The Root of All of WWE's Content Problems

So many of the problems and complaints regarding WWE's content can be linked back to WWE becoming a public company.

In October of 1999, WWE became a publicly traded company, and that was the start of so many problems WWE faces today. At the time, we didn't see immediate effects because the product was still riding the 1990s wave of popularity.

Vince McMahon wanted to take the company public because it made him worth more money, and to him, it was a step to take in the effort of making the company more Hollywood.

The irony is that when WWE was private, they did things their own way and were as mainstream as ever. If you watch the documentary Beyond The Mat, which was shot from 1997-1999, it is revealed in a WWE board meeting that WWE was fighting it out with the popular cartoon show South Park for the No. 1 brand that was selling to particular demographics.

Once the company went public, they had investors to impress and needed to show numbers. Revenue is always important when you're running a public company, as you constantly have people questioning you, wanting to see more.

This is what we have to blame for the amount of pay-per-views airing today.

WWE began increasing the number of pay-per-views to once a month back in the 90s when they were competing against WCW. During that time, there was a demand and interest for that much content, and the companies had enough content to deliver.

A pay-per-view a month for that time was acceptable, but somewhere along the way, it should have been cut back. It never was.

Nearly every issue a fan complains about when it comes to WWE's product can be linked to the issue of the number of pay-per-views in a year.

The number of Superstars who are left unused without a consistent story is because of the amount of pay-per-views. WWE gets four weeks at the most to build a pay-per-view match, and there is only so much time during the weekly programming to build storylines.

Yes, WWE uses television time to run a video package twice, reminding us what is going on in a top storyline. Many people feel that time should be used for another match between two guys who could use the exposure.

In WWE's business mindset, it's more valuable to use that five minutes of time to show a video package recapping a story because that story is one of the four big stories which shape the upcoming pay-per-view.

WWE no longer has time to plant seeds and let them grow over time. Everything needs a quick payoff. It would have been great for CM Punk to have stayed off WWE television for months after his Money In the Bank title win last July. It would have further sold what started out as real-life issues on his future and happiness with the company.

Instead, there is stock to be bought and quarterly numbers to report. Get CM Punk in the main event of SummerSlam.

WWE is always ready to hand over some of the valuable television time to any Hollywood star or musician. WWE is a public company and obtaining the right public image is higher on the list than letting Tyson Kidd get a television match.

WWE wants to be accepted by Hollywood. Getting away from the negative adjectives that often surround professional wrestling and being viewed as a legitimate entertainment show is a top priority. Nobody on Wall Street wants to get seriously involved in 'rasslin,' but they want to be involved in top-dollar entertainment.

The problem is they are presenting an entertainment format that features one of the stars of the show, while asking wrestling fans to buy what many times looks like a rerun.

The way wrestling use to be structured when it worked, was to plant the seeds and have a pay-per-view after a couple months of build. The stories grew, fans wanted to pay to see the conflict resolved or a new twist be added.

Today, it isn't about tuning in to see the payoff of this story, they want you to tune in to see John Cena or CM Punk because they are the lead stars of the show. Just as a sitcom, reality show or movie has leading roles, WWE has their leading roles.

It all comes back to the bottom line. Pay-per-view content isn't what it use to be, and the buys aren't what they use to be. However, despite all of this, it makes a lot of business sense in the short-term for WWE to run a high volume of pay-per-views.

According to what was written in his autobiography, former top WWE and WCW executive, J.J. Dillon said in the middle of the Monday Night Wars, WCW Nitro's production budget was $600,000.

I've tried reaching out to people within WWE to get a specific number on what WWE's current budget is on a Monday night or Tuesday night of taping Raw or Smackdown. Unfortunately, it's a piece of information that many people aren't made aware of. They get told what to do and how much they will be paid.

I don't know what the budget number specifically is for WWE to produce a Raw or Smackdown. Based on everything in the economy increasing in the last 15 years, let's use a hypothetical number of $1 million.

If it cost $1 million to produce Raw, they then get money back based on commercials, ticket prices, sponsorship and merchandise.

Now, think about putting on a pay-per-view. It is basically the same production set. Usually the sets are slightly redesigned to correlate with the pay-per-view's theme, but the same amount of lights, video screens and more are used. No noticeable increase of equipment or personnel is needed.

All in all, it would seem it is about the same cost on the production end to turn out a pay-per-view as it would a Raw. So if it cost that same $1 million, WWE seats for a pay-per-view are double the price than Raw; it costs $60 to see it from home plus merchandise sales.

The pay-per-view buys might be down from what they use to be, but it's still a money maker.

The one thing that constantly draws blame from fans as an issue with today's product is the more family-friendly content. I totally disagree with this. The amount of blood and curse words doesn't hold the value in the stories. If it does for you, I question if you really are a fan of professional wrestling.

I often hear people who whine about things being PG and yearn for the Attitude Era. These are the same people who don't really like the wrestling matches, but just want to see something crazy.

Blood and curse words go a long way in the right situation and with the right timing. If Mick Foley got tossed off the Hell in a Cell every month like he did at King of the Ring in 1998, it would eventually get chants of “boring.”

When the company went public, it did so from both an investment standpoint and a creative standpoint. Let anybody who can buy a share of the company do so, but let the wrestling people handle the wrestling. There are 16 writers on staff, many of whom had limited viewing history or knowledge of professional wrestling.

There are outside influences to impress and someone's new movie to promote. It's an entertainment variety show where the stage happens to be a ring, which usually symbolizes a combat competition taking place in it.

It all starts at the top.

Vince wanted to get away from being a “wrestling promoter.” You have to be impressed with the vision and accomplishments in the life of Vince McMahon. However, when the man at the top doesn't want to be associated with wrestling, how do you overcome that to satisfy your audience, who are wrestling fans?

It makes you wonder, had the first three or four movies WWE Films put out been box office hits, how many WWE events a year would Vince McMahon actually be at? How much of his time would be spent in Hollywood becoming the next Jerry Bruckheimer? How much control would Triple H have of the company's creative direction? Say what you want about Triple H, but at least at heart he's a wrestling guy.

Follow @JustinLaBar