INTERESTING INFORMATION ON PPVs

[VR]

As a follow up to the Clash thread i've done a ppv thread listing the JCP(Brief) Turner (88-01) top 25 ppv events. They are listed in order they are ranked. The number next to each prior to event title is where they rank when compared to other ppvs with the same title.

(01) BUNKHOUSE STAMPEDE 88
(01) STARRCADE 87
(01) BASH 88
(02) STARRCADE 97
(03) STARRCADE 88
(01) HALLOWEEN HAVOC 89
(02) BASH 90
(01) WRESTLEWAR 90
(03) BASH 89
(02) CHI-TOWN RUMBLE 89
(03) CAPITAL COMBAT 90
(02) HALLOWEEN HAVOC 90
(02) WRESTLEWAR 89
(04) STARRCADE 1989
(04) STARRCADE 1990
(03) WRESTLEWAR 91
(06) STARRCADE 1998
(03) HALLOWEEN HAVOC 97
(01) SUPERBRAWL 98
(01) SUPERBRAWL 99
(03) SUPERBRAWL 91
(04) BASH 91
(07) STARRCADE 1991
(04) HALLOWEEN HAVOC 94
(08) STARRCADE 1996

Interesting that JCPs first PPV SC 87 (which was not seen as abroad do to Vinnies bs) ranks as the highest rated SC of all time, and #2 all time in PPVs for both brands.

JCPs first ppv of 88 is their highest ranked ever. They had three ppvs in 88 and all three are in the top 5 of 25. This leads me to the conclusion that the thing that hurt JCP more than anything was not booking, it was not watching your funds. FINANCIAL MIS-MANAGEMENT hurt this brand more then anything, period. With all the bunps and bruises they still had a top notch product. Much better in a lower dollar era then anything Turner ever put out. 1988 smoked any year of the WCW regime, without 4hrs. of primetime live tv a week as well. OR the pocket books.

All 4 of the Turner regimes first year ppvs in 1989, well you can include SC 88, rank in the top 15 out of 25.

All 4 events form 1990 also hold spots in the top 15 out of 25.

Four out of 5 1991 ppvs rank in the top 25 excluding Havoc 91.

The years of 92 and 93 are not represented (Duh)

In closing it compares very well with the Clash thread I posted in terms of what they had and where they failed. You can see it by events and years within the company. This company hit it in 1997 and partial 98, but in no way where they as powerful in those times has they could of been (with better management prior) I feel for Sting more then anyone. I feel for Flair, but at least he had a career. Sting had a great career, but could of had an even greater one if this company would of looked at their Clash and PPV numbers a little better.

VR

[stompingground]

This seems to back up what Ole says, that they spent too much money. Its refreshing to see facts used on a wrestling board. Good job.

[ssteward]

The first two are incredibly odd to me, because they were considered flops at the time. I guess it could be possible that they could be #1 & #2 if the ranking is based on being watched in the highest percentage of homes they were available in (and Starrcade 87 had a lot less home availability as compared to Survivor Series the same night), but for sheer buys, from what I've understood they would have to be closer to the bottom.

[VR]

As for the WWF, well they were in a league of their own.

WWF WrestleMania 3 1987 did over a 10.0
WWF Survivor Series 87 did over a 7.0

JCPs numbers at SC 87 were over a 3.0 and Bunkhouse was over a 3.0 as well.

I also am aware of JCPs problems with cable outlets. I also realize the "big boom" in the late 90's tends to get blown out of proportion. People were watching on free television, key word being FREE.

In the pre-mature days of ppv you also didn't have one/two ppv's a month. It's so watered down. YOu also got more bang for your buck, as in they were not as priced as they are now, but boxing still had inflated numbers at that time.

As for the Wrestling Wars of the late 90's, more money was made due to dollar value, merchandising, and less house more live television. Seats were overpriced and still are. I truly believe though that the buisness was much more popular earlier on then in this time frame.

What's interesting is even the WWF has terrible numbers in 1992, 93, 94 just like WCW. THis was a major downturn in buisness. WWF had changed it's title formula and WCW didn't realize STING was their money in the bank and failed to look at what numbers they were putting out with him at the Clashes and earlier ppvs. By the time they took the title off him at BAsh 92 it was too late.

VR

[clawmaster]

Shannon is on the right track. The number of PPV buys is far more important than the PPV buy rate.

You take the number of PPV buys and multiply it by the cost of the PPV. Then the PPV operators like In Demand take their cut. I think the cut is/was something like 59% for the PPV operators and 41% for the wrestling companies.

So to figure out how much money was taken in by PPV,

number of buys x cost of the PPV x .41