Saturday, December 28, 2013

WWE 1997-2013 Win Percentages

WWF 1997 - WWE 2013 (Win Percentages)


This includes all WWF/WWE shows (including NXT) from 1997 to 2013.  Data was extracted from Cagematch.  This includes singles & tag matches (no rumbles) where there was 30 non-draw matches in the year that fit that description.  (The total matches line here includes draws as well as rumbles and handicap matches).

1997 to 2013 Cumulative

Highest Winning Percentages
Bobby Lashley: 258 matches (87%)
Brodus Clay: 360 matches (82%)
John Cena: 1705 matches (81%)
Steve Austin: 527 matches (79%)
Sin Cara: 241 matches (78%)
Undertaker: 1231 matches (78%)
Shawn Michaels: 549 matches (77%)
Brock Lesnar: 331 matches (72%)
Rey Mysterio Jr.: 1144 matches (72%)
Ryback: 342 matches (71%)
Ken Shamrock: 397 matches (71%)

Lowest Winning Percentages
Heath Slater: 433 matches (15%)
Mike Knox: 236 matches (22%)
Jillian Hall: 206 matches (22%)
Curt Hawkins: 262 matches (24%)
Tamina Snuka: 201 matches (24%)
Shawn Stasiak: 176 matches (26%)
Tyler Reks: 181 matches (26%)
Justin Credible: 273 matches (26%)
Maryse: 298 matches (26%)
Tyson Tomko: 200 matches (26%)
Shannon Moore: 311 matches (27%)
Kenny Dykstra: 238 matches (28%)
Sho Funaki: 758 matches (28%)
David Otunga: 261 matches (28%)
Jinder Mahal: 298 matches (29%)
Damien Sandow: 357 matches (29%)
Stevie Richards: 510 matches (29%)
Titus O'Neil: 286 matches (29%)
Savio Vega: 207 matches (29%)
Jimmy Yang: 371 matches (29%)
Roman Reigns: 212 matches (29%)
Big Bossman: 359 matches (29%)


It's interesting to see how 1999-2003 only had less than 5% of the active wrestlers in the top tier (above 75% winning percentage): Kurt Angle (1999, 2003), Steve Austin (1999, 2002), Undertaker (2000, 2001), Ron Killings (2000),  RVD (2001), Brock Lesnar (2001), Torrie Wilson (2002), Goldberg (2003).  Meanwhile, years like 2005 and 2012 were "bursting at the seam" by comparison (Kane, Big Show, John Cena, Undertaker, Batista, Shawn Michaels, Trish Stratus, Road Warrior Animal, Super Crazy, Mr. Kennedy, Bobby Lashley, Psicosis, Christy Hemme in 2005 and John Cena, Randy Orton, Rey Mysterio Jr., Sheamus, Ron Killings, Great Khali, Brodus Clay, Ryback, Antonio Cesaro, Sin Cara in 2012 all had records with winning percentages above 75%).

Low standard deviations: Evan Bourne, Nunzio, Justin Gabriel, Vladimir Kozlov, Big Bossman, Brock Lesnar, Essa Rios, Tyler Reks, Shawn Stasiak
High standard deivations: Batista, Drew McIntyre, Layla, JTG, Brie Bella, Gail Kim, Nikki Bella, Luke Gallows

Keep in mind that heels lose a lot in WWF, so it's tough to treat winning percentages as strictly a proxy for importance.

Friday, December 20, 2013

How do WWE Stars affect the B-level PPV?

Worldwide Buys

Domestic Buys

I have been working on a follow-up to this post: http://indeedwrestling.blogspot.com/2013/12/wwe-2006-2013-ppv-numbers-and-lengthy.html

This looks at the # buys for B-level PPVs (excludes Wrestlemania, Royal Rumble and Summerslam) when a wrestler was in a match on the card versus when they were not.  The 2006-2013 "averages" only include the years that the wrestler was active.

For another take on this topic, see Voices of Wrestling's piece "Is Randy Orton a Draw?"

Anything that tells me that I need more Kane and Morrison instead of Undertaker and Jeff Hardy feels odd to me, but this was the first swipe at the quandary....

@mookieghana


Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Streaming Statistics by Age Group

Streaming Statistics by Age Group by Chris Harrington

Netflix vs Cable

British Wrestling Historian John Lister pointed out an intriguing factoid that was published by Mashable on December 5:
Netflix Is Almost as Popular as Cable Among Young Adults: Among 18-36 year-old adults, 46% subscribed to Cable TV while 43% subscribed to Netflix.

The inverse directions (by age) for Cable TV versus Netflix/Hulu Plus/Amazon Prime really say a lot about who is (and is not) embracing streaming technology.

Combined with the information from Nielsen on how people are watching over-the-top video, the point has really been hammered home about how differently people watch streaming content (for instance, almost half of subscribers were watching Netflix directly on a computer).

Yet, it wasn't until I was discussing the viability of the proposed over-the-top (streaming) WWE Network with @holycowie that I was challenged to dig even deeper and to cross reference age and streaming medium.

A quick search brought up an article, "Pay-TV Penetration Remains Strong Among Netflix-Loving Parents" which noted:
Parents over-index in subscriptions to Netflix streaming service...(also more likely to subscribe to Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus)... while their their pay-TV subscriptions appear to be unaffected.

The Harris Interactive Poll (October 2013)

More importantly, I finally found the source for both the MarketingChart and Mashable pieces - a new Harris Interactive Poll (released 11/25/2013).  Harris conducted an online poll for their"Tech Tracker" series about SmartPhone ownership (52% of Americans), planning tech purchases in the next three months (37%) and most interestingly the relationship between streaming content and cord cutting by age group.
(PDF of results is available at http://www.harrisinteractive.com/vault/Harris%20Poll%2089%20-%20Tech%20Tracker_11.25.2013.pdf )

Raw Data from the Harris Poll:

U.S. Adult Ownership:
(keep in mind this survey was taken online so there's bound to be some bias there)

  • 94% owned a computer (67% had a laptop, 66% had a Desktop)
  • 80% owned a Mobile Phone with 52% indicating it was a Smartphone (28% Android, 24% iPhone)
  • 36% owned a Tablet (19% had a iPad/iPad Mini, 10% had a Amazon Kindle Fire Series tablet)
  • 21% had a stand-alone BluRay player (no breakout of what percentage were internet connected)
  • 19% had a XBox 360 and 15% had a PS3
  • 12% had a HDTV with built-in internet capabilities (44% had HDTV without)
  • 6% had "streaming media box" (such as Roku, AppleTV)
Of course Netflix has two services - Streaming and Disc Delivery:

  • 29% of U.S. Adults subscribed to Netflix (25% for Streaming, 9% for Disc Delivery)
  • 18-36 years old: 41% Netflix Streaming  / 9% Netflix Disc Delivery / 17% Amazon Prime / 8% Hulu Plus
  • 37-48 years old: 24% Netflix Streaming /  13% Netflix Disc Delivery / 15% Amazon Prime / 5% Hulu Plus
  • 49-67 years old: 18% Netflix Streaming  / 7% Netflix Disc Delivery / 10% Amazon Prime / 3% Hulu Plus
  • 68+ years old: 9% Netflix Streaming  / 7% Netflix Disc Delivery / 6% Amazon Prime / 1% Hulu Plus37% of Parents that have a child under the age of 18 subscribe to Netflix Streaming
  • 18-36 years old: 60% have TV service (46% Cable / 16% Satellite)
  • 37-48 years old: 76% have TV service (48% Cable / 30% Satellite)
  • 49-67 years old:  82% have TV service (55% Cable / 28% Satellite)
  • 68+ years old:  88% have TV service (63% Cable / 25% Satellite) 

Key Takeaways
  • Traditional Desktop and Laptop Computers are still going to be the massive gateway for over-the-top video to reach consumers (though Tablets and SmartPhones are next largest opportunities)
  • Streaming Media Boxes like Roku/AppleTV are exciting future technologies for "cutting the cord", but they are still very uncommon (half as common as internet HDTV, 1/3 as common as XBox 360, 1/6 as common as Tablet)
  • Parents with children under 18 have embraced streaming technology via Netflix
  • Satellite's hold is similar for 37+ ages groups while Cable especially grows in the 68+ age group
Looking at the actual 2010 U.S. Population by age, with a few approximations, I approximated age groups at: 
  • Echo Boomer (18-36 years old): 78.6 million (x 41% Netflix Streaming)
  • Gen X (37-48 years old): 50.5 million (x 24% Netflix Streaming)
  • Baby Boomer (49-67 years old): 69.0 million (x 18% Netflix Streaming)
  • Mature (68+ years old): 31.4 million (x 7% Netflix Streaming)
Applying the Netflix streaming numbers above would imply about 59.6 million adults have access to a Netflix streaming subscription.  If you include children under 18, that'd jump to 87.3 million people in the US.

