AEW/ROH Finances, Ratings, etc.

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

2 hours ago, Zakk_Sabbath said:

I have no idea how this could affect things for AEW (nor do I see it mentioned in the article) so while I can't say for sure if this is good or bad news, its certainly news:

Warner Bros. Discovery Says Its TV Channels Are Worth $9 Billion Less Than It Thought

https://www.indiewire.com/news/business/warner-bros-discovery-says-tv-channels-worth-9-billion-less-1235033624/

It's bad. WBD's stock closed at $6.71 today, and it was at close to $25 when the merger between Warner and Discovery completed in April 2022. That's not good in the slightest. The company is bleeding significantly and will likely either be selling off properties or cutting costs (as evidenced by Boomerang's streaming service being shuttered, Cartoon Network's website being shuttered, the NBA realizing things are a tire fire and deciding it's better to risk a lawsuit rather than let TNT Sports match the Amazon deal). AEW's not really in a position to play hardball, and WBD's not in a position to start giving high rights fees.

[Technico Support]

3 hours ago, Zakk_Sabbath said:

I have no idea how this could affect things for AEW (nor do I see it mentioned in the article) so while I can't say for sure if this is good or bad news, its certainly news:

Warner Bros. Discovery Says Its TV Channels Are Worth $9 Billion Less Than It Thought

https://www.indiewire.com/news/business/warner-bros-discovery-says-tv-channels-worth-9-billion-less-1235033624/

That’s just an insane oversight.  Have they checked under the cushions of the couch?  
 

At this rate, I’m just hoping AEW signs a new deal before Zaslav is axed and they need to start negotiating from square one with someone new.

[Zakk_Sabbath]

2 hours ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

It's bad. WBD's stock closed at $6.71 today, and it was at close to $25 when the merger between Warner and Discovery completed in April 2022. That's not good in the slightest. The company is bleeding significantly and will likely either be selling off properties or cutting costs (as evidenced by Boomerang's streaming service being shuttered, Cartoon Network's website being shuttered, the NBA realizing things are a tire fire and deciding it's better to risk a lawsuit rather than let TNT Sports match the Amazon deal). AEW's not really in a position to play hardball, and WBD's not in a position to start giving high rights fees.

Thanks - I know you have a ton of broadcasting insight so I was hoping you'd answer this. I was hoping that maybe there was a chance of them wanting to get behind one of the few properties they have that's still consistent (even if the numbers aren't what they were). That's a bummer.

Edit: @Technico Supportgiven what you mention about oversight, I wonder if this may become a legal situation of its own somehow, but who knows the terms of the current deal

Edited August 12 by Zakk_Sabbath

[odessasteps]

Surprised Danielson vs JJ didn’t get a better ratings number. 

Maybe all the hardcores it was booked for were already watching ?

Edited August 13 by odessasteps

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

5 hours ago, Technico Support said:

That’s just an insane oversight.  Have they checked under the cushions of the couch?  
 

At this rate, I’m just hoping AEW signs a new deal before Zaslav is axed and they need to start negotiating from square one with someone new.

I genuinely don't know how much of it is oversight and how much of it is a total underestimation of how quickly cable television was going to dry up. I get the feeling in re-reading that article that WBD was taken completely offguard by how fast cable has declined in the last few years, and wouldn't be surprised if their valuation was based on cable still being where it was in 2019 rather than where it is now in 2024. If you're expecting 90ish million subscribers to cable to have access to your shows and it's actually more like 65 million, and that number keeps decreasing, the value of your networks is going to go down. Not helping is how slow they've been to pivot on certain things (they were one of the last to put their services on streaming, for example, and that was after they took a sledgehammer to the value of HBO and Max).

The NBA TV deal was announced on July 24, and on July 23 WBD was trading at $8.63. They immediately dropped to $7.99, rebounded briefly from people buying the dip, and have dropped down to where they are today because of the earnings call. I genuinely don't see how Zaslav makes it out of the year - heck, he might not even make it out of the quarter - and any announcement of rights (re-)acquisitions is going to be taken especially poorly. The biggest talk of what can get them out of this mess is dismantling the various components of the company, and if they do that, I'll go ahead and ask the tough question...

... what exactly would AEW be signing a deal to join?

Edited August 13 by Stefanie Sparkleface

[username]

Yeah the one big complicating factor in the AEW TV rights deal, one that I think both haters and supporters kinda agree should be fairly straightforward, is that Warner is such an irrational/shambolic actor that there was always a non-zero percent chance they'd go about it in an utterly unpredictable manner. Given that folks are pretty sure the exclusive negotiating window has passed it is feeling a bit more likely.

