Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Kool
Now I say if you cut enough people you are going to keep the people who are more interesting to see and bring a better television product each week (well, I know history says otherwise, but I'm hoping for what I said to be true). If you have a better show, then chances are they will do better than 1 of the two seperate rosters. However, you are also once again taking in effect the amount of money given out to their crew and talent.
|
The days when ratings were the be-all-and-end-all for WWE pretty much died along with WCW. I mean, of course they still matter... bad ratings would risk the show getting cancelled which would be disasterous, and the more people watching equals more potential consumers... but television is pretty much mainly a 2 hour advertisement for WWE products (yes, that includes the wrestlers) and live events, with a paint-by-numbers wrestling show built around it.
WWE is a touring company making most of its money on the road. They won't end the brand split to create better television because having a tremendous TV show hasn't mattered since 2001. Keeping the TV show afloat enough to showcase the talent and conflicts so that people will buy PPVs and go see the live event when it comes to their city is the main priority.
Two touring groups equals double the earning potential for the company, and having the two distinct brands to advertise said shows keeps things clear and consise in promoting them.