chrom
Backup Wench
Master of the rare undecuple post
Posts: 87,154
Member is Online
|
Post by chrom on Oct 20, 2018 1:42:14 GMT -5
Is there any reason why tickets go on sale so late for these Saudi shows? I think Greatest Royal Rumble had a similar turnaround for ticket sales, so it seems bizarre to start selling them two weeks before the show and expect a good size audience, much less before they postponed the sales. I'm just used to every live event I've ever seen do advance ticketing at least two months in advance. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't GRR a mandatory attendance thing for the Saudi people? Think it was, like the WCW show in North Korea
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2018 1:44:27 GMT -5
I think if I read anything more about how businesses aren't people and need to make money (like such a line of logic isn't the most batshit stupid thing to not even bother trying to hold them accountable for dumb bullshit), I'm going to pull my hair out.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Oct 20, 2018 1:57:14 GMT -5
I think if I read anything more about how businesses aren't people and need to make money (like such a line of logic isn't the most batshit stupid thing to not even bother trying to hold them accountable for dumb bullshit), I'm going to pull my hair out. Gonna let this board in on a little secret: the very core of the idea businesses aren't people and should do whatever they can to maximize profits is how sociopaths in positions of power justify being deeply objectionable human beings, and everything from minimum wage laws to food safety regulations exist entirely because of jackhats who would happily sell rat poison and pay their employees peanuts and 'vouchers' if they could get away with it. But businesses themselves don't make that money, the shareholders and higher-ups of those businesses make the money. They want to put a layer between their reprehensible actions and accountability, but make no mistake about it, these are human beings making these decisions and benefiting from them, and anyone who says "I don't care about these human rights abuses, I care about my bottom line and how this company producing propaganda for this oppressive regime helps my bottom line" is in the wrong, doesn't matter if there's a corporate middleman to hand them the money or not. This shouldn't sit well with anyone. There's no divorcing the human element from it. This just straight-up isn't acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Oct 20, 2018 2:07:09 GMT -5
I think if I read anything more about how businesses aren't people and need to make money (like such a line of logic isn't the most batshit stupid thing to not even bother trying to hold them accountable for dumb bullshit), I'm going to pull my hair out. Gonna let this board in on a little secret: the very core of the idea businesses aren't people and should do whatever they can to maximize profits is how sociopaths in positions of power justify being deeply objectionable human beings, and everything from minimum wage laws to food safety regulations exist entirely because of jackhats who would happily sell rat poison and pay their employees peanuts and 'vouchers' if they could get away with it. But businesses themselves don't make that money, the shareholders and higher-ups of those businesses make the money. They want to put a layer between their reprehensible actions and accountability, but make no mistake about it, these are human beings making these decisions and benefiting from them, and anyone who says "I don't care about these human rights abuses, I care about my bottom line and how this company producing propaganda for this oppressive regime helps my bottom line" is in the wrong, doesn't matter if there's a corporate middleman to hand them the money or not. This shouldn't sit well with anyone. There's no divorcing the human element from it. This just straight-up isn't acceptable. The Corporate Veil is a hell of a thing.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Oct 20, 2018 2:32:43 GMT -5
The thing that amazes me is "We told our guys to bring him back to us and they went rogue" is a bullshit excuse but at least its plausible. They went for a full on unbelievable excuse.
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Oct 20, 2018 3:50:18 GMT -5
Is there any reason why tickets go on sale so late for these Saudi shows? I think Greatest Royal Rumble had a similar turnaround for ticket sales, so it seems bizarre to start selling them two weeks before the show and expect a good size audience, much less before they postponed the sales. I'm just used to every live event I've ever seen do advance ticketing at least two months in advance. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't GRR a mandatory attendance thing for the Saudi people? No, it wasn't mandatory attendance, but there were other issues that wouldn't happen in the west. You could buy either family tickets that must include a female in the group, and those seats were in the lower bowl of the stadium, or you could buy single bachelor tickets in the upper levels. Imagine wanting to go an event by yourself and being limited to the worst seats in the building if you are a male, or being unable to go at all without a man in your party if you are a woman.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Oct 20, 2018 4:41:38 GMT -5
This is a semi-regular thing isn't it? From the steroid trial, independent contractors, a union, Benoit, Punk's lawsuit, concussions, Jimmy Snuka. People get excited that such and such is going to blow up and bring down McMahon, and it never does.
In this case, it's a murder of a Saudi journalist in Turkey. Grim as it is, I just don't see it as being enough to get in the way of people acting in their own best interests.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor No on Oct 20, 2018 6:17:54 GMT -5
I understand what you are saying but it is different when the company has chosen to be a moral compass(Be A Star, Susan G Komen, Connor's Cure). The "Be A Star" company wanting to work with a "Outspoken Journalist= Bonesaw" country calls into question the company's charitable desire at minimum. Also with WWE being a US company, it is a person as ruled by the Supreme Court. Especially when it comes to company's making political contributions and the WWE is a political company now. Businesses do charity work and different fundraisers for the PR of it, which again is supposed to be representative of the bottom line because they are a business. If the WWE was giving away $20 million to charity and not publicizing it and marketing it, the stockholders would not be thrilled. Now the people actually doing the charity work may indeed have morals and be doing it for the right cause, but the entity itself is a different story. Big fundraisers/donors like WWE are life blood to charities. The charity needs their money to accomplish anything. So the WWE is a part of the "doing" especially when they announce themselves as partners with specific charities. You are saying the WWE gets all the benefits of doing charity work without having any responsibility to "walk the walk" when it comes to messages/causes they've championed for PR/profit/etc? Life and business doesn't work like that. You play with fire you get burned. Good PR for doing charity work, backlash/bad PR when you're company looks disingenuous. Don't do charity work if you don't believe in the cause because you may have to answer for it.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Oct 20, 2018 6:49:00 GMT -5
Businesses do charity work and different fundraisers for the PR of it, which again is supposed to be representative of the bottom line because they are a business. If the WWE was giving away $20 million to charity and not publicizing it and marketing it, the stockholders would not be thrilled. Now the people actually doing the charity work may indeed have morals and be doing it for the right cause, but the entity itself is a different story. Big fundraisers/donors like WWE are life blood to charities. The charity needs their money to accomplish anything. So the WWE is a part of the "doing" especially when they announce themselves as partners with specific charities. You are saying the WWE gets all the benefits of doing charity work without having any responsibility to "walk the walk" when it comes to messages/causes they've championed for PR/profit/etc? Life and business doesn't work like that. You play with fire you get burned. Good PR for doing charity work, backlash/bad PR when you're company looks disingenuous. Don't do charity work if you don't believe in the cause because you may have to answer for it. Where am I saying they don’t have to deal with backlash/bad PR? I’m saying they do have to deal with those things and consider whether the backlash/PR loss in the long run will outweigh the financial gain of the deal. I’m not even saying I agree with it, I’m just stating what the reality is.
|
|
mattperiolat
King Koopa
Thank you, Brodie... for everything.
Posts: 11,447
|
Post by mattperiolat on Oct 20, 2018 7:13:23 GMT -5
This is a semi-regular thing isn't it? From the steroid trial, independent contractors, a union, Benoit, Punk's lawsuit, concussions, Jimmy Snuka. People get excited that such and such is going to blow up and bring down McMahon, and it never does. In this case, it's a murder of a Saudi journalist in Turkey. Grim as it is, I just don't see it as being enough to get in the way of people acting in their own best interests. It’s complicated by status and politics. He was a Saudi journalist with a long history of criticism of the KSA government who was living in the US on the path to citizenship here. So, there are US interests involved. Additionally, both the US government and the current head of state in the US have business ties to the KSA, so standing up to them hurts their pocket book. To say nothing of a very hostile relationship between the press and the current US head of state at this time. Mods can delete this if I broach the politics rule, but that is as much as I am comfortable saying without naming names. Bottom line - a US business having an event that directly benefits and supports the ruling family of the KSA following the death of their biggest critic is not good regardless of any past agreement or deal and at the very least, a conversation should be held if is still in the best interests of that business to continue with the event in the short term or the agreement in the long term .
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Oct 20, 2018 7:41:18 GMT -5
This is a semi-regular thing isn't it? From the steroid trial, independent contractors, a union, Benoit, Punk's lawsuit, concussions, Jimmy Snuka. People get excited that such and such is going to blow up and bring down McMahon, and it never does. In this case, it's a murder of a Saudi journalist in Turkey. Grim as it is, I just don't see it as being enough to get in the way of people acting in their own best interests. It’s complicated by status and politics. He was a Saudi journalist with a long history of criticism of the KSA government who was living in the US on the path to citizenship here. So, there are US interests involved. Additionally, both the US government and the current head of state in the US have business ties to the KSA, so standing up to them hurts their pocket book. To say nothing of a very hostile relationship between the press and the current US head of state at this time. Mods can delete this if I broach the politics rule, but that is as much as I am comfortable saying without naming names. Bottom line - a US business having an event that directly benefits and supports the ruling family of the KSA following the death of their biggest critic is not good regardless of any past agreement or deal and at the very least, a conversation should be held if is still in the best interests of that business to continue with the event in the short term or the agreement in the long term . I mean, I get all that. I was more talking about a wider backlash from the public, which is what it would need to really hurt the WWE (given the US and other major western governments are straining to give KSA the benefit of the doubt). This will blow over because people ultimately just aren't that bothered. They aren't Saudi journalists, they're not in danger. That's what allows businesses to keep dealing with these kind of regimes. It's like the Salisbury attack in the UK. There was never any danger of businesses pulling out of the World Cup in Russia or receiving any sanctions for doing so, and the opening game literally had the head of FIFA sat next to Putin (and the Crown Prince).
|
|
mattperiolat
King Koopa
Thank you, Brodie... for everything.
