wrestling / Columns

The Hamilton Ave Journal 08.12.10: Volume 2 – Issue 150

August 12, 2010 | Posted by JP Prag

THE HAMILTON AVE JOURNAL
By JP Prag

Volume 2 – Issue 150

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

The Hamilton Ave Journal is the only wrestling news report focused solely on the business of wrestling. Here in the Journal we not only look at the stories that are important to the investor and business-minded person, but also delve deeper into stories that most fans of wrestling would overlook. That is because the Journal is about getting the heart of the matters that affect the companies and outlooks of the wrestling world.

And where is Hamilton Ave? That is the location of the WWE Production Studio in Stamford, CT, and thus the most powerful place in the wrestling world. Besides, The East Main Street Journal just does not have the right ring to it.

Who am I? I am JP Prag: consultant, entrepreneur, businessman, journalist, and wrestling fan.

Now, ring the bell because the market is open.

The Hamilton Ave Journal

WHAT'S NEWS

The Journal’s front page area known as What’s News isn’t just about telling you what has happened. The stories in this section are about what will have an effect on the wrestling industry, individual federations, and the wallets of the fans.

TOP STORY: WWE 2010 Q2 Results

Last Thursday August 5, 2010, the WWE released their Q2 results. To say they were jumbled would be an understatement as the figures across the quarter were filled with non-comparables. As such, the Journal will spend this week looking at the comparables between this year and last year and next week go through the full half-year results where most items will be evened out. Throughout this article, all 2009 results will exclude WrestleMania 25 as WrestleMania 26 took place in Q1 this year.

For 2010 Q2, the WWE posted $106.8 million in revenue, basically flat with the $106.6 million seen in 2009. The mix of that revenue, however, came in quite different:

  • Live Events and Merchandise revenue increased 8.4% from $30.9 million to $33.5 million. Average attendance in North America slipped from 7,200 to 5,800 while ticket prices increased from $34.47 to $39.50. Therefore North American events had average ticket revenue of $229,100 compared to $248,184 in 2009. Given the softness in North America, the international market more than picked up the slack, especially in Latin America.
  • For all revenues, Latin America accounted for 7.2% this year compared to 3.4% the prior year. The tour down there, new television deals (especially in Mexico), sponsorship fees, and licensing all helped Latin America experience explosive growth.
  • Margins, however, dropped for live events from 32% to 27% of revenue, or from $9.9 million to $9.2 million. The higher cost reflects the additional marketing efforts the WWE has been doing, which can be seen in other areas, including the next one.
  • PPVs have also suffered during this quarter after two quarters of growth. Revenues dropped 28.8% from $14.6 million to $10.4 million. This was also coupled with a rise in costs associated with marketing making margins drop from 72% to 62%, or from $10.5 million to $6.4 million. The drop in buyrates over the past couple of years have been offset by higher margins, so this is a complete reversal of those trends. PPV purchases were as follows:

    WWE Buyrates

    As can be seen, for the first time since the rebranding of PPVs, the buyrates have actually dropped. Coupled with the fact that the WWE dropped a whole PPV, they were hurt across the board. During this time, there was also a rise in PPV prices from $39.95 per show to $44.95. Knowing that and only looking at the three comparable shows, this year’s outing brought in $23.5 million compared to $24.7 million. Normally this drop in revenue would be acceptable if margins made up for it, but the complete opposite happened in this case. Says WWE Chairman and CEO Vince McMahon:

    “Although we believe the continued softness in the economy played a part in our results, recent changes in our talent base may have also impacted key operating metrics, particularly domestic pay-per-view buys and live event attendance…”

  • No loss of talent could hurt Television Rights Fees, which increased 8.8% from $28.3 million to $30.8 million, mostly from addition of SuperStars and contractually obligated payment increases. Given the higher importance of television rights fees, one can see why the WWE would not want to lose NXT when SmackDown moves to SyFy. Also on the this bright spot, margins increased from 36% to 42%, yielding $12.8 million in profit compared to $10.2 million. In this case, the WWE made more on more.
  • Home Video also got a huge shot in the arm as that jumped 33.7% from $8.6 million to $11.5 million. Home video has been an area of concern after two quarters of decline, so this is a beneficial reversal of that trend. Margins dropped slightly from 59% to 57% making profit margins come in at $6.6 million compared to $5.1 million.
  • Lower internet advertising rates and fewer shopped let to Digital Media taking a 31.6% hit from $7.9 million to $5.4 million. At the same time margins dropped from 43% to 37%, again reflecting a dangerous reversal of expense discipline the WWE has show for the past year and half.
  • Rounding out the rest of the revenue, Licensing dropped 3.3% to $8.7 million, WWE Studios dropped 12.5% to $0.7 million, and everything else (WWE Magazine, ad fees, appearances, Classics on Demand, etc…) slipped 10.8% to $5.8 million.
  • Overall, Cost of Goods Sold increased 7.5% from $58.6 million to $63.0 million. As a percentage of revenue, that is an increase from 55% to 59%. However, the WWE added this:

