Hulk Hogan Blasts WWE

[Bill Covington]

I hope Nathan's not tired of me sucking his dick, because I'm about to do so again, and again, and again.
Amazing post. Only you can entertain me (and others' I'm sure) with wrestling knowledge alone. For that I thank you.

[rashadz2]

quoipourquoi said:

nathanversus said:

Aye, he certainly could point to the fact that his presence coincided with the increase from 0.94 to 1.35 for SummerSlam 2005.

Problem is, WrestleMania 21 was up from 1.63 to 2.46, Royal Rumble 2006 was up from 0.83 to 1.31, Survivor Series 2005 was up from 0.81 to 0.94, Judgment Day 2005 was up from 0.38 to 0.66, Vengeance 2005 was up from 0.55 to 0.92, New Years Revolution 2006 was up from 0.68 and 0.85, Unforgiven 2005 was up from 0.44 to 0.56, Taboo Tuesday 2005 was up from 0.44 to 0.55, Armageddon 2005 was up from 0.59 to 0.73, No Mercy 2005 was up from 0.47 to 0.55 and No Way Out 2005 was up from 0.50 to 0.59.

Somebody else can work out the exact percentage increase for each of those shows (which is the only valid way to do it), but it all boils down to one thing; the increase for SummerSlam was nothing out of the ordinary, merely in line with increases that occurred with every event during that period, in some cases less. Nothing spectacular about it, nor the Backlash 2005 buyrate. SummerSlam 2005 merely increased the same as all the rest.

As for SummerSlam 2006; the last time Cena and Batista challenged for the WWE and World Heavyweight Championships (WrestleMania 21), it drew the third highest buyrate in WWE history. No reason to expect any less the next time they were in the same position, and no grounds to credit Hogan for the eventual buyrate.

I think you missed the point of my post, Nathan Versus. There is no reason to credit Hogan for the buyrate spike in SummerSlam 2005 and 2006, nor is there reason to discredit him for the poor buyrate of WrestleMania X-8 and XIX, considering that many Pay-Per-Views from 2002-2004 without him were at ridiculous lows (Taboo Tuesday 2004, Bad Blood 2004, Vengeance 2003, Armageddon 2003, No Mercy 2004, Judgment Day 2004).

I also don't see how pointing out how marked increases in Pay-Per-View buyrates in 2005 and 2006 is supposed to support your argument. Hulk Hogan didn't appear on a Pay-Per-View in 2004, so those increases have nothing to do with him being there or not being there, and thus do not prove/disprove his ability to still draw.

That, and he made an appearance on WrestleMania 21, so he could throw that back at you, as well. He could very easily say that with the 2005 Royal Rumble down .15 from the 2004 Royal Rumble and with the 2005 No Way Out only making a .09 increase over the 2004 No Way Out, that the turn-around came when he made his appearance at WrestleMania 21 and got everyone interested in wrestling again. He can cite how his appearance on Backlash boosted it .27 over the previous year's numbers, and how the momentum with his return carried the WWE to high numbers at Judgment Day (+.28), Vengeance (+.37), and eventually SummerSlam (+.40).

There's all kinds of ways to evaluate the numbers and trends, Nathan Versus, but it's all bullshit. It's not Hogan. It's not Cena and Batista. It's how popular the industry is, how much money the wrestling fans have, and how good people think the show will be - Combined.

I would venture to bet that the sudden interest in wrestling over the past two years has to do almost solely with Cena and Batista.

[quoipourquoi]

rashadz2 said:

I would venture to bet that the sudden interest in wrestling over the past two years has to do almost solely with Cena and Batista.

Can you prove it, though? If you can't, then Hulk Hogan can still make his argument and demand the big bucks.

[JimmyJackJericho]

Logic:

Cena and Batista win the titles two years ago. Business goes up. That's pretty much all you need.

[quoipourquoi]

admin said:

Logic:

Cena and Batista win the titles two years ago. Business goes up. That's pretty much all you need.

Cena and Batista winning the titles was not the only change in the WWE after WrestleMania 21, though, so no, that isn't good enough. We don't have a control group to compare the variables. Hulk Hogan rejoined the WWE the same day they won the belts, and while I agree with the assertion that Cena and Batista elevated the industry, your statement is not a fact, and thus Hulk Hogan can claim to be the factor the same way you claim Cena and Batista to be the factor.

[Nathan Versus]

quoipourquoi said:

nathanversus said:

Aye, he certainly could point to the fact that his presence coincided with the increase from 0.94 to 1.35 for SummerSlam 2005.

Problem is, WrestleMania 21 was up from 1.63 to 2.46, Royal Rumble 2006 was up from 0.83 to 1.31, Survivor Series 2005 was up from 0.81 to 0.94, Judgment Day 2005 was up from 0.38 to 0.66, Vengeance 2005 was up from 0.55 to 0.92, New Years Revolution 2006 was up from 0.68 and 0.85, Unforgiven 2005 was up from 0.44 to 0.56, Taboo Tuesday 2005 was up from 0.44 to 0.55, Armageddon 2005 was up from 0.59 to 0.73, No Mercy 2005 was up from 0.47 to 0.55 and No Way Out 2005 was up from 0.50 to 0.59.

Somebody else can work out the exact percentage increase for each of those shows (which is the only valid way to do it), but it all boils down to one thing; the increase for SummerSlam was nothing out of the ordinary, merely in line with increases that occurred with every event during that period, in some cases less. Nothing spectacular about it, nor the Backlash 2005 buyrate. SummerSlam 2005 merely increased the same as all the rest.

As for SummerSlam 2006; the last time Cena and Batista challenged for the WWE and World Heavyweight Championships (WrestleMania 21), it drew the third highest buyrate in WWE history. No reason to expect any less the next time they were in the same position, and no grounds to credit Hogan for the eventual buyrate.

I think you missed the point of my post, Nathan Versus. There is no reason to credit Hogan for the buyrate spike in SummerSlam 2005 and 2006, nor is there reason to discredit him for the poor buyrate of WrestleMania X-8 and XIX, considering that many Pay-Per-Views from 2002-2004 without him were at ridiculous lows (Taboo Tuesday 2004, Bad Blood 2004, Vengeance 2003, Armageddon 2003, No Mercy 2004, Judgment Day 2004).

I also don't see how pointing out how marked increases in Pay-Per-View buyrates in 2005 and 2006 is supposed to support your argument. Hulk Hogan didn't appear on a Pay-Per-View in 2004, so those increases have nothing to do with him being there or not being there, and thus do not prove/disprove his ability to still draw.

That, and he made an appearance on WrestleMania 21, so he could throw that back at you, as well. He could very easily say that with the 2005 Royal Rumble down .15 from the 2004 Royal Rumble and with the 2005 No Way Out only making a .09 increase over the 2004 No Way Out, that the turn-around came when he made his appearance at WrestleMania 21 and got everyone interested in wrestling again. He can cite how his appearance on Backlash boosted it .27 over the previous year's numbers, and how the momentum with his return carried the WWE to high numbers at Judgment Day (+.28), Vengeance (+.37), and eventually SummerSlam (+.40).

There's all kinds of ways to evaluate the numbers and trends, Nathan Versus, but it's all bullshit. It's not Hogan. It's not Cena and Batista. It's how popular the industry is, how much money the wrestling fans have, and how good people think the show will be - Combined.

You make some interesting points, many of which I agree with, but you misinterpret my original post. My point was that Hogan believes he deserves a deserves a bigger payday than anybody else on the roster, presumably because he believes he outdraws anybody else on the roster, despite little evidence to back up his claims. X-8 and XIX are just two examples of shows that flopped, which featured him in high profile matches. It doesn’t mean he was responsible for the decrease in buyrates, as these shows also featured The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin, but it certainly doesn’t provide any evidence to suggest that Hogan’s presence on a card miraculously increases buyrates.

The same goes for Summerslam, which increased in accordance with every other pay-per-view.

Like the others, I also attribute much of the success over the last two years to Cena and Batista. WrestleMania 21 is where the boom started, the same night they became the top men in the promotion. A mere coincidence? Perhaps, but highly unlikely, and WWE clearly feel the same way as I do.

[JimmyJackJericho]

How the fuck can Hogan claim to be the factor?

He's wrestled on three pay per views since then. Cena has done all the media appearances, worked all the house shows and so on. Hogan was a buyrate spike twice in two years. That's it.

He's not the focal point of the show the way Cena has been, and the WWE has not been built on Hogan's back the way it was in the 80's. Your argument is flawed, because you're arguing that the profitability of the company is down to Hogan, who has barely worked in that time.

