How much longer can AEW maintain the traditional PPV model?

[SirLucas]

I'll be honest. I have yet to purchase an AEW PPV. I am too spoiled with WWE Network and their price point of $9.99 a month to be motivated enough to spend an extra $50 or so on one ala carte wrestling show.  

Since HBO Max is launching in May, would it be advantageous for AEW to latch on?  At this point, AEW does not have enough catalog footage to justify an entire Network. But what if live AEW PPVs were part of the HBO Max package? Since HBO and AEW are both under the WarnerMedia umbrella, I don't see it out of realm of possibility. 

[Mozenrath]

How long? Dunno. They've only done a few, but each sold better than TNA's highest selling PPV did, from what I recall, and it likely helps they do not plan to do monthly PPVs.

[deezy]

Dec 26, 2019 0:18:24 GMT -5 SirLucas said:

I'll be honest. I have yet to purchase an AEW PPV. I am too spoiled with WWE Network and their price point of $9.99 a month to be motivated enough to spend an extra $50 or so on one ala carte wrestling show.  

Since HBO Max is launching in May, would it be advantageous for AEW to latch on?  At this point, AEW does not have enough catalog footage to justify an entire Network. But what if live AEW PPVs were part of the HBO Max package? Since HBO and AEW are both under the WarnerMedia umbrella, I don't see it out of realm of possibility. 

I'm the same way. The WWE network has me spoiled and since I work 3rd shift I don't have to watch the PPV live. I can wait until I come home in the morning to watch it.

I like watching some of AEW dynamite but there isn't enough for me to justify paying their PPV price. Not having them monthly is very smart on their part.

[cabbageboy]

There's always using a VPN and going to Fite.tv. 20 bucks that way. That said, I think AEW should consider a monthly PPV, or at least a 6 PPV a year model with a reduced rate of 30 bucks or so. First off, it would bring in more revenue than the 4 PPV model. Second, and this is the more understated aspect, 4 PPVs just make for some deadly dull TV since there's such huge time periods between PPVs and thus nothing to build. Note that AEW was doing pretty well in the build to Full Gear, but once that PPV was over and there was no new PPV in sight viewers started tuning out in droves. You really need to build to stuff on a regular basis, even if a lot of viewers don't buy the PPV they at least stay tuned to see what happens.

[Can you afford to pay me, Gah]

Dec 26, 2019 9:37:00 GMT -5 cabbageboy said:

There's always using a VPN and going to Fite.tv. 20 bucks that way. That said, I think AEW should consider a monthly PPV, or at least a 6 PPV a year model with a reduced rate of 30 bucks or so. First off, it would bring in more revenue than the 4 PPV model. Second, and this is the more understated aspect, 4 PPVs just make for some deadly dull TV since there's such huge time periods between PPVs and thus nothing to build. Note that AEW was doing pretty well in the build to Full Gear, but once that PPV was over and there was no new PPV in sight viewers started tuning out in droves. You really need to build to stuff on a regular basis, even if a lot of viewers don't buy the PPV they at least stay tuned to see what happens.

I'm fine with the 4 PPV format but in between they should at less have a classic "clash of champions" event in between. Just something to build up too I think makes sense. PPVs have to do well overall to make money because the % of the money that the providers take and what the company takes home, which is why the price is what they are. Once a month wouldn't change the price. More PPVs doesn't make prices cheaper, it's the PPV market itself.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

I didn't think I'd ever buy one of their PPVs but Omega vs Moxley got me hyped enough to do it.

Going on HBO Max is an interesting idea though I can't even begin to comment on the business side of it and whether that makes sense for any of the involved companies.

[Zone Was Wrong]

The fact they have months in between ppvs helps a lot. It'll be over 5 months between the last ppv and the next which helps with my state of mind when thinking about purchasing it.

[Deleted]

I like having a big 4

[Instant Classic]

In this day in age I will never buy a ppv more than 9.99.

[cabbageboy]

If they insist on 4 major PPVs then they need some smaller Clash style shows or even the recent mini Takeover NXT did (Cole/Balor, Ripley/Shayna). You have to build to someone though, because otherwise shows just feel meandering.

[Cyno]

UFC seems to do just fine with its even more expensive PPV's. Even WWE still sells PPV's through the traditional format as not everyone can get WWE Network, and they are more expensive than AEW's btw; Hell In A Cell and TLC were both $55 buys on my cable provider. I'd have to imagine the big shows like the Royal Rumble and especially Wrestlemania are even more expensive. I don't think AEW will abandon the traditional PPV format even if an option opens up like HBO Max or an AEW Network down the line.

[Deleted]

To be fair, the current model of having a PPV event every month is actually a deterrent as a wrestling or even a combat sports fan. WWE only half-asses it 2 1/2 months out of the year to justify watching their shows on the Network, and given how AEW currently relies on the traditional pay-per-view model to show their biggest events (which will likely be Revolution, Double or Nothing, All Out, and Full Gear), it will probably be for the best to stick to just doing regular "supercards" on Dynamite or stuff like Fight For the Fallen that can build to the PPV events.

How long can they keep it remains to be seen, but perhaps having less shows, not more, may be better in the long run.

[4TheGlory]

As long as people keep buying them (which so far they are) they have no reason to just practically give away their best shows as added content to HBO's streaming service or any one else's. PPV is proving to be a major money maker for them.

For example Full Gear did around 110,000 buys. So at 50 dollars a pop that's 5.5 million dollars in one night.

[XIII]

Dec 26, 2019 19:19:12 GMT -5 4TheGlory said:

As long as people keep buying them (which so far they are) they have no reason to just practically give away their best shows as added content to HBO's streaming service or any one else's. PPV is proving to be a major money maker for them.

For example Full Gear did around 110,000 buys. So at 50 dollars a pop that's 5.5 million dollars in one night.

I would imagine that the cable/PPV provider takes an insane cut of that, and then they still have to pay out all of the expenses and talent and it’s probably not a huge profit.

[Cyno]

The WWE Network model probably makes more sense for WWE because they run so many PPV shows a year in addition to a larger customer base. It got to a point where people would only get Wrestlemania or the other big shows while skipping the B-tier shows. This way instead of getting only $50-60 a pop for Wrestlemania or the Rumble, they get $120 a year from more people (as $10 a month is more palatable than $50+ upfront), and more eyeballs get on their non-Big Four events. Which in turn means more sponsorship revenue. The other content on the Network keeps people subscribed.

Something like that just isn't feasible for AEW yet. Traditional PPV + B/R Live makes more sense for them right now. Their PPV's do around 100k buys more or less and I don't think the jump in total buys would offset the lessened cost from a Network-style model, nor do they have the back libraries or content to support such a thing.

[KofiMania]

Dec 26, 2019 20:12:05 GMT -5 XIII said:

Dec 26, 2019 19:19:12 GMT -5 4TheGlory said:

As long as people keep buying them (which so far they are) they have no reason to just practically give away their best shows as added content to HBO's streaming service or any one else's. PPV is proving to be a major money maker for them.

For example Full Gear did around 110,000 buys. So at 50 dollars a pop that's 5.5 million dollars in one night.

I would imagine that the cable/PPV provider takes an insane cut of that, and then they still have to pay out all of the expenses and talent and it’s probably not a huge profit.

Yes, I believe the PPV providers take at least 50%.

[KofiMania]

Dec 26, 2019 20:18:07 GMT -5 Cyno said:

The WWE Network model probably makes more sense for WWE because they run so many PPV shows a year in addition to a larger customer base. It got to a point where people would only get Wrestlemania or the other big shows while skipping the B-tier shows. This way instead of getting only $50-60 a pop for Wrestlemania or the Rumble, they get $120 a year from more people (as $10 a month is more palatable than $50+ upfront), and more eyeballs get on their non-Big Four events. Which in turn means more sponsorship revenue. The other content on the Network keeps people subscribed.

Something like that just isn't feasible for AEW yet. Traditional PPV + B/R Live makes more sense for them right now. Their PPV's do around 100k buys more or less and I don't think the jump in total buys would offset the lessened cost from a Network-style model, nor do they have the back libraries or content to support such a thing.

They could do PPVs for cheaper on BR/Live and probably make a similar amount of money while getting more eyes on their product. PPV providers take 50% of the cut.

[Redbeard's Ghost]

Depending on their deal with TNT, I would like to see a quarterly "TV PPV" like the Clash of the Champions option some have mentioned. Even better would be if it could run on Monday or Friday night opposite WWE's main roster shows. These could be used as vehicles to drive more PPV buys for the big four shows, while serving as waypoint for the smaller feuds that could build to the big shows.

[Cyno]

Dec 26, 2019 20:34:39 GMT -5 KofiMania said:

Dec 26, 2019 20:18:07 GMT -5 Cyno said:

The WWE Network model probably makes more sense for WWE because they run so many PPV shows a year in addition to a larger customer base. It got to a point where people would only get Wrestlemania or the other big shows while skipping the B-tier shows. This way instead of getting only $50-60 a pop for Wrestlemania or the Rumble, they get $120 a year from more people (as $10 a month is more palatable than $50+ upfront), and more eyeballs get on their non-Big Four events. Which in turn means more sponsorship revenue. The other content on the Network keeps people subscribed.

Something like that just isn't feasible for AEW yet. Traditional PPV + B/R Live makes more sense for them right now. Their PPV's do around 100k buys more or less and I don't think the jump in total buys would offset the lessened cost from a Network-style model, nor do they have the back libraries or content to support such a thing.

They could do PPVs for cheaper on BR/Live and probably make a similar amount of money while getting more eyes on their product. PPV providers take 50% of the cut.

It's also a really bad idea to piss off the providers as a fledgling company and it's likely why the cost is so high on B/R Live. WWE did it when they put PPV's on the Network, but they were able to use their history and position in the market to smooth over any hard feelings.  AEW has none of those things yet.

[eJm]

Dec 26, 2019 21:01:38 GMT -5 Cyno said:

Dec 26, 2019 20:34:39 GMT -5 KofiMania said:

They could do PPVs for cheaper on BR/Live and probably make a similar amount of money while getting more eyes on their product. PPV providers take 50% of the cut.

It's also a really bad idea to piss off the providers as a fledgling company and it's likely why the cost is so high on B/R Live. WWE did it when they put PPV's on the Network, but they were able to use their history and position in the market to smooth over any hard feelings.  AEW has none of those things yet.

I mean, not everywhere. Doing that with Sky in the UK and Ireland is literally a key reason why they’re moving to BT Sport in January.