|
Post by Ryushinku on Jun 13, 2010 9:35:46 GMT -5
Still saying work. But, judging by the IWC firestorm, a very convincing one (and even I'm not 100%).
Many people are trying to say "the fact is this" but really, there is absolutely no unarguable fact at the moment. None.
|
|
|
Post by Ash Kingston on Jun 13, 2010 9:38:14 GMT -5
According to a couple of other wrestling forums, Meltzer's rumour is ...wait, wasn't that posted a topic or two ago on here as a joke?
|
|
|
Post by Bauertainments on Jun 13, 2010 9:38:16 GMT -5
That Meltzer rumor stinks of newz; I don't even remember the whole Mattel thing being presented as anything but a rumor, but bringing up the Deadman gimmick and Punk's SES thing reeks of just trying to piss off IWC fans even more. If The Undertaker has to scrap the Deadman gimmick, he can easy enough be reborn as the leather biker Undertaker (which won't piss off the IWC - almost the opposite) Besides, Taker would probably love to go back to the BikerTaker one more time before he hangs it up, especially if it means riding his motorcycle down to the ring again.
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Jun 13, 2010 9:41:48 GMT -5
i'm gonna be sick. and to think i once supported that monster!
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,228
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Jun 13, 2010 9:42:04 GMT -5
hahhaahahahah
|
|
|
Post by Houdini of Hardcore on Jun 13, 2010 9:51:25 GMT -5
hahhaahahahah The monster
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Jun 13, 2010 9:58:29 GMT -5
According to a couple of other wrestling forums, Meltzer's rumour is ...wait, wasn't that posted a topic or two ago on here as a joke? Why yes it was. Meltzer is as clueless as Shaggy and Scooby before the first commercial break.
|
|
Push R Truth
Patti Mayonnaise
Unique and Special Snowflake, and a pants-less heathen.
Perpetually Constipated
Posts: 39,372
|
Post by Push R Truth on Jun 13, 2010 10:02:24 GMT -5
After looking at many posts and threads all around the wrestling world this morning....
A large portion of the IWC is acting like a bunch of hyper-reactive wrestling nerds that completely re-enforce the stereotype.
Now for the good news: this forum seems to be one of the most down-to-earth ones with this event. Good show!
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Jun 13, 2010 10:02:54 GMT -5
...wait, wasn't that posted a topic or two ago on here as a joke? Why yes it was. Meltzer is as clueless as Shaggy and Scooby before the first commercial break. NICE! It's nice to see we've risen above simply being the Photoshop Kings of the IWC; we're the newsmakers now baby!
|
|
ANTLOL
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,384
|
Post by ANTLOL on Jun 13, 2010 10:08:49 GMT -5
If the firing is legitimate TNA would be beyond stupid if they don't pick him up. WWE basically build they guy up for the mainstream audience. In TNA he could shoot a little on WWE and PG bullshit. As someone who wants TNA to be successful this is good news.
|
|
|
Post by I *still* ✡ Johnny on Jun 13, 2010 10:10:27 GMT -5
Why yes it was. Meltzer is as clueless as Shaggy and Scooby before the first commercial break. NICE! It's nice to see we've risen above simply being the Photoshop Kings of the IWC; we're the newsmakers now baby! Inducted as Wrestleawesome
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Jun 13, 2010 10:20:20 GMT -5
OK, this may get lost in the shuffle, but someone has to explain this. I am going to try to explain this and help some of you guys understand the business side of this decision, because this is obviously not a work, as much as we want it to be. I am working on an MBA, I have spent my entire academic career in Business, and I know the importance Public Relations plays into all of this. If you build a business plan and a company image around family friendly entertainment as opposed to reprehensible acts and violence, you are much, much more likely to attract the support of larger sponsors. If anyone remembers the PR associated with the Attitude Era (Foley does an excellent job explaining it in his second book), while fans were coming in droves, and merchandise/PPV was through the roof, their PR image wasn't worth s***. They had Parent's TV Councils after them and everything. To sponsor WWE/F at the time was a huge risk. Millions see your product, but in the business world your reputation plummets. Wrestling was always viewed as low brow, low class entertainment, and in the stuffy, fuddy duddy, politically correct business world, sponsoring pro wrestling was basically stooping to their level, in the eyes of those businesses. Let's now fast forward to this PG era. As an advertiser, one of your major demographics should always be children. Kids see something, they nag their parents, the parents make the purchase, and bam, revenue for the company. Having said this, you could imagine being an advertiser in this current era, where not only has the older demographic been semi-retained, but you also have this entirely new market of kids and families. Anyone who has been going to live shows for sometime now can agree that the landscape of the audience is vastly different than 5-10 years ago. That right there is an advertiser's dream: not only do the kids watch the show, but so do the parents, and hence it's a goldmine of revenue. Now let's look at last week. For the past few years all has been well in the land of the WWE. They have undergone, from a business standpoint, a highly successful transition into a much larger realm of viewers. They've introduced cartoony characters that are over (Hornswoggle), rebranded once edgy characters into kid friendly cash cows (Cena, DX), and have built up a positive brand image through the guest host concept, showing the world that WWE can transverse into other forms of entertainment. So now out of nowhere, here you are, a VP of Advertising/PR for a large company sponsoring the WWE, watching Raw, and here comes this brutal assault. There's violence, destruction, and assaults on hapless employees. During this melee you see a man visibly being strangled, and the image of the company being spat on and degraded. What's the first thing that comes to your mind? Well it certainly isn't "man this is awesome" or "this feels like 1999 all over again" or "nWo." The first thing this person is thinking about is their target audience, in this case the kids watching the show. And given the media's negative portrayal towards simulated violence causing kids to mimic these acts in the real world, you are immediately put off. Do you really want to move forward with a company that employs such wreckless people (kayfabe POV)? So what do you do? Well you put in a call to the chairman, and give him an ultimatum: either appropriately address the situation, or me, my advertising, my merchandise, and my millions of dollars are out the door, and we aren't looking back. If you're Vince, what do you do? You can't always view this product from the viewpoint of a fan. Sure we all become selfish and wish that things played out and we can go back to the glory days, but there is so much more to the product than simply being a fan. There's a much larger corporate side of things that have more pull than imaginable. It seems to me, as a layman, that while rebranding to kids has been fairly successful, it hasn't gotten WWE back to the levels it has been even 5 years ago. I understand that there's a lot to that, including the recession and people being more interested in MMA now, but it feels like there's only so much that can be gained from the children's market. The case could be made that women have even more influence over products and more money to be had, does that mean the WWE has an financial imperative to make their product more geared towards women than to men and children? Should they do what broadcast and cable networks are doing constantly now, changing their format in an attempt to get as many peoples' eyes off the internet as possible? The fact is, I don't think of things in business terms. I understand that the drive of any business is to make money. But too often, you see the reasons a business exists completely sacrificed to just remain a profit making entity, not just a moneymaking entity. I have the same problem with Activision's model under Bobby Kotick: if it doesn't turn a big buck, it doesn't come out under Activision. As someone who's more concerned with the content than the profit, that's a horrible, cynical message to send to people, in my opinion. So yeah, I am burned a little by the idea that WWE is leaving me behind because of my age. But when you have a passion for something that doesn't reach to their bottom line, it's hard not to. It's hard for me to justify giving them any money if I'm not having fun with it, and the things I do like are being quickly chipped away. I guess it's all perspective, really. And I feel that there's a place for hardcore fans at the table, there just has to be a balance, something that WWE has not been able to find. Firing Danielson for a violation of a policy without any kind of suspension or talking to, because he's a wrestling performer and not a glorified stuntman, sends a cynical message to anyone who wants to break into the business. I don't want WWE to lose it's partnership with Mattel just to protect one guy, but I also hate the fact that the answer is that he should lose his livelihood, his dream, when it feels like he was praised for his performance. It stinks. But hey, that's business for you.
|
|
Convoy
El Dandy
Rusev admits to being a sex addict to large applause.
Posts: 7,616
|
Post by Convoy on Jun 13, 2010 10:25:05 GMT -5
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Jun 13, 2010 10:25:41 GMT -5
this is my only response to this whole thing...... ;D I'm surprised Fathers Against Rude Television haven't had their say in this...
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Jun 13, 2010 10:27:36 GMT -5
and there's not going to be because he didn't violate the wellness policy
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Jun 13, 2010 10:28:30 GMT -5
this is my only response to this whole thing...... ;D I'm surprised Fathers Against Rude Television haven't had their say in this... lets hope those FARTers don't catch wind of this
|
|
sabu
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,605
|
Post by sabu on Jun 13, 2010 10:28:39 GMT -5
Does Mattel have a problem with wrestlers duct taping people to things?
|
|
|
Post by Quote the Tozz, Nevermore. on Jun 13, 2010 10:30:35 GMT -5
So, we're still no closer to finding out what's going on? I left this overnight to find a new thread lol.
|
|
|
Post by Piccolo on Jun 13, 2010 10:30:43 GMT -5
Products become successful initially because they appeal to the public. Sponsors jump on board because they can also make money from something the public likes. Company sees it makes more money from the sponsors than from the public, so it caters to them. Death knell sounds, because it may not happen today, tomorrow, or ten years from now, but eventually the public's desires will not mirror the sponsors' desires, and so everyone will stop being able to make enough money to make the venture worthwhile. Company folds. Everyone wonders why, since it was so successful for so long.
Except, of course, the public, who knows that the company hadn't been putting out a worthwhile product for decades.
You have to balance what the public wants with what your sponsors want. It seems extremely short-sighted to me to say that a company always has a moral, ethical and logical obligation to immediately cave to any whim of their sponsors, because those sponsors are here because the company's product is desired by the public. If the public ceases to want the company's product, then the company isn't serving the sponsors OR the public.
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Jun 13, 2010 10:36:32 GMT -5
You can't always view this product from the viewpoint of a fan. Sure we all become selfish and wish that things played out and we can go back to the glory days, but there is so much more to the product than simply being a fan. There's a much larger corporate side of things that have more pull than imaginable. Here's the big thing about that: The viewpoint of a fan, in terms of Pro Wrestling especially WWE, is the only viewpoint we have. All this Mattel/HHH/Benoit Rule stuff is all idle speculation, true or not. Sure, the sheets are going to report what they hear from the people they know in the WWE, but WWE isn't like most entertainment organisations. They're not going to tell these presses what happened with this fireing and they probably never will until shareholders ask about it at the next meeting and who knows what'll happen before then. So as fans, everything we hear only matters to how we watch the show or how we enjoy the product. For me, it honestly has made me cared less about the product. A guy has lost his job over a rule being broken or an upstairs figure being annoyed by what he sees. Not for doing drugs, not for destroying public property or breaking the law, one thing that could have been sorted out by a suspension or a talking to or something along those lines. That is what we see and, knowing WWE, it'll probably all we know about the situation. Even then, WWE have always been harsh about fireing guys for what can be seen, in heinsight, as really petty reasons (Cryme Tyme as an example). On the flip side, we don't even know if there is anything else to it. Maybe it's a cooling down period, maybe they don't want him back, maybe TNA's been on the phone. None of us know except Vince and the other bigwigs. It's slighlty not fair to us as fans, whether you've followed the guy for years or gained interest now (like my brother did on a potential Cole/Bryan fued) but that's how these things work.
|
|