When youre talking about the deal, theres the obvious questions: How long? How much? With whom? The fact that WWE hasnt announced a deal suggests theres at least two bidders and WWE is jumping through all the necessary hoops to drive the price up, but also to fulfill legal language that offers NBCU the ability to shell out matching rights for competitive bids. While I expected that any sign that WWE was stalling on announcing this TV rights deal would be met with negative reaction from the stock market, I dont really believe that's a bad omen for the deal. They havent done things at all in the order I expected. (I thought they wouldnt endanger their PPV and Home Entertainment businesses by hastily launching a costly WWE Network before they had locked down a secured domestic TV rights deal I was wrong.) While there isnt any outright evidence of who is winning or losing, there's some interesting datapoints that one can draw inferences from. For instance, NBCU is the incumbent. The USA network has had an incredibly long relationship with Vince McMahon which dates back to WWF programming joining the channel back in 1983. (Internationally, the UK deal was hotly contested between long-term partner BSkyB and upstart competitor BT Sports. In the end the BSkyB prevailed and retained the rights, though the deal was rumored to be worth triple the previous one.) The person in charge of programming, Bonnie Hammer, is an ally and USA network can afford what WWE will cost (according to a April 2014 Adweek profile: USA Network is the single most profitable network at the company; pure profit has exceeded $1 billion since 2012). The company continues to shake-up how they sell advertising and has a person appointed to handle sales for the biggest ratings generators: NBCUSA, Syfy and WWE programs. Expanding Raw to a weekly three-hour program was their idea (WWE was willing to take their money for it). When Smackdown needed a new home in October 2010 (following the MyNetworkTV run), it ended up on NBCUs SyFy. While WWE and NBCU couldnt come to an agreement back in February (NBCU was allowed to offer their bid prior to WWE opening up to the marketplace), thats no surprise. WWEs value is completely driven by their television contracts (there may come a day they can exist without the rights fees and television exposure, but thats a long way off). They know history (when WCW lost their TV programming, the companys fate was sealed) and they must be wary of trying to overplay their hand (as they did in the Spike renewals in 2005 when Viacom unceremonially ended negotiations via press release leaving WWE beginning USA for a television platform.) Unless a wealthy dark horse candidate appears from the blue, it seems likely that Monday Night Raw will be staying on USA for the time being. Likewise, the mild success (and excellent revenue) of Total Divas on E! suggests that the female-oriented, unscripted programming would stay on the E! network going forward. While the WWE Network has ruffled feathers, one of the real friction points in this deal is going to be rebroadcast rights. WWE desperately wants to start airing new episodes of Raw and Smackdown on the WWE Network in a narrow timeframe (same week if possible) but is currently prohibited from doing that based on current contracts. Meanwhile, a digital partner (and competitor) Hulu has that access to edited versions of Raw & Smackdown. This is a key clause that WWE wants to rework and one that may even cost them some money in exchange for the ability to get their new content on the WWE Network quicker. (In theory, this enables the WWE Network to become a true source of pro-wrestling content for the cord cutter who doesnt have cable/satellite but wants to watch weekly television and monthly PPVs.) The second-biggest player is likely Viacom who is angling for marque WWE programming for their Spike network. Spike, like many cable networks, is continuing to try and reinvent themselves (adding more scripted programming) and its questionable whether the long-running but audience-stagnant TNA Impact has a future on the network. Many expect that the lack of TNA renewal announcement (coupled with the fact that Jeff Jarrett agreed that his Global Force Wrestling promotion cant negotiate for TV time on Spike) is a sign that Viacom wants top-level wrestling programming from WWE on their channel. Smackdown would seem a likely acquisition for several reasons. One imagines that Vince McMahon is wary putting all of his TV program eggs in the NBCU basket. Having some programming on a rival media conglomerate gives him a stronger hand and an insurance policy should the NBC Universal relationship crumble. Also, the only programming where the WWE has offered evidence of a strong halo effect (audience sticking around and checking out the next show) was with UFCs Ultimate Fighter airing immediately after Monday Night Raw. Viacom would like to prop up their wholly-owned MMA entity Bellator which airs live on Friday nights. Appropriating Smackdown as a Thursday night lead-in could bring a lot of new eyeballs to Bellator. The remaining networks Turner (TNT/TBS), Fox (FS1/FXX), WGN and AMC seem very unlikely. While some may have the money (Fox) or may want to steal USAs #1 show so they can unseat the network for top dog (Turner), none of these channels would mesh terrifically with WWE programming. While Fox desires the viewership, they would risk a lot of credibility adding pro-wrestling to their sports station. Plus, theyre saving their dough for major sports rights bids including NBA and Soccer. AMC has been growing with hit shows (Breaking Bad, Walking Dead) and dipping their toe in the unscripted programming arena (Small Town Security, Comic Book Men) but the closest interest theyve really shown to wrestling is greenlighting a Billy Corgan Project about his Chicago Wrestling Company. WGNs plan would be to strongarm more distributors to carry their channel (and jack up their sub fee) to pay for the WWE rights. However, despite bidding top money for projects like Breaking Bad spinoff Better Call Saul, the channels prominence (or lack thereof) has prevented them from winning these shows. It doesnt seem up WWEs alley to ally with such a weak partner. Last time, WWE threw them some C-level Programming in the form of WWE Superstars which aired from April 2009 to April 2011 before fading away (reportedly the non-renewal was due to disappointing ratings performance). WGN would want Raw but its doubtful WWE would let them have it. Turner hasnt had an appetite for wrestling in more than decade, and they had no interest in working with WWE back in 2009 when McMahon was searching for suitors. The WWE Network and WWE's Digital Media division is a whole other matter. In the past weeks, Executive Vice President of Programming Matthew Singerman was let go. Executive Vice President of Digital Media Perkins Miller left for a job with the NFL. Vice President of Global Digital Sales Brian Maddox left the company in March to join Silver Chalice Ventures. These are smaller concerns, but paint an surprising picture. The company has a long way to go before they'll have a strong, vibrant and profitable global WWE Network. In the meanwhile, these Domestic TV Rights need to keep the company afloat and subsidize other projects (such as WWE Studios). We dont know how long the new contract would be for will networks overpay just to lock down rights for ten years? We dont know who will win will WWE split their biggest two shows onto rival networks? We dont know how much theyll get has WWE solved the fundamental dilemma of low advertising rates for pro-wrestling? However, I expect well know something soon. And finally these eager investors will have something to react to. Chris Harrington is an exclusive writer for WhatCulture. He hosts a weekly podcast (Wrestlenomics Radio) and hes available for further discussion at chris.harrington@gmail.com
I'm a professional wrestling analyst, an improviser and an avid NES gamer. I live in Saint Paul, Minnesota and I'm working on my first book (#wrestlenomics). You can contact me at chris.harrington@gmail.com or on twitter (@mookieghana)
