KB Busts Up Another Myth: What Killed WCW

[TommLew10]

Actually ratings were pretty good for a few months AFTER the finger Poker of Dome, in fact WCW Nitro twice topped a 5.0 rating after that despite going directly against RAW in 1999. The Finger Poke itself re-established the original NWO as a lean, killer heel faction, reuniting Hogan, Nash, Hall, along with Steiner and purging under used or mid card talents like Horace Hogan, Curt Henning, Virgil, etc (pretty much the entire joke NWO jobber roster that comprised the Black & White faction of 98). It also clearly drew the battle lines story wise with the new, lean, mean fighting machine NWO trying to get control of the company from WCW's top anti NWO star, Ric Flair, and clearly established a hatred with Goldberg, the company's most popular wrestler, who was robbed of the World Title by NWO shennanigans.

Really the death started after SuperBrawl when it was clear they were jobbing out Flair (again) to Hogan depsite massive audience distaste. If this would have been followed by Goldberg vs Hogan II then it might not have been so bad, but they quickly began pushing Goldberg into the mid card, never capitolizing on the draw of GB vs Hogan II and really downplaying the idea of a re match with Nash, the man who ended the streak, orchestrated the NWO revival, and handed the title to Hogan in the first place. In Jan and Feb of 99 the numbers were still huge and interest (largely due to the potential fall out of the FingerPoke Of Doom) was high. The non sensical way they buried Flair & Goldberg killed much of the momentum. Switching gears completely out of nowhere having Flair turn heel, Hogan turn face, the NWO breaks up, and DDP (where did he come from) emerges as World Champ while Goldberg is MIA completley turned off the audience. Those high ratings that ran into March were significantly less after Flair's title reign ended. Even Sting's return from injury couldnt save them.

From that point the company never knew where it wanted to go. They bounced between bookers and booking styles so fast between Sept 99 when Bischoff was fired and April 200 when he returned alongside Vince Russo (in his 2nd tour of duty in less than 6 mths at this point) you couldnt keep track of who was coming and what was going on.

Its amazing when you think of the business this company was doing even in 99, drawing over $900,000 for a non televised house show in DC main evented by Flair vs Hogan in March to being on life support 12 months later. SuperBrawl 99 did a PPV rating over 1.0, this past WrestleMania did a 1.3, think about how big that was and in a year's time it was almost dead.

David Arquette's title reign helped bring mainstream media attention to the company and did a lot to publicize their upcoming PPV and weekly TV, much like Mike Tyson's ridiculous turn as "Enforcer Ref" at WrestleMania did in 98 for WWE. If anything it was probably beneficial to the company from a free advertising aspect. The problem was the product they were pushing at that point wasnt very good so all that extra publicity didnt matter in the end.

The death may have started in the Spring of 99 but it really kick started after the whole Arquette thing resolved itself. Suddenly WCW programming was devoid of anyone you wanted to see. By June of 2000 Russo had de emphasized or forced out virtually all of WCW's most popular stars, Hogan, Flair, Sting, Savage, Luger, all gone...Goldberg wasnt around much longer, Nash hardly wrestled, doing backstage vignettes when he was around, you had a large collection of unknowns, WWE & ECW midcarders, jobbers, with Booker T & Steiner in the middle. It was painful to watch just because I DIDNT KNOW WHO ANYONE WAS!!! ALL THE PEOPLE WHO COULD DRAW MONEY WERE GONE!

If Russo had been smart he would have extended his WCW vs New Blood Revolution feud, ultimately with WCW stars winning, it would have given a big rub to some of the unknowns and mid carders and maybe some of them would have become popular with the audience. Instead he wanted to ram the New Blood guys down our throats and in the process killed off everyone fans actually tuned in each week to see. That's the true DEATH NOTICE right there, June 2000, The New Blood kills WCW wrestling forever.

As far as Jarrett as champ goes, he was/is a very good in ring performer although Ive never been crazy about him. He had some very good matches with Flair, Booker T, Nash, etc during this time and fact is he's always been a hard worker. He was also well known as a "WWE" guy, he wasnt the worst choice to main event Russo's NB Revolution.

This is pretty much the truth. Had Bischoff been able to purchase WCW, it would likely still be around and TNA wouldn't be around. What level WCW would be at, nobody knows.
What happened is as simple as this . . . Huge contracts allowing stars too much control. Everybody wants to say it was awful booking, terrible storylines, etc. The issue was the creative control, allowed by the stars that didn't allow Bischoff and Russo to push the younger generation to create stars. Think about all the future stars on the roster during that time and if some of the current stars of the time would have been willing to get those guys over. The issue was they didn't have to because it was written in their contract they had control over their character.
Last but not least, I personally don't feel as though WCW really died, because of itself, but simply because the merger. They still had plenty of people watching the show, they had simply hit a tough spot, because of some of their past mistakes, I believe they would have eventually fought through it, just as the WWF did and just as they had from the late 80's to the early 90's. WWE has also had it's ups and downs, but as long as they stay televised they will always have their upswings and downswings.
The proof is in the history of wrestling.

 

[Kurgen]

I agree with a lot of the comments made about factors involved in the demise of WCW, however, something vital to the issue has always been overlooked.
Around the 90's, the number one online serice was Compuserve, followed by Prodigy Online, WCW had a forum on Prodigy. Around 1991, a new online service emerged that used a graphical interface, it was called America On-Line or AOL for short. The WWE promptly jumped on that platform. Clearly this points at business ties between the WWE and AOL dating back to before the merger with Time Warner. When Jamie Kellner was handed control of the Turner Network, the deal for the sale to Fusient media was already in the works, so what does Kellner do ? Drops WCW from the programming. Despite not being at the ratings level of the WWE, WCW was one of the top rated shows on TBS, and at the time, cost cutting had already stopped the hemmoraging. Reason given was that pro wrestling was too low brow, however, you have to take into account that Kellner's new company ACME Communications include the CW and MyNetwork TV, both of which have carried WWE's Smackdown. I think there's enough grounds to suspect an inside trading deal being the real reason behind the demise of WCW.

 

[justinept]

100% right. The writing was on the wall when Turner merged with AOHELL/Time Warner. The AOHell people hated wrestling and the only way they were going to keep it is if it made them a LOT of money.

To say they hated wrestling is a bit of an understatement. I was the media relations director for a company that was owned by Don Logan. That name might not mean much, but Mr. Logan was the CEO of Time Warner during the WCW era, serving as Ted Turner's right-hand man. After the AOL Time Warner merger, he became the Chairman of the company. During some down time one day, I asked him why he sold WCW. His response was hilarious:

"What's WCW?"

That's a shocking difference from Ted Turner's stance on the company. Again, the company folded because they lost their biggest cheerleader in Turner. The people that took over either didn't know about WCW or didn't want to remain associated with a wrestling company.

 

[Kurgen]

To say they hated wrestling is a bit of an understatement. I was the media relations director for a company that was owned by Don Logan. That name might not mean much, but Mr. Logan was the CEO of Time Warner during the WCW era, serving as Ted Turner's right-hand man. After the AOL Time Warner merger, he became the Chairman of the company. During some down time one day, I asked him why he sold WCW. His response was hilarious:

"What's WCW?"

That's a shocking difference from Ted Turner's stance on the company. Again, the company folded because they lost their biggest cheerleader in Turner. The people that took over either didn't know about WCW or didn't want to remain associated with a wrestling company.

Hello, I know I'm the "new guy" but let's take into consideration that AOL did indeed have a WWE Forum on their servers. Here's a link to an on-line chat session on AOL by Vince McMahon himself. http://www.pwwew.net/chat/vince.htm
Saying that AOL didn't want to be associated with a wrestling company doesn't fly well when they had one on their online service. Also, Mr Jamie Kellner, the man that didn't feel wrestling was a viable product was the CEO of ACME Communications, which carries the WB and MyNetwork TV.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACME_Communications both of which have had WWE Smackdown on their programming. When it all comes down, it was this one man that sealed WCW's fate. Here's the article on his decision.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/business/turner-drops-wrestling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html?ref=jamiekellner
"Mr Kellner had no comment."
What could he say ? That he got paid off ? That he made a deal with Vince under the table ? If you understand anything about business, you'd know that once Fusient Media took over WCW the network would not be losing money on that company anymore, so the cost cutting doesn't apply. Dropping high rated shows makes no sense....unless someone has a reason and an opportunity to profit from it, that person was Jamie Kellner.
Try and search for a connection between AOL and the WWE, very hard to find, but it's there, as this 1996 article proves http://www.thefreelibrary.com/NTN+and+the+WWF+launch+online+wrestling+trivia+via+America+Online.-a018250347

 

[19NightLong]

Bunch of stuff killed WCW but I believe Russo's run during his WCW tenure was no better and worser than Hogan and Nash's politcis in 1999. I mean WCW Nitro kicked the WWF Monday Night RAW asses for 84 weeks on Monday Nights then after a botched ending at Starrcade 1997 and the nWo splitting factions, no new ideas, and spinsoff along with WWF's "Atttiude Era" which kicked off after the infamous Montreal Screwjob is where WCW started to lose in the ratings.

The final nail that killed WCW was on January 4, 1999, when WCW actually spoiled WWF RAW taped results that Mick Foley winning the WWF World Heavyweight Title From The Rock. When Schiavone read the spoiler to their Nitro viewers, people literally flipped over to watch it happen and the WWF maintained ratings ever since until the end of Nitro in March 26, 2001. To add insult to injury, fans waited to Goldberg vs Nash rematch but instead Goldberg got injured and got replaced by Hogan. Hogan go against Nash then simply poke him to the floor and cover for the pin and Hogan regain the WCW World Champion. The 40,000 fans were insulted of the nWO reunion and no good matches and felt that WCW just clearly hype up just for ratings so WCW fans favored the new creative WWF instead.

Vince Russo didn't help WCW any better either. Remember the "Goldberg refused to follow the script" angle he wrote? That was horrible. TBF, Russo did helped the WWF but that's only when Vince Mcmahon had final say to his ideas. He didn't have one in WCW and felt he could do what it wants. Russo didn't understand WCW fans unlike he did up WWF in the North and WCW fans didn't like his "Crash TV" style to their shows which hurts more than it helped.

WCW was badly managed from overspending too much money on guaranteed contracts of older performers, older ego ex-WWF wrestlers like Hogan and Nash booked nWo and themselves in the main events non-stop for years, younger WCW stars got buried from the main event scene many times because of Hogan Nash's creative control clauses, stealing already-established WWF talents just for money, Sting and Ric Flair buried as well, milking non-stop nWo all the way, having wrestlers dropped the other companies belt in the trash on WCW Nitro live(see Madusa wrestler), put out matches that are clearly potential for PPV events on cable TV(Hogan vs Goldberg on WCW Nitro on July 6, 1998), famous for spoiling the WWF RAW taped results on WCW Nitro live to their viewers(See January 4, 1999, Finger Poke of Doom), putting non-wrestlers like David Arquette as WCW champion and writer Russo himself as champion, the Oklahoma gimmick played by Ed Ferrera that makes fun of WWF announcer Jim Ross's Bells Palsy, etc and so on.

Because of it, WCW lost $100 million from 1998-2000 and with AOL/Time Warner merged together in late 2000, they saw how bad WCW buyrates and ratings were and felt that WCW and wrestling in general didn't fit into their TNT and TBS network portfolio. Bischoff and the group of private investors called themselves Fusient Media Ventures tried to purchase WCW. But to save money from themselves and with WCW failing to raise buyrates and TV ratings as they promised, AOL/Time Warner removed WCW from the TV networks and put it up for sale. With no TV networks to air WCW, it was a little value to Bischoff so they backed off. The WWF, backed by billion dollars of money due to the popularity of the "Attitude Era" programming, offered to purchase the promotion in which the deal was finally finalized in March 23, 2001, when WCW's libraries, trademarks, and other contracts was sold to Vince McMahon's WWF for a cheap price of $4 million dollars.

 

[hakan]

Besides overpaid wrestlers, another thing I do believe was wrong was their presentation, it looked so unusual, look at this logo.

​

That above was better suited on a skate or surfboard, not representing a wrestling promotion. They should of stuck with the old logo, and while they were at it, not have Vince Russo as creative control from backstage, on the television, directing what ever he directed from back there like a mob boss. I think having Vince Russo as the focalpoint on Nitro (I don't know about Thunder) hurt ratings more than it helped.

Maybe Vince Russo was a saboteur in WCW? And I'm serious when I raise this too, maybe the illuminati were involved?

So many other things of course that can't be forgotten, but have been already covered. It seemed to me they did everything wrong and nothing right during their last few years in this chaffing at the bit of wanting to be on top of the WWF. We are in 2012 now, I think I'm getting sick and tired of having to even think once about how WCW went down the toilet but I still signed up especially to contribute to this thread with what I'm saying here.

There is one highlight I do remember, the return of Dusty Rhodes. They did actually beat the WWF with that little number in the ratings, but everything else as far as I'm aware was a fizzer.

When they pay their big name wrestlers too much because they can't afford to do so then WCW was just asking to be out of business.

 

[Ovaltine]

Hello, I know I'm the "new guy" but let's take into consideration that AOL did indeed have a WWE Forum on their servers. Here's a link to an on-line chat session on AOL by Vince McMahon himself. http://www.pwwew.net/chat/vince.htm
Saying that AOL didn't want to be associated with a wrestling company doesn't fly well when they had one on their online service. Also, Mr Jamie Kellner, the man that didn't feel wrestling was a viable product was the CEO of ACME Communications, which carries the WB and MyNetwork TV.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACME_Communications both of which have had WWE Smackdown on their programming. When it all comes down, it was this one man that sealed WCW's fate. Here's the article on his decision.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/19/business/turner-drops-wrestling-in-first-decision-by-its-new-chief.html?ref=jamiekellner
"Mr Kellner had no comment."
What could he say ? That he got paid off ? That he made a deal with Vince under the table ? If you understand anything about business, you'd know that once Fusient Media took over WCW the network would not be losing money on that company anymore, so the cost cutting doesn't apply. Dropping high rated shows makes no sense....unless someone has a reason and an opportunity to profit from it, that person was Jamie Kellner.
Try and search for a connection between AOL and the WWE, very hard to find, but it's there, as this 1996 article proves http://www.thefreelibrary.com/NTN+and+the+WWF+launch+online+wrestling+trivia+via+America+Online.-a018250347

How in the Blue Hell was this overlooked? If this IS indeed true than this IS the reason that WCW went under. I guess it is too late to notify anyone now, but damn! I guess Kevin Sullivan was right (Death Of WCW Shoot) someone cut a deal.

 

[whoopin' ass]

in the end, it was the merger that killed wcw. when that happened, Ted Turner lost control and couldn't just keep wcw open. had the merger not happened, there would have been some restructuring and new creative but Turner would have kept wcw running. yeah the loss of revenue would have been huge but there is something to remember - within a year or so, a lot of contracts would be up. Guys like Hogan would be gone because they were no longer valuable. the guys like Booker T, Steiner, etc were all getting a lot lower contracts which wouldn't have cost the company as much. it would have taken a while but wcw would have rebuilt and come back. but when turner lost his control, wcw was dead.

 

[Alex Lexington]

Russo is GOD!!! he started the attitude era and all you people who claim they hate Vince Russo guess what if there was no Russo I know for a fact wCw will be in WWE situation right now and WWE would have been bought out, so NO Vince did't kill wCw hell the guy was never on the program for very long, and whats funny is that when Vince Russo WAS on Nitro the ratings went up When he left the dropped, he returns guess what? the ratings go up the guy was never then when the company folded so think about that before you criticize Russo. You are full of fanboys and marks pull your heads out of your arse's why don't ya

 

[AnthonyM4]

What REALLY killed wcw was when that guy Jamie Kellner came in as president of turner programming and decided wrestling wasn't something that would be suitable for the network. It was beneath them. WCW would have not died if that didn't happen. Eric Bischoff was very close to buying it and would have continued it on tbs and tnt, but Kellner put the kobash on that. Sure a lot of the other stuff(bad booking, stupid storylines, wrestlers with egos, not creating many stars, and the such) didn't help, but the ratings were still the best of any other programming on that network.

I know what you are thinking, "well then why couldn't Bischoff get another network to take wcw?". That probably would have taken some time and in the mean time they would have been just a house show business. Maybe they could have did what TNA eventually did and become weekly ppv, but since the brand had been so damaged nobody would likely buy those ppvs.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

I can't believe I read this whole thread

Some people here hit the nail right on the head. It was the fact that Kellner wanted to take TNT in a different creative direction that negated the sale to Fuscient, and allowed McMahon to swoop in and purchase WCW at a rock bottom price.

Were there shenanigans involved? Most likely. Did WCW's mismanagement devalue the company? Absolutely. Were they losing money? Like it was going out of style.

But the thing is, WCW losing money wouldn't have meant a single thing to AOL/Time Warner once the sale was complete, because it wouldn't have been their money being lost. WCW was still one of their highest rated programs (if not the highest rated one, can't remember exactly), so once they weren't footing the bill, there was money to be made for AOL/TW. So the only thing that WCW's unprofitability meant in the grand scheme for AOL/TW was that it needed to be sold. That had nothing to do with taking away their TV.

The question was asked several times in this thread, why would Kelner want to get rid of one of his highest rated shows? Well the change in direction is a big reason, and it wouldn't have been the first time in cable TV history that a station has completely changed direction, and dropped previous programming that didn't fit that direction (regardless of ratings). It happens. Say USA gets sold, and the new CEO wants to change it into something more along the lines of the Lifetime Network. Do you think the WWE is still going to remain on that network? No, because it won't work with the new demographic they're going for.

If the sale to Fuscient had gone through, and if they'd kept their time slot on TNT, it's complete conjecture to say that they would have died or not. I personally believe that a more streamlined company could have worked. WCW still had a built in fan base that watched no matter what. They could have localized their tours to the old territory circuit, purged themselves of the bloated contracts over time, and done alright for themselves.

Or they could have continued to allow the same guys who made the horrible decisions in the past, to continue making their decisions and died out as a result. Who's to say... although without Ted Turners checkbook, it's more likely that those guys would have just ditched WCW to go find a new money mark, and done the company a favor in the process.

WCW could have continued if Kellner allowed them to stay on TNT post sale. He wouldn't though, so we got what we got.

 

[justtxyank]

Long Post

I'm sure you got a lot of rep for this post. It's being stickied means someone here likely agrees with you about the content contained within.

It is however incorrect.

WCW was still doing better ratings on TNT than any show they had. The losses being incurred by WCW are also misstated as WCW as an entity didn't get to share in advertising revenue for tv the way the WWF did with USA. WCW being owned by the broadcasting company significantly hurt their ability to profit off of the ads for the tv shows.

Now, of course they were losing money and of course creative had gone to crap by the end. However, none of that would have mattered if Kellner had made a deal to get WCW into the hands of someone else and kept their programing on TNT, or even the TBS network.

Think about this. WCW ended up selling for something like $7 million, less than Bischoff was willing to pay and less than Jerry Jarrett claims he bid for the company with a group of investors. In the end that's all they got. $7 million. No more television revenue or merchandise rights or anything. Additionally they had to sit on and pay the highest contracts anyway.

If they had kept WCW on the networks they would have made more for the sale from Fuscient + they would have continued to profit off the ad space. It's also likely that Bischoff and Fuscient would have wanted Goldberg and Hogan's contracts. This would have made AOL/Time Warner SIGNIFICANTLY more money. Kellner passed.

Whether he did it because he hated wrestling being on his network (commonly accepted idea) and wanted a total rebrand of TNT and TBS (backed up quickly after with logo changes, removing monster programming, ending the association with Babylon 5, etc) or whether it was because he cut some deal with Vince McMahon, Jamie Kellner is the man responsible for the death of WCW.

Companies can survive financial losses and creative poop stains. Heck, the WWF managed to get out of a horrible decade and become the worldwide leader. If WCW had managed to survive it would eventually have been able to do the same thing Vince did: become a publicly traded company. That would have been HUGE for WCW as the influx of cash would have kept them alive indefinitely, much like it has for the E.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

I think it is a combination of things. I know you are right KB, the company had problems long before the merger happened, and they were losing a lot of money at that point.

I think we have to look at from a number of areas. I'm not being condescending like people don't know all this, I'm just saying how I see it from my point of view.

The on the air product -was great at a point. The NWO, Goldberg were great moves. Then they got way too predictable. The Hogan promos that never ended, everyone joining NWO, Hogan never giving up the belt, or losing it only to get it back in 5 seconds.

Behind the Scenes- The booking and the storylines come from the creative department. Their ability to get their vision is dependent on the talent. Some talent are political some are not. WCW had people who used their political clout when it suited them. Hogan, Flair, Savage among others were political. The fact that the show was such a mess after so much success, shows that the person who was in charge clearly failed in making sure political games didn't harm the on-screen product. How does a company lose so much money before the accountants step in and take drastic measures ?

In spite of the problems, the show was still getting around the 3 rating which is decent and a lot better than a lot of programs at the time on that network. So there was an interest and an audience. When you consider the production costs of a Nitro program, or any other WCW program, it was considerably less and more profitable than a lot of programs they were showing and are still showing on TBS, TNT or any other Warner stations. If they just made some adjustments and weather the storm, they could have made a turnaround. It might not have happened, but for a company that generated as much income as WCW did for Warner, I think it would have been worth the effort to try and right the ship or do some major restructuring and trying all over again.

The Merger- didn't kill the company. The company really was near death at the point. The merger happens and Turner who had supported WCW had seemingle lost control and AOL Time Warner wanted nothing to do with WCW as it supposedly didn't suit their image. Bischoff and his group had made an offer to buy the company but when they discovered that the tv deal with TNT and TBS was off the table they withdrew their offer. Vince made his pitch for the company and got it. That's what I've heard but I could be wrong. Personally, I would have taken the chance. Buy the company,shop around for a tv deal, do ppvs till such time you can lock up a tv deal like, TNA did.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

Yup I agree with the above^^^

Backstage politics affected the on-air product which eventually de-valued the company.

To me, it all started at Starrcade '97. This should have been the big payoff for the year and a half long NWO storyline. Hogan should have lost... and within the next 3-4 months we would have seen the complete downfall of the NWO. Instead, one year later after Starrcade 98, the NWO was still dominating, and by this point people just stopped tuning in.

They should have built their 98 main event/title scene around:

Crow Sting
One of the hottest things in wrestling at the time of '97. He was rivalling Stone Cold for top babyface.

Bret Hart
Also one of the hottest things in wrestling after being screwed at survivor series. It's amazing that WCW had both Sting and Hart at their hottest times, in the companies peak, and they still managed to screw it up.

Goldberg
He did end up dominating most of the title scene in '98. Like him or not, he was also insanely over at the time. Goldberg ended up saving WCW for a brief period of time in the ratings... Maybe his streak went on too long, but he definitely delayed WCW's inevitable downfall.

Diamond Dallas Page
WCW fans loved DDP. His pops during this time were crazy. If anyone should have gotten the rub by beating Goldberg's streak, it should have been DDP. It would have established him and elevated him to the top.

Chris Jericho
Why not elevate the great stars you have right under your nose. Fresh talent is what pushed WWF forward, and elevating guys like Jericho, DDP and Goldberg, with established main eventers like Sting and Hart, would have been way better than NWO again.

Hollywood Hogan
He is still one of the biggest names in wrestling. He just should not have been dominating the world title picture. And not feuding with Warrior. He put over Sting (barely) and Goldberg. It's a shame his ego ran the show because he should have been used to establish Bret Hart in WCW and elevate DDP or Jericho.

And of course they still had more than enough talent to make up a successful midcard... Such as Big Show/Giant, Benoit, Guerrero, Booker T, Raven, Malenko, Rey Mysterio, Kidman and the rest of the cruiserweights. Not to mention guys like Flair, Luger, Scott Steiner could have been used to establish some of these mid-level guys or new talent coming in like Sean O'Haire, Chuck Palumbo, Shane Helms, etc.

