Shining a Spotlight 3.04.10: Economics

Posted by Michael Weyer on 03.04.2010

In the wake of several stars being let go, a look at how money effects wrestling in ways fans may not consider.

In a bit of a surprise, WWE has decided not to wait until after Wrestlemania for their annual house cleaning with releases. A few names have been prominent such as Charlie Haas being shown the door again and, to the surprise of many, Maria. As always happens when these pink slips go out, there's been some upset fans and worries over who's next. Most of all, there's that bizarre feeling that goes out, that WWE should not be doing this, they shouldn't be firing people. It's an attitude that's confused me a bit and something I wanted to talk on.
　

The Future Endeavored


I know Charlie Haas has a few fans but always found the guy bland, despite his talent. It takes more than in-ring work to make a guy a star and while he's fine in the ring, the guy doesn't quite have the personality to click over. For Helms and Burchill, the de-emphasis on small guys (man I miss the Cruiserweight title) hasn't given them much to do anyway. But Maria is a different case.



I admit it, I always liked her. It's not just her looks (although they certainly help) but she did a great job taking that ditzy persona and making it work for five years worth of material. Sure, she was no shakes in the ring but she knew her strengths and played up to them nicely. So it is a bit of a loss, considering how flat so many of the other Divas are.

There have been complaints about WWE letting her go just as she was about to do Celebrity Apprentice but not sure if that's as big a deal as some say it is. Let's face it, the buzz factor for that show faded a long time ago, it's pretty much good for comedy now and frankly, don't see her lasting long anyhow. But again, it's sad to see her leave as I do think she still had some potential despite any troubles. I'm also annoyed a bit at how she's taken the stance of blaming things on WWE a bit and sounding ungrateful to the company that made her a star in the first place. I don't blame her for wanting to branch out but would be remiss if I didn't point out the number of female stars (Sable and Chyna spring to mind) who failed to capitalize on their post-WWF fame.

　
Business Sense

A while ago, on my column comparing the IWC to Disney fanatics, I quoted a line from an author on Disney fans that can also compare to wrestling ones: "Everyone knows it's a business. They just don't like it when it acts that way." That attitude is quite prevalent, especially when WWE is prone to making decisions unpopular with a lot in the IWC.

It never ceases to amaze me how fans can so easily forget the entire point of wrestling is to make money. Oh, guys can talk about the love of the ring and all that but at the end of the day, it comes down to getting paid. It's why they get into the business and it's why so many of them are willing to put up with dumb gimmicks and bad angles in order to get some money. Most of them realize it and are comfortable with that. Big Show knows he's not a great in-ring worker but he's confident as he gets good paydays and merchandising and thus be set. Yet fans get so upset about how WWE is into that business mode.

Vince McMahon can be hard-hearted and ruthless and care about the bottom dollar. And how does that make him different than the CEO's of any Fortune 500 company? Hell, compared to the bank executives demanding billion collar government bailouts, Vince is a candidate for sainthood. The man is not a sociopath who enjoys tormenting others like on TV but he loves his company more than nearly anything. He will do what it takes to protect it and do what he thinks is right to help it. Maybe it's not what people like but Vince will do it.




Larry Matysik had a great observation of his own in a book, that quite often, "doing the right thing" is not what's best for the business. Montreal is a great example of that. Yes, what Vince did was wrong but his back was to the wall because Bret wouldn't drop a championship and Vince knew the damage if WCW bragged about getting the current WWF champion. Folks look back with too much 20/20 hindsight and forget just how bad WWF was hurting then as the cracks in WCW weren't showing just yet and a lot of rational people truly thought they'd put Vince out of business in a year. Losing the champion to their rival would have been a major blow as well and Bret was just too wrapped up in his own ego, believing dropping a title would be a mortal blow to Canada so Vince had to be harsh. It was brutal, yes, but hardly the first time such a thing was done.


Origins of the Business Model

One thing that always amazes me is how people will look back at the old territory days as this magical and perfect system. The fact is, these guys were incredibly brutal when it came to business in a way that Vince couldn't imagine. Sam Muchnick, a man generally regarded as one of the most kind-hearted promoters, came up with what remains a model of the wrestling business, which is that 32% of the gate goes to the talent. If you tried that model with actual sports like the NBA or NFL, you'd get holy hell raised but to promoters, that's a more than fair deal. Also, for those who complain about wrestlers not having any sort of pension plan or insurance coverage, time and again, the NWA board would have a proposal for that and every time, they would unanimously shoot it down.

It was a bit different for wrestlers in those days as they did have an advantage in being able to go from territory to territory and earn more paydays, something that doesn't exist anymore. At the same time, you had promoters willing to use their guys just to take on the competition, often burying guys from other territories in order to make themselves look better. It wasn't a fair system but it was the one in place until Vince came along. There was a danger often with promoters trying themselves too much to a local economy and when that suffered, so did the promotions. The best example is how Bill Watts' UWF was about to take the big step when the collapse of the Oklahoma economy in 1987 ruined his main base of fans. There was also the problem of building up big stars only to feel the loss when they jumped to other territories, as the AWA learned when Hogan and other big workers started jumping to Vince.

I know some will complain on this proving wrestling needs unions but it's hard to see that happening. The problem is not the owners as so many claim it to be. The problem is wrestlers themselves. This is not like baseball or football which are team sports so guys will stick up for each other. Wrestling has always been about making it on your own and putting yourself on top. For every guy who'd be willing to risk his job by going on strike, there are a dozen who'll jump at the chance to take his spot. The idea of wrestlers as interchangeable entities predates Vince by a long mile so you can't totally blame him for the attitude of being cold-hearted toward employees. Let me ask the question, that if it is Vince who's so horrible at workers, how come TNA and ROH haven't adopted any unions or pension plans or such? Fans can complain on the wellness policy but at least WWE has something to try and check drug abuse while TNA and ROH don't. These are problems that have affected wrestling since it started and, sadly, don't seem likely to stop anytime soon.


The modern times

The business today is a lot different of course and that's affected things majorly. While merchandising had been done before Vince, he took it to a whole new level and while not every star gets the same amount of royalties, it is a way to make more money. It's why John Cena remains a face despite how the fans react, because he moves a ton of stuff and wants to keep up with that. The de-emphasis on the importance of house shows has led to shifts as the TV tapings and PPVs are where the money is and fans realize that.

This is why TNA, despite what many of their supporters will say, is nowhere near the equal of WWE. They're not struggling financially to be sure but look at the facts. They have one weekly TV show against WWE's four. They do very little touring and 90% of their shows are in front of a non-paying theme park studio audience of less than a thousand people. Their merchandising is good but still not at the levels WWE moves as that company manages everything from t-shirts to dolls to slews of DVDs. TNA is able to move a lot but just not at that level. Their bread and butter remains the monthly PPVs which do well but not quite the level WWE does.




I do think TNA is a bit higher than ROH. The problem with ROH is that they remain something of a "niche audience" for a lot of fans and the attitude of being a bit….well, elitist for lack of a better term, hurts their ability to pull fans in. They've got good merchandising with DVDs and such and the weekly HDNet show helps but still haven't locked onto real PPV audiences like the other two companies. They make their most from touring but that can be rather iffy in these times.

Indeed, the current economic climate is a major factor for the wrestling companies to consider and may be playing into some of these early releases. WWE is powerful to be sure but hardly limitless cash even for some penny-pinching managers. In terms of business, it doesn't make good sense to keep paying for folks who don't generate much in terms of money for the company. Hell, WCW is a perfect example of corporate waste gone amuck. Sure we all know the "guaranteed contracts" mess which let guys get paid no matter what so they didn't have to do much effort in the ring. But worse was stuff like how the company would pay for the entire 130 man roster to go to every TV taping even if only forty of them would be used on the show itself. The reason the company lasted as long as they did was the backing of Turner's cash and when Turner lost his power, that massive waste came back to haunt them big time.

I'm not in the camp that TNA is replicating WCW's mistakes but do admit there are similarities with overspending to get big names despite their lack of real ring power anymore. I've said before that my major beef with TNA is that rather than be happy with their success, they keep judging themselves by what WWE does, honestly thinking they can get to that massive point in only a couple of years. Hell, it took Vince a while to make WWE the monster it is and the brutal fact is that no one in TNA shares Vince's drive and vision.

Yes, WWE can be frustrating in programming lately but in a time when a lot of fans are more concerned about whether they have jobs than what happens in a wrestling ring, they're doing what they think best to hold on. The push for younger fans is an attempt to create a new generation to hook onto, something that every promotion needs to survive. But cutting costs wherever you can is something every company is doing lately. I know that personally as my own workplace is cutting down on any overtime and trying to get guys out as early as possible. It's harsh but that's the way things are now.


Summation

Wrestling is a rotten business and often, you have to be a rotten guy to survive it. That's Vince McMahon's personal credo and one that's been replicated by promoters through the ages. They have to be hard at times, they have to make unpopular moves, they have to do what it takes to maintain the company standing. Maybe it's not fair or right but I think we all know that bosses, no matter what the workplace, can come off as uncaring bastards. At the same time, they have responsibilities and worries we can't dream of. I know for a fact I couldn't run a wrestling company and doubt many other fans could as well so complaining about what should be done is often a futile task. We can hope for the best but the brutal truth is that wrestling has always been a business about the money and more fans should accept that. Money may not make the whole world go round but it definitely affects wrestling big-time.


For this week, the spotlight is off.