 

Also since someone mentioned it I'd toss out all the ratings for every wrestling company (heck most shows period) over the past two weeks, the olympics were a giant factor this go around.

[just drew]

I think that's why WWE going to netflix was pretty genius. With NXT on CW and Smackdown staying on USA, they've taken a lot of potential partners for AEW off the table. The biggest non WBD suitors for AEW would be Fox and Paramount/CBS. There are some existing relationships TK could probably exploit, with both networks being NFL networks, but that's a crapshoot. 

[Technico Support]

Meltzer mentioned this morning that AEW will be on the new sports streaming service, Venue.  I hope it's on Max as well or at least stays on Triller UK for us VPN sickos, because I sure as fuck ain't spending $40+ per month for a bunch of sports I won't watch nor will I support the sports talking head industrial complex. 

Side note, watching Quarterback and Receiver on Netflix made me realize I have a virulent hatred for people paid to talk sports on TV.  I get the same impression from them that I do political and news commentators -- that they don't believe a thing they say and they'll all carnies.

Edited August 13 by Technico Support

[TheVileOne]

The Warner Bros. AT&T merger has only led to one disaster after another. Literally, nothing good has come out of it. 

[Zakk_Sabbath]

1 hour ago, Technico Support said:

Meltzer mentioned this morning that AEW will be on the new sports streaming service, Venue.  I hope it's on Max as well or at least stays on Triller UK for us VPN sickos, because I sure as fuck ain't spending $40+ per month for a bunch of sports I won't watch nor will I support the sports talking head industrial complex. 

Definitely agree on all of this - the only thing I could say in favor of it is that it might open some doors in terms of linear television since it's a jointly owned thing, like Hulu was. But even then, it's an outrageous price point, and the chances are slim.

2 hours ago, just drew said:

I think that's why WWE going to netflix was pretty genius. With NXT on CW and Smackdown staying on USA, they've taken a lot of potential partners for AEW off the table. The biggest non WBD suitors for AEW would be Fox and Paramount/CBS. There are some existing relationships TK could probably exploit, with both networks being NFL networks, but that's a crapshoot. 

Agreed re: Netflix, and you also make a good point about the existing NFL relationship aspect - I guess my only hangups about those two in particular would be:

1) Fox felt they weren't getting enough of a return on Smackdown - so AEW probably couldn't come close to what WWE was getting. Is there a path to airing on FX or FSN? Maybe - but I think regular-ass, antenna Fox 5 might be a longshot.

2) Paramount is hemorrhaging cash. I just saw an article indicating they added 3.5 million new subscribers last quarter and are still losing $286M a year. They sold Bellator to the Saudis and consolidated all their other sports programming under CBS - feels like they might not have interest. Also, this is probably not a huge risk since I'm going back about 20000 years, but I think its still worth mentioning: anyone there who's managed to hang around since the TNA/Spike days might not be uber-willing to jump back into the wrestling game.

ETA: I forgot to quote you @Stefanie Sparklefacebut your "What exactly...?" is kind of exactly what I fear. It seems like WBD has basically nothing going for it but reach (which as you noted is becoming less and less meaningful with streaming anyway). Their linear channels are already, what, 90-99% reruns when AEW isn't airing? If you had a gun to my head I couldn't name you a TNT original show besides Snowpiercer (and even then, I only remember it because I used to call it 'Ice Train' as a little in-joke).

Edited August 13 by Zakk_Sabbath

[twiztor]

man, this is a tough time to be seeking a broadcast deal. With all of these networks' viewership numbers down and so many streaming services flailing, there's not really any GOOD answers. The only thing i'm coming up with is Amazon Prime. I have no idea if there's interest there, but i assume not much. 

i just find it hard to see any major interest from the other mega channels. hope i'm wrong. By the end of the next contract (whether that be 1-, 3-, or 5-years) it will be interesting to see where we're at. Likely by then a lot will have shaken loose. 

[Zakk_Sabbath]

4 minutes ago, twiztor said:

The only thing i'm coming up with is Amazon Prime. I have no idea if there's interest there, but i assume not much. 

