No Mercy Buyrate

**The CyNick** · 10-17-2004, 01:04 PM

Looks like JBL's days as WWE champion are numbered, if they already weren't.

No Mercy, headined by JBL and Taker did somewhere between 180K and 190K buys, which is by far the lowest they've done in years.

In May, when Judgment Day did a little over 210,000 buys pannick set in and they took the title off Eddie. So I wonder if the same thing will happen with JBL.

Also, I wonder if this cools them off the planned idea of Taker in the main event of Mania. And with Unforgiven doing a poor number with the other half of the planned main event at Mania (Orton-HHH), I wonder if there will be any kind of shake-up. I mean I know Hunter wont be replaced, but I wonder if this speaks badly about Orton and Taker as challengers. Orton will probably be given more chances because he's young and they think he's a big star on the cusp of breaking through (insert joke here).

Eddie should be happy though, looks like there is finally some proof he wasn't the problem.

**Loose Cannon** · 10-17-2004, 01:15 PM

yep, Knew that was coming. Haven't read the Observer yet, I'm assuming you got it from there. Remember when I posted a while ago about how many tickets they sold? And they still had plenty of seats left. I could tell the PPV was going to do big time shit as there really wasn't anything special on it that fans would want to see.

They need to do a shakeup with both sides. Raw is a much better show IMO, but it's still just like "Yeah, seen that one before." And Smackdown is getting better, but it still needs "Something"

**The CyNick** · 10-17-2004, 01:33 PM

Nah, I got it off wwe.com. Meltz probably wont have it till next week.

I'm not shocked at the number, because really its not 'that' much worse than what they've been doing, but it is a clear drop form their average since Mania.

Like I said before with the attendance, all the PPVs have been doing less than stellar business attendance wise. I belive the only shows that have sold out for PPVs since Mania, were Judgment Day in LA, and Summerslam in Toronto. All the other shows have fallen short. But I dont think its just a SD problem. Orton-HHH in Portland (a city that hasn't seen a WWE PPV in....forever) did a really bad number, so did the show in Hatford, I think both were even less than No Mercy, which I believe was about 10,000. Considering the venues, I would have thought Portland would sell out in a minute, but it didn't even come close.

I think its just that people in general dont see anything different from the TVs to the PPVs. PPV matches get repeated on TV, often a week or two after the show, and the matches on TV are just as good, if not better than the ones on PPV.

Thats why I think they need to go back to the formula of shorter TV matches, and keep the long stuff for live events and PPV. At least that way you feel like you're seeing something different when you plunk down money for a show.

I'll be just interested to see if there is a knee jerk reaction on Vince's part. Hogan has been circling the bee hive for a while now, maybe he'll be dusted off. Or maybe Foley, or Austin, who knows.

**PerfectOne** · 10-17-2004, 02:59 PM

WWE's forgotten the formula for selling the PPVs.

As CyNick said, they put all their key matches on TV now. It used to be the champ wouldn't defend every week on Raw/Smackdown. If he did, it would be against jobbers who happened to have won a lot. For instance, when Rock was feuding with Foley, he still defended on TV -- but to people like Road Dogg and X-pac. People that were midcarders and above, but people you knew wouldn't be champ. When HHH was IC champ, he did the same thing, and when he was world champ. Remember when Jericho beat him for world, then had it taken away. EVERYONE HATED HHH after that, which is just what they wanted. And it was even better because it made Jericho a credible contender.

Now, the thing is, nowadays it's the HHH vs. ? sob story. Let's face it, the country is in a recession. People are losing jobs. Americans are dying over in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both the Bush and Kerry campaigns are running campaigns based on fear -- of terrorism, of job losses, of disease and death. The LAST thing the WWE should be doing is more sob stories. THEY NEED a new Rock -- someone who is FUNNY and creative. HHH isn't a bad champ, he's just a bad champ for the time. You don't put the title on the most depressing guy in the company when the people are looking to be cheered up. When people are trying to forget their own problems, they don't want a champ that bitches and moans about his own problems, or who cheats others like Orton so those people can bitch and moan about their problems.

What you need is a champ like Hurricane, or (shudders from disgust) Cena, or even Big Show. Someone that wins not from mind games or etc, but wins with comedy or at least awes the crowd with their physical prowess. There's nothing wrong with an evil champ - Rock was an evil champ, Austin was an evil champ (when he wasn't good), and both would do GREAT in today's environment. What people don't need is a champ like HHH right now, or a contender like him.

On the SD side -- JBL is just a bad choice. I think the better choices would be another run with UT, or even better a champ like Booker T (best) or Cena (worst).

**The CyNick** · 10-17-2004, 03:16 PM

Well the number speaks just as badly about Taker as it does JBL, so I wouldn't be rushing to put the strap on Taker anytime soon.

I dont think its just title matches on TV, which are actually somewhat rare now. I think they just have too many 3+ star matches on TV. I think they should go back to doing more regular tags and 6 man+ tag teams matches. They used to do that all the time back in the day, and it usually ended in a giant CF, but it was entertaining, and you didn't really give away many key matches for free. Yet, people didn't feel cheated because all the top guys wrestled. They do that sometimes on RAW, but again, I think they give away too many singles matches that should be on PPV.

Also, when they have one or two matches that go 15-20 minutes, it takes up time that could be used to get more people over. That hurts the brand exclusive PPVs, because a lot of times there will be guys on the PPVs that rarely get time on RAW to get over. Again, I think thats another arguement for going back to shorter, more explosive matches.

**Mr. JL** · 10-17-2004, 05:17 PM

Damn, it was a great Pay Per View though from bottom to the top. I'd rate it behind Wrestle Mania X-Seven in terms of the excitment and how much I enjoyed it. But it didn't draw, and that is what really matters at the end of the day when you have business. No one draws anymore, so I do not see a reason for the WWE to flip the title to another wrestler in hopes it is the miracle cure. However, the WWE usually does flip out and change the direction.

You can watch the matches online for the cost of your cable. I think there are a lot more factors in buy rates than just because "JBl is Champ", or "WWE sucks now" or becuase "Smack Down's direction sucks" and all those excuses, I really think people do not want to spend $35 bucks when they can just download on their computer. Yes, those 'excuses' maybe true... but to blame JBL for ratings/buy rates problem because he is the Champion and to not blame Guerrero for the ratings/buy rates drop when he was champion is unfair.

**Boondock Saint** · 10-17-2004, 07:17 PM

I actually thought JBL was going to lose the belt at No Mercy. I just felt like his time was up, but I also didn't want Taker with it. I was actually pretty surprised that JBL retained, however it didn't seem as though anything significant happened on the show and I'm glad I didn't order it.

But I do think JBL's time as champ is done. I haven't despised his run as much as I thought I would, and he is a good heel, but ever since he began feuding with Taker I just got bored of both he and JBL. And now he isn't even really feuding with anybody. Recent house shows have him wrestling Booker T so I guess that could possibly be the match at SurvSer? I can't see him keeping it past SurvSer but I also don't see them giving it to Booker either. Ahhh

**The CyNick** · 10-17-2004, 07:25 PM

People could download PPVs off the net in march, and Mania still maaged to do 885,000 buys.

The point is this show did about 20-30K buys worse than the worse show this year, so obviously something about it turned people off. Since JBL-Taker was the main thing that was promoted for the show, they have to take the blame. Its not fair to blame them if they did 220-230K buys like most of the recent shows have been doing, but they did worse, so its fair to blame them, despite the state of the business on a whole.

Will someone new help any? Who knows, but its clear people didn't want to see that match, so its fair to think they should go in a new direction. Of course at the same time, SD's ratings have been going up (they are now, once again doing significantly better than RAW), so maybe you could argue JBL is money for TV ratings. So maybe Taker's to blame more than JBL.

10-17-2004, 07:48 PM

Vince: "JBL, this is clearly one man's fault......Rob Van Dam."
JBL: *wipes sweat off forhead in relief*

**tazmaster** · 10-17-2004, 09:46 PM

For months I have seen people complain about 1)How many PPVs there are now and 2)How little time that leaves for storylines to develop and 3)How storylines don't continue beyond PPVs as often.

Now, you guys are saying that it must be JBL's and UT's fault? That WWE gives too many good matches away on TV? WTF! Yeah, let's just put a bunch of crap matches on that no one would care about. That's the answer. Let's put the champs up against people that would never win. There's some suspense. Save it all for the PPVs, great.