Keep in mind that Netflix only has 31.1 million domestic streaming "members" as of 9/30/2013 so this number so the near 60 million number means (a) there could be some bias in the poll towards overstating Netflix's prevalence as well (b) that more than one person in a household has access to a single membership.

So, we'd need to apply a ratio to any "viewer to subscriber" calculation: 35.6% of people (including children) or 52.2% of Adults.

Implications for WWE Network

Let's look at a base of about 4 million weekly WWE viewers. Page 15 of WWE CFO George Barrios' latest Investor Presentation reflects the WWE's claim that they have a "balanced age distribution".
  • 21% - below 18 years old  (x 37% Streaming = we'll use the Parents number)
  • 24% - between 18 and 34 years old (x 41% Streaming)
  • 22% - between 35 and 49 years old (x 25.7% Streaming = blend of Echo/GenX/Boomer)
  • 33% - above 50 years old (x 15% Streaming = we'll blend the Baby Boomer/Mature numbers)
If they had the same adoption rates of Netflix Streaming U.S. Adults, that would come up with 1.12 million households with access to the over-the-top WWE Network (assuming distribution on the same platforms as Netflix).  

(Yes, this doesn't take into account the price difference.)

Approximate 1,128,500 WWE Network Viewer Demographics (based on 4 million base)
  • 310,800 viewers (children under 18) out of 840k
  • 393,600 viewers (adults 18 to 34) out of 960k
  • 226,160 viewers (adults 35 to 49) out of 880k
  • 198,000 viewers (adults 50+) out of the 1.32 million
But assuming that a single subscription will give access to more than one person (as evidenced by the Netflix calculations), we need to apply an adjustment between 35%-52% to this number.

35.2% of 1,128,560 viewers (all ages) = 397,253 subscribers
52.2% of 817,760 viewers (18+ viewers) = 426,871 subscribers

Again, it seems to suggest that somewhere around 415,000 subscribers on a 4 million weekly base would be realistic if people were to adopt to the over-the-top WWE Network akin to Netflix.

415,000 annual domestic subscribers is about $49.8 million in annual revenue which would be twice what WWE Studios has ever produced and about 1.5x times what the Digital Media segment normally does. However, that would not cover both start-up costs and revenue cannibalization.

Chris Harrington (@mookieghana)
chris.harrington@gmail.com

Monday, December 16, 2013

WWE January - November 2013 Stats



I took results from Wrestling Observers and filled in the gaps (Axxess and PPVs) using The History of WWE 2013 page. Excludes Rumbles. Does include some "forfeit" wins which aren't really matches (for instance, Axel over HHH).

Records

175+ matches
Daniel Bryan: 211 matches (172-31-8 = 85%)
Dean Ambrose: 198 matches (70-123-5 = 36%)
Seth Rollins: 195 matches (46-146-3 = 24%)
Randy Orton: 194 matches (129-56-9 = 70%)
Roman Reigns: 186 matches (45-137-4 = 25%)
Alberto Del Rio: 180 matches (123-52-5 = 70%)
Ryback: 179 matches (102-75-2 = 58%)

150+ matches
Antonio Cesaro: 173 matches (62-110-1 = 36%)
Damien Sandow: 172 matches (38-132-2 = 22%)
Dolph Ziggler: 164 matches (51-111-2 = 31%)
Cody Rhodes: 153 matches (48-103-2 = 32%)

125+ matches
Zack Ryder: 144 matches (66-78-0 = 46%)
Jack Swagger: 142 matches (53-86-3 = 38%)
Kofi Kingston: 137 matches (69-68-0 = 50%)
Sheamus: 134 matches (106-24-4 = 82%)
Heath Slater: 133 matches (4-128-1 = 3%)
Titus O'Neil: 133 matches (33-100-0 = 25%)
Tensai: 132 matches (93-38-1 = 71%)
Curtis Axel: 130 matches (58-68-4 = 46%)
The Miz: 130 matches (62-66-2 = 48%)
Wade Barrett: 129 matches (58-71-0 = 45%)
John Cena: 128 matches (122-5-1 = 96%)
Darren Young: 127 matches (32-95-0 = 25%)
Brodus Clay: 125 matches (93-31-1 = 75%)

100+ matches
Jimmy Uso: 124 matches (79-45-0 = 64%)
Jey Uso: 123 matches (79-44-0 = 64%)
Fandango: 120 matches (53-66-1 = 45%)
Justin Gabriel: 120 matches (56-63-1 = 47%)
Kane: 119 matches (98-20-1 = 83%)
R-Truth: 116 matches (67-49-0 = 58%)
Big Show: 114 matches (55-56-3 = 50%)
Kaitlyn: 113 matches (82-29-2 = 74%)
Big E Langston: 106 matches (34-71-1 = 32%)
Great Khali: 104 matches (76-26-2 = 75%)

75+ matches
Drew McIntyre: 99 matches (8-91-0 = 8%)
CM Punk: 95 matches (69-22-4 = 76%)
Jinder Mahal: 92 matches (6-86-0 = 7%)
AJ Lee: 90 matches (36-53-1 = 40%)
Natalya: 90 matches (73-16-1 = 82%)
Tamina Snuka: 86 matches (10-75-1 = 12%)
Brie Bella: 84 matches (28-54-2 = 34%)
Naomi: 77 matches (63-12-2 = 84%)
Mark Henry: 76 matches (50-26-0 = 66%)
Aksana: 75 matches (1-74-0 = 1%)

50+ matches
Primo: 74 matches (26-48-0 = 35%)
Epico: 72 matches (26-46-0 = 36%)
Santino Marella: 64 matches (41-23-0 = 64%)
Luke Harper: 57 matches (38-18-1 = 68%)
Chris Jericho: 55 matches (34-20-1 = 63%)
Alex Riley: 54 matches (20-34-0 = 37%)
Layla: 53 matches (36-16-1 = 69%)
Alicia Fox: 51 matches (15-35-1 = 30%)
Rob Van Dam: 50 matches (34-14-2 = 71%)

25+ matches
Erick Rowan: 48 matches (34-14-0 = 71%)
Sin Cara: 48 matches (28-19-1 = 60%)
Bray Wyatt: 47 matches (41-6-0 = 87%)
Bo Dallas: 38 matches (24-14-0 = 63%)
Cameron: 38 matches (31-7-0 = 82%)
Ted DiBiase: 38 matches (23-14-1 = 62%)
Nikki Bella: 33 matches (16-17-0 = 48%)
Christian: 31 matches (22-9-0 = 71%)
Goldust: 30 matches (25-5-0 = 83%)
Hunico: 27 matches (0-27-0 = 0%)
Curt Hawkins: 25 matches (0-24-1 = 0%)

10+ matches
Yoshi Tatsu: 24 matches (14-8-2 = 64%)
Tyson Kidd: 19 matches (10-9-0 = 53%)
Billy Gunn: 18 matches (17-0-1 = 100%)
Road Dogg: 18 matches (17-0-1 = 100%)
JTG: 17 matches (0-17-0 = 0%)
Brad Maddox: 16 matches (1-15-0 = 6%)
Paul Heyman: 16 matches (2-14-0 = 13%)
Camacho: 14 matches (0-14-0 = 0%)
David Otunga: 14 matches (0-14-0 = 0%)
Corey Graves: 12 matches (0-12-0 = 0%)
Ricardo Rodriguez: 12 matches (5-5-2 = 50%)
Adrian Neville: 11 matches (10-1-0 = 91%)
Sami Zayn: 11 matches (8-3-0 = 73%)
Leo Kruger: 10 matches (0-10-0 = 0%)

5+ matches
Rey Mysterio: 9 matches (6-3-0 = 67%)
Rosa Mendes: 8 matches (0-8-0 = 0%)
Xavier Woods: 8 matches (5-3-0 = 63%)
Eva Marie: 7 matches (4-3-0 = 57%)
William Regal: 7 matches (4-3-0 = 57%)
Paige: 6 matches (4-2-0 = 67%)
Summer Rae: 6 matches (1-5-0 = 17%)
Zeb Colter: 6 matches (0-4-2 = 0%)
Conor O'Brien: 5 matches (0-5-0 = 0%)
Eve Torres: 5 matches (3-2-0 = 60%)
HHH: 5 matches (1-4-0 = 20%)

Multiple Matches
Tyler Breeze: 4 matches (0-4-0 = 0%)
Undertaker: 4 matches (3-1-0 = 75%)
Brock Lesnar: 3 matches (2-1-0 = 67%)
Emma: 3 matches (1-2-0 = 33%)
Hornswoggle: 3 matches (3-0-0 = 100%)
Jo Jo: 3 matches (3-0-0 = 100%)
Mason Ryan: 3 matches (3-0-0 = 100%)
The Rock: 3 matches (2-1-0 = 67%)

Just a dash
Jamie Noble: 2 matches (2-0-0 = 100%)
Brooklyn Brawler: 1 matches (1 loss)
Dante Dash: 1 matches (1 loss)
Ezekiel Jackson: 1 matches (1 win)
Jim Duggan: 1 matches (1 win)
Torito: 1 matches (1 win)
Vickie Guerrero: 1 matches (1 loss)

Highest Win Percentage
Daniel Bryan; 211 matches (172-31-8 = 85%)
Sheamus; 134 matches (106-24-4 = 82%)
John Cena; 128 matches (122-5-1 = 96%)
Kane; 119 matches (98-20-1 = 83%)
CM Punk; 95 matches (69-22-4 = 76%)
Natalya; 90 matches (73-16-1 = 82%)
Naomi; 77 matches (63-12-2 = 84%)
Bray Wyatt; 47 matches (41-6-0 = 87%)
Cameron; 38 matches (31-7-0 = 82%)
Goldust; 30 matches (25-5-0 = 83%)
Billy Gunn; 18 matches (17-0-1 = 100%)
Road Dogg; 18 matches (17-0-1 = 100%)
Adrian Neville; 11 matches (10-1-0 = 91%)

Lowest Win Percentage
Seth Rollins; 195 matches (46-146-3 = 24%)
Roman Reigns; 186 matches (45-137-4 = 25%)
Damien Sandow; 172 matches (38-132-2 = 22%)
Titus O'Neil; 133 matches (33-100-0 = 25%)
Heath Slater; 133 matches (4-128-1 = 3%)
Drew McIntyre; 99 matches (8-91-0 = 8%)
Jinder Mahal; 92 matches (6-86-0 = 7%)
Tamina Snuka; 86 matches (10-75-1 = 12%)
Aksana; 75 matches (1-74-0 = 1%)
Hunico; 27 matches (0-27-0 = 0%)
Curt Hawkins; 25 matches (0-24-1 = 0%)
JTG; 17 matches (0-17-0 = 0%)
Brad Maddox; 16 matches (1-15-0 = 6%)
Paul Heyman; 16 matches (2-14-0 = 13%)
Camacho; 14 matches (0-14-0 = 0%)
David Otunga; 14 matches (0-14-0 = 0%)
Corey Graves; 12 matches (0-12-0 = 0%)
Leo Kruger; 10 matches (0-10-0 = 0%)

Observations
  • I don't think there's been a year where HHH had this low of a win percentage but it's a bit deceiving as his "losses" were to Curtis Axel (hell of a lot of good that did) and trading with Lesnar.
  • Jamie Noble worked in Texas back in January beating Tensai on consecutive nights. Old friends reuniting?
  • Harper had 57 matches while Rowan had 48. Titus had 133 while Darren Young had 127. Jimmy Uso had same number of matches as his brother (I missed an Uso while counting Survivor Series matchse).
  • Most NXT guys didn't win much but Neville (Pac) was quite the exception with a 10-1 record. He beat Slater (3x), Hawkins (2x), teamed with Bo Dallas ('member him?!) and Sin Cara to beat PTP & McGillicutty and also took out Sami Zayn. He was bested in a singles matches with Primo though.
  • Yes, Jason the Gangster (JTG) is still employed. He lost to Alex Riley (there's someone on the totem pole lower than him), Ryder (ditto), Brodus Clay, Justin Gabriel, Kofi Kingston, Khali and Santino.
  • Heyman's victories were over CM Skunk (along with RybacK) and when he teamed with Axel in a No DQ Handicap Elimination Match at NOC and Ryback beat Punk up.
  • Zeb had no wins. Sadly, I don't think we're ever going to see a Paul Heyman versus Zeb Colter match.
  • Aksana's one win was over Cameron on 6/4/13 in Uniondale, NY at the Nassau Coliseum. Maybe she'll get that date tattooed AJ-style.
  • I assume that Hunico as Sin Cara 2013 started in December so he was still winless through the end of November.
  • Cena's losses this year were to the Shield (w/ Daniel Bryan & Kane on 4/29), against Curtis Axel (5/27 and 6/3 - gawd, they really did try to get him over on paper), against the Shield (w/ Ryback & Sheamus at Elimination Chamber) and when Bryan pinned him at SummerSlam. (Plus the TLC match.)
  • Daniel Bryan, The Shield, Orton, Alberto Del Rio, The Ryback, Cesaro, Sandow, Ryder, Titus O'Neil, Heath Slater, Justin Gabriel and The Great Khali all had 5+ matches for Jan-Nov. Poor Ryder is on that list but gets so very, very little airtime. 
  • Ziggler's concussion break was over a month spanning his 5/6 (loss to ADR) to 6/11 (loss to Jericho & ADR while teaming with Big E)
Feuds with most singles matches?
  • Kaitlyn vs. Tamina Snuka: 45 singles matches and 12 tag matches
  • Daniel Bryan vs. Randy Orton: 37 singles matches and 4 tag matches
  • John Cena vs. Ryback: 36 singles matches and 11 tag matches
  • Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler: 28 singles matches and 5 tag matches
  • Big Show vs. Randy Orton: 26 singles matches and 8 tag matches and 4 handicap matches
  • Alberto Del Rio vs. Big Show: 25 singles matches and 5 tag matches
  • AJ Lee vs. Kaitlyn: 24 singles matches and 14 tag matches
  • Antonio Cesaro vs. The Miz: 24 singles matches and 4 tag matches
  • Aksana vs. Natalya: 24 singles matches and 9 tag matches
  • Alberto Del Rio vs. Jack Swagger: 20 singles matches and 8 tag matches and 1 handicap match

Feuds with the most tag matches?
  • Daniel Bryan vs the Shield (Rollins/Reigns) had 70+ tag matches
  • Kane vs the Shield (Rollings/Reigns) had 50+ tag matches
  • Sheamus vs the Shield had 35+ tag matches
  • Tons of Funk (Tensai/Brodus Clay) vs Rhodes Scholars (Cody & Rhodes/Damien Sandow) had 34+ tag matches
  • Cena vs the Shield had 30+ tag matches
  • Randy Orton vs the Shield had 30+ tag matches
  • Usos vs Prime Time Players (Darren Young/Titus O’Neil) had 27+ tag matches
  • Goldust vs the Shield had 22+ tag matches
  • 3MB vs Usos had 18+ tag matches
  • 3MB vs Tons of Funk had 18+ tag matches
  • Ryback vs the Shield had 25+ tag matches
  • Wyatts vs the Usos had 17+ tag matches
-Chris Harrington (@mookieghana)

Thursday, December 12, 2013

39 Page PDF - summary of WWE Network and WWE TV Rights Stories

#wrestlenomics Analysis: WWE Network Viability
by Chris Harrington
A collection of pieces during the lead-up to the WWE Network launch.
All pieces originally appeared online at my wrestling blog: indeedwrestling.blogspot.com
Pieces
WWE Rolling 12 Month Revenue Trends – published 10/31/13
Canthe WWE Network succeed? – published 11/1/13
The WWE Whirlwind – published 11/20/13 (published in Figure Four Weekly newsletter)
WWE Network to featureWrestlemania? – published 11/21/13
PredictTV Rights Fees for 2015 – published 12/9/2013
1 million subscribers...  – published 12/10/2013

Preface
I’ve been chronicling the day-by-day machinations of the WWE for the past two months.  They’re wrestling with two enormous hurdles: TV Rights Fee Negotiations for 2015 and launching the WWE Network in 2014. Each week I’ve been pulling together the speculative data with the known details and offering my thoughts. As you go through this compendium you’ll see how the facts on the ground have continued to evolve. These pieces straddle two business presentations: October’s 3rd Quarter Conference Call (where nothing huge was announced but the stock rallied enormously) to the December UBS Global Media and Communications Conference (where WWE CFO George Barrios confirmed the company’s frustrations with gaining traction on launching the WWE Network as a Premium Channel). In between that, it became evident that WWE was moving ahead in 1st quarter of 2014 for launching the WWE Network.  We’ll know a lot more after the January 8, 2014 CES event. There’s plenty of speculation (Over-the-top or Traditionally distributed? Will it include all PPVs and even Wrestlemania? What’s the Price?). In the meanwhile, I hope you’ll find this analysis interesting.                                                      
- Chris Harrington, December 12 2013

If you’re interested in obtaining #wrestlenomics (work in progress), please email Chris.
 Pricing
$12 PDF (will include both volumes)
$25 PDF and Print Version (will include both volumes)
$45 PDF, Print Version, Excel Data (will include both volumes and Excel source data for Analytics)
 Paypal accepted.
 Note: I’m still writing the book (the collection here is a good example of the sort of analysis to expect).  I have released several hundred pages of previews (such as WWE One-Shot Stars or JCP/WCW 1983-2001 Records Book) and all backers will continue to receive these.

40-page FREE PDF is available at: https://sites.google.com/site/chrisharrington/mookieghana-prowrestlingstatistics/wwe_network

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

WWE Chief Strategy and Financial Officer George Barrios at the UBS 41st Annual Global Media and Communications Conference

WWE Chief Strategy and Financial Officer George Barrios at the UBS 41st Annual Global Media and Communications Conference

Analysis by Chris Harrington (@mookieghana)

Yesterday (Dec 10), WWE CFO and newly appointed Chief Strategy Officer George Barrios presented at the UBS 41st Annual Global Media and Communications Conference (see agenda here) alongside some heavy-hitters including from Walt Disney, Manchester United, New York Times, Time Warner, Sprint, Fox, CBS, TiVo, Clear Channel, Verizon, AOL, Sinclair, News Corp, Viacom.

WWE has presented annually at this conference since at least 2006. (And previous to that, they made appearances at other related conferences such as the UBS Warburg Media Week Conference more than a decade ago. Linda McMahon often presented at these events prior to Barrios' arrival in 2008 replacing veteran WWE employee and then-CFO Frank Serpe).

While Barrios' presentation hasn't yet been posted on the WWE Corporate website, a replay should be available soon. Luckily, Stock Market Analysis Website Seeking Alpha does have a transcript from the event available: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1890451-world-wrestling-entertainments-management-presents-at-ubs-41st-annual-global-media-and-communications-conference-transcript?part=single

(As you read the transcript, one acronym you'll be seeing a lot is "MVPDs". That stands for "Multichannel Video Programming Distributor" which is just shorthand for the systems that deliver subscription television programming - namely various cable television systems and satellite providers.)

With Vince McMahon's looming January 8 announcement at CES, everyone is hungry for solid details amongst the rumormill.

Yet, unidentified analyst #2 probably put it best when they noted, "we know you are not in a position to announce anything today despite the swirl of rumors in the press." So while there are some interesting quotes from the conference, I don't think there's anything groundbreaking being announced except the acknowledgement about different costs between "over-the-top" and traditional distribution.

Let's begin the dissection:

  • Notes on upping domestic "prime-time" programming from 4 hours to 6 hours (via adding an hour to Monday Night Raw and adding Ion's Main Event.) 
  • Brags about deals with YouTube and Hulu Plus (though the mysterious Yahoo! deal from earlier this year is left out.) 
  • Continuing to target the Indian market ("an absolute jewel for us")- specifically noting that they'd lower price toy line for that market. Also speaking of toys, expect to start seeing more "construction" (think LEGOs) WWE toys very soon from The Bridge Direct
  • Lots of WWE-ized television metrics to attempt to prove that Raw & Smackdown are the most dominate programming in the history of man watching fire to stay entertained. No doubt a talking point stolen from the TV Rights negotiations is the claim that, "If Raw comes off USA they drop down to four or five (in cable channel rankings)." 
  • Domestically 90% of their content is viewed live by the audience and they own 100% of the I.P. (This isn't a minor point - as a company like Netflix spends billions on rights fees each year. Barrios himself reiterated this point in the Q&A when he contrasted WWE's self-owned library with the enormous "cost of acquisition" that Netflix & HBO face.) The video library stands at "over 120,000 hours". They're really pushing the "live content viewing" as being another reason they are analogous to sports programming (and hence worthy of getting rate increases akin to NASCAR and others.) 
  • Bizarre jab about NBC's Sound of Music: "Somebody told me they didn't like the show, did great numbers but it’s live." 
  • We get a "We're Not Just White People!" speech about how NASCAR is 92% Caucasian while WWE is very diverse and over-indexes in Latino and African-American. 
Their Priorities are (and this is interesting to see Network leapfrog TV Contracts in this list):
I. WWE Network

II. TV Rights Contracts for Raw, Smackdown and UK/India Markets (or in corporate-speak, "key content agreements")

III. "Monetizing that large Digital Audience"
I. Regarding the WWE Network

"The network for us is taking those ala-carte pay-per-views, bundling them together, using our live range, our production capacity to program around those pay-per-views 24x7 linear as well as a large VOD component. Home entertainment library, previous pay-per-views, everything our fan is always clamoring about, all in one place. So that most valuable content that today costs $600 or $700 at retail, more linear content and VOD packages at somewhere between $10 and $15, we’ve done a lot of research."  - Barrios

They are admitting that for 3 hours of content, $45 to $65 is "pretty expensive". And also that while they're working with the distributors (MVPDs in their jargon) to "transform the pay-per-view business together", it's "been a bit of a slog". Translation: Cable & Satellite Operators aren't interested in giving up 50% split on high-dollar PPVs (even at the low domestic consumption rates for non-Wrestlemania events) in exchange for piece of a much cheaper new Premium Channel with more viewers. (We did the math in yesterday's blog.)
There's a lot of talk about "consumption of long form video over-the-top" that "we all have Netflix to thank for this." He's talking about using internet and cellular networks to deliver movies and television shows directly to us.