That's an interesting one. I don't know if they would be open to something like WWE has going where they could take Dynamite, and still allow Collision/Rampage/ROH to air on linear TV or another streamer, but I'd think fhat would be the goal rather than go exclusive (unless it's silly money). And as @just drewpointed out re: Paramount and Fox, they're an existing NFL partner so I guess there's that, too (even if there's just a small possibility of leveraging that). I could see a potential pitch to them maybe taking the angle of, "Netflix has wrestling coming, so you should get ahead of it and have a competing product in the space."

[Technico Support]

Amazon taking both football and wrestling from WBD would be something,

[just drew]

iirc, Amazon was an early choice to carry AEW if WBD hadn't worked out.

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

2 hours ago, Technico Support said:

Meltzer mentioned this morning that AEW will be on the new sports streaming service, Venue.

This is a bit of a half-truth. Venu live streams the WBD networks (TBS, TNT, truTV), so if AEW maintains their status quo, they would air live via that, but have very little archival services. I suspect it would operate like Hulu Live TV or YouTube TV where you get on demand of the last five weeks of airings, just like a cable package, but nothing before that.

50 minutes ago, Zakk_Sabbath said:

Definitely agree on all of this - the only thing I could say in favor of it is that it might open some doors in terms of linear television since it's a jointly owned thing, like Hulu was. But even then, it's an outrageous price point, and the chances are slim.

Agreed re: Netflix, and you also make a good point about the existing NFL relationship aspect - I guess my only hangups about those two in particular would be:

1) Fox felt they weren't getting enough of a return on Smackdown - so AEW probably couldn't come close to what WWE was getting. Is there a path to airing on FX or FSN? Maybe - but I think regular-ass, antenna Fox 5 might be a longshot.

2) Paramount is hemorrhaging cash. I just saw an article indicating they added 3.5 million new subscribers last quarter and are still losing $286M a year. They sold Bellator to the Saudis and consolidated all their other sports programming under CBS - feels like they might not have interest. Also, this is probably not a huge risk since I'm going back about 20000 years, but I think its still worth mentioning: anyone there who's managed to hang around since the TNA/Spike days might not be uber-willing to jump back into the wrestling game.

ETA: I forgot to quote you @Stefanie Sparklefacebut your "What exactly...?" is kind of exactly what I fear. It seems like WBD has basically nothing going for it but reach (which as you noted is becoming less and less meaningful with streaming anyway). Their linear channels are already, what, 90-99% reruns when AEW isn't airing? If you had a gun to my head I couldn't name you a TNT original show besides Snowpiercer (and even then, I only remember it because I used to call it 'Ice Train' as a little in-joke).

I've said this before, but I do think that the best fate for AEW in the long run is to opt into a YouTube subscription service. I know it would be a drastic change to drop out of TV, but I'd like to repeat my numbers from earlier... 90 million cable subscribers in 2019, 65 million now. Those numbers aren't going to get any better. You might be able to get a rights fee from a streaming service that also has lineal TV baked in, but going on your own gives you some pretty strong flexibility. For example, you can set up bonus shows, you can run a FAST channel with archive content running 24/7, you can have direct-to-archive ability for your newer shows. Essentially, what you have overseas with Triller, only in the United States. People are already using a VPN to get that sort of access now. Go all the way.

AEW has over 4 million YouTube subscribers. Convert 20% of them at $10 a month and you're talking just shy of $100 million a year (minus YouTube's cut, of course). Ad sales are now your own, not ran through the network. If you want to do a PPV, you can do it on your own. And you gain the credibility back of being an independent creator, not linked to a huge conglomerate that, might I add, is $40 billion in debt and cratering fast. Oh, and YouTube's apps are stable as heck and available almost everywhere.

It'd be a change, but it's a way to futureproof your company, and YouTube is a heck of a lot more stable than WBD is right now.

[EVA]

No offense, but that sounds like horrible business for AEW, based on a lot of the same faulty logic about streaming that has led so many companies to their doom in recent years. Signing their own death warrant type business.

 

WWE itself couldn’t even figure out how to make a subscription service a sustainable model and had to sell it off to NBCUniversal to salvage any kind of face/profit from the whole failed experiment. 0% chance that AEW survives a move like that.

[Matt D]

They get a great deal from Zaslav who is stubborn and will double down. WB more or less has to live up to it regardless of what happens. That gives them time to pivot with increased infrastructure to whatever happens next even as things are slowly falling apart around them. They're enough of a proven success/brand in other ways that they can blame whatever happens in the next few years on TV falling apart and still have perceived value for at least one more round of negotiations into whatever's next. That feels like the best option at this point.