I don't think so.

Let me remind you that most of you guys hated it when they took the belt from Eddie. Also, may I point out that the main problem with buy rates is that no one cares. Is that because of the stars involved? Not really. Right now the championship booking goes from feud to feud very, very quickly while the midcard storylines are drawn out a lot longer. Maybe if that was reversed, people would be more interested in buying PPVs. You can't blame people for not caring about HHH/JBL feuding with their 3rd rival in the space of 1 1/2 months. No story progression. No ability for fans to invest themselves in it.

Anyway, maybe I'm over doing it. I just thought the general concensus was that booking was to blame for these things. Not by what stars they pushed, but by the way they did it. This thread really surprises me.

**loopydate** · 10-17-2004, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tazmaster

For months I have seen people complain about 1)How many PPVs there are now and 2)How little time that leaves for storylines to develop and 3)How storylines don't continue beyond PPVs as often.

Now, you guys are saying that it must be JBL's and UT's fault? That WWE gives too many good matches away on TV? WTF! Yeah, let's just put a bunch of crap matches on that no one would care about. That's the answer. Let's put the champs up against people that would never win. There's some suspense. Save it all for the PPVs, great.

I don't think so.

The fact that there are so many PPVs now makes the PPVs themselves less special. When you have 20 PPVs a year (each costing $30+), and you're giving away the exact same matches on free TV, buyrates will plummet. The two are directly related.

I don't think anyone is saying that it's solely UT and JBL's fault. However, the fact that the buyrate (and live attendance) were both way down from what are already abysmal numbers, you have to think maybe the main event had something to do with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tazmaster

Let me remind you that most of you guys hated it when they took the belt from Eddie. Also, may I point out that the main problem with buy rates is that no one cares. Is that because of the stars involved? Not really. Right now the championship booking goes from feud to feud very, very quickly while the midcard storylines are drawn out a lot longer. Maybe if that was reversed, people would be more interested in buying PPVs. You can't blame people for not caring about HHH/JBL feuding with their 3rd rival in the space of 1 1/2 months. No story progression. No ability for fans to invest themselves in it.

You'd better believe that Vince McMahon cares about buyrates. You think he became a billionaire by ignoring statistics? Yes, the championship booking goes fast from feud to feud. But, you know what, a few months ago, when we got Benoit/Orton (in a hastily-thrown-together main event), buyrates were higher. It doesn't matter how long the feud has taken if nobody gives a damn about the participants. JBL is amusing on television, but I wouldn't pay to watch him wrestle for 20 minutes. I haven't been entertained by UT since 1999. Hence, I didn't spend any money on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tazmaster

Anyway, maybe I'm over doing it. I just thought the general concensus was that booking was to blame for these things. Not by what stars they pushed, but by the way they did it. This thread really surprises me.

You don't think booking has anything to do with what stars get pushed?

**tazmaster** · 10-17-2004, 10:17 PM

When I said no one cares, I meant the majority of viewers. I was not refering to Vince or anyone at WWE.

I do blame the booking... Not the stars that are booked, but the story arcs used to promote the fueds and how little depth they have and the short time they give for viewers to care about it.

**The CyNick** · 10-17-2004, 11:34 PM

People in general buy shows based on the main event, or maybe the top 2 or 3 matches. So if the numbers are in the tank (compared to other shows in that time period) then its fair to blame the people in the main spots. You shoudln't make a rash decision for just one show, because anything can happen, it could be a fluke, but if you start to see a pattern, then changes may be appropriate.

I think the main event programs have went relatively slow. HHH and HBK were fueding from January to June (6 months for anyone counting) and that overlapped the Benoit-HHH program which went on from February to July. So again, thats a 6 month program. Now, after a 2 month break, they are back to HHH-Benoit-HBK as the top storyline, with Orton in the background waiting in the wings. So I could see how people would argue the problem is that there aren't enough variety in the top level programs which sell the shows.

In terms of length of matches, thats how they did it in the boom period and they did really really well. Its not that matches 'have' to be bad, but I do think that when you give away 20 minute matches for free on TV between top guys, its going to make people second guess the idea of watching PPV matches that are often times inferior to whats been on TV. Best example is the No Mercy show vs the Eddie-Angle matches that were on Smackdown. I mean what would you have rather seen Eddie vs Angle 2/3 Falls for $35 or Reigns vs Eddie and Show vs Angle for the same $35?

