thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,660
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Jun 14, 2015 9:40:22 GMT -5
At what point is WWE a monopoly with practices like this?
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,524
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Jun 14, 2015 9:51:51 GMT -5
At what point is WWE a monopoly with practices like this? Not even close. Wrestlers can go anywhere they want to work, they just now know the risks involved with signing a deal with ROH (as it would potentially upset a major WWE business partner). As consumers we still have multiple legitimate options to watch wrestling in North America and WWE has done nothing to stop those or prevent those sources from operating.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jun 14, 2015 10:08:30 GMT -5
Up until now WWE has never seemingly had a problem with ROH and has had references to them in the past. This is the first time I can think of where WWE, Mattel and a potential likeness deal has been linked with ROH which leads me to believe that something in regards to that deal has WWE concerned from a business perspective. WWE has worked with smaller promotions in the past (ECW, UPW, SMW) and have never seemed concerned with choking out any of these smaller promotions so I see no reason other than the business aspect on why they would advise wrestlers not to sign with ROH or TNA. It could be also something with Destination America that we aren't seeing since DA is linking ROH and TNA right now. If I thought that this was simply WWE trying to choke out the competition I would be totally against it as I believe more options create better wrestlers and the wrestling industry thrives with more successful alternative are available. I also don't believe it is right when larger companies use their weight to kill off smaller companies. I'm just not seeing that in this instance. Up until now, RoH hasn't had a national TV deal or been producing action figures. There were stories about them having this policy with TNA for a while now, IIRC about the time TNA tried to go on Monday nights. Now, shortly after RoH gets a tv deal, news of this come out. The quoted section of the story really speaks for itself. If they're encouraging anyone with WWE aspirations to not sign with RoH or TNA, then it's because they want to limit the potential talent pool for those companies, and the reason for it is really irrelevant. The story didn't say they're encouraging people to not sign licensure deals or sign shorter terms, but that they're encouraging them to avoid working for those companies if they want to work in WWE. The reason behind it really isn't relevant, the quote speaks for the strategy itself. The likely result of this strategy is to choke talent away from them, because WWE is the ultimate goal for the vast majority of young wrestlers. Manipulating the access of a necessary supply to competitors is strongarm business tactic, and that's what WWE is doing.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,524
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Jun 14, 2015 10:31:45 GMT -5
Up until now, RoH hasn't had a national TV deal or been producing action figures. There were stories about them having this policy with TNA for a while now, IIRC about the time TNA tried to go on Monday nights. Now, shortly after RoH gets a tv deal, news of this come out. The quoted section of the story really speaks for itself. If they're encouraging anyone with WWE aspirations to not sign with RoH or TNA, then it's because they want to limit the potential talent pool for those companies, and the reason for it is really irrelevant. The story didn't say they're encouraging people to not sign licensure deals or sign shorter terms, but that they're encouraging them to avoid working for those companies if they want to work in WWE. The reason behind it really isn't relevant, the quote speaks for the strategy itself. The likely result of this strategy is to choke talent away from them, because WWE is the ultimate goal for the vast majority of young wrestlers. Manipulating the access of a necessary supply to competitors is strongarm business tactic, and that's what WWE is doing. Here is a quote from an article that also explains it. I know people like to have a vison of a big bad evil WWE picking on the small companies but that isn't the case right here.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jun 14, 2015 11:01:55 GMT -5
This is what has Mattel upset and why WWE is understandably issuing this warning to younger wrestlers. Again this is a business decision and not the big bad WWE trying to pick on the smaller company. As said in this article: And I get that Mattel may be upset, but I dont' think that really matters or changes how WWE looks in it. WWE is choosing the course of action that they're taking, which is to use the full force of their business acument to try to stifle talent supply to their competitors. They know that no one else can provide the star power that WWE can, they know that no one else has the ceiling that WWE does, they know that wrestlers could go to teh top indies of the world and still be fairly anonymous to the general public while top WWE stars aren't, so they're using that to try to prevent TNA and RoH from ever getting talent. I don't get how we can recognize it but say that it isn't trying to choke out the competition. The reason for the suffocating something doesn't change the act of suffocation. It's a strategy to kill competion.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,524
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Jun 14, 2015 11:33:38 GMT -5
And I get that Mattel may be upset, but I dont' think that really matters or changes how WWE looks in it. WWE is choosing the course of action that they're taking, which is to use the full force of their business acument to try to stifle talent supply to their competitors. They know that no one else can provide the star power that WWE can, they know that no one else has the ceiling that WWE does, they know that wrestlers could go to teh top indies of the world and still be fairly anonymous to the general public while top WWE stars aren't, so they're using that to try to prevent TNA and RoH from ever getting talent. I don't get how we can recognize it but say that it isn't trying to choke out the competition. The reason for the suffocating something doesn't change the act of suffocation. It's a strategy to kill competion. I don't think we will change the others opinion on this and that's cool and I do respect your opinion. I will say that if you are correct on this I would definitely be in your corner on this as I would not support WWE suffocating ROH just because they can.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Jun 14, 2015 11:39:09 GMT -5
At what point is WWE a monopoly with practices like this? When there isn't a single indie fed in any State. Which won't happen. I know we joke about it at times here, we even use the word in the forum description, but truth is, WWE is far from being a monopoly. They would have to control almost 100% of the business to be considered one, and no matter how low-rent or fly-by-night some of the indies can be, there are still far, far, far too many of them out there making money and giving employment opportunities for WWE to be a monopoly. There are indie guys who claim to make more money working those than they would have had they signed with WWE. Anybody with a few thousand dollars can buy a ring, rent a school gym and hire whatever wrestlers they can afford. There's nothing stopping them, especially WWE.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jun 14, 2015 12:25:50 GMT -5
I'm not sure where a lot of us are getting our definitions of "monopoly" here, but it seems we're only understanding it in terms of a horizontally integrated monopoly, in which a single corporation/entity controls the entirety of a stage of production - for example, if I was in the clothing industry and I owned all the means of transporting cotton from farms to factories. WWE would be this if it owned any and all platforms on which professional wrestling was performed in the United States, which it clearly does not. This model is what made guys like Rockefeller and his Standard Oil monopoly so wealthy.
When WWE engages in tactics like this, what they're seeking to solidify is a vertically integrated monopoly, the model in which a single corporation/entity wants to control all aspects of the stages of production, even if it means allowing smaller competitors to exist on some of those ladder steps. This would be like a clothing company owning cotton fields, a transportation company to move that cotton around, and the cotton refineries where they're made into clothes, as well as the stores where the finished products are sold.
Competition can exist in a vertically integrated model, but when one company can stand as an 800 pound gorilla in the room, like Andrew Carnegie's US Steel in the 19th century, or Vince McMahon's WWE today (not to fully equate McMahon with Carnegie), they can influence the industry in such a way to stifle growth among competitors to ensure their market share. When that 800 pound gorilla begins blacklisting, the effects on the industry in question can be earth-shattering.
Now WWE clearly does not own EVERY step of the production process, but they certainly own a ton, especially with the birth of the Network. Given their titanic marketshare in North American pro wrestling, if they seek to streamline the independents and concentrate all the top potential independent talent into their own pipeline, that it almost by definition a monopolistic practice. If the main story is true and WWE, the only wrestling promotion in the Western hemisphere with "800 pound gorilla" status, is telling young talent that they risk a soft blacklist should they sign with a company the size of Ring of Honor, that is characteristic of a vertically integrated monopoly, as it's using its market share power and control of so many steps of the "wrestling production process" (which is only growing, if the "WWE may be Evolve" stories are to be believed) to starve off competition.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2015 14:08:27 GMT -5
WWE will lose more money by avoiding successful wrestlers in other promotions than they will gain by avoiding merchandise/rights issues. It's not even a good business decision. It's just a bad idea with no upside.
In fact it's such a bad idea if I was a major stockholder I'd be calling it into question on calls.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,524
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Jun 14, 2015 14:29:43 GMT -5
WWE will lose more money by avoiding successful wrestlers in other promotions than they will gain by avoiding merchandise/rights issues. It's not even a good business decision. It's just a bad idea with no upside. In fact it's such a bad idea if I was a major stockholder I'd be calling it into question on calls. First off I don't think any investor would ever ask that as Mattel is much more viable to WWE and its investors than ROH and any ROH wrestler is. This won't hurt WWE in the least as they are doing it to appease one of their most valuable business partners. Pretty easy answer from WWE that I think would go something like this: While we understand your concern we at WWE are still dedicated to securing the best talent in the world to entertain our audiences. On {insert date here} we had a conference call from Mr. Schnrub, marketing director at Mattel. If you are not aware we currently have one of the more lucrative merchandising contracts with Mattel and xx% of our profits are due to this very profitable deal between both companies.
One of the reason we are able to maintain such a valuable and extensive fee is due to Mattel having exclusive rights to the talents who work for WWE. Mattel recently became concerned as a rival company has just announced plans to release an action figure of one of our up and coming starts in Kevin Owens. Mr. Schnrub was very adamant that we prevent this conflict of interest from arising again. Therefore we have announced that we will no longer be interested in obtaining the services of talent that are a part of this deal. Obviously if we can benefit from a talent's services we will do everything to acquire their services but only after their likeness deal expires so that it does not present a conflict of interest with Mattel or any of our other business partners.
|
|
Captain Stud Muffin (BLM)
FANatic
You can either sink, swim, or be the captain....Long live the cheif
Posts: 113,553
Member is Online
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Jun 14, 2015 14:39:06 GMT -5
I'm not sure where a lot of us are getting our definitions of "monopoly" here, but it seems we're only understanding it in terms of a horizontally integrated monopoly, in which a single corporation/entity controls the entirety of a stage of production - for example, if I was in the clothing industry and I owned all the means of transporting cotton from farms to factories. WWE would be this if it owned any and all platforms on which professional wrestling was performed in the United States, which it clearly does not. This model is what made guys like Rockefeller and his Standard Oil monopoly so wealthy. When WWE engages in tactics like this, what they're seeking to solidify is a vertically integrated monopoly, the model in which a single corporation/entity wants to control all aspects of the stages of production, even if it means allowing smaller competitors to exist on some of those ladder steps. This would be like a clothing company owning cotton fields, a transportation company to move that cotton around, and the cotton refineries where they're made into clothes, as well as the stores where the finished products are sold. Competition can exist in a vertically integrated model, but when one company can stand as an 800 pound gorilla in the room, like Andrew Carnegie's US Steel in the 19th century, or Vince McMahon's WWE today (not to fully equate McMahon with Carnegie), they can influence the industry in such a way to stifle growth among competitors to ensure their market share. When that 800 pound gorilla begins blacklisting, the effects on the industry in question can be earth-shattering. Now WWE clearly does not own EVERY step of the production process, but they certainly own a ton, especially with the birth of the Network. Given their titanic marketshare in North American pro wrestling, if they seek to streamline the independents and concentrate all the top potential independent talent into their own pipeline, that it almost by definition a monopolistic practice. If the main story is true and WWE, the only wrestling promotion in the Western hemisphere with "800 pound gorilla" status, is telling young talent that they risk a soft blacklist should they sign with a company the size of Ring of Honor, that is characteristic of a vertically integrated monopoly, as it's using its market share power and control of so many steps of the "wrestling production process" (which is only growing, if the "WWE may be Evolve" stories are to be believed) to starve off competition. I think people aren't separating their fandom from what is the actual existence of Corporate America. This a practice that goes on all the time and just because you have enough power in the case of WWE doesn't mean you are satisfied with where you are at. The wrestlers have choices whether they like it or not as WWE isn't the only game in town but the biggest game. When you are big like that, you can dictate a pace you want to run at. With corporations it always about the bottom line and it doesn't matter a good percentage of the time if it is morally correct to make such moves you think would be unfavorable. Just because this option was put into their ear doesn't mean they are doomed. You do what you feel is best and for some guys it's not even a matter of choice. Realistically, 200 people can say damn this messes up my chances but out of those 200 people how many people actually breach WWE and get the chance to perform there.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jun 14, 2015 16:02:39 GMT -5
WWE will never be a traditional monopoly, because the only real way to get that in entertainment would be to own the exclusive atent on the camera and somehow prevent anyone else from licensing it. But we really can't just brush off the question because what WWE has is such an advantage that they pretty much can behave like one, knowing that there's way they could be punished for it. That's why I called it a 'practical monopoly' earlier. There are other promotions and alwasy will be, but they're an alternative for wrestlers the same way the Arena League is an alternative to the NFL. They may be able to make a living, but not a single one of them could ever offer even a quarter of what WWE can offer in terms of pay and benefits. Practicaly speaking, very, very few wrestlers will ever choose RoH over WWE if the former robs you of the latter. So they can undertake monopoly behavior just as easily as a telecomm company with no other telecomms in the neighborhood. I don't think we will change the others opinion on this and that's cool and I do respect your opinion. I will say that if you are correct on this I would definitely be in your corner on this as I would not support WWE suffocating ROH just because they can. I think the difference is mostly that we agree that it's going on and theeffect, but disgree on whether Mattel being angry excuses it or alters how we should perceive the behavior. To me, it doesn't alter it at all, suffocation is suffocation whether it's corporate mandated or not. To you it is, because WWE really can't afford to lose Mattel. I agree that we won't change opinions, and I do respect yours as well, I just won't give WWE a pass because there are undoubtedly other ways to handle it than picking the method designed to starve the competition. I think people aren't separating their fandom from what is the actual existence of Corporate America. This a practice that goes on all the time and just because you have enough power in the case of WWE doesn't mean you are satisfied with where you are at. The wrestlers have choices whether they like it or not as WWE isn't the only game in town but the biggest game. When you are big like that, you can dictate a pace you want to run at. With corporations it always about the bottom line and it doesn't matter a good percentage of the time if it is morally correct to make such moves you think would be unfavorable. Just because this option was put into their ear doesn't mean they are doomed. You do what you feel is best and for some guys it's not even a matter of choice. Realistically, 200 people can say damn this messes up my chances but out of those 200 people how many people actually breach WWE and get the chance to perform there. I can't say I've heard of any situations where one company will completely blacklist employees just for working for a different company. Usually it's the opposite, companies will striek at other companies by trying to steal talent away and vice-versa. The second part is a bit trickier. Yes, of those 200 people maybe 1 or 2 might ever perform in the WWE. The problem is that it could be any of those 200. Despite the old stigma, WWE doesn't just pick up the meatheads, we have all body types from the Broduses to the Batistas to the Punks to the Nevilles. About the only body type and style that is completely off the table is hardcore wrestlers. So even if those 200 know that only two of them might make WWE, they also know that they have a chance to.
|
|
Captain Stud Muffin (BLM)
FANatic
You can either sink, swim, or be the captain....Long live the cheif
Posts: 113,553
Member is Online
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Jun 14, 2015 16:20:14 GMT -5
I think people aren't separating their fandom from what is the actual existence of Corporate America. This a practice that goes on all the time and just because you have enough power in the case of WWE doesn't mean you are satisfied with where you are at. The wrestlers have choices whether they like it or not as WWE isn't the only game in town but the biggest game. When you are big like that, you can dictate a pace you want to run at. With corporations it always about the bottom line and it doesn't matter a good percentage of the time if it is morally correct to make such moves you think would be unfavorable. Just because this option was put into their ear doesn't mean they are doomed. You do what you feel is best and for some guys it's not even a matter of choice. Realistically, 200 people can say damn this messes up my chances but out of those 200 people how many people actually breach WWE and get the chance to perform there. I can't say I've heard of any situations where one company will completely blacklist employees just for working for a different company. Usually it's the opposite, companies will striek at other companies by trying to steal talent away and vice-versa. The second part is a bit trickier. Yes, of those 200 people maybe 1 or 2 might ever perform in the WWE. The problem is that it could be any of those 200. Despite the old stigma, WWE doesn't just pick up the meatheads, we have all body types from the Broduses to the Batistas to the Punks to the Nevilles. About the only body type and style that is completely off the table is hardcore wrestlers. So even if those 200 know that only two of them might make WWE, they also know that they have a chance to. I don't really see it as blacklisting but more or less a scare tactic. I mean at the end of the day if WWE wants you they will find you no matter what they have said or what you may have heard. As an Accountant I like as it as one of the big four firms telling me listen don't work for that CPA firm if you do, don't expect a phone call from us. Okay, what are my options, I can work for this CPA firm and continue to hone my craft or I could wait on sit on hoping they find and call me in hops of not just getting the job but getting through the interview process first. Sure it's comparing Apples and Oranges but as I was saying before out of those hundreds only a few get selected but you make a good point as well. It's like saying if ROH wanted to, they would tell people who go for tryouts at WWE don't come back here at WWE tells you, you are not good enough. You wanted to take a chance at working for them instead of staying with us. Everybody has their own standards and WWE is just applying their muscle to the market in potential of scaring people to come to them. It is flawed in a sense but nothing wrong with it.