    In addition, our profitability was negatively affected by approximately $1 million in logistical costs related to the Icelandic volcano.

  • Even with that $1 million added back in, the WWE saw lower profitability because of the higher costs and the mix of lower margin products. As such, the Profit Contribution dropped 8.7% from $48.0 million to $43.8 million, or from 45% or revenue to 41%.
  • Selling, General, and Administrative costs dropped slightly from $31.3 million to $30.1 million. This, along with depreciation, yielded an Operating Income before taxes of $10.3 million to compared to $13.1 million, a dip of 21.4%.

    All and all, this was not the WWE’s best quarter. In order to hold revenues steady they had to put forth a lot more expenses. WWE Chairman and CEO Vince McMahon has stated in prior meetings that he will not blame the economy for all of the WWE’s troubles, and obviously in this report he acknowledges the impact of roster changes has had on many different parts of the business.

    What he seems to be focused less on is the changing mix in products and markets. As will be covered more in depth next week, North America is becoming far less important in the mix while at the same time television is taking dominance over live events and PPV.

    At the end of the day, the WWE is still in a strong profitable position, but this reversal of positive trends in PPV buys, cost controls, higher margins, and growing attendance highlight how quickly things can change. Also to be discussed next week in more detail is the cash flow situation as operations are once again not meeting the requirements of the dividend.

    So tune in next week where the Journal will look at the WWE’s first half the year in total to see how the numbers line up.

    Newsbites

    Some items of note in the rest of the wrestling business world:

  • WWE’s WrestleMania special on NBC did not fare well, coming in with just a 0.65 rating. This was down from last year, so it remains to be seen if NBC will want to do any more of these specials with the WWE and instead let them stay on the cable stations.
  • TNA is having iMPACT and ReACTION preempted on September 9, 2010 so Spike can show a “Gangland” marathon. There is no word yet if the show will be on a different night instead, but most would suspect not a Monday.
  • Although TNA took great care to be proactive about not using marks owned by the WWE for the Hardcore Justice PPV, WWE lawyers were watching. Says WWE lead attorney Jerry McDevitt:

    “WWE is the sole owner of the ECW marks, and as with all of WWE’s intellectual property it will be vigorously protected. TNA acts at its peril if it infringes upon WWE’s rights.”

    MARKETPLACE

    In the Marketplace we look at the trends in television ratings. This section is less for critical analysis by the Journal but more for the reader to see what is really going on and to draw their own conclusions.

    As with stocks, here in the Journal we track the progress of television ratings. If ratings are the barometer by which we judge the product, then over the course of time we should be able to see patterns, trends, and anomalies.

    For the week ending Wednesday August 4, 2010, here are the current standings of the shows:

    Analysis:

    Stagnation was the name of the game and depending on which show is being discussed that could be a good thing or a not good thing. Where RAW failed to recapture ratings and stayed in the 3.3 range, SuperStars and SmackDown both lost ratings points (though the later is facing preemptions in many major markets).

    TNA’s stagnation, on the other hand, is seen as one of the better signs as the show again came in about a 1.2 for a second week in a row. The last time this happened was during the four week streak from January 9 to 30, 2010. This week, too, extends the streak of weeks above a 1.0 to five, showing a clear trend that TNA has started their recovery from the Monday move debacle.

    MONEY AND INVESTING

    We all know that wrestling is a business, but we don’t often pay attention to what sells and makes money. Money and Investing looks into the top selling items in the world of wrestling and any interesting figures that may have come out this week.

    What are the top selling items for the WWE? WWEShopZone.com releases a list of varying numbers to show what is selling for them:

    1. Nexus Logo T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
    2. Nexus Armband ($8.00)
    3. John Cena Never Give Up White T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
    4. John Cena Never Give Up Lunch Cooler ($12.00)
    5. Raw The Beginning The Best of Seasons 1 & 2 ($39.95, on sale $19.99)
    6. John Cena Illustrated YOUTH T-Shirt ($9.99, on sale $8.95)
    7. Randy Orton Lobotomy Basics YOUTH T-Shirt ($9.99, on sale $8.95)
    8. The Hurricane Basics Series #5 Action Figure ($9.99)
    9. WWE Red/Blue Reusable Bag ($2.99)
    10. Randy Orton Lobotomy T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
    11. John Cena Never Give up Notebook ($5.99)
    12. Big Show Go Big T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
    13. Miz I’m Awesome T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
    14. Divas Black Butterfly Tank Top ($20, on sale $16.95)
    15. Bret Hart Emblem Basics YOUTH T-Shirt ($9.99, on sale $4.98)
    16. John Cena Never Give Up Backpack ($39.95)
    17. D Generation X Army Strong T-Shirt ($25, on sale $14.98)
    18. The Miz I’m Awesome Blue T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
    19. John Morrison Sunglasses ($12.00)
    20. D Generation X Army Jersey ($49, on sale $24.98)

    The t-shirt sales continues, but so does the domination of the Nexus. The Nexus had both of their items jump up the list this week to number one and two, pushing down regulars John Cena, Randy Orton, and the Miz. If anything was an indicator whether the Nexus would be sticking around or not, this sales chart should show there is quite a while in front of them yet.

    Otherwise, this list showed a lot of back-to-school items like John Cena notebooks and John Cena backpacks. There were a couple of odd items including a Hurricane action figure and a rare appearance by a Divas shirt.

    TNA sometimes releases a list of top selling items on ShopTNA.com. According to the site the top selling items were:

    1. Don’s Insane Brown Bag Special ($20)
    2. Mr. Anderson… People Are Fake T-Shirt ($19.99)
    3. Jeff Hardy Enigma T-Shirt (Glow In The Dark) ($19.99)
    4. The Best Of America’s Most Wanted DVD ($24.99, on sale $15.99)
    5. RVD – Video Wall T-shirt ($19.99)
    6. Hogan H Squared Limited Edition T-shirt ($29.99)
    7. Destination X 2010 DVD ($19.99, on sale $15.99)
    8. Unbreakable 2005 DVD ($9.99)
    9. “Hulkamania” T-shirt ($19.99)
    10. Beer Money / MMG “FANDIMONIUM” DVD ($19.99, on sale $14.99)

    Not even an update after a PPV?

    PERSONAL JOURNAL

    Wrestling isn’t just about watching and reading. The best way to be a wrestling fan is to experience it live. Where is wrestling coming to in the upcoming weeks? The Personal Journal answers that question.

    Do you know a wrestling event coming up? Send one in to The Hamilton Ave Journal and we’ll be sure to add it to the list.

    EDITORIALS

    The Editorials section is designed for you, the readers, to respond to the views presented in the Journal, send an important news item, or talk about another overlooked business related item in wrestling. Just beware: the Journal reserves the right to respond back.

    From the commentary section last week, there were quite a few discussions and many follow ups. To make this a bit easier to follow, we’ll break this up by topic. Please note that many of the commenters were edited down for points and space, so please do not be offended if you were cut off or excluded completely.

    TNA’s PPV

    Do you know when TNA’s PPV contract is scheduled to run out? I keep hearing that what they are doing on 8/12, the COTC-esque shows, will be replacing PPVs soon, but no one ever really mentions when it will happen.
    Sean

    Unfortunately, that information is not available. Since they have PPVs scheduled through December, at least until then. Judging by Dixie Carter’s earlier comments, though, it might go for at least another year beyond that.

    You can spew all the mumbo jombo you want, if TNA ditches the PPV model and sticks to TV only, they are done. RIP TNA 2011.
    Points

    Well points, these quote are for you:

    Really? Can you back this up in any way, using facts and reason?
    Why should this hurt TNA at all when they aren’t making money from PPV’s? Isn’t money what keeps businesses afloat?

    Guest#6551

    How would ditching the PPV model kill TNA? If it ends up hurting them, they could just, you know, go back to PPV!

    It’s not rocket science.
    WTF?

    IF, as it is widely believed, that TNA is losing money on every PPV, then how exactly is ditching the PPV model going to hurt them?

    TNA is not the WWE. The WWE is far too dependent on their PPV-centric business model to be able to make the change.