How do people watch streaming services?
  • Directly on a computer (48% of Netflix users, 61% Hulu Plus users - increases from last year) 
  • On Mobile Phone (11% of Netflix users, 10% of Hulu Plus users - large drop from last year) 
  • Wii (26% of Netflix users, 12% of Hulu Plus users) 
  • Internet-Enabled TV (12% of Netflix users, 9% of Hulu Plus users - down from last year) 
  • Connecting Computer to TV (11% of Netflix users, 18% of Hulu Plus users) 
  • On PS3 (12% of Netflix users, 12% of Hulu Plus users) 
  • On iPad (5% of Netflix users, 12% of Hulu Plus users - down from last year) 
  • On other Tablet (6% of Netflix users, 7% of Hulu Plus users) 
  • Internet-connected BluRay Player (14% of Netflix users, 12% of Hulu Plus users) 
  • XBox Live (13% of Netflix users, 16% of Hulu Plus users) 
  • Roku Box (12% of Netflix users, 23% of Hulu Plus users)
Source: 2013 Nielsen "Over-the-Top Video Analysis"

I also want to emphasize that Barrios invoked Netflix's name in regards to the growing trend of watching streaming content -- not because the WWE was discussing launching their Network as a Netflix tier. He was crediting them with doing the work involved with "creating the environment and the consumption habit to watch long form video-over-the-top."

Barrios does specifically note that two years ago they didn't believe it was viable to build a network that would only be delivered "over-the-top" (i.e. online only/not as a basic or Premium channel). Now, they believe that it's possible.

However, Barrios insists that, "We continue to work with the MVPDs, see if we can knockout a deal in traditional distribution." In other words, WWE is still holding out hope and supposedly it's not a completely dead deal that you won't see a WWE Network available for subscription from your local cable company or satellite operator. Why is that? Simply put, they're still not sure they can get there. While "pricing is different, splits are different, costs are different ... about a million subscribers (is) break-even with your pay-per-view cannibalization".

Regarding the difference between an over-the-top network (online-only) and traditional Premium channel, Barrios did call out:
"If you go over-the-top you have significantly more costs, you have to do things like CDN costs, credit card fees, customer service."
Normally, these costs (bandwidth for VOD delivery, customer service, billing) are being handled by the MVPDs. In the alternative model, WWE would need to take these on (or more likely subcontract responsibility to another service such as MLB Advanced Media.)

II. Regarding Television Agreements

All four agreements (Raw on USA, Smackdown on SyFy, SkyB in UK and Taj TV in India) will begin by January 2015 and they believe they'll have their domestic agreements done by April 2014 (which is the same dates and same confidence they projected about 45 days ago at the 3rd Quarter Conference Call). Altogether, these four deals would represent about $100 million of their $140 million in "media licensing revenues". They do acknowledge that the NBA deal is still coming up but insist that since most of the other major live sports content have already been "signed up for the long term", WWE must be the real opportunity left out there.

III. Regarding Digital Products

While WWE has "220 million social media followers" they also admit that they are "not doing a good job" at monetizing that audience. Specifically, they want to look at "mobile goods, mobile apps, mobile gaming" (which may be related to the recent launch of John Cena's Fast Lane mobile app). It's not clear what exactly they're planning on doing in this realm, but it's apparently a big part of their three-track plan for the future.

Question and Answer Session

A few questions were about why WWE lags so far behind the other live content generators like NASCAR (and in major advertising from companies like Pepsi or Coke.) There isn't a real meaningful answer delivered and Barrios even ends with, "We can’t find data to explain the gap." There's certainly answers about in how the pro-wrestling audience has been perceived by advertisers in the past (a reputation that may or may not be rightly earned) but when you're trying to argue that there shouldn't be a gap, I didn't expect the CFO to start throwing out red flags why their brand might be tarnished. What's curious is how everyone is pretending they have "relatively young demographic" when a significant portion (half, I believe) of the WWE watching audience is over the age of 40.

The second question basically turned into Barrios lamenting that MVPDs won't get on board with the WWE Network.
George Barrios: "And the pushback continues. I want to be fair to -- you are having this commercial discussion, everybody wants what everybody wants and sometimes you can’t agree on what is fair terms. I don't want to mischaracterize the other side in the discussion. What I will say is I have not understood and still do not understand why the pay-per-view transition to a subscription service delivered by the MVPDs did not make sense, I still don't understand it."
A response to a later question discussed the company's investment in Tout. Barrios mentions they recently invested in Hero Ventures which is a company that "..develops and produces live entertainment experiences that excite and engage consumers through immersive innovation into worlds of iconic intellectual properties... Hero Ventures’ inaugural production is an ambitious touring property featuring Marvel Entertainment’s Universe of characters, including Spider-Man, Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America, Thor, X-Men, The Fantastic Four, Wolverine, The Avengers and thousands more." (It's certainly no coincidence that the Hero Ventures Board of Directors includes WWE BOD member Basil DeVito)

Back to Tout, Barrios admits that "we said well, once we start using this on our show it's going to get downloaded by everybody who is watching, it's going to drive up the valuation". However, since Tout failed to capture the consumer market (no doubt impacted by popularity of Twitter's Vine), the Tout company strategy has shifted to becoming a "publishing tool" for outlets like the Wall Street Journal.

Regarding emerging markets, an interesting point is brought up about "what are the lessons learned around where the content really resonates?" WWE's reply is that they emphasize "localization" - such as editing the Middle East show to address sensibility concerns and doing voice-overs (announcers) for Mexico in Spanish. However, the more interesting discussion starts when Barrios alludes to looking for "deeper localization" when it comes to producing new content and utilizing their library - presumably as they look to launching the network both domestically but also internationally. (Barrios lists a number of countries - Canada, UK, Australia, Singapore, "Nordics" and Hong Kong - but that was more in the context of places where English-language content would do quite well should it be available internationally.)

Conclusion
In the end, it was the normal mix of WWE Corporate-speak and rose-colored glasses that one comes to expect when you read investor presentations or listen to conference calls. However, it seems to confirm that WWE is aggressively considering an "over-the-top" route (online only) as opposed to a Premium Channel, mostly because there still isn't enough interest from the MVPDs in switching from PPV income to Premium Channel income. We're less than a month away from the big 1/8/14 announcement - this may be the last serious batch of talking points from WWE until the CES event.


Tuesday, December 10, 2013

1 million subscribers...

David Parker asked a poignant question on Twitter:
Is it fair to suggest that a million streaming subscribers is more difficult to get than a million premium channel subscribers? 
It's a good question. 

We're talking about (as we have been for weeks) the WWE Network.  Does it have a better chance as a streaming network (using modern Gaming Consoles, iPads, Roku boxes, ChromeCast, PCs, possible mobile technology, etc.) and or a premium channel (via traditional Cable & Satellite Providers)?

It really comes down to support. 

If WWE had the full support of the cable & satellite providers, I think they could make a concerted push to reach a million subscribers. (Though this would no doubt involve incentives and bundling similar to what is done with premium channels such as HBO, Showtime, Encore, Starz, Cinemax). 

However, ultimately the evidence (demonstrated  by a lack of traction) suggests the conglomerates are not interested.  Participating cable and satellite operators would be forgoing the roughly half of the $45-$55 monthly PPV split they currently get in order to achieve a a monthly majority split on a $10-$15 premium channel.  