What was great about the booking in the late 90's/early 00's was that you'd get a ton of guys over on TV with short matches, very little would be settled on TV, but you felt drawn in to see the show the next week. Ultimately leading to big matches on PPV. The PPV matches were generally better than anything that you'd see on TV, so the people who paid to see the PPV's felt like they got their money's worth.

They also need to switch up talent a little more frequently between the brands in order to create more fresh match-ups. This goes back to RAW's problem now with HHH/Benoit and HBK as the only viable main event guys (Orton needs to be saved), and yet we've seen every combination of those guys on PPV all year, so its old, and nobody really wants to pay to see it over and over. If they had guys switch shows more often at least then there would be more match combinations throughout the year that could be explored. You could have Taker go over to RAW for a couple of months to work HHH, and HBK could come the other way to work JBL, or lets say the belt is on Kurt, and there's program people would want to see.

10-17-2004, 01:04 PM	#1
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	No Mercy Buyrate Looks like JBL's days as WWE champion are numbered, if they already weren't. No Mercy, headined by JBL and Taker did somewhere between 180K and 190K buys, which is by far the lowest they've done in years. In May, when Judgment Day did a little over 210,000 buys pannick set in and they took the title off Eddie. So I wonder if the same thing will happen with JBL. Also, I wonder if this cools them off the planned idea of Taker in the main event of Mania. And with Unforgiven doing a poor number with the other half of the planned main event at Mania (Orton-HHH), I wonder if there will be any kind of shake-up. I mean I know Hunter wont be replaced, but I wonder if this speaks badly about Orton and Taker as challengers. Orton will probably be given more chances because he's young and they think he's a big star on the cusp of breaking through (insert joke here). Eddie should be happy though, looks like there is finally some proof he wasn't the problem. Help me drain the IWC swamp!

10-17-2004, 01:15 PM	#2
Loose Cannon I'm all there is Posts: 31,811	yep, Knew that was coming. Haven't read the Observer yet, I'm assuming you got it from there. Remember when I posted a while ago about how many tickets they sold? And they still had plenty of seats left. I could tell the PPV was going to do big time shit as there really wasn't anything special on it that fans would want to see. They need to do a shakeup with both sides. Raw is a much better show IMO, but it's still just like "Yeah, seen that one before." And Smackdown is getting better, but it still needs "Something"

10-17-2004, 01:33 PM	#3
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	Nah, I got it off wwe.com. Meltz probably wont have it till next week. I'm not shocked at the number, because really its not 'that' much worse than what they've been doing, but it is a clear drop form their average since Mania. Like I said before with the attendance, all the PPVs have been doing less than stellar business attendance wise. I belive the only shows that have sold out for PPVs since Mania, were Judgment Day in LA, and Summerslam in Toronto. All the other shows have fallen short. But I dont think its just a SD problem. Orton-HHH in Portland (a city that hasn't seen a WWE PPV in....forever) did a really bad number, so did the show in Hatford, I think both were even less than No Mercy, which I believe was about 10,000. Considering the venues, I would have thought Portland would sell out in a minute, but it didn't even come close. I think its just that people in general dont see anything different from the TVs to the PPVs. PPV matches get repeated on TV, often a week or two after the show, and the matches on TV are just as good, if not better than the ones on PPV. Thats why I think they need to go back to the formula of shorter TV matches, and keep the long stuff for live events and PPV. At least that way you feel like you're seeing something different when you plunk down money for a show. I'll be just interested to see if there is a knee jerk reaction on Vince's part. Hogan has been circling the bee hive for a while now, maybe he'll be dusted off. Or maybe Foley, or Austin, who knows.