    TNA hasn’t been dependent on PPV’s since their first tv deal when they transitioned from weekly PPV.

    The loss of PPV to TNA wouldn’t harm them in the least. If anything, they could negotiate new international contracts for the PPV style shows. In the 80 or so countries that TNA is being show outside of the US, the money made on the contracts is almost pure profit.
    Darth Mortis

    Actually, the WWE is not dependent on PPV either. PPV is 9.7% of the WWE’s revenue and 14.6% of the profit margin, so the WWE could potentially survive without it. Why would they, though? There is still money to be had from PPV for the company and they would like to see those revenues back up again as opposed to letting them die out.

    TNA on PPV vs. TV

    Considering the sources saying TNA is practically done with PPV and moving to an all television business model, how does the state of their ratings reflect this? I’m no businessman, but TNA has consistently averaged a 1.0 for four years now ever since their start on Spike with no real jumps or drops of any substance. In this regard, wouldn’t moving to an all television format be unwise? PPV costs/gains aside, wouldn’t these stagnant ratings persuade otherwise because history shows this is a product that has no chance of growing? 4 years is an eternity in today’s television market. Thoughts?
    ThePants

    Pants, we need to be clear on this: TNA’s ratings have not been stagnant. When the show premiered in 2005, the ratings were a 0.80 average. After that, the ratings have gone:

  • 2006: +12.2% to 0.90
  • 2007: +16.6% to 1.05
  • 2008: +0.8% to 1.05
  • 2009: +8.0% to 1.14
  • 2010 (YTD): -9.7% to 1.03

    If it wasn’t for the move to Monday’s, TNA would be showing a continued trend upwards over five years. These are significant jumps in ratings for Spike, and that is what matters. As others pointed out, all that matters in TNA’s ratings is how they compare to Spike’s other programming. Since Spike is average a 0.6 rating right now (including iMPACT), TNA has always done well for them and continues to perform exceptional. Would they like the ratings to be higher? Of course they would! But the trend prior to the move to Monday’s was one that was quite significant for Spike.

    If this were USA Network, these ratings would not even be a blip. But Spike is a different story and they have shown a willingness to add TNA programming with everything from the Global iMPACT specials to the new ReACTION show that is supposedly premiering.

    The point of dropping PPV is that TNA could potentially make more revenue and profit off of the fees Spike pays than on PPV buyrates. That is all that matters here. The WWE could not do that because no one is going to pay $3 million for one wrestling show. However, if TNA were getting 25,000 buys at $29.95, of which they see 50%, we are talking $375,000. That might be a plausible payment for a one-night special, especially if the special show they can deliver higher ratings than a regular iMPACT.

    Besides, there are other considerations and views on this:

    Sticking at 1.0-ish for four years isn’t stagnating, it’s consistently being one of Spike’s top rated shows. Being able to virtually guarantee a decent sized viewership is a major asset for TNA. (Of course, if ratings continue to drop, this could become a problem soon).

    And sticking at that rating for four years doesn’t mean they can never grow. Raw hovered around the 2.5 mark for several years before ratings really took off in the aftermath of Montreal. If TNA ever learned to book their talent effectively (or somehow stumbled upon the next Rock, Goldberg or Austin by accident), they could seem a similar boom.

    Furthermore, the PPV model just isn’t working for TNA. Every show is losing them more money – especially with the Wrestling Observer reporting that the last three PPVs drew around 8000 buys each, a truly terrifying number. Continuing to do something that is losing more money each time out is crazy. If Spike (or someone else) can be convinced to pay TNA a profitable amount of money to run some COTC-style TV specials, that would definitely be a move in the right direction for TNA.
    BringTheNoise

    TNA’s Revenue

    No offense, but TNA is a private company, where do you get these numbers from? Wrestling Observer? TNA executives, who will never give out info that make them look bad?
    The Man

    Actually, The Man, TNA President Dixie Carter gave it away. In Issue #69 of the Journal, the Senate Sub-committee notes on drugs in professional wrestling were made public. During that, TNA President Dixie Carter stated that in 2007 the company had revenues of $15 million. The very next week, Ms. Carter told a UK Magazine that TNA’s revenue “quadrupled” in 2008, which would be $60 million.

