Brand Awareness and WWE

Brand (noun) - a kind or variety of something distinguished by some distinctive characteristic.


I was listening to Podcast today with Eric Bischoff, and they spent a few minutes talking about the various brands that the WWE supports.

Can you name them?

RAW....SmackDown....NXT...205 Live.

Wait...205 Live?

Yep, Forgot about them, didn't you?
I bet lots of folks did.

That's not a knock of the talent, the production, the staff....none of it.
It's a knock on the positioning of the "brand".

After a fantastic Cruiserweight tournament...complete with aerial action and purple ring ropes ... the 205 guys started showing up on RAW!  In fact, for the last 2 months the Cruiserweight champion and any of his top contenders arrive on RAW each week to battle for glory.

So what does that do for the 205 Live "brand"?
It makes it non-existent.   It's not a brand. It's a roster at best, and it's a pool of talent in reality.

Ok, work backwards up the list.
NXT?  Yes, it's a brand.
WWE's effort to capitalize on the Indy scene and offset Ring of Honor's momentum created a good show, stocked with great talent. A good mix of new(er) guys honing their skills and older guys who need to get back in the limelight. It has an Indy look and feel to it, and when talent gets moved up to the main roster it feels like a big deal..

#Success

Ok, what about SmackDown?
Different roster, different colors.
But how does it differ from RAW?
What is it about the television show that warrants considering it a 'brand'?

When you answer that question, don't talk about what you like about the show or what you like about specific talent. Try to focus on if/how the entire presentation is different from RAW.

You won't be able to share very much.

Again, that's not a knock on the talent...they work very hard.
The production is great.
Talking Smack was a cool avenue while it lasted.

But is it a "valuable brand"?

Pretend for a moment it's 1999 and WCW is still around.
When a wrestler moved from WWE to WCW, or vice versa, it mattered.
When wrestlers move from RAW to SmackDown...it's not a big deal.

In fact, some folks see SmackDown as being "lesser than".
Is that their brand?  "We're more exciting and less valuable than RAW".
That's not a good value prop, is it?

Ring ropes and lighting don't make for distinguishing characteristics.
Red vs Blue....that's not a brand differentiation.
What we have here are 2 nights of wrestling, 2 rosters of wrestling, 2 Pay-Per-Views a month.
It's good for the fans in way of content (we can discuss "how much is too much" another time), but it's not 2 brands.

What WOULD make RAW and SmackDown differentiated brands?

Years ago, an idea was floated around to pack SmackDown with the Luchadores/Cruiserweights.
(this is back when Rey was there, Eddie Guerrero was there, etc).
That would be something, no?
RAW could be Heavyweights and Smackdown could be acrobatics.

Or what is RAW featured blood, sex, swearing (read: Attitude Era) and SmackDown did not?
SmackDown could be the more family friendly show.

What if only 1 of the 2 shows had a Women's division?
Or a Tag Team division?

Don't these 4 ideas all constitute real DIFFERENCES?


With more and more fans reading newsletters and listening to podcasts, they're more educated.
Many are as interested in the "business" as they are in the matches.
And when they are told that RAW and SmackDown are different brands, they roll their eyes.

We don't have to give up on the presentation of different brands, but let's talk the WWE into being honest about it. Give us real differentiators, and give the fans a reason to care if/when a worker changes "brands".


Thoughts?



@SheerWrestling.com