The WWE Network just achieved its first milestone. Broadcasting Wrestlemania 30 live, over the internet across the US. It was a big moment for the Network and had they got the stream wrong, had something techincally failed, then it could have soured a lot of people on what is already a tough sell to WWE shareholders. Luckily for the WWE it was widely reported that Wresltemania streamed without problems (barring an audio issue during the preshow). This marks a special moment and a bold step forward for the WWE as they move into the next thirty years.
When the WWE Network was announced it was met with surprise and trepidation. The Network was long rumoured to be a cable channel, the idea evolved and at CES Vince McMahon announced a 24/7 streaming plan that included WWE's ludicrous back catalogue and all WWE PPV's. A bold move which went over the cable networks to provide a service directly to the consumer over the internet. A bold move which offers all PPV's within the ten dollar a month subscription, serving up massive savings to subscribers and possibly cannibalising future traditional PPV sales. As Forbes stated in one of their articles “it's risky, exciting and deeply unconventional”. Forbes also put WWE's required subscribers at one million to break even (covering for lost conventional PPV buyrates).
The bold move wasn't without backlash though as several PPV distributors felt blind sided and were re-evaluating their stance on carrying WWE PPV's. Shareholders were also concerned with the Networks bold aspirations with Intrepid Capital Management (WWE's largest outside shareholder) sold it's 10% stake in the company in January. According to Forbes, Jayme Wiggins, Intrepid portfolio manager, estimated the amount of die hard WWE fans who would subscribe to the Network at 700,000 and that gaining another 500,000 on top of that would not be easy.
Fast forward to Monday morning (the morning after Mania), WWE announced that the total amount of subscribers to the WWE Network was currently at 667,287. This is just 42 days after the Network launched in the US and well on the way to their 1 million goal by the end of the year. However on the same day, WWE stock fell 19% (according to Forbes) despite making headlines across the world as Undertaker's legendary streak ended. Analysts at Barron's (financial news) stated that the 667,000 + subscriber number was not enough of a success to counter potential pay per view buy rate loss.
What does all this mean? Was the Network a failure or a success? In truth I think it's a bit of both. The WWE Network managed to pass the first great hurdle (live streaming the biggest event of the year) with flying colours. Trepidation from buyers after previous live stream failures (The Oscars come to mind) could have reduced that number and caused people to opt to buy the pay per view traditionally (or not at all). The modest success of the Network isn't profitable right out of the gate however it's a bold, forward thinking move which, if it survives the first two years, will put WWE ahead of 90% of the entertainment industry. It's future proof if it works, something which could also have been said about the results of Wrestlemania.
Wrestlemania 30 will do gown in history as one of the most memorable events for two reasons. The crowning of Daniel Bryan as WWE World Heavyweight Champion and the end of the Undertaker's legendary undefeated streak. There was a lot of cynicism leading into Wrestlemania (with good reason). Fans, especially internet die hards, weren't convinced about the WWE's intentions to put their faith in the future and they certainly weren't convinced that Brock Lesnar would be the one to end the streak and yet both happened. WWE showcased their younger talent and accentuated their success with veterans and “marquee” names. Cesaro won the Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal, tossing out The Big Show in the process. Daniel Bryan over came every conceivable odd defeating HHH, Batista and Randy Orton in the same night to finally get his hands on the on the coveted WWE World Heavyweight Championship.
Arguably the biggest surprise was the breaking of Undertaker's undefeated streak at Wrestlemania. To me this result goes hand in hand with the bold WWE Network. A look towards the future. It could be argued that the Streak had become too big for the WWE and the Undertaker. There must have been an tremendous amount of pressure on the Undertaker to stay healthy for one, important, match of the year. As his age crept up on him, the quality of those matches began to degrade. Conversely, the amount of a draw The Streak” became increased year after year for several years, plateauing, in my view, at Wrestlemania 28. The Streak restricted storyline possibility with each years angle becoming increasingly more the same. Fans began to not believe in opponents capability in breaking the streak and when it seemed their belief in the streak being broken was at an all time low (there was little to no reaction for near falls during the Lesnar/Taker match) it ended.
It was a bold move and one that put a 22 year legacy to bed. We could argue whether or not Brock was “deserving” of breaking the streak but it had to end at some point. It could have ended badly with Undertaker's ageing body struggling to compete at such a high level but luckily, so far (reports of Undertaker's serious concussion are still coming in), it didn't.
The Network has got off to a cautiously optimistic start. WWE's production style of Wrestlemania 30 was a stark difference from Wrestlemania 29. A severe lack of charity and corporate video packages, live music segments, and the focus on the younger generation of the roster is a cautiously optimistic start to a new era. Can we be cautiously optimistic about the WWE's future? Or are we headed for heartbreak as booking moves into a direction the IWC doesn't agree with again?
I think a little optimism never hurt anyone.
-SortaCreative
