Wrestling Forum banner
1 - 20 of 84 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,278 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)


The Life After Wartime Episode sparked this up:

Basically the combined failures of Jamie Kellner, Eric Bischoff and Vince Mcmahon killed WCW, lets explain:

The idea goes that Vince Russo's poor writing caused WCW to die, this is not true. Yes Russo did poor creatively from 1999-2000, however WCW was not going to die. as Terry Taylor said in the episode quoting Ted Turner, "I've lost more money with the Braves than in Wrestling"

Aol-Time Warner simply did not want Wrestling in their portfolio, they were going to sell it to Eric Bischoff, so Bischoff would own it through Fusient Media Ventures and continue to air Nitro on TNT and Thunder on TBS.

However Jamie Kellner cancelled WCW Nitro on TNT and WCW Thunder on TBS, he cancelled All Wrestling on the Networks, meaning not even the Successful WWF could be aired on it:

"Basically we've decided that professional wrestling, in its current incarnation, is not consistent with the upscale brands we've built at TNT and TBS. Therefore, we will not be carrying it.'' - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/b...tling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html

Ok so AOL-Time Warner not only doesn't want to own the company, they don't want to even air it on their networks because they want nothing to do with Wrestling.

This proves that ratings and Russo's poor writing had absolutely nothing to do with it being cancelled, WCW Nitro was still TNT's most successful original series and drew high ratings. it was cancelled because they didn't want anything to do with wrestling, even if it was the WWF on TNT drawing 6.0's, they still would've been cancelled, ratings clearly didn't matter.

TNT would later be rebranded in June of 2001 just 3 months after the final WCW Nitro with a logo representing the channel's new direction of being Drama oriented:

Before:


After:



Now WCW is not only no longer going to be owned by AOL-Time Warner, AOL-Time Warner also won't be airing WCW on their Networks.


Enter Eric Bischoff: What did he do that killed WCW? It wasn't his mistakes in the 90s, as that didn't and wouldn't have killed WCW. it's what he did during the sale of WCW in 2001.

When Bischoff found out that AOL-Time Warner cancelled All Wrestling Programming on TNT and TBS, he dropped out of buying it. this was ridiculous, as he could have bought it and aired it on another network, simply wait for a new deal.

Supposedly FX and NBC wanted WCW.


So now Vince Mcmahon: Vince buys WCW, is it now dead?

No, in the episode they use the TNN Exclusivity Contract as an excuse as to wwhy they couldn't put WCW on TV, and/or on another Network.

Basically TNN's Contract with the World Wrestling Federation was that All their programming had to be aired on Viacom(TNN's Owner) Networks(UPN, MTV, TNN)

And they were, Raw is War was on TNN, Smackdown! was on UPN, and Sunday Night Heat was on MTV.

Now since Vince Mcmahon bought WCW under the WWF umbrella, it's a World Wrestling Federation Entertainment INC company, therefore WCW could only air on a Viacom Network due to the TNN Exclusivity Contract.

All Vince had to do was make a separate entity and transfer WCW over to it, this way WCW is not under World Wrestling Federation Entertainment INC, and he could air WCW on another network without breaching the TNN contract.

Vince Mcmahon failed to do this and instead put WCW on the shelf like he said he would on March 26, 2001 during the WWF Raw is War/WCW Nitro simulcast. he didn't even at least sacrifice Raw or Smackdown for a WCW show.

Jamie Kellner, Eric Bischoff, and Vince Mcmahon made errors that killed WCW.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dub J

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
WCW died because it sucked. Their only successful time came when they poached a bunch of Vince made stars. So in return Vince builds completely new stars and puts the nail in the coffin. WCW was always just a poor man's WWF.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,278 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
WCW died because it sucked. Their only successful time came when they poached a bunch of Vince made stars. So in return Vince builds completely new stars and puts the nail in the coffin. WCW was always just a poor man's WWF.
You're clearly a troll. didn't refute anything in the OP and what you said is clearly untrue.