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

19 minutes ago, EVA said:

No offense, but that sounds like horrible business for AEW, based on a lot of the same faulty logic about streaming that has led so many companies to their doom in recent years. Signing their own death warrant type business.

 

WWE itself couldn’t even figure out how to make a subscription service a sustainable model and had to sell it off to NBCUniversal to salvage any kind of face/profit from the whole failed experiment. 0% chance that AEW survives a move like that.

So WBD is cratering, NBC/Universal and CW are out because they're in bed with WWE, Fox and Disney are most likely out because Fox just let WWE walk, Paramount is falling apart in the same way WBD is...

What exactly is your option in lineal TV? Syndication? Hope for cable to make a resurgence and land on a channel that isn't owned by the above conglomerates I just mentioned? Who is out there?

And if you go into streaming, your choices are Netflix (out, WWE), Peacock (out, WWE), Paramount Plus (out, falling apart), Max (possibly in, but WBD is falling apart), and Hulu (again, if Fox/Disney were interested, they'd have already come to the table). That leaves Amazon and hoping they're interested, or striking it out on your own with YouTube (or Triller).

So really... show me the option. WBD might not exist in its current form in a year or two if the talks that their creditors want them to split up/spin off their TV business is true. Do you go down with WBD or do you strike it out on your own?

Edited August 13 by Stefanie Sparkleface

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

5 minutes ago, Matt D said:

They get a great deal from Zaslav who is stubborn and will double down. WB more or less has to live up to it regardless of what happens. That gives them time to pivot with increased infrastructure to whatever happens next even as things are slowly falling apart around them. They're enough of a proven success/brand in other ways that they can blame whatever happens in the next few years on TV falling apart and still have perceived value for at least one more round of negotiations into whatever's next. That feels like the best option at this point.

Pretty much all media rights deals have opt outs, that includes sports leagues (and notably TNT Sports does not include AEW under their umbrella, so WBD wouldn't give them that same sort of coverage). I am assuming that AEW's contract is more like a standard production contract, but either way, there's always ways for both sides to get out of whatever's in place. Plainly put, if Zaslav gives AEW a deal and whoever takes over for him when he's ousted doesn't want AEW, then AEW will be gone.

[Matt D]

Remember when Polynesian Pro Wrestling was on the Financial News Network....

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

11 minutes ago, Matt D said:

Remember when Polynesian Pro Wrestling was on the Financial News Network....

Wasn't that actually Score? I'm trying to remember if Score was a separate network that shared FNN's channel space or if FNN and Score were the same channel that just switched designations after a certain time period (kind of like how Cartoon Network and Adult Swim are considered separate networks within the same channel space and are designated as such).

[Zakk_Sabbath]

I think you both @EVAand @Stefanie Sparklefacehave great points. EVA's opinion is pretty close reasoning to why when Amazon came up earlier, I said the best move there would be non-exclusivity so they could still collect linear TV rights from whomever else they could land a deal with for the other three shows. And Stef, you hit the nail on the head in terms of the future-proofing/flexibility aspect. I agree with most everything you wrote, actually, but I just have this nagging feeling that going in-house streaming-only would be a mistake in terms of (gross, but) brand visibility. It's obviously a different situation in a lot of ways, but I feel like if the appetite were there for it, stuff like Honor Club or TNA+ would be doing better (of course, I have no idea what the #s really are so I'm making some assumptions there)

ETA: by the same token, I seem to recall reading in the early days that the US NJPWorld #s were a big part in AEW having any viability at all - so I could just be talking nonsense

Edited August 13 by Zakk_Sabbath

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

2 minutes ago, Zakk_Sabbath said:

I think you both @EVAand @Stefanie Sparklefacehave great points. EVA's opinion is pretty close reasoning to why when Amazon came up earlier, I said the best move there would be non-exclusivity so they could still collect linear TV rights from whomever else they could land a deal with for the other three shows. And Stef, you hit the nail on the head in terms of the future-proofing/flexibility aspect. I agree with most everything you wrote, actually, but I just have this nagging feeling that going in-house streaming-only would be a mistake in terms of (gross, but) brand visibility. It's obviously a different situation in a lot of ways, but I feel like if the appetite were there for it, stuff like Honor Club or TNA+ would be doing better (of course, I have no idea what the #s really are so I'm making some assumptions there)

It's a little foolish to assume that because a lesser product does poorly, your product would do poorly as well. At that point you make your own choices when it comes to your marketing data (visibility in terms of video views, social media engagement, how long people stay watching each show, etc, etc, measurable data that we don't have access too). Basing your operations on a product that doesn't have the same brand visibility is a mistake, and if you have a loyal fanbase (which AEW does), they will follow you where you go.

