Originally Posted by Automatic
Let's look at this. Let's say they average 10k buys a PPV (120,000 per year currently). At $35.99 they bring in $359,900 per PPV ($4,318,800 per year). That's not a fraction of what WWE makes per PPV, but it's much better than any other current company that hosts monthly PPVs after 10 years of existence. If they were to cut that in half, they would still get over $2.1 million per year on PPVs (if the numbers remain the same) whereas you're idea for 3 per year take them to $1.07 million per year. Now, I know those just seem like numbers, but a $2.2 million drop is a LOT less than a $3.24 million drop. Yes, they might "save money" by reducing the cost of PPV per month, but by dropping it as low as you say, they also stand to "not make as much money" which would counter act the whole point of cutting back to save in the first place.
Of course, this is working under the assumption that they stay at the same number of buys. They would literally have to triple the number of their average (30,000 buys) in order to get the same amount of revenue the currently get from running 12 PPVs a year. If they drop to 6 PPVs, they need 20,000 buy per PPVs. They will only need to increase PPV buys by 5,000 per PPV if they drop to 8 in order to achieve the same income from these PPVs and "save" money by not running as many PPVs yearly.