10 Things You Didn't Know About WWE Money In The Bank
Is the risk truly worth the reward? Austin Theory and Baron Corbin probably don't think so...
The Money In The Bank 'Premium Live Event' is now considered by fans a "big five" major show.
That's impressive, particularly given that it spawned amid one of the least critically acclaimed periods in WWE history. People anticipate it every year, and while WWE misjudged it as a ticket-shifting attraction in 2022 - hence why it was downgraded from the Allegiant stadium - this year's very expensive ticket sold out instantly. The second biggest arena in the United Kingdom is much too small for it.
It's funny; given all the exhausting talk of "stories" in 2023, the annual spot-fest spectacular has evolved into a beloved institution, hosting some of the hottest atmospheres in modern WWE history. Maybe people don't want a methodical match worked after three months' build. Maybe they just want to see eight great athletes fall from great heights, after taking an age to build some furniture, making terrible decisions.
Subjectively, Money In The Bank is always a tremendous time. It's exhilarating. It's as white knuckle ride as you'll get in WWE, which has mastered the multi-man Ladder match without it feeling formulaic. WWE is best in class at the stip.
One prominent wrestling journo you really might not expect echoes that opinion - but there's a lot of myth within the history of the event, too...
10. It Wasn't The Most Successful Gimmick Pay-Per-View
Money In The Bank is the last surviving "gimmick PPV".
Some never took off, like the bizarre 'Fatal 4-Way', which was never a true drawing attraction as a match. Breaking Point also failed, since Vince McMahon, after 1997, was too cowardly to book a definitive submission finish. Others, while often entertaining in isolation, ruined through overexposure and contrived, calendar-first booking the aura of the titular attractions. TLC and Hell In A Cell were finally abandoned by Triple H, and the PPV schedule is all the better for it: the location-specific big matches generate wonderful atmospheres. Writing subjectively, watching Sheamus and GUNTHER do battle live in a furnace in Cardiff is preferable to yet another Cell match. It was far more brutal than the PG downgrade, too.
Only Money In The Bank has survived and will continue to survive. The actual cash-in has lost its potency as a storyline device, but the PLE itself is a cheat code to critical acclaim and fan engagement. The shows are invariably very good to tremendous.
You'd think, then, that Money In The Bank was the most successful gimmick PPV, but this isn't the case - or at least it wasn't in the pre-Network era, for which viewership data is more readily available.
Between 2009 and 2013, HIAC drew buys of 300,000, 210,000, 180,000, 199,000 and 200,000. MITB in comparison, between 2010 and 2013, drew 162,000, 195,000, 188,000 and 199,000. MITB outdrew HIAC just once: in 2011, when CM Punk challenged John Cena for the WWE title. Does that make Punk the biggest draw not named John Cena in the early 2010s?
Not necessarily...