# AEW Is Becoming More And More Like WCW Every Day



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Hello friends, a rare thread made by me in this AEW section, hope you all are well.

With the recent debut of four brand new former WWE superstars to AEW in the past week or so (Redbeard, Strickland, Regal and Hardy) I have began thinking more and more that AEW is a modern day WCW and not really in a good way.

Lets look at the reasons WCW died and see if AEW are falling into the same problems and no, I'm not saying AEW is dying rather just making an interesting comparison piece.

---

So, the number 1 reason WCW died according to all the documentaries, books, shoot interviews etc is mismanagement of company funds. The narrative is that WCW bought up every WWE star, overpaid them to join WCW and then WCW could never make a return on said talent.

Over at AEW we know they operate at a loss and Tony continually spends money on things AEW doesn't really need. Cornette spoke last year of a cinematic match that apparently cost AEW six figures, Ring Of Honor has just been purchased which Tony probably didn't actually need, Jericho is making the best money he's ever made, Sting is rumoured to be making huge money, Punk and Bryan aren't working cheap, Jeff Hardy etc.

Verdict: AEW mismanages money just like WCW did.

The number 2 reason WCW died if you research the topic is that they never successfully pushed any of the young guys instead relying on older ex WWE stars to prop up the promotion. WCW did build one guy and that is Goldberg and I tend to give them credit for the likes of Scott Steiner, Sting etc also but the reality is they didn't make that many stars themselves at least in comparison to WWE instead choosing to buy them.

The majority of the true stars WCW had were all 40+ year olds who made a name for themselves in the WWE.

With AEW, again it is very similar. People will say "But Darby! Hangman! Jade!" but lets face facts, none of these people are actual stars and nobody knows them. The true stars of AEW are all ex WWE guys such as Punk, Bryan, Hardy, Jericho, Sting etc.

Verdict: Both very similar here also. Both companies heavily rely on the former WWE guys to prop up the company.

Another major complaint and perhaps the number 3 reason is that Eric Bischoff was afraid to be the boss and wanted to buddy up with the wrestlers especially the likes of Hogan, Hall, Nash etc. This lead to wrestlers being able to call their own shots and creative which lead to the company doing poorly because wrestlers were in it for themselves.

AEW openly promotes that they do this and many have said Tony isn't interested in ruling with an iron fist. The wrestlers call their own shots and run their own creative allegedly.

Verdict: Both the same.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of all is that Tony said in an interview that he would not make the same mistakes WCW did but as this thread proves he's making at least three major ones that WCW also did.

What says you WF? Do you see the similarities?


----------



## Sharpydon (Dec 24, 2015)

Jeff hardy won't cost a penny in his run though, his merchandise sales will cover his salary easily


----------



## Seth Grimes (Jul 31, 2015)

If you don't like AEW don't watch it, it's not for you


----------



## DougTex (11 mo ago)

I disagree on the reason WCW ended(had nothing to do with creative or finance), but those are indeed the same mistakes WCW used to make.

Difference though is at least WCW had the poise to try and cater to casual fans.

Tony Khan not only doesn’t want to cater to casual fans and only to hardcores, but he blatantly and defiantly spits in the casual audiences face and makes it clear, he does not want anyone who isn’t obsessed with wrestling to watch AEW.



Seth Grimes said:


> If you don't like AEW don't watch it, it's not for you


If you can’t handle well thought and layered criticism, don’t read, because you’re not mature enough.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Sharpydon said:


> Jeff hardy won't cost a penny in his run though, his merchandise sales will cover his salary easily


Yeah I read that a lot but how actually true is it? Lets say Jeff Hardy makes 2 million dollars a year which seems pretty realistic given who he is and he signs for three years. Lets say after costs AEW makes 3 bucks per shirt, do you really think the guy is going to sell you hundreds of thousands of T-Shirts every year? He'll move a whole heap at the start then it'll slow down.



Seth Grimes said:


> If you don't like AEW don't watch it, it's not for you


I don't watch it but I do assess the wrestling business and AEW is a pretty big part of that.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The AEW World Champ, a homegrown babyface that the fans have walked shoulder to shoulder with for 3 years, is in month 4 of being a background story.

@Chip Chipperson isn’t completely wrong in seeing similarities.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

bdon said:


> The AEW World Champ, a homegrown babyface that the fans have walked shoulder to shoulder with for 3 years, is in month 4 of being a background story.
> 
> @Chip Chipperson isn’t completely wrong in seeing similarities.


This is all part of the long term storytelling that Tiny is so well known for.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Chip Chipperson said:


> This is all part of the long term storytelling that Tiny is so well known for.


Nah, the long term story was Page winning, and a heel Cody acting as a thorn in Page’s side.

Now Kenny is hurt, and the Bucks, Cole, and Page are stuck in limbo without anyone to coattail ride.


----------



## VitoCorleoneX (Jun 27, 2016)

Did not read after the first reason.
WCW closed doors because of a rich guy that didnt wanted WCW on TNT. Its that simple. 
WCW could have done 10 more worst business desicions and it would still be alive maybe today.


----------



## Seth Grimes (Jul 31, 2015)

DougTex said:


> If you can’t handle well thought and layered criticism, don’t read, because you’re not mature enough.


How much WWE paying you, shill?


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

VitoCorleoneX said:


> Did not read after the first reason.
> WCW closed doors because of a rich guy that didnt wanted WCW on TNT. Its that simple.
> WCW could have done 10 more worst business desicions and it would still be alive maybe today.


Yeah, how'd WCW get to the point where it was losing money and losing ratings though, chief?

Nobody needs to know or cares that you stopped reading after reason 1.


----------



## Hephaesteus (Aug 20, 2018)

I mostly agree but to be fair their biggest star is probably mjf which one could argue would be on the same tier as sting was ironically enough in wcw but still there are attempts to make homegrown talent.


----------



## wrasslin_casual (May 28, 2020)

Hephaesteus said:


> I mostly agree but to be fair their biggest star is probably mjf which one could argue would be on the same tier as sting was ironically enough in wcw but still there are attempts to make homegrown talent.


MJF AEWs biggest star? HAHAHAHA


----------



## Hephaesteus (Aug 20, 2018)

wrasslin_casual said:


> MJF AEWs biggest star? HAHAHAHA


Admittedly I missed an adjective shouldve said homegrown which is true enough.


----------



## VitoCorleoneX (Jun 27, 2016)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Yeah, how'd WCW get to the point where it was losing money and losing ratings though, chief?
> 
> Nobody needs to know or cares that you stopped reading after reason 1.


First of all im not your chief.
Second of all the first reason you gave above was not the reason WCW closed doors. Overpaying WWE guys had little to nothing to do with WCWs closure.

TNT and the executives didnt care about money. 
They were even glad giving mailbox money for 1 year and selling the company for 2.5 million instead of 40m just to keep WCW out of their television network. 

Plus you cant know if AEW mismanaging/losing money or not without the data available so stop trying to make asumptions without knowing a damn thing chief.


----------



## jpickens (May 3, 2015)

I see where AEW does things better than WCW did such as not giving belts to these ex WWE guys as soon as they debut Miro went almost a year before getting the TNT championship and Brian Danielson had three chances but never won the worlds title and Wardlow a homegrown boy is becoming a star so at least Tony unlike 
Eric is pushing his own talent over WWE guys.


----------



## Kenny's Ghost (Nov 23, 2020)

You're 100% correct.

AEW is one of those things where the more I think about it, the more I dislike a lot of aspects. So I'm just here for the vibe now, same with WWE really. I mean, I want them to do well and all but it's not really a promotion I'd call myself a huge fan of. I am a fan though....obviously. Though I doubt I'll ever be as "all in" on them as I was TNA. (lol I know).

They're doing pretty great right now I'd say...will it last?...who knows.


----------



## BabaYaga (Sep 14, 2021)

I agree, unfortunately Tony Khan is just that stereotypical rich kid who got everything he wanted cause of Daddy money and it’s transcended into just so happens for him to be a wrestling fan and wanted his own organisation. I knew he was a dumb fuck, but when he bought ROH and hyped it up as some huge win when it was being thrown into the garbage bin is when it was confirmed HES THE DUMBEST FUCK 😂


----------



## wrasslin_casual (May 28, 2020)

Hephaesteus said:


> Admittedly I missed an adjective shouldve said homegrown which is true enough.


Well thats fair enough but it still doesnt mean he is an actual star.


----------



## greasykid1 (Dec 22, 2015)

To be clear, I'm an AEW fan.

But some of the observations about AEW from OP are all on the money. No company, however successful can sustain the level of spend that TK is putting on it. To be fair though, Tony himself has said that new signings will come to an end soon. But still, it's something to watch, because for a company already struggling to break even, it's not a good idea to just spend and spend.

The ROH purchase was (according to sources), out of Tony's own pocket, and not from AEW's funds. It's unclear at the moment, whether that actually makes much difference though. It still has to impact the financial position of the company, given Tony's position.

On the "Ex-WWE" talent. The thing is, AEW HAS TO bring in faces that people will recognise. They have to attract more eyes to the product somehow - and you can't bring in huge names from the wrestling industry without hiring guys that have at some point been on WWE's payroll. OP mentions 4 specific names, all of which have very different stories.

Redbeard - One match, one-off appearance, no AEW contract
Strickland - Very young up-and-comer that WWE barely used, despite having a lot of fan support
Regal - Non-Wrestler, brought in as a manager, and to pass on experience to the AEW locker room
Hardy - Re-uniting a legendary tag team for one more run

But of course, these are just the newer names. We also have Jericho, who was AEW from day one, so is a different case altogether. We also have Wight and Henry, brought in as legends and rarely take any TV time from the younger talent. We have Adam Cole, Keith Lee, Malachai Black, Buddy Matthews ... all people used awfully by WWE, and featuring prominently on AEW shows at the moment. And of course, we have the likes of Miro, who AEW seem to have forgotten, just like WWE did - so its not all good.

The biggest flaw in the AEW/WCW comparison though, is that WCW's issues were rooted in the older stars forcing themselves into the main event, refusing to even work with the new talent, let alone put them over, and the office allowing this to happen. In AEW, we are seeing the older talent constantly working with the young.

So far, we've had Sting working to elevate Allin, Tully helping elevate FTR, Jake appearing with Archer, Punk putting over MJF, Danielson being built as unbeatable and then being beat by Hangman ... The entire philosophy within the locker room seems to be completely opposite to what we saw in the dying days of WCW. Not to mention, we have to consider that AEW is still a very new company and is still working hard to grow it's brand, and it's presence ... whereas WCW was past it's peak and just had the hangers-on taking 7 and 8 figure paychecks and not giving a shit if it meant that the company folded anytime soon.


----------



## DaSlacker (Feb 9, 2020)

WCW was a subsidiary company built around TV, sponsorship, merchandise, touring and ad sales. AEW is a private company built around TV, sponsorship, merchandise, licensing and rights fees. 

Seems a small thing but it will definitely massively alter how those contracts and money flows are structured. 

That and WWE is free releasing en mass, hence the pendulum swinging in Tony Khan's favour.


----------



## Michael Myers 1991 (Sep 27, 2016)

As if. AEW wishes they had a Goldberg.


----------



## DocGonzo (10 mo ago)

I don't understand why WWE fans feel the need to endlessly try to prove these "points" to justify their own negative opinions of AEW.

Here's the thing...WCW closed because Turner Broadcasting no longer wanted it. That's from Eric Bischoff's mouth. No one could have saved it at that point.It was a corporate decision,and nothing was going to change their minds. As Eric said,they didn't want wrestling on their stations anymore at the time. Turner Broadcasting OWNED WCW.
Tony Khan owns AEW. 

Now what actually led to them losing faith in the product? It had NOTHING to do with overpaying wrestlers. What happened was a series of horrible creative bungles (Starrcade '97,Goldberg's streak,Bret Hart,Vince Russo,etc.). This led to a ton of loyal fans becoming frustrated with the product, turning their backs on it,and switching over to WWE.

The whole "AEW IS HIRING EX WWE GUYS!!!"
narrative is the most ridiculous argument I hear these days as well. If you're running a relatively new wrestling company,and some
wrestlers with BIG name value and talent are fired, or leave WWE...are people saying they should just NOT hire them?! Tell me what sense that makes?

The issues you listed might have played an extremely minor part in WCW's closure,but to say AEW is anywhere close to making the same mistakes is a HUGE leap in logic.


----------



## thorn123 (Oct 10, 2019)

Awesome, WCW was the best. Imagine If they can get someone on Hollywood hogan and Goldberg’s level - it will be a game changer.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Hephaesteus said:


> I mostly agree but to be fair their biggest star is probably mjf which one could argue would be on the same tier as sting was ironically enough in wcw but still there are attempts to make homegrown talent.


WCW attempted to make homegrown talent also but couldn't. Same deal here.

MJF just lost to 43 year old CM Punk on PPV.



VitoCorleoneX said:


> Plus you cant know if AEW mismanaging/losing money or not without the data available so stop trying to make asumptions without knowing a damn thing chief.


It is obvious bro. You think all these big stars work for free? I'd say Jericho, Punk, Danielson and Hardy alone would be about 15 million dollars a year out of the wage budget alone.



DocGonzo said:


> I don't understand why WWE fans feel the need to endlessly try to prove these "points" to justify their own negative opinions of AEW.
> 
> Here's the thing...WCW closed because Turner Broadcasting no longer wanted it. That's from Eric Bischoff's mouth. No one could have saved it at that point.It was a corporate decision,and nothing was going to change their minds. As Eric said,they didn't want wrestling on their stations anymore at the time. Turner Broadcasting OWNED WCW.
> Tony Khan owns AEW.
> ...


First of all, I haven't watched the WWE regularly in about 15 years so I'm far from a fan of theirs.

Second, you're correct that Turner didn't want it. Why didn't they want it though? Reason is simple. Poor ratings and bleeding money. If WCW was pulling a big rating and making money odds are they stick around forever.

Third, overpaying wrestlers lead to them bleeding money which definitely played a part in a business being sold.

Four, you should hire a few familiar faces but look at AEW now, how many guys do they have who are 40+ who made their name in WWE? They've got like 50 ex WWE guys at this point, the PPVs feature WWE guys in almost every match etc.


----------



## thorn123 (Oct 10, 2019)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Yeah I read that a lot but how actually true is it? Lets say Jeff Hardy makes 2 million dollars a year which seems pretty realistic given who he is and he signs for three years. Lets say after costs AEW makes 3 bucks per shirt, do you really think the guy is going to sell you hundreds of thousands of T-Shirts every year? He'll move a whole heap at the start then it'll slow down.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't watch it but I do assess the wrestling business and AEW is a pretty big part of that.


Watch it. Give it a FAIR chance.

The thing is you are missing out. You say you love wrestling. I love wrestling Just as much. And probably for longer than you. And AEW is on point.

I know that’s my opinion blah blah blah, why are more people not tuning in blah blah blah.

Why did Its a Wonderful Life and Citizen Kane bomb at the box office when they are both considered in greatest movie discussions … who knows


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Hello friends, a rare thread made by me in this AEW section, hope you all are well.
> 
> With the recent debut of four brand new former WWE superstars to AEW in the past week or so (Redbeard, Strickland, Regal and Hardy) I have began thinking more and more that AEW is a modern day WCW and not really in a good way.
> 
> ...


did you watch all of Dynamite to write this long book?

there’s nobody as worried about AEWs booking, TKs money and AEWs roster than people who 1. Don‘t watch AEW 2. Don‘t like TK and 3. don’t care for their roster

its called ‘concern trolling’


----------



## Hotdiggity11 (Aug 24, 2006)

Wrong thread.


----------



## DocGonzo (10 mo ago)

1. I apologize for making assumptions, but because you said you rarely grace the AEW forums,I assumed you were a WWE fan.

2. Contracts weren't a huge part of WCW closing. I'm sure those big contracts played some part,but the point is...Moronic creative decisions led to those guys with huge contracts being devalued to the point where things like merchandise,licensing,advertising,and yes...ratings were brought down to dismal levels. Hence Turner Broadcasting wanted them gone.

3. It is incredibly unfair to say that AEW having so many ex WWE guys is a bad thing when you consider a few points...

A. WWE has been the only game in town for a LONG while on a National/Global level.

B. With he advent of NXT,Triple H hired a ton of indie stars to pad their roster. Some of the most talented indie guys all came into WWE at or around the same time period.

So,with that considered...AEW has hired some of the best indie and NJPW guys around. Why wouldn't they hire "Ex WWE guys"?
Many of whom had big names on the indies before WWE scooped them up.

Like someone else said...if you want to play that game,we can literally say everyone in the business is an "Ex WWE" guy.

What you have to look at is this :

AEW have a big roster of Men and women ranging from 18-70. Legends and rookies alike. They have such a huge roster because they ARE looking to the future. Buying RoH as a means of building those younger talents was a very smart idea on TK's part.

As far as your point about MJF losing to Punk...why would MJF win? Look at mega heel wrestlers of the past. Did Ric Flair always come out the winner in the end? No. It's booking 101. You want to build the heel up as an irredeemable bastard,so that your babyface inevitably gets their comeuppance.
If Punk had lost there,you'd just kill off any hope of momentum for Punk in the future. Whereas MJF loses,he doesn't really lose anything,but still gets the rub for his previous wins and tremendous heel work through this feud. So not really sure what that has to do with AEW being compared to WCW. If anything this feud,win or lose,made MJF an even bigger star.


----------



## Cooper09 (Aug 24, 2016)

I’m honestly expecting Tony to book Hogan Hall and Nash vs 3 of their geeks soon.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

thorn123 said:


> Watch it. Give it a FAIR chance.
> 
> The thing is you are missing out. You say you love wrestling. I love wrestling Just as much. And probably for longer than you. And AEW is on point.
> 
> ...


I watched half of the episode where Keith Lee debuted and it was the same old same old. Long matches, overhyped surprises etc.



LifeInCattleClass said:


> did you watch all of Dynamite to write this long book?
> 
> there’s nobody as worried about AEWs booking, TKs money and AEWs roster than people who 1. Don‘t watch AEW 2. Don‘t like TK and 3. don’t care for their roster
> 
> its called ‘concern trolling’


Do I need to watch all of the TV show to assess their decisions? They've dropped millions on yet another ageing former WWE Star.


----------



## thorn123 (Oct 10, 2019)

Chip Chipperson said:


> I watched half of the episode where Keith Lee debuted and it was the same old same old. Long matches, overhyped surprises etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Do I need to watch all of the TV show to assess their decisions? They've dropped millions on yet another ageing former WWE Star.


Give it three months watching all of every episode of dynamite, rampage and ppv, and then people will give more credence to your insight… and hey you might have a good time.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

thorn123 said:


> Give it three months watching all of every episode of dynamite, rampage and ppv, and then people will give more credence to your insight.


You couldn't pay me to do that.


----------



## FrankieDs316 (12 mo ago)

100%. Tony also booking an ROH show. The man is going to be burned out. May not happen right away but he will burnt out and it will hurt the overall AEW product.


----------



## NXT Only (Apr 3, 2016)

Y’all literally have zero idea what Tony’s pockets are like and continue to say they’re overspending as if he doesn’t have a financial team walking him through every dollar allocated.

No matter how much most of you want the company to die, for whatever reason, it will continue to thrive and grow and the fans who love it will be entertained.

These are miserable ass threads, AEW‘s existence makes some of you hate life so much and I really don’t understand it.

Sitting on an Internet forum discussing something you clearly do not like with the passion day in and day out some of you have is psychotic behavior.


----------



## thorn123 (Oct 10, 2019)

Chip Chipperson said:


> You couldn't pay me to do that.


Like I said in my first post - you have to give it a FAIR go ... then make your conclusion


----------



## FrankieDs316 (12 mo ago)

DougTex said:


> Tony Khan not only doesn’t want to cater to casual fans and only to hardcores, but he blatantly and defiantly spits in the casual audiences face and makes it clear, he does not want anyone who isn’t obsessed with wrestling to watch AEW.


Disaster waiting to happen


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

thorn123 said:


> Like I said in my first post - you have to give it a FAIR go ... then make your conclusion


I gave it a fair go brother, I used to watch it every week and people told me weekly to tune out so I did.


----------



## Martyn (Feb 21, 2010)

WCW died because Turner didn’t wanted wrestling on his stations anymore. Not because of the point you made. I know that’s what Alvarez wrote in his book, but Bischoff and people who’ve been there tell a different story.

Whats with that concern of AEWs profits? Khan is a billionaire. Do you know what that means?
He was in dept last year due to investing in a video game and running half a year without fans.

Finally we have a company that can bring in top talent and present them with good theme songs and production values. There’s really nothing to complain about.

Also, AEW is not relying on the old guys like WCW did. Sure, they have them as it’s a necessary ingredient to put fresh talent over, but if you look at the champions alone or what Sting does to Darby, etc then you’d really have to be drunk to relate it to Hogan and the rest going always over guys like Guerrero, etc in WCW.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

NXT Only said:


> Y’all literally have zero idea what Tony’s pockets are like and continue to say they’re overspending as if he doesn’t have a financial team walking him through every dollar allocated.
> 
> No matter how much most of you want the company to die, for whatever reason, it will continue to thrive and grow and the fans who love it will be entertained.
> 
> ...


Man I hate posts like these, no disrespect.

First, no we don't know how much Tony has but we can tell he's losing money. He's probably got a staff of 200 people to pay weekly and apparently all of the talent are overpaid. Between Jericho, Mox, Bryan and Punk alone he'd probably be paying over a quarter of a million a week. That doesn't count Hardy, Sting, JR, The Bucks, Kenny etc. AEW would absolutely be bleeding money.

Second of all, AEW hasn't really grown at all. Check it out:

04.03.2021 (Last year): 934,000

02.03.2022 (This year): 966,000

Think about the millions and millions of dollars that have been spent for a ratings improvement over a 12 month period of just 22,000 people.

Third, I don't hate life and that's bait.

Fourth, I barely post over here. It also is bannable to talk about peoples mental health so I'd cut the "psychotic" shit right out.


----------



## Martyn (Feb 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> WCW attempted to make homegrown talent also but couldn't. Same deal here.
> 
> MJF just lost to 43 year old CM Punk on PPV.


MJF defeated Punk in his hometown twice. Also, Baker lost to Rosa last year and what happend to her?

I’m amazed that people are so obsessive about match results. It doesn’t matter that much.


----------



## Bit Bitterson (Sep 18, 2020)

Well off the mark, chip. 

WCW put far too much stock into older “stars”, yes, but it’s not the reason the doors closed.

Chip is obsessed with the term “ex WWE”, even though this term, and the way he tries to manipulate it into an inherently negative thing, has been de-bunked many a time.

If I were to critique AEW, I would say there is a lack If direction due to the heaving amount of talent on the roster that can’t get time all at once. Hopefully the ROH purchase remedies this.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Do I need to watch all of the TV show to assess their decisions? They've dropped millions on yet another ageing former WWE Star.


of course you have to watch at least some of it - otherwise your deductions won’t have the right info

like, who are the putting over or did they sign any non-wwe people - which they did PVZ

in fact, you’ll see how wrong your OP is


----------



## Martyn (Feb 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Man I hate posts like these, no disrespect.
> 
> First, no we don't know how much Tony has but we can tell he's losing money. He's probably got a staff of 200 people to pay weekly and apparently all of the talent are overpaid. Between Jericho, Mox, Bryan and Punk alone he'd probably be paying over a quarter of a million a week. That doesn't count Hardy, Sting, JR, The Bucks, Kenny etc. AEW would absolutely be bleeding money.
> 
> ...


You really have to be blind by stating that they haven’t grown since last year. It’s not just about the ratings on Turner. They grew in tons of other metrics - they did Arthur Asche, 1$ million gate with DoN, ppv buisness doing better, added Rampage, they’re even on the air in my country since the last two weeks. It’s silly and naive to look at just the ratings in the US and blindly state that they’re not moving.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Martyn said:


> MJF defeated Punk in his hometown twice. Also, Baker lost to Rosa last year and what happend to her?
> 
> I’m amazed that people are so obsessive about match results. It doesn’t matter that much.


Who won the feud? Ultimately that's all that matters.

MJF lost his feud to a 43 year old ex WWE star. Simple. And yes, match results do matter lol.



Bit Bitterson said:


> Well off the mark, chip.
> 
> WCW put far too much stock into older “stars”, yes, but it’s not the reason the doors closed.
> 
> ...


The doors shut because ratings declined and they had very high overhead which lead to the loss of money. The Turner merger got rid of WCW because the ratings were bad and they were losing money. Do you think if it was 1998 WCW they would've cut them? No chance.

Nothing wrong with ex WWE but when you have 50 of them it might be time to ease up a little.



LifeInCattleClass said:


> of course you have to watch at least some of it - otherwise your deductions won’t have the right info
> 
> like, who are the putting over or did they sign any non-wwe people - which they did PVZ
> 
> in fact, you’ll see how wrong your OP is


Alright, I have a day off this Saturday I will tune into Rampage.

inb4 Rampage isn't good enough.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Who won the feud? Ultimately that's all that matters.
> 
> MJF lost his feud to a 43 year old ex WWE star. Simple. And yes, match results do matter lol.
> 
> ...


lol - rampage is fine - sometime better than Dynamite IMO


----------



## Kenny's Ghost (Nov 23, 2020)

I really can't wrap my head around people thinking WCW would have been hunky dory forevermore if it wasn't for one guy. That's my favourite promotion, but come on.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

GNKenny said:


> I really can't wrap my head around people thinking WCW would have been hunky dory forevermore if it wasn't for one guy. That's my favourite promotion, but come on.


Exactly. Kellner cut it because it was losing money and the ratings weren't good enough to justify the loss. He's the one that took it off life support but the real blame goes to WCW management in the final years and the big contracts which bled the company dry.


----------



## VitoCorleoneX (Jun 27, 2016)

We are still arguing over the closure of WCW. Fuck.


NXT Only said:


> Sitting on an Internet forum discussing something you clearly do not like with the passion day in and day out some of you have is psychotic behavior.


Its imptessive how OP managed to have over 12.000 posts in 3 years on this forum while others that are around here for over 10-15 years have barely 10,000 posts and this is despite OP not watching WWE regulary for 15 years and barely watching AEW. 
Its quite impressive how much he wasted his time here complaining or writing about stuff that he thinks is shit. Cant be more IWC than that lol. 

I also see as time progresses that people are more worried or interested about rumors, backstage stories, buyrates, ratings and the financial aspect of a wrestling company instead of just enjoying the damn show.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

VitoCorleoneX said:


> We are still arguing over the closure of WCW. Fuck.
> A friendly r
> 
> Its imptessive how OP managed to have over 12.000 posts in 3 years on this forum while others that are around here for over 10-15 years have barely 10,000 posts and this is despite OP not watching WWE regulary for 15 years and barely watching AEW.
> ...


I actually watched AEW for about a year and a half, lol.

I also run a wrestling promotion so each and every one of my 12,000 posts are valuable in my honest opinion.


----------



## thevardinator (Nov 6, 2012)

One difference between current AEW and later WCW is probably the lack of ego's and creative control. That was a huge killer. 

I'm not saying maybe Punk, and a few other top guys don't have some input in what goes on but I can't see anybody on this roster causing shit backstage and refusing to put people over etc...


----------



## VitoCorleoneX (Jun 27, 2016)

DougTex said:


> Tony Khan not only doesn’t want to cater to casual fans and only to hardcores, but he blatantly and defiantly spits in the casual audiences face and makes it clear, he does not want anyone who isn’t obsessed with wrestling to watch AEW.


This must be reason why a green Jade Cargill is the TBS champion and a hot Wardlow (who is not a indy midget vanilla uhh whatever) is going for the TNT champion. TK stop catering to the hardcores!


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

VitoCorleoneX said:


> This must be reason why a green Jade Cargill is the TBS champion and a hot Wardlow (who is not a indy midget vanilla uhh whatever) is going for the TNT champion. TK stop catering to the hardcores!


4 matches on the last PPV that went around the 20 minute mark or longer...


----------



## DUSTY 74 (Aug 11, 2021)




----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Dub See Dub


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501904216566153217


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Dub See Dub
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501904216566153217


How many of them are over or true stars of the show? Only one is Baker really.


----------



## Geeee (Aug 9, 2010)

The solution to three is to hire Russo!


----------



## VitoCorleoneX (Jun 27, 2016)

Chip Chipperson said:


> I actually watched AEW for about a year and a half, lol.
> 
> I also run a wrestling promotion so each and every one of my 12,000 posts are valuable in my honest opinion.


just saying. You are better off investing your time on building up or expanding your wrestling promotion than posting on a iwc infested nerdy wrestling forum trying to change peoples views on a company that you dont even follow anymore. My last post wasnt a jab to the content of your posts i just found your account really odd. I couldnt invest,write stuff and complain about something that i dont like dont have enough energy or time for that. 

Good luck with your promotion bro.


----------



## VitoCorleoneX (Jun 27, 2016)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Dub See Dub
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501904216566153217


Impressive how every AEW title holder is a non WWE guy. This also includes the Dynamite Diamond Ring holder. The day we have former wwe guys holding all aew titles will be GLORIOUS here on this forum.


----------



## DUD (Feb 21, 2021)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Hello friends, a rare thread made by me in this AEW section, hope you all are well.
> 
> With the recent debut of four brand new former WWE superstars to AEW in the past week or so (Redbeard, Strickland, Regal and Hardy) I have began thinking more and more that AEW is a modern day WCW and not really in a good way.
> 
> ...


You would love the book Nitro. Guy Evans managed to get the perspectives of so many people involved in both Turner Media and WCW and is more of a historians write as opposed to a journalist shoving there opinion down our throat.


----------



## Gwi1890 (Nov 7, 2019)

Booker of the year Chip Chipperson thinks he can do better because he gets good ratings on WWE 2k22 GM Mode 😂


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Gwi1890 said:


> Booker of the year Chip Chipperson thinks he can do better because he gets good ratings on WWE 2k22 GM Mode 😂


How many shows are you going to run this month?

This isn't about me, focus on the topic at hand, chief.


----------



## Arm Drag! (Jul 21, 2020)

AEW seem to be dealing with free agents, so they can negotiate a decent wage in theory. They haven't take Wyatt or Braun and a few others past an appearance, like Bischoff and Redbeard previously. They may not be throwing money at it.

Why do you have give Hardy millions?! Everybody is talking about the much lighter workload and friendly atmosphere. They have enough talent. At this point they can offer a lot less, but for maybe ten appearances over a year. Hardy was released anyway, he either takes the deal or waits for Vince or TNA.


----------



## hardcorewrasslin (Jun 29, 2016)

I didn’t bother reading the OP because it’s Shit Shitterson, but hell yeah! AEW and WCW is a fucking awesome combo!


----------



## ClintDagger (Feb 1, 2015)

I just don’t see any positives from having a bloated roster. And I don’t see why AEW would want WWE cast offs. The guys that made WCW relevant were Hall, Nash, Hogan, and Goldberg. Goldberg was homegrown and the other three chose what WCW was offering over WWF. So sure, bring in Danielson, Moxley, Punk, Cole etcetera as I’m sure WWE doesn’t see those guy as dead weight. But 90% of the people AEW has brought in from WWE are guys / gals that were just tossed overboard like trash. At some point the money and lack of spots that goes along with having a bloated roster is going to catch up to AEW as it always has with other companies.


----------



## Dr. Middy (Jan 21, 2015)

I do agree they are signing too many guys and the roster is becoming very much bloated as a result, I would have released some guys and been very strict on whoever else would be signed from here on out if I was Tony. And while I do generally enjoy most of the storylines, I think there could be a better system than Tony just taking care of everything and just giving the ok to whatever ideas the wrestlers themselves come up with. Maybe have a small team of guys with like Arn, Tony, Regal, and some others that all the wrestlers speak to about their own ideas, so you are still allowing for that creativity which is a good thing, without having everybody doing their own thing. Granted, maybe they are doing something similar to this, but from what I last saw Tony kinda oversees everything.

However, the ONLY ex-WWE stars thing though is a bad faith argument to me. I mean you have Jurassic Express as your tag champs, Britt and Rosa are feuding for the women's title, Jade actually does feel and get treated like a star while ratings do reflect that sometimes, Hangman is your champ (even if he does feel too much in the background at times), and the MJF/Wardlow stuff probably is going to be one of their biggest feuds (while MJF himself is one of their bigger stars). So this seems like you're ignoring the rest of the roster to make a point.

But I don't really think being ex-WWE should be some sort of massive issue, why does it even matter unless you are only going to refer to a wrestler as ex-WWE for the rest of their career outside of leaving WWE? And guys like Sting and Jericho have has success in AEW while helping out younger guys, while Bryan and Punk have been successful because they are still tremendously great wrestlers in all aspects. If I were Tony I would be pushing and utilizing Bryan and Punk not because they are ex-WWE guys, but because they are two of the most consistent overall perfomers in the company still operating on a high level. It's different than building the show around ex-WWE guys way past their prime which if you wanna say that about this eventual Hardy Boys reunion, then sure.


----------



## Gwi1890 (Nov 7, 2019)

Chip Chipperson said:


> How many shows are you going to run this month?
> 
> This isn't about me, focus on the topic at hand, chief.


None mate but I don’t pretend that I do.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Gwi1890 said:


> None mate but I don’t pretend that I do.


Oh you're one of *those*


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> How many of them are over or true stars of the show? Only one is Baker really.


you see? this is why you have to watch before writing stuff like this

you have no idea who gets the pops or not

reminder: we have this dandy 'who did they sign in 2022' thread where you can easily see how many ex-wwe they sign / you'll find the balance is quite good









The 2022 ‘XYZ is All Elite’ track record of signings


Hey all a very simple thread in its premise. A place where we discuss who has been signed. But more than that - a place where we keep track. Especially since any time a new ex-WWE name pops up we get quite a few threads about AEW signing ex-WWE talent, but then all the non-WWE is forgotten...




www.wrestlingforum.com


----------



## LeGOAT (10 mo ago)

Seth Grimes said:


> If you don't like AEW don't watch it, it's not for you


Facts, I'm not even gonna bother reading that declaration of independence he posted 😂 don't know much about the guy but from some of his comments and post and banter with me, the guy seems like an arrogant whiny guy who is miserable enough to complain about a product that I bet he secretly is a fan of.


----------



## xDD (Feb 7, 2014)

Jeff gonna make his money worth only by merch sales. Also Hardy boyz vs Young Bucks will draw a lot of money.


----------



## Jersey (Jun 24, 2014)

You spelled TNA wrong.


----------



## NXT Only (Apr 3, 2016)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Man I hate posts like these, no disrespect.
> 
> First, no we don't know how much Tony has but we can tell he's losing money. He's probably got a staff of 200 people to pay weekly and apparently all of the talent are overpaid. Between Jericho, Mox, Bryan and Punk alone he'd probably be paying over a quarter of a million a week. That doesn't count Hardy, Sting, JR, The Bucks, Kenny etc. AEW would absolutely be bleeding money.
> 
> ...


I don’t care what you hate or like. You are insane and miserable. You need help, like seriously.


----------



## NXT Only (Apr 3, 2016)

Can’t even come on here and discuss storylines, potential storylines or anything. It’s literally flooded with AEW sucks, this guy sucks, another WWE guy, they mentioned WWE again, Tony Khan is an idiot, this show sucked, Punk this, Punk that, flippy shit, they’re spending too much money, Cornette was right.

That is not what this is for and this influx of negativity has ruined this forum. Like grow the hell up.


----------



## Erik. (Mar 17, 2014)

WCW was the best wrestling promotion of the 90s and AEW is the best wrestling promotion of the 20s.

Good comparison, Drip.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

VitoCorleoneX said:


> Did not read after the first reason.
> WCW closed doors because of a rich guy that didnt wanted WCW on TNT. Its that simple.
> WCW could have done 10 more worst business desicions and it would still be alive maybe today.


No they closed doors because they were losing tens of millions of dollars. Any other reason is ludicrous.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

DocGonzo said:


> I don't understand why WWE fans feel the need to endlessly try to prove these "points" to justify their own negative opinions of AEW.
> 
> Here's the thing...WCW closed because Turner Broadcasting no longer wanted it.


No they didn't want it because they were heading for bankruptcy. 

If WCW made $30 mil every year as they did in 98, it would still be around as they were worth in the estimate of $500 mil, as it was they lost $9 mil in the last half of 99, lost $62.3 mil in 2000 after extreme cost cutting. Otherwise they would have lost upwards of $80 mil. Carrying on that trend they would have been liquidated by 2002.

Simple fact of the matter is between production costs, staffing costs and rentals, they were sinking. Chip makes a valid point.


----------



## peowulf (Nov 26, 2006)

I see no similarities whatsoever, apart from some wrestlers and announcers.


----------



## Jaxon (Jul 20, 2020)

You do make some valid points, I know the kind of money they have to spend, BUT at some point they will need to stop spending. They have signed a lot of guys but they needed a better roster than what they had and that's how to do it. 

You say that nobody knows who the 'ex WWE' guys are however the people that watch do and then it comes down to booking, i agree MJF should have gone over in the Punk feud.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

thevardinator said:


> One difference between current AEW and later WCW is probably the lack of ego's and creative control. That was a huge killer.
> 
> I'm not saying maybe Punk, and a few other top guys don't have some input in what goes on but I can't see anybody on this roster causing shit backstage and refusing to put people over etc...


Lack of egos, you mean lack of stars. 

Creative control, plenty of wrestlers had it in WCW. Even Jericho had it.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

xDD said:


> Jeff gonna make his money worth only by merch sales. Also Hardy boyz vs Young Bucks will draw a lot of money.


It really won't draw a lot of money. And no they won't make money back on merch alone, for that to happen half the viewing public would have to buy a shirt and that isn't happening.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Dub See Dub
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501904216566153217


 Jeff Jarretts broken guitars made more money than them geeks.


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

This is so lazy.

AEW has a cowboy as their top guy.

AEW's champ feuded with and beat the two best workers in the world during his ascension to the top of the card.

AEW has a dominant female powerhouse.

Clearly AEW is AE WWF. /sarcasm


----------



## Stargasm (Apr 10, 2013)

As always, this forum is off the mark.

No wonder there's like 10 threads per day on this sad sack forum and like 10 threads every 10 mins on the squared circle sub. This forum is a wasteland of awful opinions.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

VitoCorleoneX said:


> Impressive how every AEW title holder is a non WWE guy. This also includes the Dynamite Diamond Ring holder. The day we have former wwe guys holding all aew titles will be GLORIOUS here on this forum.


It won't be long until Punk or Danielson takes the title off Page who has been a spectacular failure, won't be long until the Hardys are tag champs either.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

NXT Only said:


> I don’t care what you hate or like. You are insane and miserable. You need help, like seriously.


Ah yeah, because if someone would have deep insight into my sanity and how happy I am it'd be some guy I don't recognise on a Wrestling Forum.



NXT Only said:


> That is not what this is for and this influx of negativity has ruined this forum. Like grow the hell up.


Here is you being negative in this section also:



NXT Only said:


> And then the following week _crickets_





NXT Only said:


> Jeff dancing instead of helping his brother LMAOOOO





NXT Only said:


> Cody became everything he hated. His promo prior to his ladder match with Sammy was great and to turn around and do this now is some of the most hurt ego shit I’ve ever seen.