The biggest thing is that it's a mistake to shut out cordcutters. Cable audience is shrinking, and they have no archival service. If you want to watch AEW in the United States and you don't subscribe to cable, how do you do it aside from get a VPN and sign up for an overseas service or use torrents? Literally do something to fix that.

[NoFistsJustFlips]

I'm all in on cable dying and needing to have an alternative. But it's not dead yet. If you pivot to a YouTube exclusive subscription model you're basically an indy. You have no footprint. You have no visability. Ticket sales are already cratering. They fall even further off a cliff being a niche streaming only promotion.

The answer is to diversify. Get Dynamite on a streaming outlet. Amazon / Paramount / Max / Hulu... whatever one you can get a foot in the door. Keep trying for a cable deal for Collison. WBD / Paramount / Fox... wherever you can get a foot in the door. Do a subscription only model for ROH. Honor Club / YouTube/  whatever.

Splitting the rights and diversifying is the move. You may not command as big of a rights fee. But you're setup to have the biggest reach and the biggest footprint. You're hitting all the possible markets. Its pretty much what WWE is doing.

I know TK wants a big giant rights package that includes everything. But I think that limits your reach and potential revenue streams. And the demand for a giant rights package just isn't there (seemingly). Even the sports leagues split their rights up to maximize visability. It's the most business savvy longterm move.

 

Edited August 13 by NoFistsJustFlips

[EVA]

32 minutes ago, Stefanie Sparkleface said:

So WBD is cratering, NBC/Universal and CW are out because they're in bed with WWE, Fox and Disney are most likely out because Fox just let WWE walk, Paramount is falling apart in the same way WBD is...

What exactly is your option in lineal TV? Syndication? Hope for cable to make a resurgence and land on a channel that isn't owned by the above conglomerates I just mentioned? Who is out there?

And if you go into streaming, your choices are Netflix (out, WWE), Peacock (out, WWE), Paramount Plus (out, falling apart), Max (possibly in, but WBD is falling apart), and Hulu (again, if Fox/Disney were interested, they'd have already come to the table). That leaves Amazon and hoping they're interested, or striking it out on your own with YouTube (or Triller).

So really... show me the option. WBD might not exist in its current form in a year or two if the talks that their creditors want them to split up/spin off their TV business is true. Do you go down with WBD or do you strike it out on your own?

Two thoughts on this:

1) The main point I’m quibbling with is the basis of why you think a subscription YouTube channel would succeed. “We have x number of people watching/following/subscribing to our free stuff, therefore there must at least y number of them willing to pay a monthly fee for it” has absolutely been said countless times in boardrooms across the world to justify innumerable disastrous decisions in recent years. The gulf between “people who will watch a few minutes of our videos for free while they eat lunch or ride the train” and “people who are willing to invest money in making (insert product) part of their lifestyle” is VAST and often unnavigable. As I mentioned, it did not even work for WWE to a sustainable degree. Remember, the long term goal of the WWE Network was to be exactly what you’re pitching here—air our own shows, cut out the middle man, keep all the money—and even they had to give up on the dream and sell it off.

I understand the logic behind the idea, but we have a lot of real world data that suggests it rarely, if ever, works out that way. And if the Worldwide Leader in Sports Entertainment can’t figure it out, I don’t like the odds for the famously professional and well-organized AEW to pull it off.

Is cable fucked? Yes! Are there very few options on linear TV or even streaming for AEW? Seems that way! But let’s be clear: AEW as an a la cart streaming subscription business is dead within a year. The math does not work. (I think more realistic math would be, at best, 10-20% of the regular Dynamite live viewership, and the numbers on that don’t shake out too rosy.)

2) That said, I do think you may be overestimating exactly where we’re at in the whole “things fall apart” cycle. These companies are in a bad way, but these channels are not going away anytime soon. And as long they exist, they will keep giving it a go with programming. My guess is AEW’s next TV deal will be for between 3-5 years (depending who the deal is with) and I will go out on a limb and say that the Turner networks will still be around (owned/operated by who, I dunno) for the life of that deal.

Is that the most ideal situation? Probably not. But dead in the water in 3 years is much preferable than being dead in one year because we incorrectly assumed that the Honor Club business model with 10x the overhead was workable. Three years is a lot of time for fresh lifeboats to appear on the horizon.