WWE To Drop One PPV in 2010, Also Plans Price Increase
Posted by Larry Csonka on 11.06.2009
All of the details inside…
- According to a memo sent out to people in the cable industry, WWE is planning to raise the price of their non-WrestleMania PPVs. The increase will be a $5.00 increase to $44.95. Also in the memo is the confirmation that the will be dropping one of the June PPVs, and scaling back to 13 PPVs a year.
- The PPV price increase will begin with the 2010 Royal Rumble.
- Here is the WWE PPV schedule for 2010:
* 1.31.10: Royal Rumble
* 2.21.10: Elimination Chamber
* 3.28.10: WrestleMania XXVI
* 4.25.10: Backlash
* 5.23.10: Extreme Rules
* 6.20.10: WWE The Bash
* 7.18.10: TBD
* 8.15.10: Summerslam
* 9.19.10: Night of Champions
* 10.03.10: Hell In A Cell
* 10.24.10: WWE Bragging Rights
* 11.21.10: Survivor Series
* 12.19.10: WWE TLC: Tables Ladders And Chairs
Fuck that shit, if that is true, than Wrestlemania will be the only PPV I even THINK about ordering. Ridiculous.
Posted By: Dan (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:18 AM
I guess they really are trying to drive fans away.
Posted By: extremecyco13 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Doubt all those pay per views keep their names...
Posted By: Marco (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Thnak god for that, now if they just drop one of Octobers it would be perfect.
Posted By: jbardo (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Not that I order any PPVs to begin with, but it's hard to justify a price increase with the staleness that WWE is infected with.
Posted By: Cash Money (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:22 AM
"scaling back to 13 PPVs a year"
Fine with me, but I prefer 12 ppvs a year.
Posted By: The Beard (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:22 AM
TLC? I didn't remember seeing that one anywhere. I love TLC matches, but again kills the importance of the match.
Posted By: Guest#2804 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Fuck you, Vince. Its bad enough Mania is $50 for three match event.
Posted By: AFan (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Cue IWC blood pressure increase
Posted By: Dwingle (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Long live streams.
Posted By: Haha (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:25 AM
King of the Ring, kids. Winners gets shot at Summerslam. Easy.
Posted By: Re: July PPV (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:25 AM
July is supposed to be War Games.
Posted By: Kevin (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:30 AM
PPV sales are down yet they will increase the price...something isnt right.
Posted By: son of pillman sr. (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Guess that will be $44.95 I can save then....with their current product the way it is now that is.
Posted By: JoeSchmo (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:32 AM
It's a step in the right direction...the price increase might hurt though.
Posted By: Ramsey (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:32 AM
"- According to a memo sent out to people in the cable industry, WWE is planning to raise the price of their non-WrestleMania PPVs. The increase will be a $5.00 increase to $44.95. Also in the memo is the confirmation that the will be dropping one of the June PPVs, and scaling back to 13 PPVs a year."
WWE is starting to look like the airline industry (save for JetBlue) more and more every day. Vince simply doesn't get it.
Raising the price for a product people are becoming more and more disenfranchised with? During a horrific economy no less?
I'm so glad the last PPV I bought was WrestleMania XX. At the time, the webcasts were about half the price of the cable broadcast and if you had a decent PC monitor, the experience was great. They WWE realized that people could watch for a more affordable price so they raised it to the cable PPV prices but threw in old matches online as a "bonus."
They may continue to push the shitty PG FOR KIDZ~!~ product, but as parents' start tightening wallets and figure out that their children want $45 every single month (sometimes 2x/mo) just to watch a PPV, it's not going to do them any good. Greedy fucktools.
Posted By: Brad B (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Dropping a PPV is a good idea, though I am still uncertain wy October needs two gimmick PPV's with minimal build to either. Move up Hell in the Cell a week or two, and use the Bragging Rights theme for Survivor Series.
Posted By: B.Mo. (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Ridiculously high prices. and they'll still make MORE money now by dropping a ppv and rasing prices
Posted By: S Dot (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:39 AM
13 is still too many, one a month is a push.
I think they should try to reduce to 11, to allow a two month build for Wrestlemania, although as JR often states, the business model is too reliant on PPV buys, so that will never happen.
Posted By: Probes (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:41 AM
FAIL
Posted By: Marcus (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Come on the ppv prices were already ridiculous enough
Posted By: random (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:44 AM
WWE: TBD - the 2010 PPV of the year baby!
Posted By: NickNitr0 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:47 AM
OK--reducing the amount of PPV's per year is a good thing. However, a price increase will not do anything to bring in a new audience. How come it seems like every time the quality of the WWE drops, we get a matching price increase.
Perhaps VKM doesn't give a shit about buyrates anymore, and wants to drive the fans toward the DVD market--which is essentially what I've done. I haven't paid for a PPV since 2006. I'll either watch it at a bar or not even bother.
Posted By: Michael L (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:49 AM
WWE: TBD
Coming soon to PPV
And WTF with $45 per PPV? NO THANKS! Thank God for streams!
Posted By: Guest#8034 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Thats great Vince get rid of a PPV. Thats a step in the right dire...wait, price increase? Nevermind, screw you Vince.
Posted By: InDaBiz (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Hmmm, two PPVs in October now. What month is Bound For Glory, TNA's biggest PPV of the year again? And Vince cried about Bischoff being evil when he was trying to put WWE out of business in 1997.
Posted By: Guest#8394 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:54 AM
As If I didn't have enough reasons to stream WWE PPVs...
Posted By: Alcoholic (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Only 5 week build to Wrestlemania 26. Usually at least 6, and actually 7 last year.
Posted By: DB (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Dropping a PPV doesn't mean dick if they are just going to raise the price anyway. The combination of too many shows and the price of them is one of the the biggest reasons the PPV numbers have dipped so much over the last few years. I predict this will change nothing.
Posted By: christopherg (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:57 AM
FAIL!
Posted By: RareStorm (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:03 PM
I'm so glad I watch the ppvs at a restaurant, and could the TBD ppv be War Games?
Posted By: Bill (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:05 PM
On 07/18/2010 WWE presents: Countout. All matches have to end in a count out. Many buys to be had!
Posted By: Rich (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:06 PM
BULLSHIT!
Posted By: Guest#6934 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:13 PM
ooh errr Bragging Rights is on my birthday!
Also, isn't NoC supposed to b before Summerslam?
Posted By: Guest#8528 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:18 PM
great plan...higher prices and less events...
Woooooooooooooooo!
Posted By: Ser Drake (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Hell in a Cell should be cut as well. Unless they decide to go back to making the matches more epic, it can just be a match used at any of the big four between two opponents that will make it worth it as opposed to 3 matches of the night just featuring it (DX/Legacy and Orton/Cena I suppose were acceptable, but Undertaker/Punk never got off the right start.)
Also, are enough people already buying the non-big 4 PPVs? I don't buy that many, and this news sure as hell doesn't make me want to buy more....
Posted By: Guest#5726 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:24 PM
i'm sure a price increase will do wonders for those declining ppv buys
Posted By: hornswoggle fan (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:26 PM
No more Breaking Point, unless they stick it in July.
Posted By: BJC (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:28 PM
It's WWEconomics, son of pillman. We don't have the balls to do what it takes to make the shows any better, so we'll just raise the price to watch 'em. These idiots are dead set against any kind of change to the status quo whatsoever!
Posted By: Joey. (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:37 PM
All the more justification for streaming it.
Drop em to 30 and Id buy em, maybe even the shitty ones.
Posted By: AG Awesome (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:38 PM
well, just one PPV is a good thing, but adding $5 bucks doesn't make me feel like ordering a PPV.
Techinically, if someone orders all the PPVs in 2010, they are in a way would be ordering another PPV and about $15 bucks more.
For me, my boss gives me free copys that he downloads somehow.
Posted By: wrestling maniac (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:39 PM
7.18.10: TBD = WarGames!!!!!!!!
Posted By: Wrestling Maniac (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:40 PM
I take it with that price hike that they'll actually improve the quality of the PPV's too and not just re-hash the same main event over - and over - and over again?
Posted By: kliq316 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:44 PM
There's just no way people are gonna pay that kind of money to watch the same old, stale-ass matches month after month after month. And you know they aren't gonna shake things up anytime soon. Cena. Orton. Triple H. Taker. Batista. That's just the way it's gotta be, for some reason. Look how Punk got the rug pulled out from under all of a sudden. Dude flew too close to the sun with all that heat he was drawing. He made the biggest mistake anybody not named Triple H can make in the WWE, he got himself over. I could be wrong though. Maybe people will lay down the big dollars to see Kobe Johnston, but I just don't think so.
Posted By: Joey. (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:46 PM
sMART BUSINESS move. The $5 increase paid by the diehards who'll buy anything they put out should offset the people who are turned off by the increase. The math is a little more complex than this but it basically means they can afford a 12% drop in buyrate without any revenue impact.
Plus, like most public companies, such a change gives them a few excuses to appease the shareholders.
Posted By: Guest#5431 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:46 PM
I know I would get more ppv's then just Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, and Summerslam (depending on the build), if the price for monthly PPV's wasn't so high
Posted By: Guest#7179 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:52 PM
PPV sales are down yet they will increase the price...something isnt right.
Posted By: son of pillman sr. (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:32 AM
They are raising prices BECAUSE "buys" are down.
That way they can generate more revenue.
I know, you will all say that by raising prices that will prevent people from buying the PPV's thus LOWERING the "buys" even more. But in actuality, by raising the PPV by $5 the WWE will actually generate more money than this year even if the "buys go down.
Of course all of the IWC kids will bitch and complain and say "I'm never buying a PPV again" but what the IWC kiddies don't understand is that they usually don't BUY the PPV's anyway. They usually illegally download them or watch them via webstream and don't register in the "BUY" figures.
So BITCH all you want IWC, the PPV price will just keep increasing. I bet within the next 5 years, ALL PPV's will be $50 across the board with Wrestlemania coming in at $60-$65.
Posted By: Actually.......... (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:52 PM
Forty-five bucks? Danielson must be going over Cena and Triple H in the main event, with an undercard consisting of all-nude Divas matches, right?!
Posted By: Tommy. (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:05 PM
Everything looks good until after the Sept. PPV..... 3 PPV's in a 5 week span???? Fail.
Posted By: JJV (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:08 PM
fine, keeping rasing the price, i'll still be watching it for free
Posted By: wtf (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:13 PM
I have family down south in NC and they buy every ppv for the kids. But 45 bucks is retarded.
I think paying that much for a UFC event every month is a tough pill to swallow, but no thanks.
With Wrestlemania being almost 60 bucks as it is, I feel less and less guilty about being a "pirate" and watching more and more events via streams.
Greedy bastards.
Posted By: dyno (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:26 PM
Wow let's just change all our big name staple PPVs such as Armageddon and No Way Out which have been around since before some of the kids you're targeting now were born in an effort to seem "hip" and "relevant." Epic fail.
Posted By: Guest#1077 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:28 PM
We should only buy Wrestlemania at this rate. I think if their buy rates really suffer, we'll see a price drop after SummerSlam.
I also think they may do this so that people who complain that 39.95 is too much won't think so when it drops back down to it, so they appreciate it being the lower price and then are willing to pay it.
Posted By: Empire Of Ownage (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:30 PM
Also, considering that the international market pays PENNIES for the PPV's is even more disgusting and another example of corporate greed/rape.
I've seen reports on this site and others where it says PPVprices were increased in the UAE to roughly 12 dollars an event.
The PPV industry doesnt live outside North America. In the Uk you have/had channels like Setanta Sports where for 15-20 bucks a month for the premium channel and get ALL THE EVENTS,UFC, WWE, Soccer etc.
It costs to much god damn money to live where I am in NY let alone the rest of the country.
Now if Vince's event's gave you your moneys worth it might be a different story but ever since the Monday Night Wars began PPV quality has been terrible on a consistant basis.
Posted By: dyno (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:32 PM
They need to scale back to 6 PPV's a year and charge $50 each. They will generate more interest and still make some good coin since the 6 would be "must see".
Just an idea, because those fools can't seem to figure things out.
Have Vince go all "Scooner Tuna" and do a PSA saying that they understand the economy and are scaling back their PPV's so that the yearly cost won't hurt their loyal fans...errr... Universites... or whatever they call them.
Posted By: Guest#6998 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:41 PM
On 07/18/2010 WWE presents: Countout. All matches have to end in a count out. Many buys to be had!
Posted By: Rich (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 12:06 PM
^ This would be EPIC.
Posted By: Ryan (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 01:49 PM
Hey, remember when they only had four PPV's a year? Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam & Suvivor Series?
Remember how the build up for a big match MEANT something?
Those were good times.
Posted By: ThatNickGuy78 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 02:09 PM
Yay for backwards thinking economics!!! If you want more buys, drop the price, simple as that. The money they would make off of new buyers at a cheaper price would easily be more than the money they make my charging more, as this will push many people over the edge and not buy the ppvs.
Posted By: Guest#2258 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 02:25 PM
I'd prefer 6 a year make em mean something again...THEN you can raise the rates...that will NEVER happen though.