NXT Only said:


> Cody being part of the revolution was huge for him but not enough for his ego. Now he’s going back to be a cog in the machine he left in the first place. It’s melodramatic but will be fun to follow.


We're allowed to have views that aren't entirely pro AEW.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

greasykid1 said:


> The biggest flaw in the AEW/WCW comparison though, is that WCW's issues were rooted in the older stars forcing themselves into the main event, refusing to even work with the new talent, let alone put them over, and the office allowing this to happen. In AEW, we are seeing the older talent constantly working with the young.


I must have been mistaken when I saw Ric Flair put over Sting and Lex Luger. Flair and Arn put over Pillman and Austin. Kevin Sullivan put over Chris Benoit. Randy Savage put over DDP. Hollywood Hogan put over Goldberg. DDP and Kevin Nash put over Chuck Palumbo and Sean O'Haire. DDP put over Kanyon. I can keep going for a long time on this.


----------



## ShadowCounter (Sep 1, 2016)

VitoCorleoneX said:


> Did not read after the first reason.
> WCW closed doors because of a rich guy that didnt wanted WCW on TNT. Its that simple.
> WCW could have done 10 more worst business desicions and it would still be alive maybe today.


Hell, if TNT knew streaming was gonna happen they NEVER would have sold WCW.


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

He’s overspending because he’s assuming he gets a giant new TV deal and an HBO Max deal from WarnerMedia

Problem is that WarnerMedia will soon no longer exist as Discovery has purchased them and Discovery may not want anything to do with AEW (Discovery has an international deal with WWE)

The new parent company is going to be called Warner Bros. Discovery and Khan assuming they will give him everything he wants for AEW is a dangerous game

Things could end up very similar to WCW in 2001


----------



## LeGOAT (10 mo ago)

Stargasm said:


> As always, this forum is off the mark.
> 
> No wonder there's like 10 threads per day on this sad sack forum and like 10 threads every 10 mins on the squared circle sub. This forum is a wasteland of awful opinions.


That chip guy seems to be the biggest crybaby ever


----------



## ShadowCounter (Sep 1, 2016)

Gwi1890 said:


> Booker of the year Chip Chipperson thinks he can do better because he gets good ratings on WWE 2k22 GM Mode 😂


Dude is a great booker. He's so good he was thinking about quitting cause he couldn't get anyone to come to his shows. 

Insert "it's all covid's fault" here.


----------



## Martyn (Feb 21, 2010)

Shleppy said:


> He’s overspending because he’s assuming he gets a giant new TV deal and an HBO Max deal from WarnerMedia
> 
> Problem is that WarnerMedia will soon no longer exist as Discovery has purchased them and Discovery may not want anything to do with AEW (Discovery has an international deal with WWE)
> 
> ...


First off - why would they get rid off AEW when it’s one of their top programs. Even if that would happen, WCW was owned by a network. AEW isn’t and Khan would negotiate with someone else. It would be much easier now when they have a resume of strong ratings in the demos than when they did at the start with literally nothing.


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

Martyn said:


> First off - why would they get rid off AEW when it’s one of their top programs. Even if that would happen, WCW was owned by a network. AEW isn’t and Khan would negotiate with someone else. It would be much easier now when they have a resume of strong ratings in the demos than when they did at the start with literally nothing.


Because the new ownership group has an existing relationship with WWE, so this may influence their decision to cut ties with AEW

Yes, AEW could be shopped around and get a great TV deal elsewhere or could end up on a smaller network or even a new Khan created network but that’s the risk he’s taking


----------



## ForceOfNature (12 mo ago)

Don't be fucking stupid.

AEW can only HOPE to be 10% like WCW.

They're the wish version with a dumbass smark at the helm.

WCW was a powerhouse, AEW is a piss-ant wannabe.


----------



## thatonewwefanguy (Feb 6, 2020)

and not in the good way, the early 2000's way, as my dad so eloquently put it


----------



## Ameer Patel (May 30, 2019)

VitoCorleoneX said:


> First of all im not your chief.
> Second of all the first reason you gave above was not the reason WCW closed doors. Overpaying WWE guys had little to nothing to do with WCWs closure.
> 
> TNT and the executives didnt care about money.
> ...


Yeah this Chip dude is just a meme literally says the same point over and over again

Tony Khan is an experienced business man, if he's operating at a loss that's his perogative - it's completely normal for start ups to operate at a loss in their first few years


----------



## Ameer Patel (May 30, 2019)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Yeah, how'd WCW get to the point where it was losing money and losing ratings though, chief?
> 
> Nobody needs to know or cares that you stopped reading after reason 1.


It didn't close because it was losing money ffs it closed because of the time Warner merger


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

ShadowCounter said:


> Dude is a great booker. He's so good he was thinking about quitting cause he couldn't get anyone to come to his shows.
> 
> Insert "it's all covid's fault" here.


Blatant lies here.

I never said nobody comes to my shows as a matter of fact I draw the best in my part of Sydney and probably am top 5 in the entire state in terms of drawing people consistently so unfortunately you have no idea what you're talking about OR are twisting my words to make me look bad and bait me.

The truth and what I actually said is that the profits were low on a wrestling show and better business options were out there. A bad show for us we could walk away with a few hundred dollars profit and a good day would be 1000-1500 in profit. A lot of work goes into making those dollars though and sometimes the hourly rate isn't great for how much work is going in and of course sometimes you lose money also.

Also, whilst it isn't all COVID's fault it has certainly hurt crowds. We've only just been allowed to bring the non vaccinated in which kept about 70-100 people away from my first shows of the year. The vaccinated only rule has been a thing for half of 2021 and the first few months of 2022.

Pretty much you have no idea what you are talking about and respectfully should keep quiet.




Ameer Patel said:


> It didn't close because it was losing money ffs it closed because of the time Warner merger


Oh my days.

If it was making money they would have kept it. They didn't want wrestling in the merger because it was a money pit and the ratings weren't worth how much money they were losing.

It wasn't just a case of Kellner saying "Nup, don't like wrestling" and being able to get rid of it based on nothing but personal bias.


----------



## ForceOfNature (12 mo ago)

thatonewwefanguy said:


> and not in the good way, the early 2000's way, as my dad so eloquently put it



Early 2000s WCW was better.


----------



## thatonewwefanguy (Feb 6, 2020)

ForceOfNature said:


> Early 2000s WCW was better.


The f*ck???


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

Ameer Patel said:


> It didn't close because it was losing money ffs it closed because of the time Warner merger


If it was making money, Warner wouldn't have shut it down. In the last 18 months they lost $ 100 mil.



thatonewwefanguy said:


> The f*ck???


2000 WCW was better than AEW is.


----------



## thorwold (Dec 19, 2015)

Chip Chipperson said:


> I'm not saying AEW is dying rather just making an interesting comparison piece.


Did you not just make a thread recently about how they'd be dead in 5 years? Backtracked on that already?  

-- WCW died, first and foremost, because they lost their TV deal. AEW is doing some of the better numbers on their network, they're certainly far exceeding the expectations people had for them when they started. 

When you look at how much Warner just paid for the NHL, and how much worse their numbers are, it's good as guaranteed that while AEW won't get NHL money, because it's pro-wrestling, they'll surely get a whole lot more than they're getting now. There is literally nothing but your personal dislike for them that suggests they're actually heading downwards rather than upwards.

Yes, they're operating at a loss, but that seems mainly on account of Tony seems to be into the 'spend money to make money' philosophy. The video game he's invested in is what has mainly caused it, the ROH deal will have added to that. If he gets some streaming deal, as is obviously the goal, that'll be step one back in the right direction.

AEW may be overpaying, who knows, but I can't imagine it's comparable to what WCW were doing. When you consider inflation is up over 60% since WCW was on top, that Punk is surely one of AEW's top earners, and he's supposed to be making 3 million a year... Punk would not have even been in WCW's top 5 earners in that period.

-- Your second point is such a reach it's almost not even worth responding to, but what the hell... WCW died because they didn't push the young guys, AEW is pushing them, but they're not stars? What?

AEW uses the old guys to help bring visibility to the young guys. WCW used the old guys to stay on top, and kept the young ones in the undercard. It's not even remotely the same thing.

-- Given it's just recently come out that the famed AEW EVP's don't even have that much actual power, and Tony pretty much handles everything of real note himself, I'd say that comparison is also a meaningless one. There is zero indication the inmates have taken over the asylum in AEW the way happened in WCW.


----------



## Geert Wilders (Jan 18, 2021)

WCW was, up until 1999-2000 sometime, a pretty fucking good company.
I do not think AEW has reached prime WCW heights. I don’t think they ever will.


----------



## ForceOfNature (12 mo ago)

thatonewwefanguy said:


> The f*ck???


You felt like you were watching a big deal.

Not a fucking suped up nerdy indy.


----------



## Geert Wilders (Jan 18, 2021)

Also I think the whole ex WWE star argument is lazy and irrelevant. Their top stars consist of originals like MJF (unless you consider him as ex WWE when he got shoved by TNA original Joe), Wardlow, Hangman Adam Page. Their TNT champion was never in WWE as far as I know. Darby Allin, Sammy Guevara, Jungleboy and Luchasaurus are the champions right now. The Acclaimed get regular mic access.
AEW has done a great job of balancing their originals and the guys who have come from elsewhere.


----------



## syver (Mar 8, 2015)

NXT Only said:


> Y’all literally have zero idea what Tony’s pockets are like and continue to say they’re overspending as if he doesn’t have a financial team walking him through every dollar allocated.
> 
> No matter how much most of you want the company to die, for whatever reason, it will continue to thrive and grow and the fans who love it will be entertained.
> 
> ...


He displays psychotic behavior because he gave his opinion? grow up. It's amazing how sensitive you fanboys get when somebody dares criticize your precious AEW.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

the_flock said:


> If it was making money, Warner wouldn't have shut it down. In the last 18 months they lost $ 100 mil.


No it wouldn't.

Kevin Sullivan has been on record saying Ted Turner said "I will keep wrestling on here as long as I can, because it put me on the map"

Turner execs wanted to get rid of wrestling in the 80's. They told Lex Luger they wanted to get rid of it in 1997. They never looked at wrestling seriously.

WCW died because Turner sold his network .WCW was still getting high ratings in 2001 when it got cancelled.



VitoCorleoneX said:


> This must be reason why a green Jade Cargill is the TBS champion and a hot Wardlow (who is not a indy midget vanilla uhh whatever) is going for the TNT champion. TK stop catering to the hardcores!


It's hilarious how people think that casuals only want "Big guys" and "green guys"

It really shows how out of touch the fan base is.

AEW will die when one of 3 things happens:

1. Tony Khan can't handle the scrutiny anymore. Thats what happened to Dixie, its unfortunate to see what 2 years has already done to this kid. And wait until the next set of shoot interviews come out, Big Swole was a small litmus test and he failed, I think he just wont be able to handle the backlash

2. his dad sees that it is fucking up his health and cuts him off. His dad knows that it makes him happy, but Shad aint losing a kid because the marks need something to watch besides WWE

3. He just gets bored. Burnout has happened to every single person in this business. At some point the job isn't fun anymore. That could be 3 years, years or 10.... but its going to happen, and he will just shut it down.


----------



## thatonewwefanguy (Feb 6, 2020)

syver said:


> It's amazing how sensitive you fanboys get when somebody dares criticize your precious AEW.


aint a fanboy, i just like aew, so i dont know what your talkin about but i will ask this, why are we comparing a company that is up and running to a company that closed down 21 years ago


----------



## Smithy.89 (Apr 9, 2019)

Sharpydon said:


> Jeff hardy won't cost a penny in his run though, his merchandise sales will cover his salary easily


As well thought Of as he is, less kids will watch this show than wwe . It caters to different Audience who will buy omegea and co clothing


----------



## $Dolladrew$ (Jun 15, 2020)

thatonewwefanguy said:


> aint a fanboy, i just like aew, so i dont know what your talkin about but i will ask this, why are we comparing a company that is up and running to a company that closed down 21 years ago


So idiots can take pop shots at the company and armchair quarterback book thinking they know what fans want....

Aew won't die until TK does, people constantly reference his dad like that's the only money he has......yes his family are billionaires but tony is a millionaire on his own.

Gonna laugh my ass off when AEW gets a streaming deal and gets a hefty uptick in pay once negotiations roll back around.

Aews product is only getting better


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

$Dolladrew$ said:


> So idiots can take pop shots at the company and armchair quarterback book thinking they know what fans want....
> 
> Aew won't die until TK does, people constantly reference his dad like that's the only money he has......yes his family are billionaires but tony is a millionaire on his own.
> 
> ...


What happens in five years when all of AEW's stars have to retire because old and Tony doesn't have any young guys to carry the torch?


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> What happens in five years when all of AEW's stars have to retire because old and Tony doesn't have any young guys to carry the torch?


literally - what are you talking about

there is not a single company in the world that has this many established young stars

not one


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> literally - what are you talking about
> 
> there is not a single company in the world that has this many established young stars
> 
> not one


Nobody knows who they are, chief! Go to a non AEW wrestling show and ask the people if they know Britt Baker or Darby Allin. The answer will be no.


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

Chip Chipperson said:


> What happens in five years when all of AEW's stars have to retire because old and Tony doesn't have any young guys to carry the torch?


In 5 years:

Moxley - 41 (Bryan's current age, where he's as good as ever)
Omega - 43 (Punk's current age, where he's still great)
MJF - 30
Wardlow - 39
Hangman - 35
Adam Cole - 37
Darby - 34
Jungle Boy - 29
Sammy Guevera - 33
Britt Baker - 35
Jade Cargill - 34
Ricky Starks - 37
Powerhouse Hobbs - 36
Young Bucks - 41/37
Lucha Bros - 42/36

Yeah, they are in so much trouble. This ignores some other star jumping ship, or developing more young talent, which they will.


----------



## Sad Panda (Aug 16, 2021)

Chip Chipperson said:


> What happens in five years when all of AEW's stars have to retire because old and Tony doesn't have any young guys to carry the torch?


And what if they don’t have to retire because they work a much less intense schedule compared to the other company and other big companies in the past? 

Not to mention the following stars have been given from a massive amount of tv time, to a moderate amount of tv time and have all been rubbing elbows with the big stars on television for the last several months. 

Jungle Boy, Adam Page, Sammy Guevara, MJF, Wardlow, Ricky Starks, Hook, Dante Martin, Powerhouse Hobbs, Daniel Garcia, Jade Cargill, Britt Baker 

they also have their own developmental where I’m sure they will be working to establish top stars. But that list right there is a decent crop of young wrestlers, who currently all are featured on television who are relatively young and have potential, especially in the next 5-10 years.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Undertaker23RKO said:


> In 5 years:
> 
> Moxley - 41 (Bryan's current age, where he's as good as ever)
> Omega - 43 (Punk's current age, where he's still great)
> ...


None of those people except Moxley and maybe Adam Cole (Slightly) are known by the majority of wrestling fans brother, try again.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Nobody knows who they are, chief! Go to a non AEW wrestling show and ask the people if they know Britt Baker or Darby Allin. The answer will be no.


i asked all of them and they knew - i’m sorry, but it seems you are wrong

i asked the guy at my local gym and he knew OC and Danhausen and said AEW saved his life


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> i asked all of them and they knew - i’m sorry, but it seems you are wrong
> 
> i asked the guy at my local gym and he knew OC and Danhausen and said AEW saved his life


Now you're just trolling...


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

Chip Chipperson said:


> None of those people except Moxley and maybe Adam Cole (Slightly) are known by the majority of wrestling fans brother, try again.


Guess what? That's still a better roster than they debuted with, and they'll have better track records in five years. Take your L.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Now you're just trolling...


you caught me - i don’t go to the gym (obviously)

i met the guy at the supermarket


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Undertaker23RKO said:


> Guess what? That's still a better roster than they debuted with, and they'll have better track records in five years. Take your L.


Who cares? The question was what are they going to do when a large amount of their star power walks, retires or gets released because can no longer work the AEW style?

I assure you the majority of the wrestling audience won't know who Jade Cargill is in 2027 (Unless the WWE signs her or she gets into some other form of mainstream media)


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Who cares? The question was what are they going to do when a large amount of their star power walks, retires or gets released because can no longer work the AEW style?
> 
> I assure you the majority of the wrestling audience won't know who Jade Cargill is in 2027 (Unless the WWE signs her or she gets into some other form of mainstream media)


I assure you, that per usual, you're wrong.


----------



## Sad Panda (Aug 16, 2021)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Nobody knows who they are, chief! Go to a non AEW wrestling show and ask the people if they know Britt Baker or Darby Allin. The answer will be no.





Chip Chipperson said:


> I assure you the majority of the wrestling audience won't know who Jade Cargill is in 2027 (Unless the WWE signs her or she gets into some other form of mainstream media)


And How do you know this exactly?You rubbing that crystal ball over there?


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Undertaker23RKO said:


> I assure you, that per usual, you're wrong.


Please point to any mainstream star AEW has developed in the almost 3 years they've existed.



Sad Panda said:


> And How do you know this exactly?You rubbing that crystal ball over there?


Because Tony doesn't know how to make a mainstream star. Simple really.


----------



## Sad Panda (Aug 16, 2021)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Please point to any mainstream star AEW has developed in the almost 3 years they've existed.
> 
> 
> 
> Because Tony doesn't know how to make a mainstream star. Simple really.


I would say a main stream star in this era in wrestling is hard to come by. Lesnar wouldn’t be a mainstream star if he didn’t go off to UFC and play football.

I don’t think Reigns is mainstream.

15 years of monopolizing the wrestling world has created a major scab on the industry… it might take a while, if ever, we get to that level of Popularity and box office draw.


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Please point to any mainstream star AEW has developed in the almost 3 years they've existed.
> 
> 
> 
> Because Tony doesn't know how to make a mainstream star. Simple really.


They don't need a mainstream star. They are as popular as ever doing what they are doing, and going to get a big extension. A mainstream star would be fantastic but it's not in any way necessary for them to continue to do business. This is also assuming that Bryan/Punk are both gone in 5 years, no one else pops up, and no big WWE guy jumps ship. Those are all assumptions.


----------



## $Dolladrew$ (Jun 15, 2020)

Chip Chipperson said:


> What happens in five years when all of AEW's stars have to retire because old and Tony doesn't have any young guys to carry the torch?


You're imagining scenarios that don't exist bruh

AEW has plenty of young guys who are coming up and TK will continuously add pieces he feels will add to the company, in other words a shortage of talent will never happen. Aews prestige is only rising what wrestler isn't going to contemplate making the jump once contracts end?

Now he's going to a have a proper developmental org that will help groom young guys and polish them for Dynamite as yet another Avenue if finding talent. 

It's almost like you have no idea what you're talking about Chip....hmmmm???


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Mainstream stars leave for mainstream projects


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Sad Panda said:


> I don’t think Reigns is mainstream.



























Just five examples of Roman doing some big things with mainstream brands.



Undertaker23RKO said:


> They don't need a mainstream star. They are as popular as ever doing what they are doing, and going to get a big extension. A mainstream star would be fantastic but it's not in any way necessary for them to continue to do business. This is also assuming that Bryan/Punk are both gone in 5 years, no one else pops up, and no big WWE guy jumps ship. Those are all assumptions.


They need a mainstream star to continue to grow.



$Dolladrew$ said:


> You're imagining scenarios that don't exist bruh
> 
> AEW has plenty of young guys who are coming up and TK will continuously add pieces he feels will add to the company, in other words a shortage of talent will never happen. Aews prestige is only rising what wrestler isn't going to contemplate making the jump once contracts end?
> 
> ...


I thought we were being nicer to one another, ah well I'll leave it there.


----------



## $Dolladrew$ (Jun 15, 2020)

Sad Panda said:


> I would say a main stream star in this era in wrestling is hard to come by. Lesnar wouldn’t be a mainstream star if he didn’t go off to UFC and play football.
> 
> I don’t think Reigns is mainstream.
> 
> 15 years of monopolizing the wrestling world has created a major scab on the industry… it might take a while, if ever, we get to that level of Popularity and box office draw.


Yeah you're spot on with Lesnar and I'd go as far as saying there are no mainstream stars in wrestling most wrestlers are unknown outside if the wrestling bubble because wrestling in all honesty isn't popular.


----------



## Top bins (Jul 8, 2019)

I don't get the problem with what Chip is saying. I am a die hard fan of Liverpool for example and when they wasn't doing well and disappointing me for years I still watched and was commited.

I am not sure if Chip watches the show often but there's nothing more frustrating than finally we get a billionaire willing to invest in wrestling apart from Vince McMahon (I still watch WWE) and then you have the likes of Orange Cassidy and dark order in multiple segments. Chip is critical because the finances and TV deal has potential. Tony Khan can't book that's been proven with the show hovering at 1 million or less every week. And the show isn't probably formatted. I couldn't imagine in WWE Roman reigns being thrown out cold defending the title in a 8 minute match against Ricochet. But the main event being Sami Zayn vs Shinsuke Nakamura and that also had no build either. 

It's like wasted potential and it's frustrating for some fans to see. Then AEW keeps stockpiling talent like Tony Nese and Jay lethal and once they lost to Sammy they were stuck on dark.

Now someone like Keith Lee stuck feuding with QT Marshall's jobber group.

Tony signs people and doesn't know how to use them. The world champion also has no heat since winning the strap either. And the tag team champions have no heat and are boring too. And even the squash matches go on longer. 

Tony should give up booking power and just be an investor/CEO and obviously hire and fire talent. That's it.

And I don't hate Tony either.


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

You've changed your argument so many times it's hard to keep track of which goalposts you're moving 🤣


----------



## $Dolladrew$ (Jun 15, 2020)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Just five examples of Roman doing some big things with mainstream brands.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In other words you have no reply?

You assume in 5 years AEW won't have young talent to take the torch and I brought up a few points to counter that ....you honestly don't seem like you know what you're talking about because you don't watch the product.


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

Top bins said:


> I don't get the problem with what Chip is saying. I am a die hard fan of Liverpool for example and when they wasn't doing well and disappointing me for years I still watched and was commited.
> 
> I am not sure if Chip watches the show often but there's nothing more frustrating than finally we get a billionaire willing to invest in wrestling and then you have the likes of Orange Cassidy and dark order in multiple segments. Chip is critical because the finances and TV deal has potential. Tony Khan can't book that's been proven with the show hovering at 1 million or less every week.
> 
> ...


There is a difference between being frustrated with the product, giving constructive criticism, and being a full blown blow hard. I have plenty of issues with AEW. Dark Order suck. They have too much comedy. People re-use the same moves during a show way too often. They have a litany of guys who can wrestle but lack personality. They have terrible nepotism hires. Yet, I still watch them when I can because more often than not they put out a solid product. I also realize they are doing just fine business wise. They've maintained viewers while viewers are harder to come by, and going to get a huge TV deal bump coming soon. It's one thing to say whether they are disappointing you as a fan. It's another to say they are in trouble going forward, which is absolutely false by any measure.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

$Dolladrew$ said:


> In other words you have no reply?
> 
> You assume in 5 years AEW won't have young talent to take the torch and I brought up a few points to counter that ....you honestly don't seem like you know what you're talking about because you don't watch the product.


Of course I do bro, I've been in the business longer than some people on this forum have been alive.

None of the young guys have any potential to become true professional wrestling stars. Development? Maybe there is a hidden gem in there, we don't know. 

I will agree AEW's prestige is rising, they will poach more former WWE stars along the way but who knows when they will create their own mainstream star for the first time?


----------



## Geert Wilders (Jan 18, 2021)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Just five examples of Roman doing some big things with mainstream brands.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If snesker shopping is mainstream then bucks are mainstream.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

Geert Wilders said:


> If snesker shopping is mainstream then bucks are mainstream.


Moreso that he did it with Complex which has 5 million subscribers. The Bucks are on there also but only a measly quarter of a million views as opposed to the big dog who has 5 million views.


----------



## $Dolladrew$ (Jun 15, 2020)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Of course I do bro, I've been in the business longer than some people on this forum have been alive.
> 
> None of the young guys have any potential to become true professional wrestling stars. Development? Maybe there is a hidden gem in there, we don't know.
> 
> I will agree AEW's prestige is rising, they will poach more former WWE stars along the way but who knows when they will create their own mainstream star for the first time?


Wardlow has a real shot with a babyface push, jungle boy in 5 years should be bigger and likely a singles guy with a different character he has potential imo. Starks has potential especially if he bulks a bit could have a heel rock vibe. Daniel Garcia is being tutored by Daniel Bryan in his spare time.

Then you got the acrobatic guy like dante Martin,yuta wheeler. Likely not superstars but definitely will be popular. There are more that's just off the top of my head and like I said TK will remain aggressive and active in free agency so the top of the card will stay fresh.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Its about time i reveal something too.

… I’m QT Marshall - and i can confirm we have made 110% profit already in 2022 and we have laid out a solid plan to keep on establishing the stars of tomorrow

in secret, both Eric and Vince Russo is actually writing for us and Cornette is a fulltime consultant

sorry for misleading you all for so long. Its nice to come clean


----------



## Geert Wilders (Jan 18, 2021)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Moreso that he did it with Complex which has 5 million subscribers. The Bucks are on there also but only a measly quarter of a million views as opposed to the big dog who has 5 million views.


Bucks still did it. MJF has also reached TMZ. 

I don’t think AEW wrestlers will become mainstream like Reigns btw, but sneaker shopping is a bad example.


----------



## $Dolladrew$ (Jun 15, 2020)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Its about time i reveal something too.
> 
> … I’m QT Marshall - and i can confirm we have made 110% profit already in 2022 and we have laid out a solid plan to keep on establishing the stars of tomorrow
> 
> ...


No one will believe you I've revealed I'm Peter Avalon but no one believes me 🤫


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

$Dolladrew$ said:


> No one will believe you I've revealed I'm Peter Avalon but no one believes me 🤫


well, now that they know who i am, I can confirm that Dolla is actually Peter

it feels good to reveal that


----------



## Lady Eastwood (Jul 10, 2006)

I made the same thread I think it was late last year, looks like the opinions are still the same lol


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

TNA comparison is much better. 

WCW until 1999 had a clear vision of who they wanted on top be it Flair, Sting, Hogan or Goldberg between 88-98. AEW like TNA have a bunch of guys that are all mid or upper mid and seem too afraid to pull trigger on any of them for whatever reason.


----------



## DougTex (11 mo ago)

Chip Chipperson said:


> If it was making money they would have kept it. They didn't want wrestling in the merger because it was a money pit and the ratings weren't worth how much money they were losing.


Not true, The Atlanta Braves lost triple the money and were a lackluster team, literally losing Hundreds of millions, made WCW look good, yet they kept it.

Why?

Because for a merger Baseball is a good brand on portfolio, Wrestling isn’t, hence why it was sold, they never planned on selling it prior to the planning of the merger with AOL.



Chip Chipperson said:


> It wasn't just a case of Kellner saying "Nup, don't like wrestling" and being able to get rid of it based on nothing but personal bias.


That’s exactly what happened though, WCW was their highest rated programming but they were rebranding, and Keller didn’t want any wrestling, he even put a press release stating that Pro Wrestling in its current incarnation(Crash T doesn’t fit with the branding, just 2 months later TNT became the drama channel and TBS comedy.

Prior to that they were willing to give WCW 10 years on the Turner networks prior to rebranding.

Comparing AEW to WCW is a false comparison and a disservice to WCW.

AEW has never ever been in their league, WCW to the end was the highest rated shows on Turner and right behind WCW(WCW as #2 was booming compared to the WWF as #2)

AEW doesn’t draw shit or anywhere close to WCW, even at WCW’s lowest(2.5 -3.5 ratings which was 3-5 million viewers back then.)

AEW is more comparable to ECW, horriblely run and niche.

And unlike WCW, AEW doesn’t draw, so the network has double the ammo to cancel.

Say what you want about WCW but they NEVER planned on selling it until the Merger for FCC/Portfolio reasons, while keeping other shit that lost triple the money.

And WCW was NEVER planned on getting canceled, until the channels rebranded to hard drama and hard comedy

If it wasn’t for a merger WCW would still be around and wouldn’t have been sold.

Unlike WCW, AEW sucks.

WWF was alway Coke and WCW was always Pepsi to the end.

AEW is not even RC Cola.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Hello friends, a rare thread made by me in this AEW section, hope you all are well.
> 
> With the recent debut of four brand new former WWE superstars to AEW in the past week or so (Redbeard, Strickland, Regal and Hardy) I have began thinking more and more that AEW is a modern day WCW and not really in a good way.
> 
> ...


Totally different circumstances.

From a booking perspective, WCW was a pyramid scheme with no endgame in sight.The objective was to sign WWF talent, with each new signing providing momentum. The challenge for WCW was that their rival began locking up talent with guarantees at the end of 1996, and the wellspring ran dry. They then needed to rely on their own booking prowess to compensate for the lack of established stars coming over from the WWF. Aside from Goldberg and DDP, that failed.

AEW did a great job initially of taking obscure talent and building it up. To me it was reminiscent of how early Attitude Era WWF operated. They now resemble WCW more in that they are signing WWF talent. That said, this is a once in a generation occurrence. WWF released or allowed to leave most of their Golden Era roster in 1992-1993, which is what WCW capitalized on. WWE today has released over 80 wrestlers since the pandemic started. It’s logical for AEW to pursue some of these people - it would be dumb not to.

And here is the difference. AEW is a young company building towards its third content rights deal. This one should be significant, and losses now will translate into profitability in 2024. That is the end game - to keep momentum going and get to that deal. That said, they cannot allow “surprises” to be their primary booking mechanism like WCW did. It has to be underlain with good development and booking.

And having watched both, AEW is significantly better than WCW was in 1998-2000.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

ECW was run on a shoestring budget out of Heymans mothers kitchen where he signed bunch of journeymen that no major promotion wanted to touch and unknown junior heavyweights

AEW is owned by a multi billionaire who owns NFL team, soccer team in richest area of London, Four Seasons Hotel skyscraper. AEW, are signing guys to 7 figures contracts, the kind if thing Heyman could only dream of.


----------



## 3venflow (Feb 3, 2019)

Any financial concerns for AEW (which shouldn't exist as long as Tony Khan is sole owner) are 90%+ likely to be wiped out when they sign their next TV deal. It's also pretty tenuous to discuss their financial situation without any real proof of incomings vs. outgoings. 'It's rumoured that so-and-so earns this much' is not logic-based argument. How much of the wage bill and video game has been offset by the return to live events, increased PPV income, new partnerships, new international TV deals and increased merchandise profits for example?

And let's play devil's advocate and say AEW is losing $5m this year (which is peanuts for the Khans), have you heard of speculating to accumulate? Many big brands soak up losses in the short-term to see out a long-term goal of sustainability and profit. In AEW's case, I imagine that will be improved TV rights and/or a streaming deal (he hasn't bought ROH's library and stacked Dark with 10+ matches for the lolz, but for content), since that's where much of the money comes from now. They have also shown the ability to put more butts in seats than TNA ever could and have done some big $ gates. With TK being quite stingy with big singles matches in the past three years, AEW has the luxury of many big main events they could run. Put Punk in a world title match at the United Center for example, and you could be looking at a $1.5m gate with 20,000-plus people.

I see few similarities between WCW of the era you refer to and AEW personally except having a huge roster and Tony Schiavone on commentary. And I never missed a WCW show. If the main event scene was monopolized by Jericho, Hardy, Sting, Danielson, Christian and Punk for three years running with Omega, Hangman, MJF and co. stuck below a glass ceiling, that'd be an apt WCW comparison.


----------



## PhenomenalOne11 (Oct 2, 2016)

In this thread: People being upset because someone criticized their favourite tv show.

Get over it. Stop taking wrestling so seriously.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

Seafort said:


> Totally different circumstances.
> 
> From a booking perspective, WCW was a pyramid scheme with no endgame in sight.The objective was to sign WWF talent, with each new signing providing momentum. The challenge for WCW was that their rival began locking up talent with guarantees at the end of 1996, and the wellspring ran dry. They then needed to rely on their own booking prowess to compensate for the lack of established stars coming over from the WWF. Aside from Goldberg and DDP, that failed.
> 
> AEW did a great job initially of taking obscure talent and building it up. To me it was reminiscent of how early Attitude Era WWF operated. They now resemble WCW more in that they are signing WWF talent. That said, this is a once in a generation occurrence. WWF released or allowed to leave most of their Golden Era roster in 1992-1993, which is what WCW capitalized on. WWE today has released over 80 wrestlers since the pandemic started. It’s logical for AEW to pursue some of these people - it would be dumb not to.


obscure talent such as? 

I mean take first three years of TNAs existence they already had guys like Styles, Joe, Abyss, Aries, Homicide in or around mainevent and they were pretty much unknowns before TNA started

WCW in late 80s early 90s pushed Sting, Windham, Luger, Pillman, Vader, Foley, Austin, Johnny B Badd, Dustin Rhodes, Sid Vicious among others


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

To all those that are so sure that AEW will be getting a big new TV renewal, do you realize that a merger between WarnerMedia and Discovery is happening next month? What if the new group Warner Bros. Discovery have no interest in having wrestling on their TV programming no matter how good the ratings are? This happened in 2001, wrestling was not something they wanted, so they got rid of it

This could be what happens to AEW in 2023 and they will need to look for a new home

AEW fans may not realize this, but wrestling is seen as a huge embarrassment in the eyes of a lot of people who don't follow, it's not a real sport like the NHL or MLB, which are respectable even if they get less ratings, big time advertisers would prefer to advertise on their programming rather than a fake sport like pro wrestling

AEW fans need to relax on this "new TV deal" or "HBO max deal" because your hearts could get broken in due time


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

DougTex said:


> Not true, The Atlanta Braves lost triple the money and were a lackluster team, literally losing Hundreds of millions, made WCW look good, yet they kept it.
> 
> Why?
> 
> ...


Turner executives were pushing Ted to sell WCW back in the early 90s. The Evans Nitro history opens with that. You’re right that the plans were to keep the shows on Turner until the Kelner decision (which itself is an interesting story), but historically there was little but distain for WCW within the Turner or

WCW was a mature brand. Like ECW, AEW is a startup. Unlike ECW, AEW draws significantly better. Much, much better. ECW’s highest ever attendance was 5K in the peak of the wrestling boom generated by the Attitude Era. AEW has sold out NBA arenas and the Ash Center.

Dynamite is doing roughly 60% of the viewership of Raw. Thats close to what Nitro was doing against Raw in the first quarter of 1999.

ECW was going from PPV receipt to PPV receipt and was always on shaky financial footing. They could have grown more, but lacked the financial means to absorb the years of losses needed to grow (and keep their talent). AEW has those means, and is (likely) operating in the red right now purposely as they build towards their 2024 end goal.

AEW is closer to a Super version...a better run and more strategically focused version of TNA than ECW, although the dedicated fans for AEW remind me of Paul’s promotion. And I’ve been to an ECW PPV and heard one of Paul’s post show speeches...I know what it was like.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

Undertaker23RKO said:


> In 5 years:
> 
> Moxley - 41 (Bryan's current age, where he's as good as ever)
> Omega - 43 (Punk's current age, where he's still great)
> ...



Half of those people wont be in AEW in 5 years



Sad Panda said:


> I would say a main stream star in this era in wrestling is hard to come by. Lesnar wouldn’t be a mainstream star if he didn’t go off to UFC and play football.
> 
> I don’t think Reigns is mainstream.
> 
> 15 years of monopolizing the wrestling world has created a major scab on the industry… it might take a while, if ever, we get to that level of Popularity and box office draw.


Mainstream stars happen more out of popularity of the character than anything else and that includes wrestling.

Jennifer Aniston became extremely mainstream being Rachel from friends
Bryan Cranston wasn't considered A-List until he became Walter White
Look at how people wanted Cody to become "Homelander" the character is mainstream and the actor feeds from that.

Steve Austin the character was over and thats what made him over and mainstream

I don't know who is the mainstream character that AEW has that can relate on a different level.

The other issue is that TK does all the interviews. Who is the guy/girl on the roster that can go on Rich Eisen's show and make the company have eyeballs on it and be compelling enough for people to give it a chance. Jericho is maybe the only one. That has to be fixed.



> *Wardlow has a real shot with a babyface push, jungle boy in 5 years should be bigger and likely a singles guy with a different character he has potential imo.* Starks has potential especially if he bulks a bit could have a heel rock vibe. Daniel Garcia is being tutored by Daniel Bryan in his spare time.
> 
> Then you got the acrobatic guy like dante Martin,yuta wheeler. Likely not superstars but definitely will be popular. There are more that's just off the top of my head and like I said TK will remain aggressive and active in free agency so the top of the card will stay fresh.


I dont know when this started, but this mind set has to leave the business immediately.

If the chicken isn't fully cooked, and it needs to go in the oven longer than normal, thats on the chef. Wardlow and Jungle Boy have been around for 2 years, they should be at a high level today. 

The Rock debuted in WWE in 1996 and was champ 2 years later.
Steve Austin debuted in 95 and was champ 2 years later
The Undertaker debuted and was champ 1 year later
HHH debuted in 1995 and was champ 4 years later
Bret Hart became a singles wrestler in 1991 and was champ 2 years later
AJ Styles was NWA champ within his 1st year in the promotion

The idea for a 5 year plan in wrestling is crazy. You build a guy to get him over and where he needs to be as quick as possible.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

validreasoning said:


> obscure talent such as?
> 
> I mean take first three years of TNAs existence they already had guys like Styles, Joe, Abyss, Aries, Homicide in or around mainevent and they were pretty much unknowns before TNA started
> 
> WCW in late 80s early 90s pushed Sting, Windham, Luger, Pillman, Vader, Foley, Austin, Johnny B Badd, Dustin Rhodes among others


Obscure talent such as Darby Allin, Orange Cassidy, Britt Baker, MJF, Sammy Guevara, Jungle Boy, Luchasaurus, and Ricky Starks. If you’re a huge wrestling fan who watches MLW, Lucha, and NWA you might have seen them before, but for a lot of people these were totally new players.



validreasoning said:


> obscure talent such as?
> 
> I mean take first three years of TNAs existence they already had guys like Styles, Joe, Abyss, Aries, Homicide in or around mainevent and they were pretty much unknowns before TNA started
> 
> WCW in late 80s early 90s pushed Sting, Windham, Luger, Pillman, Vader, Foley, Austin, Johnny B Badd, Dustin Rhodes, Sid Vicious among others


To be fair, WCW was taking relatively obscure or green talent back in 1990-1992 when they began pushing Mick Foley, Steve Austin, Johnny B Badd, Brian Pillman, Sid, Vader, Eric Watts, Kevin Nash, and Van Hammer. Going back to 1988, when Sting was pushed he was green and that was his first nationally televised run.


----------



## 3venflow (Feb 3, 2019)

Schleppy said:


> To all those that are so sure that AEW will be getting a big new TV renewal, do you realize that a merger between WarnerMedia and Discovery is happening next month? What if the new group Warner Bros. Discovery have no interest in having wrestling on their TV programming no matter how good the ratings are? This happened in 2001, wrestling was not something they wanted, so they got rid of it


Every bit of evidence points to AEW being one of Warner's best performers and best value for money. Warner have released press releases many times lauding Dynamite's numbers and Tony Khan has said publicly (which would be risky to the relationship if he was bullshitting) that Warner are delighted with their performance.

Dynamite is often the only TNT or TBS original besides NBA that makes the charts. Even Rampage in the death slot usually ranks in the top 20. Rhodes to the Top even outperformed almost everything else on TNT due to its AEW connections. It's valuable content with a young following that is likely to be valued whatever the future is with Warner/Discovery.

But hypothetically, say the Warner/Discovery joint force have other ideas, there'll be another network out there willing to pay good money for the number one show on cable this Wednesday and many other Wednesdays. AEW Dynamite is the only pro wrestling show that has seen any year-on-year growth during the decline of traditional TV. It is worth its weight in gold to Warner. And now they have added content to their library (ROH and I wouldn't be surprised if he'll buy more libraries) in an industry where content is king.

As an aside, Warner is producing new AEW-related projects, including a Darby Allin series.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Half of those people wont be in AEW in 5 years
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That’s a great point...and the challenge that both WWE and AEW face. You cannot make that happen...or you can try like one did with Roman. It really has to happen organically.

There’s one person on the roster right now that I feel might be able...maybe...to catch fire with the right opponent and a lot of air time. I can’t believe I’m writing it, but Eddie Kingston. He’s got this incredibly authentic, Everyman vibe to him that is so refreshing, and in a way reminds me of Steve Austin. The challenge is finding the right character to play off of.


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

3venflow said:


> Every bit of evidence points to AEW being one of Warner's best performers and best value for money. Warner have released press releases many times lauding Dynamite's numbers and Tony Khan has said publicly (which would be risky to the relationship if he was bullshitting) that Warner are delighted with their performance.
> 
> Dynamite is often the only TNT or TBS original besides NBA that makes the charts. Even Rampage in the death slot usually ranks in the top 20. It's valuable content with a young following that is likely to be valued whatever the future is with Warner/Discovery.
> 
> But hypothetically, say the Warner/Discovery joint force have other ideas, there'll be another network out there willing to pay good money for the number one show on cable this Wednesday and many other Wednesdays. AEW Dynamite is the only pro wrestling show that has seen any year-on-year growth during the decline of traditional TV. It is worth its weight in gold to Warner. And now they have added content to their library (ROH and I wouldn't be surprised if he'll buy more libraries) in an industry where content is king.


[/QUOTE]

You left this part out

*AEW fans may not realize this, but wrestling is seen as a huge embarrassment in the eyes of a lot of people who don't follow, it's not a real sport like the NHL or MLB, which are respectable even if they get less ratings, big time advertisers would prefer to advertise on their programming rather than a fake sport like pro wrestling*

So what if AEW is #1 in the demo on Wednesday nights if big time paying advertisers don't want their products advertised on a fake sport? Sure AEW has big 18-49 viewership, but they are wrestling fans, so they naturally get less respect

Please explain why is the NHL getting bigger advertisers on a show that gets less ratings?

You ignore the fact that pro wrestling is a joke to a lot of big time executives


----------



## 3venflow (Feb 3, 2019)

Schleppy said:


> AEW fans may not realize this, but wrestling is seen as a huge embarrassment in the eyes of a lot of people who don't follow, it's not a real sport like the NHL or MLB, which are respectable even if they get less ratings, big time advertisers would prefer to advertise on their programming rather than a fake sport like pro wrestling


WWE landed its biggest TV deal ever due to its strong performance with the 18-49s even as its yearly decline in total viewership continued. Every year, fewer people watch their product live than the year before. Their continued high rankings in the 18-49 as well as their library of content (that being the Peacock deal, but even before that they were raking in TV money) made them so valuable.

AEW will not land a billion dollar deal nor do they need one, but this is a three-year old company that has a handful of wins over RAW already and a foundation laid for the long term.

AEW literally just debuted DraftKings as a sponsor at Revolution, the company that signed a monster deal with UFC several years back and has partnerships with top U.S. sports leagues.



> Please explain why is the NHL getting bigger advertisers on a show that gets less ratings?


Because live sport _is_ more valuable than pro wrestling. But that doesn't make pro wrestling valueless. It's not either/or. There is a hierarchy and live sports sits somewhere at or near the top. However, pro wrestling doesn't sit at the bottom or else WWE and even AEW (when it was doing lower ratings than now) wouldn't have been handed lucrative deals in relation to their popularity at the time.

Since Dynamite debuted, millions more people have cut the cord yet it has swam against the tide and grown in all metrics year-on-year. Smackdown, RAW, NXT, IMPACT were all down in 18-49 and P2+ in 2021 compared to 2020. Dynamite was up. Networks are eager to hold on to any product that can bring in younger viewers and are willing to pay big bucks for that content.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

Shleppy said:


> You left this part out
> 
> *AEW fans may not realize this, but wrestling is seen as a huge embarrassment in the eyes of a lot of people who don't follow, it's not a real sport like the NHL or MLB, which are respectable even if they get less ratings, big time advertisers would prefer to advertise on their programming rather than a fake sport like pro wrestling*
> 
> ...



I think you are making great points... but I will say this:

TK has enough money and connections where he wont need to care.

I am sure he has some childhood/college friend who is an exec somewhere that can give a deal to him.

Let's understand how he got THIS deal: He was boys with one of the programming guys and they signed a deal where half the ad revenue goes to TNT/TBS and it doesnt cost a lot to produce pro wrestling.

I wouldnt worry about them not finding a network, they will. his dad owns an NFL team, no network is going to want to piss off an NFL owner or his kid.

I dont think they sign some new mega deal or something like that, I think that is all rubbish... but they will be on TV after 2023


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> I think you are making great points... but I will say this:
> 
> TK has enough money and connections where he wont need to care.
> 
> ...


100% correct, AEW fans are lucky that a fellow wrestling mark like Tony Khan exists, he does have huge connections and will make sure AEW stays alive no matter what

For this reason I don't get why AEW fans get so upset when he is labeled a "money mark" when all facts point to him being exactly that, why so ashamed of the label?

*Tony Khan is a money mark*


----------



## Geert Wilders (Jan 18, 2021)

Shleppy said:


> You left this part out
> 
> *AEW fans may not realize this, but wrestling is seen as a huge embarrassment in the eyes of a lot of people who don't follow, it's not a real sport like the NHL or MLB, which are respectable even if they get less ratings, big time advertisers would prefer to advertise on their programming rather than a fake sport like pro wrestling*
> 
> ...


i'm pretty sure advertisers don't care where they advertise if their product is making money...


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

Geert Wilders said:


> i'm pretty sure advertisers don't care where they advertise if their product is making money...


If that was the case then the biggest companies would be advertising on AEW Dynamite, the #1 rated show on Wednesday in the 18-49 demo

Advertisers do care, otherwise Domino's pizza wouldn't have been so upset with AEW when their commercial aired in the middle of a garbage wrestling match

Domino's Threatens to Pull Ads From AEW After Pizza Cutter Attack (insider.com)


----------



## Geert Wilders (Jan 18, 2021)

Shleppy said:


> If that was the case then the biggest companies would be advertising on AEW Dynamite, the #1 rated show on Wednesday in the 18-49 demo
> 
> Advertisers do care, otherwise Domino's pizza wouldn't have been so upset with AEW when their commercial aired in the middle of a garbage wrestling match
> 
> Domino's Threatens to Pull Ads From AEW After Pizza Cutter Attack (insider.com)


i don't think they actually pulled ads, though...

threat is different to action.


----------



## yeahbaby! (Jan 27, 2014)

@Chip Chipperson I have to agree in terms of money management and signing every wrestler that's remotively active out there it seems. Can we like, join forces? I'll get on the gas, get the body, work on the promos; then you can promote me and play some politics; make a video to send to Tony. It's probably a sure thing we'll both get signed and he'll start us off on 350K each + merch portions.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

yeahbaby! said:


> @Chip Chipperson I have to agree in terms of money management and signing every wrestler that's remotively active out there it seems. Can we like, join forces? I'll get on the gas, get the body, work on the promos; then you can promote me and play some politics; make a video to send to Tony. It's probably a sure thing we'll both get signed and he'll start us off on 350K each + merch portions.


For 350k I'd do anything. You're on.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

3venflow said:


> WWE landed its biggest TV deal ever due to its strong performance with the 18-49s even as its yearly decline in total viewership continued. Every year, fewer people watch their product live than the year before. Their continued high rankings in the 18-49 as well as their library of content (that being the Peacock deal, but even before that they were raking in TV money) made them so valuable.


Not true in the slightest.

Fox spoke about the total viewers more than anything in the press release

FOX Sports Becomes New Home of SmackDown® Live

From the WWE press release:


> _SmackDown Live_ is a consistent winner on television, currently averaging1 1.3M P18-49, 1.3M P25-54 and 3M total viewers P2+.


and at the bottom:



> On air for almost 20 years and nearly 1,000 episodes, _SmackDown Live _is the second-longest running weekly episodic cable television show in U.S. primetime history, only behind _Monday Night Raw_®. _SmackDown Live _is currently among the most-watched, regularly scheduled programs on *primetime cable and delivers more viewers in primetime than any cable network in the U.S. (2.9 million average viewers)*


The Hollywood Reporter also mentions total viewers:

Fox and WWE Close to Massive Five-Year, $1 Billion Deal for ‘SmackDown’

From that article:



> The deal would split WWE programming rights with NBC, *which is expected to retain Raw. SmackDown is averaging 2.59 million viewers a week so far this year*, while _Raw_ is pulling about 3 million. Both programs currently air on USA. And the WWE had a significant part in the network’s May 14 upfront presentation to advertisers with Stephanie McMahon, WWE’s chief brand officer, introducing several female wrestlers including former UFC star Ronda Rousey.


The total viewership had just as much to do with the deal.



> AEW will not land a billion dollar deal nor do they need one, but this is a three-year old company that has a handful of wins over RAW already and a foundation laid for the long term.
> 
> AEW literally just debuted DraftKings as a sponsor at Revolution, the company that signed a monster deal with UFC several years back and has partnerships with top U.S. sports leagues.


Draft Kings became a sponsor for WWE last year They sponsor every company you can make open bets on. This is not the slam dunk you may think it is. 



> Because live sport _is_ more valuable than pro wrestling. But that doesn't make pro wrestling valueless. It's not either/or. There is a hierarchy and live sports sits somewhere at or near the top. However, pro wrestling doesn't sit at the bottom or else WWE and even AEW (when it was doing lower ratings than now) wouldn't have been handed lucrative deals in relation to their popularity at the time.


The reason why wrestling is able to get deals is because it is really cheap to produce compared to a sitcom or any other type of show. 

Wrestling has value in that it gets a dependable number at a cheap price. The issue I think some people have is that instead of it being 1 million people a week, it could be closer to 1.5-1.8 million a week. That number does wonders for the bottom line across the board. 



> Since Dynamite debuted, millions more people have cut the cord yet it has swam against the tide and grown in all metrics year-on-year. Smackdown, RAW, NXT, IMPACT were all down in 18-49 and P2+ in 2021 compared to 2020. Dynamite was up. Networks are eager to hold on to any product that can bring in younger viewers and are willing to pay big bucks for that content.


Saying Dynamite was up YoY is like me saying that WWE is thriving because they have more network subscribers.

There would (rightfully so) be an asterisk and would be fudging the numbers. The number AEW did on 4/14 which was their first day of no competition, they did: 1,219,000 people. They did not reach that number again until September and only beat it with 1,273,000 people. They also have not hit either of those numbers since. 

To pretend like AEW gained more viewers YoY is disingenous


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

Shleppy said:


> 100% correct, AEW fans are lucky that a fellow wrestling mark like Tony Khan exists, he does have huge connections and will make sure AEW stays alive no matter what
> 
> For this reason I don't get why AEW fans get so upset when he is labeled a "money mark" when all facts point to him being exactly that, why so ashamed of the label?
> 
> *Tony Khan is a money mark*


Looking at your picture though, this dude is becoming more Herb Abrams than Vince McMahon.

This business does some crazy shit to people. He looks completely different.

I will stay with my prediction that this guy is going to flame out more than anything. He is trying to keep everyone happy and they are going to use him up and then talk shit on him later on.

Exactly like Dixie,


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Half of those people wont be in AEW in 5 years


Based on what? And if they aren't, you don't think people who will replace them will? In three years the only person of value they have lost is Cody.


----------



## 3venflow (Feb 3, 2019)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Not true in the slightest.
> 
> Fox spoke about the total viewers more than anything in the press release
> 
> ...


Have a look at the chart below from Friday night. Smackdown finished above only CW shows in total viewership, but above EVERYTHING else in the 18-49.










Tell me, what do you think FOX will care about more there: Smackdown having the least total viewers outside of the non-entity CW or Smackdown having the most young viewers? If the former, then does that make Smackdown a cancellation risk and cable-bound? The answer is *no* because they are performing where it matters most, in the category that attracts the most advertisers. FOX would not tolerate being regularly beaten by their rivals in the primetime slot, but in their eyes they're winning here because Smackdown is #1 where it matters most. WWE Smackdown finished FIRST on network TV, not eighth. And it was the performance in that category that got WWE its big money rights and what will get AEW an improved package. Otherwise, logic would surely dictate that WWE would've received _less_ money since their total viewership is down down down?

Of course they pimp total viewers along with the demo in their press releases. TNT do that for Dynamite too, but in Tony Khan's own words, when they meet every week, they only discuss the demographics. That is the priority and the importance of total viewers seems to amount to be high enough to maintain a strong 18-49 rating.



> Draft Kings became a sponsor for WWE last year They sponsor every company you can make open bets on. This is not the slam dunk you may think it is.


AEW is a three-year old brand. Getting deals like this is a big deal for them even if not a game-changer, and from what I can ascertain the sports or sports-related brands that DraftKings predominantly works with are NBA, NFL, UFC, WWE and MLB, plus two English football teams. It's not bad company to be in.



> Saying Dynamite was up YoY is like me saying that WWE is thriving because they have more network subscribers.


WWE _is_ thriving from a business perspective and one of the big reasons for that is the Peacock deal. They make record profits and with the way their company is set up, that's the most important thing - not the shitty shows they produce.



> There would (rightfully so) be an asterisk and would be fudging the numbers. The number AEW did on 4/14 which was their first day of no competition, they did: 1,219,000 people. They did not reach that number again until September and only beat it with 1,273,000 people. They also have not hit either of those numbers since.
> 
> To pretend like AEW gained more viewers YoY is disingenous


So you're pointing out peaks as opposed to averages and calling me disingenuous? The best method of measuring YoY is of course... the average rating of every show in the year - the highs and the lows. As for the competition, check out how no competition has benefited NXT. It turned out there really weren't a huge number of crossover viewers in the long run. AEW also had more preemptions last year than previously, which sunk their numbers for several stretches of weeks.


----------



## VitoCorleoneX (Jun 27, 2016)

NXT Only said:


> Can’t even come on here and discuss storylines, potential storylines or anything. It’s literally flooded with AEW sucks, this guy sucks, another WWE guy, they mentioned WWE again, Tony Khan is an idiot, this show sucked, Punk this, Punk that, flippy shit, they’re spending too much money, Cornette was right.
> 
> That is not what this is for and this influx of negativity has ruined this forum. Like grow the hell up.


This!
Usually the posts of AEW rampage or dynamite threads once the show is over are really calm and nice. People point out the negatives and positives too but oh boy everything else in this forum sucks ass and as you said it is flooded with negativity.
Im gonna say it once again People are better off chatting and comminicating on Reddit,Twitter or any other forum. Because there you gonna see people that actually WATCH the show and talk ABOUT THE SHOW and not people trying to point out how AEW is WCW 2.0 and a sinking ship. Even if its true whats the point of the discussion?? Should we now cancel AEW and not support it?? At this point people should just agree with the OP and move on till the next thread comes in that says AEW is becoming TNA 2011.


----------



## Sad Panda (Aug 16, 2021)

NXT Only said:


> Can’t even come on here and discuss storylines, potential storylines or anything. It’s literally flooded with AEW sucks, this guy sucks, another WWE guy, they mentioned WWE again, Tony Khan is an idiot, this show sucked, Punk this, Punk that, flippy shit, they’re spending too much money, Cornette was right.
> 
> That is not what this is for and this influx of negativity has ruined this forum. Like grow the hell up.


Agreed. I find it ironic because everyone one here says the AEW fan base is the worst when in all reality the detractors are awful and greatly outnumber those that enjoy the show on here. It’s too much.


----------



## Sad Panda (Aug 16, 2021)

the_flock said:


> Jeff Jarretts broken guitars made more money than them geeks.


Geeks.. another word you brainiacs have completely overused, and dragged through the mud.


----------



## Saintpat (Dec 18, 2013)

Ratings are far more nuanced than just total viewership or ‘the demo.’

Yes there’s a widely-recognized idea that the 18-34/18-49 demo is ‘desirable’ but that means it has wider appeal to a larger number of potential advertisers, not that it is the desired demo for all advertisers.

For instance, golf doesn’t draw big overall numbers nor does it do well in ‘the demo.’ But it is profitable programming because it draws a concentrated number of people who have a lot of money and are willing to spend it on luxury items: if you’re selling high-end autos or Rolex watches, golf is a much better buy for you than AEW or WWE or whatever Housewives show.

Likewise, those news programs draw a large number of viewers, usually older and not in the demo, but if you ever tune in CNN or Fox News you might be surprised to find that they actually do have ads (and they charge for them) because that’s another ‘demo’ and they have a lot of viewers. Those advertisers profit from their ads on news programs, same as video game ads reach wrestling viewers. I doubt the My Pillow guy wants to spend his money on ads on a wrestling show any more than Fortnite is going to buy an ad during the third round of The Masters.

Someone who knows a lot more about this than I do had a detailed post on another forum some time ago explaining how ad buys work. Company A goes to a Madison Avenue firm and says, in effect, ‘We have $100M to spend in 2022 on advertising’ and that firm researches their product and spreads that money around where it best fits. Sponsorships might sign up for WWE or AEW, but ad buys aren’t generally ‘hey let’s advertise on AEW,’ it’s a firm saying ‘we have you placed in top-three demo programming during prime time four nights a week, split 60/40 between broadcast and cable’ … and some of that will go to AEW if it’s in the top three on cable and some of it will go to Housewives and some of it will go to Smackdown and some of it will go to … whatever the top broadcast network shows are on.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

Undertaker23RKO said:


> Based on what? And if they aren't, you don't think people who will replace them will? In three years the only person of value they have lost is Cody.


Based on the history of wrestling everywhere.

And I never said anything about someone replacing or not replacing them. 5 years ago this was the Wrestlemania card:


Kickoff: Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal.
Kickoff: WWE cruiserweight champion *Neville* vs. *Austin Aries.*
Six-Pack Challenge: SmackDown women's champion Alexa Bliss vs. Becky Lynch vs. *Mickie James* vs. Natalya vs. Carmella vs. Naomi.
Triple Threat ladder match: Raw tag team champions* Luke Gallows and Karl Anderson* vs. Sheamus and *Cesaro* vs.* Enzo and Big Cass vs. The Hardy Boyz*
WWE intercontinental champion *Dean Ambrose* vs. Baron Corbin.
Mixed Tag:* John Cena and Nikki Bella* vs. The Miz and Maryse.
Fatal 4-Way elimination match: Raw women's champion Bayley vs. Charlotte Flair vs. Sasha Banks vs. *Nia Jax.*
*Shane McMahon* vs. AJ Styles.
WWE United States champion* Chris Jericho *vs. Kevin Owens.
Non-sanctioned match: *Triple H* vs. Seth Rollins.
*The Undertake*r vs. Roman Reigns.
WWE champion* Bray Wyatt* vs. Randy Orton.
WWE Universal champion *Goldberg *vs. Brock Lesnar.

The people in the bold arent with the company anymore

Its just how it is. Very rarely do wrestling companies have similar rosters for 3 years, nonetheless 5


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

3venflow said:


> Have a look at the chart below from Friday night. Smackdown finished above only CW shows in total viewership, but above EVERYTHING else in the 18-49.
> 
> View attachment 118341


Your claim is that the 18-49 demo was the reason for the billion dollar deal.

I am showing you a press release and an article from a TV ratings centric magazine showing differently.

Showing a chart does nothing to dispute my point.



> Tell me, what do you think FOX will care about more there: Smackdown having the least total viewers outside of the non-entity CW or Smackdown having the most young viewers? If the former, then does that make Smackdown a cancellation risk and cable-bound?


This is a false equivalency that is an obvious try at a gotcha moment with no context. FOX has a contract, when pilots go on air, they are not guaranteed a 4-5 year run like SD!. This isn't the same as a TV show that doesnt have that type of security.

Two things can be true: Fox can be upset the total number of viewers is not what they expected (considering the article I showed you said they were expecting 3 million plus viewers) and still be high on the 18-49 demo.



> The answer is *no* because they are performing where it matters most, in the category that attracts the most advertisers. FOX would not tolerate being regularly beaten by their rivals in the primetime slot, but in their eyes they're winning here because Smackdown is #1 where it matters most. WWE Smackdown finished FIRST on network TV, not eighth. And it was the performance in that category that got WWE its big money rights and what will get AEW an improved package. Otherwise, logic would surely dictate that WWE would've received _less_ money since their total viewership is down down down?


First things, you can't say that Fox was expecting 3 million viewers and then say definitively that they are happy or unhappy with numbers. Also, advertisers aren't attracted to a number by base demographics. It doesnt take formal training to know that the primary income spent in the household is by women and they pay for different products than men.

Women buy the majority of household goods, clothing, and miscellaneous items in the household. This is why the NFL has been going after women to market to for so many years, because with more women watching, they can get sponsors like Dove and Secret, which are catered more towards the woman demographic.

Also, (and this is the third time now) I showed you that the deal highlighted total viewers. If you want to show me where 18-49 is what Fox was lookngn for in the purchase, I assume you would have done so by now.

Also, WWE has a social media imprint that is on par with the major sports leagues. The WWE on Fox Twitter page has 490K followers, that is more than half of what AEW has total. The WWE on Fox YouTube page has 994K followers. These are things that Fox (who also has a streaming service) also looked at, despite lower ratings.





> Of course they pimp total viewers along with the demo in their press releases. TNT do that for Dynamite too, but in Tony Khan's own words, when they meet every week, they only discuss the demographics. That is the priority and the importance of total viewers seems to amount to be high enough to maintain a strong 18-49 rating.


And in Eric Bischoff's they look at total viewers just as closely. So there, now we both namedropped someone.



> AEW is a three-year old brand. Getting deals like this is a big deal for them even if not a game-changer, and from what I can ascertain the sports or sports-related brands that DraftKings predominantly works with are NBA, NFL, UFC, WWE and MLB, plus two English football teams. It's not bad company to be in.


Ok



> WWE _is_ thriving from a business perspective and one of the big reasons for that is the Peacock deal. They make record profits and with the way their company is set up, that's the most important thing - not the shitty shows they produce.


Which is the point I am making. You are claiming the ratings have gone up YoY, when in reality that has not been because of the product, but because of the only other wrestling show not airing anymore. if they raise the rating YoY this year, then I will be a lot more impressed.



> So you're pointing out peaks as opposed to averages and calling me disingenuous? The best method of measuring YoY is of course... the average rating of every show in the year - the highs and the lows. As for the competition, check out how no competition has benefited NXT. It turned out there really weren't a huge number of crossover viewers in the long run. AEW also had more preemptions last year than previously, which sunk their numbers for several stretches of weeks.


1. We have already established that averages were skewed after April of last year

2. In order to make an argument that viewership is going up, you have to show there is an increase in the number that has been maintained. Once again, to say that "Well the numbers went up YoY, only the average" means that they did not gain viewers. Especially when there is something that drives the increase. this is what makes the averages argument disingenuous.

If we say that 2 million plus people watch Dynamite and nXt on the premiere night (the number is actually closer to 2.3) then we have to ask where 50% of that audience went in 2 years. Cord cutting happens at about a 10% cut YoY, so we can establish that. And lets be aggressive and say 20% of those people only want to watch WWE.

Then that means 20% of the market that watched in 2019 have given up on the show/wrestling completely. That is not a good number. And that goes for nXt and WWE as well, so don't know why they are brought up.[/QUOTE]


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

Yeah five years is a looong time in this business. Just look at WWE's roster in 99 and 2004 or 2009 and 2014. DMD is correct that vast majority of people are pushed to top within 1-3 years of their debuts, on rare occasions you have guys who spend years in midcard and then get pushed. 

BTW WWE's last tv deals weren't due to 18-49 numbers. Their 18-49 numbers were far higher in 2014 yet their TV deal was seen as disappointing. WWE's increase was due to two main reasons
1. Bidding war between two rival networks for the content
2. WWEs advertising revenue had grown significantly since last tv deal including many blue chip companies advertising during Raw and SD


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

I also dont agree with a lot of this about why wcw died. A lot of these reasons fell apart because of higher ups far above Eric bishoff. Once that happens it reaches the product and everything falls apart from booking,to creative, to every other little thing. WCW pushed a lot of the right people at the right time. They gave a insane amount of time to new very fresh guys. Are we honestly going to say that when wcw peaked people were asking for Rey mysterio, chris benoit and all those amazing types to main event the company ? they all got pushed in different ways and played a important part. Did they drag on the same cycle of talent at the top to long ? absolutely, But again to be fair no one else was seriously getting over. WCW would have happily pushed anyone that was reaching high levels, which they did with the few that broke out. I think there is a lot less wcw comparisons to aew than you think. AEW is not going to grow and be better based off pushing the zillion losers that are younger on this roster. It wont make a lick of difference if stone cold came to aew. The problem is entirely Tony Khan. WCW had creative, bookers, They had different visions,They had many different styles, They had character. This which aew has zero of. Almost all documentaries are nonsesne. You think a wwe owned docu is going to give real facts on why wcw died. No one in that video had a clue what was going on behind the scenes above that person pay grade. I respect a lot of your views on things but it sounds like you dont know much to what actually went down with wcw. It was even out of Ted turners hands on why it failed. AEW is not even close to being as compelling as wcw. When you have a company like this and have no bookers and no creative, What else do you expect ? This company has no clue how to do things. Also the talent thing again wwf is just as guilty for this or worse. Reality is Tony is not really catering to anyone but himself,Hes not even catering to hardcores. Its just hardcores will stand by it jerking themselves off to everything. I think guys like hangman could be made stars or darby but again Tony has no vision and no one in the company to make it happen. They have no idea how to build stars or use old stars. So ya all the old fucks coming to aew look like losers. Most of the guys that jumped to TNA came off good and were booked good. But guess what, TNA had bookers, creative and a boss that allowed these things. Dispite the fact she heavily tried to put her own bullshit taste on everything.


AEW is a flat line promotion that acts like a indy fed. I see how much fans dont come off truly engaged with whats going on. They just get worked up over stupid shit and debuts and whatever else. Dont blame them, There is nothing to invest in. You show up to an event that is based on something you enjoy and just try hard to get yourself over and have a blast with whatever.


AEW has a entire list of its own problems.


----------



## stew mack (Apr 24, 2013)

i like u and bdons post Chip but I think youre being a bit harsh on AEW. It does some stuff right you gotta praise the MJFs and the Jungle Express' of the world too. otherwise u just come off a blind h8r


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Based on the history of wrestling everywhere.
> 
> And I never said anything about someone replacing or not replacing them. 5 years ago this was the Wrestlemania card:
> 
> ...


That's a fair point. The majority of the guys I named seem like they will be around though.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

wcw worst dying days had better creative than aew


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

stew mack said:


> i like u and bdons post Chip but I think youre being a bit harsh on AEW. It does some stuff right you gotta praise the MJFs and the Jungle Express' of the world too. otherwise u just come off a blind h8r



aew has some serious problems but i dont think its comparable to wcw much personally


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Chip is just compensating with this thread because he marked out to Jeff Hardy like the rest of us.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

The One said:


> Chip is just compensating with this thread because he marked out to Jeff Hardy like the rest of us.


I'm a Jeff fan but nah, I didn't mark out it was sad seeing him in AEW to be honest especially with Tonys "We only want like 5 guys from the WWE" ringing in my head.

I did mark out for his TNA debut about 12 years ago though, THAT was cool


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

Undertaker23RKO said:


> In 5 years:
> 
> Moxley - 41 (Bryan's current age, where he's as good as ever)
> Omega - 43 (Punk's current age, where he's still great)
> ...


That is to assume they won't have jumped ship to WWE. 

MJF has openly admitted to courting WWE and wants the move. 

WWE is apparently high on Wardlow. 

Darby Allin has said he doesn't see himself having a long term wrestling career and wants to go in to movies. 

Adam Page is a decade in to his career and never drawn. Same goes for Cole. 

The rest are jobbers.



Undertaker23RKO said:


> Guess what? That's still a better roster than they debuted with, and they'll have better track records in five years. Take your L.


That's debatable. They have a roster full of people they don't know what to do with and could easily cut 30 to 40 people. 

You're also not taking in to account when they started they had the apparent best wrestler in the world Kenny Omega who was set to show those outside of Japan what he was all about. You had the red hot Moxley who had just walked out on WWE. Jericho who had reinvigorated his career in Japan. Cody and the Bucks who had dominated the Indies for a good couple of years. 

Apart from Punk and Danielson debuts, I don't see the same level of excitement in the roster. They've gone from were taking the best talent in the world and showcasing it on a big stage to we will take anybody and everybody. 

When you take in to account the fact they could have had much bigger stars than they got. They went with quantity over quality.



DMD Mofomagic said:


> It really shows how out of touch the fan base is.
> 
> AEW will die when one of 3 things happens:
> 
> ...


A number of things could go wrong. There's already enough content for a rise and fall of AEW Dvd. 

What if the the next round of deals aren't as lucrative as people think for a start.



DMD Mofomagic said:


> No it wouldn't.
> 
> Kevin Sullivan has been on record saying Ted Turner said "I will keep wrestling on here as long as I can, because it put me on the map"
> 
> ...


WCW wasn't getting high ratings when it got cancelled. They were making next to no money from PPV. Their live gates were that of Indie levels. 

I've read the transcript of Lugers interview, he never flat out said they wanted rid of wrestling. They simply spoke about the vision of Warner and showcased new TV shows at a corporate event trying to sell content to sponsors. Lugers takeaway was that they didn't mention wrestling therefore they didn't want it. He also said he spoke to his wife and said that if ratings ever dropped significantly, there would be nothing stopping it from being axed. Guess what happened, ratings dropped significantly. Had they been going toe to toe with WWE in 2000 and 2001, had they still been selling out arenas and getting stadium level crowds, they wouldn't have been dropped. It's simple business.



Chip Chipperson said:


> Who cares? The question was what are they going to do when a large amount of their star power walks, retires or gets released because can no longer work the AEW style?
> 
> I assure you the majority of the wrestling audience won't know who Jade Cargill is in 2027 (Unless the WWE signs her or she gets into some other form of mainstream media)


People talk about Jade like she's going to be the next great women of wrestling, but WWE already have a dozen women like her and better.



Seafort said:


> The objective was to sign WWF talent, with each new signing providing momentum. The challenge for WCW was that their rival began locking up talent with guarantees at the end of 1996, and the wellspring ran dry. They then needed to rely on their own booking prowess to compensate for the lack of established stars coming over from the WWF. Aside from Goldberg and DDP, that failed.
> 
> That said, this is a once in a generation occurrence. WWF released or allowed to leave most of their Golden Era roster in 1992-1993, which is what WCW capitalized on.


You've pretty much described AEW with that first line, relying on WWE talent debuting to give them a short term boost in ratings. 

You're also talking out your ass about WCW. WCW literally took a handful of WWE wrestlers. The rest were either homegrown from the powerplant, Mexico, Japan or ECW. 

WCW didn't actually need to sign anyone from WWE, they would have been fine without. Just like AEW could have done perfectly OK without signing 40 stars from WWE.



DMD Mofomagic said:


> Looking at your picture though, this dude is becoming more Herb Abrams than Vince McMahon.
> 
> This business does some crazy shit to people. He looks completely different.
> 
> ...


TK is Herb without the charisma. So there's no danger of TK being involved in Coke and Hooker scandals.



shandcraig said:


> wcw worst dying days had better creative than aew


Fully agree with this. There was an optimism is 2001 that WCW was turning things around and getting better, the problem was it was too little, too late.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Shleppy said:


> You left this part out
> 
> *AEW fans may not realize this, but wrestling is seen as a huge embarrassment in the eyes of a lot of people who don't follow, it's not a real sport like the NHL or MLB, which are respectable even if they get less ratings, big time advertisers would prefer to advertise on their programming rather than a fake sport like pro wrestling*
> 
> ...


citation needed with 2020 to 2022 data



Chip Chipperson said:


> I'm a Jeff fan but nah, I didn't mark out it was sad seeing him in AEW to be honest especially with Tonys "We only want like 5 guys from the WWE" ringing in my head.
> 
> I did mark out for his TNA debut about 12 years ago though, THAT was cool


Tony never said that

the ringing must be tinnitus


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Tony never said that
> 
> the ringing must be tinnitus











AEW President Tony Khan - "We’re Not Gonna Sign Every Talented Person Out There" - WrestleTalk


AEW CEO and President Tony Khan was a guest on Chris Jericho’s podcast Talk Is Jericho recently, where he shared several interesting comments and opinions on the formation of AEW, […]




wrestletalk.com


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> AEW President Tony Khan - "We’re Not Gonna Sign Every Talented Person Out There" - WrestleTalk
> 
> 
> AEW CEO and President Tony Khan was a guest on Chris Jericho’s podcast Talk Is Jericho recently, where he shared several interesting comments and opinions on the formation of AEW, […]
> ...


did you read it before posting? Where is the ‘5 guys’ comment?

if you mean this

_We’re spending a ton of money on talent. We’re building a great roster, a big and diverse roster of talent. I think what’s important is that everybody brings something different, but additive. The key thing is that we’re not gonna sign up every single talented person out there. You can’t and it was one of the problems with WCW. It was that there were too many people under contract. A lot of them were super talented and super great. If you were gonna cut down their contracts, you’d be making some really tough decisions because there were a lot of great people under contract in WCW, but you just don’t need that many people under contract.

For us, we need to be discerning and make this a sustainable business. To me, I want to learn from mistakes people made in the past. Let’s sign up every valuable talent we can that we have a plan for, but let’s not sign up too many people. We can’t push everybody we like. Let’s not be guilty of the same thing we mock other people for. Let’s not live in a glass house. Let’s really try and focus on the people we sign, and make sure we’re giving them a good chance, and not just sign people up for the sake of having them because when you get into that, that’s when you really damage the business, and also hurt those guys’ ability to grow._

explain how that is any different from the current reality


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> citation needed with 2020 to 2022 data


Here are the NHL marketing partners for the 2021-2022 season









NHL Corporate Marketing Partners


Welcome to NHL.com, the official site of the National Hockey League




www.nhl.com





AEW Dynamite gets better demo ratings than the NHL yet they are not even close to getting the kind of sponsors you see in that link other than a few like Upper Deck or the gambling sponsors

You would think Apple would want to advertise to AEW fans right? People 18-49 buy MacBook's and iPhone's?

Wrong, the 18-49 demo of AEW is perceived to be of lower quality as the perception is that wrestling fans are broke losers

Bischoff explains why *total viewership* is more important than the demo to big companies if they are going to advertise to wrestling fans, he uses M&M's as an example, if 3 million people watch wrestling then it's more important than the key demo






The key demo is actually being overrated, total viewership is what draws the big sponsors and that is why WWE gets huge sponsors

Wrestling fans are not well respected by the big advertisers, so total viewership is what draws them in, and AEW is a big failure in total viewership


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Shleppy said:


> Here are the NHL marketing partners for the 2021-2022 season
> 
> 
> 
> ...


uhhh - we all know sport is the most valuable

compare AEW with any other standard programming to ‘prove’ its less attractive

nobody said it was worth more than sports

you might be broke mate, but i promise you a lot of us (most) aren’t 

peeps, always distrust somebody who thinks wrestling fans ain’t shit like olde shleppy here - he looks down on the hobby


----------



## Shleppy (Jul 6, 2020)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> uhhh - we all know sport is the most valuable
> 
> compare AEW with any other standard programming to ‘prove’ its less attractive
> 
> ...


Why do you have to make things personal? You are the perfect example of what Chip has been saying about AEW fans


----------



## greasykid1 (Dec 22, 2015)

the_flock said:


> I must have been mistaken when I saw Ric Flair put over Sting and Lex Luger. Flair and Arn put over Pillman and Austin. Kevin Sullivan put over Chris Benoit. Randy Savage put over DDP. Hollywood Hogan put over Goldberg. DDP and Kevin Nash put over Chuck Palumbo and Sean O'Haire. DDP put over Kanyon. I can keep going for a long time on this.


The previous comments were all about the dying days of WCW. Everything you mention is only up to and including nWo era. WCW were absolutely great at putting over new talent in a lot of their time in business. The point is that the business started to fail once a certain few started exercising their muscles in their contracts, not in the ring.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> you might be broke mate, but i promise you a lot of us (most) aren’t


Actually I think the Reddit Census said that the average wrestling fan makes under the average US wage.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Actually I think the Reddit Census said that the average wrestling fan makes under the average US wage.


you’ve quoted that reddit census so many times and ignore all the points to the contrary that is always raised

if you read and understand that data, its actually a pretty good reflection of the average base - but even then, 9000 is not an adequate sample size

all anybody who disputes the value of wrestling fans need to know is that there are 4 wrestling shows on prime time tv for a reason - and its not because the tv companies are charitable


----------



## DUD (Feb 21, 2021)

In regards to AEW / WCW comparisons... The major flaw WCW always had was a strained relationship with Time Warner executives other than Ted Turner. The majority of influential people in the company didn't want Wrestling on the network and had a dislike to Eric Bischoff who came across as rather aloof in meetings. I don't get the impression Tony Khan has that problem albeit TNT favouring Hockey or whatever is on Wednesday nights now must have been a kick in the teeth regardless of the financial payout they received. I may be reading a little too much in to it but it feels like the quality of Rampage episodes and Battle of the Belts have felt more like B shows since the announcement and I wonder if a strained relationship may be the cause of that.

As for The Elite / NWO political comparisons. You're always going to get that when an active wrestler has creative sway and character freedom is encouraged. At the moment it feels like every show is segment by segment as opposed to having a good show flow as The Bucks, Bryan, Punk, Matt Hardy and others are given there own time slots to do what they want and TK builds the rest of the show around that. I didn't have an issue with it originally but now they find themselves in a position where they haven't built any legitimate competitors to Adam Page in the background and the Main Event title picture is suffering as a result.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> did you read it before posting? Where is the ‘5 guys’ comment?
> 
> if you mean this
> 
> ...


I understand this may be subjective in your eyes, but this is currently happening right now.

He signed Miro and did 3 stop-start pushes with him

He made a big deal about Feugo Del Sol being signed, and did nothing with him

Tony Nese was supposed to be the premiere free agent signing, nothing done with him

Jay Lethal is also on the missing person's report

He signed Buddy Matthews 2 weeks ago, and he wasn't on the PPV or on the show last week

Christian is seldom used

The roster has over 100 wrestlers on it to fill up 3 hours of TV. There is no way that anyone can have a plan for over 100 wrestlers with 3 hours of TV.



LifeInCattleClass said:


> uhhh - we all know sport is the most valuable
> 
> compare AEW with any other standard programming to ‘prove’ its less attractive
> 
> ...


You're better than this, and you know exactly what he is saying. Most wrestling fans spend money on wrestling. It is considered a low brow audience (same with Nascar) that is loyal to the product, but not the advertisers. 

Look at how AEW fans treated Domino's pizza for being upset about the pizza cutter spot.

Having a lot of money doesn't mean anything if you wont spend it.


----------



## DaSlacker (Feb 9, 2020)

The idea that WCW 1999-2000 is better than AEW is hilarious. I dare anybody to go back and do a watch along on here, trying to make sense of 75% of it. AEW obviously has that indie lovefest feel and divisive modern in-ring style. It also suffers from a few Russoisms (some of which stolen from ECW). Generally it's incomparable because it's an athletic in ring based product unlike later WCW which was angle based. AEW is a much slower and safer product than that. TNA was somewhere in between and much of WCW was similar to AEW now, though the in-ring stuff was more realistic. 

Nitro 10/04/2000
Segment: Vince Russo vs Veterans
Invisible Camera: Hogan, Sting
Match: DDP pins Luger via distraction (4:00)
Invisible Cam: Curt Henning/Russo
Promo: Tank Abbott beats up announcer
Invisible Cam: Russo's office
Backstage : Hogan searching for Bischoff
Invisible Cam: Hogan talks with Bischoff
Promo: Kidman heel turn attack on Hogan
Backstage: Flair arrives, watches opening 
Promo: Ric Flair. Mocked by Scott Steiner and attacked by Shane Douglas. 
Backstage: Kevin Nash
Interview: Shane Douglas
Match: Sting defeats Sid Vicious via count out after The Wall attacks Sid (5:00)
Promo: Flair challenges Douglas
Backstage: Hogan searches for Kidman
Invisible Cam: Hogan beats up Moore, Helms
Match: Jeff Jarrett pins Curt Hennig after interference from debuting Shawn Stasiak (3:00)
Backstage: Hogan looking for Kidman
Invisible Cam: Nash on phone 
Interview: Sting 
Match: Ric Flair def Shane Douglas via DQ after interference from Russo baseball bat (2:00)
Post Match: Russo steals Flair's watch 
Promo: Kevin Nash attacked by debuting Mike Awesome
Backstage: Bischoff, driving a hummer, and Kidman, attempts to kill Hogan
Match: DDP pins Sting after Vampiro turns heel on Sting (4:00)
Post Match: Jarrett hits DDP wife with guitar 
Promo: Jeff Jarrett + under 40's beatdown on older wrestlers as Bret Hart watches on. 

Dynamite (09/03/2022)
Promo: Jericho turns heel on Kingston, forms new faction with 2.0 and Garcia who all beat up Eddie. 
Interview: CM Punk
Match: Adam Page pins Dante Martin (7:00)
Promo: Cole challenges Page to a rematch
Match: Moxley, Danielson def unknown (4:00)
Interview: William Regal
Backstage: Page apologizes to Dark Order
Match: PAC pins Wheeler Yuta (05:00)
Backstage: Tension between Elite/Redragon
Interview: FTR fire Tully Blanchard
Promo: Andrade turns on Hardy. Babyfaces try to help. Jeff Hardy saves the day. 
Interview: Swerve, challenged by Tony Nese
Promo: Wardlow
Backstage: QT Marshall/Keith Lee tension
Match: Jungle Express def Acclaimed (9:00)
Interview: Jade Carghill
Match: Thunder Rosa pins Leyla Hirsch (8:00)
Interview: Thunder Rosa
Interview: Brit Baker
Match: Scorpio Sky pins Sammy Guevara to win TNT title after distraction (11:00). 
Close: Sky and Paige Van Zandt rough up Sammy and GF Tay Conti. 

There are similarities and some like the wacky stuff. But generally it's like comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> you’ve quoted that reddit census so many times and ignore all the points to the contrary that is always raised
> 
> if you read and understand that data, its actually a pretty good reflection of the average base - but even then, 9000 is not an adequate sample size
> 
> all anybody who disputes the value of wrestling fans need to know is that there are *4 wrestling shows on prime time tv for a reason - and its not because the tv companies are charitable*


Two are on because they are part of a juggernaut that has been the premiere name in pro wrestling for over 40 years.

The others are because once again:

*Wrestling is an extremely cheap product to produce and get consistent ratings.*

It is almost 5-10 times more expensive for a network to produce a sitcom over a season than a wrestling show.

That's why Warner just put AEW to TBS, they can get 1 million people a week to watch, and not have to worry about losing money on a new tv show.



DaSlacker said:


> The idea that WCW 1999-2000 is better than AEW is hilarious. I dare anybody to go back and do a watch along on here, trying to make sense of 75% of it. AEW obviously has that indie lovefest feel and divisive modern in-ring style. It also suffers from a few Russoisms (some of which stolen from ECW). Generally it's incomparable because it's an athletic in ring based product unlike later WCW which was angle based. AEW is a much slower and safer product than that. TNA was somewhere in between and much of WCW was similar to AEW now, though the in-ring stuff was more realistic.
> 
> Nitro 10/04/2000
> Segment: Vince Russo vs Veterans
> ...


Well, the biggest difference is that one is written like a TV show, and the other is like a wrestling show.

The "invisible camera" (which wasn't always invisible) was to further the storyof what was happening.

The idea that cameras wouldnt be everywhere in the building of a tv show is silly.

In fact AEW has more at their disposal for creativity now than in 2001.

Everyone has a vlog or their phone out to record, cameras are everywhere, so they should be doing more in the back.

This goes back to establishing the character so to invest someone into the match.

If someone watched AEW on Sunday for the first time and got hyped for it, they would have no idea who Dante Martin is. To have a cold match (that no one thought he was going to win) with little to no reasoning turns people off. The worst part is kills Martin before he gets any momentum.

You can say what you want about Russo, but the entire point of that show was for him and Bischoff to lay dominance. they were the two bosses coming in to put the old guys out to pasture and they were willing to abuse their power to do so.

Every single segment in that format was built to that. Whether you enjoyed it or not is subjective.... but you knew what the show was about.

AEW has a bunch of segments that have nothing to do with each other and they do the thing I hate the most about WWE. A guy has his segment, and is just never seen again.

Wardlow cut the promo and that was it, no interaction with Punk or MJF or anything. there is no flow, it is a bunch of guys booking their own stuff for people to critique. It insults your intelligence


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> I understand this may be subjective in your eyes, but this is currently happening right now.
> 
> He signed Miro and did 3 stop-start pushes with him
> 
> ...


Miro - injured
Feugo - jobber and dark
tony nese - jobber, dark and rampage
jay lethal - roh most likely
buddy - part of HOB, already on 3 shows and a PPV
Christian - manager and occassional worker only / he is a legend, should not be used weekly

they have 3 hrs or tv and 2 hrs on youtube and bought ROH. Their roster is fine

on the ‘low brow’ - you guys are stuck in the 90s. Any invested audience is worth a lot - especially in 2022 (anything after 2015 really). Be honest, would wrestling be on prime time or not if the audience did not make tv execs and advertisers money

really think hard about that and get back to me.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

the_flock said:


> You've pretty much described AEW with that first line, relying on WWE talent debuting to give them a short term boost in ratings.
> 
> You're also talking out your ass about WCW. WCW literally took a handful of WWE wrestlers. The rest were either homegrown from the powerplant, Mexico, Japan or ECW.
> 
> WCW didn't actually need to sign anyone from WWE, they would have been fine without. Just like AEW could have done perfectly OK without signing 40 stars from WWE.


I get what you are saying…but Psicosis, Juventud Guerrera, Villano IV, Eddie Guerrero, Ultimo Dragon, and Chris Jericho were not there in 1996 to drive ratings, or at least not to be the primary ratings drivers. Hall, Nash, Waltman, Hennig, and the other WWF signings were. That was Bischoff’s focus. That was the key. The international talent helped to differentiate WCW, but it was not why WCW pulled ahead.

Again for AEW, yes they could have easily stood still. But the question is, why? If you are willing to take the loss and your opponent just shed a third of its roster, why wouldn’t you sign some of them? In 1995, the WWF signed rookies and castoffs from WCW like Eric Watts, Chad Fortune, Mick Foley, Steve Austin, Shanghai Pierce, Maxx Payne, and Paul Levesque. Were they wrong to do so?

The danger for AEW is that the signing itself becomes the driver. WWE made unique characters out of its signings. So did ECW to brilliant effect. The trap that AEW can easily fall into is what WCW did. But if they are willing to take a cast aside talent and develop them like the WWF did with Austin, Levesque, or Foley then absolutely they should make signings. But if not, or if they can’t, then they are in trouble. We will see.


----------



## DUD (Feb 21, 2021)

Seafort said:


> I get what you are saying…but Psicosis, Juventud Guerrera, Villano IV, Eddie Guerrero, Ultimo Dragon, and Chris Jericho were not there in 1996 to drive ratings, or at least not to be the primary ratings drivers. Hall, Nash, Waltman, Hennig, and the other WWF signings were. That was Bischoff’s focus. That was the key. The international talent helped to differentiate WCW, but it was not why WCW pulled ahead.


Yeah, something Bischoff did that I really liked was he would start the show by reminding people of the main story and that story bubbled throughout the show. So you'd have the Crusierweights on after the first half hour and you'd be reminded of there stories but you'd have what the nWo are up too in the back of your mind. AEW feels like a segment by segment show to the point where once your favourites have been on once you don't need to watch the rest.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> AEW has a bunch of segments that have nothing to do with each other and they do the thing I hate the most about WWE. A guy has his segment, and is just never seen again.
> 
> Wardlow cut the promo and that was it, no interaction with Punk or MJF or anything. there is no flow, it is a bunch of guys booking their own stuff for people to critique. It insults your intelligence


Yeah that's the big problem with WWE and AEW, no main protagonist in either company where the entire show is built around. When you don't have that it feels like you are watching bunch of random matches and segments that have little to nothing in common. 

People talk about Reigns in WWE but reality is he is only getting a strong push, he isn't FOTC, outside the SD 10 second reviews they do he is never mentioned or referenced on Raw and is only in his own storyline world on SD.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Miro - injured
> Feugo - jobber and dark
> tony nese - jobber, dark and rampage
> jay lethal - roh most likely
> ...


I think you are trying to make my point. keep in mind the line " We dont sign someone without a plan for them" Looking at their status now shows that this isn't a true statement.

Miro obviously came in without a plan because they have been doing stop/start pushes with him worse than WWE did. he also isn't injured

Fuego's signing was announced on national tv. Why anyone would waste TV time on someone who isn't going to be on TV often.

Tony Nese was billed as "The hottest free agent right now" They debuted him and did absolutely nothing with him

Jay Lethal signed in November. To say he has to do with a company that was purchased 4 months later is asinine.

Yes, he was on the pre show of the PPV and off tv this week.... major planning

Christian was brought in a the "best worker in the world" This is like Stephanie McMahon saying they book a year in advance. The pattern is the same with TK, bring guy in, get pop, major story, off tv 3 or 4 weeks, then bring back in, repeat.



> they have 3 hrs or tv and 2 hrs on youtube and bought ROH. Their roster is fine


You are absolutely right. If someone wants to dedicate, let me count, 6-8 hours of their life per week (not including BTE) to AEW, the roster is fine. If you want to have a cohesive television show that gets your characters over to masses and drives them to want to watch, a number more like 40-50 is fine.

I will even concede if you want 20-25 people for dark and elevation, I wont disagree with that. But it is literally impossible to get more than the same 5-6 guys every week a lot of time to get truly over without pissing someone who wont get over off.



> on the ‘low brow’ - you guys are stuck in the 90s. Any invested audience is worth a lot - especially in 2022 (anything after 2015 really). Be honest, would wrestling be on prime time or not if the audience did not make tv execs and advertisers money
> 
> really think hard about that and get back to me


.

I have answered this for now the 3rd time:

Only 4 shows are on prime time: Raw, SD,. nXt and Dynamite

Raw and nXt has a relationship and goodwill with USA network that goes back 40 years
SD!'s prime time slot has already been answered
And Dynamite is a sweetheart deal for Warner because Warner gets a significant cut of ad revenue, dont pay for any production (DDP's team does that) and wrestling is cheap and easy to produce.

You also have the fact that TK had a personal relationship with the Warner exec who made the deal and no one is pissing off the son of an NFL owner, since they are the most powerful brand for TV (literally companies lose oney to carry NFL games)

You don't have to think hard, you just have to think logically.

And thats the thing, you are talking more like it's the 90's than today. The wrestling audience in the 90's purchased mainstream products. Wrestling fans in the 90's split their money between 1 or 2 companies and outside of shows and some merch, the dollar didnt go far.

As a hardcore fan you have:
WWE
AEW
MLW
NJPW
PWG
Impact and
Your local fed to all compete for your dollar. And keep in mind this includes streaming services, DVD's, merch, and conventions. This is directly what happened to RoH, the company stopped making money, so Sinclair said just get rid of it.

If the wrestling fan's dollar stretched that much, then they would have been able to stay in business.


----------



## DaSlacker (Feb 9, 2020)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Two are on because they are part of a juggernaut that has been the premiere name in pro wrestling for over 40 years.
> 
> The others are because once again:
> 
> ...


Good point. Fundamentally it is TV show with wrestling matches as the third wheel vs pro wrestling show with some developing rivalries. 

They could definitely be more creative without resorting to silliness. 

I'd argue the cold match is the trade off from running it as a wrestling show and by doing so building a franchise/brand. Sport is by design predictable and if a promotion centers itself around competition then there's going to be cold matches. At least the in ring action is fast paced and back and forth to keep it fun to watch. Plus you avoid the 50/50 booking, keeping talent warm and leaving a lot of stuff on the table. There's no easy answer unless you cut the running time. Or running lots of squash matches. 

I think the Wardlow thing was just about letting him shine after a long awaited development. It's a common trope to give the often silenced muscle his time to talk. Plus illustrating how Punk and MJF pushed each so far they are too banged up to appear.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

Seafort said:


> The danger for AEW is that the signing itself becomes the driver. WWE made unique characters out of its signings. So did ECW to brilliant effect. The trap that AEW can easily fall into is what WCW did. But if they are willing to take a cast aside talent and develop them like the WWF did with Austin, Levesque, or Foley then absolutely they should make signings. But if not, or if they can’t, then they are in trouble. We will see.


I understand your point but AEW aren't signing any guys in the same realm as WWE or WCW did. 

Take your example of Foley, he was cutting legendary promos in WCW and ECW for years before, he was doing things very few people were doing. WCW were scared shirtless at this time of being sued. 

Same goes for Austin, his skits with Pillman in the Flair for the Old segments were goat level, as we're his skits in ECW. 

These 2 guys have something similar in common, they weren't necessarily wanted by WWE, they developed their own characters, the creative which was done for them would have ended their careers. Ie Fang McFrost and Mason the Mutilator. 

In terms of JP Levesque, WCW were very high on him and offered him the world, but he had his mind set on WWE and always wanted to go there. 

There was a period in which all 3 guys nearly ended up back in WCW because WWE creative was so bad. These guys were so successful due to circumstances rather than anything WWE did. When you consider a guy WWE was very high on Marc Mero pretty much sank his career when he got there.



DMD Mofomagic said:


> Two are on because they are part of a juggernaut that has been the premiere name in pro wrestling for over 40 years.
> 
> The others are because once again:
> 
> ...


AEW production costs were in excess of $500, 000 per week for Dynamite. That's why when they changed the TV deal, Warner paid AEW more money, but washed their hands with the production costs. AEW has to pay this themselves. $26million dollars per year just to produce Dynamite.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> I think you are trying to make my point. keep in mind the line " We dont sign someone without a plan for them" Looking at their status now shows that this isn't a true statement.
> 
> Miro obviously came in without a plan because they have been doing stop/start pushes with him worse than WWE did. he also isn't injured
> 
> ...


what do you mean? Sometimes the plan is ‘you‘re a jobber and you’re on dark’



DMD Mofomagic said:


> I have answered this for now the 3rd time:
> 
> Only 4 shows are on prime time: Raw, SD,. nXt and Dynamite
> 
> ...


this stretches reality by some margin

so, all the wrestling on prime time just ‘happened’ to get the spots - mate, c’mon now

you also have a lot of facts wrong about AEWs deal in general

Raw - top 3 in the demo every monday, only tipped by NFL. Long running. Big license fees. 
NXT - i’ll give you this one / its a favour to WWE
Smackdown - massive license fee on national free tv, always top 5 on the night
Dynamite - always top 3 of the night, only tipped sometimes by NBA or season starters / enders of south park or stuff like that

Warner gave Dynamite 175m and a rev share on ads on top - rev share on ads is common. AEW pays their own production though / just like all tv shows. before this deal, there was a rev share only and TNT covered half the production cost - that was only for 1 year and the quickly went to the 175m deal

further - it has been agreed the renewal after the 175m will be for ‘significantly higher’ and they also got extra for moving Dynamite to TBS, reported at around 10m + a rev share for rampage extra too.

you have to understand - nothing of the above happens - even the NXT favour - if the TV company does not make their money back + profit.

that is the key - we live in an era where shows are cancelled after 1 season (agree or disagree?) - so, if a show gets 4+ year deals on primetime or is on air for 20 years on primetime - THEY MAKE MONEY


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> what do you mean? Sometimes the plan is ‘you‘re a jobber and you’re on dark’


If the plan is to not elevate a guy to a status he can be taken seriously by the audience, you shouldn't have that guy on your roster.

Everyone on your roster should be protected. Why would I invest my time (which is valuable to me) into a match/ character that I know the ending to.

Too many options in entertainment to do that. That's bad planning



the_flock said:


> AEW production costs were in excess of $500, 000 per week for Dynamite. That's why when they changed the TV deal, Warner paid AEW more money, but washed their hands with the production costs. AEW has to pay this themselves. $26million dollars per year just to produce Dynamite.



That sounds like a lot. But it is miniscule compared to what tv shows costs. This is an article from 1999 that talks about tv costs:

COST OF TV SHOWS SPIRALING UPWARD



> According to TV executives, the budget for most new one-hour series runs from $1.3 million to $1.8 million per episode, with $750,000 to $950,000 spent on average for a half-hour sitcom.


Once again, this is in 1999. So those numbers are much higher today. Wrestling costing $500K a week for 2-3 hours of tv, is peanuts.



LifeInCattleClass said:


> this stretches reality by some margin
> 
> so, all the wrestling on prime time just ‘happened’ to get the spots - mate, c’mon now
> 
> ...


The demo! the demo! Valid reasoning has already showed that the demo had nothing to do with the SD! or Raw deals. The Hollywood Reporter said nothing about the demo, but ok.

The demo is good for advertising, which has already explained in this thread that a flat demo is never used by advertisers to make ad deals.




> Warner gave Dynamite 175m and a rev share on ads on top - rev share on ads is common. AEW pays their own production though / just like all tv shows. before this deal, there was a rev share only and TNT covered half the production cost - that was only for 1 year and the quickly went to the 175m deal


AEW does not own their production. DDP's team does their production. Also, I said there was an ad split.

The only thing wrong is that TNT covered half the production costs, which would still costs less than them creating a new sitcom.



> further - it has been agreed the renewal after the 175m will be for ‘significantly higher’ and they also got extra for moving Dynamite to TBS, reported at around 10m + a rev share for rampage extra too.


Ok. I dojnt know what argument you are trying to make here.



> you have to understand - nothing of the above happens - even the NXT favour - if the TV company does not make their money back + profit.
> 
> that is the key - we live in an era where shows are cancelled after 1 season (agree or disagree?) - so, if a show gets 4+ year deals on primetime or is on air for 20 years on primetime - THEY MAKE MONEY


Not always.

The NFL notoriously has been known to costs the networks money to show the games, it is a negative effect. The only reason they do it is because the amount of eyeballs helps them promote other shows.

CBS had their shows see a ratings jump after they purchased NFL on them. 

This is why Super Bowl Advertising is so expensive, the amount of eyeballs on the product(demo be damned) is the most important thing. 

Wrestling is considered a live event. No different than a live sport. Thats partially why Vince McMahon tried to re-brand, he was tired of being treated like a sport, and wanted to be treated like a television show. At the time, that meant more money. Now that has flipped. Wrestling is also extremely easy and cheap to produce.

I said that in my post, your argument is that the rabid fanbase makes more money for the network:

It doesnt. most wrestling fans spend their income for wrestling stuff.

As you said, for a minimal amount of money, TNT/TBS is able to put on a show once a week that gives them 1 million viewers while spending a small amount of money compared to getting brand new programming.

Most shows get cancelled, because they have budgets in the millions to produce 1 show. The network bleeds money a lot faster on "The blacklist" than the will for Danielson vs. Adam Page.

If you are saying that AEW is making Turner broadcasting more than $1, then sure I guess that is true.

That doesnt mean it is making them some huge number because of the demo, that just isnt true.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

the_flock said:


> AEW production costs were in excess of $500, 000 per week for Dynamite. That's why when they changed the TV deal, Warner paid AEW more money, but washed their hands with the production costs. AEW has to pay this themselves. $26million dollars per year just to produce Dynamite.


and they made 84m a year from reports

Not sure where you get the 26m from - but that seems ok-ish



DMD Mofomagic said:


> If the plan is to not elevate a guy to a status he can be taken seriously by the audience, you shouldn't have that guy on your roster.
> 
> Everyone on your roster should be protected. Why would I invest my time (which is valuable to me) into a match/ character that I know the ending to.
> 
> Too many options in entertainment to do that. That's bad


you are arguing in a circle because you are trying to prove a point that isn’t there to prove\

you know as well as i do there are levels to workers and each will be featured different. Some will be jobbers, some will be midcarders and some main eventers

BUT - AEW does a very good job of making them legitimate at all levels - and the proof is in the complaints of many haters. One of the main complaints are ‘main event talent go too long with jobbers’ - fans know its to make them legit / haters use it as a crit

but in the end, it builds the worker


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Costing $500K a week for 2-3 hours of tv, is peanuts.


Not when it's costing you 26 mil per year just for Production, leaving just 19 mil to pay wages. If you've got several million of talent sat at homes twiddling their thumbs, it's poor business.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

Why can't people just except Tony Khan is not qualified to he creative or booker. Except this is aew biggest flaw. Vince wasn't a creative or booker, which is why he had an amazing team back then. He had some good idea here and there but also many bad. TNA had a team and at times it was epic. WCW had a team and same thing. When you watch aew it feels like nothing was figured out. Sure you get sometimes 2 guys like mjf or punk that for themselves know how to move forward. Cody Rhodes biggest reason for getting Hate was actually because he did to much and to good of a job making story or taking that big spot moment. Wrestling fans are so desperate go enjoy the business these days that the expectations are so low. That revolution ppv was such a good example of how un engaged the fans were with story. They were just having fun with themselves. Which I get, I habe to be like that ay my local wrestling show. Doesn't mean it's good to


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

the_flock said:


> Not when it's costing you 26 mil per year just for Production, leaving just 19 mil to pay wages. If you've got several million of talent sat at homes twiddling their thumbs, it's poor business.




they don’t wrestle in empty buildings and sell no merch

their product is licensed to other countries, so the 500k covers more than the TBS license

way more than 19m is left over

i meannnn….


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> and they made 84m a year from reports
> 
> Not sure where you get the 26m from - but that seems ok-ish


They get 45 mil from TV. They got a bonus of around 10 mil last year. But they now have to provide content for Rampage too, whilst also filming Dark and Elevation. 

I have no idea how much they've made aside from that. If you say the take in 84 mil, fair enough. They're not making shit when you consider their huge contracts and production costs. They need to significantly cut talent.



LifeInCattleClass said:


> they don’t wrestle in empty buildings and sell no merch
> 
> their product is licensed to other countries, so the 500k covers more than the TBS license
> 
> ...


I was talking purely based on TV revenue. I should say every show is running at a loss.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

the_flock said:


> They get 45 mil from TV. They got a bonus of around 10 mil last year. But they now have to provide content for Rampage too, whilst also filming Dark and Elevation.
> 
> I have no idea how much they've made aside from that. If you say the take in 84 mil, fair enough. They're not making shit when you consider their huge contracts and production costs. They need to significantly cut talent.


you can’t say that cause you don’t know their books



the_flock said:


> I was talking purely based on TV revenue. I should say every show is running at a loss.












For Dynamite and Rampage they make 800k per show (from tv license fee only) and you say it costs them 500k - soooooo….. thats not a loss


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> you can’t say that cause you don’t know their books


It's widely acknowledged everywhere that they are running in the red. When you're offering a nearly 50 year old Matt Hardy a bumper new contract, it's easy to see how.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

the_flock said:


> It's widely acknowledged everywhere that they are running in the red. When you're offering a nearly 50 year old Matt Hardy a bumper new contract, it's easy to see how.


it is not widely acknowledged

in fact, the only REAL quote about it is from TK saying he is running a small profit last year from a sports article he did

and only TK will know (and his team and accountants)


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> you are arguing in a circle because you are trying to prove a point that isn’t there to prove\
> 
> you know as well as i do there are levels to workers and each will be featured different. Some will be jobbers, some will be midcarders and some main eventers


Well if you are booking in 1988 with Iron Mike Sharpe and The Brooklyn Brawler, then I agree with you.

But if you are writing a show in 2022, then you are way off.

You didnt actually dispute my point. I said I wouldnt waste my time on a character that I am legitimately told to not care about.

If you are going to have someone be enhancement talent, you bring them in to do the job and pay them for the night. You dont give them a contract and valuable tv time that you can spend somewhere else just because.



> BUT - AEW does a very good job of making them legitimate at all levels - and the proof is in the complaints of many haters. One of the main complaints are ‘main event talent go too long with jobbers’ - fans know its to make them legit / haters use it as a crit
> 
> but in the end, it builds the worker


yeah, look at where Alan Angels is today!

I am going to just agree to disagree with you on this point. That is the best way to respond



the_flock said:


> Not when it's costing you 26 mil per year just for Production, leaving just 19 mil to pay wages. If you've got several million of talent sat at homes twiddling their thumbs, it's poor business.


I agree. i thought you meant for the network, not TK


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

It will be interesting to see what happens In 2 to 3 years times, What has changed if anything. Nothings changed in 3 years which is highly strange for a new company. Even wwf and wcw changed through out its peak.


----------



## Hotdiggity11 (Aug 24, 2006)

I think it’s pretty obvious AEW is running at a deficit, especially after paying supposedly 10s of millions for ROH.

Then again, most startup companies begin by accumulating debt before they turn a profit and that’s why you have banks/other companies that give out loans at often high interest rates. In AEW, they skipped the middle man since a billionaire family was the investor.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

Hotdiggity11 said:


> I think it’s pretty obvious AEW is running at a deficit, especially after paying supposedly 10s of millions for ROH.
> 
> Then again, most startup companies begin by accumulating debt before they turn a profit and that’s why you have banks/other companies that give out loans at often high interest rates. In AEW, they skipped the middle man since a billionaire family was the investor.



i always wondered how paying his dad back works. I assumed hes taken part of the money hes made off the tv deal and is paid hin. plans to pay him over a certain amaount of years. Maybe all together his dad does not care and just gave it to him to let his song enjoy some success for his life


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Well if you are booking in 1988 with Iron Mike Sharpe and The Brooklyn Brawler, then I agree with you.
> 
> But if you are writing a show in 2022, then you are way off.
> 
> ...


why not give them a contract?

not only do they become a ‘known’ jobber and gain fans - which you can turn into a midcarder

but you can also veto their work - you know if they are good or not / safe or not

+ they do other work in the business - remember, a lot of people (specifically the jobbers) are dual role in AEW


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

DaSlacker said:


> The idea that WCW 1999-2000 is better than AEW is hilarious. I dare anybody to go back and do a watch along on here, trying to make sense of 75% of it. AEW obviously has that indie lovefest feel and divisive modern in-ring style. It also suffers from a few Russoisms (some of which stolen from ECW). Generally it's incomparable because it's an athletic in ring based product unlike later WCW which was angle based. AEW is a much slower and safer product than that. TNA was somewhere in between and much of WCW was similar to AEW now, though the in-ring stuff was more realistic.
> 
> Nitro 10/04/2000
> Segment: Vince Russo vs Veterans
> ...


Maybe not the best comparison, that 10/04/2000 Nitro is probably more entertaining than any edition of Dynamite I've ever seen.


----------



## Boldgerg (Apr 2, 2017)

Well, this thread has given him exactly what he wanted.

Biggest attention seeker going.


----------



## Pentagon Senior (Nov 16, 2019)

It says something when all the critics can point to is what they think will happen in the future. But we've heard these claims since day one and they have yet to come to fruition, so...

"They won't get a TV deal"
"They won't beat NXT"
"They'll never crack a million again" etc

It comes across like some people want them to fail rather than they are failing.

With regards the tired old 'they haven't made any mainstream stars' angle - not even WWE fans think that their top performer (Roman) is known in the mainstream so it's another moot point;









How famous is Roman Reigns outside of WWE?


I've known women who weren't into wrestling who knew him because he was "hot". There might be people who recognize him for that fast and furious spin off movie or Leukemia. But yeah pretty sure he's really low in any mainstream circle. Though to be fair, who the fuck is truly famous nowadays? I...




www.wrestlingforum.com





AEW has plenty of flaws, I'd personally change a number of things and I do think the roster is bloated, for one. But I'm not going to pretend that the company is going bust if they don't listen to my uninformed opinions. The growth in cable audience is there YOY despite major reductions in the total number of cable subscriptions and most other metrics show plenty of growth too.

People can keep predicting the death of AEW if that's what floats their boat but as things stand they've only been proven wrong, time after time.


----------



## Kenny's Ghost (Nov 23, 2020)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Maybe not the best comparison, that 10/04/2000 Nitro is probably more entertaining than any edition of Dynamite I've ever seen.


Yeah, that episode whips ass despite the awkward scissors line from ol' Eazy-E and Stasiak botching his finish. Shame it didn't last!


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> why not give them a contract?
> 
> not only do they become a ‘known’ jobber and gain fans - which you can turn into a midcarder
> 
> ...


You don't give them a contract because you ultimately have a limited amount of time/resources in order to get talent over.

You have 3 hours of TV per week, that is where the most eyeballs are going to be on the product.

After commercials, you are looking at a total of about 2 hours. In that 2 hour timeframe, you have to build enough anticipation for the viewer to come back and check out your show again. And get your most important characters over

The contract reveal and match to Fuego Del Sol lasted 8 minutes. The final 3 being the contract with Guevara. The ROI would have been better suited with a promo in the back about Dynamite, or furthering a story.

If you are going to spend the 3 minutes on Del Sol, then you follow up with the story. this was the debut episode of Rampage, where someone may be checking you out for the first time. You don't spend the 3 minutes investing the viewer into a story of a guy who is just a jobber.

Its just bad booking


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> You don't give them a contract because you ultimately have a limited amount of time/resources in order to get talent over.
> 
> You have 3 hours of TV per week, that is where the most eyeballs are going to be on the product.
> 
> ...


or, you realise you are filled with a company that has a high risk style, so you will always have to rotate or rest people because of injuries, and therefore you stack your roster top to bottom

bad booking to you, good planning to him


----------



## DaSlacker (Feb 9, 2020)

McMahon built WWE to make him wealthy and then even wealthier via the stock market. Khan's obviously running this as a full time hobby with the intention of breaking even via the next rights fees negotiations. 

Really not sure why people care whether it is profitable or insist he should release 30 wrestlers. Theoretically the licensing, sponsorship, international markets, live shows, merchandise, social media and rights fees should return the majority of expenditure. Or least create a moderately sized franchise that sells to a bigger company. 

Take Tony Khan out of the equation and the wrestling biz is in a perilous state. A dead ROH, 100+ wrestlers quit the industry as MLW and NWA are too under invested, and ultra scripted WrestleMania with Drew McIntyre vs Happy Corbin and Damian Priest vs Finn Balor as apparently exciting attractions.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

the_flock said:


> I understand your point but AEW aren't signing any guys in the same realm as WWE or WCW did.
> 
> Take your example of Foley, he was cutting legendary promos in WCW and ECW for years before, he was doing things very few people were doing. WCW were scared shirtless at this time of being sued.
> 
> ...


This was the problem that hit WWE when they went live each week with Raw in 1997. It was a money loser for them, even with USA chipping in. I believe the threshold for breaking even was above 7K in ticket sales per venue.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

Forum Dud said:


> Yeah, something Bischoff did that I really liked was he would start the show by reminding people of the main story and that story bubbled throughout the show. So you'd have the Crusierweights on after the first half hour and you'd be reminded of there stories but you'd have what the nWo are up too in the back of your mind. AEW feels like a segment by segment show to the point where once your favourites have been on once you don't need to watch the rest.


Thats true, and an excellent point. WWE did the same thing in 1997 and 1998 with Raw....each episode had a primary storyline and events within the episode built towards a climax, and sometimes a cliffhanger. WWE has totally lost the art of doing that now, and AEW needs to figure out how to do it.

Amazing that this does not happen. It really is not that hard.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

DaSlacker said:


> McMahon built WWE to make him wealthy and then even wealthier via the stock market. Khan's obviously running this as a full time hobby with the intention of breaking even via the next rights fees negotiations.
> 
> Really not sure why people care whether it is profitable or insist he should release 30 wrestlers. Theoretically the licensing, sponsorship, international markets, live shows, merchandise, social media and rights fees should return the majority of expenditure. Or least create a moderately sized franchise that sells to a bigger company.
> 
> Take Tony Khan out of the equation and the wrestling biz is in a perilous state. A dead ROH, 100+ wrestlers quit the industry as MLW and NWA are too under invested, and ultra scripted WrestleMania with Drew McIntyre vs Happy Corbin and Damian Priest vs Finn Balor as apparently exciting attractions.


Yes, I question the glee that some people take in hoping for AEW’s destruction. You can dislike it’s product, but it is good for the business to not be a complete monopoly. The remaining WWE wrestlers are making considerably more now thanks to having a competitor, and the ones who were unhappy (Ambrose, Harper, FTR, Hardy) had a viable income alternative to turn to.


----------



## Hotdiggity11 (Aug 24, 2006)

DaSlacker said:


> McMahon built WWE to make him wealthy and then even wealthier via the stock market. Khan's obviously running this as a full time hobby with the intention of breaking even via the next rights fees negotiations.
> 
> Really not sure why people care whether it is profitable or insist he should release 30 wrestlers. Theoretically the licensing, sponsorship, international markets, live shows, merchandise, social media and rights fees should return the majority of expenditure. Or least create a moderately sized franchise that sells to a bigger company.
> 
> Take Tony Khan out of the equation and the wrestling biz is in a perilous state. A dead ROH, 100+ wrestlers quit the industry as MLW and NWA are too under invested, and ultra scripted WrestleMania with Drew McIntyre vs Happy Corbin and Damian Priest vs Finn Balor as apparently exciting attractions.



It’s sorta unfair to assume how ROH and other companies would fair with no AEW. While the pandemic did deliver the death blow, the truth is a second major wrestling company in the US grabbing talent is gonna kill off smaller promotions anyways.


----------



## Mister Sinister (Aug 7, 2013)

1. WCW didn't go under. It never failed. AOL just wanted it gone (and Joe Bob Briggs). AOL sold WCW when it was still drawing ratings and sold it to Vince because they wanted it to die a fiery death because its threat of return to peak glory would f'k up their plans to redesign TNT into a women's network (we saw how that worked out).
2. AOL/Warner first brought their boot down on WCW and meddled with the creative direction and wanted it to be more family friendly.
3. I don't disagree that WCW's creative was also hurt by a glut of mid card WWF guys flooding in. They only needed Hogan, Savage, Nash and Hall.
4. For me, they are in danger of overload just like when Bret Hart went to WCW. They had too many toys to make good creative at that point. How do you book a show full of world champions?
5. WCW deserves credit for creating stars with DDP, Kidman, Goldberg, Steiner, Booker, Paul Wight, Mysterio and Eddie. They didn't put some of those guys over like they should have, but those guys became stars first on Nitro before going to WWF.
6. WCW, even up to it's end had creative writers and was able to present better stories than AEW. People only talk about the failures and not the glorious times, the ratings peaks and the anticipation on Sunday night knowing that Nitro and Raw were on the next night.


----------



## Geeee (Aug 9, 2010)

The AOL/Time Warner merger was disastrous for everyone involved. When's the last time you heard about AOL LOL


----------



## TeamFlareZakk (Jul 15, 2020)

The only thing "WCW" about AEW is Team DMD.


----------



## ThunderNitro (Sep 16, 2021)

I dislike Justin Bieber’s music because I think it is awful,but you wouldn’t see me posting threads that last longer than 12 pages on a Bieber fan forum stating why I believe his career will fail in the same way that Whitney Houston’s career did.

I’m thinking that OP’s disdain for AEW runs a lot deeper than what we see on the surface.Threads like these are just coping mechanisms of dealing with whatever it is.


----------



## Teemu™ (12 mo ago)

12 pages in a matter of days. Nice to see my boy Chippah is still a draw.


----------



## Seth Grimes (Jul 31, 2015)

ThunderNitro said:


> I dislike Justin Bieber’s music because I think it is awful,but you wouldn’t see me posting threads that last longer than 12 pages on a Bieber fan forum stating why I believe his career will fail in the same way that Whitney Houston’s career did.
> 
> I’m thinking that OP’s disdain for AEW runs a lot deeper than what we see on the surface.Threads like these are just coping mechanisms of dealing with whatever it is.


I think this comparison is a bit off, no?

If you spent time in music circles or on music forums where you would constantly have a tonne of Bieber fans telling you that he's the best musician in the world, and even better than legends like Tupac, I feel like you would start posting threads on why you believe Bieber isn't the best musician in the world, or history.

Hey, we don't need to even use a hypothetical, this has already happened. When this guy blew up all the 14 year old girls would NOT stop talking about how amazing he is online, and that ended up creating a counter culture with tonnes of people shitting on Bieber constantly. It was legit the cool thing to do at the time, constantly mocking Bieber even when he wasn't related. You could go onto videos of girls crying or a horse taking a shit, and you'd see comments like "ha, I bet this is what Bieber is like when his music gets bad reviews", "hey that horse took a Bieber".


----------



## FrankieDs316 (12 mo ago)

AEW hiring all these past established WWEs stars just like WCW did in the 90s. We all saw how that turned out. It works great in the short run but in the long run not so much. The only things AEW has that WCW didn't is more wrestlers AEW has created on their own. They also have WCW has a template of what not to do. Hopefully they follow it.


----------



## Magicman38 (Jun 27, 2016)

Does AEW still have Tony Schiavone and Jim Ross doing commentary. I tuned it on a few months ago and JR mentioned someone was “tougher than a $2 steak” and I had to turn it off. Until they get younger announcers and not the same ones that did Clash of Champions I in 1988 it’s a no watch for me.


----------