[rashadz2]

quoipourquoi said:

rashadz2 said:

I would venture to bet that the sudden interest in wrestling over the past two years has to do almost solely with Cena and Batista.

Can you prove it, though? If you can't, then Hulk Hogan can still make his argument and demand the big bucks.

All you have to do is look at the high merchandise sales for Cena and Batista, mostly Cena, and that's all you really need to know.

[Bill Covington]

Source: The Wrestling Observer:

As previously noted, Hulk Hogan and WWE did squabble over financial matters recently, leading to the Hulkster not be booked for Wrestlemania this year. Hogan wanted more of a push of his merchandise, which the company is no longer featuring.

[+Donald $. Carlos+]

bccovington said:

Source: The Wrestling Observer:

As previously noted, Hulk Hogan and WWE did squabble over financial matters recently, leading to the Hulkster not be booked for Wrestlemania this year. Hogan wanted more of a push of his merchandise, which the company is no longer featuring.

I'm guessing that has a little something to do with this:

bccovington said:

Another interesting note, the WWE merchandise website has put Hogan's merchandise on a special clearance sale.

Either way, I say good riddance.

As JJJ said, Hogan isn't, and hasn't been the focal point of the WWE, or wrestling in general, as much as John Cena has been (whether he was being cheered, or booed) for the past 4 years, or so. The man is continuously generating interest, as people either want to see him retain the WWE Championship, or lose it, come time for PPV's . . . and his merchandise sales are more than enough to justify his place atop the company, which is something that Hulk Hogan hasn't been able to claim since the early nineties.

Not to mention the fact that he has only wrestled thrice on PPV's since the last time he was completely relevant. That, and you can't argue with the numbers that each PPV event draws . . .

[Bill Covington]

WORD LIFE 4LYFE~!

[Joker]

Ohh hoo hoo, I have been waiting on this for a while.

The day you all finally realize that what I've been saying about Hulk is true. He was never a good worker, he cares about no one but himself, he killed WCW.

And he is, without a doubt, a grade A, 100%, Rock brand monkey piss approved fucktard.

You see, Hulk Hogan, there's a thing called relevance, and you sir, are not relevant, you never have been and you never will be.

You basically embody everything that is wrong with pro wrestling, you can't work, you got to where you are based on stupid catchphrases, you politic and don't want anybody to get the spotlight besides you, you are selfish, and you sir are without a shadow or a shred or an inkling, or a quark of a doubt, the crappiest piece of shit to ever disgrace a wrestling ring.

And even though I know you will never read this, because you can't make two brain cells collide long enough to learn to use a computer, I hope that you do go to TNA so you and Vince Russo can destroy that company like you did WCW, so you can end up drunk under a freeway overpass somewhere with a sign that says "Will not Job for Food".

I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul, because if I ever see you anywhere in the streets, I won't.

[quoipourquoi]

nathanversus said:

You make some interesting points, many of which I agree with, but you misinterpret my original post. My point was that Hogan believes he deserves a deserves a bigger payday than anybody else on the roster, presumably because he believes he outdraws anybody else on the roster, despite little evidence to back up his claims. X-8 and XIX are just two examples of shows that flopped, which featured him in high profile matches. It doesn’t mean he was responsible for the decrease in buyrates, as these shows also featured The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin, but it certainly doesn’t provide any evidence to suggest that Hogan’s presence on a card miraculously increases buyrates.

The same goes for Summerslam, which increased in accordance with every other pay-per-view.

Like the others, I also attribute much of the success over the last two years to Cena and Batista. WrestleMania 21 is where the boom started, the same night they became the top men in the promotion. A mere coincidence? Perhaps, but highly unlikely, and WWE clearly feel the same way as I do.

I think it is mutual misinterpretation, because I am not arguing that Hogan was responsible for the change, and I've made sure to say that in almost all of my posts. What I'm saying is that Hogan can go into negotiation with the loaded argument of:

"Your buyrates started increasing dramatically after I re-appeared at WrestleMania 21."

I do not think he was the main reason, but there is no denying that the above is true. He's going into negotiations with orange-tinted glasses, and he's certainly going to claim to be the main reason for the increase, even if it is just a coincidence, because the numbers, while skewed due to other factors, are in his favor. He'd be a fool not to take claim of the success of the company in negotiations. He'd also be a fool to not say he gets one of the biggest pops, even if they are big because of his infrequent appearances in each city, because again, he does get those monster pops.

