jmule
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,274
|
Post by jmule on Nov 24, 2014 8:11:17 GMT -5
Vince says "he doesn't remember" and mean gene guessed it was 500,000 but does anyone know exactly what warrior was asking for?
Also was he holding up Vince when he first arrived at the arena that day or was it just minutes before the match?
|
|
|
Post by Ishmeal Loves Kaseyhausen on Nov 24, 2014 10:50:01 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 11:05:00 GMT -5
Yes, Warrior should not have given Vince the ultimatum he did, but aside from that he was perfectly justified in everything he was asking for. Because of that ultimatum, Vince was able to twist it in a way that made Warrior look like the heel in this situation.
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Nov 24, 2014 12:05:42 GMT -5
The Warrior was not a good enough draw when he was the WWF champion and certainly not when compared to Hogan on any level. He simply didn't deserve the money he was asking for.
|
|
|
Post by Nickybojelais on Nov 24, 2014 13:37:45 GMT -5
How do you have the nerve to bitch about someone getting paid more than you when that person is a bigger star, more use to the WWF, and bringing more success and mainstream appeal to the aforementioned company?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 13:40:43 GMT -5
The Warrior was not a good enough draw when he was the WWF champion and certainly not when compared to Hogan on any level. He simply didn't deserve the money he was asking for. That's not accurate. The Warrior was drawing and selling merchandise comparable to Hogan around '89-'90 when he won the belt.
|
|
67 more
King Koopa
He's just a Sexy Kurt
Posts: 11,502
|
Post by 67 more on Nov 24, 2014 13:44:27 GMT -5
At the end of the day, Warrior made his demands and Vince agreed then reneged. Warrior was totally in the right for holding Vince up, IMO. If Vince didn't want to pay Warrior the amount, then he should've said no to begin with.
Reading about all the times in Bret's book where Vince would agree to a deal then try to alter the contract or completely renege on the deal, it seems like something Vince is very happy to do.
Hell, look at how WWE have tried to break their contract with Sky with the UK Network release and all the times they reneged on the deal with the World Wildlife Fund. If Vince wants something, he'll do it before someone brings him back down to reality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 13:44:53 GMT -5
How do you have the nerve to bitch about someone getting paid more than you when that person is a bigger star, more use to the WWF, and bringing more success and mainstream appeal to the aforementioned company? That's easy to answer. When you're working as many or more dates than Hogan, headlining as many shows as Hogan, your merchandise is outselling Hogan's, and you're being pushed as the new face of the company, why wouldn't you want a deal as good as Hogan's?
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Nov 24, 2014 13:58:14 GMT -5
How do you have the nerve to bitch about someone getting paid more than you when that person is a bigger star, more use to the WWF, and bringing more success and mainstream appeal to the aforementioned company? That's easy to answer. When you're working as many or more dates than Hogan, headlining as many shows as Hogan, your merchandise is outselling Hogan's, and you're being pushed as the new face of the company, why wouldn't you want a deal as good as Hogan's? The buyrates and house shows were down when UW was on top though.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 24, 2014 14:39:32 GMT -5
How do you have the nerve to bitch about someone getting paid more than you when that person is a bigger star, more use to the WWF, and bringing more success and mainstream appeal to the aforementioned company? That's easy to answer. When you're working as many or more dates than Hogan, headlining as many shows as Hogan, your merchandise is outselling Hogan's, and you're being pushed as the new face of the company, why wouldn't you want a deal as good as Hogan's? I'd find it very, very difficult to believe his merchandise was ever outselling Hogan's at any point. I also don't believe his house shows drew as strongly either. Warrior was the most over non-Hogan face they'd had to that point but he still wasn't Hogan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 14:45:16 GMT -5
That's easy to answer. When you're working as many or more dates than Hogan, headlining as many shows as Hogan, your merchandise is outselling Hogan's, and you're being pushed as the new face of the company, why wouldn't you want a deal as good as Hogan's? The buyrates and house shows were down when UW was on top though. Everything went down in the 90's. Hogan didn't even bring in the same business in the 90's. The business was simply losing steam. The idea that WWE lost business because of Warrior is silly. First, because other than Hogan, Warrior was the biggest draw on the card. Second, because no one else from that era could ever lay claim to selling more merchandise than Hogan. Third, because Hogan never actually left the main event picture. They just started booking double main events so that Hulkamania could continue to reign supreme. Fourth, because there was no boom when they took the belt off Warrior and put it back on Hogan. It's silly to blame Warrior for being a businessman and trying to get a better deal, especially since Vince agreed to the deal. Warrior's only fault in all of this is holding up Vince for the money at Summerslam. That's easy to answer. When you're working as many or more dates than Hogan, headlining as many shows as Hogan, your merchandise is outselling Hogan's, and you're being pushed as the new face of the company, why wouldn't you want a deal as good as Hogan's? I'd find it very, very difficult to believe his merchandise was ever outselling Hogan's at any point. I also don't believe his house shows drew as strongly either. Warrior was the most over non-Hogan face they'd had to that point but he still wasn't Hogan. There are people in the business who were around at that time who said that it did. WWE Network wouldn't lie to me.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 24, 2014 15:26:51 GMT -5
Average listed attendance from that 'History of WWE' page in 1990 from the major markets: Chicago, Minneapolis, LA, Toronto, Orlando, Philadelphia, Boston (I know it doesn't include attendances for every show, so it's not exactly scientific, but I've pulled the ones it does give) {Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler} Chicago (Rosemont Horizon):
Warrior - 8,033 Hogan - 13,500
Minneapolis:
Warrior - 4,650 Hogan - 7,300
LA (Sports Arena)
Warrior - 10,925 Hogan - 12,100
Toronto (ex WM)
Warrior - 5,000 Hogan - 12,900
Orlando
Warrior -4,700 Hogan - 7,500
Philadelphia (Spectrum)
Warrior - 11,176 Hogan - 11,340
Boston (Gardens)
Warrior - 11,507 Hogan - 11,957 Warrior ave - 7,998 Hogan ave 10,942 I've excluded MSG because those results are a massive cluster**** it's hard to determine what is what as most of them are long-ass TV tapings for the MSG Network. Bear in mind as said above, the whole of the business was down from 1989 as the Hogan vs Savage feud was and remains their biggest ticket-selling feud up and down the country. Warrior was still an excellent draw, deserving of the title and the push but I don't think he was ever really the draw Hogan was even when he had the strap.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Nov 24, 2014 15:43:27 GMT -5
Nailz price?
Vince's life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 16:00:48 GMT -5
Average listed attendance from that 'History of WWE' page in 1990 from the major markets: Chicago, Minneapolis, LA, Toronto, Orlando, Philadelphia, Boston (I know it doesn't include attendances for every show, so it's not exactly scientific, but I've pulled the ones it does give) {Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler} Chicago (Rosemont Horizon):
Warrior - 8,033 Hogan - 13,500
Minneapolis:
Warrior - 4,650 Hogan - 7,300
LA (Sports Arena)
Warrior - 10,925 Hogan - 12,100
Toronto (ex WM)
Warrior - 5,000 Hogan - 12,900
Orlando
Warrior -4,700 Hogan - 7,500
Philadelphia (Spectrum)
Warrior - 11,176 Hogan - 11,340
Boston (Gardens)
Warrior - 11,507 Hogan - 11,957 Warrior ave - 7,998 Hogan ave 10,942 I've excluded MSG because those results are a massive cluster**** it's hard to determine what is what as most of them are long-ass TV tapings for the MSG Network. Bear in mind as said above, the whole of the business was down from 1989 as the Hogan vs Savage feud was and remains their biggest ticket-selling feud up and down the country. Warrior was still an excellent draw, deserving of the title and the push but I don't think he was ever really the draw Hogan was even when he had the strap. Agreed, he was never the draw that Hogan was. Then again, no one was. Anyone compared to Hogan is going to come up short.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 24, 2014 16:04:36 GMT -5
Vince is a cut-throat businessman.
