AVM

38 minutes ago, CavemanLynn said:

That's going to be one of the eye-opening things for a lot of lesser promoters - actual overheads, that do cut into your margins. You know, like a business.

For a two-hour show, take £75 per hour as your medic cost (£150), and say you have 10 performers, including refs and announcers, on the shows, getting £75 each. That's £900. Ring hire and venue hire at £400 each, to bring it to £1700. Now you have performers, a venue, equipment, and medical support to run a basic show. Round up to £2000 for extras like music. If you charge £10 a pop, that means you have to draw 200 to break even. That's not world-beating numbers, but probably a damn sight more than many budget for.

Absolutely, these are really basic overheads in the context of the entertainment industry and really business as a whole. If you can't make an entertainment business viable with £2,000 of overheads (and the first cut back to make would be the £225-£300 medic cost), then it's probably not the right venture to be involved with.

Overall, I don't think it'll damage the industry too much were these measures brought into law. The people to go under would be the carnies with shady business practices. The big, relevant UK indies like Progress, ICW, Rev Pro, FCP, Riptide, Attack Pro will be alright. Most of the holiday camp guys will be okay also, but I'm less trusting in their word when they say they'll adhere to these changes. 

I've already seen several promotions privately complain about how running paramedics will diminish their margins to levels that would be virtually unmanageable to which I say, tough tits. People that choose to capitalise off of people risking their health to entertain should at the bare minimum be prepared to pay for an on-site paramedic.

The Equity pledges are obviously welcome, but they don't go far enough to resolve everything and I also suspect its self-policing, which kind of defeats the object because carnies cannot be trusted on their word, so again it'll be up to the talent to risk their careers by speaking truth to power in order to uphold minimum standards.

Great question.

Vince is an awful person. WWE is an awful company with awful practices...

However, I only ever half switch off - I.E I keep track from afar without watching entire shows and then give it a look if something peaks my interest. At the moment I’m doing that - I don’t directly spend money on the product because I’m not interested but I could do so at any given moment.

Honestly, the only way I could see myself switching off permanently would be a kind of fizzle out of interest and to be honest I hate that because I should have taken a stand already.

I'm guessing that is due to the hike in TV money. No chance they'll be getting that with a million viewers when its up for renewal. 

Integrity really isn’t the word when it comes to WWE but it’s the most appropriate word I can think of.

Vince seems to have gone batshit over lockdown and he seems to have thrown basic integrity out the window - hence wrestlers thrown off buildings then turning up two days later, alternate universes, best match ever, eye gouging.. Some early encouragement on the cinematic approach has seen the man get totally carried away by the looks of it.

Knowing WWE the way I do, I expect about another six months of this before they do the whole ‘we hear the voices of the WWE universe and we are embarking on change’ spiel.

I’ve not watched a full show since the Rumble. Caught bits and pieces here and there. It all seems like absolute garbage at the moment, doesn’t it? I’ve certainly no desire to watch anything in full at the moment.

I notice that some relations of the accused think deleting a tweet equates to a retraction/discrediting... Doesn’t work that way!

I stand 100% by my claims and am completely open to be questioned on it, I just didn’t want the aggro of it being out in the open and didn’t fancy waking up to threats on live-streams by ex-convicts.

Yeah, his body language is not good there at all. Along with the lack of eye contact with the camera, I believe that the look up to the top left is a classic indication of a lie - as I understand it, the creative side of our brain is on the left looking forward and we tend to naturally look in that direction when we’re invoking our creativity.

What I’d also say is that a lot of the victims will want to de-escalate, and that’s another reason why there is silence.

I know in my case, and it was one of the lesser known cases, the attention was really intense. Too intense, and there was a certain group of people that were effectively set on me to question my character - people who do not know me and do not know my story and used a distorted account of the situation to justify their attacks. The attention was horrible, I just wanted to hide away and that’s why I deleted my Twitter, my LinkedIn and locked down my Facebook to within an inch of my life. The first live stream on the subject also made me fear for my family’s wellbeing, something I didn’t want to expose them to.

The legal threats and all that didn’t bother me. I know that if a civil case is brought against me, I have the evidence and the inclination to fight it and win, but the attention was intense and at this point I just want to defuse the situation and move on.

I can, therefore, only imagine what the ladies implicated in the higher profile scandals are going through. They are some tough, tough women. It takes a huge amount of courage to come out with something so personal and intimate, speak truth to power and keep that account out there in the face of god knows what - not least because a lot of these are harrowing personal traumas. I never regarded my allegation as a trauma as it was very much ‘a part of the show’, and was seen as such at the time but the questioning of my character got to me - thrown in a bit of trauma in there and I just cannot imagine what they’re going through. The folk that say ‘oh they just want their five minutes of fame’ could not be more wrong - I’m sure these ladies (and some guys) that keep their accounts in the public domain would love to crawl under a rock right now.

1 hour ago, theringmaster said:

The irony of course being Paige used a very similar racial slur in the original documentary but nobody talks about that....

There's pattern of selective memory emerging for certain and I should probably leave it at that. 

28 minutes ago, DavidB6937 said:

Without a third of the talent?

An exaggeration but Ligero, Banks, Joe Coffey (I think that’s the Coffey), Wolfgang, Devlin all accused. Possibly more than that. That’s a fair chunk of the roster - furthermore, the UK is quite a narrow catch moment. I can see them widening the net and running shows across the continent.

That all said, I did hear a rumour a while back that they were exploring using the BT Studio for tapings, sort of using their PR launch as a test, so it could be the reverse.

13 minutes ago, Kfogg1991 said:

can this be the beginning of the end for nxt-uk?

https://www.f4wonline.com/nxt-news/major-nxt-uk-announcement-expected-tuesday-314396?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Conversion to NXT-Europe I bet. Dressed up as an expansion rather than the fact NXT-UK without a third of the talent it had isn’t viable.

Whataboutery doesn't work on this. Each case demands accountability. 

Anyone referring to a hierarchy of sexual assault and bullying is missing the point on the #speakingout movement - its about eliminating the toxicity within its culture and aligning wrestling into the standards of the outside world, whilst resolving each case on its own merits. I'm a little bit surprised that this needs explaining, but nothing shocks me anymore.

I totally forgot about that..

Here’s a direct quote:

“Been told I can't go to WWE tryouts because I threatened a NXT trainer, or whatever. That's bullshit. The bottom line is, [William] Regal, we heard he was slagging my family off," claimed Roy. "A lot of wrestlers told us he was slagging us off, calling us poutine scum and my dad's a gangster. I mentioned to Mr. Regal, 'what's your problem with my dad, what's your problem with my family? Why do you keep blocking us? If you got an issue, I'll come on my own to meet you at any venue in the world and we can have a chat about it. Or a shoot fight, whatever you want to do. Kick the shit out of each other, shake hands, get done with it.' He messaged my dad and was really nice to my dad. I messaged him saying, 'it's done. Thanks a lot.' Men like to speak to each other because that's what most men do. I'm not a 'Yes Man' like most people you hire. I don't know why you keep carrying this on.”

There is a bit on James Mason I’m seeing too. I wonder if he was the guy that Paige went on record to say was dangled out the window? 

I didn’t really ever take much interest in these guys beyond the obvious. There seems to be some history to put it mildly. I don’t know if there’s even much a reputation to tarnish at this point - and by that I mean they’re known for being quite aggressive, quite violent - that’s the persona and their main following either don’t know about it, don’t care or are in denial about it, and no allegations at this point would change that.

Registration on companies house is of course welcome but it shouldn’t prove a distraction from the real issues at hand here. Dangling people off off multi story buildings, hitting them over the head with pool cues, hitting them with bags of ice, ‘bangcocking’ people (presumably hitting people in their genitalia without consent?), passionately kissing fans seemingly without consent on multiple occasions, family members making threats on multiple of occasions, encouraging people to target accusers immediately after their full name and town of location is published... all of this is stuff that’s either been admitted in person (or in one case alleged by a relative of the folk implicated) or has been caught on camera and it does not scrape the surface as to what evidence is available to counter any legal case that could be brought against the allegations that have been made (my case and the others) and it absolutely dwarths the evidence that has been presented in legal cases successfully defended relating to historical accusations of sexual abuse.

Being on companies house hasn’t proven an obstacle to all the above happening, there has to be other safeguards and the marketplace should be informed within the boundaries of the law so it can vote with its feet.

Who leads this? This isn’t just a union job, though they are a bit part of it. I think a lot of this goes straight to the top too.

... oh and by the way, the intimidation of the accused won’t work. There’s a presumption that accused are always internet trolls. Not always so. Sometimes the fear of having a punch thrown at them by a member of the family with a criminal history won’t be enough to make them take it back. Sometimes folk have the inclination and the capital to defend their case all the way. Sometimes when you don’t expect folk to reach out to the police and their lawyers they do. Sometimes when you mess with people you think are weak they bite back, sometimes folk know their truth so passionately that they actively welcome the opportunity to prove it and aren’t afraid of big burly men who can’t string a sentence together.

In other words, some bullies never lose but when they pick a fight against folk that are used to bullies, that understand how they operate and have the intelligence, capital and internal strength to stand up to them? It brings about a fucking big shock to the system.

4 hours ago, air_raid said:

So, doing the next UKFF50 is going to be fun.

Sounds like you’re just going to need to say Pete Dunne fifty times at this point.

42 minutes ago, MungoChutney said:

I think the idea of an industry regulator for wrestling is a complete non-starter. I work in regulation within an industry that was self-regulated until the early 2000s and can think of many reasons why regulation in the manner people are asking for won't happen. Above all else the financial implications would make it unviable to run any shows outside of arenas because there's no way any government funding is finding its way down to this. That leaves the cost with the industry itself and that's not happening off of 100 people in a social club. You're also talking about legislation, which again isn't likely because who cares enough about pro wrestling to make it change who they vote for?

 

I don't know enough about local authorities in England but in Scotland the best (as in achieving maximum possible standards and safeguards without regulation) method would be to ask councils to review their licensing criteria to include a specific category for pro wrestling. In the same way that taxis and pubs are subject to national legislation but are licensed at a local authority level.

While the talk remains with the idea of regulation, either by an independent body or self-regulation by wrestlers (bad idea), then nothing will really change beyond a few companies improving their practice. The fans who follow all this kind of thing on social media might not be willing to attend certain companies or watch certain individuals but that's not going to be enough of a detriment to stop all of these characters resurfacing. 

How realistic would be to regulate whilst retaining feasible business practice?

Yeah, it’s an interesting one that video. A proper psychoanalysis of it would be interesting because a lot of that sounds horrific to me. I don’t think I’d be too chuffed if someone had uncovered a story about my family dangling someone off a multi storey building. 

That all said, benefit of the doubt on the nice people stuff. They’ve clearly done a lot of good, charity work, training disabled people, taken people in etc. However, it does not excuse irresponsible or inappropriate behaviour however isolated it is and by that I’m not talking about ‘working stuff’. Plenty trainers manage to train strong style without facing these allegations.

I’ve no idea what Danielle Mathesson’s allegation was, but the comment in her thread that said ‘blink twice if you’re okay’ about summed it up for me. Such a fucked up business.

30 minutes ago, Michael_3165 said:

That's the point. Immediate reporting and forensic testing is the only proof much of the time. Waiting decreases conviction chances sadly. 

The problem I have is if we assume people are guilty as a starting position. How can someone prove they didn't do it? 

My friend has been accused (can't go into details).  With absolutely no evidence his name gets dragged through the mud. How is that OK? I believe him as it goes, I just can't see it at all. With one accusation his whole career can be finished and everything that goes along w that. 

 

The problem with defamation cases, or at least libel, is that in a sense it does presume guilt because the burden is on the defendant to prove they are telling the truth, in other words the presumption is that the defendant is lying. This is problematic when it comes to sexual abuse cases.

That being said the precedent is generally that libel cases can be successfully defended more easily than proving criminal cases - which is probably why the amount of libel cases in this country is fairly low (I think it’s 67 a year?). There’s a fair bit of risk involved if the defendant has solid evidence - I’d imagine that’s why you see a fair amount of these strong arm statements etc. It gives the claimant a moral victory without taking on the risk of a full trial - though that strategy only works if the defendant wishes to de-escalate at all costs. Some people are prepared to fight their case all the way because they know they’re telling the truth and they know they have the evidence to back it up.

One other thing that I think is fundamentally nuts - it’s not a legal requirement to have a trained paramedic on hand at a wrestling show. 

19 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

It should be about both, and there's plenty of room for it to be both. Some people should not be allowed near this industry again, or be 'cancelled', if you will.

Oh for sure, I think there should be discretion (David Starr for instance is beyond the pale with his accusations) but equally I believe people can reform themselves. That starts with accountability and if I’m honest I can count on one hand the amount of accused folk who have shown proper, genuine contrition and an understanding of the gravity of their accusation.

If I’m honest I hope he does rehabilitate himself and revive his career. This movement shouldn’t be about cancelling people, it should be about reforming and safeguarding the industry. No longer should abuse be justified in the name of bullshit time honoured traditions. This whole movement has shone a light on the fact that there’s a real world outside the professional wrestling bubble with progressive values and safe working practices and recognition of that will see old abuse enabling values crumble.

2 hours ago, Kfogg1991 said:

the knight family have brought out some i stand with saraya t-shirts to help go towards legal costs......

I'm thinking with what they have been accused of they are going to try and take everyone accountable for the accusations to court 

Sounds snazzy