What even is a WWE pay-per-view anymore?
It doesn't pay the wrestlers like it used to - several have explored options elsewhere thanks to a financial imbalance on their payslip WWE have kept tight-lipped about disclosing since launching the Network in 2014.
It's categorically not the direct money-making mechanism it used to be. Their streaming service's subscriber numbers broadly trend upwards every year, but typically only the Royal Rumble-to-WrestleMania quarter reflects growth worthy of significant boasts. Vince McMahon has played the long game and will likely win in the end, but his company's insistence on clinging to a dated monthly model without the incoming revenues to justify it has diluted a television output he now relies upon for significant funds.
Since the 2016 Brand Split, the shark-infested waters have gotten only muddier. Peddling two supercards a month on numerous occasions, the apparent need to establish Raw and Smackdown as re-partitioned entities resulted in a seismic overload of sup-par product, forcing even the most ardent fans to take a breather from the sheer amount of content they'd been expected to endure on a bi-monthly basis.
2017 was subject to the burden, though lessons have apparently been learned with the binning of at least two shows next year. It was very easy to get lost or look away as another Sunday show crept up, but the sheer diversity of the modern era ensured almost every show had something noteworthy, even if it wasn't always for the right reasons.