You get what you give. I have no problem with any wrestler playing hardball with him.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Nov 25, 2014 9:30:31 GMT -5
The buyrates and house shows were down when UW was on top though. It's a bit unfair to say Warrior was responsible for a drop in buyrates when Hogan still front and center, the Hogan/Quake feud was given equal status to Warrior's feuds and he main evented all the PPVs while Warrior was the champion. Warrior's run as a main eventer started when he won the title at WM6, Summerslam 90 has Hogan/Quake as part of a double main event, Survivor series 90 had Hogan and Warrior on the same team in the main event, Royal Rumble 91 had Hogan winning the Rumble in the main event to face Slaughter in the main event of WrestleMania 7 with Warrior/Savage midway down the card and finally, Summerslam 91 had Hogan/Warrior tagging in the main event. Hogan and the WWF in general were losing their luster thanks to scandals and people being sick of the same old routine. The decline would have happened whoever was main eventing, Savage, Flair, Hart, Hogan all saw declining returns, Warrior just happened to be the one on top when the slide began.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 26, 2014 3:28:03 GMT -5
it's not as simple as that though. It wasn't just that business was down - it was that Warrior's business was 'declining' at a faster rate than Hogan's. Hogan's house shows sold better and his merchandise sold more and he was likely considered by sponsors and people who WWE licensed to make their crap, considered the bigger asset. Business was down in general, nobody blames Warrior for that, but even a declining business still has it's number 1 guy and even when Warrior had the strap that was Hogan and after 10 months or so with the belt they decided to switch it back to their number 1 draw.
This was an era when unless you had a specific reason not to, the champion was always the number 1 guy in the company unlike today's "see how he gets on" methodology. Vince took a risk with Warrior hoping the belt would send him over the top to be the number 1 guy in the company - but it never did that that's why it was returned to Hogan eventually.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2014 10:13:05 GMT -5
it's not as simple as that though. It wasn't just that business was down - it was that Warrior's business was 'declining' at a faster rate than Hogan's. Hogan's house shows sold better and his merchandise sold more and he was likely considered by sponsors and people who WWE licensed to make their crap, considered the bigger asset. Business was down in general, nobody blames Warrior for that, but even a declining business still has it's number 1 guy and even when Warrior had the strap that was Hogan and after 10 months or so with the belt they decided to switch it back to their number 1 draw. This was an era when unless you had a specific reason not to, the champion was always the number 1 guy in the company unlike today's "see how he gets on" methodology. Vince took a risk with Warrior hoping the belt would send him over the top to be the number 1 guy in the company - but it never did that that's why it was returned to Hogan eventually. I don't really buy that people stopped watching because Warrior had the belt. I hated the Ultimate Warrior as a child (and Hogan too) and I was glued to the product during this era, because overall it was great. Aside from that, as has been pointed out, Hulk Hogan never left the main event. Hogan was in the spotlight just as much during Warrior's reign as he was during Savage's reign. Putting the belt on Warrior was, as you say, a ploy to push Warrior into becoming the same caliber of star as Hogan. It didn't work, but the only way it could be argued that this actually hurt the business would have been if they had taken Hogan completely out of the picture to see how Warrior could carry it as a solo act. Since they didn't do that, and Hogan was doing exactly the same things he would have been doing if he were still wearing the belt, it's impossible to say that Warrior was responsible for declining business.
|
|
Crappler El 0 M
Dalek
Never Forgets an Octagon
I'm a good R-Truth.
Posts: 58,479
|
Post by Crappler El 0 M on Nov 26, 2014 10:20:59 GMT -5
Meltzer reports that the 'hold-up' didn't happen on the day of SummerSlam, as WWE-produced documentaries portray the situation. It happened a few weeks earlier. Vince agreed to give Warrior what he wanted without a metaphorical "gun to his head." According to Meltzer, Vince regretted giving Warrior what he agreed to and released him after SummerSlam.
Who's to know which version of events is true, but I don't think we should automatically assume the 'gun to his head' version put out by WWE over the years is the true side of things.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Nov 26, 2014 15:39:18 GMT -5
$9.99
|
|