Nick LoPiccolo
@nicklopiccolo • 5,406 subscribers
Founder, RARESTNDRD | Co-Founder, AMANA | @THR Top Sports Agents 2025 | @THR Next Gen 35 Under 35 | Go Birds 🦅
Shorts
Videos
dave meltzer: youtube enthusiast 💀 perfect. now we can stop pretending this was ever complicated. the real story is not that wwe is afraid of aew. the real story is not that “high level wwe officials” are whispering scary things to dave meltzer. the real story is not even that tony khan got asked a planted question on a media call with very little distribution about the possibility of aew soon having very little distribution, although that sentence is so stupidly perfect it should be bronzed and placed outside the wrestling observer newsletter office like a war memorial for people who died pretending this was journalism. the real story is that aew is going to lose its wbd distribution deal. either it ends at the expiration of the three-year term in 2027, or it ends earlier if paramount closes wbd and decides aew has no strategic place inside the new company. and based on the board as it exists right now, the most likely landing spot for aew in 2027 is google / youtube. that is the story. everything else is laundering. tony khan wants the story to be: “why would wwe say this about us?” that is the whole operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a lightly viewed roh show. a planted story. a planted messenger. a rehearsed answer. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the exact thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is not. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. aew is heading toward youtube because the domestic media rights board is closing around them. not as a troll. not as a bit. not as “pr spin.” as a business conclusion. aew is not leverage. wwe is not afraid of aew. the $185 million number was bullshit. the buyer universe was shrinking. paramount / skydance was coming for wbd. wbd was not going to be some permanent aew safe house. youtube was only ever a real “option” if someone at google was actually cutting a media rights check and underwriting production. not because every divorced mom with a ring light and a gmail account can upload video to the same platform. that was always the distinction. that is still the distinction. Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2025 “YouTube is an option the same way you or I could start a YT channel tomorrow. Is Jon Cruz cutting AEW a media rights check or underwriting a production budget? Hell no. Just the reality. It isn’t the model. Jon is global head of sports over there.” that was february, not last week. not after dave meltzer suddenly discovered youtube prelim numbers like columbus finding the new world. it is becoming inevitable now. Nick LoPiccolo — April 30, 2026 — 11:26 AM — 251.2K Views “to every journalist and every podcast who interviews tony khan from this day forward: please ask tony if wbd told him back in august they would not be renewing aew. wbd told him in august. i confirmed it directly and triple sourced it. please ask why tony has been acting like nothing is wrong for the last 8 months, and then please ask tony what his actual distribution plan is. because the only distributor left that will take aew is google/youtube. the myaew app is not realistic. the my aewapp is a death sentence in 2026 if youtube doesn’t make an mg deal for aew. they started building it too late and there is no realistic way to scale it. also, who is going to sell ads for the platform? kiswe is not the best. they built the myaew app. they are new to the game. hold tony’s feet to the fire. Paramount is not real for aew. WBD passed back in August. CW/Roku is now off the table. Amazon and Fox do not want AEW. ask Tony why he's been lying to you and to the locker room and to the fans, acting like things are all great with the network? i am sure a lot of people would love to hear his answer.” april 30. 251.2k views. not whispered. not hidden. not vague. not “high level wwe officials.” i said it publicly and directly: wbd passed back in august. paramount is not real for aew. cw / roku is off the table. amazon and fox do not want aew. the myaew app is not realistic. google / youtube is the only distributor left on the board that makes sense. that is the actual story tony khan does not want to answer. not “why would wwe say this?” ask tony khan if wbd told him in august that wbd would not be renewing aew. ask what his actual distribution plan is. ask who is selling ads for the myaew app. ask how a platform built this late scales in 2026. ask whether youtube is an actual rights partner with an mg, or just the place you go when the real buyers are gone. that is the question. not the fake question dave meltzer laundered into “high level wwe officials.” the real question. Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 10:51 AM — 9,565 Views “No one in Hollywood believes the $185 million number.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 11:35 AM — 7,470 Views “The $185 million figure is inflated. Variety’s October 2, 2024 article was likely updated after a publicist called on AEW’s behalf, as early reports placed the deal between $140 and $150 million per year. Tony Khan was also included in Variety’s Dealmakers 2024 list, which, while not officially pay to play, strongly favors those spending significant advertising dollars with the outlet. No one in Hollywood seriously believes WBD, which is in junk bond status, is paying AEW $185 million per year. Clear enough?” clear enough? the number was never clean. the number was never real in the way aew fans and wrestling media pretended it was real. and when the $185 million number started getting laughed out of adult rooms, the number magically became $178 million. that is where the shell game gets funny. because $178 million was not some sacred sourced number either. it was brandon thurston taking the median between $170 million, reported by sports business journal, and $185 million, reported by variety and others. that is literally what wrestlenomics said. Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “Why use $178 million here for AEW’s new deal when some outlets are reporting the average annual value is $185 million?” Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “I used $178 million here because it is simply the median of $170 million, as reported by Sports Business Journal, and $185 million, reported by Variety and others.” there it is. arithmetic. not an all-cash rights fee. not a clean license number. not proof wbd valued aew like raw. not a finance-department document from warner bros. discovery. a midpoint between conflicting public reports. then wrestling media treated that midpoint like scripture because they needed the story to be “aew is valued like raw,” not “aew pr inflated a number no serious person in hollywood believed.” and by the way, $170 million was not the clean all-cash number either. that is the scam. float the number. repeat the number. launder the number. defend the number with people who do not understand the difference between cash rights fees, in-kind services, equity, marketing commitments, platform value, make-goods, ad inventory, and press release math. then when the number collapses, pretend the next number was always the number. that is not reporting. that is aew state news. Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 5:53 AM — 12.6K Views “AEW isn’t leverage. It’s not competition. It’s a niche product with loud fans and limited reach.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 8:56 AM — 1,018 Views “We handle wrestling deals too, but thinking we need AEW for leverage is myopic. The landscape is changing and the game I’m playing is different.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 15, 2025 — 25.7K Views “AEW isn’t leverage.” that was never emotional. that was never tribal. that was never “i hate aew.” it was market structure. wwe did not need aew as leverage because real leverage was never “another wrestling show exists.” real leverage is architecture, scale, subscriber churn, platform strategy, sports adjacency, global rights, advertising, sponsorship, live inventory, library value, data, brand safety, executive relationships, and the actual buyer universe of maybe 18-20 companies in the united states that matter for live sports rights. aew fans thought this was a wrestling argument. it was never a wrestling argument. it was a board. and the board was already moving. Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 482 Views “I wasn’t viewing the above in that context (TKO vs AEW counter programming), it was more of this is what I’m hearing after 2 weeks of big media deals rolling out (Skydance closing, South Park library moving) etc. Which have all been in the works for awhile.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 388 Views “But if you were to look at it from a counter programming perspective (and I don’t think this was a factor in UFC deal) - there are only so many players for these big media rights deals. PARA is likely off the board (via TKO deal) & then what if they acquire WB in 2026/27?” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 535 Views “Yes, of course, that wouldn’t mean the end for AEW. It would make navigating their media rights deal more challenging, I would guess. But this is a hypothetical scenario & I do not believe anyone is paying $7.7b for UFC or a $40b valuation for WB w/ how do we fuck AEW, either.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 “And hearing all weekend Paramount is still interested in WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 1.3K Views “I think more interesting for what it could mean as the dominoes keep falling in terms of the still evolving landscape. The deals are massive & the number of major players at the top are shrinking as still big push for consolidation & scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 12:11 PM — 2,588 Views “And I’d view AAA on Google/YouTube as directly competitive. It targets both the CMLL collab & the audience that used to watch AEW Dark on YouTube, & WWE is able to send well known stars to AAA events with an eye towards converting more of the younger, YouTube demo of viewers who don’t watch streamers.” again: august 11. not yesterday. not after dave meltzer tweeted a netflix prelim number. not after anyone had to retrofit the argument. the point was already there: the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, paramount was likely off the board for aew because of the tko deal, google / youtube was becoming directly competitive for the exact audience aew used to reach through dark, and the buyer universe was consolidating around deals much bigger than tony khan’s feelings. this was not mysticism. this was not inside baseball for the sake of sounding smart. this was the board. Nick LoPiccolo — August 24, 2025 “This isn’t fair. I misread your question. AEW will exist but likely on the Discovery Global app (if it ever launches, I would bet that it doesn’t) and it will continue to do consistent ratings. If Paramount/Skydance buys WBD in a year…” Nick LoPiccolo — September 4, 2025 — 76 Views “No, that’s the WBD network division (cable, news, sports) that was already announced as being spun off under Discovery Global. The article you’re citing is about them selling a minority equity stake in that unit to cut debt and boost valuation ahead of the 2026 split.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 3.6K Views “This is not just about Hollywood scale. It is the foundation of a conservative aligned media infrastructure. A Paramount/WBD merger would fold CBS, CNN, HBO, and Warner Bros IP into Ellison’s orbit under Trump’s regulatory umbrella.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 11K Views “Within 48 hours of the rumor, WBD stock surged ~55% and Paramount Skydance rose ~24%. That market response itself boxed David Zaslav in; his board, Wall Street, and his own contract now expect movement.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 27, 2025 — 12:16 PM — 3,516 Views “Nah homie. Enjoy watching the show on YouTube after Ellison buys WBD and Ari who is advising Ellison and used to represent Trump and runs TKO makes the call.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 28, 2025 — 174 Views “I believe if and when Paramount acquires WBD, TKO will push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. The long knives are already out for competitors, and the rights deals have likely been spread around town precisely to keep rivals from signing with those streamers.” none of that was random. paramount / skydance, ellison, ari, tko, wbd linear assets, youtube, aaa, the tko deal, the wbd split, the shrinking rights buyer universe — all of it was one connected domestic rights architecture. that is why this conversation was always over the heads of the people screaming “cope” in my replies. they were arguing like fans. i was reading the cap table. Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Yes, I always believed Paramount would walk away with WBD. I was one of the first to talk about it on here, even if I wasn’t the first to hear it. The Paramount Skydance acquisition closed on August 7. I posted this on August 11, about 1 month before the The Wall Street Journal first broke the news on September 12 that Paramount Skydance was preparing a bid for WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “The bid was always going to be hostile. We are only in this process because it was a hostile bid. Most people in Hollywood believed Ellison long coveted WB and Jack Warner’s chair. WB was not for sale when Skydance acquired Paramount, which is much smaller in scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Nearly everyone in town assumed an Ellison acquisition of WBD was inevitable until the Netflix bid shocked everyone. Signs were there for the last two weeks, which is also when I stopped posting about what might happen. Of course, its not over yet. Paramount still has paths to winning this acquisition. The one thing that’s for certain though is an Ellison-led acquisition of WBD is no longer inevitable.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 8, 2025 “END CREDITS” space jam is a warner bros. movie. that was the joke. and the joke was the same thing i had been saying the whole time: paramount was winning the bid, for those who did not understand. Nick LoPiccolo — December 19, 2025 — 4:30 PM — 828 Views “Here is another reference to it. So tell me how exactly is Paramount the better outcome for Dave’s argument? Netflix doesn’t touch the WBD linear assets. Gunnar keeps his SpinCo.” Puck excerpt — December 19, 2025 “Many industry insiders are also skeptical about Paramount’s seven-year, $7.7 billion deal for exclusive UFC rights in the U.S. Yes, it can be read as a signal that Ellison came to play. But some people see it more as Ari Emanuel having his way with the person to whom he is ostensibly an (unpaid) advisor…” that is the board. that is the relationship map. that is the thing wrestling media either does not understand or pretends not to understand, because understanding it means admitting the story is not “aew has leverage.” the story is that aew is sitting in the middle of a consolidating rights marketplace where the people with leverage are doing much bigger things than worrying about tony khan’s feelings. Nick LoPiccolo — January 21, 2026 — 4:22 PM — 870 Views “i mean get ready to learn youtube buddy” Nick LoPiccolo — February 19, 2026 — 2.8K Views “Paramount was always my bet to acquire Warner Bros. Never wavered.” Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2026 — 1:27 PM — 118 Views “you don’t need to look under a hood I AM SAYING THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 I BEEN SAYING IT SINCE JULY / AUGUST 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 PARAMOUNT IS COMING FOR WBD AEW WILL LOSE A TV DEAL 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 GUESS WHO WAS RIGHT 💀” so no, this is not hindsight. this is not showing up after the fact with a flashlight and pretending i discovered the body. this is a paper trail. february: youtube is not a real rights model unless google is cutting the check. april: wbd passed back in august, the myaew app is not realistic, paramount is not real for aew, cw / roku is off the table, amazon and fox do not want aew, and google / youtube is the only distributor left that makes sense. july: the $185 million number is inflated and aew is not leverage. august: the buyer board is shrinking, paramount is still interested in wbd, and google / youtube becomes directly competitive. september: paramount / wbd folds the board into ellison’s orbit, and if ellison buys wbd, enjoy youtube. december: paramount was always the bet, the bid was always going to be hostile, and netflix does not solve dave meltzer’s argument because netflix does not touch the linear assets. january: get ready to learn youtube. february: paramount is coming for wbd and aew will lose a tv deal. same board. same thesis. same answer. now here is the part tony khan and dave meltzer do not want to say out loud. tony khan and dave meltzer do not mention me publicly for a reason. because the second they say my name out loud, they admit where this conversation has actually been coming from. not wwe. not some anonymous “high level official.” not some shadowy tko whisper campaign. me. that is the problem for them. behind the scenes, ask any real insider what happens when my name comes up around this subject. there is a reaction. not because i’m magic. not because i’m some internet boogeyman. because they know exactly who is saying it, why i’m saying it, what rooms i have been in, what companies i have dealt with, what executives i have spoken to, and why the analysis keeps landing. that is why they keep trying to non-person me publicly while reacting to me privately. they want the argument. they want the benefit of responding to the argument. they just do not want to admit whose argument it is. when i said wbd told aew back in august 2025 they were not exercising the option for the fourth year, tony khan blew up behind the scenes and forced john mcmullen to revise / update his article 2-3 weeks ago after i tweeted it. which is hilarious because that should not even be crazy or damaging “news.” that is how this business works. when a distributor is not continuing, they tell you early enough so you have time to find a new home. that is not sabotage. that is not wwe. that is not nick lopiccolo hiding inside david zaslav’s air vents with a clipboard. that is corporate courtesy. wbd execs privately whisper and shake their heads at tony khan’s behavior because their view is very simple: why does tony khan act like everything is great and rainbows and sunshine with the studio? we told tony khan as a courtesy so tony khan would have time to find a new home. and no, this has zero to do with paramount looming as an excuse. paramount did not even make its first hostile bid for wbd until september 11 or 12. that was after tony khan was already told there would not be a wbd renewal. so what did tony khan do? tony khan turned the truth into a wrestling angle. tony khan, or one of tony khan’s minions, gets dave meltzer to drop a story assigning my claims and what i have been publicly posting about tony khan to “high level wwe officials.” why? because it gives tony khan a safer enemy. tony khan does not want the story to be the actual timeline. because the actual timeline is brutal. on february 28, i said youtube was not a real media rights model unless google was actually cutting the check and underwriting production. on april 30, i said wbd passed in august, the myaew app was not realistic, paramount was not real for aew, cw / roku was off the table, amazon and fox did not want aew, and the only distributor left that made sense was google / youtube. on july 9, i said no one in hollywood believed the $185 million number. on july 10, i said aew was not leverage. on august 11, i said the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, and google / youtube was becoming a directly competitive lane. on september 16, i said a paramount / wbd merger would fold cbs, cnn, hbo, and warner bros. ip into ellison’s orbit. on september 27, i said enjoy the show on youtube after ellison buys wbd. on september 28, i said if paramount acquires wbd, tko would push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. on december 6, i said paramount skydance was preparing a bid for wbd long before most people admitted the obvious. on february 19, i said paramount was always my bet to acquire warner bros. and on february 28, i said it in all caps: paramount is coming for wbd. aew will lose a tv deal. that is the part tony khan cannot answer directly, because the direct answer means admitting this was never “wwe is scared of us.” it was always the board closing. tony khan wants the story to be: why would wwe say this about us? that is the laundering operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a show with very little distribution answering a canned question about aew potentially having very little distribution. based on a planted story, from a planted messenger, with a rehearsed answer, after an roh show maybe 8-15k people watched. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the very thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. a canned and rehearsed answer at an roh media scrum about a planted dave meltzer story based on my very real and very public analysis of the media rights board. but make no mistake. tony khan was responding to my words. tony khan just laundered them through dave meltzer and assigned them to wwe / tko so tony khan could keep lying about it publicly without ever saying my name. and now, voila. dave meltzer is posting about youtube viewers and prelims. Dave Meltzer — May 16, 2026 “At this moment there are 340,000 people watching prelims for Netflix on YouTube. It’s a good number.” yes, dave meltzer. youtube can have good numbers. nobody said youtube cannot have good numbers. that was never the issue. the issue is whether youtube is being used as a funnel into a premium rights ecosystem or as a substitute because the premium rights ecosystem rejected you. that is the difference. that has always been the difference. netflix using youtube prelims as audience acquisition is not the same thing as aew trying to spin youtube as a media rights home because the real buyers are gone. ufc using youtube as a funnel is not the same thing as aew using youtube as a life raft. wwe sending stars to aaa on youtube to convert a younger demo is not the same thing as aew retreating to youtube after the traditional buyer board closes. and the fact that dave meltzer is now suddenly tweeting like the mayor of youtube is the punchline. because the same people who mocked the youtube outcome are now going to spend the next several months explaining why youtube is actually good. of course it can be good. for the right use case. for the right property. inside the right architecture. with the right check attached. but when you spend two years telling everyone you were valued like raw and your next stop is “please subscribe and smash that bell,” maybe stop pretending this is victory formation? i told y’all where this was going. the record is right there. i’m still right. and tony and dave: you guys are see through translucent. that’s it for ye 🎤🎤🎤
Nick LoPiccolo99,106 görüntüleme • 25 gün önce
This is the trailer for Rob Reiner’s Being Charlie. A deeply personal film co-written by his son Nick, drawn from Nick’s years battling addiction. Reiner later said, “What I didn’t understand was the depth of what my son was going through.” A father trying to truly see his child.
Nick LoPiccolo688,369 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce
let me preface with this: i respect mjf. i know how my clients feel about him. i have a ton of respect for his rep, bryan diperstein. dip had a 15 year career as an agent at icm and caa, and he exited caa in 2024 to move into management, a more entrepreneurial role. it’s been a minute since i’ve caught up with dip. i exited paradigm in jan 2026 after almost 17 years. do the math. this is where the industry in large part is heading, especially my generation, dip’s generation. i believe dip also works with becky, seth, and ricky. we’re peers. my personality is a little different. i’m an ex-d1 football player. i bounce around. i’m in your face. i like conflict. i am very comfortable with confrontation. some others, i’ve learned, not so much. but i’ve got all the respect in the world for mjf and for dip. let’s assume that i’m right, others are right, ProWrestleTimes is right in the clip. tony had dave write the story about what i posted so that he could comment on it. i believe that to be true. i have no issue, i have no heat with Jon Alba. i don’t think it’s notable at all that tony denied this. the evidence that this is what I HAVE SAID is all over the timeline. there are receipts. it’s undeniable. from june 2025 until may 21, 2026, i’ve been out with my worldview publicly. mjf: “we have to be smart about what sources we listen to?” mjf has a job to do, too. i respect him doing his job. am i any less of an authority than dip, who is mjf’s own personal representative? we are direct peers. we share almost directly the same career arc. dip left caa 2 years before i exited paradigm. 15 years vs 17 years. not likely to me that you dismiss me orcdunk on me, but mjf wouldn’t do the same to dip. that’s his guy. our resumes are almost symmetrical. i’m on x and ig. he has a podcast. 🤷♂️ mjf is doing his job. he’s a pro. btw, i think this was unintentional. mjf: “nick khan’s job is to do this, and to make everybody look over here.” yeah. that’s exactly what it feels like mjf / aew are doing in this helwani clip.
Nick LoPiccolo16,706 görüntüleme • 21 gün önce
Why is AEW building a DTC platform? Because if TV carriage disappears when the Paramount merger closes, the realistic buyers narrow to three: Amazon, Fox, Roku. And there are problems with each. Amazon: global mandate to drive Prime subscriptions. Focused on tier-1 rights. Fox: broadcast network built for mass audience scale. Roku: AVOD distribution platform without the budget for major sports rights. DTC is the contingency. It is shmuck insurance if those lanes don’t open. So is YouTube.
Nick LoPiccolo34,592 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce
make ari gold, not ari emanuel, the new vince mcmahon on screen every week on monday night raw. the story writes itself. the head of tko but it’s ari gold. hyper aggressive, zero patience, screaming at talent, cutting deals mid-segment, firing people on live tv, breaking the fourth wall about ratings and money. you don’t script him, you unleash him. every week becomes must watch chaos because nobody knows who he’s about to bury or build. that’s not nostalgia, that’s oxygen for the product. i sold the movie sweetwater, by the way, it was financed by my clients pasaca capital (who also financed lee with kate winslet, prisoners daughter with brian cox and kate beckinsale). pasaca is a chinese private equity company that made its money selling n95 masks at the beginning of covid. i love Jeremy Piven btw and this is could be entourage 2.0 but netflix and monday night raw. imagine ari gold vs cm punk on the mic in this segment? or ari vs cody?
Nick LoPiccolo24,088 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce
ok it’s time to nuke this stupid dave meltzer ppv narrative let’s be clear. dave is not reporting verifiable, audited numbers. dave is making shit up and presenting it like real transactional data this only works because the ppv ecosystem that used to check this is gone. no pipes, no reporting, no one left to call it out think about it the only person who “knows” these numbers is dave meltzer not the platform. not the distributor. not the rights holders. not anyone reconciling revenue. just dave. and marks dumb enough to want to believe dave. there is no audit trail no platform reporting that matches this. just a number dave makes up that doesn’t come from real ppv data. “140k ppv buys on hbo max” is structurally incoherent it’s a dead metric from a dead system forced onto a platform not built for it let me start with the kill shot... the core infrastructure is gone indemand ppv, the backbone of cable ppv for 40 years, SHUT DOWN in 2025 it was the central distributor for boxing, wrestling, everything, for ppv and that pipe enabled real, auditable ppv at scale. it’s gone. IT NO LONGER EXISTS. this isn’t isolated... it’s the entire market showtime exited ppv hbo exited ppv wwe exited ppv and moved to peacock, then netflix and espn ufc exited ppv and a massive long term deal with paramount these are the operators generating billions they all made the same decision guaranteed money beats volatile buys. less friction beats upsells. scale beats nostalgia. if ppv worked, they’d still be doing it. they’re not. boxing, the last real ppv engine, is done at scale there are no big boxing ppvs in 2026 the one REAL number that people can cite, tank vs ryan, did around 1 million buys, and that was in 2023 most events since are far lower. the premium layer is hollowed out now the biggest fights aren’t ppv they’re on streamers or free tyson vs mayweather exhibition is going to a streamer rousey vs carano is netflix the top saudi cards are free, global, and often mid-day in the US turki KILLED what was left of ppv I REPEAT turki KILLED what was left of ppv you don’t give people elite fights for free and then ask for $60 again the ppv business is DEAD look at what you’re being asked to believe that aew is generating meaningful, HIGH PRICED, transactional ppv inside HBO MAX a subscription platform in 2026 after the infrastructure died after leaders exited after pricing collapsed after behavior shifted and doing “140k” implying a deep paying audience the math doesn’t work. at 5 percent conversion, ~2.8m engaged viewers at 10 percent, ~1.4m so where are they? where is that audience on tv? where in digital? where in live demand? you don’t get premium conversion without premium engagement that’s how media works this is where it breaks there are no real ppv reporting pipes left no independent verification Dave Meltzer makes shit up and people repeat it max didn’t even build ppv as a core business they added it late in the rights cycle as a favor to aew not because it drives real revenue if it did, it would’ve been core from day one scaled marketed everywhere it wasn’t it showed up late and quiet because the business is subscriptions and engagement not one-off transactions so put it together the infrastructure is gone the biggest players exited boxing ppv collapsed into free and streaming consumer behavior moved on the platform isn’t built for it and the only “source” is one guy with no audit trail Dave Meltzer, who is authoritatively a clown and not authoritative on any of this and you’re supposed to believe 140k ppv buys on max is real that’s a guy making shit up ppv didn’t evolve. it got replaced you’re watching someone invent numbers for a model that doesn’t exist anymore and dave wonders why i say aew is in trouble at the end of this wbd deal warm regards “45”
Nick LoPiccolo26,621 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce
let’s start where this actually lives, not where you want it to live. with the math. the last three weeks of dynamite: 👉 765k 👉 730k 👉 654k that is not a ramp. that is not momentum. that is not “heating up” into a conversion window. that is a decline into it. you are looking at a -111k drop in two weeks, roughly 14–15% contraction from the high to the low, at the exact point where a traditional ppv cycle should be stabilizing or expanding. instead, you have compression. average those three weeks and you land at roughly ~716k linear viewers. that is your real, observable, measurable audience. not hypothetical reach not cumulative impressions not social engagement proxies actual people sitting down and watching the show in the time slot that matters for conversion. i’ve already laid out in detail what the max numbers actually represent and how simulcast behavior works, so i’m not going to re-litigate all of that here. but it matters enough to say again clearly: max is not a second audience at scale. it is a distribution extension that splits the same audience. it does not double your reach. it does not materially expand your funnel. it shifts a portion of existing behavior from one pipe to another. the short version is already established: 👉 max is not additive at scale 👉 max is a split of the same audience 👉 max realistically contributes ~50k–150k, ~75k center so your total reachable audience on a good night is: 👉 ~790k–800k all-in that’s the funnel. that’s the ceiling. that’s the number you are working from. that’s the universe that can possibly convert into a paid transaction. not hypothetical not inflated not “what if” that is the real audience number. now take the number dave is floating: 👉 ~143k ppv buys run the only equation that matters: 👉 143k ÷ 800k = ~17.9% conversion stop there for a second Dave Meltzer is unironically asserting that nearly 1 out of every 5 viewers is converting into a $40–$50 transaction in 2026 in a market with: – no centralized ppv infrastructure – subscription-first behavior – widespread piracy – fragmented pricing (domestic, max discount, vpn international) – a declining weekly audience trend that is the claim. not “strong performance.” not “better than expected.” not “up year over year.” the claim is nearly 1 in 5 viewers converting into a $40–$50 transaction in 2026. this is where the conversation should end, because that number does not exist anywhere in modern media behavior. it doesn’t exist in boxing. it doesn’t exist in ufc. it doesn’t exist in any scaled transactional model operating in the current environment. and more importantly, it didn’t exist consistently even when the infrastructure supporting it was intact. again, this is the part people either don’t understand or choose to ignore: ppv is not just a pricing model. it is an infrastructure model. and that infrastructure is gone. for decades, the backbone of ppv was inDemand. that system wasn’t just pushing content out to cable homes. it was aggregating buys, standardizing reporting, and creating a reconciliation layer that allowed promoters, distributors, and networks to operate off the same dataset. if you were serious about this business, you could triangulate numbers. you could get within a narrow band of reality because the pipes were real and the accounting was shared. that system shut down in 2025. 👉 143k ppv buys is not an aggressive take 👉 it is not an optimistic take 👉 it is a structurally impossible take because we know what real conversion looks like. we do not need to guess. it has been modeled across combat sports, boxing, ufc, and multiple transactional platforms. the ranges are stable: 👉 1–3% → normal 👉 3–5% → strong 👉 5%+ → elite and rare, reserved for events with massive cultural heat and crossover appeal those ranges were established when the infrastructure was intact, pricing was more controlled, piracy was less frictionless, and distribution was more centralized. today, every one of those conditions is worse. pricing is fragmented. you have $49.99 standard, $39.99 through max, international pricing accessible through vpn, and a piracy environment where high-quality streams are available instantly. that is a high-friction, high-leakage system. so conversion should compress, not expand. now apply real-world conversion to your real audience: 👉 800k × 2% = 16k buys 👉 800k × 3% = 24k buys 👉 800k × 5% = 40k buys that’s your range. 👉 ~15k–35k realistic 👉 ~20k–30k as the most defensible center 👉 ~40k reasonable given the strength of the headliners now invert the math, because this is where the claim completely collapses. if you want to justify 143k buys at even a healthy 3% conversion rate, you need roughly 4.7 million engaged viewers. so the question becomes extremely simple: where are the other four million people? 👉they are not on linear television. 👉they are not on max. 👉they are not showing up in any digital engagement metrics that correlate with that level of demand. 👉they are not visible anywhere in the ecosystem that would need to exist to support that level of conversion. 👉👉👉👉👉 they do not exist. and this is before you even account for the trend line moving the wrong way. you are not converting off a growing base. you are converting off a shrinking one. you are not building urgency. you are losing reach. that matters, because conversion does not happen in a vacuum. it happens on top of momentum, visibility, and audience expansion. when those inputs are declining, conversion does not spike to historic highs. it compresses further. the biggest fights in the world are no longer relying on ppv as their primary distribution model. they are moving to platforms that guarantee reach and revenue up front. the most recent example should end this conversation for anyone actually paying attention: netflix just locked tyson fury vs anthony joshua for a major global fight this august. that is one of the biggest possible matchups in boxing. in any previous era, that is a premium ppv event with massive buy expectations, heavy marketing, and a full transactional rollout. instead, it is going to a subscription platform. why? because the economics are better. the reach is global. the friction is lower. the platform values engagement at scale over one-off purchases. that is where the industry is. so when you are being asked to believe that a weekly wrestling property with a ~700k linear audience, declining into its ppv window, is somehow generating six-figure transactional buys inside a subscription platform in 2026, you are not just being asked to accept a number. dave is asking you to ignore the direction of the entire market. and that’s before you even bring in platform behavior. max is not a live sports-first platform. it does not behave like one. when max has something it cares about, it promotes it aggressively. homepage rails. push notifications. press releases. talent integration. cross-platform amplification. you do not see that here. and that absence is not accidental. platforms surface what they want you to see. they amplify what drives engagement and revenue. if ppv at scale were happening inside that ecosystem, it would be visible. it would be part of the narrative. it would be monetized loudly. it isn’t. and that’s before you even factor in the other variables i’ve broken down in detail before: 👉 i’ve already debunked why the max numbers people are throwing around don’t make sense 👉 i’ve already explained what the linear number actually represents and what it doesn’t 👉 i’ve already mapped the media rights landscape in 2026, including how these properties are being evaluated ahead of the paramount–wbd merger the wsj reports could close as early as july so when you’re being told by dave that a property with a ~700k weekly audience trending downward into a ppv window is generating six-figure transactional buys at premium pricing inside a subscription platform in 2026, you’re not being given data. you’re being given a number that does not reconcile with anything else in the system. that’s math. stop it - 45
Nick LoPiccolo20,695 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce
Ok Dave Meltzer, this is an intervention. Everyone in the IWC loves you — that’s why they’re here (virtually). I'm not of the IWC, but I’ve been designated to do this for them too, because I’m the only one who’s actually done interventions in real life. Not once, not twice — dozens of times. I’ve dragged stars barefoot out of wreckage, posted 3am bail after they broke into the wrong house, I’ve fixed the unfixable in real time. And those were just the ones I couldn’t bury with Michael Sitrick–level crisis PR. That’s why it has to be me telling you this. You’re a Hall of Famer. But this is the internet, and the NWHOF is a website with only slightly better coding than PWInsider.com. In memoriam of the passing of Wrestling Observer, please donate your $14.99 to Mike Johnson. I thought this would be easier than the crazy interventions in real life, but you just don't seem to get it, much like an addict in denial. You're just... old. It happens to all of us. Time to get off the road, Dave, for the safety of the other drivers. This time, I’ll say it in words you can hopefully understand:
Nick LoPiccolo60,276 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce
alright let’s do a class on nielsen ratings / witness a timeline murder? i’m about to spin the block. the programming insider screenshots below are for weds, march 31. Programming Insider is one of the few places that just posts the raw nielsen grid without spin. every demo every network every show laid out the way buyers sellers and network executives actually read it. it’s not a recap site it’s not opinion it’s the sheet and if you’re not reading the sheet you’re not actually talking about the same thing as the people making the decisions 730k and a 0.15 in adults 18–49 is a real number and it maps cleanly within the expected range. nobody serious disputes that. in the current environment you’re generally looking at: 0.10 ≈ 580k–610k 0.11 ≈ 600k–630k 0.12 ≈ 620k–660k 0.13 ≈ 650k–690k 0.14 ≈ 680k–720k 0.15 ≈ 710k–750k 0.16 ≈ 740k–790k 0.17 ≈ 780k–830k 0.18 ≈ 820k–880k 0.19 ≈ 860k–920k 0.20 ≈ 900k–960k the issue is how often people stop there and treat it like a conclusion instead of the starting point. because a single demo pulled out of context doesn’t tell you what kind of number it actually was what kind of audience it represents or what it means in a real marketplace start with the full AEW row because that’s the foundation. AEW on TBS for 121 minutes posted: 0.44 household rating 0.12 adults 18–34 0.15 adults 18–49 0.09 women 18–49 0.20 men 18–49 0.22 adults 25–54 0.13 women 25–54 0.30 men 25–54 0.10 persons 12–34 0.07 females 12–34 0.12 males 12–34 0.03 teens 12–17 730k total viewers 6th in adults 18–49 12th in total viewers that’s the entire result. not the tweet version not the clipped version not the one number people like to repeat. that full row is the reality and once you actually read it the first thing that matters is not the 0.15 it’s how that 0.15 is built 0.20 men 18–49 0.09 women 18–49 that’s not a subtle imbalance that’s the number. this is not a broad demo performance it’s a concentrated one. when one side of the demo is doing more than double the work of the other side you are not looking at wide audience adoption you are looking at a defined lane showing up consistently and that distinction is everything because certain faux authorities talk about 0.15 like it’s a universal currency when it’s not. a 0.15 built on something like 0.14 women and 0.16 men is a fundamentally different asset than a 0.15 built on 0.09 women and 0.20 men. one is balanced one is narrow. one has flexibility across advertisers scheduling and audience expansion the other is predictable reliable and capped this one is clearly the latter same story in 25–54 0.30 men 25–54 0.13 women 25–54 again more than double same structural dependence same ceiling implication and then you go younger and nothing changes 0.12 adults 18–34 0.10 persons 12–34 0.12 males 12–34 0.07 females 12–34 it’s the same shape repeated across demos which tells you this is not a one week anomaly it’s the product identity. stable consistent defined not expanding and that’s where the difference between narrow reliability and broad strategic heat actually shows up in the data this is reliable. the audience shows up. the profile is predictable. the show holds its lane it is not broad. it is not expanding. it is not signaling that new segments are coming into the tent and changing the ceiling of the property that’s not opinion that’s what the row says now zoom out to the actual cable landscape that night because this is where context starts to cut through the noise Hannity 0.50 NBA on ESPN 0.36 Jesse Watters Primetime 0.28 Gutfeld 0.25 The Source with Kaitlan Collins 0.18 AEW Dynamite 0.15 that’s the board. that’s the tiering. AEW is not competing with the leaders it’s sitting clearly below them in the next band the gap from 0.15 to 0.18 is real the gap from 0.15 to 0.25 is large the gap from 0.15 to 0.36 and 0.50 is massive and this is where people get sloppy because they use ranking to imply proximity when there isn’t any the placements are: 6th in adults 18–49 12th in total viewers those are good placements for a cable property they are not dominant placements and they are not close to dominant placements. 12th at 730k tells you exactly how much total audience is actually there across the full market not just the demo slice people like to highlight and that matters because scale still matters. total audience still matters. you don’t get to ignore it just because the demo is easier to weaponize quickly on the presidential address because this keeps getting dragged in like it explains something and it doesn’t a brief presidential address is not real competition it’s not counterprogramming it’s not sustained audience capture it’s a short interruption that hits every network at the same time. everyone gets disrupted nobody gets singled out. it doesn’t change relative positioning it doesn’t create winners or losers it’s just noise in the system and leaning on it is basically avoiding what the table actually shows same thing with hourly ranks 3rd in an hour 4th in an hour fine but relative to what. if the field is thin outside a few programs you can place well in a window and still be materially behind the actual leaders. a 0.15 does not become a 0.25 because it ranked 3rd it stays a 0.15 now zoom out even further and look at the broader tv ecosystem broadcast that same night is pulling 4M 5M viewers with broader demo balance. different ecosystem yes but it gives you scale perspective. cable is fragmented expectations are different a 0.15 can be a good cable number but that does not make it a market moving television number it makes it solid within its lane and that’s where most of the conversation should stop but it doesn’t because once you layer in actual market structure the ratings matter even less than people think they do the buyer universe is not theoretical it is already allocated high tier buyers netflix amazon apple all operate at 600k+ per telecast levels but only for global scalable franchise inventory netflix has already consolidated the global wwe backbone across raw international distribution and library. there is no incentive to layer overlapping wrestling inventory into that system amazon is deploying capital into nfl nba nascar and large scale league ecosystems. servicing ppv distribution is not the same thing as underwriting long term weekly rights. there is no mandate for niche weekly wrestling at scale apple is curating a premium global sports portfolio aligned with brand identity. nothing niche nothing polarizing nothing demo fragmented clears that filter mid tier buyers disney espn already has wwe premium live events and massive nfl nba and college football commitments. the wrestling lane is already defined at the tentpole level fox is concentrated on nfl and big ten with disciplined incremental spend and no mandate for a second wrestling property peacock is structurally tied into wwe across events and library footprint. that lane is occupied paramount plus max post merger is sitting on one of the heaviest combat sports portfolios in the market ufc at roughly 1.1b per year zuffa boxing pbr nfl afc that is category consolidation not exploration. any additional combat adjacent inventory