous during that time frame. Everyone was getting a piece of the pie back then.

I simply want to see the same thing re-created again, with true product alternatives, but Vince getting the whole pie this time.

When you think about it, there really isn't a ton you can do with matches and promos ....

I couldn't disagree more. Matches, promos, and storylines are 100% affected and restricted by the PG Rating. Hence, something that is more appropriate for Kids is not going to appeal to Adults. You can argue that it is "appropriate for adults" and nobody is arguing that. But the real question is "does today's programming APPEAL TO AND TARGET ADULTS AND THEIR INTERESTS?" And the answer is No. That is again, why the entire wrestling audience shrunk.

Vince is trying to tell adults, young adults, little kids, older adults ... that EVERYONE should be liking the same thing. Given how today's culture is pickier than ever, the old formula of the past is broken.

and I think the WWE does the best they can to mix it up.

Well, that is a highly debatable point, because I don't know if you've noticed or not, but quite a few fans have left wrestling over the years, and I see a large amount of people unhappy online, as well ... that still follow the product, simply out of loyalty.

By refining their operations, they can be doing a much, much better job creatively, because the viewers will feel they truly have a choice in shows to watch. If one gets tired of watching Raw, then tune into a completely different program with Smackdown. If one gets tired of watching Smackdown, then they can switch over to ECW, or switch back to Raw ... where you truly have different, viable brand alternatives. Thus, it helps in keeping fans interested, as opposed to simply offering one universal product.

Obviously, there are enough people watching it to keep WWE as a successful company.

Nobody is arguing that WWE doesn't get by okay. They do. But what WWE has settled for is mediocrity, because of laziness due to there being No Competition. They could be producing higher revenues and expand their audience by actually going after them, as opposed to simply hoping for the best and trying to force adults and kids to sit down and tell them "this product is for all of you, AND you are all going to like it."

Once again, it is not the same show every week.

Yes, it essentially is. Same basic formula every single week. The show has the same look. Same open. Same close. The same format. Same GM spots. Same Main Event with interference in the last match.

The shows are essentially one giant infomercial, and it comes across that they are just going through the motions every single week. Then, they have a PPV. Then, repeat process. Go through the motions and hype next PPV. Hold PPV. Then, onto the next month. I remember when each show was very unique some 10 years ago, and it gave the impression to the viewer that

I agree that I'm getting kind of tired on the Legacy beatdowns each week on Raw, but the storyline will play out soon enough and there will be something new.

What do you base this opinion on? Hope, that it will?

Furthermore, there is a multitude of other storylines and new stars that keep me, and a lot of others, watching.

Like what, exactly? Tell me exactly which of the current storylines that you find "compelling" and keep you interested in the product.

Really, has he taken everything away? You can't find anything good about the company? What exactly was it that they had 10 years ago that they don't have now?

Edgy, expect the unexpected programming, that was more geared towards adults.

More interesting characters.

Far better storylines.

Less Predictable outcomes of matches.

Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock. And John Cena is not in their league.

Emphasis on the Mid Card storylines.

Emphasis on Tag Teams.

Ringside Managers.

Face/Heel Broadcasting Teams.

Big Matches that Only Occurred on PPV, which made PPV Events a big deal. Now, PPV matches are given away for Free on Raw and Smackdown, thus taking prestige away from the PPV's themselves.

And competition, so where as if you were bored with WWE, you could watch Nitro, or ECW.

The fact of the matter is, it is still wrestling, there are still great matches (HBK/Undertaker), there are still interesting stars and the WWE is putting out 6 hours of shows every week, not counting PPVs.

You can only watch so much wrestling, before you realize that you essentially watch the same matches over and over, each and every week.

 

[Slyfox696]

First of all, before we continue, spare me your pompous, arrogant tone in your post, Sly. Spare me, "the more you post, the more you prove my point" and "I thought you understood this was a business" bullshit. And spare me the "I'm disappointed in you, Sidious."

Then spare me the ignorant ridiculousness that has been running rampant throughout your posts. I truly mean those things when I said them, I spoke highly of you to the other mods when you got here...and in this thread, you are proving me wrong.

I respect you as a poster, a Mod, and as a person .... but the tone of that post is completely insulting and disrespectful.

So are things like trying to get people to think that RVD was champion for only a month for reasons other than the fact he was busted with drugs.

All too many Moderators on Wrestling Forums have this "I'm a Mod. I am God. My opinion is God. I expect you to respect me, but I don't have to respect you back, because I'm a Mod" arrogant approach to Moderating. I thought you would be above that kind of thing. But you proved me wrong.

I am WAY above that kind of thing. I don't do that because I'm a mod, I do that because I'm me. I did the same stuff before I was a mod. You should know, you've seen it on other forums. And you can go back in the old John Cena thread, look at posts I made before I was a mod, and see the same style of posting. In fact, I post LESS like this now because I'm a mod.

So spare me your persecution theory, because you are just getting Slyfox, not a mod.

And what's wrong with that? Why eliminate that style of programming altogether, from the fans who want to see it?

Because it's already been proven to not work anymore. We saw that in the early 2000s, with the incredible decline of ratings. There is only so much shock than can be had, and only so far you can go with sexuality. You eventually reach the very precipice, and have no where else to go. That's what happened around the year 2002.

Vince has sent half of his audience away because he did not have a replacement for Austin and The Rock to take over. Cena wasn't ready yet, and when he finally was, and they were grooming him as the lone rapper ... then they take that away from him ... removed the only thing compelling about his character, shoved him down the throats of WWE fans .... and hence the fans turned on him ... and eventually turned on WWE as well ... and bolted.

But that's not what happened. Cena actually DREW more people to the product. They didn't turn on the WWE because of Cena.

Go back and look at your ratings. In 2004, you'll see an average rating of around 3.7, 2005 a 3.8 and 2006 a 3.9. In 2007, you'll see that the WWE continued their 3.9 range of ratings...until the Benoit double murder/suicide. Shortly after that, there was the big SI steroid scandal where like 10 wrestlers were busted and suspended. THEN John Cena got injured a month after that.

Ratings have never recovered. It wasn't John Cena that drove them away, it was Benoit, steroids and a lack of Cena that drove them away.

Actually, if you examined the WWE's bread and butter ... the PPV data, he is not making as much money in PPV's today, even with the increased price and lost customers, as he was making when the price point was $34.95 and there were more customers.

But he WAS, until Benoit/Steroids/Economy.

If you were to lower the price to $34.95 now, then he would make LESS money than he does.

At this point, I'm not going to responding to anything else from you, unless it's directly related to the topic. I'm tired of having to explain the simple stuff to you, stuff you should understand.

Now, as far as "no one really gives a Fuck about what fans think". That much is pretty evident, and actually points to my post about the "Audience of One". And just a side note, don't make me out to be the one who created that Philosophy. "The Audience of One" claim has been around for about 2 years now and apparently former Writers and those who work in the business agree with it. You can have a disagreement with the Wrestlezone Reporters, however that story about Vince having this mentality was reported right here on the site.

That's great. I don't care because you've already agreed it's false. In fact, why are you still posting, when you already said that Vince is trying to provide to the different demographics, rather than just what amuses him?

I have never seen as many upset fans at the product since the IWC was formed, than today.

OK, I'll make an exemption for this one.

The very nature of the IWC, even before they were on the Internet, is to complain about professional wrestling. Find some old Usenet groups from 10-15 years ago, you'll see the same level of bitching and whining you do today. Maybe YOU haven't seen it, but I certainly have.

Ah, so it's the audience's fault. I think I see how it works with you. It's never Vince's fault. You come off as a blind, loyalist Vince mark. Vince is always right and the Audience is always wrong. Pompous attitude if there ever was one.

Again, point shown that Vince did not listen to the audience.

Finally, something that addresses the thread topic again.

Who said anything about it being anyone's fault? Do you even know what you're talking about anymore? The audience demanded John Cena, and Vince gave it to them. Sure, after the audience bought the ticket they booed Cena, but who cares as long as they bought the ticket to see Cena?

That's like saying that the NWA didn't listen to its fans because despite the fact they paid money to watch Ric Flair, they booed him. It doesn't matter WHY they buy the ticket, as long as they buy the ticket. And John Cena WAS the reason they were buying the tickets, and doing so at a much improved rate than before.

So, by buying those tickets, the fans said to Vince "Hey Vince, I want to see John Cena". Vince said, "All right fans, here is more John Cena".

This isn't hard to grasp. Vince didn't put Cena out there because he wanted him out there, Vince put Cena out there because the fans did. Vince didn't book for himself, he booked for the fans.

So the Mid Card doesn't sell. And Tag Teams don't sell. That's funny, because for many, many years I always thought it was the entire product together, as a whole, that sold the audience and helped build interest in the overall package. But today, that apparently is not the case.

It's never been the case.

Let's put it this way. On one card, the two main-events is The Killer Bees vs. The Hart Foundation and Tito Santana vs. Honkey Tonk Man for the Intercontinental Title. On the other card, you have Hulk Hogan vs. Andre the Giant.

Which card do you think would sell better? At the end of the day, fans don't give a damn about the midcard, they pay their money to see the main-event. It's like that in boxing, and it's like that in MMA, and it's like that in music concerts and it's like that with pro wrestling. And always has been.

Vince books for the audience by providing interesting main-event matchups. And the mid-card is just the place to give exposure and experience to the future main-eventers and future money makers.

So, if Tag Teams and the Mid Card does not sell, then why don't we do away with Tag Teams, altogether? Let's just take the next step and completely do away with them, since they are essentially useless ... and there apparently would be no harm in doing so, since they don't matter?

I thought we pretty much had in the WWE. TNA uses them because they only have 2 hours of TV each week, and tag teams are a great way to get more guys on the show.

Didn't you claim that WWE offers "tremendous variety"? I say that this claim of yours is complete, 100% Bullshit. And in this case, there is very little variety even in the matches.

Would you like to watch cruiserweights wrestle? Well, we have Rey and Sydal for that. You like women's wrestling? We have two separate divisions. You like tag wrestling? We have unified tag champions which can defend their belts on ever show. You like super heavyweights? We have Big Show and Khali. You like comedy skits? We have Santino. You like watching developmental talent? We have ECW and Superstars. You want to watch the best wrestlers in the world? We have Cena, HBK, Orton, Undertaker, etc. You want to see midgets wrestle? We have Hornswoggle.

Just what exactly does the WWE not provide?

My contention is that Vince puts out a product that is suitable for all audiences.

i thought your contention was that he books only for his amusement? Changing stories?


I don't have time for the rest of this now. Maybe in a future post.

 

[gd]

Very simple. We all accept that times have changed, given what the Internet has done to wrestling and the concept of Kayfabe being all but dead. Times have changed in this regard, as well.

Not really, the IWC only makes up 10% of the audience, so there are few "smarky" fans our there. There are still millions of fans that don't use the internet as a tool to gain wrestling knowledge.

And I point to the elimination of WCW and ECW as far as when the interest in wrestling began dying. What they offered was true product alternatives, and the entire wrestling audience was enormous during that time frame. Everyone was getting a piece of the pie back then.

I simply want to see the same thing re-created again, with true product alternatives, but Vince getting the whole pie this time.

I completely agree with this, the WWE would be much better with legitimite competition, and hopefully TNA or ROH can provide that in a few years. But, I don't think that the WWE is not even trying to get better just because there is no one else. Obviously, they want to put out the best product they can every single week.

I couldn't disagree more. Matches, promos, and storylines are 100% affected and restricted by the PG Rating. Hence, something that is more appropriate for Kids is not going to appeal to Adults. You can argue that it is "appropriate for adults" and nobody is arguing that. But the real question is "does today's programming APPEAL TO AND TARGET ADULTS AND THEIR INTERESTS?" And the answer is No. That is again, why the entire wrestling audience shrunk.

Wouldn't it have shrunk a lot more if every storyline was based on sex/drugs/etc. so that almost no kids could watch it? I agree that storylines may not be as "edgy" as some like, but the WWE would lose a lot more fans with an over the top sexed up prodcut than they would by going to PG.

I still don't think the PG rating has a huge effect on the show though. Can you give me a specific instance where a storyline today would be better without a PG rating?