10-17-2004, 02:59 PM	#4
PerfectOne Posts: 97	WWE's forgotten the formula for selling the PPVs. As CyNick said, they put all their key matches on TV now. It used to be the champ wouldn't defend every week on Raw/Smackdown. If he did, it would be against jobbers who happened to have won a lot. For instance, when Rock was feuding with Foley, he still defended on TV -- but to people like Road Dogg and X-pac. People that were midcarders and above, but people you knew wouldn't be champ. When HHH was IC champ, he did the same thing, and when he was world champ. Remember when Jericho beat him for world, then had it taken away. EVERYONE HATED HHH after that, which is just what they wanted. And it was even better because it made Jericho a credible contender. Now, the thing is, nowadays it's the HHH vs. ? sob story. Let's face it, the country is in a recession. People are losing jobs. Americans are dying over in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both the Bush and Kerry campaigns are running campaigns based on fear -- of terrorism, of job losses, of disease and death. The LAST thing the WWE should be doing is more sob stories. THEY NEED a new Rock -- someone who is FUNNY and creative. HHH isn't a bad champ, he's just a bad champ for the time. You don't put the title on the most depressing guy in the company when the people are looking to be cheered up. When people are trying to forget their own problems, they don't want a champ that bitches and moans about his own problems, or who cheats others like Orton so those people can bitch and moan about their problems. What you need is a champ like Hurricane, or (shudders from disgust) Cena, or even Big Show. Someone that wins not from mind games or etc, but wins with comedy or at least awes the crowd with their physical prowess. There's nothing wrong with an evil champ - Rock was an evil champ, Austin was an evil champ (when he wasn't good), and both would do GREAT in today's environment. What people don't need is a champ like HHH right now, or a contender like him. On the SD side -- JBL is just a bad choice. I think the better choices would be another run with UT, or even better a champ like Booker T (best) or Cena (worst).

10-17-2004, 03:16 PM	#5
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	Well the number speaks just as badly about Taker as it does JBL, so I wouldn't be rushing to put the strap on Taker anytime soon. I dont think its just title matches on TV, which are actually somewhat rare now. I think they just have too many 3+ star matches on TV. I think they should go back to doing more regular tags and 6 man+ tag teams matches. They used to do that all the time back in the day, and it usually ended in a giant CF, but it was entertaining, and you didn't really give away many key matches for free. Yet, people didn't feel cheated because all the top guys wrestled. They do that sometimes on RAW, but again, I think they give away too many singles matches that should be on PPV. Also, when they have one or two matches that go 15-20 minutes, it takes up time that could be used to get more people over. That hurts the brand exclusive PPVs, because a lot of times there will be guys on the PPVs that rarely get time on RAW to get over. Again, I think thats another arguement for going back to shorter, more explosive matches.

10-17-2004, 05:17 PM	#6
Mr. JL Posts: 4,834	Damn, it was a great Pay Per View though from bottom to the top. I'd rate it behind Wrestle Mania X-Seven in terms of the excitment and how much I enjoyed it. But it didn't draw, and that is what really matters at the end of the day when you have business. No one draws anymore, so I do not see a reason for the WWE to flip the title to another wrestler in hopes it is the miracle cure. However, the WWE usually does flip out and change the direction. You can watch the matches online for the cost of your cable. I think there are a lot more factors in buy rates than just because "JBl is Champ", or "WWE sucks now" or becuase "Smack Down's direction sucks" and all those excuses, I really think people do not want to spend $35 bucks when they can just download on their computer. Yes, those 'excuses' maybe true... but to blame JBL for ratings/buy rates problem because he is the Champion and to not blame Guerrero for the ratings/buy rates drop when he was champion is unfair.

10-17-2004, 07:17 PM	#7
Boondock Saint Posts: 8,795	I actually thought JBL was going to lose the belt at No Mercy. I just felt like his time was up, but I also didn't want Taker with it. I was actually pretty surprised that JBL retained, however it didn't seem as though anything significant happened on the show and I'm glad I didn't order it. But I do think JBL's time as champ is done. I haven't despised his run as much as I thought I would, and he is a good heel, but ever since he began feuding with Taker I just got bored of both he and JBL. And now he isn't even really feuding with anybody. Recent house shows have him wrestling Booker T so I guess that could possibly be the match at SurvSer? I can't see him keeping it past SurvSer but I also don't see them giving it to Booker either. Ahhh

10-17-2004, 07:25 PM	#8
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	People could download PPVs off the net in march, and Mania still maaged to do 885,000 buys. The point is this show did about 20-30K buys worse than the worse show this year, so obviously something about it turned people off. Since JBL-Taker was the main thing that was promoted for the show, they have to take the blame. Its not fair to blame them if they did 220-230K buys like most of the recent shows have been doing, but they did worse, so its fair to blame them, despite the state of the business on a whole. Will someone new help any? Who knows, but its clear people didn't want to see that match, so its fair to think they should go in a new direction. Of course at the same time, SD's ratings have been going up (they are now, once again doing significantly better than RAW), so maybe you could argue JBL is money for TV ratings. So maybe Taker's to blame more than JBL.