Posts: 11,447
|
Post by mattperiolat on Oct 20, 2018 9:34:02 GMT -5
It’s complicated by status and politics. He was a Saudi journalist with a long history of criticism of the KSA government who was living in the US on the path to citizenship here. So, there are US interests involved. Additionally, both the US government and the current head of state in the US have business ties to the KSA, so standing up to them hurts their pocket book. To say nothing of a very hostile relationship between the press and the current US head of state at this time. Mods can delete this if I broach the politics rule, but that is as much as I am comfortable saying without naming names. Bottom line - a US business having an event that directly benefits and supports the ruling family of the KSA following the death of their biggest critic is not good regardless of any past agreement or deal and at the very least, a conversation should be held if is still in the best interests of that business to continue with the event in the short term or the agreement in the long term . I mean, I get all that. I was more talking about a wider backlash from the public, which is what it would need to really hurt the WWE (given the US and other major western governments are straining to give KSA the benefit of the doubt). This will blow over because people ultimately just aren't that bothered. They aren't Saudi journalists, they're not in danger. That's what allows businesses to keep dealing with these kind of regimes. It's like the Salisbury attack in the UK. There was never any danger of businesses pulling out of the World Cup in Russia or receiving any sanctions for doing so, and the opening game literally had the head of FIFA sat next to Putin (and the Crown Prince). How quickly we forget past transgressions in favor of monetary expediency. And oil. I’ll leave it at that regarding the KSA. We’d be getting off topic and into politics if I get into Russian operations on British soil. Gives new meaning to getting away with murder is my last word.
|
|
lionheart21
Patti Mayonnaise
Once did a thing...
Posts: 31,594
Member is Online
|
Post by lionheart21 on Oct 20, 2018 10:16:26 GMT -5
|
|
Spiderf 4
Patti Mayonnaise
Dedicated 6,666th post to Irontyger
I believe in Joe Hendry.
Posts: 39,786
Member is Online
|
Post by Spiderf 4 on Oct 20, 2018 10:18:22 GMT -5
I heard that figure too. BUT, would 12-16 mill be the loss JUST for the loss of Crown Jewel, or for the loss of the entire contract? Like what would the total money price be if that whole contract was ripped up by the WWE?
|
|
lionheart21
Patti Mayonnaise
Once did a thing...
Posts: 31,594
Member is Online
|
Post by lionheart21 on Oct 20, 2018 10:24:41 GMT -5
I heard that figure too. BUT, would 12-16 mill be the loss JUST for the loss of Crown Jewel, or for the loss of the entire contract? Like what would the total money price be if that whole contract was ripped up by the WWE? The article said that it would be if they walked away from the 10-year deal. Not sure if it'll affect the earnings for the upcoming years, though, since it only stated for the 2019 earnings. Even if its not for the entire deal, it would still be a smart move in the long run due to the massive backlash, both socially and financially, that would come as a result of them staying in the deal.
|
|
|
Post by Friday Night SmackOwn on Oct 20, 2018 10:34:02 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the upcoming Fox SmackDown deal worth even more than the projected losses if they canceled the KSA agreement?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2018 10:34:13 GMT -5
I'd imagine it'd be a good PR move to announce on WWE.com that the Event is moved to other location, and that WWE has pulled out of the Contract wit SA.
right?
|
|
Perd
Patti Mayonnaise
Leslie needs to butt out for fear of receiving The Bunghole Buster
Posts: 32,422
Member is Online
|
Post by Perd on Oct 20, 2018 10:36:26 GMT -5
If corporations aren’t humans, then explain Corporate Kane.
*does Jerry Lawler nod*
|
|
|
Post by Friday Night SmackOwn on Oct 20, 2018 10:45:52 GMT -5
Would WWE shareholders be at all happy next Thursday if the conference call started off with WWE heads trying desperately to deflect from being asked about the KSA deal?
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Oct 20, 2018 10:58:39 GMT -5
If they just cancel the show altogether, how will they handle the world cup? Wacky multi-man match on RAW?
|
|