Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 28,829
Member is Online
|
Post by Sephiroth on Jul 26, 2014 10:12:36 GMT -5
When WCW and ECW died out, there ceased to be an alternative to WWE. Even today you can't really call TNA or ROH alternatives because of they're limited availability. There are plenty of entertainment giants that could easily start up a new wrestling fed to rival WWE, but thus far none seem interested.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Jul 26, 2014 10:19:01 GMT -5
When WCW and ECW died out, there ceased to be an alternative to WWE. Even today you can't really call TNA or ROH alternatives because of they're limited availability. There are plenty of entertainment giants that could easily start up a new wrestling fed to rival WWE, but thus far none seem interested. That's because there isn't enough short term gains to make it worth investing the time and effort into starting from scratch. Disney rather buy established, money making brands instead of starting from the ground up. Reason why they bought Pixar, Star Wars, and Marvel instead of trying to create their own. Starting a wrestling promotion even on the small indy level cost money. Imagine doing that on a national level.
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 28,829
Member is Online
|
Post by Sephiroth on Jul 26, 2014 10:55:38 GMT -5
When WCW and ECW died out, there ceased to be an alternative to WWE. Even today you can't really call TNA or ROH alternatives because of they're limited availability. There are plenty of entertainment giants that could easily start up a new wrestling fed to rival WWE, but thus far none seem interested. That's because there isn't enough short term gains to make it worth investing the time and effort into starting from scratch. Disney rather buy established, money making brands instead of starting from the ground up. Reason why they bought Pixar, Star Wars, and Marvel instead of trying to create their own. Starting a wrestling promotion even on the small indy level cost money. Imagine doing that on a national level. Indeed. I actually did a thread a couple months ago suggesting that it would not amaze me if Disney ever decided to purchase ROH or TNA; granted, wrestling would not seem to fit the Disney portfolio, but given how much they seem to be diversifying it would not shock me at all.
|
|
|
Post by OVO 40 hunched over like he 80 on Jul 26, 2014 11:25:46 GMT -5
It's astonishing that Vince owns about 90% of wrestling ever produced on his library. I wonder if a Japanese promotion ever close would he just buy it for content?
|
|
vinnie245
Bubba Ho-Tep
The Vinster
Posts: 568
|
Post by vinnie245 on Jul 26, 2014 11:32:24 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2014 11:41:16 GMT -5
That's because there isn't enough short term gains to make it worth investing the time and effort into starting from scratch. Disney rather buy established, money making brands instead of starting from the ground up. Reason why they bought Pixar, Star Wars, and Marvel instead of trying to create their own. Starting a wrestling promotion even on the small indy level cost money. Imagine doing that on a national level. Indeed. I actually did a thread a couple months ago suggesting that it would not amaze me if Disney ever decided to purchase ROH or TNA; granted, wrestling would not seem to fit the Disney portfolio, but given how much they seem to be diversifying it would not shock me at all. ROH and Marvel are working together on some stuff, so it's not out of the realm of possibility for Disney to maybe try and buy them if their partnership is profitable. As for Vince, I am sick of people blaming him for having the product most people wanted to watch 15 years ago. It's not his fault that AOL Time Warner didn't want a wrestling show or that Paul Heyman was bad with money. And to his credit, despite the attempts being somewhat misguided, he did attempt to keep both WCW and ECW around in some capacity.
