The Thread Killer

The financial woes news continues... 70 days late gets into "WTF" territory. If this is true, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that they are out of business soon. When you're that far behind on paying people you're in Heyman territory.

Why wouldn't I get the news at 411? It's reliable, true, sourced, free, and easy to access. What an odd thing to care about.

I wasn't sure there was an Elder Statesman Vince, but then I was shocked when I saw the Ultimate Warrior tribute special they did on the WWE Network. When they interviewed Vince he got choked up and cried. It came off as totally sincere and legit, too. I've seen my share of crocodile tears in my day, and I don't think Vince is that good an actor. It shocked me for two reasons: 1) After all their history, I assumed Vince hated Warrior and only made nice with him because it was good for business. I never expected him to care that much. 2) I assumed Vince was some sort of uncaring cyborg, fueled by a combination of cocaine and testosterone. This is a guy who doesn't like people yawning around him and doesn't believe in illness, because he sees both as a sign of weakness...but he cried!

Right now, I'd have to say my biggest pet peeve/utter hatred is watching the way Dixie Carter is flushing TNA down the toilet. When Panda Energy got involved with TNA, they had a decent roster and most of the pieces in place to take a legit run at being the #2 wrestling promotion in North America. Through a steady series of idiotic decisions, she has systematically screwed that up to the point where now they can't even pay their talent. It's maddening to watch somebody take something that had potential and destroy it through utter incompetence. TNA never was a real alternative to WWE, but there was no reason they couldn't have been, if not for gross mismanagement.

There was another article today on 411 saying that they are still really behind on paying their production staff, and that when the staff call to find out the status of their pay, they get the runaround with a bunch of BS excuses. This is pretty pathetic. I find it sad that they can't pay their employees but still expect them to show up for work. Who can blame Taz for not going to Nashville to do his voiceovers and quitting instead. Looks like Joe knew what he was doing when he jumped ship, it sounds like working for TNA is not really a realistic option for anybody - not if you actually want to get paid for your work. I know people have been predicting the death of this company since almost Day 1, but after all this time there might actually be smoke to that fire. When you have a loser of a TV contract, your ratings are crap, you can't sell PPV's or DVD's, one of your biggest stars (Joe) walks away, your color commentator quits because he isn't getting paid, your production staff aren't being paid and bitch about it to the dirt sheets, and there is really nothing bright on the horizon that might turn this around - maybe TNA really is good and screwed and it is time to pull the plug on this mess. I was never one of those people who wanted TNA to fail. I was hoping they would succeed. Hell, I am one of the only fans I know who actually paid for pretty much all of their weekly PPV's back in the day. But it seems like since Dixie Carter got involved, it has been one stupid decision after another. I hate to see TNA go under because I like to see wrestlers who can't get a chance in WWE work somewhere else, but I don't think Dixie Carter has the ability to run a successful wrestling company - there is too much evidence to the contrary.

It must have been pretty bad for Taz to walk away, since he just re-signed with TNA last year, no? I am also surprised they are getting that far behind on pay, since the talent aren't working half as much as they used to.

So I saw WrestleMania and was intrigued enough to the point where I would consider watching WWE again to see if they can build on what they did there. Back when I followed the product, RAW and Smackdown were almost separate entities with their own World titles and different rosters. I know that is a thing of the past now. Here is my question... Is Smackdown back to being a "B" level show that you really don't need to see in order to follow WWE? Or does most of the angle advancement happen on RAW with more quality wrestling on Smackdown? Or is there no difference between the two shows? I get the impression RAW is still the flagship show and Smackdown is of less overall importance, but I'm not sure. I was going to ask this in the general WWE thread but it got closed, so I ask here... Opinions please?

I don't know if ROH really could be on par with NXT, now that I have seen both products recently. I think the talent level in NXT is significantly higher, and I find the booking in ROH to be really flat, uninspired and unimaginative, in my opinion as a fan. I don't want to sound like your typical online fan/keyboard warrior, but based on things I have seen people write here on PWO, I think some of the members here could come up with better storylines and matchmaking than what ROH is doing right now. I just find their writing to be uninteresting.

It doesn't really work as marketing, though, when a company explicitly calls it out as a successful strategy for (ugh) #brand management. I agree it's one of those things you don't really talk about, at least in public. There were a million times when I was trying to pitch a company on a major gift that I'd point out all the upsides to them in terms of their public image. (I don't believe I ever used the term brand management then, those weren't popular buzzwords when I worked in that area.) But you are correct, it probably isn't something a company should talk about, it should remain unspoken. I personally have always been of the opinion that if a corporation is going to make a financial contribution or help with publicity for a charitable cause, they can promote themselves however they like and say whatever they want - within the bounds of good taste. But you are right, tact dictates you probably don't want to actually mention the reason you're doing something is for brand management, not altruism. Then again, although Stephanie McMahon is highly educated and obviously book smart, she has done quite a few things that lead me to think she lacks basic common sense. Her comments after 9/11 spring to mind as an example.

What's the big deal? Speaking as somebody with a background in charitable fund development myself, I have zero problem with that quote. Philanthropy is marketing, and everbody knows that. Charities aren't stupid, they know that corporations donate money and get behind campaigns for tax breaks, for good publicity, and maybe as a distant third (depending on the corporation in question) to do something good or for personal reasons. (Like an owner or board member affected by the cause, etc.) I have never worked with a charity that had a problem publicizing a company or brand once they had agreed to take a charitable donation. I have worked for charities who turned down money from companies that they did not want to be identified with. In my experience, individuals tend to give money for purely altrusitic reasons. Corporations, not so much...they want something in return for their money, and if it is marketing, so be it. It's a win-win. Keller picks odd things to get offended by. Of all things WWE does or has done to get his shorts in a twist over, this hardly seems to be it.

Now that is a totally appropriate time to dress up. Of course, now I have to inform Jerry McDevitt about this, so you and your favorite hooker can expect a cease and desist letter, ASAP. Also, "hooker" was the name of the Lou Thesz biography...and as such, has too much of an old school rasslin sound to it, back when sex was held in small, smoke filled rooms. Please refer to her as your "sex entertainer."

Yes. As Joan Rivers. Dave, the Candian version has the online features, or will eventually, depending on who your provider (or your friend's). Right now, online access is available for Rogers, Eastlink and Optik. Will be available for the others eventually. http://www.wwe.com/canada Hey, is this Marty...as in MartyEWR my old buddy from WAAAYYY back? Sadly, my friend (and myself) are on with Bell ExpressVu. I have been enjoying the free preview myself (which ends this Sunday, one week before Mania) but without the On Demand Library there is no way I am ponying up the dough for this Network. I really like NXT, but I am not paying money every month to basically see NXT, and a bunch of old episodes of Nitro.

Not to mention the drug tests.

I was reading this news byte here: http://411mania.com/wrestling/daniel-bryan-talks-wrestlemania-31-the-ic-title-more/ Specifically: Looks like DB is trying to find the positives in his current situation and make the best out of it - the whole chicken salad out of chicken shit deal, I guess. Could be he is just being a good company guy and giving positive interviews, but if I had to guess I'd bet he is sincere about making the most out of his midcard status. If he really feels this way, I hope he does come out of WM31 with the Intercontinental title. Although - I admire his ambitions to elevate that championship, even if he does win it, I doubt the way that belt is booked will change. The only hope he has there is if Lesnar re-signs with WWE and keeps the WWE World Title. I read recently that if Lesnar re-signs, he might keep the big belt, which will remain as a "special attraction" and the Intercontinental and US titles will be elevated in importance and defended more. If that really is the case, then I guess DB is just the guy to put that title on. Probably wishful thinking on my part, though.

This needed to be spun into it's own thread? I was being facetious. The other half of the argument where I supported the costumed fans being moved or ejected for production reasons is still in the Current WWE thread and I'm not going to bother schlepping all those posts over here - it's not exactly worth the effort. Suffice it to say I thought that the costumed fans being moved was justified, and we'll leave it at that.

Just found out I'll be seeing the show after all. I have a friend who just got the WWE Network (albeit the crappy Canadian version without the On Demand features) and he also has a massive plasma screen and surround sound that takes up his entire family room wall. He's hosting a Wrestlemania party, so I am going to go. Because hey - I get to see friends I haven't seen in ages, plus there will be food and drink and I get to see the show for free. So I cast my vote for "Low enthusiasm - This card looks like shit, still going to watch."

No. I barely tried at all, yet managed to hit the mark dead on. It was uncanny, really. I actually managed to impress even myself. Like I said in my original post, it's a production thing. I know it sounds goofy (almost as goofy as dressing up like a wrestler to go to a live event) but they have this hardcore mentality of wanting the viewer at home focusing on the ring or wherever else the camera goes, at the expense of all else. I went to a RAW at the Skydome back in 98 with a guy who was studying Radio/TV production at the time and I remember him telling me it's like that at a lot of live television broadcasts, sporting or otherwise. I'm not sure if this is true, but he said he heard of some production people asking fans sitting in sightlines at live events to remove hats with the Nike symbol, or cover it up with electrical tape - and turn a t-shirt with a particular logo inside out. I don't know if that is because it was supposedly distracting, or because they weren't being paid by Nike as a sponsor, or they had a competing sponsor who didn't want their competitor's logo on the live TV broadcast, or what. Point is, they have some weird rules when it comes to what they'll allow to show up on camera, for legal, sponsorship or production reasons. I don't know that it means they're trying to kill the fun - they may have had other valid reasons. Or at least, reasons they thought were valid.

Any time I think of the possibilty of the Briscoes going to WWE, I always think of this promo... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnzOZBtyP8Y I really like the Briscoes, but I don't think they have a hope in hell of suceeding in WWE, sadly.

I agree...that's what I'm saying. I really think that anything any fan does in sight of the camera that production thinks might distract the viewer is going to get removed...fans in costumes, clowns, whatever.

Except, there's a difference between walking out onto the street dressed like that vs. some kind of comic convention or live wrestling event. Those two scenarios are not exactly the same as "going out in public" and doing mundane things like shopping at the supermarket, buying coffee, etc. while fully dressed as Dr. Who or Sting. Even if it's not for you (and it's not for me either, truth be told), surely you can still see the distinction? I see the distinction, yes. But I also feel there is a difference between a fan convention and a live event. At a convention you're going to be around a ton of people in costume, at an event, probably not so much.

The other thing is merchandise. I don't know if it's true, but I read that if you have a hot selling T-shirt you can make more from that than your actual contract. Bryan will move a lot more merchandise with WWE than he would anywhere else, that's for sure.

I dressed as 1992 Shawn Michaels at a Halloween party and got laid after. Then I sold the costume on eBay for 400 dollars. It was awesome. That's totally different. That's wearing a costume to a costume party. Being a grown adult and dressing up like a wrestler when you are going to a live event, especially when you know the event is going to be televised, is basically just trying to bring attention to yourself - it's the equivilent of standing on your chair and screaming "hey everybody, look at me!" In other words, quite lame, in my opinion. Rumor has it that it was Kevin Dunn who ordered the costumed fans removed. From everything I have heard/read about Kevin Dunn, he is a jerk and I have little to no use for his decisions and opinions on pro wrestling. However, in his capacity as a television producer, he made the right decision in this case. When you are broadcasting a live event, you remove anything from the shot that is distracting the viewer from focusing on the action at hand. What those costumed fans were doing was the same as somebody walking up behing a reporter who is doing a live remote, and making faces at the camera, or jumping up and down. They were taking away from the shot, so they were stopped from doing so. Dunn wanted people at home watching the ring, not trying to figure who the guys in the outfits were, what they were doing there, and if they were part of the show. So you wouldn't object if they were seated further back? From a television production standpoint, no I would not. From a "damn that's goofy" standpoint, I'd still think it's goofy. Look...I understand that some people love to dress up and act goofy. This is why people go to the Rocky Horror Picture Show, and Conventions, and Nickelback concerts. What I don't like is fans who go places and act in a manner that is clearly meant to distract away from the event at hand, or at the very least draw attention to themselves. I don't like fans who do things to try and "get themselves over" especially when it is at the expense of the product. In this particular case, you could make an argument that these fans weren't doing any particular harm - and there may be some merit to that argument. I freely admit I just don't get this whole dressing up thing. I get fandom, I get hardcore obsessive fandom. (Hell, that's why we are all here.) Look, I am a huge Doctor Who fan. I have every single episode of the show from it's entire 50 year history - including some of the non-canon audio adventures. I have a poster. I have a t-shirt. I have action figures. But I don't dress up like one of the Doctors and go out in public dressed like that - which I could, because a couple of them were quite stylish dressers. To me, that crosses the line between super-fandom and "hey look at me, I have issues." But that's just my opinion, so if you don't agree, you don't agree.

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read No it isn't. You found it witty and yet at the same time intelligent, and you're a better person for having read it.

The problem is, a lot of the guys who get into the business do so with the specific dream of making it to WWE. Even those guys who end up making a living on the indies or in Japan/Mexico might not feel they really "made it" unless they work Wrestlemania. I think of the interviews Kurt Angle has given where he talks about meeting fans who think he quit wrestling after leaving WWE. I wonder if a lot of those guys are not as worried about the job satisfaction as they are the fame and wide exposure that comes with WWE. I have no doubt that Bryan would have better matches and deal with way less political nonsense if he was working a combination of ROH/NJPW, but you have to wonder if he would consider that not really making it. I think for a lot of these guys it's WWE or bust, sadly.

Bit of a buzzkill there mate. You might actually kill this thread. Never happen.