Vince is trying to tell adults, young adults, little kids, older adults ... that EVERYONE should be liking the same thing. Given how today's culture is pickier than ever, the old formula of the past is broken.

Obviously, everyone isn't going to like the same thing, but Vince is right for trying to convince him that. If his prodcut is a certain way, his main goal should be to convince everyone that that way is the best way. Not everyone is going to agree, but he can do his best to try.

Well, that is a highly debatable point, because I don't know if you've noticed or not, but quite a few fans have left wrestling over the years, and I see a large amount of people unhappy online, as well ... that still follow the product, simply out of loyalty.

Yes, but they are gaining fans as well as losing them, just as any entertainment company does. Don't bring up people online again because I've already said that they make up only a small amount of the audience. And just because a few people are unhappy that means that the product is horrible? Even if the WWE was the best it could be, some people would still be unhappy.

By refining their operations, they can be doing a much, much better job creatively, because the viewers will feel they truly have a choice in shows to watch. If one gets tired of watching Raw, then tune into a completely different program with Smackdown. If one gets tired of watching Smackdown, then they can switch over to ECW, or switch back to Raw ... where you truly have different, viable brand alternatives. Thus, it helps in keeping fans interested, as opposed to simply offering one universal product.

I agree and that is what the WWE is doing right now. Raw, ECW, and Smackdown are completely different shows. As Sly would say "You're proving my point."

Nobody is arguing that WWE doesn't get by okay. They do. But what WWE has settled for is mediocrity, because of laziness due to there being No Competition. They could be producing higher revenues and expand their audience by actually going after them, as opposed to simply hoping for the best and trying to force adults and kids to sit down and tell them "this product is for all of you, AND you are all going to like it."

As I said before, they are still trying to make the product better. Vince will never be content with mediocrity and you calling the company lazy is highly unlikely, considering they are one of the biggest companies in the world. And what do you mean by going after their audience? Do you want them to break into their homes and force them to watch wrestling? The only thing they can do is make the best product possible, according to their opinion, and hope people watch it.

Yes, it essentially is. Same basic formula every single week. The show has the same look. Same open. Same close. The same format. Same GM spots. Same Main Event with interference in the last match.

How else do you want them to do it? That has been the formula of wrestling shows for years and it isn't going to change anytime soon.

The shows are essentially one giant infomercial, and it comes across that they are just going through the motions every single week. Then, they have a PPV. Then, repeat process. Go through the motions and hype next PPV. Hold PPV. Then, onto the next month. I remember when each show was very unique some 10 years ago, and it gave the impression to the viewer that

As a business, this is their goal. You could call each show an informercial, but I still look at it as entertainment. Of course they are going to spend a large amount of time hyping up their PPVs because that is how they make money to keep the company going. Simple Economics.

What do you base this opinion on? Hope, that it will?

No storyline goes on forever, I will guarantee you it ends within 2 months.

Like what, exactly? Tell me exactly which of the current storylines that you find "compelling" and keep you interested in the product.

I guess you didn't read my whole post, or you just ignored the parts that you didn't know how to respond to.

Edgy, expect the unexpected programming, that was more geared towards adults.

More interesting characters.

Far better storylines.

Less Predictable outcomes of matches.

Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock. And John Cena is not in their league.

Emphasis on the Mid Card storylines.

Emphasis on Tag Teams.

Ringside Managers.

Face/Heel Broadcasting Teams.

Once again, I already adressed all of these, if you'd take the time to read all of my other post, you could respond to them.

Big Matches that Only Occurred on PPV, which made PPV Events a big deal. Now, PPV matches are given away for Free on Raw and Smackdown, thus taking prestige away from the PPV's themselves.

I think that PPV events are still a big deal. Aside from CM Punk last year, when was the last time the title actually changed hands on free TV. I don't understand why you are against quality matches on free TV, that can only be good for a fan.

And competition, so where as if you were bored with WWE, you could watch Nitro, or ECW.

What do you want Vince to do about this? Lend some of his talent to TNA so they can compete with them? It's not his fault that they are the best wrestling company in the world.

You can only watch so much wrestling, before you realize that you essentially watch the same matches over and over, each and every week.

