WWE/USA network update

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

If Matthew's point is that a wrestling only channel owned by the WWE would put more time into promoting Raw, that's probably accurate.

 

If his point means ANYTHING else, it's the craziest thinking I've heard all week. I wish I could live in a world where an OnDemand channel with a limited subscriber base (or as his scenario seems to be, not 24/7, but some new upstart channel that apparently is able to get on every cable system and have a more penetration than the well established USA network) is considered more exposure than the 3 million homes that watch Raw on basic cable.

[Celtic Jobber 0]

My local cable company doesn't even offer InDemand period, much less WWE 24/7. I'm sure many people would never be able to watch WWE if it only existed on their own network.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Itd be like the NFL Network, Im sure Vince would have trouble getting carriage early but eventually I think all the cable companies that carry 24/7 would carry it as well and Im sure Directv/Dish Network would too. it'd be in the Sports Tier or similar level. I dont see how its any different from the Tennis Channel, Golf Channel or Boxing Channel, niche sports that have their own networks. Hell, even ratings starved as the NHL is, they're getting their own network, and the NHL made about the same amount of money ($400 million) as the WWF did.

 

How is a cable network a bad thing? Non wrestling fans might be more apt to watch if there was an entire network and the schedule had showings of RAW/SD/ECW multiple times, as well as OVW Shows, classic shows. Vince wouldnt need to put much money out for it since Im sure they have the production facilities in Stamford to do it now.

 

Fact is, at some point, the Money Vince could make by this Wrestling venture will outweigh the money he'll get from USA or any other network given the current state of Wrestling in general. And he'd be ahead of the game in terms of having a cable network, an on demand service and a internet presence.

[Jingus 0]

Also, don't underestimate the sheer number of people in rural areas who can't get cable, period. I live in a well-populated little suburb maybe half an hour's drive from downtown Dallas, and we don't get cable here, it's either sattelite or nothing.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Itd be like the NFL Network, Im sure Vince would have trouble getting carriage early but eventually I think all the cable companies that carry 24/7 would carry it as well and Im sure Directv/Dish Network would too. it'd be in the Sports Tier or similar level. I dont see how its any different from the Tennis Channel, Golf Channel or Boxing Channel, niche sports that have their own networks. Hell, even ratings starved as the NHL is, they're getting their own network, and the NHL made about the same amount of money ($400 million) as the WWF did.

 

How is a cable network a bad thing? Non wrestling fans might be more apt to watch if there was an entire network and the schedule had showings of RAW/SD/ECW multiple times, as well as OVW Shows, classic shows. Vince wouldnt need to put much money out for it since Im sure they have the production facilities in Stamford to do it now.

 

Fact is, at some point, the Money Vince could make by this Wrestling venture will outweigh the money he'll get from USA or any other network given the current state of Wrestling in general. And he'd be ahead of the game in terms of having a cable network, an on demand service and a internet presence.

And how exactly would Vince make this big money, that would outweigh the money he'd get from USA or another network?

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Wouldn't Vince actually lose money on this? He'd have to pay to get the network on as a channel/service then garner ZERO ad rates that he could use to make up the losses? His only chance would be to hike the price for the service at a ridiculously high price, a price not many wrestling fans are willing to meet. I think WWE 24/7 is the best gauge of how successful a WWE network would be, and as far as I know, it is not as successful as it needs to be to make it the primary network for original WWE programming.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Wouldn't Vince actually lose money on this? He'd have to pay to get the network on as a channel/service then garner ZERO ad rates that he could use to make up the losses? His only chance would be to hike the price for the service at a ridiculously high price, a price not many wrestling fans are willing to meet. I think WWE 24/7 is the best gauge of how successful a WWE network would be, and as far as I know, it is not as successful as it needs to be to make it the primary network for original WWE programming.

I know something like 40 cable companies carry WWF 24/7 although I dont know how many actually subscribe. But, if it were put on a sports tier of a cable/satellite company, all of their subscribers would pay for it regardless of whether or not they watch the channel at all.

Good example is NFL Network which charges cable/sat companies $.75 a subscriber, which some saw as too high, but eventually its carried now to almost 60 million households. If those 40 cable companies + Directv and Dish (which are roughly 20 million subs alone and dont offer 24/7 yet) add WWENet (or whatever the hell Vince called it) I could see about 40 million subscribers. 40 million subscribers x $.15 a subscriber (a really low price for a cable channel) would $6 million a month alone (or $18 million per quarter) not counting advertising rates that they wouldnt have to share or take a small cut of. WWF made $24 million in the 2nd quarter this year on their tv deal and it looks like that will be lower given the USA deal getting lowered. Granted I dont know all the details of how much it would cost to run the network but still..

 

I saw the general figure to set up a cable network is $100 million, however I do believe that the WWF probably has the equipment already in place to do it so they could probably save 1/2 of that easily.

[Bix 0]

WWE 24/7 was specifically launched as video on demand as opposed to a regularly broadcasting channel because it was easier to get clearances that way.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

What the hell is World Wildlife Fund 24/7? That infomercial they air, but on a channel 24 hours a day?

[Jingus 0]

I saw the general figure to set up a cable network is $100 million, however I do believe that the WWF probably has the equipment already in place to do it so they could probably save 1/2 of that easily.

No Marvin, they don't already have the equipment. Producing a TV show and DVDs is completely, entirely different from broadcasting an entire cable channel. It's a whole separate setup.

[CanadianChris 0]

Wouldn't Vince actually lose money on this? He'd have to pay to get the network on as a channel/service then garner ZERO ad rates that he could use to make up the losses? His only chance would be to hike the price for the service at a ridiculously high price, a price not many wrestling fans are willing to meet. I think WWE 24/7 is the best gauge of how successful a WWE network would be, and as far as I know, it is not as successful as it needs to be to make it the primary network for original WWE programming.

I know something like 40 cable companies carry WWF 24/7 although I dont know how many actually subscribe. But, if it were put on a sports tier of a cable/satellite company, all of their subscribers would pay for it regardless of whether or not they watch the channel at all.

Good example is NFL Network which charges cable/sat companies $.75 a subscriber, which some saw as too high, but eventually its carried now to almost 60 million households. If those 40 cable companies + Directv and Dish (which are roughly 20 million subs alone and dont offer 24/7 yet) add WWENet (or whatever the hell Vince called it) I could see about 40 million subscribers. 40 million subscribers x $.15 a subscriber (a really low price for a cable channel) would $6 million a month alone (or $18 million per quarter) not counting advertising rates that they wouldnt have to share or take a small cut of. WWF made $24 million in the 2nd quarter this year on their tv deal and it looks like that will be lower given the USA deal getting lowered. Granted I dont know all the details of how much it would cost to run the network but still..

 

I saw the general figure to set up a cable network is $100 million, however I do believe that the WWF probably has the equipment already in place to do it so they could probably save 1/2 of that easily.

The NFL Network is a terrible example, as they're only able to charge what they do because they're the exclusive carrier for several NFL games and can put the squeeze on carriers through their huge audience of fans that want to see the games. WWE has no such leverage.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I subscribe to WWE 24/7 as it's relatively affordable at $6.95 a month and a good value. I would NOT upgrade my cable service simply to watch professional wrestling.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

In the UK and some of Europe, we get a free wrestling channel via Sky. It used to show the TNA Weekly PPVs (6 months behind), and then iMPACT (2 weeks behind), as well as a selection of Indy promotions (CZW, ROH, Memphis). However, the quality was horrible, bad audio and low bit carrier streams, and they'd cut up and reorder cards how they saw fit - or at least that's how they bought the tapes.

 

However, if you can up with that, its pretty decent - though in recent times, it has turned into an MMA channel with a little selection of Indy shows (UK based) and some really old repeated Super Card shows that they used to show 4 years ago. The channel draws really low figures and each year it survives seems to surprise me, considering how much it costs to broadcast a TV show across the SKY frequencies, let alone production costs and buying library tapes to show.

 

A WWE Wrestling Channel, that would show Raw, Smackdown, ECW and the PPV, as well as the content on WWE 24/7 would be ok, but I don't think it would really draw the numbers required to make it worthwhile. The only attraction that the UK Wrestling Channel had, was that it offered a wide spectrum of shows to watch and it was free, would people really subscribe to a WWE wrestling channel to watch Raw, SD, ECW and PPVs given the current state of the shows?

[Toxxic 0]

When TWC lost TNA to Bravo 2 the only good thing it really had left was ROH (if you can stand seeing half a show at a time) and NOAH (the continuity of which I don't know about, and just enjoy the wrestling). I mean, I did change from ntl to Sky to get The Wrestling Channel, but that was a couple of years ago when they had TNA on and showed less shitty MMA.

 

(I'm not saying MMA is shitty. But the stuff they show is shitty).

[justcoz 0]

Wouldn't Vince actually lose money on this? He'd have to pay to get the network on as a channel/service then garner ZERO ad rates that he could use to make up the losses? His only chance would be to hike the price for the service at a ridiculously high price, a price not many wrestling fans are willing to meet. I think WWE 24/7 is the best gauge of how successful a WWE network would be, and as far as I know, it is not as successful as it needs to be to make it the primary network for original WWE programming.

I know something like 40 cable companies carry WWF 24/7 although I dont know how many actually subscribe. But, if it were put on a sports tier of a cable/satellite company, all of their subscribers would pay for it regardless of whether or not they watch the channel at all.

Good example is NFL Network which charges cable/sat companies $.75 a subscriber, which some saw as too high, but eventually its carried now to almost 60 million households. If those 40 cable companies + Directv and Dish (which are roughly 20 million subs alone and dont offer 24/7 yet) add WWENet (or whatever the hell Vince called it) I could see about 40 million subscribers. 40 million subscribers x $.15 a subscriber (a really low price for a cable channel) would $6 million a month alone (or $18 million per quarter) not counting advertising rates that they wouldnt have to share or take a small cut of. WWF made $24 million in the 2nd quarter this year on their tv deal and it looks like that will be lower given the USA deal getting lowered. Granted I dont know all the details of how much it would cost to run the network but still..

 

I saw the general figure to set up a cable network is $100 million, however I do believe that the WWF probably has the equipment already in place to do it so they could probably save 1/2 of that easily.

 

I think this is the general direction they are headed. Their popularity has declined and the cable networks aren't going to see any value at all in their programming if they aren't going to at least pop a decent cable rating. They are okay right now but with their numbers declining and some of the other shows on cable getting monster numbers, with competition that used to be on big networks like MNF and the MLB playoffs now on cable, their programming means less and less every year. They are no longer the premiere company on cable. They are no longer the kings of PPV. They've bombed on network television with NBC's attempts to revive SNME. Pretty much the only thing they have going for them is they monopolize wrestling for the most part.

 

Their tape library is extremely important. Whether the current product is popular or not there will always be people that "used to watch wrestling". Your friends, people in your family, etc. There is no reason to think that someone won't want to watch old Nitro and Raws or ECW, WCW, NWA, AWA, World Class, PPV's, etc. My grandpap hates everything about WWE right now but he loves those Jim Ross Legends of Wrestling roundtables. WWE 24/7 would probably be more successful if they did a better job marketing the programming. I even think they could have clearance for a non subscription channel and get advertising if they handle everything correctly. They'd probably pick up some respectable numbers along side shows on USA, Spike, Comedy Central, MTV, etc.

 

They need to one up that. They need to finish off acquring other tape libraries like Mid South/UWF, Memphis, St. Louis, Portland, Stampede and take that International as well. Work out deals with Japan, Mexico and Puerto Rico. This would round out the classic programming.

 

I think they should farm ROH and other U.S. indies like they did ECW back in the day. Televise ROH stuff along with OVW, Florida and any other regional developmental they put together. Maybe even make access to those particular shows an online ON DEMAND subscription. The free network could plug ON DEMAND online programming like classic PPV's or DVD releases to generate some revenue that way. Another revenue generator they could use the network for would be to promote touring Legend Conventions where they ship out guys like Roddy Piper, Jimmy Snuka, Ted Dibiase, etc. for meet and greets.

 

They could produce some interesting television. The retrospectives they have on WWE 24/7 and Confidential style pieces on current and legendary talent. They could show angles, matches, random segments, in MTV video style or broadcast entire classic shows from the past. Their current programming would have Raw, Smackdown, ECW, magazine type pieces, maybe even arena house shows, and special productions like WWE's own versions of Cribs, I Love the 80's, JBL financial advice, etc. Not to mention whenever they get their own international territories running.

 

[Diamonddust 0]

Wouldn't Vince actually lose money on this? He'd have to pay to get the network on as a channel/service then garner ZERO ad rates that he could use to make up the losses? His only chance would be to hike the price for the service at a ridiculously high price, a price not many wrestling fans are willing to meet. I think WWE 24/7 is the best gauge of how successful a WWE network would be, and as far as I know, it is not as successful as it needs to be to make it the primary network for original WWE programming.

I know something like 40 cable companies carry WWF 24/7 although I dont know how many actually subscribe. But, if it were put on a sports tier of a cable/satellite company, all of their subscribers would pay for it regardless of whether or not they watch the channel at all.

Good example is NFL Network which charges cable/sat companies $.75 a subscriber, which some saw as too high, but eventually its carried now to almost 60 million households. If those 40 cable companies + Directv and Dish (which are roughly 20 million subs alone and dont offer 24/7 yet) add WWENet (or whatever the hell Vince called it) I could see about 40 million subscribers. 40 million subscribers x $.15 a subscriber (a really low price for a cable channel) would $6 million a month alone (or $18 million per quarter) not counting advertising rates that they wouldnt have to share or take a small cut of. WWF made $24 million in the 2nd quarter this year on their tv deal and it looks like that will be lower given the USA deal getting lowered. Granted I dont know all the details of how much it would cost to run the network but still..

 

I saw the general figure to set up a cable network is $100 million, however I do believe that the WWF probably has the equipment already in place to do it so they could probably save 1/2 of that easily.

 

I think this is the general direction they are headed. Their popularity has declined and the cable networks aren't going to see any value at all in their programming if they aren't going to at least pop a decent cable rating. They are okay right now but with their numbers declining and some of the other shows on cable getting monster numbers, with competition that used to be on big networks like MNF and the MLB playoffs now on cable, their programming means less and less every year. They are no longer the premiere company on cable. They are no longer the kings of PPV. They've bombed on network television with NBC's attempts to revive SNME. Pretty much the only thing they have going for them is they monopolize wrestling for the most part.

 

Their tape library is extremely important. Whether the current product is popular or not there will always be people that "used to watch wrestling". Your friends, people in your family, etc. There is no reason to think that someone won't want to watch old Nitro and Raws or ECW, WCW, NWA, AWA, World Class, PPV's, etc. My grandpap hates everything about WWE right now but he loves those Jim Ross Legends of Wrestling roundtables. WWE 24/7 would probably be more successful if they did a better job marketing the programming. I even think they could have clearance for a non subscription channel and get advertising if they handle everything correctly. They'd probably pick up some respectable numbers along side shows on USA, Spike, Comedy Central, MTV, etc.

 

They need to one up that. They need to finish off acquring other tape libraries like Mid South/UWF, Memphis, St. Louis, Portland, Stampede and take that International as well. Work out deals with Japan, Mexico and Puerto Rico. This would round out the classic programming.

 

I think they should farm ROH and other U.S. indies like they did ECW back in the day. Televise ROH stuff along with OVW, Florida and any other regional developmental they put together. Maybe even make access to those particular shows an online ON DEMAND subscription. The free network could plug ON DEMAND online programming like classic PPV's or DVD releases to generate some revenue that way. Another revenue generator they could use the network for would be to promote touring Legend Conventions where they ship out guys like Roddy Piper, Jimmy Snuka, Ted Dibiase, etc. for meet and greets.

 

They could produce some interesting television. The retrospectives they have on WWE 24/7 and Confidential style pieces on current and legendary talent. They could show angles, matches, random segments, in MTV video style or broadcast entire classic shows from the past. Their current programming would have Raw, Smackdown, ECW, magazine type pieces, maybe even arena house shows, and special productions like WWE's own versions of Cribs, I Love the 80's, JBL financial advice, etc. Not to mention whenever they get their own international territories running.

 

They have access to all those libraries with the exception of Mid-South. Bill Watts' ex-wife owns that collection, and her asking price must be outrageous for McMahon not to have already purchased it.

[Bix 0]

They don't have Memphis (muddy ownership, they get to use some footage that exists via other libraries), St. Louis (owned by The Fight Network), or Portland (no actual master library, rights owned by Barry Owen and licensed to WWE for the Piper DVD set).

[Kizzo 0]

I think this is the general direction they are headed. Their popularity has declined and the cable networks aren't going to see any value at all in their programming if they aren't going to at least pop a decent cable rating. They are okay right now but with their numbers declining and some of the other shows on cable getting monster numbers, with competition that used to be on big networks like MNF and the MLB playoffs now on cable, their programming means less and less every year. They are no longer the premiere company on cable. They are no longer the kings of PPV. They've bombed on network television with NBC's attempts to revive SNME. Pretty much the only thing they have going for them is they monopolize wrestling for the most part.

 

Great point... More and more POPULAR content is being moved to cable. With the move of MNF to cable last year(brining in record numbers), and now MLB Playoffs on cable it is no longer the premier company on cable as you stated. Its a different ball game now.

[Diamonddust 0]

They don't have Memphis (muddy ownership, they get to use some footage that exists via other libraries), St. Louis (owned by The Fight Network), or Portland (no actual master library, rights owned by Barry Owen and licensed to WWE for the Piper DVD set).

 

Gotcha.

 

I thought they had St. Louis since Crockett had bought that promotion out and was part of the purchase Turner initially made.

 

As for Memphis, I guess the pre-AWA/WCCW/USWA involvement footage they've used is owned directly by Lawler or something along those lines.

[Bix 0]

They don't have Memphis (muddy ownership, they get to use some footage that exists via other libraries), St. Louis (owned by The Fight Network), or Portland (no actual master library, rights owned by Barry Owen and licensed to WWE for the Piper DVD set).

 

Gotcha.

 

I thought they had St. Louis since Crockett had bought that promotion out and was part of the purchase Turner initially made.

I have been wondering about this lately, as it didn't really make sense that Larry Matysik had the rights unless he accquired them later on from Muchnick or KPLR. As far as Crockett, keep in mind that they didn't get the video libraries of any of the territories they bought out other than GCW.

 

As for Memphis, I guess the pre-AWA/WCCW/USWA involvement footage they've used is owned directly by Lawler or something along those lines.

The belief is that technically, the Selker brothers (the guys conned by Lawler into overpaying for the USWA) own the rights, but either don't know or don't care. Lawler & Hart have used Memphis footage on the Opening The Vault show, segments on current Memphis TV, etc w/o repurcussions, but whatever rights they may or may not have isn't good enough for WWE to try to buy it.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

A bunch of the Memphis footage was used for the Andy Kaufman "I'm From Hollywood" documentary. Not sure where the rights came from there, but it certainly seems Memphis stuff is more freely available than any other promotion. (Except maybe the Dumont footage from the '50s.)

[cabbageboy 0]

There are also a few clips tossed onto WWE DVDs from Memphis, just stuff like Joe LeDuc tossing Lawler onto the announce table. Or Lawler beating Hennig for the AWA title (though this might be from the AWA library?). Lawler vs. Funk in the empty arena was on 24/7 a while back.

 

I think one problem is that Memphis footage just looks like crap anyway in terms of video quality.

[Bix 0]

The LeDuc clip was short enough to probably fall completely under the radar, Lawler-Hennig was just the post-match interview on the WWE DVD which I'm sure aired on AWA TV, and Lawler-Funk aired in other territories including Florida.

 

There is plenty of master stuff that looks great. Lawler has some, I believe Jimmy Hart & WMC TV have some, PM Film has some via ICW, Jeff Osborne has some he got at a garage sale (really), Cornette might have some (and has a lot of off-air recordings that could be restored like the St. Louis was), and there may be a little more I'm forgetting. It might not be as much as other libraries, but it's out there.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I saw the general figure to set up a cable network is $100 million, however I do believe that the WWF probably has the equipment already in place to do it so they could probably save 1/2 of that easily.

No Marvin, they don't already have the equipment. Producing a TV show and DVDs is completely, entirely different from broadcasting an entire cable channel. It's a whole separate setup.

WWF has at least one satellite truck (maybe 2?) and at least one satellite at their production facility in Stamford. The one in Stamford is used to accept the live broadcast of the Smackdown tapings so they can edit it and send it back to the CW via satellite. (I know this because I used to be able to watch the RAW feed live without commercials and the edited broadcast version of Smackdown on my huge C-Band dish several years ago) But Im sure it could be modified to send the WWF Network feed just as easily. Which is why I say they could save about half the ammount typically needed because they wont have to do much upgrading with their production studios in Stamford, especially given they're already upgrading to HD to be top of the line equipment wise.

 

 

[Jingus 0]

Marvin, have you ever been in a TV studio? Trust me, there's a LOT of incredibly specialized equipment. Hell, you need your own complicated and expensive computer setup just to be able to cut to commercial at the right time. And the WWE doesn't own a satellite, those suckers easily run into the billion-dollar price tag, they just rent satellite time like every other small television business out there. And yes, I said small. WWE wouldn't even be a pimple on the ass of a company like Fox.

 

Plus there's all kinds of new costs that would come along with trying to run a new cable company. USA pays them to be on the air, why would the WWE want to expend all the time, money, and effort it would take to do it themselves? You'd have to buy new equipment, buy new office and production space, hire a shitload of new people, spend an obscene amount of money on satellite time, go get all your commercial sponsors yourself (ones that want to advertise on an all-wrestling channel which would almost certainly draw pathetic ratings, good luck). Plus, Vince has made it very clear that he thinks he's "above" professional wrestling, that his true competition is stuff like American Idol and 24. I seriously, seriously doubt he would ever air Raw or Smackdown on the same channel with other wrestling content.

[Kawalimus 0]

If WWE went to a pay network had to pay watch it all the time I'd would stop watching wrestling period.

 

And you say No network gonna take WWE but like I said it's easy to do that when there's no offer on the table. Look at The Wire season 2, Frank Sobotka said he was done dealing with those Greeks. But then when they offered pay him triple? He changed his mind. Just like it's easy for TBS to say now they wouldn't take wrestling, but when they get opportunity for many fans come in and watch their station, they will think harder .

[Jingus 0]

TBS had wrestling. Wrestling that was drawing similar ratings to what Raw got last week. And they actively chose to get rid of it, and sold it off for pennies on the dollar just to do so quickly. Ted Turner himself was the one whose will kept WCW running for so long, the rest of his staff couldn't stand it.

[justcoz 0]

While WWE setting up and establishing their own network seems highly unlikely and expensive, is it any more expensive or unreasonable as the idea of establishing international territories overseas, creating new superstars continent to continent, overseas television production, house shows, offices, etc? Is it any more unreasonable than the XFL or WWE Films or whatever else they've thrown away money with?

 

The McMahons are so hell bent on being more than a 'wrestling company' that they are completely overlooking the fact that they are essentially the NFL of their business. Vince did exactly what he wanted to do in the 80's Pretty much anyone, from any region in the U.S., that watched wrestling in the 70's, 80's or 90's, whether they like the current product or not, rely on WWE to see the wrestling they grew up with. I think the AWA, Ric Flair/Horsemen and ECW (pre re-launch) DVD's proved that WWE can make money from those people if they market something that appeals to them. I think even WWE 24/7 in its current form would be more successful if promoted better. They don't even promote it well enough to their current audience let alone the audience they've lost with the current product.

 

Obviously asking that potential audience to pay for a subscription to programming is a downfall and getting advertisers on board for the network to be carried in all homes with a cable package is troublesome too. What is the demographic? Teenagers will watch the current product but would they be watching wrestling from the 80's? 18-34 covers a lot of that audience chunk, people that grew up with Hogan and Flair, but there will also be people older than that demographic watching old stuff too. WWE can't get automobile, Coke/Pepsi and beer advertisers for their current programming let alone a network. So that's the biggest problem I think. Making the whole thing lucrative. They still haven't even come up with an income generating business model for WWE.com. I may be out of my mind but I don't think ratings for an all wrestling channel would be all that horrid. It would get channel surfers, maybe more so than the Golf network or whatever.

 

And it doesn't have to be 'all wrestling'. There could be programming geared towards the personalities in the company. In fact, that would be a big part of the production. Marketing the personalities. Old and new.

 

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Marvin, have you ever been in a TV studio? Trust me, there's a LOT of incredibly specialized equipment. Hell, you need your own complicated and expensive computer setup just to be able to cut to commercial at the right time. And the WWE doesn't own a satellite, those suckers easily run into the billion-dollar price tag, they just rent satellite time like every other small television business out there. And yes, I said small. WWE wouldn't even be a pimple on the ass of a company like Fox.

 

Plus there's all kinds of new costs that would come along with trying to run a new cable company. USA pays them to be on the air, why would the WWE want to expend all the time, money, and effort it would take to do it themselves? You'd have to buy new equipment, buy new office and production space, hire a shitload of new people, spend an obscene amount of money on satellite time, go get all your commercial sponsors yourself (ones that want to advertise on an all-wrestling channel which would almost certainly draw pathetic ratings, good luck). Plus, Vince has made it very clear that he thinks he's "above" professional wrestling, that his true competition is stuff like American Idol and 24. I seriously, seriously doubt he would ever air Raw or Smackdown on the same channel with other wrestling content.

 

Ok, for one, I should have added the word "dish" after satellite. A satellite dish does not cost a billion dollars and the WWF owns at least 2 of them, maybe more.

 

Plus, the WWFNet could run paid advertising a lot and make money off of that. And they'd get advertisers to sponsor their main shows (RAW/SD,ECW) but it would probably be hard to find them for the other shows.

 

And the benefit of getting their own network is that Cable/Sat subscribers pay for the channel even if they DONT watch the network at all. While a big network like NFL Network can get away with charging $.75 a subscriber, Im sure that Vince could get at least $.15 to $.20 (which is on the real low end for Cable Networks) which at 40 million subs would be $8 million a month alone.

 

 

[Bix 0]

I hope you understand that advertisers pay very little for ad space on wrestling shows.