WCW outdid the WWF in creative with the NWO which was edgy, caused the WWF to get edgy, as the reality-tv style WCW was ending the WWF in the ratings.

the WWF didn't make Crow Sting & the NWO, WCW did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,118 Posts
Ok so a certain someone says WCW's only successful time was with the NWO but ignores that WCW was also successful in the pre-Ted Turner days as Jim Crockett Promotions as well as the fact that the Hogan Era poached LOTS of JCP, AWA,USWA etc talent.

On top of that The Hogan Era had JCP's original booker George Scott handling the booking for most of that time.

Anyway, Yes during that period Russo alone didn't kill WCW because it was on life support before he got there. However Russo practically put it on it's death bed before McMahon, Kellner, and Bischoff put the nail in the coffin.
 

·
NO PAIN!
Joined
·
5,277 Posts
I agree and disagree with the OP.

If WCW was still doing a 5 rating and making $65 million a year in profits in 2001, Jamie Kellner would have felt a lot differently about having wrestling as part of the portfolio. The fact is, WCW was losing over $50 million a year and struggling to get a 3 rating. Regardless of whether WCW was still one of the highest rated shows on TNT or not, when you are losing $50 million a year there are serious issues, and it's a lot harder to justify staying in the wrestling business.

The reason WCW was losing so much money was because of improper management by Bischoff, along with the rest of the Turner corporate structure. WCW was already dying by the time Russo came, Russo just made canceling the show easier because of how atrocious his writing was. Don't get me wrong, there has never been a more talentless hack than Russo, but to be fair he didn't single handedly kill WCW. He definitely hurt the product and helped them continue on their path of incompetence, but WCW was already on life support by September 1999.

I've always felt the death of WCW started with Starrcade 1997. They so badly botched the greatest angle WCW had ever had that it was going to be impossible to recover. Once that match stunk as bad as it did, and the finished as botched as badly as it was, there was no turning back.

You want to know what's really sad? How many great matches and feuds we as wrestling fans were robbed of because of how out of control the politics in WCW were. Why didn't we ever get a proper heel Chris Jericho vs Goldberg feud in 1998? Or a heel Eddie Guerrero vs crow Sting feud in 1998? Or a Benoit vs Hogan feud in 1998? Or a Jericho/Bret Hart feud? Or a Mysterio/Randy Savage feud? WCW had all this AMAZING undercard talent that they never even let sniff the main event scene. It's a tragedy. If WCW had chosen to use all of 1998 to build new stars like Jericho, Eddie, Benoit, Mysterio, etc they probably would have stayed profitable and stayed in business. But the fact is, from 1996-2001, we saw the same 6 or 7 guys in the main event over and over and over again. It's ridiculous. They had all these fresh, amazing matchups they could have exploited and chose not to. We as wrestling fans were robbed, plain and simple. They deserved to go out of business after that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,576 Posts
First of all, regarding these "errors":


On Vince's side, he originally negotiated to buy WCW as far back as the fall of 2000. And his plan was to keep it on Turner Networks. Problem was the exclusive deal with Viacom. They felt that, since they were paying Vince $28 million a year, he can't invest in their cable competition, TBS and TNT. By the end of 2000, Vince was out of the running.

Fast forward to January 2001, Bischoff and Fusient Media Ventures hold a press conference, announcing that they purchased WCW and even revealed plans going forward. Meanwhile, then President of WWE Stu Snyder (a former executive with Turner Broadcasting) was informed by Brad Siegel (Time Warner executive) that Bischoff was NEVER going to get the company.

Then, Jamie Kellner is announced as head of Turner programming and his first move was to cancel WCW programming, in favor of a more upscale network. Kellner hates wrestling. He was the former President of FOX and was also the same guy that cancelled WWE's short run on FOX with SNME in '92.

This leaves Bischoff with a 2 week deadline to find a network for WCW or the deal was off. And FX was showing interest but 3 days before the deadline, it's announced that Vince bought WCW.


So, you saying Bischoff's error was that the entertainment business moves slow?

Kellner's error was that he cancelled something that was costing more than it was making?

And Vince's error was that he didn't do his deal under the table?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,278 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
First of all, regarding these "errors":


On Vince's side, he originally negotiated to buy WCW as far back as the fall of 2000. And his plan was to keep it on Turner Networks. Problem was the exclusive deal with Viacom. They felt that, since they were paying Vince $28 million a year, he can't invest in their cable competition, TBS and TNT. By the end of 2000, Vince was out of the running.
The TNN exclusivity contract was only for World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc

Vince Mcmahon was in his rights to have WCW under a separate entity, this way it wouldn't be under the World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc umbrella, therefore not breaching the WWF/TNN contract.

Vince Mcmahon failed to do that simple solution.

Fast forward to January 2001, Bischoff and Fusient Media Ventures hold a press conference, announcing that they purchased WCW and even revealed plans going forward. Meanwhile, then President of WWE Stu Snyder (a former executive with Turner Broadcasting) was informed by Brad Siegel (Time Warner executive) that Bischoff was NEVER going to get the company.
Bischoff already had the deal, all he had to do was sign, he gave it up due to WCW being cancelled on TNT & TBS.

Then, Jamie Kellner is announced as head of Turner programming and his first move was to cancel WCW programming, in favor of a more upscale network. Kellner hates wrestling. He was the former President of FOX and was also the same guy that cancelled WWE's short run on FOX with SNME in '92.

This leaves Bischoff with a 2 week deadline to find a network for WCW or the deal was off. And FX was showing interest but 3 days before the deadline, it's announced that Vince bought WCW.
He didn't have a deadline, he could've bought it then searched, he unwisely chose not to.

So, you saying Bischoff's error was that the entertainment business moves slow?
No, it was not buying it just because he couldn't air it on TNT and TBS, all he had to do was buy it and then wait for a deal.

Kellner's error was that he cancelled something that was costing more than it was making?
Jamie Kellner didn't cancel WCW on TNT and TBS because of money lost, it was the most successful programming,

Here's why he cancelled it:

"Basically we've decided that professional wrestling, in its current incarnation, is not consistent with the upscale brands we've built at TNT and TBS. Therefore, we will not be carrying it.'' - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/b...tling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html



And Vince's error was that he didn't do his deal under the table?
How would he do the deal under the table if he put WCW under a different entity other than the WWF?

He can air WCW under another company that's not the WWF, this way he doesn't breach the TNN contract, and there's nothing Viacom could do about it.

I agree and disagree with the OP.

If WCW was still doing a 5 rating and making $65 million a year in profits in 2001, Jamie Kellner would have felt a lot differently about having wrestling as part of the portfolio. The fact is, WCW was losing over $50 million a year and struggling to get a 3 rating. Regardless of whether WCW was still one of the highest rated shows on TNT or not, when you are losing $50 million a year there are serious issues, and it's a lot harder to justify staying in the wrestling business.
Incorrect, the highly successful WWF would've even been cancelled:

"Basically we've decided that professional wrestling, in its current incarnation, is not consistent with the upscale brands we've built at TNT and TBS. Therefore, we will not be carrying it.'' - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/b...tling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html

They simply didn't want Wrestling of the late 90s/early 2000s(Crash TV) on the Network, regardless of what company it was(WCW, WWF, ECW)

The reason WCW was losing so much money was because of improper management by Bischoff, along with the rest of the Turner corporate structure. WCW was already dying by the time Russo came, Russo just made canceling the show easier because of how atrocious his writing was. Don't get me wrong, there has never been a more talentless hack than Russo, but to be fair he didn't single handedly kill WCW. He definitely hurt the product and helped them continue on their path of incompetence, but WCW was already on life support by September 1999.
You're rehashing the same things that I refuted in the OP.

I've always felt the death of WCW started with Starrcade 1997. They so badly botched the greatest angle WCW had ever had that it was going to be impossible to recover. Once that match stunk as bad as it did, and the finished as botched as badly as it was, there was no turning back.
I doubt that you watched WCW back then, they were still very successful after Starrcade 1997, that botch's effect is overrated. in 1998 we had Goldberg, Wolfpac(I don't like Wolfpac but it drew), DPP/Leno

As far as pushing New Talent, if you watched WCW in 2000, you how successful Booker T and Nash were.

"Basically we've decided that professional wrestling, in its current incarnation, is not consistent with the upscale brands we've built at TNT and TBS. Therefore, we will not be carrying it.'' - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/b...tling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html

That settles it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,198 Posts
I agree with the subject, but I think the actual post makes a lot of assumptions that aren't really well founded. It's just not realistic to think that AOL/Time-Warner wouldn't have wanted wrestling, or at least wouldn't have wanted to make millions off of selling WCW, when it was making so damn much money in 1998.

The Rabid Wolverine above explained it pretty well. WCW had problems that put it on the chopping block long before Jamie Kellner entered the picture. Bischoff was fired in 1999 for a reason, and that's because WCW fell off a steep cliff when it didn't provide the fans with a product they wanted.

Wrestling was at its hottest in 1999 and WCW's market share was dwarfed by the WWF just a year after being one of the hottest properties in television.

What I dislike the most is that perspectives like this treat WCW like it was a lost cause and act like there was nothing that could have been done to avoid the situation it inevitably found itself in. This wasn't unavoidable.

What the AOL/Time-Warner merger did was expose the WCW books to accountants who kept more of a tab on WCW, but had they been open in 1998, there weren't a lot of problems since the company was profitable. What happened was Bischoff, and the people he listened to, made horrible decisions that drove their fanbase away to the competition, and that's what made WCW vulnerable for Vince to deliver the killing blow.

So, Bischoff's decisions in the 90's absolutely were a big part of it.

I don't really blame Russo, though. He was dealing with damanged goods by the time he entered the picture. He didn't really help, but there was a reason they hired him to begin with (In 1999, Russo was successful, Bischoff blew his success).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,768 Posts
Lots of factors played into the death of wcw but trying to absolve russo of blame is beyond silly. his booking played a major factor into why people stopped watching the product, why less people were attending live shows, why less people were buying ppvs and why in the end less revenue was coming in...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,576 Posts
Fuck all the back and forth.


Rookie, you need to read this:


http://www.wrestlingforum.com/class...-wcw-attempt-keeping-ecw-alive-long-read.html


Explains why Bischoff's deal fell apart (and why he never had a shot in the first place), what Vince originally wanted for WCW, countless other names/groups interested in buying WCW and how ECW's survival was heavily dependent on whether or not WCW (assuming Bischoff bought it) could get a TV deal.

Long read, well worth it and you get the WHOLE story, even going back to '76 and Turner's introduction to cable, all the way up to how miserable WWE was with Viacom and how that deal hurt them so much that they've yet to recover.
 

·
NO PAIN!
Joined
·
5,277 Posts
The TNN exclusivity contract was only for World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc

Vince Mcmahon was in his rights to have WCW under a separate entity, this way it wouldn't be under the World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc umbrella, therefore not breaching the WWF/TNN contract.

Vince Mcmahon failed to do that simple solution.



Bischoff already had the deal, all he had to do was sign, he gave it up due to WCW being cancelled on TNT & TBS.



He didn't have a deadline, he could've bought it then searched, he unwisely chose not to.



No, it was not buying it just because he couldn't air it on TNT and TBS, all he had to do was buy it and then wait for a deal.



Jamie Kellner didn't cancel WCW on TNT and TBS because of money lost, it was the most successful programming,

Here's why he cancelled it:

"Basically we've decided that professional wrestling, in its current incarnation, is not consistent with the upscale brands we've built at TNT and TBS. Therefore, we will not be carrying it.'' - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/b...tling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html





How would he do the deal under the table if he put WCW under a different entity other than the WWF?

He can air WCW under another company that's not the WWF, this way he doesn't breach the TNN contract, and there's nothing Viacom could do about it.



Incorrect, the highly successful WWF would've even been cancelled:

"Basically we've decided that professional wrestling, in its current incarnation, is not consistent with the upscale brands we've built at TNT and TBS. Therefore, we will not be carrying it.'' - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/b...tling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html

They simply didn't want Wrestling of the late 90s/early 2000s(Crash TV) on the Network, regardless of what company it was(WCW, WWF, ECW)



You're rehashing the same things that I refuted in the OP.



I doubt that you watched WCW back then, they were still very successful after Starrcade 1997, that botch's effect is overrated. in 1998 we had Goldberg, Wolfpac(I don't like Wolfpac but it drew), DPP/Leno

As far as pushing New Talent, if you watched WCW in 2000, you how successful Booker T and Nash were.

"Basically we've decided that professional wrestling, in its current incarnation, is not consistent with the upscale brands we've built at TNT and TBS. Therefore, we will not be carrying it.'' - http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/b...tling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html

That settles it.


1. You keep throwing out that quote by Jamie Kellner like it's the gospel truth. It's not. If WCW was making $65 million a year instead of losing $50 million+, he wouldn't be in a position to cancel. He can dislike wrestling all he wants, but he's responsible to share holders and to the board of executives at AOL/Time Warner, you can't just cancel something that's raking in $65 million a year in profits for all your share holders just because you don't like it. That's how you lose your job, chief. How dense are you?

2. Don't try and pretend you know me, or know what I was watching in 1997. I was 10-15 years old during the Monday Night Wars. I still clearly remember how in 1997 everyone in school was wearing NWO shirts, but by 1998 all those same people were wearing Austin 3:16 shirts. By 1999, NO ONE in my school was still watching WCW. It was completely passé. The first major blow to WCW was them badly botching the Sting/Hogan payoff, and following that up with how horribly they botched Bret Harts debut. You can't tell me otherwise, I was there, I was watching it, and so were all my friends. Of course, you couldn't tell on the surface just how damaging those two botches were, I mean WCW was still hugely profitable in 1998. But those two moves showed just how out of his element Bishoff was. Politics can be the only explanation for mishandling those two things as badly as they were mishandled.


Stop acting like you know more than everyone else. You don't. You're a fool if you honestly believe Jamie Kellner would have cancelled WCW if they were still raking in $65 million a year. WCW was a complete money pit by 2001, they were losing so much money so fast it was completely untenable. That's why Kellner was able to come in and cancel it. No other reason. As much as you want to absolve Russo of any and all blame, the fact is if he had been able to create some true money making angles and turned the product around, there is a chance, a SMALL chance, but a chance it would not have been cancelled when it was. But Russo came in and proceeded to create the worst television in the history of wrestling. That was the FINAL nail in the coffin. The other previous nails were the Sting/Hogan angle, Bret Harts botched debut, Goldbergs Streak ending/Goldberg getting injured right afterwards, politics and creative control clauses in contracts running wild, and the complete failure to create new stars in 1998. All those things added up and created the environment that allowed WCW to be cancelled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,198 Posts
1. You keep throwing out that quote by Jamie Kellner like it's the gospel truth. It's not. If WCW was making $65 million a year instead of losing $50 million+, he wouldn't be in a position to cancel. He can dislike wrestling all he wants, but he's responsible to share holders and to the board of executives at AOL/Time Warner, you can't just cancel something that's raking in $65 million a year in profits for all your share holders just because you don't like it. That's how you lose your job, chief. How dense are you?
In addition, that Kellner quote is dated March 19, 2001, so it's not like Kellner made this announcement months in advance and was dead set on canceling WCW and finally got his way. This was a statement dated a week before the last Nitro, and often times, a lot of corporate speak is only done out of convenience.

