Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5494967)

i dont disagree that expecting 100% is unreasonable but 10% is below reasonable too. a goo draw id hope to keep 70% but if im to even consider a guy a draw id expect him to keep 40% of what is explicitly, empirically, his own audience. which punk, or the booking, failed to do. I dont know what these people thought, perhaps they loved the punk segment and hated everything else. I cant say. but 10% is very low retention. 100k die hard punk fans dropped IRL money to see him and they clearly didnt think it was worth it to do it again. Thats a truth.

Originally Posted by Triple A (Post 5494955)

Why would any rational person expect the next PPV to do the same as the one with CM Punk's first match in years...

Originally Posted by Vastardikai (Post 5494956)

It was the PPV that was supposed to be the culmination of the "Long Term Storytelling."

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5494975)

every show has a reason it works or doesnt work

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5494968)

but again the YTD is very healthy

Originally Posted by xrodmuc316 (Post 5494440)

WWE gets $16 million+ a month from Peacock for those PPVs they "devalued". After the PPV providers cut, AEW would need to sell about 2.5 million for their quarterly PPVs to come close to the money WWE makes from their PPVs. Or in other words, AEW would need to get 12 times more people to buy their PPVs that bought All Out when they had all the buzz possible.

I guess if they could get every person who watches Dynamite to buy each PPV three times for no reason, well then they might be able to actually brag about their PPV revenue.

Of course, that would not make up for the money they do not make from their TV deal. $45 million a year for 3 hours of weekly TV is about $285,000 per hour. Or in other words, WAAAAAAAY less than what Tony Khan is paying his roster.

AEW is able to put on a good product because they are alright losing a ton of money. They are only successful because they do not have to run as a sustainable business. If AEW had to run only on the money they earn, they would have to cut the expenses a lot. That would mean guys taking big pay cuts, or being outright released.

Look, I like what AEW is doing far more than when they started. They still do odd things, but the good outweighs the bad. That said, no they are not a successful company. Its the opposite of what you said, regardless of how much wrestling fans like us may enjoy AEW, they are undeniably a unsuccessful money losing company and to say otherwise it’s just being willfully blinded by fandom.

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5495224)

and to that end not being able to retain those viewers really hurts. they need growth because the business model demands it. theyre far from sustainable long term.

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5495234)

well lets not rule out how in dire straights TV is right now. Live TV has a lot of clout and thats only looking to rise. 18-49 or not. im not dismissing your point because its valid but hey could still pen a deal thats better than the one they have now in 5 years time based strictly on the shrinking market

Originally Posted by Queen Darlene (Post 5496179)

I don't think Ishii has gone to a doctor in the last decade. Man looks stiffer than a two dollar steak.

Originally Posted by Mr. Nerfect (Post 5497752)

898k for Dynamite. Down, as predicted. Whodathunk that turning a beloved babyface heel and vowing to destroy a bunch of good-hearted bums would encourage people to tune out?