Jump to content

WWE announces its financial results for the third quarter


Kam
 Share

Recommended Posts

From the Wrestling-Online Newsletter:

 

WWE ANNOUNCES 3Q 2008 FINANCIAL RESULTS

 

- It's an ugly day for WWE as the company announced its financial results for the third quarter ended September 30, 2008. Revenues totaled $108.8 million as compared to $108.1 million in the prior year quarter, while operating income was $7.9 million as compared to $13.4 million in the prior year quarter. Net income was $5.3 million as compared to $8.5 million in the prior year quarter. WWE CEO Linda McMahon announced that there will be a $20 million cost savings in the coming year which will definitely mean some jobs will be slashed. "In addition, we have adjusted the scope of our Media Center project and reduced our planned capital spending by approximately $30 million to a range of $65 million to $75 million. We remain committed to managing our business in a manner that is consistent with maintaining our dividend and achieving our long-term financial objectives," said Linda McMahon. You can read the full press release at http://corporate.wwe.com/documents/Q3PressRelease115pmFINAL.pdf

So there could be a few more releases in the upcoming months...
Link to comment
Share on other sites


It's wrestling-wide, right now. TNA are also cutting costs now that house show business is dwindling and the Impact game is a financial disaster. I wouldn't be surprised if UFC are hurting a little too.

 

The obvious reasons (decreasing quality of product) apply, but it's not isolated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If its operational costs they are looking to cut, I would expect it more to be Production Staff (especially those on the road) than Talent...

 

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. There's much more non-wrestling staff in WWE than there are wrestlers [or Entertainers or whatever] isn't there?

 

And I don't know why, but I can see this leading to WWE releasing Freddie Prinze Jr. from the Writing Staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. There's much more non-wrestling staff in WWE than there are wrestlers [or Entertainers or whatever] isn't there?

 

And I don't know why, but I can see this leading to WWE releasing Freddie Prinze Jr. from the Writing Staff.

 

Yes plenty....Average Raw is around 50 + crew...I think the cull may have started already backstage..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes plenty....Average Raw is around 50 + crew...I think the cull may have started already backstage..

 

culling crew is small fry not enough savings. WWE has a large roster which IMO 50% could disappear over night and will not be missed. It is a good chance for the WWE to get rid of dead weight and end this crap brand spilt.

 

Have the ECW show still for the younyer guys but have Smackdown and Raw have one roster and one crew. That could lead to better quality (which would make them more money) and reduce talent bill which would save them money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

culling crew is small fry not enough savings. WWE has a large roster which IMO 50% could disappear over night and will not be missed. It is a good chance for the WWE to get rid of dead weight and end this crap brand spilt.

 

Trust me it really isnt small fry as you put it. There is 50 + crew, around 50% of those are contracted in on a freelance basis, which over the 4 days most of them are away for, totals a great amount of wages, flights and hotels, catering that the WWE are forking out for, and that could be saved.

 

Many of the wrestlers on the roster, who arent withing the top 2 strands in the WWE ladder get paid very little, in compairson to some of the crew for example.

 

The Brand Split will never ended, due to the fact that the TV deals the 3 shows generate and to a lesser extent the ticket revenue is too great for the WWE to lose.

 

As I said before, if its operational costs it suggests Production over Talent and as I said the Production staff culling has been happening for a number of weeks now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me it really isnt small fry as you put it. There is 50 + crew, around 50% of those are contracted in on a freelance basis, which over the 4 days most of them are away for, totals a great amount of wages, flights and hotels, catering that the WWE are forking out for, and that could be saved.

 

Many of the wrestlers on the roster, who arent withing the top 2 strands in the WWE ladder get paid very little, in compairson to some of the crew for example.

 

The Brand Split will never ended, due to the fact that the TV deals the 3 shows generate and to a lesser extent the ticket revenue is too great for the WWE to lose.

 

As I said before, if its operational costs it suggests Production over Talent and as I said the Production staff culling has been happening for a number of weeks now...

 

i am not saying have one show, in 2000 they had one roster to smackdown and raw and it work really well. cutting production staff may cut some cost but it will not improve quality and thus will not help them improve there profitability that much. Ratings have fallen across smackdown and raw thus the quality has to improve. I will not be suprised if smackdown in 09 drops below 2.0 and settles between 1.5 and 2.0 cutting roster can increase quality and decrease costs which is better than just reducing costs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Profit wise WWE make around £15million a year or something like that (well they have been before the big economic problems) so not knowing how much the average Prem teams makes a year I couldn't say, but hope that helps you

 

They made a profit of around £25 million last year.

 

But the amount of money WWE have made over the years is far far greater then any single premiership club lol. Anyone but Man Utd probably infact.

 

 

This is a breakdown of what their profit margins were earlier in the year through April to June.

 

DVDs, $11 million profit (21%)

- PPVs, $10 million profit (19%)

- House shows, $10 million profit (19%)

- Licensing, $7 million profit (13%)

- TV production, $5 million profit (9%)

- House show merchandise, $3 million profit (5%)

- WWE.com, $2 million profit (4%)

- TV advertising, $2 million profit (3%)

- WWE.com merchandise, $1 million profit (3%)

- WWE 24/7, $1 million profit (2%)

- Magazines, $1 million profit (2%)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a Question... are WWE as rich as the average Premiership team?

 

With WWE's profits & the war chest they have in reserve, they could probably afford to take over the likes of Fulham, Bolton and teams in the bottom half of the table.

 

Figures Chuck Palumbo was let go, his contract was coming up soon. A shame with Paul London but anyway - the first of many coming up I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am not saying have one show, in 2000 they had one roster to smackdown and raw and it work really well. cutting production staff may cut some cost but it will not improve quality and thus will not help them improve there profitability that much. Ratings have fallen across smackdown and raw thus the quality has to improve. I will not be suprised if smackdown in 09 drops below 2.0 and settles between 1.5 and 2.0 cutting roster can increase quality and decrease costs which is better than just reducing costs

 

Basically your having a dig at the quality again, which really has nothing to do with the operational costs! So that argument is pretty much null and void

 

In terms of profability, they still have television deals in place with networks for the 3 shows in the U.S as well as deals with networks across the world, with many of the deals set on each seperate show...

 

Cutting production staff will cut the operational costs which Linda McMahon stated the WWE are trying to do. The quality is a whole different issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically your having a dig at the quality again, which really has nothing to do with the operational costs! So that argument is pretty much null and void

 

In terms of profability, they still have television deals in place with networks for the 3 shows in the U.S as well as deals with networks across the world, with many of the deals set on each seperate show...

 

Cutting production staff will cut the operational costs which Linda McMahon stated the WWE are trying to do. The quality is a whole different issue

 

I disagree the lack of quality has everything to do with it. Coke Cola sales more than virgin Coke why, becasue of its brand and its quality. if you are going to cut costs why not do so in a way that also improves quality (its a no brainer really) cutting backstage stage will not improve quality. if you were to reduce the dead weight in the roster it will make a saving and not water down there product thus improving overall quality. this would lead to higher ratings, the higher the ratings the more advertisers get interested the more money you can bring in also PPV sells will improved with the quality. With an increase income and reduce cost it means higher profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree the lack of quality has everything to do with it. Coke Cola sales more than virgin Coke why, becasue of its brand and its quality. if you are going to cut costs why not do so in a way that also improves quality (its a no brainer really) cutting backstage stage will not improve quality. if you were to reduce the dead weight in the roster it will make a saving and not water down there product thus improving overall quality. this would lead to higher ratings, the higher the ratings the more advertisers get interested the more money you can bring in also PPV sells will improved with the quality. With an increase income and reduce cost it means higher profit.

 

How exactly would cutting the roster in itself improve quality? If you release the "dead weight", there will still be the same amount of "talented" guys there as before, only they wont have as many guys to work with. It wont improve the product at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How exactly would cutting the roster in itself improve quality? If you release the "dead weight", there will still be the same amount of "talented" guys there as before, only they wont have as many guys to work with. It wont improve the product at all.

 

The overall quality will improve. if you had for example RAW and Smackdown with 6 matches on them if 1 is great 2 are good and 3 that are crap if you cut the crap and had one roster over the two shows then you have the potential to have 2 great matches and 4 good matches and no crap matches hence quality of the overall show has improved.

 

yes they have the same amount of talented guys but they are not water down by the crap and hence the overall quality of your product will increase and a brand with is of a better quality will tend to make more money.

 

it is at least how i would deal with the WWE financial and creative issues

Edited by Jayfunk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The overall quality will improve. if you had for example RAW and Smackdown with 6 matches on them if 1 is great 2 are good and 3 that are crap if you cut the crap and had one roster over the two shows then you have the potential to have 2 great matches and 4 good matches and no crap matches hence quality of the overall show has improved.

 

Then you have guys doing even more dates per week/month/year and risking health problems again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...