Cena/Lesnar Buyrate

[SuperFist]

147,000

This is what hot shotting gets you. The WWE's current biggest money making match can't even beat the worst UFC PPV numbers.

[Adam]

147,000

This is what hot shotting gets you. The WWE's current biggest money making match can't even beat the worst UFC PPV numbers.

Ouch, that is bad. They'll probably respond by moving Lesnar/HHH up from Summerslam to No Way Out.

[TheMilkJug]

what. That's just american numbers. The overall buyrate did well, in fact, over 35000 more than last year. Which is almost 2 million more in money, which pays off over half of Lesnar's salary in one night. 251,000 buys, which by the way ,is better than some of UFC's worst PPVs.

DO SOME FUCKING RESEARCH YOU TROLL SUPERFIST

[TheMilkJug]

Oh and it did the most buys for a april non wrestlemania ppv since 2006!

[Captain Howdy]

I think the point is that they tried to put Lesnar/Cena at the same level or a step above Rock/Cena and it failed miserably. Thus far Lesnar as an investment has not paid off as PPV buy rates did not meet what they were expecting and the ratings for Raw have been on a steady decline since he showed up on WWE TV.

The point of bringing in a high-profile personality is so that the ENTIRE product can flourish. Is WWE losing money on this venture? No. But they're not gaining any money, or new viewers to expose the rest of the roster to, and that's the problem.

[TheMilkJug]

i think people had ridiculous expectations, and please don't say stuff like "what they were expecting" when you're just like me, a fucking mark, your not in the business and even if you were, youre not there, so you dont know what was expected.

i think people online have too ridiculous expectations and dont really get how wrestling works. Not you per say, but in general. me included.

[Captain Howdy]

and please don't say stuff like "what they were expecting" when you're just like me, a fucking mark, your not in the business and even if you were, youre not there, so you dont know what was expected.

I think it's pretty astute to make the assumption that they were expecting an INCREASE in ratings, not a DECREASE.

[TheMilkJug]

Nobody said Lesnar was a ratings draw, just a ppv draw. Lesnar has never ever drew ratings.

[Captain Howdy]

Nobody said Lesnar was a ratings draw, just a ppv draw. Lesnar has never ever drew ratings.

Wow.

Kid, you are just really talking out of your ass now. Let's go over the basics here...

1, The Raw the night after a PPV is supposed to garner high ratings to reflect the fallout from the night before.

2. The Raw the night after WrestleMania is (arguably) the biggest Raw of the year for the company.

3. They debuted Lesnar on that episode for this specific reason.

4. The subsequent episodes of WWE TV leading into the next PPV are for buildup to the next main event, and thus crucial towards building PPV buy rates.
a)If the episodes of WWE TV leading into the PPV are declining in the ratings, it will lead to a lackluster buy rate for the PPV.
b)If the PPV has low sales, the next night's episode of Raw will reflect it with another decline in ratings, thus starting the cycle over again.

5. There is more ad space in a 2-3 hour episode of WWE programming than there is on a PPV.
a)there is a substantial amount of revenue earned from TV episodes that outnumber the amount of PPV's per year.

6. If Lesnar has "never ever drew ratings" he wouldn't have been signed by Vince, especially for the amount he's making. Television is the bigger part of the picture.


You don't need to be "in the wrestling business" to get this, but you DO need to understand business as a whole.

[TheMilkJug]

1, The Raw the night after a PPV is supposed to garner high ratings to reflect the fallout from the night before.

Lesnar had no control over the ratings for that night due to nobody knowing whether he'd be there or not.

2. The Raw the night after WrestleMania is (arguably) the biggest Raw of the year for the company.

See the above post.

3. They debuted Lesnar on that episode for this specific reason.

Yes, to debut him with as many eyes as possible, but more importantly, because it prevents the annual post-mania lull.

4. The subsequent episodes of WWE TV leading into the next PPV are for buildup to the next main event, and thus crucial towards building PPV buy rates.
a)If the episodes of WWE TV leading into the PPV are declining in the ratings, it will lead to a lackluster buy rate for the PPV.
b)If the PPV has low sales, the next night's episode of Raw will reflect it with another decline in ratings, thus starting the cycle over again.

Ratings are highly overrated and a .1 or .2 difference isn't going to effect buyrates much, as proven by the buys being HIGHER for this event than previous ones with higher ratings.

5. There is more ad space in a 2-3 hour episode of WWE programming than there is on a PPV.
a)there is a substantial amount of revenue earned from TV episodes that outnumber the amount of PPV's per year.

Yes, of course, but .1/.2 differences RARELY effect the advertising revenue (at least until contract renewal occurs)

6. If Lesnar has "never ever drew ratings" he wouldn't have been signed by Vince, especially for the amount he's making. Television is the bigger part of the picture.

No... he's never drawn ratings. Do some fucking research. Drawing ratings = an increase of ratings because he's there. RAW never increased thanks to Lesnar. SD never increased thanks to Lesnar. Lesnar isn't a TV draw, he's a box office draw. Anyone with a brain knows this.

do some fucking research and stop pretending you know about how this works because clearly you don't. TV is important, especially with PPV being labeled "a dying business" but Brock is clearly brought in for the PPV buys, live gates, and merch, which altogether easily has paid off his contract as it is with the next 3-4 big PPVs only added bonus.

