Why is the WWE Network struggling?

[modestgenius]

I'd buy it in a shot if I thought RAW/SD would be updated a day after broadcast - but since that isn't going to happen for at least 5 years...

Or, start uploading a new episodes of Smackdown from the beginning once a week. I'd pay for and watch that for years.

[Professor Chaos]

Americans would rather spend their spare money on alcohol and dope.

["Cane Dewey" Johnson]

Jul 14, 2014 17:14:05 GMT -5 Professor Chaos said:

Americans would rather spend their spare money on alcohol and dope.

Sometimes that's to make watching WWE easier.

[Fuji's racist salt]

I am still wondering if they are aware of the numbers of overseas subscribers,if they are burying their heads in the the sand to keep the shareholders sweet then when the network is finally rolled out worldwide they better be ready for a lot less overseas subscribers than they think their getting

[The Dark Order Inferno]

I can't help but think that by the end of the year, they'll accept that this is the level they're going to get and there'll be talk of switching the WWE network to a tiered system like cable to wring more cash from the people willing to subscribe. $9.99 WWE Archive, where you get old stuff and PPVs 60 days on and WWE Network Plus, $20 for all PPVs, NXT, NXT events and WWE Live Events which are recorded house shows similar to the TNA pretape PPVs and the old Coliseum video exclusive events, which have good matches and interesting themes like Tournaments but don't affect what's happening on Raw in any way.

[Professor Chaos]

Jul 15, 2014 8:19:31 GMT -5 The Dark Order Inferno said:

I can't help but think that by the end of the year, they'll accept that this is the level they're going to get and there'll be talk of switching the WWE network to a tiered system like cable to wring more cash from the people willing to subscribe. $9.99 WWE Archive, where you get old stuff and PPVs 60 days on and WWE Network Plus, $20 for all PPVs, NXT, NXT events and WWE Live Events which are recorded house shows similar to the TNA pretape PPVs and the old Coliseum video exclusive events, which have good matches and interesting themes like Tournaments but don't affect what's happening on Raw in any way.

If they do that there's more hope with dope.

[Deleted]

As a person who doesn't have the network, I have no idea what they're even offering aside from a few gimmicks. I shouldn't have to go out of my way to do research on it. Say explicitly what exactly you have and keep it organized.

That and I have a natural aversion to giving money to WWE because they do so many things I disapprove of, and I don't want to be an enabler.

[The Dark Order Inferno]

Jul 15, 2014 8:46:37 GMT -5 Professor Chaos said:

If they do that there's more hope with dope.

You'd think so, but it's been the standard model for pay TV for years now and you have video games companies doing likewise, heck, you need to subscribe to another service to get the privilege of paying for the WWE network on some devices. The only surprise is that it wasn't the structure for the WWE network from the very start, people will pay it as they can tell themselves it's still cheaper than the PPV system.

[joeiscool]

The fact they are doing better than netflix did at this stage of their streaming, and they have way less content and 2 dollars more expensive makes me wonder if what they are aiming for is just ridiculous..

[Deleted]

Everyone has seen the PPVs a thousand times. It's the TV stuff that's more interesting to me, and there could stand to be way more of that.

I think that at the end of the day, WWE is eventually going to have to get back the "Superstars of Wrestling" trademark, because so much of their pre-Attitude era content is going to be affected by that issue.

[joeiscool]

Jul 15, 2014 13:29:06 GMT -5 @wvguitar said:

Everyone has seen the PPVs a thousand times. It's the TV stuff that's more interesting to me, and there could stand to be way more of that.

I think that at the end of the day, WWE is eventually going to have to get back the "Superstars of Wrestling" trademark, because so much of their pre-Attitude era content is going to be affected by that issue.

Have you actually seen the network?

[Allie Kitsune]

They really need Shane McMahon to come back and fix all this.

You figure he has the experience now, having run that On-Demand service in China for a few years and all.

[Deleted]

Jul 15, 2014 13:49:49 GMT -5 joeiscool said:

Jul 15, 2014 13:29:06 GMT -5 @wvguitar said:

Everyone has seen the PPVs a thousand times. It's the TV stuff that's more interesting to me, and there could stand to be way more of that.

I think that at the end of the day, WWE is eventually going to have to get back the "Superstars of Wrestling" trademark, because so much of their pre-Attitude era content is going to be affected by that issue.

Have you actually seen the network?

If you can find the pre-Monday Night Raw weekly TV, or any WCW/NWA weekly TV for that matter, feel free to point me to it.

[Fuji's racist salt]

This weeks original programming is Main event and NXT,no wondering they are struggling,no offence to NXT but that is a pathetic amount of new content.

[EvenBaldobombHasAJob]

the numbers it's getting are realistic and what WWE should have expected. it's struggling because WWE had ridiculous expectations for how it would do out of the gate.

[Deleted]

I'm still surprised they put the current PPVs on it and only charged $10 for it. If they had put the price a bit higher or didn't put the PPVs on it and instead put more historic TV and PPV footage on it, maybe they wouldn't be struggling financially?

Course I'm not a business expert or anything so the above could have made it worse ha

[willyjakes]

Another thing that's hurting them is that a lot of the old nostalgia pop content that people really want to see is still freely available on Youtube and Dailymotion

[4TheGlory]

I honestly think they still would have the same subscription numbers they do now if they offered all PPVs free except for the big 4. I think they gave away too much too fast.

[saintpat]

Jul 12, 2014 14:16:23 GMT -5 @ihateeverything said:

But I am asking more about the costs and practicalities of the service itself, not why people are not buying it, as I said in the first message, lol.

Should it be costing WWE so much to run the Network that they need 1.4m to break even? Surely it shouldn't cost that much? You'd have thought they'd be able to run it cheaper. It's like they are paying premium bandwidth rates or something. If this is the cost of it all, I can see why they wanted their own TV channel.

Part of it is that creating this revenue stream, which may be best for the long run, cut very deeply into another major revenue stream -- PPV buys.

By giving away all PPVs for a premium price WWE created a major loss of usual revenue from buys. It would be like if Netflix had been built around a Blockbuster Video model at first, then switched to online -- giving up video rental revenue. So not only does WWE have to cover the cost of starting up and running the network (and to be sure many more salaries of people hired to handle technical issues, create more content, etc.), it has to overcome the loss of revenue from PPV buys.

That's the main thing.

[xCompackx]

Jul 16, 2014 19:27:05 GMT -5 @cyclonechyno said:

I'm still surprised they put the current PPVs on it and only charged $10 for it. If they had put the price a bit higher or didn't put the PPVs on it and instead put more historic TV and PPV footage on it, maybe they wouldn't be struggling financially?

Course I'm not a business expert or anything so the above could have made it worse ha

I think the $9.99 price point was really only done to "compete" with Netflix and the like. Considering PPVs are just about $60 a piece, they really could've listed WWE Network anywhere cheaper than that and it'd still be a good deal in comparison. But now that it's what it is, raising the price is going to be hard for the same reason it's hard for Netflix to do it.