Logical reasons for gimmick PPV's.

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by Crayo, Mar 23, 2012.

  1. I've been debating with myself for ten minutes (yeah I'm cool, get over it) about why the WWE would carry on burying gimmick matches and turning them into individual gimmick PPV's, but I can't come up with any other logical reason than "increase buys". Does it even work? Is that the only reason?

  2. Creative team is actually a bunch of chimps who produce random shit and Vince is too senile to realize. Plus the monopolization of the wrestling or "Sports Entertainment" industry causes him to reproduce the same old shit as no one is going to give him the kick up the arse he requires.
  3. Doesn't work, ruins what were once great matches HIAC used to be the ultimate way to end a feud now it's like meh who cares I've seen it all before.

    Dont actually know who buys into these PPV's as being any good as vast majority of ppl I know who watch WWE i.e. this forum cant stand them and feel they're a waste of time.
  4. - stupid idea of labeling everything
    - insulting their fans' intelligence
    - laziness
    - campy writing and booking approach
  5. Positive spin:
    -Gives the PPV's their own unique identity
    -Gives the fans a reason to buy the filler PPV's
    -They protected the LMS match at least
  6. You know what I'd like? WWE should add a sub-name to a PPV here and there, something ala the way ROH does it (Joe vs. Punk II, Joe vs. Kobashi, Aries vs. Richards, Richards vs. Daniels...).

    Imagine this: Vengeance 2012: Punk vs. Rock, or TLC 2012: Cena vs. Orton, Revival, or Bragging Rights 2012: Cena vs. Taker...
    • Like Like x 1
Similar Threads
  1. Neptune