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 28,829
Member is Online
|
Post by Sephiroth on Jul 26, 2014 12:03:14 GMT -5
Indeed. I actually did a thread a couple months ago suggesting that it would not amaze me if Disney ever decided to purchase ROH or TNA; granted, wrestling would not seem to fit the Disney portfolio, but given how much they seem to be diversifying it would not shock me at all. ROH and Marvel are working together on some stuff, so it's not out of the realm of possibility for Disney to maybe try and buy them if their partnership is profitable. As for Vince, I am sick of people blaming him for having the product most people wanted to watch 15 years ago. It's not his fault that AOL Time Warner didn't want a wrestling show or that Paul Heyman was bad with money. And to his credit, despite the attempts being somewhat misguided, he did attempt to keep both WCW and ECW around in some capacity. As stated by another poster, I think it is more because of how badly the whole InVasion angle was handled. Vince more or less actively tried to destroy WCW's legacy as a promotion that gave him a run for his money, to some extent still does.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jul 26, 2014 12:04:46 GMT -5
Vince destroyed wrestling due to his own strange beliefs and imposing his carny personality on the booking of the company
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2014 12:13:06 GMT -5
ROH and Marvel are working together on some stuff, so it's not out of the realm of possibility for Disney to maybe try and buy them if their partnership is profitable. As for Vince, I am sick of people blaming him for having the product most people wanted to watch 15 years ago. It's not his fault that AOL Time Warner didn't want a wrestling show or that Paul Heyman was bad with money. And to his credit, despite the attempts being somewhat misguided, he did attempt to keep both WCW and ECW around in some capacity. As stated by another poster, I think it is more because of how badly the whole InVasion angle was handled. Vince more or less actively tried to destroy WCW's legacy as a promotion that gave him a run for his money, to some extent still does. Vince tried to replace Monday Night Raw with WCW Nitro but the networks didn't want it. Hardly the act of someone that wants to bury it. Now I fully admit that in subsequent years they have buried WCW, but the fact remains they tried to save it.
|
|
|
Post by Main Eventer on Jul 26, 2014 12:44:17 GMT -5
It was a great idea for Vince to buy WCW and ECW so that way there was no real competition for him ever again. It was bad for everybody else because there was no alternative to WWE and now if wrestlers don't make it in WWF there is nobody else to go.
I mean they could go to TNA, but you might as well get a job at Wal-Mart. At least Wal-Mart will pay you on time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2014 12:52:10 GMT -5
The entire argument that Vince destroyed wrestling is flawed. First, we have to establish, "What is wrestling?"
Wrestling is still going on in high schools and colleges across the world. Oh wait, you meant the scripted professional kind of wrestling? It's still going on across the world too. So, exactly how did Vince destroy wrestling?
What people mean is that they have not found a brand of wrestling they have enjoyed since ECW and/or WCW went off the air. That's reasonable, but it's not Vince's fault.
WCW ended for one reason: Time Warner/AOL didn't like wrestling and didn't want wrestling on their network, so they cancelled all its wrestling programming. Their demise had nothing to do with low ratings, guaranteed contracts, bad booking, Russo, Bischoff, Hogan, or any of the other laundry list of things that people typically prescribe. Had their TV not been cancelled, WCW would have continued in some form under new ownership.
If you want to direct your anger at anyone for WCW's demise, aim it at Time Warner.
You CAN be angry at Vince for his handling of WCW after he bought it, because it was just one massive screwup after another. There is no greater failure in the history of pro wrestling than how Vince incorporated WCW into his brand.
|
|
|
Post by sportatorium on Jul 26, 2014 14:01:46 GMT -5
Vince didn't "destroy" wrestling. WCW execs destroyed that company by spending way more $ than they could ever expect to see a return from. ECW couldn't compete with the big 2 and they both snatched talent at will from them.
Post attitude era- WWE reinvented itself as a PG, sponsor hungry corporation. They have now gone way too far down that rabbit hole & no longer operate like a wrestling company. This is the destruction of wrestling in some people's eyes. Vince & his family would tell you that it was the inevitable next step. Don't get me wrong, I'm not apologizing for the state of WWE 2014 to hardcore wrestling fans, just saying it may not be the product to watch.
|
|
|
Post by Andy Martin on Jul 26, 2014 14:27:25 GMT -5
Vince destroyed wrestling due to his own strange beliefs and imposing his carny personality on the booking of the company Wrestling is still here though?
