WWE Wants To Know Why People Paid More For Wrestlemania 30, Who Fans Want At SummerSlam

WWE was surprised that nearly 400,000 households in the United States ordered Wrestlemania 30 on a traditional basis at a much steeper price, rather than paying $9.99/month for a WWE Network subscription. The question they are looking to answer is – why?

The company issued the following survey on Tuesday:

They also followed by asking respondents how likely they would be to purchase Wrestlemania on WWE Network if it was not available through cable and satellite systems.

Another area where WWE is looking for answers relates to SummerSlam. The following question was included in the same survey:

Why is Daniel Bryan not listed? I don’t know.

Connect With WNW

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and LinkedIn!

  • david

    The biggest challenges that they have in getting people on the network model is the high speed internet connection and getting it on their television screens. They are available on a large number of TV devices that are used by the majors for streaming so I think they are off to a great start in that respect and really couldn’t do anything else at this point on that front. While people use mobile devices more and more for video content I don’t think people are going to be as willing to sit there for three hour pay per view events on their phones. As for the internet connection that’s definitely going to be an issue for some and that’s not something that will be overcome so easily. I think WWE needs to give the satellite companies a small break on fees to get them to keep carrying the PPV’s. Satellite subscribers are probably less likely to have non-tiered high speed internet and watching streaming can be more challenging for some of those customers. Completely cutting ties with cable companies eventually could end up forcing subscribers to the network model but that is a risky move.

    Also if the network really takes off they might end up having some issues like Netflix where they will need to end up paying the cable companies for directly connecting to their network.

    I love the WWE Network and it’s been a great investment. They could raise the price and I wouldn’t balk at paying it either. I think that ultimately it will be successful but it’s going to take some time and some kinks will have to be worked out.

    • Steve pritchard

      Netflix didn’t turn into the multi billion dollar company overnight. This will take time. . But will ultimately be successful . I have satellite and high speed internet. . So that logic is flawed. . Of course the same can’t be said for rural areas. As far as ditching cable being a risky move. I disagree . Comcast last year reported major losses due to other alternatives at cheaper price. Cable is on it’s way out . It took people a little while to make netflix what it is now. Netflix has it’s own original programming now . Which isn’t good news for big cable companies. We are witnessing the end of cable tv. It’s gonna take time but it will happen. Streaming services are becoming cheaper and offering more content . More rural areas where I live have access to high speed internet than a few years ago. Just give it time. People are tired of paying do much for tv. When they can watch netflix and wwe network for 10$ a piece.

      • Whammaster

        Is high speed internet more accessible? yes, is it cheap? no. Hell where i live “high speed” is still a D+ on the speedtest website, and i can just keep up with 720p on youtube. So to assume that everyone has the accessibility to it is the same thought pattern that the former worker of Xbox, and i dont even need to say his name because everyone knows.

      • david

        There is nothing flawed about the logic. AFFORDABLE HIGH SPEED INTERNET IS NOT AN OPTION FOR EVERYONE. Because of that it makes it MUCH more difficult to sell the WWE Network to THOSE people. For the people who have access to high speed internet THAT IS NOT AFFORDABLE they are more likely to be satellite subscribers AND more likely to pay to order an event on a monthly basis if they want to watch it. I never said that people don’t have high speed internet and satellite. Those either WITHOUT high speed internet or WITHOUT AFFORDABLE high speed internet are more likely to have satellite. There certainly are options for people to get high speed internet in rural areas but many options are NOT AFFORDABLE and MAY NOT ALLOW AN INEXPENSIVE WAY TO STREAM CONTENT. Many options (such as Hughes Net satellite internet) are available but they have monthly limits. When there are limits streaming services are hurt the most. It’s not that people can’t use them, and that they aren’t there. They just cost a lot of money and the monthly limits cause people to be more cautious about what they are using.

        It’s not about the cost of the streaming service, it’s about the cost of the internet connection to stream the content. For the vast majority of people it’s not an issue but the key will be to figure out how to get to those who it is. At this point it’s important to keep the satellite providers on board for this reason.

