Can the Cable Industry Smell What the WWE Is Cooking?

Is the new WWE Network a death blow for the cable companies' PPV business?

Jan 12, 2014 at 1:07PM

In announcing that its new network would offer all 12 of its pay-per-view events, including Wrestlemania, for a $9.99 a month fee, World Wrestling Entertainment (NYSE:WWE) has smashed a figurative folding chair across the back of the cable industry.

Currently, WWE's pay-per-views are offered through traditional cable company channels. In this arrangement, the cable company gets a large chunk of the money customers spend (around half, though deals vary among cable systems and satellite companies) without taking any risk. For its 12 PPVs, WWE pays all production costs and all the cable companies do is provide billing and transmit the show.

The arrangement has been good for both parties for years. WWE PPVs averaging around 150,000-200,000 domestic buys for its lesser shows, 300,000-500,000 for its bigger attractions, and a million or more for the group's Super Bowl, Wrestlemania. With prices ranging form $44.99 to $59.99 depending upon the event and whether you order it in HD, both the cable companies and WWE have made a lot of money.

A rake to the eyes of cable

For the WWE, however, this marriage with cable companies has been a necessary evil. Until fairly recently, it was not feasible to assume that the PPV audience would buy the shows on any platform other than traditional television. Efforts to sell traditional PPVs on strictly digital platforms have met with very modest results for WWE and, though many lesser wrestling groups do Internet-only iPPVs, these shows rarely get more than a couple thousand buys from diehard fans.

With its new network, however, WWE is going the Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) route and leaving the cable companies behind. For $9.99 a month (with a minimum six-month commitment), network subscribers get all 12 PPVs plus a variety of archival footage, new shows, and a chance to watch thousands of hours of old programs. The network will be available on virtually every platform Netflix is -- Roku, Andorid devices, Apple devices (including Apple TV), Xbox One and Xbox 360, and Google Chromecast, to name a few.

For anyone who was considering spending $59.99 to just get Wrestlemania, buying the network instead makes sense. PPVs will still be offered over traditional channels, but it seems unlikely that anyone except people who lack appropriate devices would opt for the new network. That's likely a tiny percentage of the WWE's fanbase.

Basically, the WWE gets the revenue certainty of having a base of subscribers and the company gets to keep a much larger percentage of the revenue. The cable companies get nothing but scraps.

Not without risks

The WWE's biggest source of revenue comes from selling rights to its flagship RAW and Smackdown programs. In the next year, as both of those deals come due, the company expects to be able to massively increase its rights fees because rights fees for sports have climbed steadily.

WWE, however, has spent years selling itself as a soap opera-style drama and not sports, so it's no guarantee, the company will the multiple suitors required to drive fees higher. In fact, the last time rights to RAW came up for auction, WWE had no suitors and ended up making a worse deal with USA than it previously had with Spike.

The network, however, may be a less risky proposition than it seems. On one hand, PPV has been a major source of revenue for the company, but fans pick and choose which PPVs to buy leaving wild uncertainty in the buy rates and revenue realized. The network not only takes that uncertainty away, it also removes WWE's incentives to spend millions on non-regular performers to spike a buy rate.

For example, in past years the company has given mufti-million dollar, limited-appearance deals to The Rock and Brock Lesnar to spike buy rates. With a fixed audience, those deals would be less necessary as the value of getting all 12 PPVs, plus all the added content, would outweigh any one-time special appearance.

According to WWE's financials, the company took $83.6 million in PPV revenue in 2012. If the company gets 1 million subscribers in year one, it would take in $119.9 million. Even if you assume 30% of that revenue would go to the services distributing and delivering the network, then the WWE would be taking in $83.9 million.

In its press release announcing the launch of the network, WWE said, "based on our market research, we estimate that a fully distributed domestic pay network could ultimately attract between 2 million and 3 million subscribers." If it reaches those numbers, it would potentially add hundreds of millions to the bottom line, while effectively crippling -- or worse -- the cable companies and the current PPV market.

PPV without WWE

The other major player on PPV, UFC, has already taken steps to create a similar network to WWE, albeit in a smaller way. It can be assumed that if a network works for WWE, it would work for UFC and that would leave cable with a couple of major boxing events and little else.

If the WWE Network works, and maybe even if it fails, it likely signals the end of the PPV gravy train for cable.

The next step

Want to figure out how to profit on business analysis like this? The key is to learn how to turn business insights into portfolio gold by taking your first steps as an investor. Those who wait on the sidelines are missing out on huge gains and putting their financial futures in jeopardy. In our brand-new special report, "Your Essential Guide to Start Investing Today," The Motley Fool's personal-finance experts show you what you need to get started, and even gives you access to some stocks to buy first. Click here to get your copy today -- it's absolutely free.

Fool contributor Daniel Kline has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

4 in 5 Americans Are Ignoring Buffett's Warning

Don't be one of them.

Jun 12, 2015 at 5:01PM

Admitting fear is difficult.

So you can imagine how shocked I was to find out Warren Buffett recently told a select number of investors about the cutting-edge technology that's keeping him awake at night.

This past May, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting. CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger fielded questions for nearly 6 hours.
The catch was: Attendees weren't allowed to record any of it. No audio. No video. 

Our team of analysts wrote down every single word Buffett and Munger uttered. Over 16,000 words. But only two words stood out to me as I read the detailed transcript of the event: "Real threat."

That's how Buffett responded when asked about this emerging market that is already expected to be worth more than $2 trillion in the U.S. alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend. 

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous, the rest of us can invest in this new industry BEFORE the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG advises we're "on the cusp of revolutionary change" coming much "sooner than you think."

Even one legendary MIT professor had to recant his position that the technology was "beyond the capability of computer science." (He recently confessed to The Wall Street Journal that he's now a believer and amazed "how quickly this technology caught on.")

Yet according to one J.D. Power and Associates survey, only 1 in 5 Americans are even interested in this technology, much less ready to invest in it. Needless to say, you haven't missed your window of opportunity. 

Think about how many amazing technologies you've watched soar to new heights while you kick yourself thinking, "I knew about that technology before everyone was talking about it, but I just sat on my hands." 

Don't let that happen again. This time, it should be your family telling you, "I can't believe you knew about and invested in that technology so early on."

That's why I hope you take just a few minutes to access the exclusive research our team of analysts has put together on this industry and the one stock positioned to capitalize on this major shift.

Click here to learn about this incredible technology before Buffett stops being scared and starts buying!

David Hanson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and American Express. The Motley Fool recommends and owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway, Google, and Coca-Cola.We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

©1995-2014 The Motley Fool. All rights reserved. | Privacy/Legal Information