EGame & Brye

Current TDL Non-Wrestling Division Champion

EGame & Brye

Current TDL Non-Wrestling Division Champion

...

THE MAN returns.

Cal OWNS

***

Welcome to my debate, let me begin by showing all of you the definition of a 'gimmick'.

An innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to promote a project: an advertising gimmick.

A marketing ploy basically which in the WWE translates into the use of barbaric, diabolical weapons and structures in the ring for contests they call 'gimmick matches'. Considering it's a marketing ploy, stipulations added onto a regular match are also ploys to market and attract interest to certain contests, like title matches, so they can also be considered 'gimmick' matches too. Now that we've established the meaning of a gimmick and how it refers to the WWE with their match types, it should be obvious why a PPV full of gimmick matches would come out as a catastrophe.

***

Let's look at the PPV's that the WWE has set as gimmick shows with a card stacked of title or diabolical matches.



+



=

Buyrate Disaster

1.0 roughly means 400,000 seperate homes ordering the event, so let's look at the difference in buyrates.

Originally Posted by WWE/ECW One Night Stand 2005: 0.81 2006: 0.76 2007: 0.47

2008 buyrate hasn't come in yet. Last years concept was the same as this years; a PPV card 'STACKED' with gimmick matches. It originally was 'hot' buyrate wise, getting buys from 300,000 to 325,000 homes for the first two years. But in recent history the 'effect' of the PPV wore completely off and it came off as repetitive, resulting in a loss of over 100,000 buys, which is a difference of four million dollars. Let's see how it effected Vengeance when it turned into a 'Night Of Champions' gimmick filled event.

Originally Posted by Vengeance/Night Of Champions 2005: 0.92 2006: 0.84 2007: 0.61

As you can see, the difference between 2005 and 2007 is roughly 130,000 or a bit more buyrates. A loss of over 100,000 regardless compared to 06 and it's a loss of several million dollars again. The difference between 06 and 07 was one had a show full of gimmick matches ... the other had some, but not as many. And some might ask why did it drop? Simple.

***

Repetition Hinders Quality

With these PPV's {ONS & NOC} back to back and stacked with matches full of weapons, titles and or structures ... there is only so many ways to end a match on a single show in the first place. Trying to find finishes and new moves to be 'fresh' on a card built of matches alike each other, when it takes creativity to just incorporate creativity into a 'regular' PPV in the first place, brings out repetition. With this repetition, the quality of most matches falls, which brings down the show quality. With low show quality, the amount of replay buys is significantly lower than it would be. 0.15 could be a replay buyrate for the week if the show was good; if it drops down to 0.04 because the show was terrible ... that's a loss of one point six million dollars on it's own.

Run Into Any Pro's Yet??

Let's look at ONS 08; because a lot said that ONS 08 was awesome. But it involved two significant injuries to two top stars and we've yet to see a buyrate, which is what matters, the profit. Until we see that, it can't be considered a pro, more or less a one off good event with big repercussions injuring Orton and Wight. Pretty big 'con' event actually until we see how much revenue was made, so throw that out. So what pro's does that leave us with??? None yet. Since JD's 07 buyrate was 0.61 which was only down 0.02 from 06's and No Mercy's buyrate went up 0.20 from 06 to 07 reaching 0.68. The only other major drop besides ONS & NOC/Vengeance was Backlash and Unforgiven with it being 0.54 unlike 06 which was 0.77. Backlash dropped tremendously in 07 but wasn't that after the highest grossing PPV of all time?? Yeah. All the others either stayed the same, increased or are non existent now.

***

Injury Risk Increases

When you throw superstars like The Great Khali into a match with John Cena at One Night Stand 2007, you've already heightened the risk of injury to John Cena because of the lack of training and ability Khali has. You throw them into a gimmick match on that PPV; it could damage profits if the companies top dog were to be injured by an inexperienced star and because injury becomes more likely when you add extra intangibles {like weapons/structures} into the equation. Now let's look at top stars that have gotten injured at the hand of these "gimmick matches".

Royal Rumble 98: Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker - WWF Title Casket Match

Michaels leaves the match with a horrendous back injury that results in four years of Michaels prime being taken away from him and extra revenue that could've been drawn from Shawn ... lost due to his inactivity as a superstar.

Survivor Series 97: Steve Austin vs. Owen Hart - WWF IC Title

Austin suffers a neck injury ... that very well could've ended his career and shortened his career greatly, damaging the match quality of some of his future performances too. Use your imagination and guess how great Austin's matches could've been had he been in perfect health.

