Paid Members MoChatra Posted March 11, 2004 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2004 I wonder if Bobbins feels the same way about the word 'prick' as he does about 'twat'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hong Kong Dave Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Wow I didn't think it was possible but this thread is in even worse shape than it was yesterday. The FWA negotiated a business deal - full stop.With the guest matches on cards, the Unsigned show & the slots on Academy shows they are / will be giving opportunities to wrestlers which is the important thing here (not them aiding rival promotions).Wrestling gets called a business because it is one - it is not a social service. If a business can gain a potential advantage (which is all TWC is right now) over their competitors via a negotiated deal with a third party then they should do just that.....which they appear to have done (that said it'll be interesting to see what Alex's statement says)! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest overbooked Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Wrestling gets called a business because it is one - it is not a social service. Even without any moral arguments (which are pretty much redundant in wrestling anyway) its not good business to shut out other British companies.It is in TWCs interests for British wrestling to be popular again, as that means more viewers. If more UK promotions are on TWC, more of their fans will watch the channel. It would benefit both parties. Considering the volatility of the US indie scene (how are they going to show MLW shows in 6 months?), it would make sense to have more UK promotions who produce regular shows on board.As for the FWA, its all well and good them playing Vince (with their pyros and their tactics), but I think competition is healthy both from a creative and business standpoint for wrestling- there are plenty of examples of that.If the reason is what Mo suggests, then that is slightly different, but I can't see it working, as TV deal or not, if someone comes in with enough money wrestlers will still jump. And the FWA will be in a position where it has lost key workers, and has alienated other promotions who could help them out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Freedom Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Mo has expanded on the point I was making early that perhaps the 5 year clause is as much about protecting the FWA from others "as stopping others coming in". After all any buisness want to protect it's assets. I can understand that line of thinking, but then why not then try to get the roster under contract then? I suppose a lot of people would have balked at that one though. Why the need for the length of the deal though. Even a 3 year deal would have been acceptable, as if someone ever did try and pull a UWA, the FWA would have ample time to prepare for it.And Mikey I happen to know of no less than 3 occasions in the past where Wrestling has come close to coming back on TV..The main reason isn't numbers of viewers as numbers themselves aren't just the issue..one thing going in Wrestlings favour is that it's audience is incredibly LOYAL. Thus once the casuals come and go you can get around 80% of the same fans tunning in week after week..Advertisers love the idea of a stable audience and Male 16-34 year old are even better. The reasons Wrestling hasn't got on any other Channel to date is down to 3 things..1.MONEY2.PRODUCTION QUALITY/ISSUES Including levels of violence(thanks Channel4!)3.MARKETINGWrestling does has a solid core audience, one of the things that TWC desperately needs to stay alive IMO. I didn't think Production Quality would be that much of an issue as I was impressed with Revival's production. I still think marketing a product to advertisers and channels is still difficult if you don't have the numbers behind you to back it up. What advertisers are interested in spending money on advertising to less people than you would get if you advertised on Channel 5 deadtime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbins Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 The other promotions have had 16 years to get their shit together.FWA did it in, what, a couple of years? They worked for it, they deserve it.Jesus motherfucking Christ, you have got to be shitting me.If you're talking about the show on TWC, there hasn't been a dedicated Wrestling Channel for the last 16 years. If you're talking about the show on Bravo. 1. It wasn't promoted by FWA. 2. It was a fucking huge failure in terms of securing a spot on TV for British Wrestling.I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY OF THAT CRAP!!!! NWA Hammerlock have been promising a tv deal for year, and never closed the deal. The UWA died a death on live tv. What the fuck are you talking about? Really, do you have any points that make sense?WELL NAME ALL THESE OTHER BRITISH PROMOTIONS THEN THAT YOU THINK ARE SO GOOD!AND THEN HIGHLIGHT THE ONES IN RED THAT YOU THINK ARE READY FOR TV RIGHT NOW. FWA are ready right now. They pushed for exclusivity. Yes this is bad. AS I STATED ON PAGE 6 OF THIS THREAD, QUOTE ABOVE.Can you read? I know you understand the words on the screen, but obviously you're unable to digest them and comprehend what people have been saying. We're going round in circles. You've argued for the exclusivity deal, but later said you're against it. You've just gone round and round arguing for the sake of it without actually having a single point. I can break the thread down for you page by page if you want, where you chime in on Page 2 without having read the press release, arguing in favour of the FWA deal. Then on Page 6, you click that there might be a downside to the whole thing, so you start backpedalling, all the time on the defensive and trying to distract people from the issues because you were embarrassed about arguing so fervently for the deal initially. You should be a politician.Seriously, go back and read the entire thread again, but this time try and take in the points that people actually make, you might want to avoid your own posts, because you don't actually make any.Stop being such a pompous smartarse prick (use of the word 'prick' inserted as it is highly appropriate in reference to you).    Pompous, I? Hmph! (Where's the folds arms, nose in the air emoticon?)I wonder if Bobbins feels the same way about the word 'prick' as he does about 'twat'.See you at K-Star. As for Mo's theory of why this deal came about. Wahey! A reason. That makes sense. I don't agree with it, but at least there's a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Sadly I don't have time to read through all of this. What I have read is interesting though, including what i wrote earlier about hoping teh FWA show fails miserably. That's not true, I hope it's a success, as long as British Wrestling is on TV there is hope, but I still think this is rubbish. For everyone saying "the FWA is the only UK promotion ready for TV"....that's not true at all, it's just the only company you know of that is.Less than 2 months ago there was one promotion that has been around for a few years now, who contacted the Wrestling Channel. The channel apparently told the company they were interested in showing their product on the television and to send them a tape of a TV quality show. Next week, the company spent 2 days recording shows and the next 6 weeks turning them into a TV show, only to read this. That is bollocks, and the blame is on the channel not the FWA.Apparently the guy running the channel doesn't have much experience in TV production and all that stuff, and I'm guessing he's just a rich kid who thought starting a channel would be the best way to get free tapes from all his favourite promotions.Let's now hope X Wrestling is a success and their show on Overload TV is decent and goes well, as many more people just casually flicking through the channels are gonna stop and watch something on channel 208 than 432. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurningHammer Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Meh, ITV World of Sport repeats will smoke the FWA shows anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhettmoir Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Does anyone know the viewing figures for the wrestling shows on Friendly TV, i'm sure when the wrestling channel starts those figures will be very similar? Anyone know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members herbie747 Posted March 11, 2004 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2004 Isn't "Extreme Sports" a combination of sports, as opposed to one particluar sport like wrestling?That's like saying American Football, Soccer and Rugby combined, are bigger than Tennis - the argument doesn't make any valid point; it's irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CracktonMoj Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Does anyone know the viewing figures for the wrestling shows on Friendly TV, i'm sure when the wrestling channel starts those figures will be very similar? Anyone know?I'd suggest that the Friendly TV stuff will be lower than the actual channel ratings, as FTV had no advertising at all, plus was only on for an hour a day. People channel hopping at the times that wrestling wasn't on would have had no clue that FTV showed wrestling - this won't be the case with Wrestling TV, as the name makes it pretty clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClassicsGuy Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 WELL NAME ALL THESE OTHER BRITISH PROMOTIONS THEN THAT YOU THINK ARE SO GOOD!AND THEN HIGHLIGHT THE ONES IN RED THAT YOU THINK ARE READY FOR TV RIGHT NOW. FWA are ready right now. They pushed for exclusivity.Are you missing the point on purpose, or what? No. FWA were the only company ready for tv.The only two people at the negotiating table were FWA and TWC.FWA were well within their own rights as a company to ask for exclusivity. Whether this is morally right, ethically right, good for British wrestling, bad for British wrestling - whatever, you decide - they were well within their rights to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClassicsGuy Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 (edited) Dear Buttons, or Bobbins, or 'ASSFACE' (on his avatar), or whatever you'd like to call yourself,No amount of you ridiculing me, or posting cute little smillies, or making your oh so 'too-cool-for-this-board-I-watch-puroseau-I-am-knowledgable-and-I-laugh-at-all-you-WWE-marks-and-FWA-fanboys' remarks, will change the fact that I have my opinion, of which I am entitled to.I am also content in the fact that I have made a worthwhile contribution to this thread, perhaps in the devils' advocate role, but nonetheless, offering a genuine viewpoint of merit, that at least half a dozen contributors (and maybe more) have agreed with, including an actual RIVAL BRITISH PROMOTER, in Gary from WZW, and also the guy who works for (runs?) the The Wrestling Channel, herbie747, who has included a ton of my quotes from this thread; that he has not only agreed with, but also used as a basis for his arguments in favour of the FWA deal.You can turn this into a personal, flaming dispute if you wish to, but that will reflect badly on you and not on me.Best Wishes,Classics Guy. Edited March 11, 2004 by ClassicsGuy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest overbooked Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 WELL NAME ALL THESE OTHER BRITISH PROMOTIONS THEN THAT YOU THINK ARE SO GOOD!AND THEN HIGHLIGHT THE ONES IN RED THAT YOU THINK ARE READY FOR TV RIGHT NOW. FWA are ready right now. They pushed for exclusivity.Are you missing the point on purpose, or what? No. FWA were the only company ready for tv.The only two people at the negotiating table were FWA and TWC.FWA were well within their own rights as a company to ask for exclusivity. Whether this is morally right, ethically right, good for British wrestling, bad for British wrestling - whatever, you decide - they were well within their rights to do so. Yep, you're still missing the point.That point being, what happens when another company is ready for TV?READ THE THREAD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClassicsGuy Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Yep, you're still missing the point.That point being, what happens when another company is ready for TV?READ THE THREAD. Who knows. I can't see into the future.I really have no opinion on the what ifs. If someone is ready within the next two years, well great. But they should have been ready earlier, then maybe they could have got the FWA's deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurningHammer Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 If another company had got there first they might not have been as greedy.And ClassicsGuy, you're copping out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts