The Return Of Brand-Exclusive Pay-Per-Views

[Kcorthe]

As we all know, the WWE has returned to the format of every PPV features every Brand. Where as it used to be (in 2003-early 2007) the B-PPV's were all Brand-Exclusive.

I think we should return to that format, with the Royal Rumble, WrestleMania, Night Of Champions, SummerSlam, and Survivor Series being the only Tri-Branded PPV's of the year.

All of the other PPV's would be divided equally among RAW and SmackDown!, with ECW having a match or maybe even two on every SmackDown! PPV. Pretty much how it was right before we went back to Tri-Branded PPVs.

Why do I think we should return to this format?

Because, think of it. With 3 Brands of WWE now, there are more Main Event Superstars at one time than ever. Cena, Batista, Triple H, HBK, Jericho, Kane, 'Taker, Edge, Big Show, Mysterio, JBL, Orton, Umaga, Jeff Hardy, Kennedy, Matt Hardy, MVP, Khali, Henry, and I'm sure I am forgetting some. And with all of the aforementioned guys needing a PPV match, we STILL have to keep building the future! DiBiase, Rhodes, Burchill, Morrison, Miz, Cryme Tyme, Kingston, Benjamin, etc. PLUS, now we have TWO Diva Divsions. And with PPVs only getting 7-9 matches at the most per PPV, there simply isn't enough room on each PPV Card for all of the wrestlers we want to see.

Mr. Kennedy hasn't been on PPV since WrestleMania.
MVP has been left off of the last two PPV's. And at Judgment Day, he wasn't even billed to appear.
Umaga has only been on two PPVs since WrestleMania.
Etc, etc, etc.

This trend only continues. To fix this, we need to return to Brand-Exclusive B-PPV's in order to continue building stars and what not. Also this would make the A-PPV's all the more interesting and exciting.

Does anyone else agree with me, or do you disagree?

 

[Seal]

I'm not too sure really, nothing wrong with the current PPVs. It wouldn't be good for buyrates I'd imagine, but perhaps they're attempting to make Smackdown more powerful for that very reason...

Hmm, there were some great brand exclusive PPVs though. Particularly Raw ones in early 2004.

 

[mcflyboy]

Personally, it doesn't really matter to me if they share PPVs or have exclusivity, because I have only ever plunked down cash for the big 4 PPVs.

However, from a big picture standpoint, I think the answer really depends on what you would rather see at pay per views. If you would like to see more midcarders on the PPVs, as it sounds like Kcorthe would prefer when starting this thread, then brand exclusive ones would be best suited to make that happen.

However from a business standpoint (and the WWE's perspective), then I think that combined pay per views make more sense, for the following reasons (in no particular order).

1. Appeal to a greater audience.

Not everyone watches both raw and smackdown. Those who only watch one or the other--say RAW for example--are less likely to order a smackdown-only ppv, and vice versa. By having individuals from both shows, you aren't alienating those who only watch 1 show. Or alienating those who only want to spend money to watch specific wrestlers who only appear on one show.

2. Storylines/feuds

From what I understand, there is a RAW team of writers and a smackdown team of writers that are basically independent. If both shows share a ppv, the teams of writers only need to come up with half the storylines and feuds that they would need to if the upcoming ppv was exclusive to only one show, which would be much easier.

3. Length of time between PPVs

If the ppvs are show exclusive, then you would conceivably have blocks of time where there is 2 months or so between a show's PPVs. That's arguably a long block of time, and then the shows would be stuck with either building up a story/rivalry for 2 months before it's conclusion (quite a while), or weeks at a time where nothing really happens or builds (which would make things boring). Of course, this particular problem could be alleviated somewhat if feuds ended or more title matches took place on the weekly shows instead of PPVs, but that doesn't seem to happen very often.


4. Mix it up a little.

When you watch a regular show, you basically watch 2 hours of raw only stars or 2 hours of smackdown only stars. With a brand exclusive PPV, you watch 3 hours of only raw or only smackdown. On the other hand, a shared PPV mixes it up a little. Maybe it's just me, but it's nice and different to see things mixed up a little, it feels less like an extra long RAW or Smackdown and more like a ppv.

5. Do you want to see a lot of mid or lowcarders or more diva matches on a ppv?

This one probably depends more on your personal tastes and preferences. But if you have show-exclusive PPVs, you might get stuck with more matches at the mid card or even lower level, just to make the show long enough. If this happens, you run the risk of turning off folks who might not want to fork out the money to watch a pay per view if the card includes too many matches along the lines of haas vs. palumbo, or supercrazy vs. delaney, or a diva title match with a twist called a "reverse bra and panties" and the victor is the one who forces her opponent into a parka and snowpants.



So those are my thoughts...I do see the appeal in returning to show-exclusive PPVs, but I think overall from an entertainment and business standpoint things are probably better being shared at PPVs.

 

[jtbsoon2b]

I'm not too sure really, nothing wrong with the current PPVs. It wouldn't be good for buyrates I'd imagine, but perhaps they're attempting to make Smackdown more powerful for that very reason...

Hmm, there were some great brand exclusive PPVs though. Particularly Raw ones in early 2004.

Actually buyrates have only slightly increased with tri-branded ppvs.

I think they should go back to exclusive ppvs, but allow the ALL WORLD TITLES to be defended on the ppv. (on SD! ppv the WHC and ECW title can also be defended)

IMO that would still have the same buyrates, because in reality many "fans" only care about the world titles

 

[chance]

As we all know, the WWE has returned to the format of every PPV features every Brand. Where as it used to be (in 2003-early 2007) the B-PPV's were all Brand-Exclusive.

I think we should return to that format, with the Royal Rumble, WrestleMania, Night Of Champions, SummerSlam, and Survivor Series being the only Tri-Branded PPV's of the year.

All of the other PPV's would be divided equally among RAW and SmackDown!, with ECW having a match or maybe even two on every SmackDown! PPV. Pretty much how it was right before we went back to Tri-Branded PPVs.

Why do I think we should return to this format?

Because, think of it. With 3 Brands of WWE now, there are more Main Event Superstars at one time than ever. Cena, Batista, Triple H, HBK, Jericho, Kane, 'Taker, Edge, Big Show, Mysterio, JBL, Orton, Umaga, Jeff Hardy, Kennedy, Matt Hardy, MVP, Khali, Henry, and I'm sure I am forgetting some. And with all of the aforementioned guys needing a PPV match, we STILL have to keep building the future! DiBiase, Rhodes, Burchill, Morrison, Miz, Cryme Tyme, Kingston, Benjamin, etc. PLUS, now we have TWO Diva Divsions. And with PPVs only getting 7-9 matches at the most per PPV, there simply isn't enough room on each PPV Card for all of the wrestlers we want to see.

Mr. Kennedy hasn't been on PPV since WrestleMania.
MVP has been left off of the last two PPV's. And at Judgment Day, he wasn't even billed to appear.
Umaga has only been on two PPVs since WrestleMania.
Etc, etc, etc.

This trend only continues. To fix this, we need to return to Brand-Exclusive B-PPV's in order to continue building stars and what not. Also this would make the A-PPV's all the more interesting and exciting.

Does anyone else agree with me, or do you disagree?

I mostly agree. personally id say make noc a regular raw. but, maybe 3 hours. and to even things out, just bring back cyber sunday since they got rid of that. NOC don't belong in the same category as the other 4.

On the part about the future, id say not just that, but all mid carders. The tribranded ppvs is part of what killed the cw division. Only one tri branded ppv featured a cw match, and that was night of champions.

I agree, guys like kennedy shouldnt be left off every ppv.

True, thats what makes the main ppvs great.

Also, it creates more time for build up. It saves us from 3 week feuds

To the guy a few spaces above me even with single brand ppvs you never have delaney vs super crazy or haas vs palumbo or super crazy vs delaney.

Which takes me back to the last single brand ppv no way out 2007. You had benoit and the hardys vs mvp and mnm all upper mid card. Then. the cruiserweight open which while lower mid card was a title match in which the title changes hands. then, finlay and little bastard ( now hornswoggle) vs boogyman and little boogyman. While, this was a bad match both were mid card. Kane vs King booker Both are former world champs. Then, paul london and brian kendrick vs deuce and domino at the time both were upper mid card and londrick had the title for almost a year and deuce and domino won the week before. Then Mr. kennedy vs lashley at the time lashley was basically black cena and he beat everyone, and kennedy was a great upper mid carder. Then cena and hbk vs undertaker and batista while a crappy excuse for main event both were mania main eventerse

It should go back to single brand ppvs.

 

[Showtime]

Yes! i absolutly agree. The WWE needs to start going back to single brand ppv's. I'm tired of seeing storylines get really dragged on and each ppv is just a rematch from the last one. How many straight ppv's did Taker and Edge fight for the title. And Edge and Batista the year before. And Cena and Orton, And Trips and Orton, And JBL and Cena. And the main reason is with only 4-5 shows between each ppv, little can be built up that fast to draw interest in the show, so they do rematches. Having some single branded ppv's (with the obvious tri-branded ones too), would give the shows a little more time to work out angles and stories, as well give the underappreciated middle card a chance to go out there and shine. Too many good midcard talent (kennedy, mvp, umaga) are being left off ppv's.

 

[kane_Jr]

I definately agree. Someone said before about the fact that when you have a 2 month gap between PPVs it can make a story line go stale quick, this is true. One solution to that is after a PPV, start another World title fued, and about halfway between the two months have a title match to end the fued on RAW, Smackdown, or ECW. Then you can start another one to build toward the upcoming PPV. Plus it wouldnt hurt to have a title match on those shows especially if a title change takes place. They also need to really establish ECW. expand the roster, add titles to it, give it a second hour. Then when its good enough give it its own PPVs. Dont do it like December to Dismember in 2006. No build up, crappy matches.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

The major problem with this, is the PPVs become glorified versions of the weekly show far too often. We will see weeks of MVP Vs Hardy, then at the PPV we will see....MVP Vs Hardy. LOL. The big shows actually make EVERYTHING a higher quality. It allows the WWE to see what feuds and pairings get the most reaction, and thus, THOSE matches get put on a PPV. If people react, they like it, and wil pay to see the show. pretty easy. also, you get some PPV quality match ups on TV, such as The Kofi Kingston Vs Birchill IC title match we got, things of that nature.

Better PPVs, better TV shows weekly. The big show PPVs make everything in programming better. If they were to buy out TNA one day, then yes, I could see them doing the seperate shows. but as of now, no, becuase the roster isnt quite stacked enough to make the "B" shows anything more than glorified 40$ versions of a weekly TV show.

 

[Shocky]

The problem is, still way too many pay per views at this point to begin with. 14 pay per views is a bit much. i would love to see it get down to 10, but realize that isn't going to happen.

Does anyone honestly feel that one brand is strong enough to carry an entire pay per view? I no longer long for the days of Jimmy Wang Yang vs. Shannon Moore on a pay per view. I don't want to see crap, so therefore I'm not going to pay for crap.

The WWE with three brands rarely puts on spectacular pay per views from top to bottom, so it's impossible for them to do it with 1/3 of their roster available to be on the card. Does anyone honestly believe that ECW is capable of putting on a good pay per view, or do I need to remind everyone of December to Dismember.

 

[Joker ' Ferreira]

I do agree with the return of brand-exclusive PPVs, for so many reasons, first, to showcase talent. We wont see a Intercontinental or US Championship Match on a PPV if there isn't any major storyline with it, before, we could see great matches, Benoit vs. Regal, and so, so much more options and it didn't get repetitive.

Of course, you can say that a lot of talent is useless, of course it is, but they aren't showcased, MVP, Kennedy, Umaga, Morrison, and the list goes on, haven't got a major title shot because they don't have time to build up them as main-eventers, all they can do is 4 or 5 rematches in a row.

For sure, Cena vs. Orton, Undertaker vs. Edge are great matches, no doubt about it, at least in my perspective, but I'm just tired of all this rematches thrown together just because they don't have time to build up anything, before, even New Year's Revolution was important, it was the first PPV of the year and it served the purpose of showcasing talent for the new year, now, the PPV doesn't even exist and new talent can only hope that they get hype based on weekly shows, Evan Bourne wont be on a PPV at least until 2009, why is that? I don't think it's the correct way to build up things, not in my view.

 

[DeadmanInc.]

I don't think it's a good idea to bring back single brand PPVs. Even if we get more variety on them, not all of the matches or feuds are worthy enough to be on a PPV. I hated the days where I had to pay to see Gregory Helms vs Super Crazy. Matches like that should stay on the weekly shows. Back when we had single branded PPVs, a good chunk of the matches on the card are ones that should be viewed for free on RAW/Smackdown.

For example, compare No Way Out 2007 (the last single brand PPV) to 2008. On 07's card you have a 6 man tag grudge match, a mixed tag match with two midgets and a Gauntlet match for a worthless title. These types of matches aren't worthy of being on PPV at all, they should be on the weekly shows instead. Meanwhile, 08's card is much better. It's completely stacked with good matches from top to bottom, such as the two elimination chambers, Ric Flair vs Kennedy, and three world title matches. You can't get that kind of a PPV with a single brand.

Sure, some of the talent are left off of PPV cards but that's because creative doesn't have anything for them yet or their feuds aren't something people want to pay for. The Kennedy/Burchill feud was great for free TV but not something I would want to pay for. Guys like Kennedy, Umaga, Morrison, and MVP are obvious diamonds in the rough. They will get their time to shine eventually. Right now they're still being built up as the future of the company.

 

[Haner388994]

I think that it would be a good idea for the company to go back to the brand exclusive PPV's for these reasons:

1. The storyline would be in great form because they have more time to grow and get can get an emotional feel to the matches. They would have 1 and a half to 2 months to pump the 6-7 different feuds for the upcoming PPV.

2. The Tri-Branded PPV's that they still have (Summerslam, Survivor Series, Night Of Champions, Royal Rumble, and Wrestlemania), will be much bigger and bring a larger crowd for these special PPV's.

Those are just a few of the better things about having a Tri-Branded PPV's.

 

[Chaze2k1]

I think I am fine with the PPV's like this problem that they need to fix is to have only 12 events instead of the 14 because the product suffers cause of it. The other option would be to go with 13 events and combine the concepts of Cyber Sunday and ONS. WWE would have to eliminate ppv's if they went back to the brand exclusive or come back with 900 ppvs in a year.

 

[Slack]

I like the idea of the separate PPVs for the 3 brands, but only this way and I'll explain why. But first they need to treat all three brands as separate companies. Hell let Vince run one, Shane run one and Stephanie run one.

First, have the big four PPVs be tri brand. This will give a chance for the fans to still see those dream crossbrand match ups at the and show all the talent at once of all 3 brands and make it special. Only have these PPVs on at those months.

Second have both Smackdown and RAW have a PPV every month, except for months that the big 4 PPVs fall on. This could put more of the talent on each of the PPVs and can show different match ups and create more stars.

