>>6960449>You realize viewership is down for all of TV right?Not in the numbers that WWE have lost.
>How do you cope with record profits in the modern era?By not being a retard and understanding where that money actually comes from, which is paying wrestlers piddly wages, strategic layoffs, making deals with saudi money marks and, ironically enough, through continuously putting out non-tv content that panders to nostalgiafags. The Network is like 75% attitude era nostalgiabait, it's legends this, DX that, the Rock this, Stone Cold that. The only memorable moment from last Wrestlemania was dragging Stone Cold out of retirement to re-enact some attitude era skit with Vince McMahon. Now is that the kind of thing a company would feel the need to resort to if their modern product was as strong, if not stronger, than the era they continue to rely upon? No. You're a braindead cultist manchild who can't let go of WWE and are trying to convince yourself there's anything worth watching in it today, quoting record profits while WWE take in another 500 million for a saudi show where every sandnigger in that country are begging to see attitude era legends and not whatever dimeless shitters WWE employs these days.
