Limit The Amount Of PPVs You Can Run Without Diminishing Returns

[Jaded]

I THINK this was in 16, maybe?

 

I'm currently show-spamming as an experiment (I'm just trying to see what might be not working as well as it could be) and with IPW have managed to get enough money to get an internet PPV network that's very big in the US and medium everywhere else. Running daily PPVs (which, obviously, isn't realistic but like I said, I just wanted to test something out) by Saturday week 3 Feb I was getting $2.7 million a day in PPV revenue. Yes, I got hit with massive tax bill and miscellaneous costs at the end of the month, but I still made $18.9 million over the course of the month.

 

Obviously, it's easy enough NOT to spam shows and I was mainly testing to see if it worked, but a mechanic where people lost interest after a certain amount of PPVs a month might be interesting.

 

Edit: My finances for the 2 months.

 

[BuddyGarner]

No daily shows were effective in 16.

[Jon The GOAT]

No daily shows were effective in 16.

 

They were but I think hes referring more so to the fact that PPVs were meant to offer diminishing returns the more they happened. PPVs give a LOT of money so being able to spam it without diminishing returns would kill it.

 

On average what's the most PPVs that the WWE or UFC or Boxing orgs do in a month/year? I feel like that might be a decent baseline for the max amount of PPVs in a year a company should be able to hold at a certain frequency before you get significant diminishing returns.

 

In general though, please fix show spamming. Please for the love of god.

[Jaded]

They were but I think hes referring more so to the fact that PPVs were meant to offer diminishing returns the more they happened. PPVs give a LOT of money so being able to spam it without diminishing returns would kill it.

 

Yeah, this was what I meant.

[nerodragomir1]

Okay, I never tried this in TEW2016 but I remember it saying you'll get penalized in some way for doing more than 2 PPV's a month. The fact you were able to gross that much money in 2 months seems kind of broken. I don't know about you, but when I played TEW. I only ran NJPW styled tours (I know they weren't tours but in my head they were) I only did PPV's twice a month. It gave me like 3 or 4 million in profits for the entire month.

[Self]

On average what's the most PPVs that the WWE or UFC or Boxing orgs do in a month/year? I feel like that might be a decent baseline for the max amount of PPVs in a year a company should be able to hold at a certain frequency before you get significant diminishing returns.

 

I've always thought having PPV's more frequently than Quarterly was the point at which numbers should start declining. The Big Four would be optimum, in terms of maximum buys per show. As soon as WWE started going monthly, that was when it seemed like a portion of fans started skipping the 'lesser' ones. I know I did. So each show (depending on card) would earn less... but for WWE it was still financially sensible to run 13 per year.

 

That's the game I want to play. Having to figure out whether I want fewer shows with more buys, or more shows with fewer buys. At the moment that's not a thing at all, and it's disappointing.

[Jon The GOAT]

I've always thought having PPV's more frequently than Quarterly was the point at which numbers should start declining. The Big Four would be optimum, in terms of maximum buys per show. As soon as WWE started going monthly, that was when it seemed like a portion of fans started skipping the 'lesser' ones. I know I did. So each show (depending on card) would earn less... but for WWE it was still financially sensible to run 13 per year.

 

That's the game I want to play. Having to figure out whether I want fewer shows with more buys, or more shows with fewer buys. At the moment that's not a thing at all, and it's disappointing.

 

I really dig this and it makes a lot of sense to me. In '16, like someone else mentioned, I was basically just running 2 PPVs a month because there was no real drawback, I could build up to that reasonably well, and Id make a killing. If there was a stark contrast in running 24 PPVs vs. 4 PPVs in a year (I mean STARK) then that'd be awesome.

[Capelli King]

Maybe the cap for PPV's was not added to this game.

[Donners]

<p>It was definitely a thing in 16 - I accidently signed a PPV provider for my weekly TV show, and it more than halved the buy rate for my monthly PPVs.</p><p> </p><p>

Doesn't seem like that's happening here.</p>

[BHK1978]

I've always thought having PPV's more frequently than Quarterly was the point at which numbers should start declining. The Big Four would be optimum, in terms of maximum buys per show. As soon as WWE started going monthly, that was when it seemed like a portion of fans started skipping the 'lesser' ones. I know I did. So each show (depending on card) would earn less... but for WWE it was still financially sensible to run 13 per year.

 

That's the game I want to play. Having to figure out whether I want fewer shows with more buys, or more shows with fewer buys. At the moment that's not a thing at all, and it's disappointing.

 

Exactly. I stopped caring about seeing the WWF pay-per-views when This Tuesday In Texas and the In Your House ones started popping up. There was just too much product and it cost a lot of money. Obviously I was a kid at the time so it was my parents money so they would pretty much only order the four major ones and then one of the lesser ones.

 

That is how it was with UFC pay-per-views for me to a lesser extent (Because it was a combo of television and pay-per-view). When I first started watching they were every month but that was it, MMA on television was sparse. Then they started showing up on television more which watered down the pay-per-view cards and made them a heck of a lot more disinteresting because that it caused the UFC to be overexposed to me and I finally stopped watching it.