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jul 26, 2014 14:40:04 GMT -5
Vince destroyed wrestling due to his own strange beliefs and imposing his carny personality on the booking of the company Wrestling is still here though? Sports entertainment comedy variety with action based stories or whatever bullshit euphamism Vince and Dunn love is still here. Wrestling in WWE is limited mainly to NXT, which thankfully he has the least amount of interest in.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Grimlock
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 14,948
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Jul 26, 2014 15:02:21 GMT -5
Both deals were shady, because there were groups that wanted to buy WCW and ECW respectively and they were sold to the WWE for far less than these groups offered to pay. The deal Dreamer was talking about for a hundred million for ECW and whatever amount Bischoff's group was going to pay, yet they were sold to the WWE for pennies on the dollar. While I don't normally subscribe to conspiracy theories, we already know Vince was paying for ECW and Heyman sabotaged Dreamer's opportunity. I find it hard to believe that a company like AOL/Time Warner would sell a property like WCW to the LOWER bidder without there being some fast track/ under the table agreement with the WWE. I did hear a rumour that as part of the deal when Vince sued WCW for portraying Hall and Nash as still working for him at first, that he got first option on buying WCW if it became available. Not sure how much stock I put in it though, considering the landscape in 1996, it'd be an amazing bit of foresight to ask for that.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,846
|
Post by chazraps on Jul 26, 2014 15:04:36 GMT -5
HE CAN'T REMEMBER MY NAME!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2014 15:05:58 GMT -5
Both companies dies on their own, but there is no doubting WWE's popularity and overall product has dropped off since WCW went under
|
|
|
Post by Ganon83 on Jul 26, 2014 15:40:38 GMT -5
WCW ended for one reason: Time Warner/AOL didn't like wrestling and didn't want wrestling on their network, so they cancelled all its wrestling programming. Their demise had nothing to do with low ratings, guaranteed contracts, bad booking, Russo, Bischoff, Hogan, or any of the other laundry list of things that people typically prescribe. Had their TV not been cancelled, WCW would have continued in some form under new ownership. I agree in part, but if the company had been making money or was as popular as it was in 1997-1998, I think somebody would of picked it up and opened bids on it. In 2001, WCW had a good TV deal, but it had 1. A depleted roster that had either given up, gone crazy (Steiner), or were politicians (Nash) 2. A brand name that, outside of a 3 year hot streak, had always been number 2 and had embarrassed itself more than anything 3. A bad reputation within a business most look down on to begin with 4. Was in debt and nowhere near profitable. Obviously the loss of TV WAS the main reason WCW died, but it isn't like the guys/reasons you mentioned didn't have a part in it.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Jul 26, 2014 15:44:49 GMT -5
Wrestling is still here though? Sports entertainment comedy variety with action based stories or whatever bullshit euphamism Vince and Dunn love is still here. Wrestling in WWE is limited mainly to NXT, which thankfully he has the least amount of interest in. That's been around since Hulkamania and especially during the Attitude Era. And I don't know why people act like wrestling matches only happen on NXT. Top notch wrestling matches happen on Raw and Smackdown every week also. But since NXT is the new IT thing, folks forget that. NXT has its good and bad weeks. Not everything is perfect.
|
|
|
Post by "Cane Dewey" Johnson on Jul 26, 2014 15:48:50 GMT -5
Vince destroyed wrestling due to his own strange beliefs and imposing his carny personality on the booking of the company Wrestling is still here though? I think Cornette has the best approach to thinking about the contemporary state of something which could be called 'wrestling' (or at the very least resembles it): How many people today can make a successful living off of wresting compared to those from 30-40 years ago? How many people today watch wrestling compared to those from 30-40 years ago? While WWE has certainly consolidated most of wrestling business (save for the more well-known Japanese and Mexican promotions, and maybe TNA and ROH), can we say that there are more wrestlers today than ever making a successful living off of wrestling? Or that there are more people today than ever watching wrestling?
|
|