A. 250k subscribers at $10/month (60% split for the operator) = $18 million annually for operator
B. 250k subscribers at $15/month (60% split for the operator) = $27 million annually for operator
C. 500k subscribers at $10/month (60% split for the operator) = $36 million annually for operator
D. 500k subscribers at $15/month (60% split for the operator) = $54 million annually for operator

Meanwhile, WWE averages about 1.6 million domestic non-WM buys annually. That works out to about 133,000 buys a month.

133k monthly buys at $25/month = $40 million annually for operator

This state (current state) fits in snugly between scenario C and scenario D.

So, unless the cable & satellite operators believe WWE is going to pull at an average of 500,000 subscribers annually (and that's before we've even factored in the role of Wrestlemania), it's not necessarily in their interest to provide a gateway for a network that offers PPVs at 20% the current price (unless they can more than triple their current monthly domestic base of purchasers).  Wrestlemania throws an even bigger wrench into things because that's a high-price item and the split is very profitable for both WWE and the operators (since it's been averaging more than 630,000 domestic buys over the last five years).

Honestly, the only way I see the Premium Channel hitting a million subscribers annually would be to include Wrestlemania and offer incentives/bundling (i.e. free months) similar to what is done with other premium channels.  They could hit a 1,000,000 people, but it would be at a much lower ASP (average selling price) than full $10/month (or $15/month) retail.

Now, let's flip it around - what is the scenario that WWE hits a million people using only a streaming service?

Let's exclude the world in which WWE becomes an outgrowth of either Hulu or Netflix.  If that happened, it would be quite a game changer (for all involved) and the large base of established subscribers would put the million 'WWE Network' subscriber idea in the realm of possibility; however, I just don't see that situation being likely at this moment.

Instead, let's look at the scenario that appears to be playing out today - WWE Network launches as a streaming "channel" built on the back of MLB Advanced Technology streaming services and includes a large VOD library.  Right now the WWE App has been downloaded in excess of 7 million times (I believe last night's RAW mentioned 9 million,)  That's a free service, worldwide that they've pushed heavily for months on end.

Netflix has above 32 million domestic subscribers.  Hulu Plus has surpassed 4 million subscribers.  Compare with a mega-Premium channel like HBO which has over 30 million with Showtime at over 20 million.

Is it possible to envision a world where WWE can reach 1 million (a quarter of their RAW audience, a tenth of all people who have downloaded their app) subscribers for an online-only network?  Not in 2014. Especially when you consider that half of WWE fans are over the age of 40 and far less likely to be using the new technology required to access an online-only WWE Network on their television.

 However, in the long run, it still feels like the approach that is going to pay dividends in 3-5 years, especially since it seems far more likely to bring back more lapsed fans and more likely to entice younger fans to join the program.

-Chris Harrington (chris.harrington@gmail.com) 
twitter: @mookieghana

Monday, December 09, 2013

Can we predict WWE TV Rights Fees for 2015?

There's been plenty of talk from WWE about how they're expecting dramatic TV Rights Fees increases when they renegotiate key television deals set to go into effect at higher rates in 2015.
They're looking at USA (RAW), SyFy (Smackdown), UK (BSkyB), and India (Taj TV) which "represent more than two-thirds of our 2012 annual TV rights revenue".

WWE is banking on the Escalating Sports Rights Phenomenon and their large base on active, live viewers (which they feel proportional to TV Rights Fees is a steal).

The question is - how much can they realistically expect to get?

First, let's try to put TV Rights Fees into perspective. I've pulled the annual fees for the last eight years from their SEC filings and done some estimates on how many episodes of each of their major shows that they aired.



2006: $85.5M ($54.9M domestic + $30.6M int'l) in TV Rights + $7.4M in TV Advertising
* 52 episodes of RAW on USA (104 hours)
* 37 episodes of Smackdown on UPN (74 hours) + 15 episodes of Smackdown on CW (30 hours)
* 29 episodes of ECW on SciFi (29 hours)
* 53 episodes of Sunday Night Heat (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 23 episodes of Velocity (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 53 episodes of AM Raw on USA
* 2 episodes of SNME
* 1 episode of Tribute to the Troops

2007: $92.4M ($59.6M domestic + $32.8M int'l) in TV Rights + $5.9M in TV Advertising
* 53 episodes of RAW on USA (106 hours)
* 52 episodes of Smackdown on CW (104 hours)
* 52 episodes of ECW on SciFi (52 hours)
* 52 episodes of Sunday Night Heat (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 52 episodes of AM Raw on USA
* 2 episodes of SNME
* 1 episode of Tribute to the Troops

2008: $100.7M ($63.5M domestic + $37.2M int'l) in TV Rights + $7.4M in TV Advertising
* 52 episodes of RAW on USA (104 hours)
* 39 episodes of Smackdown on CW (78 hours) + 13 episodes of Smackdown on MyNetworkTV (26 hours)
* 53 episodes of ECW on SciFi (53 hours)
* 22 episodes of Sunday Night Heat (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 52 episodes of AM Raw on USA
* 1 episode of SNME
* 1 episode of Tribute to the Troops

2009: $111.9M ($72.8M domestic + $39.1M int'l) in TV Rights + $7.7M in TV Advertising
* 52 episodes of RAW on USA (104 hours)
* 52 episodes of Smackdown on MyNetworkTV (104 hours)
* 38 episodes of WWE Superstars on WGN America (38 hours)
* 52 episodes of ECW on SciFi/SyFy (33 hours)
* 52 episodes of AM Raw on USA
* 1 episode of Tribute to the Troops

2010: $127.0M ($81.6M domestic + $45.4M int'l) in TV Rights + $5.9M in TV Advertising
* 52 episodes of RAW on USA (107 hours)
* 39 episodes of Smackdown on MyNetworkTV (78 hours) + 14 episodes of Smackdown on SyFy (28 hours)
* 52 episodes of WWE Superstars on WGN America (52 hours)
* 7 episodes of ECW on SyFy (7 hours)
* 32 episodes of NXT on SyFy (32 hours)
* 13 episodes of NXT (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 52 episode of AM Raw on USA
* 1 episode of Tribute to the Troops (2 hours USA, 1 hour NBC)

2011: $131.5M ($80.3M domestic + $51.2M int'l) in TV Rights + $1.1M in TV Advertising
* 52 episodes of RAW on USA (108 hours)
* 52 episodes of Smackdown on SyFy (104 hours)
* 14 episodes of WWE Superstars on WGN America (14 hours)
* 38 episodes of WWE Superstars (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 52 episodes of NXT (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 52 episodes of AM Raw on USA
* 1 episode of Tribute to the Troops (2 hours USA, 1 hour NBC)

2012: $139.5M ($88.9M domestic + $50.6M int'l) in TV Rights + $1.4M in TV Advertising
* 53 episodes of RAW on USA (131 hours), era of 3-hour RAWs weekly begins with Raw 1000
* 52 episodes of Smackdown on SyFy (104 hours)
* 13 episodes of Main Event on Ion (13 hours)
* 19 episodes of Saturday Morning Slam on CW (9.5 hours)
* 52 episodes of WWE Superstars (shown int'l/wwe.com/hulu)
* 24 episodes of NXT (shown int'l/wwe.com)
* 14 episodes of NXT (Developmental Territory, Hulu, int'l?)
* 53 episodes of AM Raw on USA
* 1 episode of Tribute to the troops (2 hours USA, 1 hour NBC)

2013 YTD (9 months): $119.6M ($78.5M domestic + $41.1M int'l) + $1.4M in TV Advertising (3 quarters)
2013 (estimated Q4): $168.4M ($106.1M domestic + $62.3M int'l) + $1.8M in TV Advertising (estimating Q4 2013)
* 52 episodes of RAW on USA (156 hours), full year of 3-hour RAWs weekly
* 52 episodes of Smackdown on SyFy (104 hours)
* 15 episodes of Total Divas on E! (15 hours, 14 episodes + special)
* 52 episodes of Main Event on Ion (52 hours)
* 19 episodes of Saturday Morning Slam on CW (9.5 hours)
* 52 episodes of WWE Superstars (shown int'l/wwe.com/hulu)
* 52 episodes of NXT (Developmental Territory, Hulu, int'l?)
* 52 episodes of AM Raw on USA
* 1 episode of Tribute to the Troops on NBC

As you can see, from 2006-2012 TV Rights were going up by about $8.5M/yr but they jumped dramatically (more than $28M) this past year.

