WCW Finding Another TV Station in 2001

[toodarkmark]

When WCW lost their TV spots with TNT and TBS because of Jamie Kellner, it effectively killed WCW. I think if that were to happen today, they would have a lot more options, maybe.

At that time, there just weren't many options. Viacom and WWE became "partners", and Viacom owned so much. USA did not want to do any wrestling other than WWE. There just wasn't much left after that in 2001. I guess FX was their only option, and it's been said that Bischoff spoke to them, and they had a deal in place, but WCW said if they sold to Bishoff's group WCW would HAVE to stay on TBS/TNT. Then the new guy came in and said nah. So, I wonder why FX didn't move in after that?

Either way, other than FX, what was out there? ESPN2 was moving away from youth programming in 2000, and I don't think ESPN were interested in wrestling at that time. ABC had yet to buy Fox Family, making it ABC Family which could have been a destination. But that's about it. It's weird to think there used to be only a few really national channels something could appear on. Maybe that's still the truth.

Anyone have any thoughts or know why FX didn't move on it once WCW was contractually allowed to not stay on Turner stations? Or why another station would not have worked?

[Sephiroth]

Because WCW was a rating’s loser and money pit like few other’s in TV at that point. Plus WWE’s raunchy programming had further stigmatized wrestling in the eyes of networks, despite the sky high ratings they were enjoying. Even if WCW had gotten a new tv deal I doubt they would have lasted more than a couple of years.

[toodarkmark]

Mar 11, 2018 14:31:07 GMT -5 Sephiroth said:

Because WCW was a rating’s loser and money pit like few other’s in TV at that point. Plus WWE’s raunchy programming had further stigmatized wrestling in the eyes of networks, despite the sky high ratings they were enjoying. Even if WCW had gotten a new tv deal I doubt they would have lasted more than a couple of years.

Mid 2.0's is not a ratings loser. Maybe to WWE's numbers, but it was still a known brand, that although damaged, still had interest from some companies. Like I said, FX was interested, and I'm wondering if people know of stories why it was a possibility and then 2,3 months later it isn't. I do agree about the WWF raunchy point. That did hurt them a lot in finding networks.

WWE still makes money off of WCW, so obviously it still had some content/brand recognition that could have been salvaged and may have survived.

[OVO 40 hunched over like he 80]

Mar 11, 2018 14:31:07 GMT -5 Sephiroth said:

Because WCW was a rating’s loser and money pit like few other’s in TV at that point. Plus WWE’s raunchy programming had further stigmatized wrestling in the eyes of networks, despite the sky high ratings they were enjoying. Even if WCW had gotten a new tv deal I doubt they would have lasted more than a couple of years.

This.

WCW's failure killed wrestling on tv for years. No network wanted to touch wrestling, apparently UPN told the wwe to f*** off when they wanted to air a wcw show.

In the tna year one documentary, Bob Ryder said that they used the weekly ppv format because they were told by different stations that they didn't want to air wrestling.

WCW was such a toxic brand and such a money pit that even if they did great ratings nobody wanted to be involved with that clusterf***, similar to how tna got cancelled even though they were the highest rated show on Spike tv.

[celtics543]

It is kind of incredible though that TNA keeps finding networks and WCW couldn't find one. WCW on its worst day was still way better than 99% of TNA.

[mauled]

Mar 11, 2018 14:42:46 GMT -5 toodarkmark said:

Mar 11, 2018 14:31:07 GMT -5 Sephiroth said:

Because WCW was a rating’s loser and money pit like few other’s in TV at that point. Plus WWE’s raunchy programming had further stigmatized wrestling in the eyes of networks, despite the sky high ratings they were enjoying. Even if WCW had gotten a new tv deal I doubt they would have lasted more than a couple of years.

Mid 2.0's is not a ratings loser. Maybe to WWE's numbers, but it was still a known brand, that although damaged, still had interest from some companies. Like I said, FX was interested, and I'm wondering if people know of stories why it was a possibility and then 2,3 months later it isn't. I do agree about the WWF raunchy point. That did hurt them a lot in finding networks.

WWE still makes money off of WCW, so obviously it still had some content/brand recognition that could have been salvaged and may have survived.

And they didn’t make any money from it. The costs were out weighing the earnings.

[Vice honcho room temperature]

Mar 11, 2018 15:01:39 GMT -5 OVO 40 hunched over like he 80 said:

Mar 11, 2018 14:31:07 GMT -5 Sephiroth said:

Because WCW was a rating’s loser and money pit like few other’s in TV at that point. Plus WWE’s raunchy programming had further stigmatized wrestling in the eyes of networks, despite the sky high ratings they were enjoying. Even if WCW had gotten a new tv deal I doubt they would have lasted more than a couple of years.

This.

WCW's failure killed wrestling on tv for years. No network wanted to touch wrestling, apparently UPN told the wwe to f*** off when they wanted to air a wcw show.

In the tna year one documentary, Bob Ryder said that they used the weekly ppv format because they were told by different stations that they didn't want to air wrestling.

WCW was such a toxic brand and such a money pit that even if they did great ratings nobody wanted to be involved with that clusterf***, similar to how tna got cancelled even though they were the highest rated show on Spike tv.

UPN didn't want WCW because they had WWF. WWF was a way stronger brand and UPN had no reason to want a "WCW" branded show even if the WWF produced it when they currently had the hot hand with the WWF. If WCW was its own company they could have found another network. I don't know if the slot would be as good as Monday on TNT but there would have been somewhere to go.

[horsemen4ever]

The reason the brand was toxic, was the nWo trashed it and made it look un cool. WCW biggest successful time was when it trashed its own brand.

[Reflecto]

Mar 11, 2018 14:31:07 GMT -5 Sephiroth said:

Because WCW was a rating’s loser and money pit like few other’s in TV at that point. Plus WWE’s raunchy programming had further stigmatized wrestling in the eyes of networks, despite the sky high ratings they were enjoying. Even if WCW had gotten a new tv deal I doubt they would have lasted more than a couple of years.

But that's another tie-in for this one: Even if WCW was seen as a money pit because of their time and FX couldn't last with it (which are unlikely- not having Time Warner's deep pockets would have lowered the prices a lot for it), the other point needs to be made: WCW would only HAVE to last a couple of years on FX.

Keep in mind, Fusient started College Sports Network (now CBS Sports Network) in 2003, so all WCW had to do was survive two years on FX, and then they could move to College Sports Network and have a guaranteed TV spot on a network that owned them.

Even worst case scenario: CBS doesn't keep them when they buy the network, doesn't change because by then, you're in 2006 and networks are willing to try again.

[Sephiroth]

Mar 11, 2018 15:51:37 GMT -5 celtics543 said:

It is kind of incredible though that TNA keeps finding networks and WCW couldn't find one. WCW on its worst day was still way better than 99% of TNA.

Two things worth noting: WCW was purely a Turner owned property. Without Uncle Ted to save them they had nothing, especially at the end when their ratings had tanked and wrestling was in an even worse negative light than usual.
2. TNA still finds networks in no small part because it is a recognized brand. Survivor and The Simpson’s are no longer the ratings champions they once where but could still find networks based on name recognition alone. Plus WWE’s sheer prominence convinces a lot of wannabe networks they can capture just a part of that audience by airing wrestling, good or bad.

[OVO 40 hunched over like he 80]

Mar 11, 2018 16:07:54 GMT -5 Vice honcho room temperature said:

Mar 11, 2018 15:01:39 GMT -5 OVO 40 hunched over like he 80 said:

This.

WCW's failure killed wrestling on tv for years. No network wanted to touch wrestling, apparently UPN told the wwe to f*** off when they wanted to air a wcw show.

In the tna year one documentary, Bob Ryder said that they used the weekly ppv format because they were told by different stations that they didn't want to air wrestling.

WCW was such a toxic brand and such a money pit that even if they did great ratings nobody wanted to be involved with that clusterf***, similar to how tna got cancelled even though they were the highest rated show on Spike tv.

UPN didn't want WCW because they had WWF. WWF was a way stronger brand and UPN had no reason to want a "WCW" branded show even if the WWF produced it when they currently had the hot hand with the WWF. If WCW was its own company they could have found another network. I don't know if the slot would be as good as Monday on TNT but there would have been somewhere to go.

WCW couldn't find a new network, why you think Bischoff didn't buy it? Without a place to broadcast it, wcw was useless and the reason why Vince bought it for peanuts.

[Shark]

WCW by 2001 was losing money hand over fist, I think they lost $62 million in 2000. They had been a hot company and were on a very downward trajectory by 2001. They also had several outstanding lawsuits against them. Even at its peak, selling advertising for wrestling was not easy, as we've seen in recent years with Impact jumping networks over and over, so networks are going to be a little gun shy on giving 2 hours of prime time TV to WCW.

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2018 14:42:46 GMT -5 toodarkmark said:

Mid 2.0's is not a ratings loser.

For wrestling at that point in time it sure was. Advertisers wanted nothing to do with it so it made vastly less than some other show of the same numbers in a different genre would have. There's a reason why when WWF was at its peak USA had no qualms about letting them go.

[Vice honcho room temperature]

Mar 11, 2018 17:05:20 GMT -5 OVO 40 hunched over like he 80 said:

Mar 11, 2018 16:07:54 GMT -5 Vice honcho room temperature said:

UPN didn't want WCW because they had WWF. WWF was a way stronger brand and UPN had no reason to want a "WCW" branded show even if the WWF produced it when they currently had the hot hand with the WWF. If WCW was its own company they could have found another network. I don't know if the slot would be as good as Monday on TNT but there would have been somewhere to go.

WCW couldn't find a new network, why you think Bischoff didn't buy it? Without a place to broadcast it, wcw was useless and the reason why Vince bought it for peanuts.

I thought that was because Turner execs canceled it late in Feb and then thry just wanted to wash their hands of it quickly underselling to Vince

[toodarkmark]

Mar 11, 2018 16:57:03 GMT -5 Reflecto said:

Mar 11, 2018 14:31:07 GMT -5 Sephiroth said:

Because WCW was a rating’s loser and money pit like few other’s in TV at that point. Plus WWE’s raunchy programming had further stigmatized wrestling in the eyes of networks, despite the sky high ratings they were enjoying. Even if WCW had gotten a new tv deal I doubt they would have lasted more than a couple of years.

But that's another tie-in for this one: Even if WCW was seen as a money pit because of their time and FX couldn't last with it (which are unlikely- not having Time Warner's deep pockets would have lowered the prices a lot for it), the other point needs to be made: WCW would only HAVE to last a couple of years on FX.

Keep in mind, Fusient started College Sports Network (now CBS Sports Network) in 2003, so all WCW had to do was survive two years on FX, and then they could move to College Sports Network and have a guaranteed TV spot on a network that owned them.

Even worst case scenario: CBS doesn't keep them when they buy the network, doesn't change because by then, you're in 2006 and networks are willing to try again.

This is what I wanted out of this thread. Fusient knows it needs content for a possible network someday. There is zero doubt that if they make it to 2005, they get the Spike TV contract. How it's run, who's on top, how similar is it to TNA, who are the moneymarks involved, what's its format are all open questions. All I know is they were going down the Cruiserweight path in 2001, and who knows. So they just need a few years from FX, who maybe moves them to their Fox Sports Network, which is they had them on in May 2004. Fusient is such a factor here, would love to have been a fly on the wall between their and WCW and FX negotiations.

[CMPunkyBrewster]

Mar 11, 2018 15:51:37 GMT -5 celtics543 said:

It is kind of incredible though that TNA keeps finding networks and WCW couldn't find one. WCW on its worst day was still way better than 99% of TNA.

In many, MANY respects, TNA basically IS WCW on it's worst day...

[mauled]

Mar 11, 2018 22:57:54 GMT -5 CMPunkyBrewster said:

Mar 11, 2018 15:51:37 GMT -5 celtics543 said:

It is kind of incredible though that TNA keeps finding networks and WCW couldn't find one. WCW on its worst day was still way better than 99% of TNA.

In many, MANY respects, TNA basically IS WCW on it's worst day...

At least TNA doesn’t have all the crazy contracts that WCW were still paying ie Hogan/Nash/Goldberg and Hall etc. Though admittedly Hogan sucked TNA dry as much as he could too

[jimmyjames]

Mar 11, 2018 18:05:35 GMT -5 toodarkmark said:

Mar 11, 2018 16:57:03 GMT -5 Reflecto said:

But that's another tie-in for this one: Even if WCW was seen as a money pit because of their time and FX couldn't last with it (which are unlikely- not having Time Warner's deep pockets would have lowered the prices a lot for it), the other point needs to be made: WCW would only HAVE to last a couple of years on FX.

Keep in mind, Fusient started College Sports Network (now CBS Sports Network) in 2003, so all WCW had to do was survive two years on FX, and then they could move to College Sports Network and have a guaranteed TV spot on a network that owned them.

Even worst case scenario: CBS doesn't keep them when they buy the network, doesn't change because by then, you're in 2006 and networks are willing to try again.

This is what I wanted out of this thread. Fusient knows it needs content for a possible network someday. There is zero doubt that if they make it to 2005, they get the Spike TV contract. How it's run, who's on top, how similar is it to TNA, who are the moneymarks involved, what's its format are all open questions. All I know is they were going down the Cruiserweight path in 2001, and who knows. So they just need a few years from FX, who maybe moves them to their Fox Sports Network, which is they had them on in May 2004. Fusient is such a factor here, would love to have been a fly on the wall between their and WCW and FX negotiations.

But that's hindsight and hindsight is always 20/20. Maybe it happens that way maybe it doesn't but chances are it wouldn't have. The FX scenario probably doesn't happen. They canceled Son of the Beach even though it was their highest rated show because of the content so I don't see them getting involved in wrestling. College Sports Network was a really minuscule network that wasn't on basic cable. There was no way WCW was going to get a contract that came anywhere near bringing in the revenue they would have needed to stay afloat.

The fact is that when TNT (always going through a change, i.e. canceling Monstervision) canceled Nitro that was the end for WCW.

[Fade]

Mar 11, 2018 22:57:54 GMT -5 CMPunkyBrewster said:

Mar 11, 2018 15:51:37 GMT -5 celtics543 said:

It is kind of incredible though that TNA keeps finding networks and WCW couldn't find one. WCW on its worst day was still way better than 99% of TNA.

In many, MANY respects, TNA basically IS WCW on it's worst day...

I had a thought the other day that future
Young wrestling fans will probably just presume TNA is what WCW turned into.

[The Barber]

I don't believe Bischoff about the FX story. I believe Heyman said the same thing about ECW (going to FX, and we all know how much he spits the truth *eyeroll*). I believe WCW was sabotaged from the inside.


However, they POSSIBLY could have gotten on TNN/The NEW TNN! (He Got Pop!)/Spike if the WWF stayed on USA. ESPN wasn't touching it and neither was the CBS network.