WWE is the billionaire blockbuster, NJPW is the Best Picture

>>2632771
So they're both shit?

I like how we pretend NJPW is some kind of backyard fed or some shit, they're a major promotion drawing in big dimes.

>>2632771

The WWE is like Michael Bay. Everyone knows it is shit and no one expects anything else, but somehow it is still very successful.

>>2632777
>big dimes
Not in real money. The yen is in free fall.

>>2632783
Do go on.

>>2632777

Compared to the WWE it is still very little...

Nobody in America apart from obese basement-dwelling smarks who have never taken a shower have even heard of NJPW. WWE = wrestling.

>>2632777
no one even knows what njpw is

>>2632771
*tip*

>>2632807
Reminder that WWE's yearly profits for the last financial year were just $800K.

>>2632816
New Japan has been mentioned on-camera by WWE plenty of times.

WWE is MCU, NJPW is Marvel's netflix

More like: WWE is the billionaire blockbuster, NJPW is the 144p quality youtube video of a autistic child's webcam recording.

>>2632777
>Dimes

Wasn't their profit only like 2 million USD last year?

>>2632840
That would put them over a million above WWE

>>2632828
Imagine posting this.

>>2632822

Reminder that a quarter isn't a year.

Also reminder that it still would be about on par with NJPW even though it was a quarter with a lot of "out of the ordinary" expenses.

>>2632856
Either way, a company that puts on a lot more shows in much bigger venues doesn't reflect well on WWE

>>2632862
That entirely depends on the reasons.

For 2016 their overall numbers were fine. The biggest problem is, that everything hinges on the national TV contract with USA and the next one will likely not be as generous.

New Japan? More like Poo Japan.

>>2632871
>#1 Contender to WWE's top championship is a poo-in-loo

>>2632844
As a publicly traded company all of WWEs financials are available. They made way more than 1 million.

>>2632940
I think I just read wresltmenaia did $2million in traditional ppv buys for payback alone.

>>2632959
I meant either or,it was mentioned in their investment meeting and I just woke up.

>>2632940
>>2632959
Be honest now: do you even know what Gross or Net mean?

>>2632973
Network has about 1.5 million paid subs as well.

It's beyond unrealistic to say they are operating at near cost.

>>2633012
Good post. Could use sauce.

>>2633012

They actually make very little from the network in terms of profit.

And considering they are giving it away for free for Mania instead of selling the views they must lose so much money they could otherwise make with Mania...

>>2633021
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2017/0403/624879/updated-wwe-network-subscriber-count-revealed/

Also reported by several other outlets.

>>2633033
Compared to what does it make little profit? They still do traditional ppv as well.

>>2633059
>Compared to what does it make little profit? They still do traditional ppv as well.

Compared to its costs.

Yeah, but how many people are buying Mania, when you literally (and legally) can get it for free?

File: BBD.png (2MB, 1322x636px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1322x636px

>>2632771
Nope

>>2633059
And how many of them are around for the other 11 months of the year?

Mandatory reminder that WWE expected and needed over 2 million domestic subs just to break even.

>>2633075
At 400,000 it was profitable on it's own, at 1 million it was outpacing ppv buys at the time because of how ppv revenue breakdown works.

http://variety.com/2014/digital/news/profit-in-sight-nearly-670000-subscribe-to-wwe-network-1201153433/

>>2633086
Not true. Investors expect stuff to grow over time. That's why they set goals like 2 million. The 1.5 paid has been holding for about 6 months now.

>>2633086

Yeah, how are they supposed to get 2 million paying domestic subs, when hardly 2 million are still watching the more or less free program on cable?

>>2633091
>unsourced math from a gossip rag

>>2633095
It was WWE's own goal they set up to meet a year after launch.

>>2633096
I never said WWE set realistic expectations.

>>2633099
>Loss of Pay-Per-View Revenue. WWE Network carries programming that we historically offered through payper-view
channels. On a pay-per-view basis, such programming resulted in worldwide revenues of $82.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2013, which was the last full year prior to our launch of WWE Network

>Network subscription net revenues were $138.8 million and $69.5 million, representing 21% and 13% of total net
revenues in 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Straight from WWE's annual

http://www.annualreports.com/HostedData/AnnualReports/PDF/NYSE_WWE_2015.PDF

If PPV's were profitable then the network is kicking its ass.

>>2632771
WWE - Saving Private Ryan
NJPW - Shakespeare in Love

>>2633132
>If PPV's were profitable

They weren't: that's why the WWE stopped doing them.

>>2633086
They needed 1 mil to break even

>>2633132
>If PPV's were profitable then the network is kicking its ass.

You are aware that they have much larger costs with the Network as well right? All those extra stuff on there isn't made for free...

>>2633140

That number doesn't really mean anything anymore. If your production for the Network gets more expansive you also need more subs to cover the costs.

>>2633146
They have a deal with the people who do the MLB network. They aren't doing it themselves. Again that's in the report.

>>2633141
Would love to see a source that says whatever deal they have is more than 40% its revenue, which ppv's are known to be, also pulling in less money than the network is the last year it was available.

Just a funny note from that report though listed as a risk

>The unexpected loss of the services of Vincent K. McMahon could adversely affect our ability to create
popular characters and creative storylines or could otherwise adversely affect our operating results.

>>2633155
>They have a deal with the people who do the MLB network. They aren't doing it themselves. Again that's in the report.

You are aware that I'm not talking about the server infrastructure but the shows they put on there, right?

>>2633155
>Would love to see a source that says whatever deal they have is more than 40% its revenue, which ppv's are known to be, also pulling in less money than the network is the last year it was available.

They could still sell the bigger PPV, specially Mania. They are giving it away for literally nothing. Just do the free month, cancel it after that and you got Mania for free.

>>2633171
Too circumstantial to know exactly what's going into those shows. I'm sure they weren't spending $20 million for foley to make an ass out of himself, and clips shows.

About 500k people did that for this years wm, which is about a quarter of total subs at the 2million mark. the 1.5 paid has been the average for a while. And they do still sell regular ppvs. There are people dumb enough to spend $60 on mania compared to using a streaming service for whatever retarded reason.

>>2633195
>Too circumstantial to know exactly what's going into those shows. I'm sure they weren't spending $20 million for foley to make an ass out of himself, and clips shows.

I think le Meltz actually put costs and revenue right next to each other, but I don't have the Newsletter myself.

File: open-uri20150422-12561-b2fy7x_ad1e55ca.jpg (43KB, 300x450px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 300x450px

>>2632771
failed blockbuster is better

>>2632816
njpw airs on american television, and casuals don't exist to begin with

WWE is /asp/, /wooo/ is NJPW

>>2632771
Yeah pretty much, they are both shit like most movies these days.

>>2632771
I'd go with movies based on video games for WWE. There hasn't been a decent one in like 20 years, but there's still an audience out there that keeps watching.