Thread: TPWW's Official Dirty Sheets News Thread
View Single Post
Old 01-30-2018, 07:35 PM   #1671
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 60,919
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+)
At some point it's a case of "What have you done for me lately," though. Bonnie Hammer's not there. The ratings and viewership were cute at the start, but at some point that needs to translate into revenue, or it's a case of "we're not going to pay you hundreds of millions more to be down $60 million" or whatever. Surely. That's how money works, right? At some point a hot-shot young executive looking to build their stock in the company is going to come in and say "Um, guys. I can save us millions and millions by just cutting out this WWE crap no one wants to watch anymore."

Loyalty might extend to the point that they don't replace Raw or SmackDown with other wrestling, which it is possible to theorize that people would still watch out of habit and you can realistically pay a lot, lot less for, but I don't think that's the same as willingly running at a deficit because Vince McMahon was useful to you in 1993. In fact, USA has dropped them before. It's not inconceivable that it's a pragmatic possibility again.
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote