Less PPVS For 2018?

Discussion in 'WWE Pay Per Views' started by Jack-Hammer, Nov 6, 2017.

  1. Jack-Hammer

    Jack-Hammer YOU WILL RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!!!!
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    12,959
    Likes Received:
    3,793
    According to Dave Meltzer, WWE will be reducing the number of ppvs for next year, though details are pretty scant on exactly how many will go down. Meltzer did state that there won't be more than a single ppv a month until around April or May and that's pretty much all the info that's out there.

    With the way things are set up right now, WWE will have had a total of 16 ppvs this year with Clash of Champions next month being #16; that equals out to 6 Raw brand ppvs, 6 SmackDown brand ppvs and the classic Big Four as dual branded ppvs. I don't think there'll be a whole helluva lot less next year, maybe 13 or 14 would be my guess. It's highly, highly unlikely there'll ever be less than a total of 10 ppvs for WWE again and if WWE had the creative discipline, I think they could pull off the Big Four as dual branded shows and have 3 ppvs for each brand as it'd give more time for build up and for the storylines to be fleshed out. The problem, as I alluded to, is that there's a risk that too many weekly episode of Raw and/or SmackDown Live would be filler shows that wouldn't progress storylines or keep focus on building towards the ppv itself. With less ppvs, I also believe that WWE would need to do what it could to keep wrestlers scheduled to face each other during ppvs out of singles competition with each other on Raw and SmackDown; I wish they'd focus more on that in the first place and if they did want them to have some physicality, do like New Japan does and just put together some random traditional, 6 man, 8 man or 10 man tag team matches and let each match eat up a good chunk of TV time.
     
    #1
  2. LODemolition

    LODemolition Championship Contender

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    821
    Likes Received:
    158
    Well good. I can't imagine there being any more than there are now. I haven't watched any since SummerSlam and I'm sure I haven't missed anything. I do give them credit for at least trying to make TLC special by throwing Angle onto the card for that one when Reigns couldn't compete, but it was so random and last minute that it still didn't persuade me to tune in. I'm also really confused by them having a Clash of the Champions ppv when that's exactly what is happening at Survivor Series. How is that supposed to feel unique when there's 4 champion vs champion matches coming up?
     
    #2
  3. Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.

    Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D. Kamehamehaaaaa!!

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    370
    Well, Hell In A Cell was great, so you did miss that.

    As for less PPVs? Does it really matter? I don't care. It has been 1 month build for a PPV for years now. Each brand now have one month for their PPVs. The PPVs sell. There's really no reason to reduce them. You don't need the PPVs to be special anymore, because nobody buys each PPV as a seperate and unique show, like the old PPV era. What matters is giving your subscribers content. So, if PPVs ticket sales are good and WWE is making money with the current formation, they shouldn't reduce the # of PPVs.

    Some changes would be good though.

    a) Create the new big 4: Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, Money in The Bank

    b) Keep the current format of Survivor Series as a RAW vs SD event and add one extra "special" event before the Series: Nigh of Champions. There have every champion defend their belt, so you can see which champion can go into the Series to fight for his brand.
     
    #3
  4. Dagger Dias

    Dagger Dias Natural 20
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,862
    Likes Received:
    4,183
    As much as most of the people posting on this forum may want the PPV schedule to be reduced, I'm not sure it is going to happen. If the WWE is making more money by doing two shows per month (other than the Big 4) than they will continue doing so. I've suggested a Big 6 numerous times and still think they should go that route. The original Big 4 along with Money In The Bank and Night Of Champions (back to its "all titles on the line" format with NO bogus non-title matches) as the 6 dual-branded events.


    January - Royal Rumble

    April - Wrestlemania

    June or July - Money In The Bank

    August - Summerslam

    November - Survivor Series

    December - Night Of Champions


    All of the other months could be for Raw exclusive events or Smackdown exclusive events. If the WWE do reduce the amount of PPV events then I could see them going back to only one show per month. The months that do not have a dual-branded event should still be exclusive to either Raw or Smackdown. It allows exposure for more people across the card and also allows one brand to build to their next show during a month the other brand has theirs. Or they could just keep doing 2 shows for most months. I'm fine with that, but I know I am in the minority around our forum when it comes to that.
     
    #4
  5. d_henderson1810

    d_henderson1810 Mid-Card Championship Winner

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,792
    Likes Received:
    272
    I think that they will continue with the current format unless one of the following happens:-

    (a) The brand extension ends.
    (b) The single-brand PPVs don't do well, so they make every PPV dual-branded, with maybe four RAW and four SD Live! Matches (which means that they only need one PPV a month).


    When you were buying seperate PPVs, it was too much to ask to have more than one a month (I remember that I used to budget for 12 PPVs a year, and used to always get it, twenty years ago. But then they had years with 13 or 14 PPVs, and I had to decide which ones to skip, as I refused to pay for any more than one a month).

    Now, with the Network, you are actually getting a bargain, because you can now see 2 PPVs for 6 times less the price of one PPV before the Network.

    The PPVs would be more special if they stopped repeating PPV matches on RAW and SD Live as well. Just keep those matches for PPVs and have more of the "two faces team against their respective heel opponents at the next PPV in a tag-team match as the main event of RAW or SD that week".
     
    #5
  6. FromGlasgow

    FromGlasgow Championship Contender

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    698
    Likes Received:
    78
    Does anyone still buy PPV's? I think the amount should be cut and would make them feel more special, They used to feel special but now it just feels like watching another episode of Raw. If there was only 6 per year I could handle that and wouldn't miss them but as it is I don't have the time to keep up with them all.
     
    #6

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"