Too much of a good thing?

[krill]

Back when i started watching WWF around the time of WM5 there were only 4 main PPV's The Rumble, Wrestlemainia (the big one), Summerslam and Survivor Series.

I feel now that they cant build a decent feud because of monthly PPV's, it used to be build a feud for months where the wrestlers hardy ever made contact with each other and the big payoff always (most often than not) came at oneof the PPVS.

These days the wrestlers wrestle each other every week so why is it so special when they do it at a PPV?

Come on Vince, SORT IT OUT!!!

[amsiraK]

Absolutely they do! The overload of PPVs is killing off the excitement of the main 4. And even beyond that, they cut short the time between big blow-ups. There are no real feuds anymore because there's no time to really nurture them.

[Hiroshi Hase]

I'd agree as last night for example, I didn't see the need in paying $40 to see Orton/HBK 5 or 6 this year, and Bats/Taker part 7 when they were facing each other on SD and on the lesser PPV's this year. Just not that special, at least to me anyways.

I do wish they'd space it out so to let feuds build up, but WWE wants to make money, so they'll stay.

[Splinter]

SNITSKY!

[azz0r]

Eight a year would be perfect.

[Deleted]

Yes, absolutely.

Back when there was only four or five, it used to be a huge event. Something that you would be really excited for (mostly due to the matches on the card, as the feuds had time to develop).

Now, it hardly means anything.

WWE can never go back, though - they make so much money from pay-per-view, it would be stupid to go back.

[ghettooverlord]

Capitalism is great in that making the most money doesn't necessarily mean putting out the best product. <3

Vince makes more money putting out a dozen pay-per-views per year rather than hyping up four, well-written big ones.

It's the sad truth.

[britishbulldog]

Hell when I started watching they didn't even have PPV yet. the Wrestling Classic was the first followed by WM ater that year. And they were on closed ciruit TV

[seano]

The overload of TV is what's really killing the product. So much TV, so much character development and angle advancement, so thus so much PPVs.

Moneywise, I'm sure Vince doesn't mind since more PPVs = more $$$, but they've gotten to the point where they can never go back to the old days of "1 show a week, 4 PPVs a year." If they did, then amongst other things the internet - another big reason why we can't go back to the old days: because our perceptions and understanding of wrestling has changed - would be proclaiming big problems for the company and it'd help result in financial catastrophe for the WWE and the industry as a whole.

[Deleted]

Having all the titles defended on each PPV makes it even worse.

At least before the RAW or SD titles would get a 6-7 week break because the next PPV up would be a counterpart ppv for the other brand. Now they don't even have that.

ECW is hurt by this the most, since with their small roster they really need to have the time to build up feuds more.

[wwerules60]

I still think they can get away with 12 ppvs. But they need to end the Brand Spilt and move on to new feuds. If they did it like back in the In Your House days it would be great.

[Lancers]

I'm loving those poll numbers. 28 to zero. It's true though. They do subtract the importance of the big four PPVs. But, money's to be made and that's the bottom line cuz capitalism said so.