This Sunday will technically present the 4th installment of the Cyber Sunday concept pay-per-view. The reason I say technically is because in 2004 and 2005, the event was advertised as Taboo Tuesday. Same concept, different name.
Cyber Sunday is one of the most innovative shows of the year for the WWE, allowing users to seemingly “Log On. Take Over.” Fans across the world can vote on several different aspects for each match, whether is be who the opponent will be, which title will be on the line, and the stipulation for the contest. Although WWE touts that over 7 million people voted last year, only a very VERY small percentage of those people actually bought the pay-per-view to find out if the fate they voted on was selected- 2% of the 7 million tallied votes (140,000 buys) to be exact.
But Cyber Sunday hasn’t been the only poorly performing pay-per-view hosted by McMahon’s company. Who can forget the bomb of ‘December to Dismember’? In addition to the alarming number of 55,000 domestic buys for the ‘December to Dismember’ event, several of WWE’s pay-per-view events in the second half of 2006 failed to draw 150,000 domestic buys, including Great American Bash (140,000); No Mercy (120,000); Cyber Sunday (140,000); and Armageddon (145,000).
I began to mull over the data trying to figure out why there wouldn’t be more people buying the show, seeing as how THEY are the ones that essentially put it together. It was only then did I come to the realization that WWE pulled the wool over nearly everyone’s eyes with a classic marketing ploy: Limited Unlimited Possibilities. The idea is basically that a specific product or service can be customized to the consumer’s liking. In turn, this customization is said to add to the value that the consumer receives when the purchase the product or service. Take the cell phone industry, for example. Nearly every company has given in to this theory by providing “no contracts” and “customizable ringtones” and the T-Mobile flagship of the “Fave 5” (where you can customize your top 5 contacts and call them unlimitedly for no charge). But for the nearly unlimited number of choices, there are limits and fine print.
Back to the WWE concept. Do you think that Vince McMahon would actually let the WWE FANS take control over his empire, if even for one night? I’ll quote the good ol’ Stone Cold and give you a resounding “HELL NO!” In reality, the matches are already made and the decisions have been selected. And only after the decisions have been selected do we get to vote on which one we would like to see. Triple H and Umaga will be feuding this Sunday with the ‘choice’ of the stipulation being a street fight, first blood match, or steel cage match. Although they are three good choices, all of which could culminate into a great story, I’m sure there are plenty of fans of there that may want to see a Hell in a Cell, or perhaps a Last Man Standing, and what about the classic “I Quit” match? See, we don’t get those as options to vote on, therefore we, the fans, do not really have ‘control’ over the show. I think people have wised up to that.
Oh? What’s that I hear? “But we still can choose which of those 3 matches we want. So to an extent we can still decide the outcome and have some control over things.” Tisk, tisk. That brings me to my next point. Have you noticed over the past years that as the fire is added to the fuel that the storylines tend to lean towards a particular choice? Returning to the example of Triple H and Umaga, this past Monday night on RAW they went at it and fought each other fist to fist and ripped each other apart. The way they fought was reminiscent of a street fight. Jerry Lawler even added his take saying “I’d love to see these two go at it in a street fight this Sunday, JR!” Some may say that he was just putting his own thoughts out there, but I’ve got a feeling that this was more of a subliminal message that was etched into the viewers’ minds. Here you have these two men beating the hell out of each other with chairs and ringbells and the announcer’s booth (a la street fight) and one of the most dominant voices in wrestling commentary telling you ‘his view’ on things. Obviously, the goal of the segment was to sway the voters’ minds and tempt them to vote for the outcome in which WWE desires, in a sense, relinquishing the ‘control’ the fans had in the first place.
Continuing, there are even instances of when the choices are jovial, at best. Take Taboo Tuesday 2005, for example. Batista vs Jonathan Coachman (originally Austin vs Coachman before Austin pulled out the night before). The choices to vote on were street fight, verbal debate, and arm wrestling match. How did the votes turn out, you might ask? I just happened to have the voting results: Street Fight 91%, Verbal Debate 6%, Arm Wrestling Match 3%. To be honest, I have absolutely NO idea why this wasn’t a closer race between the three stipulations. Clearly they were all superb choices (end sarcasm).
So how much control do you REALLY have? As far as the voting goes, I’d say slim to none (barring the idea that there is a WWE conspiracy to rig the votes). However, I will say that the real control lies in the fate of the Cyber Sunday show/concept in itself. If you want to control it’s future for the positive, buy the show. If you wish it would just fall off the face of the earth, don’t order it. That is where the real control lies for the show.
Questions/comments/concerns are always appreciated. Here at XHeadlines we give you what you want… and unlike Cyber Sunday, you, the readers, ARE in control- but only when you give us feedback. So be sure to fill out the comment box that can be found at the bottom of every post!!
