All Elite Wrestling trademarks filed

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, Yakashi said:

According to Dave, so you know, they had enough ticket requests on the website to have sold 43000 tickets. 

That’s from Cody saying so on the road to double or nothing videos 

[David]

6 minutes ago, Louch said:

That’s from Cody saying so on the road to double or nothing videos 

#sources

[UK Kat Von D]

59 minutes ago, garynysmon said:

TNA were in a position to sign Sting, Foley, Angle, Hulk Hogan, Nash etc.

As I noted in my post, its a reflection that there's just no huge names out there any more that can make an Impact (pardon the pun), other than a 48 year old Chris Jericho who's older now than all of the above were (with the exception of Hogan), when debuting with TNA. 

 Bit embarrassing that AEW are managing to draw a bigger crowd with a 48 year old Jericho than TNA ever managed with access to genuine headline talent. 

Between this and WWE’s use of guys like Styles it really just shows how dogshit TNA have been 

[garynysmon]

7 minutes ago, UK Kat Von D said:

Between this and WWE’s use of guys like Styles it really just shows how dogshit TNA have been 

I don't think you'll find anyone that wouldn't agree that Dixie Carter couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery and that the promotion was woefully under-promoted. That's basically the polar opposite to AEW who are seemingly the lords of self promotion but obviously the jury's out on the actual product.

[Carbomb]

Yeah, TNA's problem wasn't the lack of talent, it was seemingly the sheer ineptitude at everything else. You have to wonder how much more quickly they'd have fallen if they hadn't had a machine like Borash putting in all that work to drag them to even half-competency. The booking had the odd good moment, but it was mostly awful, they didn't seem to be able to make stars of anyone homegrown, or if they did, they completely fucked it (Roode losing to Angle at BFG as a key example). The only main-eventer they had that turned out any good at all (Styles), they lost because even his loyalty was going to be tested by their losing money and exposure, and, more importantly, the workers' goodwill by not even paying them on time. 

Their regular spiv tactic of trying to sell every setback as a positive with "industry-changing announcements" was ridiculous too. TNA basically became the Monty Python Black Knight of wrestling.

[air_raid]

2 hours ago, Snitsky's back acne said:

It is becoming a bit in danger of not being able to live up to the hype.

Wait... you mean the business ISNT going to change forever????

[WyattSheepMask]

4 minutes ago, air_raid said:

Wait... you mean the business ISNT going to change forever????

How can it? All In did that already 😉

[Tamura]

Well, if you believe some people, the competition created by AEW will improve WWE's output. I'm not sure where they get this idea from, presumably it was from WCW starting Nitro that created competition with the WWF. However, there's a significant flaw in this reasoning. The WWE creative team do actually seem to be doing the best job they can, despite the falling viewing figures and other criticisms. I don't believe they are sitting on lots of killer angles just in case there's some competition somewhere down the line, I honestly believe they are trying to put out the best shows they can. Neither do I see AEW creating a sea change in WWE's output, a second Attitude Era if you will. WWE are quite happy with their current advertiser and TV network friendly programming, especially with the monstrous TV deals they've signed recently.

Edited April 25, 2019 by Tamura

[Factotum]

It wont in terms of product, but I think Trips said something on the NXT media phone call with Meltzer that it's something you'll have to look at when going after talent. Doesn't mean WWE will change how they present their shows, because they don't need to, but might allow pushes etc. that might not have happened because said wrestler has his head turned. Dunno, its all up in the air and theorising. We'll only find out when it starts up and running.

[Yakashi]

3 hours ago, Tamura said:

Well, if you believe some people, the competition created by AEW will improve WWE's output. I'm not sure where they get this idea from, presumably it was from WCW starting Nitro that created competition with the WWF. However, there's a significant flaw in this reasoning. The WWE creative team do actually seem to be doing the best job they can, despite the falling viewing figures and other criticisms. I don't believe they are sitting on lots of killer angles just in case there's some competition somewhere down the line, I honestly believe they are trying to put out the best shows they can. Neither do I see AEW creating a sea change in WWE's output, a second Attitude Era if you will. WWE are quite happy with their current advertiser and TV network friendly programming, especially with the monstrous TV deals they've signed recently.

It doesn’t matter how good their writing is if there’s a 70 year old lunatic that changes it all 15 times before the show starts. 

[Loki]

All the TNA/Impact bashing is bewildering.  The company has provided an alternative workplace for wrestlers since 2002, helped elevate a lot of guys and girls into stars, and most importantly is still going.  It's outlasted ECW and WCW and managed to keep itself on tv all these years.  People forget but after WCW folded, the WWE was literally the ONLY place with weekly tv.  For all its many, many faults TNA has been hugely beneficial to the wrestling industry.

AEW hasn't even announced a tv deal yet, and has run precisely one show.  Let's see if they can last more than a couple of years shall we, before we start favourably comparing it to TNA.

[tiger_rick]

6 minutes ago, Loki said:

All the TNA/Impact bashing is bewildering.

It's really not, they're responsible for some of the worst crimes against wrestling!

Seriously though, it's not about bashing them. It's just a comparison because everyone seems so black and white about AEW. You've either got to be a mark who thinks they're going to sink WWE or be seen to hammer everything they're trying to do so you can be right when it all goes Herb Abrams. Serious lack of reasoned discussion about what it might be.

Personally, I think a lot of the "TNA bashing" of late has been spot on. It's not really bashing, it's just pointing out that TNA had all the star names you could have post WCW and they made a mess of things time and again. So judging this on "names" is daft.

[Loki]

I do wonder what people count as success and failure in the wrestling business.   If success=beating WWE in the ratings and anything else is failure, then that's a tough fucking scale that only WCW has ever achieved.

For me, TNA has been a success as it's survived.  And I genuinely enjoyed a lot of their output when I watched - including the New Monday Night Wars episode.  I'd love to ahve seen them genuinely compete long-term at WWE's level, but I don't even know if that's possible nowadays.

Similarly, I will judge AEW as a success if they get a long-term product up and running and are able to pay their wrestlers a decent wage.  I have no expectation of them "challenging" WWE and I think it's an unfair metric to assess them on.

[tiger_rick]

5 minutes ago, Loki said:

Similarly, I will judge AEW as a success if they get a long-term product up and running and are able to pay their wrestlers a decent wage.  I have no expectation of them "challenging" WWE and I think it's an unfair metric to assess them on. 

Absolutely. Said this in the early pages of the thread. There is loads of room for alternative promotions to povide a place to work and make some money. That's the bit where TNA failed most for me. They lost money hand over fist, mostly because i think they were obsessed with WWE. AEW shouldn't even consider them in the same universe. Just keep building your brand, keep the buzz you've done well to create and remember it's a business not a competition.

[Carbomb]

9 minutes ago, Loki said:

Similarly, I will judge AEW as a success if they get a long-term product up and running and are able to pay their wrestlers a decent wage.  I have no expectation of them "challenging" WWE and I think it's an unfair metric to assess them on.

I don't know if you were including my post about them, but I never used that metric. It was all in terms of themselves, what fans want from them, the quality of the product they put out, how much money they didn't make in comparison to what they could've been making, and the fact that most of their recent developments have been regressive, moving to smaller channels with fewer eyeballs. More importantly, it was also because, at one point, they weren't even paying their workers, which showed just how much the rot had set in.