Third. I personally wouldn't give ECW it's own monthly PPV, but give it a quarterly PPV. The reason is this, PPVs are sold on star power and/or the anticipation of the matches that will be on the PPV. ECW doesn't really have the star power, so they need to do a buildup to the PPV. A quarterly PPV would provide this

 

[KingShaw3]

No way. That is not a good idea. Tri-branded pay-per-views every month for sure. Anyone or anything that doesn't make the cut each month too bad. Put the best wrestlers from the company as a whole in the best matches possible each month. I hated when they had Raw brand or Smackdown brand pay-per-views. Not to mention if ECW doesn't get their own ppvs then it would only further prove the fact that they are the weakest brand. The most time between WWE ppvs is 30 days usually and sometimes only two weeks between monthly ppvs. If WWE can't get your favorites on each ppv then that's more of a reason to watch them for free on tv. Not to mention if you watch RAW every week and don't catch Smackdown normally or visa versa then why would you buy the ppv highlighting the show you don't watch. This way WWE can break down what's happening week in and week out on all three programs and decide what fueds are ppv worthy each month.

 

[ecw4life]

Single branded ppvs al the way. Plus this is a chance for ECW to get stars. Bump its show to 2 hours. Add ECWTV title and tag titles. and give ECW One Night Stand, New Years Revolution, December to Dismember and bring Heat wave or Barely Legal. MAke ECW TV 14. and make it the outlaw, make the show for rebels. weapons can be used all the crazy blood and crap can be seen on ECw not TV PG Raw or Smackdown.

 

[klunderbunker]

At this point, its a good idea on paper but it wouldn't work if played out in real life. The pay per view market is flooded beyond belief already and the brand split shows were awful in the first place. The problem then was that there were too many mid card feuds that should have been on tv only being put on ppv. Feuds like that are left on tv because there's no need to pay to see them as tehy're just not main event level feuds. The mixed shows work well enough now simply because they're balanced correctly. The only problem is that the roster is too big right now. There are too many wrestlers to fit onto a 2:45 hour card with all of the titles that have to be involved. With the unification of the women's and tag belts, room could be made for more non title matches which are the main thigns missing right now.

 

[Hyorinmaru]

I think they should keep the mixed Brand PPVs. It makes for less filler matches when they have three brands and like 2 or 3 major feuds from each brand. That's at least 6-9 matches on a PPV card which in my opinion isn't a bad PPV. Yeah they would probably add a filler match or two but not as many as they used to have when it was 1 brand per PPV except the big 4.

 

[ronthony717]

I 100% agree on the idea of bringing back the brand exclusive ppvs. I have been thinking about that a lot lately because of the draft making more wrestlers jumping on top of the main rosters proving themselves.. i have even thought about matches.. ecw and smackdown would throw some pretty good matches with ecw having three matches involved..
with raw with more powerful roster with Jericho, Mysterio, Michaels, Orton, Punk, Kane, JBL, Cena, Batista all on top and a tough mid card with Kofi Kingston, D'Lo Brown, Lance Cade, Santino, Regal, Cryme Tyme, Rhodes, Ted Jr, Hass, Burchill and even Palumbo and Noble and Highlanders still on the list. Then you have the toughest womens division in a very long time with Beth, Mickie, Melina, Katie Lee, Jillian Hall, Kelly Kelly and the return of Candice Michelle..
Smcakdown and ECW has a big list now adays with headliners like Undertaker, Tripler H, Edge, Big Show, Jeff Hardy, Umaga, Kahli, Mark Henry, Matt Hardy, Morrison. Then the Mid carders like Chavo, Bourne, Ortiz, Dreamer, Delaney, MVP, Kennedy, Shelton, Burke, Ryder and Hawkins, Neely, vladmir, Kendrick, festus, helms, Big Daddy V, Carlito, Ezekiel, Finlay, Knox, Crazy and Miz.. dont forget the improving divas division with Maria, Victoria, McCool, Cherry, Natalya... I think this will have so many different kind of matches and ratings would improve with the oppratunity of building so many fueds and then witnessing the finale of the fued on its own ppv and maybe gettin a spot on the big ppv... i say yes to exclusive ppvs... cause thats the best thing to do right now

 

[Starchild]

There are a few things to look at here in weighing the pros and cons of the brand exclusive and tri-brand ppvs.

As for the brand exclusive, it worked for a while but as has been stated, it got old by the end watching some matches not worthy of a ppv. The thing I liked most about them was the sufficient time they allotted for build up, particularly in big matches. Feuds like the HHH/Batista ones were great...that lasted for about 5 months if you count from the Royal Rumble until Vengeance 2005. In that time, the two only had 3 big matches and the culminating HIAC was highly anticipated. This kind of thing would be useful in say the Batista/Cena feud. There were only a few weeks to build to a match that is years in the making..the two biggest stars in the company today.

On the flip side, some of these feuds were dragged on for a bit too long and got stale. The biggest upside for the tri-brand ppvs is that we more or less only get matches worthy of a ppv. Yes we don't get to see everyone, such as Kane, Jericho, Morrison, Kennedy, MVP, etc. sometimes not getting a match but most of these guys are fairly young and will likely be main eventers in coming years. Also, the big 4 generally drew more of an audience than the tri-brands..yes because of the name and prestige they hold, but also because of the fact that we got to see many more main eventers and better matches.

Overall, I'd say that the brand exclusives were no where near being totally bad, but the tri-brands just have them beat.

 

[Tim]

Its sort of a lose-lose scenario, whichever way you look at it.

For tri-branded ppv's, you have the same people on the card a lot of the time and a lot of the other talent is left off. But for singular brand ppvs, the talent get the matches, but the matches won't be as good.
I just want to know, what would happen to ECW if WWE starts having single brand ppvs again? Would ECW get its own share, would it join up with Smackdown, or would it just have ONS? To me, this is just one of thereasons why singular branded ppvs would not work.

What WWE needs to do is shuffle the matches around on each card, but still have tri branded ppvs.

 

[TNAw00t]

yeah i agree, i think the brands should have their own ppv....back a long time ago when they had those things, i got excited when it was a two brand thing like summerslam, wrestlemania, survivor series i think, and royal rumble (and taboo tuesday once) but now i just feel like they're like the other ppvs....except the royal rumble cause of the rumble thing

 

[rjdonuts]

I am in favor of single-branded ppv's. the roster is big enough, and the already mentioned neglected mid-card talent could use some ppv experience, especially if they are to be the future stars.

So i propose a return to the "In Your House" style ppv. give each brand a 2 hour ppv slot every 4-6 weeks between the big 4 (ecw may need to join with one brand or the other, or both). have these 2 hour ppv's be almost all wrestling and use them to build the big feuds and showcase midcard talent. BY SHOWCASE i mean actually use tv shows to put them in feuds and build them up. in my opinion, wrestling fans deserve to see feuds over the ic, us, and tag titles. otherwise, they might as well rename them all the tv title.

It would be the job of writers and wrestlers to make is care about these mid card feuds. also, we could see some new names, bring back some old ones, or maybe tap into the wcw ppv archive. it would be fun to see "souled out", "rock bottom", "breakdown" or "cold day in hell" again.

also, wwe could charge, say 24.99 for each, so they actually make 10 extra bucks, and fans could actually see feuds built up properly, unlike this cena/batista debacle. these smaller ppv's would also allow the big ones to truly be big, by being the show where fueds culminate, not start. i mean, honestly, who wasn't more stoked about taker/edge TLC than taker/edge wrestlemania. i was, because the feud had been going on for months...

anyway, the ideas not perfect but i think it could be done without wasting the time and money of fans, nor the true talent of the company, which is often the mid to upper mid card.

 

[BigDaddyT]

I agree, but to a certain extent.

Smackdown and Raw could certainly do with some brand exclusive ppvs, but ECW? Hardly. ECW just does not yet have the fire power to start getting its own ppvs. Remember WWE's "December to Dismember?" I cringe at the thought of another ONE of those none the less a whole line up. Other than that i totally agree.