Would this have been enough to compete with Austin, Foley, Rock, HHH and Undertaker? No probably not. But they may not have fallen off a cliff as quickly as they did.

 

[TheTimeTraveler]

I think some people are completely confused about WCW and exactly how much money it was losing. WCW wasn't sold to Bischoff's new group for many reasons. Why would AOL-Time Warner want to sit there and negotiate with Bischoff when Vince offered up cash to immediately end the headache? AOL was already going to be forced to honor some of these bloated contracts even after the death of WCW due to Bischoff's ignorance when he was heading it.

 

[justtxyank]

I think some people are completely confused about WCW and exactly how much money it was losing. WCW wasn't sold to Bischoff's new group for many reasons. Why would AOL-Time Warner want to sit there and negotiate with Bischoff when Vince offered up cash to immediately end the headache? AOL was already going to be forced to honor some of these bloated contracts even after the death of WCW due to Bischoff's ignorance when he was heading it.

I think you are right. Some people are confused. You are one of them.

There was no "sit there and negotiate" to be done. Bischoff's group had the cash. They offered more money, predicated on keeping WCW on the air with Turner. That fell through and Vince stepped in.

Aol-Time Warner lost a lot of money in the deal with Vince.

 

[waylon p]

Do not forget that all those guys with guaranteed contracts still had to be paid, whether or not they were used. If the fussiest deal had gone down, at least aol could have profitted from the millions they were paying guys like hogan, flair, and Nash.

The deal they made only makes sense if you assume that Turner going in a different direction was the reason WCW was put out of our misery. Keeping the show on the network would have allowed them to profit from the respectable ratings they were already pulling, without having to take the financial risks involved. It was a winner for them. But they turned it down to take less money.

 

[Rayne]

Ugh. This thread got bumped, and some people are still living the dream that WCW was a success that was strangled in its sleep. If you still believe that WCW died from any other reason beyond the fact that it was hemorrhaging cash, there's only one question you need to ask.

Why did no one else make an offer for WCW, beyond Eric Bischoff and Vince McMahon?

The Bischoff/Fusient offer was a red herring. It was an offer to buy the company, minus the Time Warner contracts, predicated upon Turner/AOL guaranteeing them television time. They would still be married to the product, they would still continue to lose money if the product didn't turn around; this time less directly, from a failure to maximize advertising revenue. (Ongoing capitalization was an issue that has never been broached publicly- who would be responsible for providing further funding should it be necessary? The option "if that's the case, let the product fail" wouldn't have been any more attractive for Turner/AOL.) Giving a guaranteed television slot is a HUGE caveat that almost no one gets without a long, proven run of success, which is not what WCW was in the middle of in 2000. Typically, when a program isn't making money, the network that airs it has the freedom to not purchase it anymore. Turner/AOL would have had to be damned fools to take this offer. I've always said Eric Bischoff is an absolutely spectacular con artist; I remain convinced that he made this offer so that he could brag that he offered a lot of money to "save" WCW, without mentioning the ridiculous conditions he insisted on.

Vince McMahon then came along and purchased WCW for a price listed between $4-7 million. During the Monday Night Wars, a few top performers were making that per year. At that price, WCW was virtually free. Vince McMahon and Eric Bischoff aren't the only two people in the world with money. They aren't the only people in the television industry with money. So if WCW had this great potential value as a revived product, why didn't anyone else step in with capital? Why were there no other television networks that expressed interest?

Simple answer- WCW wasn't worth anything to anyone except Vince McMahon, who could make use of the tape library. No television executive who values their job would guarantee air space for a significant period of time to a product which had been continuously trending downwards in the ratings. (Ratings are almost everything- they have to be measured against how much the show in question costs to purchase. There's a reason why SpikeTV shows so much crap like "1,000 Ways to Die"- the shows cost almost nothing to produce.)

What killed WCW was horrible fiscal mismanagement, the same thing that kills off plenty of other companies. Once the financial lifeline was pulled away, there was nothing to the company that was worth saving.

 

[braveh]

Why did no one else make an offer for WCW, beyond Eric Bischoff and Vince McMahon?

Because there was no prospect of a tv-deal for WCW. Turner didn't want Nitro, Fox didn't want it (they negotiated), NBC/USA didn't want it (just got rid of raw), CBS/Comcast(just got raw) didn't want it...what companies were left? ABC but they're not going to put Nitro on the network or ESPN.

Looking back I am aghast that no tv-company wanted a 50-week 2 hour cable show that could draw 2 to 4 million viewers. I'm sure that today the tv-companies would fight over a tv-show with that kind of track record.

 

[Rayne]

Because there was no prospect of a tv-deal for WCW. Turner didn't want Nitro, Fox didn't want it (they negotiated), NBC/USA didn't want it (just got rid of raw), CBS/Comcast(just got raw) didn't want it...what companies were left? ABC but they're not going to put Nitro on the network or ESPN.

Looking back I am aghast that no tv-company wanted a 50-week 2 hour cable show that could draw 2 to 4 million viewers. I'm sure that today the tv-companies would fight over a tv-show with that kind of track record.

Exactly that- there was no prospect of a TV deal. Why was there no prospect of a TV deal? No network thought that WCW would make them money.

Remember, it's not "total viewers", it's "viewers vs. cost of production". Live, scripted programming isn't cheap, then add the fact that you're in a different location every week. WCW was still trending downwards at the time of its failure, and a purchase of WCW for any kind of attractive price would leave all of its major stars under contract to Time Warner. With WCW losing money the way they were at the time (like crazy), what network would take the chance on purchasing WCW programming, knowing that they would end up becoming the lender of last resort if WCW didn't turn around their financials?

While Time Warner was willing to be that lender of last resort, WCW stayed afloat; once they started straightening out their financial house after the merger, they were no longer willing to support WCW. It shouldn't be surprising that no one else wanted to be WCW's bank- which was a major, unspoken question mark in the Bischoff/Fusient offer.

The myth that lives on is that WCW got cancelled because television executives just didn't like professional wrestling. It's pedaled by everyone who was in any way shape or form in some form of command of WCW, because dirt sheets just don't care what a television executive has to say, but they'll print every word out of Kevin Nash's mouth. The narrative plays great to an insecure wrestling fan who thinks the world looks down on their form of entertainment, but it doesn't hold up well to financial scrutiny.

 

[braveh]

Exactly that- there was no prospect of a TV deal. Why was there no prospect of a TV deal? No network thought that WCW would make them money.

Remember, it's not "total viewers", it's "viewers vs. cost of production". Live, scripted programming isn't cheap, then add the fact that you're in a different location every week. WCW was still trending downwards at the time of its failure, and a purchase of WCW for any kind of attractive price would leave all of its major stars under contract to Time Warner. With WCW losing money the way they were at the time (like crazy), what network would take the chance on purchasing WCW programming, knowing that they would end up becoming the lender of last resort if WCW didn't turn around their financials?

While Time Warner was willing to be that lender of last resort, WCW stayed afloat; once they started straightening out their financial house after the merger, they were no longer willing to support WCW. It shouldn't be surprising that no one else wanted to be WCW's bank- which was a major, unspoken question mark in the Bischoff/Fusient offer.

The myth that lives on is that WCW got cancelled because television executives just didn't like professional wrestling. It's pedaled by everyone who was in any way shape or form in some form of command of WCW, because dirt sheets just don't care what a television executive has to say, but they'll print every word out of Kevin Nash's mouth. The narrative plays great to an insecure wrestling fan who thinks the world looks down on their form of entertainment, but it doesn't hold up well to financial scrutiny.

No, no. Why would the network be the lender of last resort? Fox were never in the process of buying WCW. WCW would've been an independent company but they obviously needed a long term commitment from a network.

edit: that's how I understood it.

 

[Rayne]

No, no. Why would the network be the lender of last resort? Fox were never in the process of buying WCW. WCW would've been an independent company but they obviously needed a long term commitment from a network.

Because if WCW were to run out of operating capital- which they did when the Turner/AOL lifeline was cut- they would either need to find someone to fund them, or go bankrupt.

Going bankrupt would be an unacceptable option for a network hosting WCW. That leaves a large hole in their programming, which is advertising that isn't sold. You also have commitments to advertisers who had purchased programming during WCW's time slots that you would have to renege on. Those advertising contracts typically have penalty clauses built into them if you're unable to provide the slot you've offered. As well, a large professional wrestling program is usually a tentpole program for a network- a show which draws people in and gets them to watch other programming on your network. Losing WCW suddenly via bankruptcy would result in losing a program which you use to promote your entire network.

Independent companies aren't absolutely independent, unless they're bankrolled by someone with very large amounts of money that they don't mind losing. They require operating capital from some source. If a bank won't provide it- as they obviously wouldn't when WCW folded, else we'd still be talking about WCW in the present tense- the next, and final source for looking for that funding would be relying on the television network's mutual interest in your program's success.

The reason they couldn't acquire a long-term commitment from a network was that there were no networks who felt WCW could be successful, long-term, without relying on further investment from them.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Hey I see Rayne, silly bugger!

I was under the influence that many factors killed WCW.

The bloated nWo, stupid-ass matches like Hogan/Flair at Uncensored, horrible storylines letting stellar mid-card talent to leave and just nonsense people getting pushes.


All this resulted in WCW's crass presentation and people started changing the channel. Ratings slumped and all the money used to produce the show was now a wound that wouldn't stop bleeding. And fuck's sake THUNDER WAS STILL ALIVE! Good god, if people thought Nitro was shit, I remember catching some Thunder back in the day. Now that was some rancid shit.


Anyway, I did buy into the fact that AOL didn't want WCW, but it didn't complete sense because if a company was making just making a turnover in the hundreds of millions just year ago, why would they think it was beneath them. An empire is not built on morals.

