TPWW Forums - View Single Post - DISCUSSION - What was the total profit for the WWE in years 1999, 2000, and 2003?

**The CyNick** · 05-03-2004, 12:19 AM

Long Winded response to Heyman #546:

In terms of the profits thing, 98/99, 99/00 will all be ahead of this year in terms of profits, this year's profits ($30+ mil) may or may not pass the numbers form 01/02. So it will likely be #3 or 4. However you have to remember that 00/01 was the XFL, which was the best year wrestling profits wise for the company, but the XFL brought the overall numbers down to $16 million (the wrestling profits that year were a little less than $100 million). So in theory 03/04 will be #4 or 5 for wrestling. The reasoning is more about cost cutting measures that have very little to do with the brand extension, but like I said before it does help them run more international events, which are very profitable (at least for now).

Before the brand extension they were running two shows per night (most nights) except for TV tapings. They would run an A show and then a B show, usually headlined by RVD. The problem with that is its tough to advertise to an international market that you'll be coming with a "B show" line-up. Of course you could argue right now, SD is a B-show, but if we're talking about the concept of brand extension, the two shows should be equal in order to create two viable touring brands.

No TV exec is going to know who Billy Gunn is, let alone consider it as a reason to give a promotion a TV spot. Depth doesn't matter to these people, all they care about is who will bring in the ratings, and Billy Gunn has NOTHING to do with that. I would bring in the same ratings as Billy Gunn, and I've never worked a match in my life.

There were some good feuds in the time period of 99-02, but at the same time, the guys who were stars in 1999 were the only guys who were stars in 2002. The point is, in those years no NEW talent was created until the brand extension. A lot of that had to do with the fcat that you had the same guys from 99 on top, and they were trying to protect their spots, as a result you didn't see meaningful JOBs to create new stars. Angle is the perfect example of how one roster hurts pushes, yes he was given the title, but the top spots on the shows went to Austin, HHH, Taker and Rock. Same thing happened with Jericho. At least after the brand extension they had shows booked around Lesnar, Angle and now we're seeing Eddie and Benoit on top. That wouldn't have happened with one roster.

All of the guys like Austin, Rock and HHH who were created as top stars did so when there was nobody in the company who could carry the ball. As a result they were forced to create new stars in order to stay in business. But the point I was trying to make is that when you look at the time period after those guys were made nobody else was made. Why? Because all the established guys were trying to keep their spots on the card. If you only have one roster that means you only have say 4 top spots, at least with two shows you have 8, its simple mathematics.

Orotn and Cena may have still got pushes, but you have to recognize the guys like HHH, HBK, Taker, Austin, Angle, Lesnar and co would have the top spots locked up. Guys like Cena and Orton would have had to fight for the middle-bottom spots and wouldn't get the TV time they are now. You look at Cena and he's #2 on SD, that would have NEVER happened with one roster so quickly. What happens then is that fans dont get to see them skyrocket to the top and they are more likely to lose faith in them (ala RVD, Jericho and otrhers). Most of the guys who ended up as major draws were protected like crazy or got immediate pushes to the main events right form the start.

Brock didn't leave because he was too successful, he left because he's a professional athlete and the WWE treats their wrestlers like circus animals, thats what forced him to leave. The WWE likes their workers to be marks for the business so that when they get treated like $hit they dont compalin, they ask for more. Hulk Hogan was pushed to the moon and he's been in the business for well over 20 years. Beisdes, having two rosters doesn't mean you HAVE to push a guy really quickly, it just allows the opportunity to push someone if they are good enough.

Taker is on most of the house shows, the speciall attraction thing is just a gimmick for TV. HBK is basically on a full schedule at this point, he works most of the house shows, and he's one of the focal points of every TV, so I dont know where you get that from. In terms of putting Cena and Orton on TV twice a week, I say they would get burned out too fast. Some people think Cena is already over doing it with one rap per week, imagine if you had to hear two per week?

In terms of fans creating new stars, thats how it 'should' work, but it doesn't in practise with one roster (and sometimes even with two). I can point to Jericho in 99 and 2000, RVD in 2001 and 2002 and Benoit in 2001 and others as examples of guys who were ready to run with the ball but due to established guys being protected they never got the proper push. Again, with only one roster there are only so many spots at the top, and once again, the established guard will fight to stay on top. If Vince had the balls to push these guys aside it would be a different story, but we know he doesn't. The only time he creates new stars is when he's out of viable main events and he's forced to (hence the panic). And ratings were not going "upwards" as you say when Lesnar was champ, they had been going down pretty much since the eraly part of 2001, when business peaked.

Yes, Kurt won the title with the rosters unified, but so what? The point is he didn't get a chance to be a top guy, until after the brand extension. Tell me if I'm worng, but I assume you understand that a guy can have the World Title and still not get pushed (if you dont understand I'll send you some tapes of Jericho in 2001/02). Once again it goes back to more spots = more stars.

As for Eddie, he won the title when SD was clearly the #1 show, its not his fault that they have turned SD into ECW. The point isn't about how good or bad SD is, its that because of the brand extension we get Eddie on top on one show and Benoit also on top on anothr show. That would never have happened with a unified roster. Instead we would get HBK vs Taker for the WWE title, followed by HHH vs HBK, followed by HHH vs Taker, followed by Taker vs HBK and so on.

05-03-2004, 12:19 AM	#6
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	Long Winded response to Heyman #546: In terms of the profits thing, 98/99, 99/00 will all be ahead of this year in terms of profits, this year's profits ($30+ mil) may or may not pass the numbers form 01/02. So it will likely be #3 or 4. However you have to remember that 00/01 was the XFL, which was the best year wrestling profits wise for the company, but the XFL brought the overall numbers down to $16 million (the wrestling profits that year were a little less than $100 million). So in theory 03/04 will be #4 or 5 for wrestling. The reasoning is more about cost cutting measures that have very little to do with the brand extension, but like I said before it does help them run more international events, which are very profitable (at least for now). Before the brand extension they were running two shows per night (most nights) except for TV tapings. They would run an A show and then a B show, usually headlined by RVD. The problem with that is its tough to advertise to an international market that you'll be coming with a "B show" line-up. Of course you could argue right now, SD is a B-show, but if we're talking about the concept of brand extension, the two shows should be equal in order to create two viable touring brands. No TV exec is going to know who Billy Gunn is, let alone consider it as a reason to give a promotion a TV spot. Depth doesn't matter to these people, all they care about is who will bring in the ratings, and Billy Gunn has NOTHING to do with that. I would bring in the same ratings as Billy Gunn, and I've never worked a match in my life. There were some good feuds in the time period of 99-02, but at the same time, the guys who were stars in 1999 were the only guys who were stars in 2002. The point is, in those years no NEW talent was created until the brand extension. A lot of that had to do with the fcat that you had the same guys from 99 on top, and they were trying to protect their spots, as a result you didn't see meaningful JOBs to create new stars. Angle is the perfect example of how one roster hurts pushes, yes he was given the title, but the top spots on the shows went to Austin, HHH, Taker and Rock. Same thing happened with Jericho. At least after the brand extension they had shows booked around Lesnar, Angle and now we're seeing Eddie and Benoit on top. That wouldn't have happened with one roster. All of the guys like Austin, Rock and HHH who were created as top stars did so when there was nobody in the company who could carry the ball. As a result they were forced to create new stars in order to stay in business. But the point I was trying to make is that when you look at the time period after those guys were made nobody else was made. Why? Because all the established guys were trying to keep their spots on the card. If you only have one roster that means you only have say 4 top spots, at least with two shows you have 8, its simple mathematics. Orotn and Cena may have still got pushes, but you have to recognize the guys like HHH, HBK, Taker, Austin, Angle, Lesnar and co would have the top spots locked up. Guys like Cena and Orton would have had to fight for the middle-bottom spots and wouldn't get the TV time they are now. You look at Cena and he's #2 on SD, that would have NEVER happened with one roster so quickly. What happens then is that fans dont get to see them skyrocket to the top and they are more likely to lose faith in them (ala RVD, Jericho and otrhers). Most of the guys who ended up as major draws were protected like crazy or got immediate pushes to the main events right form the start. Brock didn't leave because he was too successful, he left because he's a professional athlete and the WWE treats their wrestlers like circus animals, thats what forced him to leave. The WWE likes their workers to be marks for the business so that when they get treated like $hit they dont compalin, they ask for more. Hulk Hogan was pushed to the moon and he's been in the business for well over 20 years. Beisdes, having two rosters doesn't mean you HAVE to push a guy really quickly, it just allows the opportunity to push someone if they are good enough. Taker is on most of the house shows, the speciall attraction thing is just a gimmick for TV. HBK is basically on a full schedule at this point, he works most of the house shows, and he's one of the focal points of every TV, so I dont know where you get that from. In terms of putting Cena and Orton on TV twice a week, I say they would get burned out too fast. Some people think Cena is already over doing it with one rap per week, imagine if you had to hear two per week? In terms of fans creating new stars, thats how it 'should' work, but it doesn't in practise with one roster (and sometimes even with two). I can point to Jericho in 99 and 2000, RVD in 2001 and 2002 and Benoit in 2001 and others as examples of guys who were ready to run with the ball but due to established guys being protected they never got the proper push. Again, with only one roster there are only so many spots at the top, and once again, the established guard will fight to stay on top. If Vince had the balls to push these guys aside it would be a different story, but we know he doesn't. The only time he creates new stars is when he's out of viable main events and he's forced to (hence the panic). And ratings were not going "upwards" as you say when Lesnar was champ, they had been going down pretty much since the eraly part of 2001, when business peaked. Yes, Kurt won the title with the rosters unified, but so what? The point is he didn't get a chance to be a top guy, until after the brand extension. Tell me if I'm worng, but I assume you understand that a guy can have the World Title and still not get pushed (if you dont understand I'll send you some tapes of Jericho in 2001/02). Once again it goes back to more spots = more stars. As for Eddie, he won the title when SD was clearly the #1 show, its not his fault that they have turned SD into ECW. The point isn't about how good or bad SD is, its that because of the brand extension we get Eddie on top on one show and Benoit also on top on anothr show. That would never have happened with a unified roster. Instead we would get HBK vs Taker for the WWE title, followed by HHH vs HBK, followed by HHH vs Taker, followed by Taker vs HBK and so on.