|WWE Stock – Lifetime|
WWE U.S. Audience Profile:
- 61% are male
- 15% are ages 12-17
- 67% are ages 18-49
- 41% are males 18-34
- 33% are non-white
- 29% have a HHI of 75K or higher
- 15% have a HHI of 100K or higher
So the WWE lost a bunch of money, huh? Over a TV deal and a gamble on the WWE Network. Thankfully it’s more-or-less theoretical money and I doubt the stock dive will affect attendance / the fanbase.
If you were the WWE what would you do to solidify investor relations? What can the WWE do to generate the same massive positive impact the WWE Network had on stock?
My theory? I present to you “The Troll Zone”
Reality TV owes quite a lot to Pro Wrestling – they both in a sense dramatize competition and feature largely manufactured interpersonal drama between cast members. The only issue is that Reality TV still has Kayfabe. I vote the WWE shows it who’s boss.
With WWE already having a presence on Total Divas and such – it’d be easy to have feuds and story-lines branch out to things like concerts, MMA fights, sporting events, TMZ, and so on. In my world I envision John Cena throwing out the first pitch at a Red Sox game and getting attacked by Bray Wyatt, or “The Whole World in his Hands” music coming on over the PA system.
If TMZ catches Triple H in an airport, I want Triple H complaining about Daniel Bryan / The Shield etc – in a way that’s still professional and ‘out of character’ but still enough to juice the given feud. Remember the time Bret Hart went H.A.M on Will Sasso and the cast of Mad TV? How AWESOME was that as a kid (sure the feud turned to shit but the moment was cool!)
Even better is if the WWE captured these things in a way they didn’t deliberately acknowledge (but actually did themselves). For example if they obtained some disturbing ‘fan captured’ footage of Kane shopping at a local hardware store for implements of destruction for his PPV match.
If the WWE did this right, they’d find themselves in a situation where they’re getting coverage on a variety of networks, TV shows, and internet sites that the buzz would grow rapidly just because of how interesting and wide-reaching it could be – especially if they kept the media outlets they’re trolling mostly in the dark. Sure, most people would know it’s fake, but the fact we wouldn’t be 100 percent sure, would make it worth talking about.
Essentially I want everything the WWE does that isn’t a typical promo, to feel dynamic enough where we have no idea where the next plot point will come from – a youtube video, public appearance – anything. Change the WWE from “Anything can happen in the WWE” to “Anything can happen where the WWE goes”.
But what we’ll get in reality is probably a consolidation and the WWE Relying on the tried-and-true. I got a chance to talk to a pretty popular TV producer a few years ago and she made a GREAT point about television.
Essentially that when things go rough for a TV show that relies heavily on ratings and they start to wane, they focus on the things that they ASSUME their audience is there for. So for CSI it’s all the cool science / gruesome stuff. For Scrubs it was smaller stories self-referential humor, Lost double-downed on the characters, and so on.
So for the WWE I thiiink this means if we see a change at all, it’ll mean more Cena, more Triple H, more Shield, more Bryan, and I would imagine more special attractions. Don’t be surprised if the WWE backs up a BRINKS truck to CM Punk and Steve Austin at some point because they’re known commodities that put asses in seats.
Hi Scott I know you don’t 100% agree with what happened but there is no doubt that Brock Lesnar is now the hottest heel in wrestling. Just curious to how you/the blog would book him from here on in until next Wrestlemania? Here’s an idea I came up with: I could see him not wrestling and just gloating until Summerslam where he is brought in as Triple H’s “final solution” for taking the title off Daniel Bryan. He could then decimate Bryan in a match similar to the Punk match last year. From there he basically takes the title hostage doing his only matches at Survivor Series and Royal Rumble – getting decisive wins against say Cena and Batista – and taking the title in to Wrestlemania. If he is still as over as he is now, Bryan can then fall into self doubt and a tailspin before coming back strong and winning the Royal Rumble. Meanwhile Triple H begins to realise that he has created a monster and at Wrestlemania he takes out Paul Heyman allowing Bryan to become the ultimate underdog and dethrone Lesnar at the biggest show of them all. This would bring both the Bryan/HHH stories and Brock Lesnar story full circle in my eyes with Taker’s loss giving Bryan as well as Brock the boost to carry storylines for a full year. Obviously if Bryan isn’t as over then you can easily replace him with the next hot babyface (not Cena)
I think you’re absolutely on the right path with this one and that’s kind of what I expect to happen, in fact.
I mentioned this in a thread earlier but wanted your opinion. Is Paul Heyman going to manage babyface Cesaro and mega-heel Lesnar simultaneously with both of those guys in those roles? I don’t recall a manager handling heels and faces at the same time in the past. It certainly would be an interesting dynamic, and if it could be pulled off by anyone it’s Heyman. In this “Reality” era, it makes sense that Heyman should be able to advocate for anyone in any role and simply be that, a mouthpiece with no real personal “feelings” about anything other than his clients’ interests. Almost like the ultimate “spokesman-for-hire”, kind of like a lawyer I guess.
Well the thing with Heyman is that they don’t really need any more big babyfaces at the moment, whereas the heel side is really weak in the midcard, so now they have a hot cool heel like what Ziggler used to be who can carry things underneath the main event. It’s not important to turn Cesaro as much as it’s important to ELEVATE him, and putting him with Heyman in that role absolutely does it.
Scott, Heyman’s promo last night for Lesnar was great. What do you think the ideal path is for Lesnar from here? I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt in assuming that Lesnar won’t be losing to anybody anytime soon on account of him beating the streak. How would you book him? I still can’t believe they had him lose to Cena two years ago at Extreme Rules when they obviously had built him up as something special leading up to that pay-per-view, so I’m hoping they’re able to recapture some of that magic. You would think that Daniel Bryan and him will eventually meet down the road, because what else is out there for Brock?
Well he DID declare himself the #1 contender a while ago, remember…
Any chance Taker just lost his love of working when Bearer died? Like, I know Bearer wasn’t consistently part of the gimmick anymore, but he was his friend, and I could see some of the magic being gone with somebody who was such a big part of his career passing. I know Bearer passed before the Punk match, but this kinda stuff can take a while to process (or, maybe Taker still doesn’t like Punk and didn’t wanna give him the Streak)… anyways, I just think it’s interesting that Bearer died, and Taker (presumably) retired like 14 months after.
Given how beaten up he looked last year, it’s far more likely he just realized that he couldn’t go any longer. Taker wanted to give the streak to Brock because Brock is a “real fighter” and that’s Taker’s mindset. Honestly, as much as everyone hates Cena, the redemption arc for him in 2012 should have been where he (should have) lost to Brock, had a shitty year until January, and then revived himself as a top level guy by breaking the streak. Winning the title from Rock meant nothing because he’s already had the title a million times. Breaking the streak would have meant SOMETHING at least.
No, I did not write it, and am not looking for a plug. Thought it raises some surprisingly valid points. Your thoughts?
Given that no one but UT and Vince knew, that’s giving them WAY too much credit on this one.