FanPost

WWE fans always defeat themselves

WWE.com

If you are a diehard hockey fan like myself that's a historian of the game, then you may know who Harold Ballard is. For those that don't, Harold Ballard was the owner of the Toronto Maple Leafs during the 1970s and 1980s and widely regarded as one of the most miserly and miserable owners in the history of the sport.

Despite the fact that the Leafs were barely successful on the ice, they were still a hit at the box office with the Toronto faithful, allowing Ballard to enjoy decent profits without having to make a meaningful investment in the product. But this is not a new strategy - it's happening in the wrestling world with WWE.

Now, let's be fair -- the WWE is nowhere near the profit generating machine that it was back in 2000. Back then, the WWE made $54 million (net income before taxes and other deductions) - that's nearly $74 million in 2014 dollars. In fact, if you adjust all of the subsequent years by inflation to 2014 dollars, the WWE does not have a single year in which they made over $55 million, except for 2010, when their income was $53 million (roughly $57 million in 2014 dollars). Moreover, it will look like the WWE will lose over $25 million due to the launch of the WWE network. But all numbers aside, there's a point about profits, monopoly, and product investment.

You probably saw the headline about the WWE Network hitting 1 million subscribers. The fans and the dirtsheets are having a field day in debate, but today is not really relevant in the long run. The real story will be given this spring as part of the WWE's quarterly report. Regardless, this shows that there are plenty fans that are still willing to invest in the WWE product with all of its flaws.

Despite the fact that RAW only draws 3 to 4 million viewers a week (down from the 7 million that it used to draw during the Attitude Era), RAW still usually ends up as the one of the two or three most watched shows on cable. The WWE can still sell out live events with ease. As such, there's still a continued investment by fans in the WWE product.

Some of it may be because there's no other alternative that is considered on equal ground with the WWE. Some of it may be brand loyalty. Yet all of it points to a key thing -- Vince McMahon has no real need to make significant changes to improve the product.

McMahon is no different than any other wrestling promoter in the sense that he follows a certain formula. The current formula is in effect a bet -- no matter how much the fans are displeased with the WWE product, there will still be enough fans that will invest in it. McMahon will continue to fill his romantic vision as to what a top guy should be -- over 6 feet tall, with muscles, and a limited formulaic move set.

That might create acrimony with the fans, but he uses it his advantage: fans will watch in consistent hope for change, don't get it, and then take actions to display their grievance with the company -- all of which helps the WWE in regards to live attendance, social media impressions, and in a way, television ratings if the Nielsen samples are to be believed.

Moreover, he uses fan acrimony to the company's advantage when handling the booking of talent such as Dolph Zigger, Dean Ambrose, Cesaro, Damien Sandow, and yes, Daniel Bryan -- all of whom are widely popular with smarks. Unsurprisingly, smarks will support them thoroughly in the hopes that McMahon does something more with them than subjecting them to haphazard booking.

As such, fans looking for change ultimately defeat themselves. As long as consumption of the product is at an acceptable level for the WWE, then the WWE will see no real need to alter its current formula. The name of the game is consumption, not reaction.

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Cageside Seats readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cageside Seats editors or staff.