JimmyJackJericho:

Hulk Hogan can claim to have given them momentum. He can claim that the buyrates increased because he started to make wrestling popular again. After all, John Cena had a marquee match at No Way Out 2005, but it had a mediocre buyrate. Batista was in the Elimination Chamber Main Event at New Year's Revolution 2005, but it too had a mediocre buyrate. He can argue that there is no explanation for the sudden jump in buyrates at WrestleMania 21 other than the selection of Hulk Hogan to the Hall of Fame and the assumed WrestleMania appearance, because if Cena and Batista were popular enough to warrant a .83 increase, then it would've shown at the previous two events they main evented. He can argue that Cena and Batista only got new fans because old fans ordered WrestleMania 21 to see Hulk Hogan, and only then caught on to the new superstars.

My argument cannot possibly be flawed because I am "arguing that the profitability of the company is down to Hogan, who has barely worked in that time," because I am not arguing that. I am arguing that Hulk Hogan can claim to have given the WWE the momentum in 2005 by bringing the Hulkamaniacs back at WrestleMania 21. He can't prove it, but the WWE can't disprove it, so he's going to claim it. That's how negotiations work.

rashadz2:

I know that Cena sells merchandise very well. Hell, I own some of his stuff. With Mysterio and Triple H down with injuries, John Cena is pretty much my favorite wrestler at the moment. Has he sold as much merchandise as Hulk Hogan? God, no. Hogan could take credit for the success of the nWo (and he would), and the T-Shirt sales, alone, are incredible. If Hulk Hogan appeared at WrestleMania 23, would Hulk Hogan merchandise sell better at the venue than John Cena merchandise? Again, Hogan can make that argument based upon his past. Also, I'm pretty sure that Hogan Anthology DVD sold well, so he can make a case for the current demand of Hulk Hogan, as well.


I'm fucking glad Hulk Hogan is off of WWE programming, but he did the smart move business-wise, not settling for less than what he wants. He has statistics which give him leverage. Obviously, the WWE, like the rest of us, don't buy his hype. As the Hulk-free WWE keeps on trucking, Hogan will either gain or lose that leverage as the ratings increase/decrease over the years. If the ratings go up, he'll lower his asking price. If the ratings go down, the WWE will pay him what he demands. Let's hope for the former.

[JimmyJackJericho]

Fair enough.

They should do Umaga/Hogan. Tell Umaga to work as normal, without protecting him like he did Dusty and Piper the other week.

[President Skroob]

This thread sucks without a Headhunter post.

[JimmyJackJericho]

WHAT DOES EVERYBODY WANT?

[Michelangelo]

HEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDdd

[Michelangelo]

Or maybe Pepper, or Pierre.

[jay2damizzle]

After reading this segment on Hogan putting the WWE on blast ,I've come to one conclusion and that conclusion is this....In the words of the great Chris Jericho "WOULD HE PULEEEZE SHUT...THE..HELL...UP!!" I mean good God Hogan will never let get used to the fact that this is 2007..not 1987 I mean dude just thinks that he can walk on to any wwe show and expect to get paid ass-loads of money?! Well I got two words: NEGRO PLEASE!!!! He still thinks that he's Gods Gift to wrestling? eh-eh no suh!!! Hogan had his glory he had his fame and he just needs to move on and let the past be the past, shit, for all we know that fool's still rich as fuck, I watch H.K.B and I don't think his family don't look like they hurting on money too much I can see why Vince don't like his ass..I watched McMahon's DVD and I can clearly see why indeed

[†SamuraiFoochs†]

jay2damizzle said:

After reading this segment on Hogan putting the WWE on blast ,I've come to one conclusion and that conclusion is this....In the words of the great Chris Jericho "WOULD HE PULEEEZE SHUT...THE..HELL...UP!!" I mean good God Hogan will never let get used to the fact that this is 2007..not 1987 I mean dude just thinks that he can walk on to any wwe show and expect to get paid ass-loads of money?! Well I got to words: NEGRO PLEASE!!!! He still thinks that he's Gods Gift to wrestling? eh-eh no suh!!! Hogan had his glory he had his fame and he just needs to move on and let the past be the past, shit, for all we know that fool's still rich as fuck, I watch H.K.B and I don't his family don't look like they hurting on money too much I can see why Vince don't like his ass..I watched McMahon's DVD and I can clearly see why indeed

Jay, as always, speaks the truth.