Based.

>>2852158
>what is inflation
Dumb Edrone

X-Pac really wants a job.

That just means WWE has ran off everyone except the most rabid fans who will spend thousands of dollars for merch, tickets and subscriptions.

File: ShortSpanishCanine.gif (2MB, 368x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 368x288px

>>2852164
gotta pay for all that meth

>>2852162
Adjusted for inflation the 99 revenue would still be around 550m

>what is inflation
>what are more revenue streams

most of it is from the USA tv deal where they expected much better ratings

if they don't get an equally good deal next time they are in trouble

He was the 1-2-3-4 kid right?

>>2852170
Haitch mirin

1998 WCW had revenue of 356 million, adjusted for inflation is 531 million.
>WWE has taken over an industry and shrunk it MASSIVELY

>>2852187
Why don't ya use the year WCW died ya pinhead

>>2852198
Doesn't count because McMahonetty ruined the industry with his shenanigans and nobody wanted anything to do with wrestling. Vince working himself into a shoot.

Since when were revenue and profit the same thing?

Are we sure those numbers aren't manufactured like manias numbers.

>>2852212
>kayfabing the stockholders

>>2852158
Just curious, what was their profit?

1999 (over $68 million) and 1998 ($56 million) is WWE's two biggest years profit wise.

I can guarantee you their profit margins were much higher in 1999 than they are today. Revenue is pretty meaningless.

Inflation?

>>2852219

$33 million last year.

Adjusting the 2017 figure for inflation, in 1999 money their revenue is about 500,000,000.

And this after them creating or expanding many different divisions in their company to create more revenue: books, movies, licensing, the network, internet etc.

So they spend more now to create more content, but they profit less because their profit margin is much smaller now. This is while their viewership as shrunk, as evidenced by declining ratings and attendance to events.
>then why the make more monies?
Because, again, they make more of everything now to sell that their audience will buy. Plus they're in more markets now around the globe.

>>2852230
and it still didn't cover the $37 in dividends the wwdummies payed out

>revenue, not profit
>not controlling for inflation

>>2852261
$37,000,000 i mean

>Adjusting for inflation
>about 494,410,000
>Only make 234,806,000 more 18 years later after going public, going PG, partnering with Mattel and Hanna Barbera and launching a subscription service featuring every show they've ever done

>>2852158

The fact that the company is a bit bigger means nothing about the wrestling quality. You might as well say, "Well I am bigger than you and i can beat you up, so I am right", it's the same mentality. It's retarded. WWE sucks, no amount of creative accounting will fix that.

>LE INCREASE REVENUE BY 33% MEME

>revenue

not an argument

File: 1471979553872.jpg (98KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 400x400px

>>2852162
>Edrone

Nice meme, faggot

File: todo fine.png (665KB, 1280x622px) Image search: [Google]

665KB, 1280x622px

>WWE will always pay their bills no matter how shitty they get

Why isn't X-Pac blackballed from WWE for being in a legit porno?

>>2852158
>>2852171
>>2852219
>>2852263
I looked it up and last year despite having record revenue was the 11th most profitable year in the last 19 years (since the attitude era began)

Revenue =/= profit. They weren't very successful last year.

>>2852417
The man literally ripped himself a new asshole in-ring. WWE figured he'd suffered enough

>>2852162
They actually do make more money.

Everyone bashes PG, but it is good for business in a lot of ways. WWE has a lot more sponsorship opportunities because it's a lot less controversial thanmit was back in Attitude.

Also, WWE is in a lot more territories now than it ever has been, and that PG rating makes them a lot more compatible to the varying markets.

People tend to look at the US TV ratings as the be all and end all, and that's no longer strictly the case. Not that I'm undermining the importance of TV, as WWE still make the majority of money from TV exposure, but it's no longer the sole metric it once was.

>>2852428
SEETHING

>>2852450
I'm really not seething just trying to teach you guys something

It wasn't a very profitable year for them, not a TERRIBLE year, but not great. I fear this year will be much lower and I don't want to see WWE die, just improve their product

>>2852444
You can easily tell this anon started watching wrestling in 2014

>>2852444
Very well said. I like a edgier product also, but reality advertising revenue/TV rights price tag means a hell of a lot more than ratings alone.

You can do a hot rating but if nobody wants to be associated with it, it's not really worth it.

BTW XPac is a scumbag but he's Kliq so he like the rest of the hanger-on junkies get "alternative rules" but I will be more than glad not to ever see that greaseball.

>>2852459
Ignore Carter. The point you were making was common sense. Even if they gain revenue, their expenditure has increased, the Performance Center and NXT burns fucking holes. It's also proof that WWE will not improve their product since they have a monopoly

>>2852158
Money mark

>>2852158
But what about profit my dude

>>2852158
Now post profit.

>>2852490
>>2852484
It was around 33 million iirc, it could be at 37 like other anons have said I'd have to look through their report again. This puts it at 11th/19 most profitable since 1998. (2004 is in 10th at 39 million profit for reference)

>>2852433
So what? It wasn't in their ring

>>2852500
So profit was much better in 1999 in relation to revenue

The Network model is much better financially, so the fact that they aren't turning tremendous profits is troubling.

They aren't making new fans, which is tremendously troubling long-term.

The USA Network deal is about as sweet as it will ever get right now, and they still aren't turning great profits.

There are some really troubling trends that are circling around WWE right now.

>>2852539
Their USA deal expires in about two years, so they better figure something out quick.
They can't try to hustle a new deal when the ratings have dipped so drastically.

>>2852551
Nobody will be watching flow-TV in 2020. The medium has been dying for at least a decade now.
WWE will be able to show RAW and Smackdown on the WWE Network or make a deal with Netflix.

>>2852551
Shit as WWE's ratings are, they're still one of the most watched things on the USA network. Raw and Smackdown made USA the most watched "cable entertainment network" for Monday and Tuesday nights in the 18-49 y/o demographics.

Bottom line, USA needs the WWE as much as WWE needs them.

>>2852606
Considering that, in that time, WWE got rid of all serious mainstream competition, and has effectively had a monopoly on pro wrestling for more than a decade, it'd be nearly impossible or them to have LESS money than they did in 1999.

That doesn't mean they're successful though. They're doing good sure, averaging $9 million profit each year, but for a business, particularly one with a monopoly over their industry, you have to wonder how much money they could have right now if they made better decisions and didn't simultaneously alienate casuals and piss off smarks.

>>2852158
1999 -- Xpac was on the roster
2017 -- Xpac was not on the roster

Tranny slammer btfo

>>2852158
>Revenue

How much of that was Profit

>>2852164
Pac could care less. He is sitting on a lot of cash and still earns six figures.

>>2852162
Inflation has not doubled currency in 18 years you stupid fuck

>>2852170
sean is living rent free in your head.

>>2852729
>still earns six figures.
lol no

File: 1490749892257.jpg (84KB, 719x666px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 719x666px

>>2852729
If he was earning 6 figures he wouldn't have been caught smuggling drugs across state lines.

>inflation, as has been mentioned numerous times
>x-pac in charge of knowing the difference between revenue and profits

>you now remember that vince burned all his attitude era profits on the xfl

People not knowing the difference between revenue and profit is so goddamn annoying. They're getting this high levels of revenue due to their TV deal they signed in 2014, which increases each year. It's up in 2019 and the ratings are in the toilet. No way they'll get as good of a deal.

Profit, off the top of my head, in 1999 with inflation was over 100 million. Last year was about 33 million. Reminder Vince lost all of the Attitude era profits on the XFL.

>>2852158
Yeah but the product is so much shittier. Fuck you 2017 sensitive faggots.

You would fucking hope revenue would be higher with a thousand times more means of money making ventures.

look at wolfcuck seething in the comments of that tweet HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
https://twitter.com/TheRealXPac/status/883819235293577216

>>2853045
hes not wrong though

1999 WWE Profit = $68,973,000 (adjusted for inflation = $101,320,343.39). 2017 WWE Profit = $33,725,000.

>>2853045
But he's right, as I mention here >>2852988 Even Meltzer said as much.

I'm real autistic about old PPV buyrates, attendances, house shows, ratings etc. I just find it really interesting.

>>2852158
(most of) 1999: not a publicly traded company
2017: publicly traded company