twitter google-plus feed2 chevron

More on the WWE Network Including Top PPV’s Possibly Being Moved

– As noted the other day, WWE sent out a survey to fans seeking interest on potential new programming for the WWE Network, including moving pay-per-views to the channel. Here is the exact text from the survey, which provides a bit more insight into what might come of the network:

“Imagine a 24-hour cable network that was run by The WWE. It featured a mix of WWE-made programs, including new shows, repeats of Raw and SmackDown from USA and Syfy and “classic” or “historical” programs featuring shows from different promotions like classic WWE footage, WCW, ECW, NWA, AWA, etc. from years past.

It would have two new weekly WWE live in-ring shows (wrestling), but not SmackDown or Raw.

It would have a daily live in-studio viewer interactive show similar to SportsCenter.

Additionally, this network would include WWE’s “classic big 4″ pay-per-view events including WrestleMania, SummerSlam, Survivor Series and Royal Rumble to the lineup at no additional cost. Rather than having to pay for them, they would now be specials with the same match quality you’re used to seeing on pay-per-view for no additional cost. These 4 events would only be available on The WWE Network.

In addition to The WWE Network, you would receive approximately 30 additional channels including NFL Network, NBA TV, Biography Channel, Fox Business Network and Fuel TV.

How interested would you be in upgrading your service for an additional $7-$12 per month to a tier which would include the WWE Network described above?”

  • the_electrifing_one


    I am aware sky owns exclusive rights. Though I would not be surpised to hear sky is in on the network. By the sounds of it Raw and Smackdown would stay on sky sports. Plus its not the end of the world £14.95 (less than $30)for a ppv is not bad at all.

    Isnt it like $50 in the US??

  • The Fork on the left

    are you guys stupid? It says it will be 7-12 dollars more a month! They use that money and we get PPV’S win/win 😀

  • Ryan

    if the UK got the network it would be different to what America will get, Sky has an exclusive deal with WWE on ALL WWE programming until 2014, so even if we got it we’d still be paying for our PPVs because sky own the rights to broadcast. But i can imagine when it gets to like 3-4am and they have nothing to show so they start showing a WWE tv shop hosted by scott stanford or something!

  • ironcross

    They just got a $200 million loan, how many countries will this network be available in?

  • Buttercastle

    I think what they meant to say was the big 4 would also be included on the channel, therefor if you are subscribed to the channel you get to watch them on there rather than having to order them on ppv. Otherwise they ate still available to everyone else via ppv.

  • Jenn

    The BIG 4 SHOULD be on the Network! The approx. pricethat was listed, not to shabby, considering the ppvs are the biggest ones why the the hell not put them on the network, let them revamp the more less money attracting ppvs and put those out there to make money!!

  • Tom… Just Tom

    I think they should run it like WWE Classics On Demand. Monthly features, show PPVs a couple of months after the first showing, show all the wrestling companies that they own and the classic arena matches (MSG, Spectrum, etc).

  • Mike Oxafloppin

    I just find it funny that you get FUEL TV with WWE Network. Why is that funny? Well in 2012 UFC programming will be on FUEL because of the deal the UFC made with FOX and FUEL is a FOX network. Seems like Vince just can’t get away

  • JJT

    It is true, most with a half decent connection are fine getting PPVs via torrent sites which I imagine is where WWE misses out on many a buy

    You could probably add something like 10k buys if everyone that torrents actually bought the PPV

  • JJT is a horrible place to watch WWE PPVs

    I remember watching WM25 and that year’s Hell in a Cell on
    Ok when you have a stream that doesn’t have audio 30 seconds out of sync but all I remember is switching channels every few minutes because of all the copyright shutdowns. I can’t imagine it’s gotten any better.

  • tim

    I actually think itd be a good idea because ppv is dying off because of the internet.

  • KitKrock

    “Imagine a 24-hour cable network that was run by The WWE.” <– Lord, no.

  • D2K

    @LVW: Shhhhhh! 😉

  • LVW

    Why ruin the ppv aspect to watch things you can basically see on already.

  • D2K

    @Sean: You are right. It is not a wise idea at all. Vince has a tendency to be overtly-ambitious at times when branching out and he always winds up cutting off his nose to spite his face. The XFL comes to mind. He can ruin this whole thing by trying to do too much, too soon.

  • Effmenow

    The Big 4 should ALWAYS be on PPV. Put these other crap PPV’s on the network.

  • Sean Mooney

    The “BIG FOUR” (and all PPV’s) on WWE Network…? That doesn’t seem like a wise idea for WWE.

  • Big Papa

    I 100% agree with D2K about having Wrestlemania, Royal Rumble, Summerslam and Survivor Series on PPV and putting all of the other “PPV’s” on the WWE Network. I have the next to highest package on DirecTV right now so hopefully when it comes out it will be on my package.

  • D2K

    I guess the only questions I have are…

    A. How much will the network cost?

    B. What will the availability be?

    Unless you can get this channel on every major cable and satellite system in America I say a huge NO to putting PPVs on their otherwise too many people would miss out.

    If anything, I say put all these garbage, gimmick PPVs on the network for free and leave the standard 4 major PPVs on normal PPV. That would be a good way to bring true prestige back to those PPVs without eliminating the others.

  • Zack Ryder

    how much do you guys think this will cost?