Should the WWE Put on Fewer PPVs?
The WWE is currently over saturated with pay-per-views. Or are they?
With pay-per-view buyrates sinking over the years as a result of an increased diet of these box office offerings, could there be possible reasons as to why the WWE could be justified in continuing to load up on pay-per-views?
The WWE continues to find a relatively healthy source of revenue with monthly events such as WWE Money in the Bank and WWE Over the Limit. However, they seem to be carried annually by cash-cow, big-four franchises such as the Royal Rumble and WrestleMania.
Some argue that WWE may be better off scrapping all non-big-four events in favor of classic pay-per-views to facilitate the build-up process while giving what would be quarterly pay-per-views a big-fight feel.
Others argue the business aspect of the WWE necessitates an environment where the worldwide leader must collect as much pay-per-view revenue as possible.
Join Big Nasty and Justin LaBar as they take opposing views on this always controversial topic.
Follow Big Nasty on Twitter @ThisIsNasty.
Follow Justin LaBar on Twitter @JustinLaBar.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?