Wrong time to drop Single Brand PPVs?

[clifford]

Anyone else feeling like it's completely the wrong time to switch to dual branded pay per views?

Just looking at all the call ups and shake ups in the last two weeks, it seems that committing to dual branded pay per views is going to really squeeze out those guys below the main event.

Just look at a potential pay per view card for Raw;
Roman Vs Owens Vs Sami
Seth Vs Ziggler
Finn Vs Drew
Rousey/Natayla vs Riott Squad
Roode vs Elias
Nia Vs Alexa Vs Ember Vs Mickie
Lashley Vs Corbin
Bayley Vs Sasha
AOP Vs Matt & Bray


And Smackdown's;
AJ Vs Nakamura
Bryan Vs Miz
Orton Vs Jeff
Joe Vs Rusev
Almas Vs Tye/Sin Cara/R Truth
The Bar vs Bludgeon Brothers
New Day Vs Sanity
Charlotte & Becky Vs the Iconics
Carmella Vs Asuka


These are just hypotheticals to highlight how many are on each roster, I'm not fantasy booking here. But it shows that a lot of guys are gonna get lost in the shuffle with these dual branded pay per views. Each hypothetical card above would have to lose 4 to 5 matches. Also looking at the above cards, man Smackdown is stacked.

[Sparkybob]

Those matchup can just be TV feuds then.

[thecrusherwi]

If anything, this will lead to more blowoffs on TV and/or fewer three match PPV series that we've been having for years now.

[Deleted]

You forgot about 205 Live and it's perpetual spot on the pre show.

[mrbananagrabber]

Don’t these PPV’s still have pre-shows?

[Fauxnaki]

I liked her single brand ppv. even though they had a lot of filler, there were so many of them that I didn't need to bother watching through raw and smack down

[Deleted]

They should've dropped them well before they did. Almost all of them were bad, they had no impact on Network subscriptions, and their ticket sales were crap.

[This Player Hating Mothman]

Dual-branded PPVs meant more people got booked, got paid for the night, and got the TV time to set up those matches. We've seen in the era between brand splits that TV time will be dedicated to building up the PPV programs and there won't be many TV feuds, there'll just be people who don't really do much of anything and slip through the cracks. TV is meant to sell the network, and if you don't have a match at the PPV you're probably going to take a backseat further than the one you're already in for not being in the main event or one of Vince's crushes. We already know WWE's philosophy for shows is to get all the important players on first and fill in the blanks later, so anyone outside of the core priority guys are going to be in a crappy place and there's little they can do to fix it.

[auph10imitated]

Single brand PPV's exhausted people. It exhausted creative. It was way too much, so while I agree everyone gets better pay and bookings etc, I think for the good of the show itself a dual branded PPV is the best.

You can get about 10 matches (pre show included) on a PPV, thats more than enough IMO. PPV's shiuldnt have all the lower tier wrestlers, your paying for PPV's so you should be getting the higher scale of the roster.

[Josh Spicer]

Apr 20, 2018 7:39:28 GMT -5 auph10imitated said:

Single brand PPV's exhausted people. It exhausted creative. It was way too much, so while I agree everyone gets better pay and bookings etc, I think for the good of the show itself a dual branded PPV is the best.

You can get about 10 matches (pre show included) on a PPV, thats more than enough IMO. PPV's shiuldnt have all the lower tier wrestlers, your paying for PPV's so you should be getting the higher scale of the roster.

Except with the network you're not paying for PPV's. You're paying 10 bucks to get unlimited access to every live special event and the ability to watch it later on demand.

PPV's are still 50 bucks standard, 60 bucks HD.

The only way WWE could make money off that investment is by having more "special events".

[KofiMania]

Not everyone should be on every PPV. And you can blow off some midcard feuds on Raw/Smackdown, making them more must-see.

[auph10imitated]

Apr 20, 2018 9:19:06 GMT -5 Josh Spicer said:

Apr 20, 2018 7:39:28 GMT -5 auph10imitated said:

Single brand PPV's exhausted people. It exhausted creative. It was way too much, so while I agree everyone gets better pay and bookings etc, I think for the good of the show itself a dual branded PPV is the best.

You can get about 10 matches (pre show included) on a PPV, thats more than enough IMO. PPV's shiuldnt have all the lower tier wrestlers, your paying for PPV's so you should be getting the higher scale of the roster.

Except with the network you're not paying for PPV's. You're paying 10 bucks to get unlimited access to every live special event and the ability to watch it later on demand.

PPV's are still 50 bucks standard, 60 bucks HD.

The only way WWE could make money off that investment is by having more "special events".

True, but a PPV still should be treated as a "special show" and filling it lower card matches just make them more forgettable.

[Cronant]

I feel like going with a Part timer as one champ and Jinder as the other wasn't the smartest thing to do. If those issues got fixed, then split PPVs weren't that bad. A Smackdown PPV with this roster nowadays looks like it could be fun.

The women are going to get screwed over a bit too. They've usually had room for 1 title and 1 non title match at all the split PPVs. Now it'll likely be the two title matches and maybe a pre show match.