Has the 'Mania buyrate been announced yet?
 

I'm just wondering what it pulled in compared primarily to recent years. Especially with the "20 million dollars" spent on Mayweather...

(Yes, I know he wasn't paid that...Hence the quotes...Before anyone decides to point it out)

He was NOT paid twen—

Oh.

:lol:

20 Bucks and Cab Fare.

No they haven't announced anything yet.

World Wrestling Entertainment® set both attendance and ticket sale records at WrestleMania XXIV tonight at the Florida Citrus Bowl in Orlando.
WWE® grossed more than $5.85 million in ticket sales, making it the highest grossing live event in WWE history and in the history of the Citrus Bowl.
---
Still no buyrate info, but there is that. I'm surprised they haven't announced at least preliminary data yet.

On a related note, the ratings for the first Raw after Mania are in. Raw did hours of 3.5 and 3.2, which is hugely up from before Mania. Unfortunately, it's not musch stronger than recent weeks, and this is COMING OFF OF THE BIGGEST EVENT OF THE YEAR.

It obviously didn't do what they wanted. The question now is how badly they did do, since they released the overnights last year right away.

Yeah, we can be certain that if it did well, it'd be all over the place.

That Raw was MAKE OR BREAK IT for WWE and the ratings it pulled were UNACCEPTABLE.

Well, it's obvious why. Old guys like CM PUNK are getting PUSHED while guys in their PRIME like MARK HENRY are PUSHED TO THE SIDE!

How is it obviously worse than they wanted? I had read estimates of 1.4 million as of that monday morning. Of course, these could be wrong. But that would make it more bought than wrestlemania 23 was, with encores all week to add on.

That was Yahoo!Sports that reported the new WWE record for buys, as well as Mayweather promotions.

I'm not sure if this is true, that remains to be seen. But take that as you will. I don't understand "it obviously didn't do what they wanted"

If it did what they wanted they would have released the preliminary numbers asap and pushed them. By now they would be out.

Well I think they wanted 2 million buys, which is nearly double what they set the record with last year. So I highly doubt they met that goal, but I don't think anything could have met that goal.
1.4 million + buys is hardly dissapointing. It's the record.

I'd like to see that, actually. Thing is, I haven't. Which is why this thread was made in the first place. I mean, if you're sitting on info, by all means, share. However comma, WWE hasn't mentioned anything so far, even on their corporate site.

And the fact that they're bragging about other figures and not bringing this up kind of does indicate, you know...Bad things.

Well I highly doubt Wrestlemania did bad things. I'll try to find the Yahoo story asap. I still don't see how the assumptions you guys are making are more credible than a major news outlets reporting. I'm not aruging you guys really either, just presenting what I heard and where I heard it from.

I'll look into it

Also, aren't you two the ones who were spelling doom and insisting that it would fail, and that "people didn't know who Mayweather was" and all that. I mean, with all due respect, don't you guys kinda want it to fail so that you're right? That might be why you think it failed.

They would cum in their pants if they did 2 million buys.

Ideally, they wanted 1.4 million. I think it's touch and go if they got it. I'd be shocked if they didn't hit 1.2 million anyway.

They stated that was their goal. Of course, nobody including them expected it. I think they just said that

I'm not finding that story, but I know for a fact I read it on Yahoo Sports. If anyone wants to help me search for it, or a similar story feel free.

Found it...

http://sports.yahoo.com/box/news;_yl...ki-floyd040208

There are no hard Mania-related numbers that I noticed (I skimmed it), but there's this:

"The WWE isn’t expected to release pay-per-view results until next week, though Ellerbe said he was told the show has already done better than the previous record of 1.25 million sales."

I love how hard you're trying to push a motive on us.

But still, your stupidity aside, can you explain why they wouldn't be running with these numbers if they were so good? WWE generally broadcasts their numbers when they're hot and hides them when they're not. Last week's Raw is another such example. So if the numbers were as good as or better than expected, wouldn't they run with that?

I mean, they're already running with the arena sales.

Wasn't Yahoo! Sports also reporting Mayweather as making 20 million dollars?

Which contradicts this, in the same article:

He is part of the best-selling bout in boxing history and his appearance at WrestleMania 24 on Sunday in Orlando, Fla., was such a hit, Ellerbe says, that the wrestling pay-per-view record of 1.25 million is expected to be topped.

Note the word "expected."

On a side note, does anyone else kind of expect promoters to say things which are, you know, Bullshit?

If it didn't top 1.25 I'll be a monkey's uncle

If Mayweather didn't make 20 million dollars, Jeritron will probably still be a monkey's uncle.

Well you know how figures can be made up, 77% of TPWW knows that.

Do you have a source for this? 82% seems highly dubious.

His source is Yahoo.

In related news, Mayweather made 20 million dollars. I saw in on Yahoo.

I demand a link for this 82%

In related news, wrestlemania failed because I say so

come on dude, man the fuck up

Man up to your retarded assertions?

Can I make up your argument for you and then scream at you to man up, too?

I would have simply used the term "strawman," but that would doubtless involve Terranrich and Afterlife.

Misinformation. They want you to believe it didn't do well so they can say 'hey you, we did great, see you next year. Meanwhile on Raw, we have people dressed up as Hilary and Barack fight in the ring, watch RAW!'

So it's a swerve? BRILLIANT!

I wonder how long we'll have to wait to see the buyrate, though.

For the record, NoJabbaNoBogRoll's 82% claim has been stricken due to lack of evidence. We are back at 77%

It's been a few weeks now; you'd think they'd have released some kind of information on the buy rate. I mean, they've touted it as the best selling ticket sales for a WrestleMania, but not the PPV numbers. Probably means Floyd Mayweather wasn't as big of a draw as they thought he was going to be, and frankly, I'm not surprised.

Everything's true except "A few weeks."

However, when a PPV does as expected or better, they usually release results within a few days. It's clear they can tabulate the results fast, at least preliminaries, but if the preliminaries are good, they run with them until the big numbers are in.

My bet, and this is still speculation, is that the preliminary numbers aren't numbers they want to wave around in front of their investors. As such, they're hoping the final results (Which are more accurate) will be better, so we're not seeing anything. Speculation, as I said, but reasonable. After all, Mania cost them a lot more this year, so they need to make more money than last year, and not just by a little.

Mayweather probably was a draw, but WWE were obviously banking on him being a huge draw, and spent a lot on him and promoting him. If that money turns out to not be worth it, if he wasn't as big of a draw as they'd hoped, it will reflect poorly.

But then, I just want Wrestlemania to "fail," whatever that means. I mean, I know outright failure isn't possible, so that can't be it. And WWE will turn a profit on the event, so that can't be it, so I can only think that there MUST be some other definition of "fail" I'm wanting...

The promoter of Wrestlemania 3 says the show did 78,000 and yet the marks still refuse to accept it didn't do 93,000 because WWE says it did.

Yeah, I keep forgetting that idiots will believe blatant lies.

Benoit didn't have steroids in his system!

Okay, seriously, I just checked their corporate site, and I still don't see an announcement. What the Hell?

If they're not telling us, they're most likely hiding something, like the fact that the buyrate was nowhere near their predictions, and the money they wasted on Floyd Mayweather was truly a waste.

The WM 24 buyrate is going to go the way of Chris Benoit, "the F," and "I still remember."

91bilion

Blurred, hung, then fired?

I bet WWE's going to come out and say that the $20mil was a work. Because if it's as low as I think it is (considering how long it's taken) they're going to have some explaining to do otherwise.

There's no doubt it was a work. That was about 20% of their profits last year. Even WWE wouldn't stake that kind of green on a single person in this kind of gamble.

WWE wasn't a publically traded company then either.

According to Dave Scherer on PWInsider the buyrate is *RUMORED* (he hasn't heard the actual number yet) to be around 1.1million, about 10% less than last year's.

Wonder if that's going to be remotely accurate.

Perhaps it a disappointing buyrate. Knowing they spent much more cost wise on the PPV and not having that show in the buyrate?

Well, at least now I know how I want it to fail.

Though I think a more accurate statement would be that I predicted that the cost of the event was probably not worth the eventual gain, and that even Wrestlemania had a finite cap.

As a rationalist, and as a scientist, I'm more interested in testing the outcome than specifically being right, because even being wrong will teach me something.

- Early numbers indicate that WrestleMania XXIV did approximately 1.1 million buys with 700,000 to 800,000 of them from North America. This will place it at number two on the list as one of the most watched pay-per-view events in WWE history.

That's apparently from Meltzer, though Boone and company reported it, so it could just as well be from the crazy guy on the corner who tells Fox about the "Inside Job."

Okay, it's been a month now, and nothing on WWE's corporate site.

No official numbers. Scherer and Meltzer both have reported similar preliminary numbers, but those are all we have to go on right now.

This is odd, and really does make me think Mania didn't do as well as predicted. Though I'm still looking for real numbers, since I'd rather not just assume they did poorly.

Unless their calculator broke

That makes sense.

Mike Adamle had the only record of the buyrates on him when he walked out on ECW.

/Breaking News

And he botched calling them.

Assuming 1.1 that is a stinging disappointment (IMO) You spent all the money to bring in Mayweather, you're obviously looking for mainstream attention, and I don't mean from ESPN and whatnot, I'm referring to buys and fans - consider, wasn't last year was 1.25?

Then again, if you were a casual interested party and paid for WM looking to see something resembling semi legit with Mayweather, you walked away pissed anyways

Sadly, I think this'll reflect more on Mayweather, even though it should reflect on the WWE. I have no doubt that Mayweather's a draw, considering his record-setting PPVs. But WWE's a joke, and Mayweather's fans aren't necessarily going to follow him to Wrestlemania.

I'm sure some did, but it's a step down from real fighting to fake fighting. There's a lot of similarity between sports and sports entertainment, but really.

I'm gonna make a couple of assumptions here:

1. That everyone who was booked for WM 23 was also booked for WM24, so in terms of salary alone, WWE spent about the same. Off the top of my head, I don't think I'm missing anyone. Also assuming no one is making drastically less than they were the previous year.

2. The use of venue cost as much if not more than WM 24. Figure all of the special tools and lights needs for an outdoor event. All the items needed to waterproof said tools and lights and protect people in case of rain (which was in the forecast) Also consider the mass amounts of fireworks that would eventually rain down on fans, that amount of fireworks not being possible at an indoor event.

3. At that point, if your costs don't already exceed WM 23, bringing in Mayweather definitely brings it over the top. I'm not going to use 20 mil, and I don't have an actual number, so insert whatever number you'd feel most comfortable with.

Subtract 1.1 million buys, down from the previous year's 1.25

If that's not the definition of failure you're looking for, I'm not entirely sure what is

I didn't know I was looking for a definition of failure.

it was a failure because Cena didn't win

Meh, they clearly made the buyrate announcement disappear like they do some of their storylines. its been "Vince'd".

:shifty:

Why, did it choke out its wife and kids?

The good news is the quarterly report's coming up, and it should include buyrate info.

It really was a sub-par showing, and the card didn't help in terms of drawing a buyrate. The only real money match was Flair vs. HBK, and to most fans, that's not enough to throw down $50 and a whole Sunday afternoon for WrestleMania.

I mean, I was there in the Citrus Bowl and even I realized how shitty the card was, despite all of the fanfare and craziness of being there live. I remember watching Cena vs. Rhyno at some house show in 2002, and that was a better match than most of what I saw at WrestleMania 24.

The main events weren't spectacular looking on paper. Fans are used to Rock vs. Austin, or Rock vs. Hogan, Jericho vs. HBK, Benoit winning the title - big moment stuff like that. There was no big moment match at WM besides Flair retiring, which we all knew was going to happen, and Undertaker losing his streak, which we all knew wasn't going to happen. It was a highly, highly predictable WrestleMania showing, and didn't really feel like the "showcase of the immortals," but more like "the show between No Way Out and Backlash."

A lesser buyrate from WM23 is not a shock.

Also, as far as Mayweather goes, it's like what KK said before - he draws huge in his own territory of boxing, but that doesn't neccesarily mean all of those fans will follow him over to the "fake sport" of pro wrestling.

It's like "Rocky 3." If the whole film was about his build-up to fighting Thunderlips in that Wrestler vs. Boxer match, and that was the finale for the third act, it would have drawn shit, been shit, and probably would've been the end of the franchise. The reason being: it's hokey and it's fake. Rocky vs. Clubber Lang is a REAL boxing fight and a rightful and true drawing main event.

So, what am I saying with this? I'm saying that bringing in Floyd Mayweather was a waste of money and a waste of airtime.

Well I don't know if anyone has pointed this out but I was looking at the Business drivers and it looks like that report puts the figure between 1m and 1.1m (preliminary estimates) which compares to between 1.2m and 1.3m in 2007 and between 900k and 1m in 2006. No Way out looks to have done a lot better than the last few years though...

I'm going to agree that Mayweather didn't do alot. Haven't watched WWE in a while so don't know what the 'draws' are for most of their events nowadays. They done something decent last year at Wrestlemania though and no idea what happened two years ago.

From the time it seemedthat Americans didn't know much about Mayweather compared to the rest of us in the world, while Trump is more well known in America (the Apprentice?) whereas apart from a businessman (if that) the rest of us in the world wouldn't know a lot about him.

My conclusion: concentrate on getting a bigger US name in terms of popularity. Not exactly rocket science but y'know.

I'm sure WWE would have preferred De La Hoya, who I believe would have been a legit draw... In fact, I'm sure the only reason Mayweather was even an option was because he's set to face De La Hoya and they were trying to ride that wave. Unfortunately, without De La Hoya, Mayweather clearly isn't a wrestling draw.

But I'll say again that Mayweather did a great job at taking the beating and I wouldn't mind seeing him again.

Actually, I'm betting they saw the roll he was on, saw the bank from his record-setting fight, and then saw dollar signs. That simple.