Tell Me What You Think Of This WWE PPV Schedule

RVDFAN · 07-03-2009, 12:36 PM

I hope this the right place to post this.

Jan-Royal Rumble
Feb-No Way Out
April-WrestleMania
June-King Of The Ring
Aug- SummerSlam
October-No Mercy
November-Survivor Series

I think that 7 ppvs is enough and the way I got it set up it give wwe plenty of time to plan out storylines without everything being so rush.

I kept NoWayOut cause I like the chambers matches on the ppv so I feel thats a good ppv to have.I also brought back KOTR Thats always been one of my favs PPVS.

Kizza · 07-03-2009, 12:49 PM

So, uh, what's the point of this?

horrorfan_1986 · 07-03-2009, 01:39 PM

I see no reason to bring back the King of the Ring. KOTR is a well known financial disappointment. Every year, the buy rates would be one of the lowest of the year. If that wasn't bad enough, it was typically one of the worst PPV's of the year as well. Getting rid of the KOTR was one of the best moves the WWE made.

Red Devils · 07-03-2009, 02:55 PM

Surprisingly enough WWE made a correct decision for once by getting rid of KOTR and just having it back during the tv shows. I prefer having a PPV every month because it brings more excitement and you don't have to wait a few months for one.

Y 2 Jake · 07-04-2009, 07:43 AM

WWE can't go back to anything less than 12 PPV per year now. They're not going to eliminate a sourse of income.

Maybe making the ''B'' shows like they were when they were In Your House would be better. Cheaper, shorter, a wider variety of matches..

Mr. Kennedy · 07-05-2009, 05:28 PM

They may go down to 12, a WWE executive has said they are considering dropping some of their off-brand PPV's. I would guess that means getting rid of The Bash (since there is no theme to it now, it used to be a patriotic themed event, and is just a generic PPV) and maybe Annihilation. That would bring them back down to 12.

RaiZ-R · 07-09-2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horrorfan_1986
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I see no reason to bring back the King of the Ring. KOTR is a well known financial disappointment. Every year, the buy rates would be one of the lowest of the year. If that wasn't bad enough, it was typically one of the worst PPV's of the year as well. Getting rid of the KOTR was one of the best moves the WWE made.

And yet it managed to create stars in a manner we all agreed with and respected.

Austin, Triple H, Lesnar... All former King Of The Ring winners, all propelled by that win into the upper echelon's of the WWE roster. Considering how much they've struggled to make new stars since scrapping the PPV, I'd say it was worth it.

horrorfan_1986 · 07-09-2009, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaiZ-R
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

And yet it managed to create stars in a manner we all agreed with and respected.

Austin, Triple H, Lesnar... All former King Of The Ring winners, all propelled by that win into the upper echelon's of the WWE roster. Considering how much they've struggled to make new stars since scrapping the PPV, I'd say it was worth it.

Creating stars has nothing to do with scraping or keeping a PPV. Whether it created stars or not, the PPV was a massive failure. The WWE hasn't made stars in recent years because they haven't tried to. All of these other promotions (Past and current) were able to make stars without the KOTR, so can the WWE.

RaiZ-R · 07-09-2009, 07:30 PM

My point is that no matter how "unsuccessful" a PPV King Of The Ring was, I doubt it ever lost money. Not only that, but for one below par buyrate you got a bonafide excuse to create a brand new star, who had the potential to not only sell shitloads of merch, but also to become the biggest star in the 'E.

It was also an intriguing yearly tournament, and a PPV that I always enjoyed, and was considered by many as an honourary fifth to the Big Four or Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, and Survivor Series.

horrorfan_1986 · 07-09-2009, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaiZ-R
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My point is that no matter how "unsuccessful" a PPV King Of The Ring was, I doubt it ever lost money. Not only that, but for one below par buyrate you got a bonafide excuse to create a brand new star, who had the potential to not only sell shitloads of merch, but also to become the biggest star in the 'E.

It was also an intriguing yearly tournament, and a PPV that I always enjoyed, and was considered by many as an honourary fifth to the Big Four or Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam, and Survivor Series.

You're acting as if the KOTR was the only way to make a new star.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The PPV was a disaster so they got rid of it. Time to find a new way to make a top star. For every Austin, there was a Mabel and a Ken Shamrock.

Tell Me What You Think Of This WWE PPV Schedule

This is a discussion on Tell Me What You Think Of This WWE PPV Schedule within the WWE Discussion forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; I hope this the right place to post this. Jan-Royal Rumble Feb-No Way Out April-WrestleMania June-King Of The Ring Aug- ...