|
|
|
Post by Raw is Doodie101 on Jun 14, 2015 16:28:43 GMT -5
WWE gettin their jimmies rustled that someone is actually climbing the ranks that might be a truly viable alternative.....good. Theyre not really scared of those guys though. This is more about not losing money to deals the Indy guys might make.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Jun 14, 2015 17:00:55 GMT -5
Now WWE clearly does not own EVERY step of the production process Well, see, there's the true elephant in the room. WWE can't possibly do that, not even conceivably. They don't own the patent on rings, they can't sublease every arena, they can't even hire all the wrestlers because someone will just train more. They can't even technically blacklist people; all they can do is not hire them for their own company. They can't prevent anything on that level. And as Turner and Sinclair and Panda and others have shown, so long as there's another entity out there with the money and desire, boom, instant new promotion. WWE can't prevent them from getting a show on DA or Fox or the Cooking Channel. WWE is throwing their weight around only because it is unchallenged, no other reason. But it *could* be, on every level. That's not a true monopoly, horizontal, vertical or otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jun 14, 2015 17:39:01 GMT -5
I don't really see it as blacklisting but more or less a scare tactic. I mean at the end of the day if WWE wants you they will find you no matter what they have said or what you may have heard. As an Accountant I like as it as one of the big four firms telling me listen don't work for that CPA firm if you do, don't expect a phone call from us. Okay, what are my options, I can work for this CPA firm and continue to hone my craft or I could wait on sit on hoping they find and call me in hops of not just getting the job but getting through the interview process first. Sure it's comparing Apples and Oranges but as I was saying before out of those hundreds only a few get selected but you make a good point as well. It's like saying if ROH wanted to, they would tell people who go for tryouts at WWE don't come back here at WWE tells you, you are not good enough. You wanted to take a chance at working for them instead of staying with us. Everybody has their own standards and WWE is just applying their muscle to the market in potential of scaring people to come to them. It is flawed in a sense but nothing wrong with it. There's a huge scope difference though. Indie wrestlers could recoup an RoH paycheck elsewhere, and a CPA still has the other 3 major firms (and many other options for pretty profitable employment in the business world). There's no one close to WWE in wrestling, so a WWE blackball will be a lot bigger potential loss. So for a company like RoH, they have to convince people to sign with them knowing they a) could work elsewhere and likely make as close if not equal and b) completely cut off WWE for their future. Further, WWE actually has the resources to carry it out, they don't need anyone on the indy circuit, so they can carry through with any threat they want. It's not about standards, RoH's standards have been fine for WWE, it's about using a bully pulpit to make an underhanded attack on a competitor.
|
|
Glitch
King Koopa
Not Going To Die; Childs, we're goin' out to give Blair the test. If he tries to make it back here and we're not with him... burn him.
Watching you.
