kjh

Cornette gets *much much* angrier on the official trailer. :-/

Dave discounted this idea on his radio show today.

I think a better way of putting it would be why run a poll if there's only one right answer.

This could be on the right track, as I'm sure Meltzer mentioned at one point that the lead contender to buy TNA was a group Jeff Jarrett had found.

I think Dave's point was that it wasn't an organic spontaneous reaction, but one that was expected and scripted by having Benoit look at the crowd with big eyes that screamed "please cheer for me" whilst he hobbled to the back like a wounded warrior.

Lance needs to become a cranky academic. His head might explode about hearing that journals don't pay authors or reviewers for their work.

I think one thing we as wrestling fans should know by now is that meetings with TV companies are pretty meaningless until a concrete offer is made. I'm not sure the TV industry will buy into WWE's spin as much as Variety did.

AJ Lee should call Missy Hyatt for legal advice.

Mike Awesome had a tryout with the WWF in December 1996 and presumably didn't get offered a job.

Rob mentioned on the Observer podcast that he had heard back that he was perceived as just running around and being Dusty Rhodes's bitch in NXT.

I really hope Rob gets another shot in WWE down the line, although I think the current ambiguity is only there because that's what he wanted to see. We've all been around long enough to know that whenever WWE uses the "creative has nothing for you" line it's BS. Someone isn't called an executive's "bitch", if he's universally, as in everyone in the company, likes him. When your old job is advertised immediately after you are fired, that's a sign that they don't want you in the position today so don't bother applying.

He said "connect devices" so that implies XBOX360/XBOX-One, PS3/PS4 along with presumably services like Roku. If it's available via major video game consoles, it at least has a shot - and as been noted, should they get 80% of the cut instead of 33%, that should majorly help on the break-even point. Lastly, it won't completely gut normal PPV ordering until 2015 which they will have more TV money to supplement. Honestly, if I can get WM streamed in HD on my TV via XBOX360, the $60 is spent and the rest is gravy for me. I do wonder if we're in the bubble here, being generally more tech savvy and hardcore than the average wrestling fan. I would be interested in knowing stats about how many people currently use consoles to watch online events through their TV.

I think going the online route is a disaster waiting to happen, but it seems to be there only option at this point. WWE had major problems at WrestleMania 29 with their online feed and that was with only a fraction of the viewers they hope to get for the Network. The only saving grace is if this means that they can roll out the Network internationally then that may overcome the big negative that lots of people aren't willing to watch TV through their computer yet.

I agree with John, all lateral moves, though it may be a sign that Vince is giving up more of his duties and responsibilities, though he's still the man in charge of course. Moreover, it looks like everyone in the company has more work on their plate with the WWE Network finally about to be launched.

The problem with TNT is that his North American run was largely mediocre. Konnan had the same problem, but his drawing power in the early 90s in Mexico couldn't be denied. I can't see TNT's numbers being as impressive coming at the tail end of the peak of Puerto Rican wrestling.

Latest on Dana vs. GSP: Classy.

Assuming WrestleMania 30 does 600,000 buys in the U.S. at an average price of $65, that would mean 600,000*32.5=$19.5 million in revenue. Say the network's running costs are $4 million for the month. So you would need $23.5 million in revenue from the network to break even. Assuming the price is $9.95 for the network and they receive half of that money per subscriber leads to a little over 4.5 million subscribers. The idea, though, is that they would make the money back over the year by having a lot of these subscribers become lifelong subscribers. Yes, that's true, but given that most fans only watch one to three pay-per-views a year, it's highly likely that most fans will buy just to see WrestleMania 30 and then cancel their subscription until the next major pay-per-view airs on the WWE Network.

Assuming WrestleMania 30 does 600,000 buys in the U.S. at an average price of $65, that would mean 600,000*32.5=$19.5 million in revenue. Say the network's running costs are $4 million for the month. So you would need $23.5 million in revenue from the network to break even. Assuming the price is $9.95 for the network and they receive half of that money per subscriber leads to a little over 4.5 million subscribers.

A replay of WrestleMania a few weeks after the event makes sense to drive subscriptions. Airing the event live is a reckless move. They'd need about 4.5 million subscribers (assuming universal clearance) to get the same amount of revenue that they would from airing the event on pay-per-view and cover the network's costs. And once you provide it for $9.95 there's no going back.

I thought all wrestlers other than The Rock just had downside guarantees that had to be met over a 12 month period? Given that the network isn't going to get coverage in the U.S. everywhere immediately and the international pay-per-views will continue, one would imagine they'll still get payoffs for each pay-per-view though the size of them will be lower unless the network is a big success from day one. In the end I can see a lot of disgruntled performers as they'll probably end up doing more work for the same or lower pay. I was thinking about it the other way - referring to David's earlier point about whether PPVs will matter..... If guys know they're going to be paid more for doing a "PPV" (and PPVs will still exist until the Network has such coverage that it just doesn't make sense to offer them ala cart - i.e. they'll always exist), even if the storylines aren't culminating in a huge way at every monthly PPV, I still think wrestlers will be motivated to go out there and work hard. Now, there's always that potential of a WCW situation where people stop caring, but this is a company that's run a lot different than WCW and this is also not the same coasting-on-the-star-power crew that they had either. Really, TNA moving to four pay-per-views a year and having special themed editions of Impact on the months without a pay-per-view is a good case study at the possible effects of moving most WWE pay-per-views to the network. In TNA's case, the TV specials seem less of a big deal than when the shows were pay-per-views, even though the wrestlers still put in the same effort. I can't see the wrestlers, creative staff and management stop caring, as where else do they go to make the same money? It's not like WCW where the top stars could tank the company and realize there would always be WWE to go back to. The bigger risk would be burn out and the quality of the shows dropping as a consequence.

I thought all wrestlers other than The Rock just had downside guarantees that had to be met over a 12 month period? Given that the network isn't going to get coverage in the U.S. everywhere immediately and the international pay-per-views will continue, one would imagine they'll still get payoffs for each pay-per-view though the size of them will be lower unless the network is a big success from day one. In the end I can see a lot of disgruntled performers as they'll probably end up doing more work for the same or lower pay.

It's possible they tried and no-one bit. Two years ago, when the WWE network was first thought imminent the word was that were having great difficulty finding someone willing to pick up the poisoned chalice of running the channel.

Joe Rogan calls for Georges St. Pierre to retire, cites memory loss and alien abduction Dana's going to love that!

G4 is effective dead: John I should have been clearer that I was just using G4 as an hypothetical example though as was pointed out, there was a time they could have struck and they missed it. I don't disagree with your thinking of how that all could have worked and how it'd be a hell of a lot smoother than a nebulous premium channel launch. WWE did try the "buy an existing channel from NBCUniversal" route, as Vince McMahon apparently tried to buy the Universal HD network from his TV partners in 2011, but clearly the negotiations went nowhere if there was anything to that rumoured story.

The shitting on the NSAC was more to do with Dana disliking Keith Kizer I imagine. Dave mentioned that the night before there were some sort of shenanigans involving the NSAC during the taping of TUF (BJ vs Edgar) so Dana was pissed. It's also because Kizer keeps picking judges and referees (e.g. Steve Mazzagatti) that Dana thinks are incompetent.