Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
Join Date: Dec 2013
Re: No indy shows during WM31 week?
Yes, a city or a state can refuse to allow a privately-owned arena from hosting a show because it can refuse to issue an event license. Happens all the time. Marilyn Manson has been banned from appearing in certain cities and states, for instance -- which means a venue cannot get an event license to host a MM concert in those places.
The Democratic and Republican national conventions also reach agreements with host cities not to issue permits to protest groups (public assembly in most places requires a permit to gather) within a certain distance of the host arena. They may not shove them completely out of town, that would result in bad publicity, but they do push them away from immediate proximity of the event itself.
WWE brings an economic impact of many millions of dollars to whatever city it takes WM to, and with that it can make demands. If City A says, no, we're going to stand up for Whatever Arena's right to rent its 400-seat arena to DGUSA that week, then WWE can say go right ahead, we're going to City B. Now it's not likely that WWE can make that kind of deal with all the surrounding cities -- i.e. it may have an agreement in place for Santa Clara (and according to what I heard from someone who works for ROH, they believe that is so) but it probably doesn't have an agreement for neighboring towns which have their own licensing boards.
So at worst, I'd expect WWE to be able to push indy shows far enough away to make it inconvenient for people to attend, but not to stomp them out entirely. The biggest victim might be Wrestlecon, which would need to rent a convention center of some size to hold its event, and needs steady traffic all weekend to make it work -- if that's too far away it would be tough to make a go (tougher than any individual indy show, which doesn't need steady day-and-night traffic -- just a decent crowd to show up for a few hours).
Release the hounds!