A Wipo case is not won due to PPC adds running on a landing page. It is won by the complainant winning ALL 3 of these arguments:
1. The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade or service mark in which the complainant has rights.
2. The domain registrant has no legitimate rights or interests in the domain name (other than the fact that the registrant had registered the domain name, of course).
3. The domain name has been registered and used in “bad faith”.
Having a landing page or a dead page is not relivant to any of the points above just so you know. As a matter of fact, having PPC driven landing pages legitimizes the domain and more cases have been won on this one point alone under the arguments against #2 above:
The Landmark Group v. DigiMedia.com, L.P., NAF Case No.285459 [arb-forum.com...]
Respondent alleges that its business model is the registration of large numbers of dictionary words commonly searched by Internet users, and that it generates revenue by providing pay-per-click advertising links related to the generic nature of each site’s domain name. For example, in addition to the generic domain name <landmarks.com>, Respondent also owns and operates websites such as <chairs.com>, <pants.com>, <dress.com> and <webdesign.com>. As long as the domain names have been registered because of their attraction as dictionary words, and not because of their value as trademarks, this is a business model that is permitted under the Policy. Gen. Mach. Prods. Co. v. Prime Domains, FA
92531 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 26, 2000).
winning one or two of the arguments will not win the case, the complainant would have to win all 3 arguments.
In any case, hope this helps.