Back In Business

Well, I finally figured out what was wrong with my computer, and unfortunately, I had to completely wipe my hard drive and reinstall everything. And I can’t find my install disks for Adobe CS3. But I still have all of my art for SEIZURE 2 chapter 2, so this action comic will continue to go on uninterrupted for another few weeks.

So now back to what’s really important: rasslin’.

It’s been brought to my attention that WWE’s last Vengeance Pay-Per-View was its lowest rated in quite a few years, almost the lowest-rated EVER. There are a lot of reasons for that. There was no buildup for the storylines, and it was right off the heels of another, much better-received PPV. On top of that, the main event was John Cena and Alberto Del Rio, two stars that don’t exactly have everyone clamoring to see what happens with them all of the time.
But I think this points to a larger problem that WWE has. There are simply too many Pay-Per-Views on their schedule. You’re at a point now where there is one every two to three weeks. I think that is a mistake, because it devalues the Pay-Per-View event in general because if you miss one, then there’s another one in a couple of weeks anyway which will often feature the same competitors and storylines.
More specifically, though, The oversaturation of PPV events creates other problems. First of all, no consumer base can sustain being pumped for money like that. I can’t imagine anyone being that much of a WWE fan to shell out 20 bucks every other week for a watered-down PPV, especially when they can just see the main event rematch on the following Monday night RAW Supershow. You also have added wear and tear on your performers, and a lack of real buildup for these events to where the fans really don’t care who is wrestling.
The free streaming of PPVs is also an issue, but not that major of one. If the event looks worthwhile, you will still get enough people buying it to turn in good numbers. Not everyone whow ants to see it will have access to those streaming sites or want to go through the trouble of setting it up.
So here’s my solution: reduce the number of PPVs. Even one a month might be too many. You want to give enough time to adequately build up feuds and storylines so that the matches at these events mean more and have more at skate, and the viewers will have more invested into them. First of all, you need to keep your four majors, which are Summerslam, Survivor Series, Royal Rumble and of course Wrestlemania. But those majors need at least a month to themselves to build up, maybe more than a month. That limits the buildup time for the other PPVs, which is why you only have four more on the schedule: Night of Champions, Backlash, No Way Out, and Armageddon. These are the PPVs you use to enhance storylines and break out new characters and new feuds.
Now, about those gimmick matches that PPVs are so famous for. That is part of the problem. WWE has taken their most popular gimmick matches and tried to build whole PPVs around them. That diminishes the uniqueness and special-ness of these matches. We don’t need three Hell in a Cell matches at one PPV. Take those matches and include them in the 8 PPVs instead of making a whole PPV around one type of match. That restores the status of the events to something really worth looking forward to. Also, you need to continue to innovate more new gimmick matches (or bring back some classics like The Scramble, Wargames and Battlebowl) and use them ONLY at the 8 pay-per views.
I think this would be the smartest way to go for WWE to get better PPV buys. But then again, what do I know?