- Joined
- Jan 7, 2014
- Messages
- 44,470
- Reaction score
- 4,214
- Points
- 118
- Favorite Wrestler
-
- Favorite Wrestler
-
- Favorite Wrestler
-
- Favorite Wrestler
-
- Favorite Wrestler
-
- Favorite Wrestler
-
So I saw this on a late night British wrestling TV show and went to check it for myself a research/study of monthly revenue for the WWE while John Cena is champion, while Randy Orton is champion and while CM Punk is champion. (Explanation in Spoiler)
So if you read through and read the quarterly revenue graphs then you'd know WWE actually suffers with John Cena as champion, while it grows with Randy Orton and it grew to the highest it has ever been since Q4 2010 in Q1 2012 with CM Punk as champion. Only two of John Cena's reigns have lifted the WWE's revenue since Q4 2009 none of his four other reigns brought up revenue. Randy Orton's reigns however have brought up revenue ever since the first report in Q1 2009. CM Punk brought in the highest and lowest revenue but dropped the belt just as revenue was getting higher and higher before it crashed in Q1 2013 at the hands of John Cena's title reign.
Crazy shit.
Source
When WWE’s Money in the Bank pay-per-view event went off the air Sunday night, it closed with a defiant John Cena brandishing his newly won WWE World Heavyweight Championship belts. It was, for many fans, a disappointing finish, but hardly a surprise. In fact, a Cena championship victory is usually as close as you can get to a foregone conclusion.
There are two main, and very inter-related, reasons that it shouldn’t be very surprising that Cena won. First, in the ring Cena often plays the character of Guy Who Can’t Lose At Wrestling, which made him the odds-on favorite going into Sunday night. And secondly, he is a veritable goldmine for WWE, thanks to being the company’s biggest star among young fans, who in turn comprise a massive portion of WWE’s fan base. That latter reason would seem to explain why WWE slapped the championship on Cena just one month removed from a massive drop in share price, which cost head honcho Vince McMahon $750 million.
Cena is obviously important for WWE’s popularity and subsequent income, but I thought it would be fun to see just what sort of impact his having a title belt might actually have on the company’s bottom line. My look back on past trends is far from conclusive evidence, but it suggests that maybe Cena isn’t what’s best for WWE’s business.
I first pulled WWE’s quarterly revenue figures, but was quickly reminded that it’s difficult to locate meaningful trends for a business that often revolves around a single, annual event. More to the point, WrestleMania accounts for a massive portion of annual revenue, which creates revenue spikes in the second quarter of each year. This trend in recent years is clearly illustrated below; the general pattern is skewed a bit in 2010 because WrestleMania fell in Q1 that year.
In order to adjust for the event’s impact on company financials, I averaged the three quarters prior to each Q2 WrestleMania and found that company revenue in the second quarters of 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2013 rose by an average 25% over the previous three quarters (these were relatively consistent increases, too, ranging from 22% to 33%). I then adjusted the numbers to diminish the perceived impact of WrestleMania on second-quarter revenues, which flattens out the sharp peaks seen above:
The below graph plots out the numbers, which have bounced between $100 million and $125 million from 2009 through the end of last year, on a slightly truncated y-axis in order to better illustrate fluctuations in the adjusted quarterly revenue. I then just overlaid the championship reigns of Cena, Randy Orton and CM Punk, the three biggest stars of the last five years, to see who lorded over the greatest gains:
Note: Omitted from the graph are Cena’s brief concurrent championship run in the summer of 2011 and his even briefer moments-long reign at Elimination Chamber in 2010.
As shown in the graph, over the last five years Cena has only been champion during one period of rising revenue, in late 2009. Since then he’s held the belt at length four different times, and during all of them WWE’s quarterly revenue has been on the decline. What’s more, the company’s income tends to rebound shortly after those title runs come to an end.
And curiously enough, in-story COO Triple-H’s repetitive claims that Orton ought to be the face of the company appear to ring true. When Orton wears the championship belt, WWE’s revenues tend to climb. Then again, company performance was all over the place during CM Punk’s 434-day reign, and that may be the only proof we need that WWE’s in-ring champion doesn’t actually have much impact on the company’s revenue.
To reiterate, this is obviously far from a scientific study. WWE’s total revenues include segments like DVD sales and WWE Studios, which have little to do with the ongoing in-ring action. Plus this study only looks at the revenue side; perhaps a further analysis would show that WWE’s profits surge under Cena’s title reigns. But a brief look at the numbers suggests that, popular as he is, Cena being the WWE champion isn’t necessarily the best thing for business. And who knows, maybe that means Cena’s latest title run has more to do with in-ring story telling than cashing in on young fans, and maybe, just maybe, that means he’ll do something interesting for once.
There are two main, and very inter-related, reasons that it shouldn’t be very surprising that Cena won. First, in the ring Cena often plays the character of Guy Who Can’t Lose At Wrestling, which made him the odds-on favorite going into Sunday night. And secondly, he is a veritable goldmine for WWE, thanks to being the company’s biggest star among young fans, who in turn comprise a massive portion of WWE’s fan base. That latter reason would seem to explain why WWE slapped the championship on Cena just one month removed from a massive drop in share price, which cost head honcho Vince McMahon $750 million.
Cena is obviously important for WWE’s popularity and subsequent income, but I thought it would be fun to see just what sort of impact his having a title belt might actually have on the company’s bottom line. My look back on past trends is far from conclusive evidence, but it suggests that maybe Cena isn’t what’s best for WWE’s business.
I first pulled WWE’s quarterly revenue figures, but was quickly reminded that it’s difficult to locate meaningful trends for a business that often revolves around a single, annual event. More to the point, WrestleMania accounts for a massive portion of annual revenue, which creates revenue spikes in the second quarter of each year. This trend in recent years is clearly illustrated below; the general pattern is skewed a bit in 2010 because WrestleMania fell in Q1 that year.
In order to adjust for the event’s impact on company financials, I averaged the three quarters prior to each Q2 WrestleMania and found that company revenue in the second quarters of 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2013 rose by an average 25% over the previous three quarters (these were relatively consistent increases, too, ranging from 22% to 33%). I then adjusted the numbers to diminish the perceived impact of WrestleMania on second-quarter revenues, which flattens out the sharp peaks seen above:
The below graph plots out the numbers, which have bounced between $100 million and $125 million from 2009 through the end of last year, on a slightly truncated y-axis in order to better illustrate fluctuations in the adjusted quarterly revenue. I then just overlaid the championship reigns of Cena, Randy Orton and CM Punk, the three biggest stars of the last five years, to see who lorded over the greatest gains:
Note: Omitted from the graph are Cena’s brief concurrent championship run in the summer of 2011 and his even briefer moments-long reign at Elimination Chamber in 2010.
As shown in the graph, over the last five years Cena has only been champion during one period of rising revenue, in late 2009. Since then he’s held the belt at length four different times, and during all of them WWE’s quarterly revenue has been on the decline. What’s more, the company’s income tends to rebound shortly after those title runs come to an end.
And curiously enough, in-story COO Triple-H’s repetitive claims that Orton ought to be the face of the company appear to ring true. When Orton wears the championship belt, WWE’s revenues tend to climb. Then again, company performance was all over the place during CM Punk’s 434-day reign, and that may be the only proof we need that WWE’s in-ring champion doesn’t actually have much impact on the company’s revenue.
To reiterate, this is obviously far from a scientific study. WWE’s total revenues include segments like DVD sales and WWE Studios, which have little to do with the ongoing in-ring action. Plus this study only looks at the revenue side; perhaps a further analysis would show that WWE’s profits surge under Cena’s title reigns. But a brief look at the numbers suggests that, popular as he is, Cena being the WWE champion isn’t necessarily the best thing for business. And who knows, maybe that means Cena’s latest title run has more to do with in-ring story telling than cashing in on young fans, and maybe, just maybe, that means he’ll do something interesting for once.
So if you read through and read the quarterly revenue graphs then you'd know WWE actually suffers with John Cena as champion, while it grows with Randy Orton and it grew to the highest it has ever been since Q4 2010 in Q1 2012 with CM Punk as champion. Only two of John Cena's reigns have lifted the WWE's revenue since Q4 2009 none of his four other reigns brought up revenue. Randy Orton's reigns however have brought up revenue ever since the first report in Q1 2009. CM Punk brought in the highest and lowest revenue but dropped the belt just as revenue was getting higher and higher before it crashed in Q1 2013 at the hands of John Cena's title reign.
Crazy shit.
Source
1:
: