WWE to change PPV Format

[Blue Demon]

WWE Pay-Per-Views To Follow WrestleMania Formula
March 14, 2007

STAMFORD, Conn., March 14, 2007 - In the spirit that has made WrestleMania the premier brand in the pay-per-view industry, every future World Wrestling Entertainment pay-per-views will feature talent and storylines from all three WWE programs: -- “Monday Night RAW®,” “Friday Night SmackDown®,” and “ECW®: Extreme Championship Wrestling™.”

Starting with Backlash® on April 29, WWE fans will see all their favorite Superstars on every pay-per-view. This is a change from 2005 and 2006, when only four of WWE’s 16 pay-per-views featured talent from more than one WWE brand.

“We have seen over the past two years that WWE pay-per-views have significantly better buy rates when more than one WWE brand is involved,” said Kurt Schneider, Executive Vice President, Marketing. “WrestleMania, with an average of one million buys per event over the past three years, is the perfect example. This new direction will give our fans more of what they want in every one of our pay-per-views.”

Schneider said that the tri-branded WWE pay-per-views will benefit from promotion on all three WWE prime time programs – “Monday Night RAW,” (USA, 9/8C), “Friday Night SmackDown,” (CW, 8/7C)and “ECW: Extreme Championship Wrestling” (Tuesdays, SCI FI, 10/9C). WWE has had the No. 1 prime time shows on USA, SCI FI, and The CW each week in January and February among households and total viewers, compared to programs with two or more telecasts. Throughout January and February, WWE programs reached 15.7 million viewers in 10.8 million households during the average week.

Additional information on World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (NYSE: WWE), can be found at wwe.com and corporate.wwe.com . For information on our global activities, go to http://www.wwe.com/worldwide/.

-30-

Media Contact: Gary Davis, 203-353-5066

Investor Contact: Michael Weitz, 203-352-8642

Trademarks: All World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. programming, talent names, images, likenesses, slogans, wrestling moves, and logos are the exclusive property of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. ECW is a trademark of WWE Libraries, Inc. All other trademarks, logos and copyrights are the property of their respective owners.

Forward-Looking Statements: This news release contains forward-looking statements pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which are subject to various risks and uncertainties. These risks and uncertainties include the conditions of the markets for live events, broadcast television, cable television, pay-per-view, Internet, feature films, entertainment, professional sports, and licensed merchandise; acceptance of the Company's brands, media and merchandise within those markets; uncertainties relating to litigation; risks associated with producing live events both domestically and internationally; uncertainties associated with international markets; risks relating to maintaining and renewing key agreements, including television distribution agreements; and other risks and factors set forth from time to time in Company filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Actual results could differ materially from those currently expected or anticipated. In addition to these risks and uncertainties, our dividend is based on a number of factors, including our liquidity and historical and projected cash flow, strategic plan, our financial results and condition, contractual and legal restrictions on the payment of dividends and such other factors as our board of directors may consider relevant.



So essentially...ALL ppvs will have wrstlers from ALL brands wrestling.

[Xero]

And now there is no sense whatsoever to have 16. 13 at most.

[Honky Tonk Man]

good move, but wayyy to many PPV's still. If I had it my way, there would only be 8 PPV's per year.

[Xero]

Shut up CC.

[Russenmafia]

this could be the start of the brand split finally ending.

[KayfabeMan]

I think they should have 8-10 PPV's a year.

They'd have more build time and such, not that they'd have any freaking clue what to do with such a thing, but the thought itself is comforting....

[Russenmafia]

I think having the feuds over the other shows is a good idea. What was good about the Attitute era was that there was two shows a week to build feuds rather than the one show nowadays. Now if WWE actually did this and make the feuds interesting, they would generate more hype for undercard on a PPV and generate more buys.

[The One]

Just end the Brand Split, go back to 12 PPVs a year as a max.

January: Royal Rumble (Special because of Rumble Match)
February: No Way Out
March: WrestleMania (Special because it's Mania
April: Backlash
May: Cyber Sunday (Special because marks think their opinions matter)
June: Great American Bash
July: SummerSlam (Special because it's the second biggest event WWE has)
Augest: Unforgiven
September: King of the Ring (Special because they would bring the tournament back)
October: No Mercy
November: Servivor Series (Special because they would have Survivor Series Matches)
December: Armageddon

Basically switching off every other month as a special hype event. Or they could only do the 6 specialty PPVs a year. OR if they fufilled my wishes, they would only have Rumble, Mania, SumerSlam, and King of the Ring. That would really be the best in my opinion.

[PullMyFinger]

I thought next year WWE only has 13 PPVs?

[PullMyFinger]

Anyhow, regardless, this is a good start...now they should lower the amount of PPVs. They have way too much PPVs and thus due to the lack of build up...theres a lack of interest. Thats the main reason why their buyrates are crap.

[The MAC]

how well are all the PPVs selling right now? Thats the real question. If they are not making the money they should then theyve saturated the ppv market and should cut back. Its about money,they want more

[PullMyFinger]

Theyre not making that much. Buyrates are pathetic when compared to the past.

[ddpBANG]

I think they should go 10 max with long lead-ups to Mania and Survivor Series.


January: Royal Rumble

March: WrestleMania
April: Backlash
May: Judgment Day
June: King of the Ring
July: Great American Bash
August: SummerSlam
September: No Mercy

November: Survivor Series
December: Armageddon

[Jeritron]

They should try changing up the fucking names once in a while instead of having the same names every year like WCW.

[Pepsi Man]

So basically all of this crap about more people getting more time on the air has finally just about come to an end? I mean, already, those "younger wrestlers" aren't going to be on Pay-Per-Views if this is the case, and with more cross-brand appearances to hype PPV matches.......

[Jeritron]

Theres no point to brand extension now. I mean, you're gonna have to fit in 2 main events a month. And you're gonna have to have your 2 second main events.
Then you have US and IC title division matches to knock out.

2 sets of tag team belts becomes even more pointless.

Any good effects of brand extension, like talent getting on ppvs that normally wouldn't and pushing more stars, goes down the tubes.

Might as well just end it now. Because I'll also have to say that it seems as is they have trouble coming up with new and interesting fueds for PPVs, and now that they have to send each champion to the main event to defend against an opponent 12 times a year, it just became twice as hard and twice as cluttered, while the rest of the roster has half the time.

[Theo Dious]

Yeah, I've been a supporter of the brand split, but if they're doing this then they need to just drop it. Trying to run seperate brands with fully integrated PPVs is going to be a trainwreck and a clusterfuck rolled up into a squishy little ball.

[Xero]

Theres no point to brand extension now. I mean, you're gonna have to fit in 2 main events a month. And you're gonna have to have your 2 second main events.
Then you have US and IC title division matches to knock out.

2 sets of tag team belts becomes even more pointless.

Any good effects of brand extension, like talent getting on ppvs that normally wouldn't and pushing more stars, goes down the tubes.

Might as well just end it now. Because I'll also have to say that it seems as is they have trouble coming up with new and interesting fueds for PPVs, and now that they have to send each champion to the main event to defend against an opponent 12 times a year, it just became twice as hard and twice as cluttered, while the rest of the roster has half the time.
I love how everyone blatantly ignores ECW.

[Pepsi Man]

I love how everyone blatantly ignores ECW.
Ignores what?:shifty:

[TerranRich]

They should try changing up the fucking names once in a while instead of having the same names every year like WCW.
WWE In Your House: This PPV Is Seriously Different Than The Last IYH One We Had™

[tucsonspeed6]

They have better buy rates when all three brands are involved. Of course you do! That's because the only times all three brands are involved in a PPV are when it's one of the big 4.

Not saying it's a bad idea or anything. Just saying it's bad logic.

[Kane Knight]

I thought they meant 5 hours extravaganzas of increasingly diminished importance.

I was pretty close, actually.

[Jeritron]

I love how everyone blatantly ignores ECW.


I never ignore ECW when talking about this. I think it should remain as its own brand if the 2 other brands unite. Then it should be strengthened with a few big roster jumps, (ie Benoit, Rey, Jeff Hardy, etc.). There'd be too many names on a united WWE, so ECW would benefit as well.

Then you'd be able to move your show up to 2 hours and put some titles on it so it can actually have a midcard and not just the same main event every week, one midcard match, and an expose.

[The One]

I just realised, if all WWE PPVs are going to be all three Brands...what does that mean for ECW One Night Stand 3?

[Xero]

I never ignore ECW when talking about this. I think it should remain as its own brand if the 2 other brands unite. Then it should be strengthened with a few big roster jumps, (ie Benoit, Rey, Jeff Hardy, etc.). There'd be too many names on a united WWE, so ECW would benefit as well.

Then you'd be able to move your show up to 2 hours and put some titles on it so it can actually have a midcard and not just the same main event every week, one midcard match, and an expose.
I misread. I thought you said 2 main events, not 2 second main events.

[Pepsi Man]

I just realised, if all WWE PPVs are going to be all three Brands...what does that mean for ECW One Night Stand 3?
Cena vs. Umaga as the main event.

[El Fangel]

Theres no point to brand extension now. I mean, you're gonna have to fit in 2 main events a month. And you're gonna have to have your 2 second main events.
Then you have US and IC title division matches to knock out.

2 sets of tag team belts becomes even more pointless.

Any good effects of brand extension, like talent getting on ppvs that normally wouldn't and pushing more stars, goes down the tubes.

Might as well just end it now. Because I'll also have to say that it seems as is they have trouble coming up with new and interesting fueds for PPVs, and now that they have to send each champion to the main event to defend against an opponent 12 times a year, it just became twice as hard and twice as cluttered, while the rest of the roster has half the time.

[FourFifty]

I love how everyone blatantly ignores ECW.

<img src=http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g122/sandman3g/Misc/devine.jpg>

[Xero]

"On a special Mythbusters, we attempt to prove that people CAN indeed look away from horrific crashes."

[Jeritron]

I've always wonder why people call a terrible program or failed show a trainwreck. Calling it a mess would be more fitting. If ECW were a trainwreck it'd be doin 9.0s in the nielsens