PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE

 
 

GETTING HEAT IN WWE, INDIES VS. WWE, HOW TNA CAN BE LOSING MONEY AND MORE

By Dave Scherer on 2013-10-28 09:59:00

-You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q&A by clicking here.

Just recently I have started to attend Indy events. I am one of those "disenfranchised" WWE fans. I love the fact that I can take my son, sit fifth row get autographs and a t-shirt, all for about $30 less than 1 WWE ticket. And the WWE ticket is a ways away from the ring and you have no access the the wrestlers(which is huge to a kid). With that said, could the Indies pose a bigger threat to the WWE in the future, more so than ROH or TNA? I know I'd rather spend my money on three or four Indy shows than one WWE house show.

I don't see it happening. Indy shows are fine for what they are, but they don't draw any serious revenue. WWE generates tens of millions of dollars. They have nothing to fear from indies.

So if Dolph Ziggler does have heat for any reasons regarding his media appearances, instead of burying him on TV, why not just take him off media appearances & have him focus solely on his in-ring stuff?? The newspapers or TV stations don't specifically ask for him or anyone else do they?

The bottom line in WWE is once you get heat for something, you tend to keep it for a while. In some cases you keep it forever. WWE really makes people work hard to get second chances. They expect you to do things their way from the get go and if you show them you can't, they lose faith in you.

I recently saw a ticket website showing future TNA seating charts with a 6 sided ring. Is there any truth to TNA going back to 6 sides? In my opinion one of the best things they did under the Bischoff/Hogan tenure was going back to 4 sides.

I saw that too, it was for a show that is supposedly two years in the future. There is nothing in place now to say that TNA will go back to the old ring.

How is TNA losing so much money? They tape tv 2 nights a month when their Wrestlers reportedly only get paid per date worked, saving on when they filmed 4 a month in Orlando. They now have people buying tickets and spending money to watch them. The set they use for TV/PPV is a throw back from WCW 1990 with a ramp and 1 screen, hardly expensive, yet I keep reading they're in financial trouble and going back to Orlando to tape TV's again minus the Hogan's, Andersons and Van Dam's who came into give the company some star power. Surely trucking around a ramp and ring across the country every 2 weeks isn't bankrupting them?

TV tapings cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. They are indeed very expensive, with the set, the talent, satellite time, etc. You don't realize how expensive it is to do TV. If they had a deal like the one WWE has with NBC Universal, it wouldn't be an issue but they don't have anything close to that deal.

In response to your response from a reader about The Big Show buying Stephanie stock, let me say, that I don't think it would be a good angle either. But as for the fact that there would be a problem with the SEC, wasn't WWE a publicly traded company back when Ric Flair and a consortium "purchased" WCW from Shane McMahon? How did WWE handle that with the SEC and investors?

WCW was purchased by WWE proper, not Shane. So there was no SEC issue since Shane never owned WCW.

You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q&A by clicking here.