Smack2k Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 What were the terms of the deal that Vince did with his dad and partners to gain ownership of the WWWF? I know his dad was thiniking of selling, so VKM stepped in, but have always been curious about the business side of the deal? Anyone with some deeper knowledge of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Here's what happened last time we discussed this: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?s=&a...t&p=5534458 But all of the raw info is in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smack2k Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Thanks Brotha....I would LOVE to get the real business details of that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Thanks Brotha....I would LOVE to get the real business details of that.... Fun thread. Ran onto Page 3. Then the Mid South stuff started, which was a riot as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smack2k Posted February 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Yeah, read it last night...really good stuff..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 It wasn't very fun to take part in. The conclusion that any sane, thinking person would take from that debate was that a slump in the economy does affect the box office, but ultimately it's down to the company just to try that bit harder to draw. Therefore they can't use the economy alone as an excuse and Watts should accept more blame / responsibility for the decline of his company. That's a balanced and nuanced conclusion. Do you know what isn't? Totally discounting external factors. Back on the WWF takeover stuff, I still don't think jdw has any real reason to discount the Gorilla story other than his own reactionary knee-jerk "it's all bullshit" response. The story we have is from Meltzer, who protects his sources. If we don't believe Meltzer on the Gorilla payoff deal then what do we believe him on? How do you decide what is and isn't legit when in lots of cases he's our only source for numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Absent a good reason to doubt Meltzer's sources, why question his reporting. Can argue on taste but I don't recall any reasons to challenge his integrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Why question Dave? Because the math didn't pass the laugh test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 Back on the WWF takeover stuff, I still don't think jdw has any real reason to discount the Gorilla story other than his own reactionary knee-jerk "it's all bullshit" response. The story we have is from Meltzer, who protects his sources. If we don't believe Meltzer on the Gorilla payoff deal then what do we believe him on? How do you decide what is and isn't legit when in lots of cases he's our only source for numbers? Well, this is what you rolled out in your last post: "Just to play devil's advocate here, where's your evidence to back that up?" -Jerry To which I responded (after dealing with all the other nonsense in your post): "What evidence do you have that Gorilla was even paid $100K for his share? Do you have a copy of the sale agreement? Do you have a copy of the check? Anything? Or just hearsay and/or Wrestling Stories? Which still stands. You've got literally nothing, yet you're requiring us to prove wrong something that is utterly laughable. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khawk20 Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 It wasn't very fun to take part in. Some people are very good at sucking the fun out of a topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 It wasn't very fun to take part in. The conclusion that any sane, thinking person would take from that debate was that a slump in the economy does affect the box office, but ultimately it's down to the company just to try that bit harder to draw. Therefore they can't use the economy alone as an excuse and Watts should accept more blame / responsibility for the decline of his company. That's a balanced and nuanced conclusion. Do you know what isn't? Totally discounting external factors. I think the very first response to you, by one of the more sane posters on the site, summed up the entire position of one side of the discussion perfectly: "The oil crisis tended to disproportionately affect wrestling promoters who weren't giving people what they wanted to see anymore." -Loss The thing went on for page after page after that because you tried to shape shift as the thing went along, which was summed up well by one response: Point me to any factor other than the "oil crisis" that you cite as causing his promotion to be put on the verge of BK. In the very first post that followed, Loss pointed to "product". Which you wouldn't buy, and won't let go of the oil factor. Come on Jerry... don't pull a Watts and rewrite the history of this thread. We actually can go back and read what happened a day ago, as opposed to Watts being able to pull the wool over your eyes on something that happened nearly 30 years ago. Christ... Which is still the case. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 It wasn't very fun to take part in. Some people are very good at sucking the fun out of a topic. You loved Sorrow's Happy Days post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I don't understand why it's that hard to believe Gorilla was paid so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheapshot Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I don't understand why it's that hard to believe Gorilla was paid so well. Agreed, using Annual Inflation of 2.85% from 1983 to 2014 it would still only be $238,779.71 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 And as far as the "1.5x prelim pay on every show they ran" part goes, it's possible Dave's financial reports he got faxed each morning from WWE with gate/paid/paper had payoffs & draws (advances) on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I don't understand why it's that hard to believe Gorilla was paid so well. No one is saying Gorilla didn't get paid well for working for the WWF. The buyout doesn't really have much of anything to do with Gorilla getting paid as an announcer in the WWF. I'm saying that math for the "buyout" doesn't pass the laugh test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 And as far as the "1.5x prelim pay on every show they ran" part goes, it's possible Dave's financial reports he got faxed each morning from WWE with gate/paid/paper had payoffs & draws (advances) on them. There's nothing in Dave's writing in the 80s that indicate he was getting WWF financial reports faxed to him daily. Pop open a random month of WON's in 1989. Do his numbers for WWF house shows look like they *all* are exact on attendance and gates? Does it even look like in any single issue he's tracking every card the WWF ran that week (i.e. all three crews along with any double shots)? At what point did Dave start including numbers for "every" card? Summer of 1992 when he broke out the results into their own section? How exact are they in 1992? Is attendance even listed for every card? It would be wildly entertaining if Dave scanned in one of those "financial reports" that he got "daily". It's 20 years after the fact... it would be pretty hard for the WWF to come after him at this point. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 It would be wildly entertaining if Dave scanned in one of those "financial reports" that he got "daily". It's 20 years after the fact... it would be pretty hard for the WWF to come after him at this point. John I'll believe it when I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 I don't really care at this point, John, you fill every thread with so much stuff that very simple arguments get convoluted fast. You don't talk to me like a human being having a conversation, but rather hound me looking for errors and ways to trip me up. That's a dick move. And you make it time and again, because you're a dick, it's as simple as that. 'Cause there's always someone, somewhere With a big nose, who knows And who trips you up and laughs When you fall That's you that is. But you do it even in cases where someone is making pretty reasonable points. For example, Meltzer reports the Gorilla deal as being the prelim package. This has been corroborated by several other eye witnesses down the years. Yet, for some reason, you think you know better. And so in your basic pig-headness put yourself in the position of the one with the big nose who knows. Every time, even when you don't have much more than a gut feeling that the numbers are "laughable" to go on. Likewise, my only point in that thread on Mid South, which I thought was clear then and still is now, is that just because Watts and co pin everything on the oil crisis, doesn't mean that it wasn't a factor. You can't discount it as a factor, because it was a factor. Was it the only one? No. There were at least four, probably more. But your seemingly psychopathic desire to crush any possibility of the oil crisis having part of the decline of the company -- when it so clearly did have some impact -- is the work of a sick mind my friend. It's not the work of a particularly academic or intellectual mind, but one whose only will is towards, by whatever means necessary, ridiculing the person you are talking to. Not a very nice man. Even after I point this out to you, with crushing and inevitable predictability, you'll come back trying to prove this or that. Trying to show that on October 4th at 6pm I said this or that or the other. You don't deserve to have any friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 There is nothing new to add to this. I think Brian got another source and reference to go by. Thread closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts