Steel-cage legal wrangle. (buyer interest in the World Wrestling Federation) (Elements of Media).

MEDIAWEEK 3.n9 (March 1, 1993): pp20(1). (782 words) 

COPYRIGHT Adweek L.P. 1993
Alleged scandal and lawsuits don't diminish buyer interest in the World Wrestling Federation. But the slumping ratings might.

In February, World Wrestling Federation owner Vince McMahon filed lawsuits against two well-known tabloid journalists and their employers: Tribune's Geraldo Rivera and New York Post columnist Phil Mushnick. The suits aim to rebut, and win damages for, allegations of sexual misconduct on the part of McMahon and WWF employees. This comes on top of a highly publicized steroid scandal a couple years ago.

What's all this got to do with the cost of tea in China? Better to ask: What's it got to do with the cost of kids 2-11? The WWF is an important ad vehicle with an estimated $15-$20 million in syndicated ad sales, and those kinds of charges have been known to make clients a tad skittish. So far, advertisers are shrugging it off. But that could change--especially if the WWF's ratings continue to slide.

The Geraldo suit focuses on a 1992 segment of the late Now It Can Be Told, alleging a complex scheme to fabricate a rape charge against McMahon by an ex-employee. The Mushnick suit is more sweeping, describing an 18-month "smear campaign" by the Post columnist. "By direct statement or provable innuendo," thunders the lawsuit, "Mushnick has written or orally stated that Mr. McMahon is a child abuser, a child molester, homosexual, a charged heterosexual rapist, a miscreant, a homosexual criminal sexual offender, a liar in general ... and worse than the fictional character Hannibal Lecter." Hey, you'd sue too.

So far, that hasn't deterred advertisers such as Hasbro, Nintendo, Sega, M&M/Mars, Nestle, The Gap, Acclaim Entertainment Software, Slim Jim Snacks and American Home Products. (Local advertisers in New York include such Howard Stern stalwarts as Dial-A-Mattress and Hair Club For Men.)

Calls to buyers indicate that there has been no backlash to date, and the program remains extremely well sold. A spokesman for Leo Burnett, which buys the show for Nintendo, says, "It hasn't been red-flagged to us. We continue to monitor the situation, but in the meantime, it's business as usual." Says Grey senior vp Jon Mandel, "I haven't heard anybody talking about it as an issue. Once people decide to go into wrestling, they're not going to be bothered by this stuff." He adds that client Hasbro's Tonka unit makes a WWF toy.

But will this mud-slinging eventually affect the show? "Eventually it has to," says a current buyer. "Sure, everyone is looking at it. Between that and the steroids, there's a lot of !expletive delected^ there."

It doesn't help that ratings for the syndicated WWF show have dropped precipitously since last year. The 6.1 household rating this season is off 26 percent, with teens and young men down by that much or more. WWF's strongest demo, kids 6-11, has held up best, losing only 7 percent. Because of that kids skew, WWF is not a natural vehicle for jeans, sodas and sneakers.

The WWF points out that ratings have bounced back to around 8 in recent weeks, and they attribute part of that turnaround to the lawsuits. The company adds that it sold 70 percent of its inventory upfront, and that recent events have had no effect on ad sales.

The ratings had declined on WWF's primetime showcase on USA Network as well, drifting from the 3's in years past to a 2 late last year. In January, USA cut back the Monday night show from two hours to one, shifting an hour to Saturday morning. That and a change to a live format have helped the Monday night ratings come back to nearly a 3. The WWF lost its network berth on NBC two years ago; Fox has done a few specials, but nothing major.

David Meltzer, who puts out the "Wrestling Observer" newsletter, thinks some of the ratings decline is due to the exit of several top WWF personalities last year in the wake of the steroid scandal, led by Hulk Hogan. That's also hurt the live gate--he puts that at $45 million annually for WWF, including pay-per-view revenues and arena-sold merchandise. Dantia Gould, editor of "Pay-Per-View Update" newsletter, says that though PPV buy rates are down, revenues are up slightly due to an expanding addressable audience and a price hike in '91.

The WWF may be down substantially from its late 1980s peak, when Forbes pegged revenues at $150 million, but the company has a solid base and isn't going away anytime soon. And that tremendous kiddie appeal means it will likely continue as a TV player. As for the mudbath with Geraldo and the Post, smirks one agency type, "It's pro wrestling. You've got to expect a little scandal."