So, what can account for the extra money? What changed year-over-year?
  1. Full year of Raw at 3-hours (about 25 more three-hour episodes YOY).
  2. Total Divas! began airing on E! (will have 14 episodes + 1 special by end of the year).
  3. Full year of Main Event (about 39 more episodes).
I've been trying to work through the rates for the shows, especially for the latest 2011-2013 run.

I'm thinking what NBCU pays domestically for RAW+Smackdown went from about $84 million in 2012 to $93.5M in 2013 and that WWE is getting more than $600k/episode for Total Divas (probably above $9M domestically for the whole run).

So, if my math is any good (and I haven't checked my numbers against what Dave has written in the Observer, so I could be way off) and WWE is getting around $90M domestically today for Smackdown + RAW, how much do you think they could make on domestic TV Rights?


Predict WWE's Domestic TV Rights in 2015
$100M to $125M - no significant increase for RAW/Smackdown
$125M to $175M - about 25% to 50% increase on RAW/Smackdown
$175M to $250M - RAW/Smackdown doubles
$250M to $300M - RAW/Smackdown triples
$300M to $350M - RAW/Smackdown quadruples
Above $350M

Saturday, December 07, 2013

How do you tabulate all those stats?

Perhaps people are interested in my #wrestlenomics process.  Let's start with taking results and turning them into win-loss records by wrestler.

Here we do go.

Step One: Find a good datasource.

This can actually be the hardest step.  You want to find useful, concise, complete and accurate summary of wrestling results. Each of these adjectives is important:

* Useful - An alternative word might be "consistent". You want to split your data by key terms.  It's terribly helpful if the transcriber uses the same set of words to describe match results and if you only have one match per line.
* Concise - it's FAR easier to compile your starting point if an entire year's worth of results are available on a single webpage. However, it's far too common to locate results which have been split into separate webpages; you often spend as much time opening and copying individual pages as you'll spend on the actual analysis.
* Complete - For instance, if you're working on annual results, make sure your dataset includes both television tapings and house shows.
* Accurate - You want to trust the source of the data.

For this tutorial, I'll start with one of my favorite websites: TheHistoryofWWE.com

Step Two: Transfer Data into your Spreadsheet

Data Source: Let's work on WWF 1991 from the The History of WWE for our example.
Spreadsheet Software: I am quite partial to Microsoft Excel so I'll be using MS Excel 2010 in this example, but you can use earlier (or newer) versions of Excel or other free applications like Google Docs.

a. "Select All" on the webpage
b.  Paste Special (right-click) and choose as "Text" in your spreadsheet (I usually start in cell B2).


Getting rid of any unusual formatting (bold text, images, merged cells) is key. You really want to start with a clean dataset.

Step Three: Label your Columns and number your lines

It's important that you can preserve the initial state of your data so you can always get the information in the same order as you started.

I started with all my text in cell B2 leaving Column A completely blank.

I label my columns:
A1 = linenum (this will be a unique number used to identify the data)
B1 = linetxt (this is the text from the webpage)
C1 = type (i.e. is it a wrestling match or a date or random note?)



 I label my first line of text with a number (typically in the form of YYYY0001 so in this case the first line is 19910001).
Label cell A2 as a number "19910001"

For the rest of column A, I use an equation to auto-number each line: A3 = A2+1
I carry the formula down to the end of the dataset.
There's several ways you can do that.
Method1: What I usually do is copy cell A3 (highlight cell A3, hit control+C), go the bottom of the sheet (control+End), moving over to column A, highlighting back to cell A3 (control+shift+up) and pasting the formula (control+V).
Method2: Grab the corner of the cell (your cursor will change from a large "open" plus-sign to a tiny plus-sign) and "drag" the formula down until you reach the bottom of the data.

Since may reorder data later in the process, let's freeze the data.
Copy column A and paste special values on Column A.  (highlight column A, control+C, move to cell A1, right-click Paste Special->Values).

It's also good form to freeze the top row so you can see your labels across the spreadsheet.
Menu: View => Freeze Panes => Freeze Top Row

Step Four: Label some obvious Data

The goal at the end of this exercise is to have every row of data labelled in column C.

These are the codes that I use:
  • blank = no data on this line
  • event = location & date of Wrestling Show (possibly attendance too)
  • match = wrestling match
  • other = battle royal or other contest (Divas Dance Contest, for instance)
  • taping = indicating beginning of a television or PPV taping
  • included = information on other stars who appeared on the card without match details
  • notes = other information that is not a wrestling match (for instance, who "no showed" due to injury)
 Add Filters to the top row. (Data => Filter)


Let's label the blank rows first.  Click on large grey down arrow in cell B1 for the filter and choose "Text Filters => Equals".

We'll start with the blank lines.  Press OK.

I label the top cell "blank" and copy it to the bottom.
(Type "blank" into cell C2, control+C, control+shift+end, hold down shift and press left until you only have column C highlighted, control+V).

The quickest way to reset things is to click on the Filter icon twice (turning it off and back on again).


Next thing to label is some obvious "notes". Notes on The History of WWE begin with a dash (-).



Next thing to label is some of the events "event". Some events on The History of WWE contain a @.

Label all of these as "event".

Step Five: Search for the Match buzzwords

There's several ways that matches are described:
  • Jimmy Snuka defeated Black Bart
  • Saba Simba pinned Buddy Rose
  • Davey Boy Smith fought the Warlord to a double count-out
  • Kerry Von Erich vs. Ted Dibiase
The keywords are: "defeated", "pinned", "fought" and "vs."
We're going to search for those four words.

D1 = "min"
E1 = " defeated " (leading space)
F1 = " pinned " (leading space)
G1 = " fought " (leading space)
H1 = " vs. " (leading space)
D2 = "=min(E2:H2)"  (find the minimum number in cells E2 through cells H2)

Copy formula in cell D2 all the way to the bottom of the sheet.




Next let's add the formula looking for the keyword in the linetxt.

E2: =IFERROR(FIND(E$1,$B2),"")

Copy this to cell F2, G2 and H2.  Then copy cells E2 through H2 to the bottom row.

Next, let's assign "match" if minimum (column D) fall between 1-124. Filter on column D.
Label any filtered rows as column C as "match".


Filter on Column B for matches that begin with "Included" or "Also included".

 Label any filtered rows as column C as "included".

Filter on Column B for matches that end with a ":" and label them as "taping"

Filter on Column B for matches that contain a " won " and label them as "other"

Filter on Column C for lines that have not yet been labelled.
There are about 45 (out of 5131 records) left.  Manually assign the remaining labels.

Most remaining lines are labelled "notes" or "event".  There are occasional misspelled match terms or alternate terms used such as "WWF IC Champion Mr. Perfect battled Davey Boy Smith to a draw" or "Jesse Bolt defetaed the Brooklyn Brawler".  Usually, it's easiest to manually edit these lines (switching "battled" to "fought" and fixing the spelling for "defeated").

Step Six: Attach Event Labels to all Matches

We're going to label column I as "event".
I2: =IF(C2="blank","blank",IF(C2="event",B2,I1))

Copy the formula to the bottom of the data.


Step Seven: Isolate Matches

Filter on "type" (Column C) on "match".

Copy the match data.


Paste Values on the next Sheet.