RAW, October 2007: John Cena vs. Mr. Kennedy - Non-Title

I'll address relevance later. Mr. Kennedy takes part in the injuring of John Cena's pec, taking ratings and profits from the company in the mean time for the following three-four month period.

---

In each match, top company stars took a severe injury. But the last match is very relevant ... why? Because in PPV's FULL of gimmick matches, stars like Mr. Kennedy and the midcard get used to fill the 'STACKED' card. There are several stars in the WWE that have been there less time then he has ... CM Punk, MVP, Cody Rhodes, Umaga ... all in prominent roles that would take part in those 'Gimmick Filled PPVs'. Now in each match there is a risk of injury, in a gimmick match it increases a large percentage. You take two up and coming young stars lacking experience and training not to injury somebody in a regular match ... like Mr. Kennedy, put them together in a match with each other or another star in a gimmick match and you heighten risk of injury further.

***

What happens when a Mr. Kennedy injures a Chris Jericho in an IC Title match on PPV or an MVP injures a Batista if their set up in a feud for a gimmick match on the same PPV. Which is pretty possible in gimmick matches in the first place. You get a further loss of profit ... a loss of profit added onto a HUGE drop of profit you get from having such a repetitive ridiculous PPV like One Night Stand or Night Of Champions. This is additionally topped by a loss of TV ratings, which two drawing stars down if not more lower card stars that are untrained, get injured in barbaric matches. Leading to an even less creative, even more stale TV Show(s) which drops the ratings further, ratings that were already dropping leading up to such a PPV because of lack of interest ... a lack of interest proven by the lack of buys.

***

What Are The Pro's?

These PPVs are used as a way to increase interest, heighten profits and improve stories ... but if the stars get injured, the ratings go down and the interest flops, there is no pro to it because there will be no fans watching the story when they lack interest in it already!

Any better ideas?

Look to the buyrates and TV ratings of 2006. Look at Unforgiven 2006; you have two HUGE gimmick matches on the same card with the last match between Trish & Lita. This lead to a huge success. Who got hurt? No one! Why? Because each gimmick match involved experienced superstars. Because the show wasn't full of the same spots because there was only two gimmick matches. They balanced it out properly and threw us enough blood and guts plus proper in ring action to attract what they were aiming for; interest. That's how you get an increase of buyrates and TV ratings, by getting the fans interest. If you have too many gimmick matches like at ONS or NOC. You risk injury more and you reduce the quality of the PPV ... which is irrelevent anyway {quality that is} because if the fans last interest, they won't see how 'quality' the show is in the first place.

***

Originally Posted by What did we find out? ~ We lose buyrates when we stack a card with gimmick matches. ~ We lose interest in the product when gimmick PPVs come up, obvious by the lack of buyrates. ~ Younger talent have a high chance of injuring themselves, other young talent and experienced stars on these PPV's. ~ These PPV's are appalling. ~ Quality drifts usually and doesn't matter if the fans don't care in the first place. ~ Finding a proper balance between 'gimmick filled' and 'no gimmicks at all' will attract interest. ~ The WWE has enough problems being creative without 'Gimmick PPVs' as it is. These shows only exasperate them. ~ The cons out weigh the pros.

***

Originally Posted by some asshole This PPV is going to be a giant clusterfuck.

Originally Posted by some moron Oh but hey, injuries are more likely to happen at a PPV with all gimmick matches.

Originally Posted by some jobber This PPV will suck because there are only 2 weeks of build.

Originally Posted by some jackass Nobody wants to watch the same old feuds.

Originally Posted by Raw ratings for May 2008 May 5, 2008 3.2 May 12, 2008 3.3 May 19, 2008 3.2 May 26, 2008 3.1 June 2, 2008 3.1

Originally Posted by same jackass What about last year? That PPV sucked balls.

Originally Posted by Raw ratings for May 2007 May 7, 2007 3.6 May 14, 2007 3.6 May 21, 2007 3.7 May 28, 2007 3.2 June 4, 2007 3.8 June 11, 2007 3.8 June 18, 2007 4.1 or 4.2 June 25, 2007 3.8

Originally Posted by One Night Stand buyrates 2005 0.81 2006 0.76 2007 0.47

Originally Posted by yet another asshole Wow, look at that massive drop from 2006 to 2007.

Originally Posted by random 2007 WWE buyrates Backlash 0.49 Unforgiven 0.54 Armageddon 0.59 Great American Bash 0.58 New Year’s Revolution 0.55

...

THE MAN returns.

Cal OWNS

---

...

THE MAN returns.

Cal OWNS

...

THE MAN returns.

Cal OWNS

---