Looks like Wrestlemania is the only one I will be ordering anymore :-(
Posted By: Guest#5879 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 02:25 PM
IWC still refuses to believe that stealing WWE's PPV's through streams and torrents every month doesnt have an effect on PPV buy rates.
Posted By: Guest#7548 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 02:30 PM
Didn't they already do this? I could've sworn a year or two ago people were bitching (and rightfully so) about a $5 increase in WWE ppvs, but I have no memories of them ever having $35 ppvs.
oh well, TNA's still cheaper, although with their $5 increase, I'm going to be less likely to order a show "because there's always at least one good match". TNA's going to have to step it up if they want $5 and give me at least 3 good matches.
Posted By: Guest#1 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 02:43 PM
In response to the comment above about the UK and the prices of PPVs they have been £15 (around $25) for the best part of 12 years now. Setanta was cheap (UFC PPVs, football, loads of American sport for £10 a month) but Sky Sports isn't- it's around £35 (around $55) a month.
Admittedly we get six of the PPVs for free but per year but still we pay a very high cost just to see Raw/Smackdown/ECW per week. Currently the WWE and Sky haven't reached an agreement past 2009 so I suspect that PPV prices are rising in the UK and Sky are trying to resist it.
Posted By: Ed (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 02:47 PM
Thats too much.More than 30-35 for a b ppv is too much especially nowadays.
Honestly most people are buying only WM and whatever other ppv has a strong hype to it.
No one is buying EVERY ppv only spoiled little boys or nerds.
They should do 8 a year and then people can pay that.
Posted By: MacDollarz. (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 02:59 PM
no Breaking Point?
Posted By: Crowaxe (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 03:05 PM
WWE: Countout, it would be like a last man standing for all. Except outside of the ring. The last man to answer to count and able to get to the ring loses! Title changes without getting pinned. I can see Orton punt someone outside of the ring and win by countout! Also have CM Punk handcup taker so he can't return to the ring and lose again, via count out!
1......2......3.......4.....hey get back in the ring (reset count) 1......2.........3..................4
Posted By: Not a bad idea (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 03:24 PM
Sounds to me like they WANT to kill their business. You take pay per views down to 29.95, that lets more fans buy them. You let more fans buy them, you make more money in general in the long haul. The more fans that buy them, the more fans get to see the "payoff" to your long-running feuds. More fans see the "payoff" and the (hopefully, if you start playing your cards right) fairly consistent quality matches on pay-per-view, the more fans order them. The more fans appreciate that, the more fans attend shows and watch television. The more fans attend shows and watch television, the more the company's revenue goes up. Thus, if they wanted more money, they'd book more consistent pay-per-view main events (consistent in quality, that is), hack the price down a bit, have their wrestlers do more promotion, etc. But I guess that outlook shows too much perspective.
Because that would require thinking for five seconds rather than just being greedy. And it would require long-term planning, but that doesn't "sell" well on the stock market in many cases. So fine, WWE. Shoot yourself in the foot all you want.
Basically, you're showing people the first 3/4ths of a movie (and those first 3/4ths increasingly seem to suck), then saying, "If you want to see the end, pay us for it!"...well, if they keep seeing the first 3/4ths and it sucks and then you tell them, "Oh, and we're charging you more now."...you'll lose buys, fans, etc. as people refuse to invest financially or emotionally in the outcome. Thus, fans flee the business...while you whittle down your "mainstream" pay per view buyers.
To simplify further...
Bad writing
+Price increase
+Bad economy
+Fluctuating ratings
DOES NOT=$$$
Make your money in bulk...sell far more, make more. It's not like it's really a "supply and demand"-related issue here...
Posted By: Ash (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 03:48 PM
Still one PPV too many and $15 bucks too much per PPV. Rather than try to grow the business by trying to innovate and responding to what fans want, the WWE is squeezing every last penny from the most loyal of their fans.
Posted By: @MaskedTweeter (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 05:12 PM
The problem isn't the price. It's the product. UFC charges the same price and look at the number they are doing.
Posted By: Guest#1859 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 05:23 PM
Thank fuck for torrents!
Posted By: Guest#3043 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 06:10 PM
I wonder if The Bash and Backlash are gonna get some kind of gimmick next year
Posted By: Guest#2142 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 06:19 PM
Even if I was a millionaire I still would only buy 4 ppv's a year, only The Big ones(Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania, Summerslam and Survivor Series). Instead of buying all 13 because when you buy them all you get the same bloody matches for every single PPV. It gets too repetitive for me to order every single PPV.
Posted By: Tom (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 06:26 PM
I can see their point somewhat.
100,000 buys x $40 = $4,000,000
90,000 buys x $45 = $4,050,000
By going from $40 to $45, the buyrates can drop up to 12.5 percent, and WWE will still increase their revenue, even though less people bought the show.
Posted By: Guest#0297 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 06:34 PM
"scaling back to 13 PPVs a year"
Fine with me, but I prefer 12 ppvs a year.
Posted By: The Beard (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:22 AM
I prefer having the big four, or at the most adding two gimmick ppv's of lesser significance for a total of 6.
Posted By: Guest#5945 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 06:50 PM
If the WWE wanna raise the price of thier PPVs, They better fix thier damn product 1st!
Posted By: Leon (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 07:35 PM
As long as they are PG I wont buy shit!
Posted By: Guest#1214 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 08:15 PM
TBD? Will that be anything like the WWF'S PPV "TBA" (later called "This Tuesday in Texas", but it was listed as "To Be Announced" in TV Guide)?
Posted By: ThatDonGuy (Registered) on November 06, 2009 at 10:35 PM
$10 to watch the PPVs in Asia, and it's still too much for most of the crap we've had this year.
Posted By: Guest#3637 (Guest) on November 06, 2009 at 11:08 PM
TBD, a Pay-per-view composed entirely of mystery opponents and partners!!!!
Posted By: G (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 12:59 AM
the 7.18.10 PPV will be entitled Growing up Up Hernandez or My Father Was Not a Slave, He Was His Own Man He Was a Free Man , which will consist of the son of late WWE wrestler Hercules sitting alone in a darkened ring telling stories about his father.
Posted By: Guest#5282 (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 01:59 AM
"I can see their point somewhat.
100,000 buys x $40 = $4,000,000
90,000 buys x $45 = $4,050,000"
Or they could charge $5,000,000 to order the PPV and hope just one person out there is a really,really big wrestling fan
Posted By: Guest#5553 (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 02:01 AM
As a Verizon customer, I pay $44.95 ALREADY for PPVs every time I order one. WrestleMania is the exception as it is close to sixty dollars or actually sixty, I forget the exact figure off the top of my head.
The correct decision to do is to drop two PPVs and drop the price by 5 dollars on each event. This will let people be able to recover from those massive PPV heavy periods and buy what they want. The low buyrates are an indication less and less people are interested in this product. Raising the price is just fucking stupid, and taking away one PPV is the only smart thing they have done with the news so far after the buyrates came out.
I'm not paying $49.95 to see a 60 minute match with two people I hate, or a PPV entirely devoted to submission wrestling with a predictable ending like Show/Cena, or anything really with John Cena main eventing. I've tried to stay loyal to the WWE but I'm having more and more difficulty convincing myself to buy events I barely enjoy. These days I rather just watch Sunday night on FOX.
Posted By: Black Scorpion (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 03:33 AM
Watch Raw the next night, most of the matches get repeated.
Posted By: Guest#4345 (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 06:05 AM
I can remember the time when there was the Big 4 pay per views..... which was awesome and back then the pay per views were well worth what they want to charge now. I also remember when they had the lesser pay per views (like In Your House) and would charge less for them. I could understand having the Big Four and 4 "in-between" pay per views for less money than the other 4 (Like $29.95 for the in-between ppv's and $39.95 for the big 4).
July Pay Per View- I would like to see a random draw tag team pay per view (Lethal Lottery style). Not like the WWE listens to the fans though
Posted By: tha_wicked_1 (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 07:26 AM
If you'll all notice, they didn't really DROP a June PPV at all. They just moved NIGHT OF CHAMPIONS to September instead. I'm all for more space and time in between the big shows, but how in the hell does a price increase assist in gaining more buying fans? Vince is losing it.
Posted By: Devin (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 08:21 AM
Move Bragging Rights to the last one of the year 12/19 and make the 10.24 Halloween Havoc!!!!! (with War Games main event!)
If you don't like the price, don't order. When people don't order they lose money and have to drop the price.
I only order WWM and the Rumble with like 10 guys chipping in.
Posted By: DCFlash (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Werent they already LOSING viewers? I havnt watched their product for 2 years but still keep up to date now an increase? Not the smartest bunch of business people.
Posted By: Guest#9236 (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Although this allows them wiggle room in buyrates, when the point is supposed to be to get people to buy the PPVs, there'll less incentive to buy, therefore people will care nothing about the build since they wont be ordering the PPV.
Truly is backasswards.
Posted By: Guest#6987 (Guest) on November 07, 2009 at 08:59 PM