Part I ended with us pasting values of the Matches on a separate sheet.

We'll pick up there.

Step Six: Isolate the Winners and Losers


First, let's freeze the top row.

View => Freeze Panes => Freeze Top Row

We can delete columns E/F/G/H (defeated/pinned/fought/vs.)

Let's label column F as "word".

Using our minimum word calculation in column D (min), let's find the word from the column B (llinetxt).

F2:  =MID(B2,D2,FIND(" ",B2,D2+1)-D2)

Copy the formula to the bottom of the data.

Label column G as "AA" and column H as "BB".

AA will represent the wrestlers on the first team (typically the winners) and BB will be for the other wrestlers.

G2: =IFERROR(TRIM(RIGHT(LEFT(B2,D2),LEN(LEFT(B2,D2))-FIND(":",LEFT(B2,D2)))),TRIM(LEFT(B2,D2)))
H2: =RIGHT(RIGHT(B2,LEN(B2)-D2),LEN(RIGHT(B2,LEN(B2)-D2))-FIND(" ",RIGHT(B2,LEN(B2)-D2)))

Column G (AA) is looking at the wrestlers are the left side of the word (but to the right of a colon, for things like "Prime Time Wrestling - 11/4/91:").
Column H (BB) is looking at the wrestlers to the right side of the word.

 Step Seven: Trim down the "Losing" Team

 New Column Labels
Column I = "BB_Trim"
Column J = "min"
Column K = " to "
Column L = " at "
Column M = " after "
Column N = " follow"
Column O = " by "
Column P = " via "
Column Q = " when "
Column R = " with "
Column S = "; "
Column T = " in "

The goal is to reduce the length of the second team (which currently has a lot of extraneous data to the actual person/team, i.e. "Jake Roberts via count-out" to "Jake Roberts").

I2: =TRIM(IF(J2>0,LEFT(H2,J2-1),H2))
J2: =MIN(K2:T2)
K2: =IFERROR(FIND(K$1,$H2),"")
L2: =IFERROR(FIND(L$1,$H2),"")
M2: =IFERROR(FIND(M$1,$H2),"")
N2: =IFERROR(FIND(N$1,$H2),"")
O2: =IFERROR(FIND(O$1,$H2),"")
P2: =IFERROR(FIND(P$1,$H2),"")
Q2: =IFERROR(FIND(Q$1,$H2),"")
R2: =IFERROR(FIND(R$1,$H2),"")
S2: =IFERROR(FIND(S$1,$H2),"")
T2: =IFERROR(FIND(T$1,$H2),"")

Copy these formulas to the bottom of the data.

 Step Eight: Separate the Teams and the Valets

 Copy all of the match data from Sheet2 onto Sheet3 and special paste values.

Go ahead and trim the columns - we're going to keep:

Column Labels
Column A = "linenum"
Column B = "linetxt"
Column C = "type"
Column D = "min"
Column E = "event"
Column F = "word"
Column G = "AA"
Column H = BB_trim"

Freeze top row (View => Freeze Panes => Freeze Top Row)



Column I = "team"
Column J = "team_num"

First, we want to copy all of Column G to Column I.

I2: =G2
J2: ="AA"

Copy this to the bottom.

Next we want to copy all of the data from row 2 to the bottom of the data and append it to the bottom of the dataset.  Starting at the first row of this duplicated row (if you lose track, search for the linenum that is in cell A2, the second location is where your data begins repeating)..

I3800: =H3800
J3800: ="BB"

Copy this down to the bottom of your data.

 You should now have a column I which has the names of all of the teams involved in matches and column J which indicates whether they are part of team AA (usually the winners) or team BB (usually the losers).

Next we want to strip off the valets and manager information which is in the paratheses.

New Columns
Column K = "("
Column L = ")"
Column M = "()"
Column N = "team_trim"

K2: =IFERROR(FIND(K$1,$I2),"")
L2: =IFERROR(FIND(L$1,$I2),"")
M2: =IFERROR(MID(I2,K2,L2-K2+1),"")
N2: =TRIM(SUBSTITUTE(I2,M2,""))

I would sort my sheet on column M using the "Sort Z to A" button on Data menu.

The top examples will move to the top.

What we want to do is both preserve the ()_text as well as remove it from the "team" line.

Here's the process:
I add one more column O which is labelled "()_text"
I copy and paste values from column M into column O.
Then I copy and paste values from column N into column I.
Then it's another "Sort Z to A" on Column M.

If you're lucky, there's only a few lines of data that have more than one set of text in paratheses.
For us, it's only about nine lines.

Find the best way to append the useful data to column O.

Usually, I use a quick dummy column P (labelled temp).  
P2: =O2&" "&M2
Carry down to the bottom of the ()_text.
Copy the data from column O and paste values on top of column O.
Delete Column P.
Copy the data from column N and paste values to column I.

Remove columns K/L/M/N.

 Step Nine: Separate Teams into Wrestlers

If things have gone well, columns should be:
Column A: linenum
Column B: linetxt
Column C: type
Column D: min
Column E: event
Column F: word
Column G: AA
Column H: BB_trim
Column I: team
Column J: team_num
Column K: ()_text

All of these columns should be values only - no formulas.

The next goal is to separate these teams into individual wrestlers.

New Columns
Column L: person
Column M: " & "
Column N: person1
Column O: person2

L2: =SUBSTITUTE(SUBSTITUTE(TRIM(SUBSTITUTE(SUBSTITUTE(SUBSTITUTE(I2," and "," & "),","," & "),"  "," ")),".","")," & & "," & ")M2: =IFERROR(FIND($M$1,L2),"")N2: =IF(M2<>"",TRIM(LEFT(L2,M2-1)),"")
O2: =IF(M2<>"",TRIM(RIGHT(L2,LEN(L2)-M2)),"")

Column L is converting column I (team) in three ways: converting "and", "/" and "," to "&" and removing periods. Then we're splitting into two groups - a single person (column N) and the remaining people (column O).

Next, we're going to have an iterative process to finish deconstructing the teams.  Here are the steps involved:

1. Sort A-Z on column M ( & )
2. Turn on the Filter
3. Filter on Column M for empty columns (Text Filters "equals" blank)
4. Delete data from first blank cell in columns M/N/O to the bottom of data

 
5. Turn off the Filter
6. Copy columns O and P and Paste Values on Columns P/Q


7. Copy the non-empty Columns from P to column L
8. Append a copy of the non-empty rows of the data to the bottom of the dataset
9. Starting with the new data appended on the bottom, paste non-empty data from Column Q back on Column L
10. Delete Columns P and Columns Q

Your goal is to rinse, lather and repeat these ten steps until you no longer have any entries in column L with a "&" in them.

Once you're down with that, delete Columns M/N/O (which should be blank).

Step Ten: Cleaning up the Corners

At this point now there's two major steps left: (a) change names into final form, (b) assign wins/losses.

(a) Final Names

Column M: "final person"

This is a process.  First you want to remove the "Champion" titles.

M2: =TRIM(IFERROR(RIGHT(RIGHT(L2,LEN(L2)-FIND(" Champion",L2)),LEN(RIGHT(L2,LEN(L2)-FIND(" Champion",L2)))-FIND(" ",RIGHT(L2,LEN(L2)-FIND(" Champion",L2)))),L2))

Then I usually do a PivotTable to start analyzing how many misspelling or multiple identities or tag teams will we need to decipher.

(b) Wins & Losses

wordAABB
defeated win loss
pinned win loss
fought draw draw
vs. unknown unknown

Column N: "result"

N2: =IF(F2=" vs. ","unknown",IF(F2=" fought ","draw",IF(J2="AA","win","loss")))

At this point, you should have a moderately usable dataset.  You still need to remove some "false positives" (lines of data that aren't actually matches) or lines of data from events that weren't in your original federation (filter on column E event).