But were they in now way attached to the product? Yes. Did they think it was uncooth? Yes. Turner had a soft spot for wrestling and would give it another shot if he could, but thats about it.

The new execs didn't like the product AND it was spiraling downwards, in content and viewership against Raw; one sees why they sold it.

 

[justtxyank]

Exactly that- there was no prospect of a TV deal. Why was there no prospect of a TV deal? No network thought that WCW would make them money.

This combined with your last sentence about it not being true that networks look down on wrestling are just patently false. Networks were absolutely shying away from professional wrestling because there has long been a stigma associated with putting wrestling on your network.

It shouldn't be surprising that no one else wanted to be WCW's bank- which was a major, unspoken question mark in the Bischoff/Fusient offer.

1) Nobody knew how cheap WCW was. Nobody. Ric Flair and many others have said that had they known how cheap it was going to sell for they would have purchased it. Jerry Jarrett did want to purchase it and claims to have been prepared to offer more than what Vince got it for.

2) No entertainment company, ie Fusient, was going to purchase it if they couldn't put it on television. And they couldn't. TNA ended up on television with Fox Sports a short while later with NO TRACK RECORD AT ALL of ratings success. At the time this deal was happening though, there was literally not a single network that was going to put them on tv. That took out the prospect of an offer bankrolled by an entertainment company.

The myth that lives on is that WCW got cancelled because television executives just didn't like professional wrestling. It's pedaled by everyone who was in any way shape or form in some form of command of WCW, because dirt sheets just don't care what a television executive has to say, but they'll print every word out of Kevin Nash's mouth. The narrative plays great to an insecure wrestling fan who thinks the world looks down on their form of entertainment, but it doesn't hold up well to financial scrutiny.

A lot of things contributed to WCW's death. The biggest one being that it was owned by a media group that decided it wanted out of wrestling. However, the idea that television executives DIDN'T have an agenda against wrestling is ridiculous. Ask McMahon. He purchased WCW with the intention of putting it on air as it's own program under the WWF banner. He couldn't get the network airing his programs to do it for him though. Nobody wanted more wrestling!

 

[Rayne]

1) Nobody knew how cheap WCW was. Nobody. Ric Flair and many others have said that had they known how cheap it was going to sell for they would have purchased it. Jerry Jarrett did want to purchase it and claims to have been prepared to offer more than what Vince got it for.

Ric Flair says a lot of things about money. However, right after he says them, he usually has to go to someone else and ask for a loan against his next performance. If Jerry Jarrett was prepared to offer more, with the network deal that would have to accompany a purchase, where was he at the time? It was no secret to anyone that WCW was looking for a new buyer, the surprise to people was that Vince McMahon turned out to be the buyer. If people say today that they were prepared to offer more money back then- then where were they at the time? They just didn't feel like making an offer?

In the absence of a network deal, Vince McMahon was the only buyer who made sense. You couldn't just unwind WCW into a regional promotion without a TV deal, unless you were just interested in the initials. The only thing of any value in WCW, once you strip it down for components, was the tape library, which is what Vince purchased it for. I'd say he's made back his investment cost.

2) No entertainment company, ie Fusient, was going to purchase it if they couldn't put it on television. And they couldn't. TNA ended up on television with Fox Sports a short while later with NO TRACK RECORD AT ALL of ratings success. At the time this deal was happening though, there was literally not a single network that was going to put them on tv. That took out the prospect of an offer bankrolled by an entertainment company.

Yes, that's kind of the point of my post. TNA had no record of ratings, period, and got a crappy slot on a sports network with- especially at the time- very poor market penetration. (Fox Sports Network was at the time very new.) WCW had a negative record of ratings, was trending downwards, was in very obvious financial trouble, and had no leadership. That's not a vendetta against professional wrestling, that's a vendetta against... shitty programming that doesn't make money, and will be turning around in a year to ask you for bankroll.

A lot of things contributed to WCW's death. The biggest one being that it was owned by a media group that decided it wanted out of wrestling. However, the idea that television executives DIDN'T have an agenda against wrestling is ridiculous. Ask McMahon. He purchased WCW with the intention of putting it on air as it's own program under the WWF banner. He couldn't get the network airing his programs to do it for him though. Nobody wanted more wrestling!

Why do you believe Vince had the intention to keep alive WCW as a separate brand, because he said he did? Merger 101: The first piece of PR you put out during a merger is about how nothing is going to change, that the two companies will coexist side by side, no one will lose their job, etc., etc. Meanwhile, you start stripping away the parts of the absorbed company that you don't want, while merging the parts that you do want into your own company. Ask anyone who's ever read a business page in a newspaper.


It comes back to The Narrative. Of course WCW was owned by a media group that wanted out of professional wrestling, the key is answering "why". People who believe in The Narrative insist that Turner/AOL wanted out of professional wrestling because those dang-blasted media executives just didn't like 'wrasslin! People whose brains work past "well this guy said" explanations understand that professional wrestling is a business, just like any other, and when a business is losing lots of money, it ends up shutting down.