Are you agitated by this as well?

[Doomsday]

IWF's very own psychic poltergeist couldn't help but notice (well, I've noticed it for a while but I've never said anything) that all the WWE Programming excluding PPVs just are hype-build up for PPVs.
It seems like there are 14 to 16 WWE PPVs per year. Far over what I would consider necessary and to me it just seems like a giant pain in the ass.
What's with that? WWE expects little kids to cry for every PPV which cost a ridiculous amount of money and have parents cave each and every time they do bawl about it?
For realz?!

If you ask me 8 ppvs a year is just fine.

 

[Axis]

8 sounds like a good amount to me. Having PPVs two or three weeks apart is asinine.

 

[Montana]

I agree. I'm not sure of anyone thinks 14-16 ppvs a year is good for the product. Problem is the WWE keeps getting paid for these PPV's. Certainly more people go to PPV's live, opposed to Raw/House show, and on top of that all the PPV buys, DVD sales, and all that other rolled up with it. I'd imagine buyrates would have to drop even more before WWE changes this format. Realistically they would probably drop 1-2 at a time, even if they do start to drop.

 

[gatesoftanhauser]

Let's go back to the Big 5:
Royal Rumble
Wrestlemania (push it to April so that you have more or less 90 days of build up after RR)
King of the Ring
Summer Slam
Survivor Series

Longer feuds used to be more memorable and better, imo.

 

[Marty Jannetty]

I can't afford one WWE ppv a year. If I didn't spend so much money on beer, weed, and cocaine I could afford them all. Fuck that noise. I'm a former WWE intercontinental champion and match of the year winner. Plus, I party all night.

Rock on!

 

[Pat Patterson]

Marty you have 500 vCash. I think that stands for Virgin Cash. If you get to 1000 you can buy back your innocence.

 

[imported_Adam]

This isn't really agitating. Just don't buy them all. There, problem solved.

 

[Axis]

This isn't really agitating. Just don't buy them all. There, problem solved.

The over-saturation of PPVs hurts the overall quality of the product. So, no, problem not solved.

 

[monkeystyle]

The over-saturation of PPVs hurts the overall quality of the product. So, no, problem not solved.

Don't expect Adam to think. Nor expect him to understand the concept of money either as he still lives in the magical Mommy and Daddy world where things that he needs/wants seemingly appear out of nowhere.

 

[Axis]

THERES A DVD IN MY MAILBOX!~

 

[jerseyboybastard]

It doesn't really agitate me since at this point I can't afford to buy ppvs regardless of how many a year there are (honestly, I'd rather invest in the dvds if I'm going to spend money), BUT I do agree that there are so many that they dilute any potential build to making the matches relevant. I would say 8-10 a year is a workable number.

Honestly, I'm more disappointed that not only have they renamed most of the ppvs, but also none of the new names are even a slight improvement.

 

[imported_Adam]

^You mean you don't like Over The Limit? LOL.

 

[Airfixx]

^^^Who gives a fuck what it's called?!?!? ...It's what goes on that counts and if I recall correctly OTL had some good moments.

all the WWE Programming excluding PPVs just are hype-build up for PPVs.

Really don't need to be a "psychic" to have sussed that out a long time ago.


I agree it would be nice to have less PPVs for the reasons mentioned, but the flip side of that creates longer gaps between PPVs, which, yes, helps in fued building etc, BUT it also means that the TV shows would have to stand on their own two feet a little more and WWE are gonna be very financially concious about drawing a line between TV quality & PPV quality product. Gates' mentioned going back to the 'big 5'... Again, I like the idea, BUT the whole format and structure of the TV shows was different back then... You wouldn't get the equivalent of Orton v Cena and such facing off on TV; you'd have superstars vs jobbers and with today's audience that won't wash since effectively your average fan wants PPV quality matches on TV week after week....

At least right now with the frequency of PPVs, they can have Orton face cena give it a crappy finish and just use it to give the PPV a rub.

So yeah, until they re-think the TV format I can't ever see them dropping below one per month.

(Edit: Appologies... Just re-read that and it's a bit rambled, but the points, like the truth, are "out there". ;o] )

 

[Doomsday]

Don't expect Adam to think. Nor expect him to understand the concept of money either as he still lives in the magical Mommy and Daddy world where things that he needs/wants seemingly appear out of nowhere.

I lived in a similar world once... then 2012 came to it about 5 years early.

 

[Lady Redfield]

This isn't really agitating. Just don't buy them all. There, problem solved.

Way to not bring up a valid point.

It's no so much 'don't buy them if you can't afford it/don't want to watch them', it's more the fact that there are so many PPVs per year that they don't even have any time to build up proper feuds. They either throw together a random feud without much of a story or you see the same fucking guys feuding forever. If they had less PPVs, they would be ale to properly and fully make a feud that would actually end up in a PPV match people give a shit about. Having the same guys fight in every goddamn PPV doesn't make the last match any more meaningful than the first match.