Once again, that is how wrestling is. Wrestlers are in fueds with each other and interact with each other each week. And I think you would agree that EVERY show is not the same EVERY week.

 

[SK]

Sorry but I cannot agree at all here, Vince Mcmahon runs the most successful wrestling business ever, I think he knows what we want to see. Jeff Hardy for example, do you honestly think Mcmahon likes this guy as an employee? A man who has 2 strikes, is a loose cannon, seems to have no commitment or concern for his own body. However, Vince put all this aside and realised that Jef is extremely over and put the title on the most unreliable man in the company.

Sure, he gets it wrong sometimes, but who doesn't? Do you honestly think Vince is so petty and stuck in his ways that he would only do what he wants to do regardless of ratings or money.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Sorry but I cannot agree at all here, Vince Mcmahon runs the most successful wrestling business ever, I think he knows what we want to see. Jeff Hardy for example, do you honestly think Mcmahon likes this guy as an employee? A man who has 2 strikes, is a loose cannon, seems to have no commitment or concern for his own body. However, Vince put all this aside and realised that Jef is extremely over and put the title on the most unreliable man in the company.

Sure, he gets it wrong sometimes, but who doesn't? Do you honestly think Vince is so petty and stuck in his ways that he would only do what he wants to do regardless of ratings or money.

You see, the sad part about it is that I think a lot of fans are disgusted with the product, but they simply watch out of loyalty ... because they have been fans for so long.

The fact that you bring up that "Vince runs the most successful wrestling business ever" is just another example of one being blinded by the guy's past accomplishments. Vince McMahon of the 80's and 90's is not necessarily the same Vince McMahon of today. People age. And they go past their prime. Wrestlers do, as we all know. But so do people behind the scenes, including Vince.

Vince enjoys the success he does, because of no competition. All of which was made possible because of the success of the Attitude Era, and him listening to advice that was given to him. Why did it take him so long to listen to that advice? Because his back was up against the wall, and his company was facing the possibility of going out of business.

The man is not a genius, like his marks may want to believe. And Vince has stated that he doesn't consider himself to be one either ... (as a WWE Merchandiser once told me from a sit-down conversation he had with Vince). The thing he has going for him is that not a lot of people really have any desire to invest in the wrestling business ... so Vince enjoys being King of the Mountain. And his fans put up with it, because that is pretty much all they have to pick from .... unless they simply want to give up wrestling altogether. Which many people have, and went over to UFC, instead.

The question is whether or not Vince listens to his audience, or if he only does what he wants to do. He does and he doesn't. As stated, I think the man only listens to his audience when his back is up against the wall ... and he literally has no other alternative.

As long as Vince can maintain his profitability, and doesn't have any serious competition, I think he is going to continue simply doing what he is doing. And that includes half-assing all of his weekly TV shows week in and week out. And as long as he maintains his profitability, and continues telling fans what he wants them to think, then more power to the man. But again, I think the lack of competition and product alternatives has caused many fans to simply accept Vince's vision, because there really are no other alternatives. They want to continue being wrestling fans, don't enjoy today's product as much as before, but don't want to move on.

Maybe it's time that some fans do move on. I'm actually contemplating doing so, because this is NOT the WWE that I fell in love with back in 1990, and not the same WWE I loved during the Attitude Era, either. The product has completely transformed since then, and it just does not interest me, whatsoever. My interest began dying around 2003 or so, like a lot of other people, but I've been a fan for so long, I hated to leave it altogether.

I went from watching all of their shows ... then stopped watching ECW. Then, I went from watching Raw and Smackdown on DVR and fast forwarding most of it. Then, I stopped watching Smackdown. Then, I made sure to watch 24 over Raw, and then switched over to Raw for the last hour. And I even stopped watching Raw when Adamle was GM.

But I am probably going to simply stop watching altogether. As I said, this simply is not the same WWE I fell in love with back and loved throughout the entire decade between 1990-2000 and onto 2002. And that is probably what fans like me realistically need to do is simply stop watching, altogether.

At the same time, I don't think I realistically left the WWE. Rather, the WWE and the WWE I loved has left me.

