View Single Post
Old 01-30-2018, 07:46 PM   #1672
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 60,894
Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
I need to engage with these numbers more. I've always been led to believe that although ad revenue from WWE is comparatively low to things with that viewership, it was still making them money. Am I wrong in assuming that ad revenue is basically how the USA Network makes its money. I'm just trying to wrap my head around why they would pay the WWE more money to keep its television afloat with diminishing returns.

Is it because that withdrawing financial support is going to stifle the product even more? If so, that's a pretty good reason to kind of resent the WWE, haha. You're locked in a dance with no real positive outcome, because it's not realistic to assume that the WWE is just going to start turning in more ad revenue. Is the idea that it's a long-term investment by the USA Network to prop them up and challenge the idea that wrestling can't advertise?

Is there some sort of money-making element I am missing? Is there some way that the WWE makes money for USA that isn't through ads? Is there something about ad revenue without much viewership > viewership without ad revenue that I'm confusing?
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote