By James Caldwell, PWTorch columnist

WWE's third quarter earnings report revealed a significant issue WWE needs to address in the PPV business department. As we reported on two weeks ago, PPV business tumbled comparable to the third quarter 2007 with revenue down and costs up.

Jim Ross says in his latest blog on jrsbarbq.com that he doesn't anticipate the number of PPV events per year changing, however. The financial benefit of grabbing revenue no matter the cost will win every time.

"For the record, the number of pay-per-views likely isn't going to lessen any time soon," Ross said on jrsbarbq.com. "Creative would most likely be all for it but the accountants definitely wouldn't. In a publicly traded company with budgets to meet and with pay-per-view comprising such a vital part of the bottom line, the bean counters win."

Regarding this Sunday's PPV in Boston, Ross said the announcing assignments for the multiple inter-brand traditional Survivor Series battles probably won't be finalized until Sunday or Saturday if they're lucky. It could make for an interesting night of preparation.

"Some of us preparation freaks like to know what bouts we will be responsible for but there is a good chance that info might not be available until Sunday or Saturday at the earliest," he said. "My philosophy has always been to prepare as if I am calling all the bouts and take it from there."

Link: Ross blog.

Caldwell's Analysis: WWE has subscribed to the philosophy of quantity over quality throughout the last ten-plus years in terms of trying to force as many $40 PPVs onto the market as possible to grab whatever revenue the market will bear for a given PPV event. Maybe cutting back one or two PPVs per year to focus on more quality events wouldn't make up for the lost revenue, but I think it's worth a shot.

Plus, it would free up creative an extra two weeks per year to come up with fresher TV content that could attract more eyeballs to the product who will in turn buy more quality events. The indirect effect of cutting back PPVs to help creative produce a better product could have a trickle-down effect in other financial revenue segments.

I just haven't seen WWE step up and justify having PPVs on a three-week turnaround time other than simply the quantity of revenue being generated. Over the long haul, I firmly believe from studying WWE's financials for four years that if they had more quality PPV events, the long-term benefit would be realized over time.

If they can up the per-PPV-revenue total significantly each quarter, they'll eventually get to a point where 12 PPVs per year will equal the revenue of 14 PPVs per year, with the TV product much more improved and other financial segments picking up revenue from fans being more excited about the product.

RELATED STORY at PWTorch.com: Jim Ross addresses Kurt Angle in MMA from yesterday.

We suggest these recent related articles...

WWE NEWS: Superstars SPOILERS - Results from Chicago Raw

WWE NETWORK: Monday, Oct. 12 Schedule - Raw pre-show, Sting DVD preview

WWE NEWS: Lana & Rusev reportedly engaged - follow the interesting 2015 timeline