Posts: 12,717
|
Post by Glitch on Jun 14, 2015 19:00:31 GMT -5
Telling them not sign to roh or tna? Then I guess wwe is ok with the other option they didn't mention. {Spoiler}
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,203
Member is Online
|
Post by Mozenrath on Jun 14, 2015 19:03:26 GMT -5
Telling them not sign to roh or tna? Then I guess wwe is ok with the other option they didn't mention. If LU's not making toys, WWE's probably fine with it, since Mattel won't be pissy.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jun 14, 2015 20:13:24 GMT -5
I'm not sure where a lot of us are getting our definitions of "monopoly" here, but it seems we're only understanding it in terms of a horizontally integrated monopoly, in which a single corporation/entity controls the entirety of a stage of production - for example, if I was in the clothing industry and I owned all the means of transporting cotton from farms to factories. WWE would be this if it owned any and all platforms on which professional wrestling was performed in the United States, which it clearly does not. This model is what made guys like Rockefeller and his Standard Oil monopoly so wealthy. When WWE engages in tactics like this, what they're seeking to solidify is a vertically integrated monopoly, the model in which a single corporation/entity wants to control all aspects of the stages of production, even if it means allowing smaller competitors to exist on some of those ladder steps. This would be like a clothing company owning cotton fields, a transportation company to move that cotton around, and the cotton refineries where they're made into clothes, as well as the stores where the finished products are sold. Competition can exist in a vertically integrated model, but when one company can stand as an 800 pound gorilla in the room, like Andrew Carnegie's US Steel in the 19th century, or Vince McMahon's WWE today (not to fully equate McMahon with Carnegie), they can influence the industry in such a way to stifle growth among competitors to ensure their market share. When that 800 pound gorilla begins blacklisting, the effects on the industry in question can be earth-shattering. Now WWE clearly does not own EVERY step of the production process, but they certainly own a ton, especially with the birth of the Network. Given their titanic marketshare in North American pro wrestling, if they seek to streamline the independents and concentrate all the top potential independent talent into their own pipeline, that it almost by definition a monopolistic practice. If the main story is true and WWE, the only wrestling promotion in the Western hemisphere with "800 pound gorilla" status, is telling young talent that they risk a soft blacklist should they sign with a company the size of Ring of Honor, that is characteristic of a vertically integrated monopoly, as it's using its market share power and control of so many steps of the "wrestling production process" (which is only growing, if the "WWE may be Evolve" stories are to be believed) to starve off competition. I think people aren't separating their fandom from what is the actual existence of Corporate America. This a practice that goes on all the time and just because you have enough power in the case of WWE doesn't mean you are satisfied with where you are at. The wrestlers have choices whether they like it or not as WWE isn't the only game in town but the biggest game. When you are big like that, you can dictate a pace you want to run at. With corporations it always about the bottom line and it doesn't matter a good percentage of the time if it is morally correct to make such moves you think would be unfavorable. Just because this option was put into their ear doesn't mean they are doomed. You do what you feel is best and for some guys it's not even a matter of choice. Realistically, 200 people can say damn this messes up my chances but out of those 200 people how many people actually breach WWE and get the chance to perform there. It doesn't really work that way, though; you're focusing on the immediate few dozen guys who regularly work for ROH and maybe the crop of guys who may be working there in the near future. The point is that if the WWE decides it wants to dictate the direction the top talents on the indy will take by creating their own feeder system that goes from the lowest levels to the highest, WWE's sheer size and market power will force a change in the rest of the industry, regardless of whether or not those guys are about to work for ROH or not. If WWE says "don't sign with those guys, or we won't hire you", that will keep high-level talent away from that promotion; if WWE says "don't sign with a company that has toys" (or any other potential product), that company must alter its business model or risk losing that top-level talent; WWE will, in essence, be able to dictate how most of the mid-level to major indies will have to operate, or those smaller companies will have to risk going without top-level talent that doesn't want to risk its shot at the only big league in town. Mads - my point is that they're attempting to create that system in terms of wrestler development, not that they already have it. Of course new promotions could pop up at any time on a channel given a financial backer and a willing network, vertical systems don't preclude that; but this seems to be building toward a vertical development system that, again, given WWE's size effectively dictates the terms the rest of the industry must operate within, and should WWE speak the word like they seem to have concerning ROH, severely curtails the talent available to these companies.
|
|