The Hamilton Ave Journal 07.22.10: Volume 2 – Issue 147
Posted by JP Prag on 07.22.2010
Are the Nexus poised to be top sellers? Is TNA growing in all the right places or is a lawsuit from the WWE because of ECW on the horizon? Did Lucha Libre USA deliver any ratings? All this and more is answered in this week’s edition of the Hamilton Ave Journal!
THE HAMILTON AVE JOURNAL
By JP Prag
Volume 2 – Issue 147
ABOUT THE JOURNAL
The Hamilton Ave Journal is the only wrestling news report focused solely on the business of wrestling. Here in the Journal we not only look at the stories that are important to the investor and business-minded person, but also delve deeper into stories that most fans of wrestling would overlook. That is because the Journal is about getting the heart of the matters that affect the companies and outlooks of the wrestling world.
And where is Hamilton Ave? That is the location of the WWE Production Studio in Stamford, CT, and thus the most powerful place in the wrestling world. Besides, The East Main Street Journal just does not have the right ring to it.
Who am I? I am JP Prag: consultant, entrepreneur, businessman, journalist, and wrestling fan.
Now, ring the bell because the market is open.
The Journal's front page area known as What's News isn't just about telling you what has happened. The stories in this section are about what will have an effect on the wrestling industry, individual federations, and the wallets of the fans.
TOP STORY: TNA roundup
TNA has been making moves all around the world. Close to home, TNA Founder Jeff Jarrett sat down with the Miami Herald recently to talk about the growth of the company. When asked about the move to Monday's and the mistakes from it Mr. Jarrett said:
"The mistake would be not learning from that experiment. We are about to take another step and change on how the company does business. We don't want to sit back and rest on our accomplishments. We are always trying and always pushing ourselves not just talent in the ring, but all facets of our business."
Mr. Jarrett is obviously taking a positive attitude to what transpired and if he speaks the truth, TNA has areas for growth. The issue for TNA has been in the past, though, that they often repeat the same mistakes ad nauseum. Sometimes there are risks to take, but TNA does not necessarily calculate the risks and costs associated with them. These have often been costly, which led to the next part of the interview. The article continued:
With the recent money invested, there would be a number of cost-cutting measures, including roster cuts. Without confirming or denying, Jarrett believes it's the nature of the beast for any company.
"We run a business and in the business of making money,'' Jarrett said. "So what needs to be done needs to be done in order for us to be in business."
Much like the WWE, TNA is in the business of making money. Still, letting a domestic mistake dominate the headlines undermines what TNA is going around the world. Right now, Kurt Angle, Mick Foley, and Jay Lethal are on a six day tour of India, traveling to four cities. Says Dan Steverson, Director of International Marketing for TNA:
"India has always been an important market for us."
As for the goals of this trip, Mr. Stevenson said elsewhere:
"We have three objectives. The first is to promote our partnership with ESPN Star Sports through promotional events. The second objective, though, is to go beyond the TV screen. We want to bring the TNA experience to our fans. Therefore, we are looking at doing live events. We are talking to several promoters."
The third objective is covered by indiantelevision.com:
The third objective is to look for an Indian wrestler. The company in association with ESPN Star Sports is searching for the next great Indian wrestler. It is clearly taking a cue from the fact that the Great Khali has helped its rival World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) gain viewers. The search will take six months. TNA is looking for the look, ability to entertain and an athletic talent and whoever wins will get a contract with TNA.
This seems similar to the talent search in Australia, although that ended up going nowhere as TNA never had their tour and therefore never signed anyone to a contract. While looking for an Indian talent could just be a publicity stunt, it could still do what TNA intends: create buzz and interest.
India is one of the hotbeds of the modern wrestling era and TNA is looking to make sure they have a foothold for all the future potential growth.
Newsbites
Some items of note in the rest of the wrestling business world:
Lucha Libra USA premiered to a 0.16 rating, which is in line with what MTV2 does at that time of day. The first replace did another 0.09 rating.
Despite rumors to the contrary, Eric Bischoff's absence from iMPACT was a pre-planned vacation with his family. Mr. Bischoff has released several blogs, Facebooks posts, tweets, and stated in more interviews that he is looking forward to the next set up tapings and thanked everyone involved for stepping up in his absence. Hulk Hogan was absent, too, because of his back surgery, but he appeared fine a few days later as he flew across the continent for appearances as far away as Vancouver.
The WWE and the McMahons have until August 11, 2010 to file a response to Martha Hart's lawsuit against the company. Expect the WWE to file an extension and be granted one, followed by a second extension before responding. This is a common tactic by WWE legal to draw out court cases and deplete the resources of those who bring up suits against them. Guilt or innocence does not factor into the equation so much as how much this will cost the company in the end.
Multichannel news has picked up the vast amount of local and national advertising going in to this year's SummerSlam event. This includes blimp advertisements during major baseball games, downloadable content to cell phones, and visits to local schools in the LA area from WWE superstars.
The WWE will announce their second quarter results on August 5, 2010 before markets open. Per usual, the Journal will have a complete analysis on the following week.
In the Marketplace we look at the trends in television ratings. This section is less for critical analysis by the Journal but more for the reader to see what is really going on and to draw their own conclusions.
As with stocks, here in the Journal we track the progress of television ratings. If ratings are the barometer by which we judge the product, then over the course of time we should be able to see patterns, trends, and anomalies.
For the week ending Wednesday July 21, 2010, here are the current standings of the shows:
Analysis:
On this week, it appears that SuperStars is the big winner as the show jumped another 16% to a 0.74 rating. While still off the last high of a 0.8 on June 10, 2010, the show has continued to rise the return of iMPACT. Speaking of iMPACT, the show once again held above a 1.0, the first time it has been above a 1.0 for most than one week since before the Monday move. Once again, it appears that TNA is repairing their lost audience, a process that is going to be long and arduous for them.
Also on the rebuilding front, RAW came in with a 3.39, a slight tick above the last two weeks. The show continues to hang out in the 3.3 to 3.4 range, but that is much better than when they were averaging a 3.1 back in May. SmackDown, too, has held on well despite preemptions and no network support, coming in at a 1.9 two weeks ago.
We all know that wrestling is a business, but we don't often pay attention to what sells and makes money. Money and Investing looks into the top selling items in the world of wrestling and any interesting figures that may have come out this week.
What are the top selling items for the WWE? WWEShopZone.com releases a list of varying numbers to show what is selling for them:
1. John Cena Never Give Up T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
2. Randy Orton Lobotomy TOP ROPE T-Shirt ($45, on sale $37.95)
3. Nexus Logo T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
4. Miz I'm Awesome T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
5. John Cena Never Give Up YOUTH T-Shirt ($20, on sale $17.95)
6. Randy Orton Lobotomy T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
7. Triple H Return to Fear T-Shirt ($25, on sale $19.95)
8. Bret Hart Since 1984 T-Shirt Package ($75, on sale $35.99)
9. John Morrison Sunglasses ($12.00)
10. Bret Hart Emblem T-Shirt ($25, on sale $14.98)
11. CM Punk Salvation T-Shirt ($25, on sal e$19.95)
12. Bret Hart Emblem Basics T-Shirt ($14.99, on sale $6.98)
13. John Cena Never Give up Beach Towel ($19.99, on sale $14.99, on double sale $9.99)
14. Bret Hart Emblem Skull Cap ($20, on sale $9.98)
15. WWE 11 Piece School Accessories Value Pack ($9.99)
16. John Cena Never Give Up Baseball Cap ($20.00)
17. John Morrison Revolution T-Shirt ($25, on sale $14.98)
18. Hart Dynasty T-Shirt ($25, on sale $14.98)
19. WWE Red/Blue Reusable Bag ($2.99)
20. John Cena Never Give Up Sweatband Set ($12.00)
Have a sale and the merchandise flies. In a rare event, the WWE is having a sale on their high margin t-shirts which has caused a large volume to start moving. Despite this, most of the list remained unchanged with John Cena, the Miz, and Randy Orton dominating. Both Bret Hart and the Hart Dynasty saw a resurgence after Bret's appearance on Monday as well as the sale, and John Morrison even doubled up his space on the list. CM Punk, too managed to secure a place on the list coming in at number eleven. But coming in at number three is the Nexus, showing the group is more than just angle: they can sell product as well. If the Nexus can keep up a place on this list, it will go a long way to securing long-term futures.
TNA sometimes releases a list of top selling items on ShopTNA.com. According to the site the top selling items were:
1. Don's Insane Brown Bag Special ($20)
2. Mr. Anderson... People Are Fake T-Shirt ($19.99)
3. Jeff Hardy Enigma T-Shirt (Glow In The Dark) ($19.99)
4. The Best Of America's Most Wanted DVD ($24.99, on sale $15.99)
5. RVD - Video Wall T-shirt ($19.99)
6. Hogan H Squared Limited Edition T-shirt ($29.99)
7. Destination X 2010 DVD ($19.99, on sale $15.99)
8. Unbreakable 2005 DVD ($9.99)
9. "Hulkamania" T-shirt ($19.99)
10. Beer Money / MMG "FANDIMONIUM" DVD ($19.99, on sale $14.99)
With Mr. Hogan and Mr. Bischoff of vacation, the folks at the TNAShop.com are also resting easy. Not that they do updates even when they are around.
Wrestling isn't just about watching and reading. The best way to be a wrestling fan is to experience it live. Where is wrestling coming to in the upcoming weeks? The Personal Journal answers that question.
Do you know a wrestling event coming up? Send one in to The Hamilton Ave Journal and we'll be sure to add it to the list.
The Editorials section is designed for you, the readers, to respond to the views presented in the Journal, send an important news item, or talk about another overlooked business related item in wrestling. Just beware: the Journal reserves the right to respond back.
From the commentary section last week, we begin with a game of logic courtesy of Miss Lindsie:
I am surprised that the WWE NXT got a good rating, since the battle royal stunk because of six winners.
To this Miss Brookey gave the apropos response:
How would the ENDING of a TV show affect that show's rating AT ALL?
There does seem to be a misunderstanding in the IWC of what ratings are. Ratings are lagging indicators of a shows overall performance. The reaction of the audience from one week is not reflected until the next week. Yes, there will be some trends in the show and a decreasing rating during a broadcast is never a good sign, but the real testament is what happens in the following week.
Now to something more based in reality gpjunk asks:
I knew WWE is profitable (despite all the commenters on this site who like to declare its dying) and I was glad to hear TNA is profitable even if it's a small margin. A few million is still a few million.
My question is what about ROH?
I have to assume they are profitable because they've been around awhile but is there room for growth or would a three month slump kill them? Also how would you estimate the overall health of the pro wrestling industry is the US?
I keep hearing about how threatening the rise of MMA is to the wrestling business but I would estimate between the big three and all the independents there is at least $50 million in profits in the wrestling industry in a down economy no less and that doesn't sound like a threatened industry to me. Wrestling may have contracted some from the heyday of the Monday Night Wars but it seems to me that the money is still there.
ROH was in trouble for a while, which is why they started to only use local talent, cut back on the number of tours, drop PPV entirely, and go to VOD web model instead of most regular DVDs. These efforts appear to be working as the company is stable and is likely profitable my a small margin. Their numbers cannot be anywhere near TNA's, but they stand the chance to be doing well especially since they have few fixed costs and regular staff. Also, HDNet has made some investment in the company that has eased their burden.
As for competition, forget about MMA; everything is competition to wrestling. At the end of the day, wrestling--like any sport whether real or predetermined--is a form of entertainment that is in competition with every other form of entertainment.
With the profitability, the WWE alone last year had Operating Profits Before Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization of nearly $78 million, so your estimate is quite low. What a lot of people do not realize is the WWE makes far more in revenues and profit now than they did during the Monday Night Wars Era. At the time, the WWE did not have the controls it has now, the product diversification, nor the global reach. The reason the WWE went public in the first place was to raise money to start new ventures, so they did not have all of the leverage they have today.
Moving on to trademark law, Guest#1062 states:
"On top of that, trademark law only works where the products are similar. So another wrestling organization already called NXT like SWA had could have a case. But what does a golf ball have to do with wrestling?"
What do pandas have to do with wrestling? Nothing, but they still won.
Sorry, Guest, but that case was not about trademarks. In the early 1980's, the World Wrestling Federation and the World Wildlife Fund came to an agreement on how either company could use the initials "WWF". They had a contract that specifically outlined the use and that contract was signed in perpetuity. In the mid-1990's, the WWE launched WWF.com. Obviously, a contract signed in the 1980's would not have a provision for websites, but that is what the World Wildlife Fund sued over. They said that the use of the initials WWF for WWF.com went beyond the original contract and the that the World Wrestling Federation did not have the rights to use them. The British courts agreed (re: in the UK, this case never came to the USA) and said the WWE had violated the original contract.
The case took years and was finished in 2001/2002. By that time, the WWE decided they were ok with rebranding their entire company instead of just doing something special in the UK. As such, they volunteered to change their name and image. Despite this, the WWE has several "WWF" and "World Wrestling Federations" trademarks on file today and can use them as they please, pursuant to the original contract with the World Wildlife Fund.
Jumping over to TNA, several people have been commenting about TNA's supposed buyrates. The Journal has not commented on them because there has been no confirmation that the buyrates are real or any secondary sources confirming them. As such, consider the buyrates that are out there to be rumors at best. That said, Guest#4917 sums up everything the Journal has said about TNA and PPV:
TNA's business model does not depend on PPV revenues, so changing their business model is not necessary.
Dixie Carter has been on record and it has been repeated here at least twice a month saying that TNA is leaving the PPV business when their contracts are over.
So that is the end of that topic.
Moving on to a more interesting and topical discussion, Andy asks:
During the closing angle on Impact this week, the commentators regularly referred to "the guys from ECW". How is it that TNA can refer to ECW, and clearly attempt to use the trademark for their own creative purposes, when it is completely owned by WWE? Is this legal? And if it is illegal, would WWE realistically attempt legal action, and risk giving TNA exposure?
It's not "illegal" in the sense that someone can be arrested, but it is against trademark law. The WWE clearly owns the rights, history, logo, and video library of ECW. Saying that someone once "worked in ECW" is fine because that is the truth. However, TNA is presenting the ECW crew as coming from ECW and representing ECW. That is where they will get in trouble as presenting someone as a representative of ECW implies the WWE condones the actions since they own ECW.
To get a real world example, look no forward than the original Outsiders in WCW. At the time, WCW presented Scott Hall and Kevin Nash as being under contract to the then WWF and that they were literally invading WCW. The WWF sued WCW because by presenting it so, it made it look like the WWF was in support of WCW using their trademarks. Although the case was settled out of court and no fault was admitted by WCW, it was a case the WWE had a full right to make.
The difference between WCW and TNA is that WCW had large pools of money, especially after the lawsuit when they were at their peak. TNA cannot handle a very large lawsuit from the WWE and the WWE can use this as a reason to go after them. The question for the WWE is if it is worth their time and resources, or if they will just send a cease and desist order?
Back when NXT launched, there was a small independent wrestling organization that was advertising Billy Gunn and Jesse James. The WWE sent them a very stern cease and desist letter that the company in turn posted on their website. The WWE may just do the same to TNA here and TNA will back down because they do not want to go to court on this. There are plenty of other things they can call the ECW guys, although naming a PPV "One More Stand" was probably not the best way to show they are moving away from using WWE trademarks.
As for the exposure, the case would not get very much attention outside of these circles, so the WWE has little to worry about there. Again, it is just a question of effort and dollars and if it is quicker and cheaper to use a cease and desist letter and TNA complies, then everything will come to an end quickly.
Plenty more was written, so be sure to take a look. And if you enjoy the Journal, why not bookmark 411mania.com and make it your home page? You can do that by clicking here.
This concludes Issue #147 (Volume 2) of THE HAMILTON AVE JOURNAL. Join us next week as we get ready to ring the bell again.
They just have come into the arena a few times and Taz, who also worked for ECW commented on them, and mentioned ECW a couple times. At no point did I ever hear him say that these were ECW guys.
Shit Raven, Rhyno, and Richards were all in a TNA ring a few months ago.
Even when they stormed the ring it wasnt mentioned at all as an invasion, that was the definition the unwashed internet masses gave it.
Dixie said they were invited, so that solves any problem there.
So lets not lose our minds over them being mentioned as ECW guys, I am also pretty sure they have been called FORMER ECW as well.
Really if TNA wanted to they would say, well now that that company up in New England bought up and destroyed another regional based promotion these guys need a place to go. And since that company has been out of business for months now these guys are feeling the pinch like so many Americans who have lost their jobs and had their places of employment dissolved, we here at TNA have decided to give them refuge and a place to showcase their talents.
TNA can play it many different ways, but as of yet I havent seen one word said or printed saying that these guys are FROM ECW (currently) or invading from another promotion. Other than from self proclaimed wrestling experts blogging on websites like this one.
Posted By: Rich (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 01:47 AM
"What a lot of people do not realize is the WWE makes far more in revenues and profit now than they did during the Monday Night Wars Era."
I think most of the IWC just looks at ratings and makes up facts. UFC gets 1.0-2.0 ratings, but get HUGE PPV buyrates.
Just as WWE has lower ratings than the late 90's, but has a thousand different avenues to make money....
Posted By: Thank You! (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 02:34 AM
I believe the ECW-TNA themed PPV is "One Last Stand", not "One More Stand". The issue is the same though. They will be hearing from WWE soon. That is MY GUESS-anyone else want to guess? Yes or no? WWE sends them legal letters in the upcoming weeks. JP?
Posted By: JP Hag (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 02:36 AM
so LuchaLibreUSA did well and why ROH does not post it's ratings is a complete mystery to fans
Posted By: Guest#4566 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 02:52 AM
This week RAW rating: 3.39
Overall RAW ALL-TIME HIGH rating: 8.10
Hmmmm........... Wonder when this was?
Posted By: stats (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 03:50 AM
well knowing wwe thay will sue tna just because thay can in ecw matter. LuchaLibreUSA 0.16+0.9 replay=238000,000 watch the debut show not bad
Posted By: Guest#7038 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 06:06 AM
although naming a PPV "One More Stand" was probably not the best way to show they are moving away from using WWE trademarks.
Not that it makes much difference but the PPV is actually being labelled one last stand
Posted By: The Fresh (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 06:13 AM
"...although naming a PPV 'One More Stand' was probably not the best way to show they are moving away from using WWE trademarks"
It was named One -Last- Stand.
Posted By: Shawn Struck (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 09:04 AM
Thanks for replying to my question about the ECW trademark. From what you've said, a cease and desist letter seems likely, although WWE may just let it go since it looks like this PPV and angle is a one-time only thing.
I notice that Miz is now at #4 in the best-selling items list. His T-Shirt has been steadily climbing the Top 20 for weeks now and really reflects that this guy is getting over. It's also interesting that the Nexus t-shirt is at #3. This angle has definitely worked in terms of ratings and so on.
Finally, it's good to see TNA is getting closer to the 1.2/1.3 they were averaging before the disasterous move to monday nights. I know everyone round here shits on TNA, but I really want them to succeed and do well because it will mean a better product for everyone.
Posted By: Andy (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 09:29 AM
At no point did I ever hear him say that these were ECW guys.
Posted By: Rich (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 01:47 AM
Execpt for the part on the PPV advert where there's ECW chants. And the whole title of the PPV being a rip off of the old One Night Stand ppv.
Posted By: Sideshow Jim (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 10:23 AM
Lucha Libre USA did good, you can't expect big ratings on that network at that time and has a bunch of replays. Last weekend, I seen like 3 different replays of the show.
The good thing is that the deal is 52 weeks. They safe for awhile. I heard they might show replays on the main network starting next month? Did you hear about this?
Posted By: USAUSA1 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM
You know, I seem to recall TNA having an Indian wrestler on their roster at one time. And he was fairly over in that part of the world, too; not quite to the godlike levels of Khali, but doing pretty well for himself before he was shoved into a lame gimmick and then fired. Wonder whatever happened to him...
Posted By: HeartBurnKid (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 11:44 AM
This week RAW rating: 3.39
Overall RAW ALL-TIME HIGH rating: 8.10
Hmmmm........... Wonder when this was?
Posted By: stats (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 03:50 AM
that episode of RAW is considered one of the worst of the Attitude era.
besides, the actual number of viewers for that episode isn't that far off what this past week's Raw's actual numbers were.
the ratings, unlike the IWC, evolve.
Posted By: Guest#7258 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 01:00 PM
so LuchaLibreUSA did well and why ROH does not post it's ratings is a complete mystery to fans
Posted By: Guest#4566 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 02:52 AM
Nielson is a private company and not a public service. The act of getting rated and therefore having a rating to release costs money. Since HDNet doesn't appear concerned, there is no reason to get measured.
ROH isn't trying to become number one or two in the ratings either. I do believe they want to grow, but they seem content to do their thing for now. Really with contracts in place a week to week rating is more about vanity then anything else.
Now trends and long term averages are things to have some concern about.
Posted By: Guest#1713 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 01:31 PM
This week RAW rating: 3.39
Overall RAW ALL-TIME HIGH rating: 8.10
Hmmmm........... Wonder when this was?
Posted By: stats (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 03:50 AM
As a business, who cares? The goal is profitability, not ratings. Whichever path leads to higher margins and profits is the one to take.
That was a problem with WCW. Bishoff was always talking about the importance of ratings while making decisions that were hurting profitability.
If it is a vanity project then ratings might be more important. If the goal is a viable company, then ratings are merely an indicator of potential.
People really get distracted by the ephemeral.
Posted By: Guest#0510 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 01:37 PM
I look forward to reading the Journal every week, as it's one of the few(maybe only) worthwhile regular wrestling-related read anywhere, but something's always bugged me : WWE is a publicly traded company, ratings are posted on official Nielsen sites, you can check a trademark on the USPTO website, etc., so those are facts you can look at. But how do you know with such certainty that TNA's gotten out of the hole the past couple years? What made me want to finally post this question was your response to the ROH subject from last time, which was so incredibly off the mark that if I didn't like your column so much I'd probably just stop reading. For instance :
"...they started to only use local talent." Really. They're based out of the northeast. They routinely use Davey Richards from Missouri, Adam Pearce(backstage every show) from California, Tyler Black from Iowa, Chris Daniels from Los Angeles, Roderick Strong & Erick Stevens from Florida, Austin Aries Wisconsin, Jerry Lynn from Minnesota, Kenny King from Vegas, Cabana from Chicago, then El Generico, Kevin Steen, the Super Smash Bro.s & Kenny Omega ALL from Canada, etc. Not even including irregulars like Rasche Brown, Petey Williams, etc. Cornette drives to every show, but everyone else listed(unless they happen to be in a different area other than their home or something like that) is a flight. That's a big expense. While they may not be on every show, yes, there's certainly enough on a given night. This doesn't include hotel, car rental, wrestling fee, etc.
"...the company is stable and likely profitable by a small margin" How do you know? They're not publicly traded. Dirtsheets like observer & insider are glorified gossip columns supplied by leaks in offices and wrestlers sucking up, neither of which might be telling the truth and more often than not aren't. This column is the closest thing to wrestling journalism I know, the rest is a bunch of paranoid, roided up yentas & comic book nerds talking behind each others' backs so they can suck up to these goofballs and hopefully get good 'press.'
"They have few fixed costs." Excuse me? Have you ever run a wrestling show in any way? Do you know how much it costs, even doing a small show? Even ROH's smallest shows have building rental, a big set(that's truck rental, sound, lighting, chairs, ring crew, staff, etc.), licensing depending on area, the costs related to talent mentioned above, insurance, equipment(cameras, tapes, mic.s, ring stuff - hell, the ring itself, etc.) sometimes concessions, promotional costs(tickets, flyers, merchandise, etc.) not to mention the post-production of DVDs/shows, etc. Wrestling is not a cheap business, esp. on the level ROH does it.
Point being, where do you get your info. from? Just trying to help.
Posted By: Guest#0038 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 01:46 PM
Im not sure if you covered this a while ago or not but did WWE lose much money due to the Volcanic ash cloud back in April or that still yet to be known??
Posted By: Muta Mark (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 03:04 PM
The WWE could have made cases against TNA a dozen times or more easily for copyright infringement, but they never will, for a couple of reasons. Foremost among them are that to do so would immediately give TNA huge exposure, it would mean admitting that TNA is realistic competition, and it would be a move that Vince would never take because he's too arrogant to believe TNA will ever be any threat to WWE's business (he's probably right, of course).
Basically, the WWE will never sue TNA.
Posted By: JustAnotherVictim (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 08:36 PM
The WWE could have made cases against TNA a dozen times or more easily for copyright infringement, but they never will, for a couple of reasons. Foremost among them are that to do so would immediately give TNA huge exposure, it would mean admitting that TNA is realistic competition, and it would be a move that Vince would never take because he's too arrogant to believe TNA will ever be any threat to WWE's business (he's probably right, of course).
Basically, the WWE will never sue TNA.
Posted By: JustAnotherVictim (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 08:36 PM
The same guy who has gone after tiny promotions when they advertise former WWE wrestlers appearing as if they were still in the WWE?
No, a lawsuit would not mean in any real terms that TNA or anybody else is realistic competition. If I started printing up t-shirts with WWE logos and copyrighted material, I'd be getting a letter once they knew.
If enough legal points line up and he could make it hurt, through legal costs or legal judgment, the lawyers will be on it.
Posted By: Guest#4939 (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 10:45 PM
Execpt for the part on the PPV advert where there's ECW chants. And the whole title of the PPV being a rip off of the old One Night Stand ppv.
Posted By: Sideshow Jim (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 10:23 AM
______________________________________
so the chants of some drunken people in an audience is now legal and something that can be used in court?
As fas as the name being a rip off, well Vince basically used the reputation of the original ECW and pissed all over it. Sure he owned it, but still doesnt make it right.
WEE has ZERO claim on anything.
What people might want to realize is that WWE isnt too good at winning lawsuits involving naming or copyrights. They are probably going to lose another one once the company that has a claim gets all its ducks in a row. Or WWE writes them a big check.
TNA has lawyers I am sure, and more than likely TNA is doing its best to push the envelope as far as they can on purppose and just stay on the right side of the line enough so that WWE has no case. I really dont think they are even close to the line right now, even after the 'official' announcement tonight.
But I suppose that guy that shouted "vince sucks" made WWE a great case against TNA for libel.
Posted By: Rich (Guest) on July 22, 2010 at 11:07 PM
Doesn't look to me like NXT is setting the world on fire with ratings. In fact, was that a minus in front of their percentage for the week? One can appreciate the fact that a company tries to improve its product(in this case, wrestlers), but it seems like they're trying a little too hard to get these guys over. Maybe that's the rub; with so much in the news about gangs, that's what the big hoorah is all about. Sorry, people. That's what it looks like to me
Posted By: guest (Guest) on July 23, 2010 at 10:12 AM
Will they cease and desist? or would they sort of want TNA to succeed. I recently watched the monday night war video and as i recall vince said it was never his ambition to drive wcw out of business that was wcw's goal to which vince had no choice but to fight back. I think most the wrestling world is happy with having two companies again. It gives the wrestlers a choice and the fans a choice which is always a good thing. I dont see why you have to be a 'WWE' fan or a 'TNA' fan and not just a wrestling fan. And dont give me that crap from the IWC that WWE isnt wrestling. Wrestling as we know it hasnt been wrestling since the 1970's so stop bitchin about that. Im from the UK so i cant do a damn thing about TNA's or WWE's ratings but for one i would watch every week because i would want to support both companies.
Posted By: Noonan (Guest) on July 23, 2010 at 01:18 PM
"so the chants of some drunken people in an audience is now legal and something that can be used in court?
As fas as the name being a rip off, well Vince basically used the reputation of the original ECW and pissed all over it. Sure he owned it, but still doesnt make it right."
Not much of an argument. It doesn't matter what WWE did with ECW, he owns it. Whether or not you like it is immaterial.
And yes, drunken chants can be used in court. They were not part of a live broadcast. The chants were in a pre-made advertisement for a PPV, used so everybody would know that this was ECW related. Huge difference.
As for TNA having lawyers, TNA does not have a good track record of getting things done right. They have advertised wrestlers not under contract multiple times, in spite of having been burned multiple times. They show the negative signs of not having a cleanly defined power structure. Often they seem to be chasing their own tail. So I wouldn't put too much stock in TNA having lawyers who can tell them where to toe the line until I see internal memos.
Posted By: Guest#5940 (Guest) on July 23, 2010 at 01:41 PM
Doesn't look to me like NXT is setting the world on fire with ratings. In fact, was that a minus in front of their percentage for the week? One can appreciate the fact that a company tries to improve its product(in this case, wrestlers), but it seems like they're trying a little too hard to get these guys over. Maybe that's the rub; with so much in the news about gangs, that's what the big hoorah is all about. Sorry, people. That's what it looks like to me
Posted By: guest (Guest) on July 23, 2010 at 10:12 AM
You are reading a lot into numbers. A 3.6% drop is just noise in the signal. It may be a heat wave, people going to state fairs, many things.
A search of major news sites hasn't shown many stories about gangs at all, so attributing a one week change to that is just pure conjecture.
Now trend is something to watch out for. But given that the rating is safely above a 1.0, I don't think there is much to worry about.
Posted By: Guest#0235 (Guest) on July 23, 2010 at 05:30 PM
Copyright (c) 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.