If anything, Nitro's falling numbers and WCW's losses were what gave Kellner the leverage to re-frame TNT with the "WE KNOW DRAMA" tagline. And those numbers were falling because WCW was putting out a terrible product nobody wanted to buy, thanks to the revolving door of people in charge of the organization.

Bischoff's success, and fall, were responsible for opening that revolving door back up. You give the audience what they want, the audience gives you what you want - $$$.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,278 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 · (Edited)
1. You keep throwing out that quote by Jamie Kellner like it's the gospel truth. It's not. If WCW was making $65 million a year instead of losing $50 million+, he wouldn't be in a position to cancel. He can dislike wrestling all he wants, but he's responsible to share holders and to the board of executives at AOL/Time Warner, you can't just cancel something that's raking in $65 million a year in profits for all your share holders just because you don't like it. That's how you lose your job, chief. How dense are you?

2. Don't try and pretend you know me, or know what I was watching in 1997. I was 10-15 years old during the Monday Night Wars. I still clearly remember how in 1997 everyone in school was wearing NWO shirts, but by 1998 all those same people were wearing Austin 3:16 shirts. By 1999, NO ONE in my school was still watching WCW. It was completely passé. The first major blow to WCW was them badly botching the Sting/Hogan payoff, and following that up with how horribly they botched Bret Harts debut. You can't tell me otherwise, I was there, I was watching it, and so were all my friends. Of course, you couldn't tell on the surface just how damaging those two botches were, I mean WCW was still hugely profitable in 1998. But those two moves showed just how out of his element Bishoff was. Politics can be the only explanation for mishandling those two things as badly as they were mishandled.


Stop acting like you know more than everyone else. You don't. You're a fool if you honestly believe Jamie Kellner would have cancelled WCW if they were still raking in $65 million a year. WCW was a complete money pit by 2001, they were losing so much money so fast it was completely untenable. That's why Kellner was able to come in and cancel it. No other reason. As much as you want to absolve Russo of any and all blame, the fact is if he had been able to create some true money making angles and turned the product around, there is a chance, a SMALL chance, but a chance it would not have been cancelled when it was. But Russo came in and proceeded to create the worst television in the history of wrestling. That was the FINAL nail in the coffin. The other previous nails were the Sting/Hogan angle, Bret Harts botched debut, Goldbergs Streak ending/Goldberg getting injured right afterwards, politics and creative control clauses in contracts running wild, and the complete failure to create new stars in 1998. All those things added up and created the environment that allowed WCW to be cancelled.
Attempting to make out Jamie Kellner as a guy who wouldn't cancel a Successful TV Show shows you likely don't even know who he is, this is the same guy that cancelled Animaniacs, Pinky and the Brain, and Batman the animated series.

You suggested Hulk Hogan vs Chris Benoit in 1998.... 1998. Benoit couldn't even draw after his feud with The Rock in 2000, let alone wasn't a draw in 1998. Benoit got impact in 2000 when he won the World Title and left to the WWF.

WCW's failure was using the same old guys And using Draws against guys who didn't draw(Billy Kidman), Hogan vs Benoit would be no different.

You need to Build guys up, just like they did Crow Sting, Goldberg, and DDP, once they Stopped doing that, they failed, but it didn't kill them, AOL-Time Warner wanting an upscale brand did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,198 Posts
Attempting to make out Jamie Kellner as a guy who wouldn't cancel a Successful TV Show shows you likely don't even know who he is, this is the same guy that cancelled Animaniacs, Pinky and the Brain, and Batman the animated series.
No one is saying Jamie Kellner is a genius, but in the WCW situation, it's hard to blame him for wanting to give it the axe. I've seen claims that Nitro was the "highest rated show on TNT" but looking at the ratings chart from 2000-2001, it was only in the mid-to-low 2's so considering how much it cost them, that's nowhere near what the WWF was getting.

Along with wanting to re-brand the network, sacrificing a show that's doing a 2.1 every week isn't that big of a deal when it's an expensive show to produce with expensive contracts involved. Canceling a 5.0/6.0 show, however, is a tough sell.

