shooter_mcgavin
Mid-Card Championship Winner
Hello folks ...
This argument I is something I have pondered about for quite some time.
Back in the Attitude Era TV Ratings were through the roof and PPV's got better buy rates and attendance.
Of course people will say its because the Attitude Era had Austin, Shock TV, and such.
I think one people forget is that the Attitude Era really distinguished the purpose of a PPV and the purpose of a TV Program like RAW.
In the Attitude Era RAW had an average of 28 mins dedicated to matches, most of the show was dedicated to promos, backstage segments, skits and so forth.
So what did this mean? For fans to see the top draws like Austin, Undertaker, The Rock in actual meaningful wrestling matches, they had to order a PPV just to see them in 15 to 30 min bouts.
Now this kind of makes sense for many reasons:
In TV shows like RAW or Smackdown!, viewers tend to have a short attention span since there are literally hundreds of channels (in North America anyways) to choose from. Wrestling Matches, while entertaining, requires a sense of dedication from the viewer in a medium where there's lots of distractions. In PPV's we pay $40 to $60 to watch PPV's so its easier for viewers to pay attention to a 20 mins wrestling match since there's no way they would be channel flipping for something they paid so much for.
Another reason is more of an booking one. If promos are made to build up a rivalry, it's the matches that are the climax or the start of a new chapter in the feud. So free TV is basically a tease but payed PPV is where people watch the payoff of the feud.
So what does this have to do with before or today?
Simple in those days to watch your favorite superstar like Austin in a match you had to pay to see him wrestle. There's no other option.
Notice in his build up to his match with Shawn Michaels at WM14 or his hyped match with Undertaker at Summer Slam on that same year. Austin was barley involved in matches on free TV. In fact I can probably could a total of 1 or 2 matches in free TV on those 2 month spans. Since it was a rarity to see Austin in a match on free TV even Tag Team Main Event Matches involving Austin can sell a minor PPV (see No Way Out and Fully Loaded in 1998).
These PPV's sold well in contrast to today when even a tag team match involving The Rock and Cena in one of the big four PPV's results at a low buyrate. So why do today's PPV do relatively poorly? Just look at the matches they throw at free TV over the last year ... CM Punk vs. Cena after their hot Summer Slam Match, Randy Orton vs. Christian right after Extreme Rules, Orton vs. Rhodes before their PPV Match, Punk vs. Bryan. And a few years back we got Triple H vs. Undertaker in 2008 on Friday Night Smackdown! ... at a time when that match could have sold a WM alone. They are also featuing Ladder Matches, Steel Cage Matches, and such on free TV more so than before.
Long story short today you are putting big stars in big matches on free TV. If this is the case there is less of an incentive to order of PPV knowing guys like Punk, Cena, or Orton will be performing on a regular basis on RAW or Smackdown? As opposed to before just to see Austin beat the cr@p out of people we had to pay.
So my question is does it make more sense to follow the Attitude Era model where the top stars limit their inring involvement on TV and focus on Promos. And leave the actual wrestling on PPV In hopes to increase TV ratings due to more time on promos and also PPV buy rates?
My answer is already obvious from what I pointed above. But what about you guys
This argument I is something I have pondered about for quite some time.
Back in the Attitude Era TV Ratings were through the roof and PPV's got better buy rates and attendance.
Of course people will say its because the Attitude Era had Austin, Shock TV, and such.
I think one people forget is that the Attitude Era really distinguished the purpose of a PPV and the purpose of a TV Program like RAW.
In the Attitude Era RAW had an average of 28 mins dedicated to matches, most of the show was dedicated to promos, backstage segments, skits and so forth.
So what did this mean? For fans to see the top draws like Austin, Undertaker, The Rock in actual meaningful wrestling matches, they had to order a PPV just to see them in 15 to 30 min bouts.
Now this kind of makes sense for many reasons:
In TV shows like RAW or Smackdown!, viewers tend to have a short attention span since there are literally hundreds of channels (in North America anyways) to choose from. Wrestling Matches, while entertaining, requires a sense of dedication from the viewer in a medium where there's lots of distractions. In PPV's we pay $40 to $60 to watch PPV's so its easier for viewers to pay attention to a 20 mins wrestling match since there's no way they would be channel flipping for something they paid so much for.
Another reason is more of an booking one. If promos are made to build up a rivalry, it's the matches that are the climax or the start of a new chapter in the feud. So free TV is basically a tease but payed PPV is where people watch the payoff of the feud.
So what does this have to do with before or today?
Simple in those days to watch your favorite superstar like Austin in a match you had to pay to see him wrestle. There's no other option.
Notice in his build up to his match with Shawn Michaels at WM14 or his hyped match with Undertaker at Summer Slam on that same year. Austin was barley involved in matches on free TV. In fact I can probably could a total of 1 or 2 matches in free TV on those 2 month spans. Since it was a rarity to see Austin in a match on free TV even Tag Team Main Event Matches involving Austin can sell a minor PPV (see No Way Out and Fully Loaded in 1998).
These PPV's sold well in contrast to today when even a tag team match involving The Rock and Cena in one of the big four PPV's results at a low buyrate. So why do today's PPV do relatively poorly? Just look at the matches they throw at free TV over the last year ... CM Punk vs. Cena after their hot Summer Slam Match, Randy Orton vs. Christian right after Extreme Rules, Orton vs. Rhodes before their PPV Match, Punk vs. Bryan. And a few years back we got Triple H vs. Undertaker in 2008 on Friday Night Smackdown! ... at a time when that match could have sold a WM alone. They are also featuing Ladder Matches, Steel Cage Matches, and such on free TV more so than before.
Long story short today you are putting big stars in big matches on free TV. If this is the case there is less of an incentive to order of PPV knowing guys like Punk, Cena, or Orton will be performing on a regular basis on RAW or Smackdown? As opposed to before just to see Austin beat the cr@p out of people we had to pay.
So my question is does it make more sense to follow the Attitude Era model where the top stars limit their inring involvement on TV and focus on Promos. And leave the actual wrestling on PPV In hopes to increase TV ratings due to more time on promos and also PPV buy rates?
My answer is already obvious from what I pointed above. But what about you guys