 

[SK]

The fact that you bring up that "Vince runs the most successful wrestling business ever" is just another example of one being blinded by the guy's past accomplishments. Vince McMahon of the 80's and 90's is not necessarily the same Vince McMahon of today. People age. And they go past their prime. Wrestlers do, as we all know. But so do people behind the scenes, including Vince.

Sorry but no-one can say WWE still isn't the most successful wrestling business ever, yes the 80s and 90s were more successful, but the WWE is still very successful and it's fan base is continuously developing by attracting in the younger fans. I'm not saying Vince is the same as he was in the 80s or 90s but he still knows what he is doing and how to entertain the fans.

Vince enjoys the success he does, because of no competition. All of which was made possible because of the success of the Attitude Era, and him listening to advice that was given to him. Why did it take him so long to listen to that advice? Because his back was up against the wall, and his company was facing the possibility of going out of business.

Vince enjoys success because of a company that HE made successful. He eliminated the competition through clever business, good programming and sure a bit of luck that WCW destroyed itself. The attitude era was born out of the Monday night wars, and because of the attitude era which HE created, the WWE beat the competition and the WWE created a bigger fan base to which McMahon obviously satisfied.

The man is not a genius, like his marks may want to believe. And Vince has stated that he doesn't consider himself to be one either ... (as a WWE Merchandiser once told me from a sit-down conversation he had with Vince). The thing he has going for him is that not a lot of people really have any desire to invest in the wrestling business ... so Vince enjoys being King of the Mountain. And his fans put up with it, because that is pretty much all they have to pick from .... unless they simply want to give up wrestling altogether. Which many people have, and went over to UFC, instead.

Agreed, the man is no genius, I am no mark for Vince, but I can accept that without him pro wrestling would be nowhere near the level it is now. Being the king of the mountain is very good and advantageous for Vince. He can afford to experiment and to make mistakes, or what you might perceive as catering to himself. Do you really think that many people have switched from WWE to UFC? And do you really think if this was the case he wouldn’t do something to stop this, rather than just make his own decisions, no. This is why you read reports of him getting so angry over low ratings!

The question is whether or not Vince listens to his audience, or if he only does what he wants to do. He does and he doesn't. As stated, I think the man only listens to his audience when his back is up against the wall ... and he literally has no other alternative.

Again allow me to bring you back to Jeff Hardy, so did what was necessary and put the title on him, not because his back was against the wall, but because it’s what the fans wanted.

As long as Vince can maintain his profitability, and doesn't have any serious competition, I think he is going to continue simply doing what he is doing. And that includes half-assing all of his weekly TV shows week in and week out. And as long as he maintains his profitability, and continues telling fans what he wants them to think, then more power to the man. But again, I think the lack of competition and product alternatives has caused many fans to simply accept Vince's vision, because there really are no other alternatives. They want to continue being wrestling fans, don't enjoy today's product as much as before, but don't want to move on.

Here you are arguing against yourself, you said WWE fans will leave for UFC, but here your saying they have no other option. I think Vince is trying his best to get ratings up by experimenting with over people such as Hardy and Punk. The lack of competition is a bad thing I do agree, it encourages lazy programming and storylines. But if the numbers drop, Vince will be trying his best to sort it.

Maybe it's time that some fans do move on. I'm actually contemplating doing so, because this is NOT the WWE that I fell in love with back in 1990, and not the same WWE I loved during the Attitude Era, either. The product has completely transformed since then, and it just does not interest me, whatsoever. My interest began dying around 2003 or so, like a lot of other people, but I've been a fan for so long, I hated to leave it altogether.

If fans are going to leave because this is not the attitude era, they should. Let it go, things change, things evolve,. But I bet you if the attitude era was brought back, people would complain that Vince is lazy by doing the same old thing. Ok, so some interest is dying out but over 175, 000 people at Wrestlemania this year show differently.

But I am probably going to simply stop watching altogether. As I said, this simply is not the same WWE I fell in love with back and loved throughout the entire decade between 1990-2000 and onto 2002. And that is probably what fans like me realistically need to do is simply stop watching, altogether.

I agree with you, if you don’t enjoy something, don’t watch it.