10-17-2004, 07:48 PM	#9
I-Hate-You Guest Posts: n/a	Vince: "JBL, this is clearly one man's fault......Rob Van Dam." JBL: wipes sweat off forhead in relief

10-17-2004, 09:46 PM	#10
tazmaster A mark's mark Posts: 84	For months I have seen people complain about 1)How many PPVs there are now and 2)How little time that leaves for storylines to develop and 3)How storylines don't continue beyond PPVs as often. Now, you guys are saying that it must be JBL's and UT's fault? That WWE gives too many good matches away on TV? WTF! Yeah, let's just put a bunch of crap matches on that no one would care about. That's the answer. Let's put the champs up against people that would never win. There's some suspense. Save it all for the PPVs, great. I don't think so. Let me remind you that most of you guys hated it when they took the belt from Eddie. Also, may I point out that the main problem with buy rates is that no one cares. Is that because of the stars involved? Not really. Right now the championship booking goes from feud to feud very, very quickly while the midcard storylines are drawn out a lot longer. Maybe if that was reversed, people would be more interested in buying PPVs. You can't blame people for not caring about HHH/JBL feuding with their 3rd rival in the space of 1 1/2 months. No story progression. No ability for fans to invest themselves in it. Anyway, maybe I'm over doing it. I just thought the general concensus was that booking was to blame for these things. Not by what stars they pushed, but by the way they did it. This thread really surprises me.

10-17-2004, 10:17 PM	#12
tazmaster A mark's mark Posts: 84	When I said no one cares, I meant the majority of viewers. I was not refering to Vince or anyone at WWE. I do blame the booking... Not the stars that are booked, but the story arcs used to promote the fueds and how little depth they have and the short time they give for viewers to care about it.

10-17-2004, 11:34 PM	#13
The CyNick Make the IWC Great Again Posts: 8,922	People in general buy shows based on the main event, or maybe the top 2 or 3 matches. So if the numbers are in the tank (compared to other shows in that time period) then its fair to blame the people in the main spots. You shoudln't make a rash decision for just one show, because anything can happen, it could be a fluke, but if you start to see a pattern, then changes may be appropriate. I think the main event programs have went relatively slow. HHH and HBK were fueding from January to June (6 months for anyone counting) and that overlapped the Benoit-HHH program which went on from February to July. So again, thats a 6 month program. Now, after a 2 month break, they are back to HHH-Benoit-HBK as the top storyline, with Orton in the background waiting in the wings. So I could see how people would argue the problem is that there aren't enough variety in the top level programs which sell the shows. In terms of length of matches, thats how they did it in the boom period and they did really really well. Its not that matches 'have' to be bad, but I do think that when you give away 20 minute matches for free on TV between top guys, its going to make people second guess the idea of watching PPV matches that are often times inferior to whats been on TV. Best example is the No Mercy show vs the Eddie-Angle matches that were on Smackdown. I mean what would you have rather seen Eddie vs Angle 2/3 Falls for $35 or Reigns vs Eddie and Show vs Angle for the same $35? What was great about the booking in the late 90's/early 00's was that you'd get a ton of guys over on TV with short matches, very little would be settled on TV, but you felt drawn in to see the show the next week. Ultimately leading to big matches on PPV. The PPV matches were generally better than anything that you'd see on TV, so the people who paid to see the PPV's felt like they got their money's worth. They also need to switch up talent a little more frequently between the brands in order to create more fresh match-ups. This goes back to RAW's problem now with HHH/Benoit and HBK as the only viable main event guys (Orton needs to be saved), and yet we've seen every combination of those guys on PPV all year, so its old, and nobody really wants to pay to see it over and over. If they had guys switch shows more often at least then there would be more match combinations throughout the year that could be explored. You could have Taker go over to RAW for a couple of months to work HHH, and HBK could come the other way to work JBL, or lets say the belt is on Kurt, and there's program people would want to see.