You're arguments are flawed and. if i may say so, downright embarrassing. Thanks, come again when you have a better understanding of the big time!

[Captain Howdy]

Whatever kid. I went to school for business. You're just a pissy wrestling fan who always has to be right.

And just an FYI - .1 - .2 in the Neilsen ratings = over 100,000 homes. That isn't a "little" amount.

[TheMilkJug]

When it comes to advertising income WWE will see, it is. Do you know how advertising revenue works? If not, again, do research.

And pissy? i'm the opposite of pissy! I'm the one who's saying it's good, not some jaded smark douche who has to criticize everything on an internet forum because it makes my dick hard!

[SuperFist]

what. That's just american numbers. The overall buyrate did well, in fact, over 35000 more than last year. Which is almost 2 million more in money, which pays off over half of Lesnar's salary in one night. 251,000 buys, which by the way ,is better than some of UFC's worst PPVs.

DO SOME FUCKING RESEARCH YOU TROLL SUPERFIST

If anyone is a troll, it's you.

My point was and still is that

1. Cena .vs. Lesnar is the biggest money making match they have right now.
2. Instead of giving it time to build, they hot shot it onto the first PPV after Wrestlemania.
3. Yes, even with the international numbers, it only did 251,000 buy's, which is a huge disappointment considering what the numbers could have been.
Also, do you really think that 35,000 more buys than last year is a great number? Last years buy rate was up 27,000 from 2010. And lets compare the top matches.
2011 had John Cena .vs. The Miz .vs. John Morrison coming off of an awful Wrestlemania Main Event
2012 had John Cena .vs. Brock Lesnar coming off of a highly rated Cena .vs. Rock WM Main Event and with Brock Lesnar coming back to the company after a very successful UFC run.

And don't tell me to do research because I didn't include the international number, when you are throwing out ridiculous claims that this one PPV paid "over half of Brock Lesnar's contract" because it definitely didn't. There's too many variables to make a statement like that. And Brock's salary wasn't my argument anyway. It was the fact that the WWE had so much momentum after Wrestlemania and they got white hot heat for Brock's return only to squander it away.

[TheMilkJug]

my point was that they made enough money to pay it off, not that they definitely used it. But with merch, the shows he was on, the live gate, and extra ppv buys, it's really easy to see.

Making well over a million dollars more in money is a great thing. Is it the best it could have been? Probably not, but it's not some huge disappointing number!

Anyone who expected UFC like buys are crazy.

I do apologize to howdy however if i seemed agressive!

[SuperFist]

Do you really think 251,000 buys for a John Cena .vs. Brock Lesnar match considering everything surrounding it is a good number?

Because that's the point of the thread. Which you obviously couldn't understand.

[TheMilkJug]

Bigger than a recent UFC ppv and brought in more money than any April non Mania PPV since 2006. Yes, that's good.

Not everything is about what could be. What is is what we discuss and WWE DID make way more money than they have normally so thats a good number. is it AS good as it COULD have been? no. but that doesnt make it not good. it makes it not great.

[SuperFist]

Bigger than a recent UFC ppv and brought in more money than any April non Mania PPV since 2006. Yes, that's good.

Not everything is about what could be. What is is what we discuss and WWE DID make way more money than they have normally so thats a good number. is it AS good as it COULD have been? no. but that doesnt make it not good. it makes it not great.

Actually, the last UFC PPV drew 700,000 buys.

[TheMilkJug]

"Better than a recent UFC ppv" isn't the same as the last UFC PPV. Reding comprehension please.

[SuperFist]

"Better than a recent UFC ppv" isn't the same as the last UFC PPV. Reding comprehension please.

Wow, you should go into politics with these piss poor debate skills.

The last UFC PPV would be the most recent. And I love how you misspelled reading while trying to insult my "reding comprehension".

And just to let you know,
UFC 145 had 700,000 buys
UFC 144 had 375,000 buys
UFC 143 had 400,000 buys

[SuperFist]

Maybe we should go back to UFC 142 where they sold only 225,000 PPV's, which was considered a disaster. Oddly enough it's only 26,000 buys less than Lesnar-Cena. Other than that, you'd have to go all the way back to 2008 to find a worse draw.

Does that bring my reading comprehension back up?

[TheMilkJug]

142 was a disaster which is my point. UFC draws regularly double that. So that was a low buy. You said WWE couldn't beat the worse UFC PPVs. You were clearly proven wrong. Hyperbole isn't a defense, by the way, it just makes you look more desperate.

[SuperFist]

You're just proving my point.

UFC 142 which was headlined by the lowest drawing champion in the company was a complete and utter disaster and was only 26,000 buys under Extreme Rules which was headlined by the biggest money makers that the WWE has. UFC 142 was like the WWE having The Great Khali .vs. Lord Tensai as the headliner.

Here it is, plain and simple. Cena-Lesnar outdrew only 1 UFC PPV in the past 4 years. If they had given that angle more time, it probably could have done double.

[enforcer]

Lesnar had no control over the ratings for that night due to nobody knowing whether he'd be there or not.

Let me just add that it was announced that Lesnar had signed back on with the WWE just before WM so I've got a pretty strong hunch there were people expecting him to be there that night.

[TheMilkJug]

Let's please not exaggerate the number of fans that read dirt sheets.

And again, inever said it was a great buy, just a good one and far from terrible. you said it didnt outdraw any ufc show, i proved it wrong. plain and simple.