has to clear duplication against that stack turner inside that same structure is no longer operating independently. it is part of a combined portfolio that already has a defined combat sports identity low tier buyers roku tubi vice are operating in the 150k–300k per telecast range and are not positioned to escalate into premium rights competition so when you actually map the landscape it’s not that buyers are hesitant it’s that lanes are already filled there is no real second bidder dynamic and once you remove the idea of competitive bidding the ratings stop functioning as leverage they become a utility metric now go back to the numbers 0.15 730k male heavy composition those are not bad numbers they are just not strong enough to override strategic redundancy inside a portfolio that already includes ufc and global wwe alignment across multiple platforms so the conversation shifts this is no longer what will the market pay this becomes what is this worth inside our existing portfolio can we fill two hours cheaper can we replicate the demo with studio shows shoulder programming unscripted if yes there is no leverage if no it stays but on controlled terms that’s the real decision tree and this is where the difference between narrow reliability and broad strategic heat becomes the entire story this is reliable inventory. it shows up every week it delivers a consistent demo it fills two hours it holds a lane it is not broad strategic heat. it does not expand the audience map it does not unlock new advertiser categories it does not create urgency across buyers it does not force capital to move and that’s not a criticism it’s a classification so the clean read is simple the number is real the audience is still there the composition is still narrow the placement is still upper middle and none of that on its own creates leverage in a market that is already structurally allocated this is a property negotiating inside someone else’s portfolio not across an open market and that leads to the only conclusion that actually matters once capital is already deployed across nfl nba ufc and global wwe distribution and once the high tier buyers are structurally filtered out this stops being a rights negotiation driven by ratings and becomes an internal portfolio decision driven by overlap cost efficiency and replacement value. at that point a steady 0.15 does not create leverage it defines the floor of what that two hour block is worth relative to everything else competing for the same capital and now add the part everyone either ignores or pretends doesn’t exist TKO is effectively sitting on ~100% of premium combat sports market share at scale when you look at UFC plus WWE across global distribution lanes. that’s not just another player in the category that is the category so when you’re talking about where AEW fits you’re not comparing it in a vacuum you’re comparing it against the most consolidated combat sports stack the business has ever seen and that stack isn’t just operating independently Ari Emanuel has been advising David Ellison for 15+ years that relationship matters because it shapes how these portfolios are thought about at the highest level. this isn’t random alignment this is long term strategic overlap between the people actually making decisions about where billions in rights fees go so when you layer that on top of a potential Paramount controlled WBD structure you’re not just dealing with ratings anymore you’re dealing with a fully informed portfolio strategy that already knows exactly what it values in combat sports and what it doesn’t and then you zoom all the way out to cultural positioning because this part matters more than people think Pat McAfee is in the main event at WrestleMania that’s not a throwaway detail that’s the signal that’s WWE extending into mainstream sports media personalities who already command massive audiences across multiple platforms and pulling them into the biggest event in the space that’s what broad strategic heat actually looks like not just a consistent demo number not just reliable weekly inventory but expansion into new audience layers new distribution touchpoints and new cultural relevance that travels outside the core base so when you put all of this together the picture gets even clearer AEW is stable AEW is reliable AEW fills a lane but it’s operating in a market where the category leader already controls the majority of premium combat IP the decision makers are aligned at the highest levels the buyer universe is structurally closed and the biggest player is actively expanding its cultural footprint beyond wrestling itself that’s the environment so yes a 0.15 matters. yes 730k matters the number isn’t fake the number isn’t terrible the number is specific it tells you exactly what the show is right now it tells you the core audience showed up it tells you that audience is heavily male it tells you women are materially underrepresented it tells you the show converts to about 730k it tells you where it sits on the night it tells you the audience shape hasn’t changed what it doesn’t tell you matters just as much it doesn’t tell you the audience is expanding it doesn’t tell you the show is broadening it doesn’t tell you the ceiling moved this was a good night for a show with a defined audience but none of it overrides the reality that this is being evaluated inside a system that already knows what “must have” looks like and right now that bar is being set somewhere else entirely cc: Dave Meltzer
Nick LoPiccolo17,146 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce
my ad read goat. buy whatever sean is selling you especially replica titles Sean Ross Sapp of Fightful.com
Nick LoPiccolo26,290 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce
The Sickos, the Prophet, and the Scoreboard🧵 PART 1: THE SICKOS
Nick LoPiccolo28,597 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce
For those who don't want to read the full post 🔽 Dave says Drew’s out for awhile because he's doing a movie He’s doing what he always does. Guessing Highlander starts mid April 2026. LMFAO. If you want to set your money on fire, keep subscribing to Dave. It’s the same thing.
Nick LoPiccolo16,222 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce
Don't take my word for it. Let the timeline speak for itself.
Nick LoPiccolo14,483 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce
Stfu—"what it means for wrestling short and long-term in the marketplace, as well as how other news, sports and entertainment show numbers have changed"—you DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS. Do not send me a 2007 Geocities Hall of Fame website and pretend like you do—Dave Meltzer
Nick LoPiccolo16,910 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce
Daha fazla içerik yok.