I can't speak to the animated shows, because I don't know enough about them, but something tells me that Pinky and the Brain wasn't competing with Monday Night Football at one point. Batman: The Animated Series lasted a few seasons before it was canceled, so maybe it was underperforming when the call was made to cancel it. I can't just automatically assume that this was a bad call.

At the time WCW was canceled and cast away from Turner networks, it wasn't worth what they were putting into it, so I don't blame Kellner for making that call at all.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,278 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
No one is saying Jamie Kellner is a genius, but in the WCW situation, it's hard to blame him for wanting to give it the axe. I've seen claims that Nitro was the "highest rated show on TNT" but looking at the ratings chart from 2000-2001, it was only in the mid-to-low 2's so considering how much it cost them, that's nowhere near what the WWF was getting.
Of course it wasn't beating the WWF, who said that? It however was TNT's most successful TV show, they had no reason to cancel it.

They cancelled it simply because it was Wrestling, cancelled for a stupid reason, they were no longer going to own the company, so anyone else airing it on Turner networks wouldn't do anything to them, they simply didn't want Wrestling on there Networks, just like Kellner cancelled the other successful series.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,198 Posts
Of course it wasn't beating the WWF, who said that? It however was TNT's most successful TV show, they had no reason to cancel it.

They cancelled it simply because it was Wrestling, cancelled for a stupid reason, they were no longer going to own the company, so anyone else airing it on Turner networks wouldn't do anything to them, they simply didn't want Wrestling on there Networks, just like Kellner cancelled the other successful series.
Bill Goldberg, Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Scott Hall, Sting, and Kevin Nash
all had very expensive AOL/Time Warner contracts (and then there's the rest of the roster they were paying) and the show was pulling a 2.1 rating. They weren't getting out what they were putting into it. That's a very good reason to cancel it.

Even if Bischoff would have purchased WCW and cleared Time Warner of the financial burden of running WCW, it's doubtful that he would have been able to get the top stars if Vince wasn't going to pony up for them. Even with TV, Bischoff would have inherited a HUGE financial burden that wasn't sustaining itself.

They didn't cancel it because it was wrestling. They canceled it because it was very expensive wrestling that had no value on their networks.
 

·
NO PAIN!
Joined
·
5,277 Posts
Of course it wasn't beating the WWF, who said that? It however was TNT's most successful TV show, they had no reason to cancel it.

They cancelled it simply because it was Wrestling, cancelled for a stupid reason, they were no longer going to own the company, so anyone else airing it on Turner networks wouldn't do anything to them, they simply didn't want Wrestling on there Networks, just like Kellner cancelled the other successful series.

How freaking dense are you?!?! Can you NOT read? You just compared a company that rakes in $65+ million a year in profits to cult favorite animated shows.

Look, it's really REALLY simple to understand if you have even an ounce of common sense. No matter how much someone hates wrestling or any type of show, NO BUSINESS MAN IN THE TELVISION INDUSTRY WOULD EVER CANCEL A SHOW OR SELL A COMPANY THAT RAKES IN $65 MILLION A YEAR IN PROFITS FOR $2.5 MILLION! Do you realize how idiotic you sound when you claim that Jamie Keller hated wrestling SO MUCH that he would have cancelled WCW in 1998 while it was a massive cash cow? That's by far one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. You really need to read that link from elipsis corter, it breaks it all down for you and makes it really simple.

And good job singling out Benoit, claiming he could never draw. All those guys I listed, Eddie/Benoit/Jericho/Mysterio were either WWE/WHC champions for a substantial amount of time. You don't get that belt if you aren't over and drawing fans, plain and simple. Atleast you didn't back then, nowadays if you have "DA LOOK" that's all you need. WCW was stupid not to elevate those 4 guys to the main event in 1998. They realized their mistake by 2000, but by then it was too late. You need to create new stars all the time, you can't rest on your laurels, star power is the primary resource of the wrestling business.
 
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
Top