    Given that Ms. Carter has been known to exaggerate, those numbers were scaled back to $50 million. Since that was a year and half ago, TNA’s revenue should actually be quite higher now. A better estimate would be $60 to $65 million given the additional markets, new television contract with Spike, and the growth in house show revenue that Jeff Jarrett talks about. Margins, on the other hand, are the real question mark, especially this year.

    Keep this in mind for our next subject.

    TNA number two?

    I’m still skeptical of TNA as the No. 2 promotion in the world. They certainly aren’t No. 2 in live attendance, their best ever was about 6,000 in NYC while AAA’s Triplemania just did 18,000 and New Japan’s Jan 4 Supershow did 27,500 (thank you Wikipedia).

    Their US TV audience is under 2 million, and I have no idea how to get ratings info for AAA or NJPW, or how many overseas viewers TNA has.

    Are more people going to TNA events than NJPW or AAA? Obviously not.

    Are more people watching TNA than NJPW or AAA? I don’t know.

    Those are the relevant measures, I think, rather than worrying about how many countries those people are in.

    The third big measure would be revenue, and Hamilton Ave gives TNA’s revenues around $50M (although I still can’t see how it’s that high. $15M for Impact, say $10M for international TV. That leaves $25M coming from 1,200 person house show gates, 25,000 buyrate PPVs and Don West’s Brown Bag specials?) Again, I have no idea of AAA’s or NJPW’s revenues.
    John Bragg

    Well, John, let’s work backwards. As covered above, whether any of us can figure out TNA’s revenue streams or not, this is the number that TNA Dixie Carter has presented. It seems that you woefully underestimate what TNA gets for international TV (which usually includes Xplosion and PPVs, not just iMPACT). TNA also has various forms of merchandise, appearances, live events, and international licensing. Believe it or not, TNA is not without resources on various revenue streams.

    Now, on to some of your other points. First up, TNA’s largest audience was 8,000 at Lockdown in Lowell, MA, so you do have to at least come in with the right numbers. And the Journal covered last week the area they lack against promotions like AAA and NJPW is in attendance. However, if AAA or NJPW ran a show in South Carolina, France, or Ireland, they would not have numbers like in that. In their home markets they are incredibly successful, but TNA has more viewers in aggregate around the world. Let’s take a look at some of the feedback and math on why this is:

    As for being skeptical of TNA being the number 2 promotion in the world, you overlook the fact that the Japanese and Mexican promotions basically sell only in their home markets, without large contracts elsewhere.

    TNA gets to sell the same show without adding significant costs – basically re-editing and some translation. They make more money on the same products. This is very low overhead and high margin.

    In contrast, when you only have the one contract, each unit of product (one show) has its own individual costs that are covered by the single point of sales (the contract for a given number of shows). More sales entails more (significant) costs.

    Live gate attendance is also a diminished factor in profits. Sure it would be good to have and if TNA understood how to promote their shows I would advise them to do more of it. But since the first Wrestlemania live shows have gone from primary revenue stream to one of many. So it is probable that a fraction of TNA’s overseas contracts covers the missed profits (and the game is or should be about profits and not revenues) of going on the road.

    So yes, the regional limits of Mexican and Japanese promotions makes it extremely probably that TNA is number 2 in terms of revenue and viewership.
    Guest#6216

    Regarding the argument around TNA as the second biggest company in the world. If we’re talking only about brand awareness, I certainly have to agree. Whilst companies like New Japan may be huge draws in their own country, they don’t have the same global recognition that TNA does.

    Most of my friends [here in the UK] who are wrestling fans are simply casual WWE fans, but have at least heard of TNA. If I were to mention NJPW or any other company, I’m sure I’d be greeted with blank stares.
    Jack Conner

    Of course, comments like these bring about counters.

    People are weirdly discounting what the Japanese and Mexican promotions do because it’s in their home countries. I think that if you’re counting, viewers are viewers. You don’t get extra points because of what country your viewers are in. If company A is seen by 2 million Japanese, and Company B is seen by 1 million British, 500,000 Australians and 500,000 continental Europeans, Company A and B have the same audience. Company B “being seen in 14 different countries” doesn’t really mean anything.
    Guest#1602

    Unfortunately, when you put numbers out there someone is going to have better one:

    Actually, I haven’t been discounting them. They are limited in the scope of their operations and the margins from each show produced.

    Economies and spending power being equal, it shouldn’t matter too much what countries a show is being seen in if they have the same number of viewers and if they are valued correctly.

