Would you rather have PPVs split for individual brands?

[Da Big Champ]

I recently started getting bored of the interbrand PPVs and began wondering if other people agreed with me and if they would rather see PPVs being split for each brand. I mainly enjoy watching Smackdown and when I watch a PPV and theres a Raw match I usually don't watch it. I also find that the build up for a match is rushed which makes the match seem boring or pointless.
So would you rather see WWE PPVs be interbrand or split for individual brands?

 

[goodlay]

No. The brand PPVs were pretty bad back in the day, and most of the time they were just extended episodes of Raw and SD and really didn't have a PPV feel to them. The cards were really weak besides Raw in 02-03 when it was stacked with the top WWE, WCW, and ECW guys. There's a reason they made PPVs all brands (Raw, SD, and ECW when it was around) once again back in 2007: The PPVs would be terrible. Think about making a card month after month for SD. That would be pretty awful imo.

 

[Dave]

No, I like it the way it is right now.

Really, the WWE has lowered how much time it takes to see a feud progress and a month seems to be the number that they have settled on. Sure, back in the day, you would not see a wrestler lay a hand on another wrestler for two or three months as the feud got increasingly better. However, the WWE has realised that children don’t like to wait for things and have, smarty, reduced the time that it takes for feud to build up. By doing this, you can safely assume that you can go from having a feud start, to having it end in a little more than a month.

Now, I am not one of those people who attack the WWE PG mantra but building feuds is what the WWE has done best for the better part of a decade. Taking away the build from feuds leaves them dead in the water and means that no one cares about them. However, that is the route that the WWE has taken and as such, inter-brand promotional PPV’s are here to stay. At the end of the day, I hate watching just one promotions PPV. I always wanted to see the Raw PPV’s when they were single brand PPV’s but Smackdown didn’t have the name pulling power that Raw did back then and has now.

For me, the Raw brand is still the strongest and I seriously doubt that the WWE could make me want to buy a Smackdown PPV. Sorry but Jack Swagger against Rey Mysterio as the main event on a card that would have lower card talent on the PPV. Smackdown just doesn’t have the mainstream appeal that RAW does and until the day when it does, inter-brand PPV’s are here to stay.

 

[The Crock]

I definitely think that the ppv's should not be brand exclusive. It's much more interesting if you have both brands on the show because you can even have a cross brand feud. With the old brand exclusive ppv's it used to get dull because you would have a limited amount of superstars and you would have to use jobbers during the pay-per-views. The new pay-per-views also have a much bigger feel to them because you're defending the WWE Championship, the World Heavyweight Championship, the Intercontinetal Championship, the United States Championship, and the Tag Team Belts all on one pay-per-view. To me, it is just more appealing to have both brands at a pay-per-view.

 

[mrbrownstone]

Definitely interbrand PPVs could you imagine what a SD exclusive ppv would be right now with their main event scene punk is out for a while as is taker so that leaves you with Kane, Swagger, Rey and Show the buy rates would be awful i wouldnt buy a PPV headlined by Swagger vs Kane or Rey vs Show or Kane vs Show and what else would they put on the show The Dudebusters vs Hawkins and Archer im sure people would pay to see that.

 

[billm75]

I'd like separate branded ppv's ONLY if both brands had the same quality of roster. As it stands now, Smackdown is the new ECW in terms of building new stars. Take away Undertaker, Big Show, Mysterio and Kane, and how many guys at the top level do you have with 10 years+ experience? Not many. And I'm talking about the ones you actually see on TV each week, not the ones who work house shows and dark matches.

If both brands had equal talent, then yes, I'd be all for branded PPV's. Mainly because that would mean 6 weeks between a PPV for either brand, they could really build storylines with depth and feuds with meaning. As it stands now, every 3 weeks they're turning things around. Sure, some feuds span 2 or more PPV events, but most don't. And even then, they seem rushed.

So, until the imbalance in upper mid-card to Main-event talent is taken care of, I don't see HOW they could do branded PPV's.

 

[kobrad]

YES YES YES!!! and let me tell you why!

There is no such thing as a real feud anymore. Everyone always complains about crap feuds in WWE and this would def. make WWE think more about their feuds and dig deeper into the feuds. Honestly WWE needs this!!!!!

You wanna make stars? Then this is how you do that! you give them matches on PPV and also WWE wouldnt have to fire so many people!!!

 

[JJ15776]

Brand-exclusive PPVs is a good idea - but not the way they did it.

I would much rather have brand exclusive PPVs if they did them like they originally did the In Your House events - 2 hours hours long and only $20. Have two of those a month, one for Raw and one for SD!, and it would work very well. They're secondary PPVs, treat them as such. But taking one brand and trying to turn it into a 3 hour PPV, for the same price, just doesn't work well. It's secondary quality but they're trying to sell it as a premiere event. Of course people didn't like them.

 

[Dum Dum Dudley]

Originally, I was torn between yes or no. I felt that brand specific PPVs would have their positives. Firstly, feuds would have the opportunity to gather steam before the eventual match. With an alternating schedule of RAW then SD!, it would be 8 weeks between each brands PPVs instead of the usual 4 or even sometimes (god forbid) 3 weeks. Secondly, it would allow talent a chance to shine and allow the paying customer to see something different as I think the midcard and tag titles would be defended more regularly at PPV.

But overall, I'm gonna have to go with no on this one. The main problem I have with brand specific PPVs is that some talent just do not warrant a spot on PPV. Take Shad VS JTG at Extreme Rules 2010. The crowd did not buy into the match at all and not even the strap stipulation starved off the feeling that we were watching a Smackdown quality match.

 

[MrEdgeFan]

Plain and simple, no. I like to see the crossing between each brand. You might even see a SD superstar meet up with a RAW superstar make something that gives the PPV an extra star(in ratings).

Also, you could just have another show for that brand and make it three-hour special.

 

[y2straightedge]

No I dont because I feel the Uni-Branded PPVS do not allow the other brand to progress if you have a short attention spand and you have to keep the feud going with matches at Pay Per Views even cumilating and meeting in a themed matchup.

Also, WWE doesnt have the roster as before which you have to have to fill up the card.
Plus, a interbrand feud might come and it beats the purpose of uni-branded PPVS. Look, 2007.


y2straightedge

 

[wushady]

Right now no when they tried before there were many weak matches on the card. Because they didn't have enough stars on each brand to make a great show.

I think maybe when all the top stars return from injury, and they build more solid midcarders. They should try it again it gives both brands more time to build feuds and angle going in to pay per views.

If they did it again right now it would be just as bad as before in my opinion. We don't want to see Zach Ryder vs Santino on pay per view.

 

[Devlin]

I'd prefer Brand Specific PPV's if they pushed some of the mid card feuds a bit more. Back in the day most matches on a RAW or SD Brand PPV just felt like filler as opposed to a match you wanted to see.

If the WWE pushed a few decent mid-card feuds then without a doubt I would prefer Brand exclusive PPV's. It would add less repetition to main events, so we wouldn't see the likes of Orton Vs Cena for 5 PPV's straight.

What makes this harder to do now more then ever though is the themed PPV's. If HIAC was a SD brand PPV would that mean there would never be a RAW HIAC match?, etc.

 

[sergcavs]

Yeah keep it how it is now. I much rather see talent from smackdown and raw rather than have one brand just booking filler matches simply to extend the pay per view until the main event. I never really liked brand exclusive pay per views and I absolutely wouldnt want to see them again. WWE keep pay per views mixed with Raw and Smackdown matches

 

[Nicole13Edge/HardyFan]

On one hand I would like to have the PPVs split for individual brands and on the other hand I don't.

The reasons why I would like to see the PPVs split for individual brands is because then they would have more time to build their storylines like they used to. The fueds would have more time to develop and the matches would make more sense instead of just putting matches together last minute.


The reason I would not like to see the PPVs split for individual brands is because the brands wouldn't be able to put on a great PPV card like they used to in the attitude era. The reason being is that they haven't built there superstars enought to have a card for just Raw or Smackdown.

So no I don't think that they should have split PPVs for individual brands maybe when they build up there superstars more but not now.

 

[Bigmac1892]

I'm going to have to go with the few people who have said Yes. Now, there is a good argument, which is saying like who would want to see Santino vs. Zack Ryder. The thing is, that with 8 weeks to create feuds, they could make it a watchable feud. A enjoyable feud. If I was to tell you in January, that we would see Matt Hardy vs. Drew McIntyre in a feud, you would have most likely have said that it would be horrible.

Well, now in July, We have seen this feud escalate from being Matt beating Drew in a Money in the Bank Qualifying Match, to being one of the best feuds as of late on television, in my eyes, only behind NXT, Kane (Undertaker), and Edge vs Orton.

A feud could be so easy to make watchable, and acceptable even with Santino or Zack Ryder. Have Zack come out with a new diva, saying how he was the only one in the world who could have got her. Then have Santino come out, and convince her to come with him. She goes, Zack gets Jealous, and after a few matches and promos, of Santino winning. It could be a "enjoyable" feud, on the Undercard of a Raw pay-per-view.

With such a long period of time, any two (or more) wrestler, even the likes of Chavo or Chris Masters, could have a decent, but watchable feud. That is to me the reason you could have Brand Exclusive Pay-Per-Views. In a 8 week period, you have about 16 hours of Raw. Give Santino and Zack 20 minutes on one Raw, later in the feud, What harm could a 20 minute segment and match do, especially if you have 15 or so hours of programming for other feuds, and in the end, a good quality feud that people may care about.

So all in all, I think the Pay-Per-Views are fine the way they are, but I would definatley rather see WWE use the undercard talent alot more and give them their well deserved time on a Pay-Per-View, and I think it IS possible for them to have it and make the PPV not be boring and not worth the money.

 

[dirtsheetplayaz20091996]

I definitely think it should go back to Brand Only PPV's. Nowadays on Raw we only see a few big names, and the rest of the matches are just random mixups of the undercards. What they SHOULD be doing is using the top names like orton, cena edge etc in feuds with people like chris masters, christian, and vladimir kozlov etc to give those younger guys a push and make more quality superstars and in turn, matches. even if they only come up for a few months or so it still makes for a good card. As Brand Only ppv formats have clearly vanished i think it would be good to bring them back again and create a rivalry with smackdown vs raw, to put on the better shows. They should do what TNA have been doing with their superstars. Kazarian for example. He came back about six months ago or so and was big, he then sunk down into an occasional ring competitior. When he received his push into flairs "gang" and had his feud with angle, his career took off again, which leads me to jay lethal who was never really big until now since his feud with flair. WWE need to make there undercard stars into superstars in order for the brand only ppv format to work and get better ratings

 

[mayankeagle]

Damn, if PPVs were brand-specific, they would be so boring. A Raw viewer would not even buy a PPV for a Smackdown PPV, and that's bad. Having multi-brand PPVs is good for both, the fans and the business. Its good for the business because you would probably buy the PPV regardless of whether you are a Raw fan or a Smackdown fan, since there is a bigger probability that your stars would be performing there (since there will be Raw main-events and Smackdown main-events). Its also good for the business because this opens the door for more variety in story-telling. And from the fans' perspectives, they get to see what they want. We wouldn't have had Taker vs HBK at Wrestlemania if it was not for cross-brand PPVs.

 

[Ferbian]

The Pay Per View set up right now is perfectly fine, we get to see good matches regularly with talent from both shows rather than watching Pay Per Views from one specific show with talents we might not care about, then have to sit around a period of time for us to get a show where the people we do care about is on.

That will make a mess, besides the Pay Per View shows right now as I said has talent from both rosters, which will mean it draws more because the top draws on the specific rosters will most likely be featured on the Pay Per View, therefore receiving more buys.

This way as well you get to present more intense feuds in terms of switching back and forth between the gimmick matches as well as who comes out the winner, Rey Mysterio vs CM Punk is a great example of this, with different gimmick matches, the feud carrying on very well and the winners switched from time to time.

The only thing that could possibly be bad for the Pay Per Views to be interbranded is that it leaves open for more title switches, but that again only depends on how WWE chooses to book it, which without interbrand Pay Per Views could very well happen on RAW or SmackDown either way.

 

[Bobby B]

Pretty sure I replied to an identical thread 6 weeks ago.

Here's the reasons why you shouldn't have brand specific PPV's:

- 2 hours per show isn't enough time to build enough serious fueds for a PPV. You end up having really underprepared filler matches.
- The Price - It would appear that in the UK PPV's are now free (Summerslam is billed as being on SkySports according to WWE.com) but in the US the price is very high, people won't pay for half the feuds they should be getting.
- 8 weeks is a long time to draw out a feud - some feuds get a little predictable after 4 weeks - lets just say the PPV coming up was a Raw PPV - we'd have to build Rey vs Swagger for 8 weeks leading into Summerslam - would get very boring very quickly.
- Joint Pay Per Views are better - they just are. Because there are a few more feuds combined on Raw and Smackdown that can make a PPV - only the good feuds get onto the PPV.

Let say hypothetically each brand had their own PPV coming up (lets totally ignore Money In the Bank) - these would be the matches:

RAW PPV

WWE Title - Cena Vs Sheamus
Edge vs Orton
Evan Bourne vs Jericho
Unified Tag Titles - The Hart Dyansty vs The Uso's
Divas Title - Eve vs Alicia Fox
US Title The Miz vs John Morrison

It's good - but it's not great.

Smackdown PPV

World Title - Rey vs Swagger
Kane vs CM Punk (Let's ignore the injury)
Christian vs Dolph Ziggler
US Title - Matt Hardy vs Drew McIntyre vs Kofi Kingston
Women's Title - Laycool vs Kelly Kelly and Tiffany
Hawkins and Archer vs The Dudebusters

From a exposure standpoint, I guess it's quite nice seeing The Dudebusters and people like that on PPV, but beyond the two title matches, and the two big draw matches (Orton/Edge and Kane/Punk) the card gets very thin very quickly.

But put that into a joint PPV:

WWE Title - Cena Vs Sheamus
World Title - Mysterio vs Swagger
Edge vs Orton
Kane vs Punk
Unified Tag Titles - Hart's vs Uso's
US Title - Hardy vs Kingston vs McIntyre
Divas Match

It's a much more stacked card. There's interest in each match, and people would be much more willing to pay for that, than two different PPV's.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

No...the split from 200? to 2007 failed...just look at the buy-rates...i admit, it lets the feuds build for longer, but now a days WWE writing team find it hard to keep fueds going for more than a month...

The way it is now is good as it could mean inter-promotional matches at any show and plus with the new concept ppv's coming in, it wouldn't be fair to give Raw the TLC ppv, when clearly both brands can have it..also wh owould get Hell in a Cell?? You can't have 3 hell in a cell matches from the same brand now can you?? the build ups would just be screwed up!!

 

[kodiak69]

alright guys I agree about brand specific however if you go to brand specific then each brand will end up with roughly 4 months off a year to heal up between matches as well as make the writers draw out the storylines a little longer to last two months this would also work out great for an idea I posted in the roulette PPV forum where they can build to a big finish for any big story lines so that there was more pizzazz to the finish so that fan base could grow again