PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE



By Dave Scherer on 2013-10-13 09:59:00

You can send us questions for the Q&A by clicking here.

I'm not claiming to be a business expert but let me take a shot at this. So in the beginning of 2013 TNA gets ready to spend more money by going on the road for impacts, but cuts 8 revenue generating PPVs from the lineup and puts on 8 special ppvs that probably are making very little $ for their profit sheets....while WWE is still making tons of money from their monthly PPV lineup? I get the whole "slow down everything" approach but I'm pretty sure they're not getting 20-40 thousand more people to order their 4 "big ppvs" just because they have a longer push? If WWE is the model you want to duplicate, why cut revenue for the year then add to your spending..isn't this why TNA is rumored to have all these financial difficulties right now?

Actually, according to numerous sources most of the PPVs were actually costing TNA money due to the fact that the buyrate was so low so consolidating and taping them actually saved them money in the long run.

Any opinion on the people that are calling their PPV providers for refunds for WWE PPVs? Will it affect the way WWE books its PPVs? I'm of the opinion that most are trying to game the system to watch a PPV for free, rather than being genuinely upset.

If someone is mad that they paid for the past show and got screwed out of a finish, I can see their anger. I get that WWE never "promises finishes" but to me shows that cost people $55 should not be used as a vehicle to get you to watch Raw on Monday. To me, I can see them calling and asking for a refund, but only once. If they do it again, then yes they are gaming the system because they should know better. As for WWE, the only thing I see making them change the way they approach PPVs is if buyrates drop precipitously after the two bad main event finishes at Night Of Champions and Battleground.

I was wondering why it's emphasized that HHH was hampered with a bad gimmick on his DVD when doing the blue blood gimmick. I thought it was despicable as hell and worked very well at the time. What are your thoughts on the character

He turned it into that later but in the beginning the character was a goofy joke. I remember it. It was bad.

It's cool to see that there is life after WWE for John Morrison, MVP, and Trent Baretta. My question is... how are they able to use those names in the indys? Weren't those their WWE names?

They most probably obtained the rights. Sometimes WWE lets the names of older characters go.

Is it just me or has the build for Bound For Glory been terrible? Come to think of it ever since Bischoff was put in charge of creative it feels like they've given up or just don't care anymore.

It is not just you. It has been terrible. And Bischoff was always overseeing creative in TNA but recently he became more hands on. And as he has, the product has gotten worse from a storyline standpoint. TNA needs new blood in charger of their storylines because it's been awful lately. BFG is their biggest show of the year and it seems like far too many people are apathetic towards it.

You can send us questions for the Q&A by clicking here.

If you enjoy you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more, right now for THREE DAYS free by clicking here!