    This isn’t the case though. I’d have to guess that even in the worst economy, the UK does significantly better than Mexico, so each viewer is worth more. No overhead in selling to the UK market either. Let’s just say the same goes for the other European countries, especially the Western ones other than adding translation.

    Japan has about 130 million people. America 330 million, the EU about the same. See how numbers quickly add up against companies that are limited to only their own home markets?

    There are two large Mexican companies that I am aware of and several competing Japanese companies. That means that they divide their markets too, in addition to competing with WWE. So they divide, TNA adds more markets.

    So yeah, TNA being a distant number 2 in America yet going global is a lot better position to be in than being one of many in a large local market.

    This is before the Holy Grails of China and India come into play.
    Guest#1266

    Let’s just go this way. NJPW is available in a country with 130 million people. TNA is in 80 countries with an aggregate population of 3 billion. Even if TNA has only the same percentage of viewers of a population as in America (0.7%), that is still 20 million viewers. NJPW would need nearly 15% of their home market watching and that is just not happening.

    On a side note, Japan has a declining population which makes them a much less desirable long term market than, say, China or India. As China and India grow in population and wealth they become much more important than Japan, the US, or the EU. And TNA has a strong foothold in India and is looking at that for major expansion. The WWE, as covered, is making huge investments in China for the future.

    Just to make the point again: the Journal is not saying AAA, NJPW, CMLL, and plenty of others are not successful and are not profitable. CMLL, in particular, has much better margin percentages than TNA and possibly the WWE because their variable cost are lower. That said, TNA is far more well known, seen, experienced, and bought than those promotions. Being successful just in your home market is not a bad thing; it is perfectly acceptable and should be applauded so long as they are profitable. But that is not TNA’s model; TNA is looking to be a large global phenomenon and as such their goals are totally different from AAA.

    TNA Paychecks

    If TNA was such a great and profitable company, why they were paying Amazing Kong and other Knockouts like $350 per show. And why their other wrestlers is getting paid dirt cheap?
    The Man

    This is simply a matter of economics:

    Why would they pay more if they didn’t have to? TNA is a business, after all.

    I’m a big fan of Christian and Kong, but they weren’t essential cogs in the TNA machine.
    Guest#8644

    You keep bringing up what TNA pays their wrestlers, but that is meaningless as an indicator. The fact is that they only needed to pay as much as they did to get the wrestlers you named. Losing those wrestlers was not a deciding factor in lower ratings either.

    Over-valuing assets and paying that way is a sure way to kill profitability. The goal is to take advantage of assets others under-value.
    Guest#0673

    And that’s the bottom line. If TNA pays these people too little, it is up to them to negotiate better or walk away. If they can get more elsewhere, that is their responsibility.

    Also, do not forget that TNA pays everyone less than the WWE because they offer a benefit the WWE does not have: lighter schedules. When this reporter talked to Christian towards the end of his contract with TNA, he was getting upset that he was on the road so much doing promotion. He figured if he was going to be on the road that much he should be making WWE money, so that is what he did. Others negotiate less dates and that works for them. These are personal decisions made between contractors and companies and have nothing to do with the health of TNA.

    Many smart companies are going to try to pay employees less if they believe in maximum profitability. You believe less profitability is fine and you’d rather spend profitability on employees. And while you or this reporter are free to run a business that way because that is what we see as a better use of funds, that is not what TNA and the WWE do.

    All right, enough of the TNA talk. We wrap up this week with something else entirely.

    Wrestlicious, baby!

    You know it’s a sad days when Wrestlicious is the third most watched wrestling company in the US.
    Andrew Barbarash

    Wrestlicious is the third highest wrestling show? Really?!
    Jonberg

    They only way that could be figured is if you group all WWE programming into one, said TNA was two, then perhaps Wrestlicious is three. Since ROH doesn’t get ratings (meant literally, HDNet does not pay for ratings and therefore they are not tracked), perhaps MAVTV does and that means since they have some ratings they might then be considered the third highest. However, it would be interesting to compare Wrestlicious ratings against Viva la Lucha.

    Plenty more was written, so be sure to take a look. And if you enjoy the Journal, why not bookmark 411wrestling.com and make it your home page? You can do that by clicking here.

    CLOSING BELL

    This concludes Issue #150 (Volume 2) of THE HAMILTON AVE JOURNAL. Join us next week as we get ready to ring the bell again.

    Till then!

  • NULL

    article topics

    JP Prag

    Comments are closed.