        Ultimately the network will be successful but these are the challenges and I’m sure the WWE knew that going into it. The reaction by the satellite companies is surprising though as they are only hurting themselves and their subscribers. Eventually they will get to a level where they feel comfortable with dropping the cable companies on their own to push people to the network – it will just take some time to when they feel comfortable to do that.

  • Jeremy

    For me, it was the first PPV on the network and I wasn’t sure if they would be able to handle all of that streaming data. They did, and I commend them for that. On another note, there’s so much free wrestling out there ( I get 2 wwe, 1 tna, and 1 roh) that paying 10 bucks a month isn’t worth it to me, plus you can find a lot of free wrestling on the internet already

    • Vic Jose

      You can find wwe ppv for free but the feeds are horrible and not hd and full of ads.

  • Brandy

    For me it comes down to this, I looove tv, I have 6 tvs (one in each room) and the smallest is a 24 inch in the kitchen. My computer monitor (I have desktop and prefer that) is only 21 inches and is in one room. My mobile is my cell and its waaay smaller then my tvs. I have a 60 inch tv in my living room. Why on earth would I order it on something small. Or sit at my desk for 3 + hours. This way I was able to DVR it. ANd I had it on in each room so if I wanted a sandwich, I could watch while eating. And too, with my cell (Windows phone) what if somone called on it while I watched it.
    I wish they did like Oprah and had a channel I could watch on the tv.

    • Mike Elliott

      So you’re saying you can afford 6 tvs, a desktop computer, a DVR, and a Windows Phone, but don’t have an Xbox, Play Station 3 or 4, or Roku? If you can afford all of those gadgets, surely you could afford a platform to stream it to your TV.

      • Brandy

        Nope. I dont play video games so Im not buying one of them, and Im not spending any money on Roku when my cable bill is high enough.
        Im not on here to argue about what I can and cannot afford, its a choice. Im just explaining why I ordered it on PPV and not ordering the WWE network.

        • Mike Elliott

          You misunderstand me. I’m not meaning to argue. Just was surprised. Lol.

          • Brandy

            OK thats fine. To be fair having another device is just one more thing to have to move to dust and have to pay and take care of. Im trying to minimalize. I dont like having a million devices. With my tvs, its just a tv and a cable box. Buuuut if WWE had this as a pay station, even on the tv, I would pay for it. And too with having the tv in every room, if I had wanted to go to bed early with it on, I could.

          • Avalanchian

            During Black Friday you can get a Roku 2 for $40. Get on Newegg and buy an HDMI cable for $5. Bam you would be done. It can do your Netflix, WWE, HULU, and more.

          • Vic Jose

            Why not run it from the computer to the tv?

          • Mike

            Clearly you’re replying for “reactions” and you made me lol so thank you :-).

    • Vic Jose

      You can watch it on the tv

  • Patrick

    WWE asks why? a better question is who cares. if people wanted to spend up to $60 or what ever the price was..on WM that’s their bussiness. sure $9 is cheaper and a smarter bargin but if they want to waste tht much money on WM…… let them and don’t worry about it.

    • opie

      WWE gets a higher percentage of the profits from the network vs. ppv

    • a7beeny

      geez chillax .. they want to know more about their audience and provide an easy way to experience their product

  • Evon Callaway Bitterweed Reese

    I couldn’t get it to play on our xbox. Really was disappointed. Is there such a device I can plug into my tv I can watch on without using a computer?

    • david

      Roku box. Apple TV and the new Fire TV is supposed to have it eventually. Roku is a great device. Small and very user friendly. Most of the boxes have similar apps but the advantage with Roku is that its independent where Apple and Amazon obviously are not.

      • Evon Callaway Bitterweed Reese

        Thank you

    • Vic Jose

      Playstation! lol

  • Evon Callaway Bitterweed Reese

    I’m trying to watch the main event right now over the xbox but am being told the network isn’t available right now. Sucks

  • Vic Jose

    I guess Daniel isn’t listed because of his injury of because they already know the answer, lol