No compete policy

[cwcanno]

I have thought about this a lot over the past few years and can see the good and bad in it. Now days, when wrestling companies sign new talent (or old talent) always work in the "90 days No Compete" clause in their contract. Now I can definitely understand the reason after watching the Monday Night Wars.

But was that the best solution they could come up with? I can understand why. Take the wind from their sails before they move on to another promotion. Prevent superstars from taking a title to another promotion. But, couldn't they write that into the contract?

Instead of the "90-day No Compete" , couldn't they make the "Can't take My Title Anywhere Else" clause.

I know it sounds stupid at first, but the entertainment of wrestling has been taken away a bit. The competition does not have enough shock value when bringing in a wrestler from another promotion. In their 90-days the internet is already all over the story.

So, I guess my question is...Should promotions take away the 90-day No Compete clause? And come up with something else to protect their company?

 

[#hamler]

The competition does not have enough shock value when bringing in a wrestler from another promotion. In their 90-days the internet is already all over the story.

Wrestling companies don't care about other wrestling companies.... well most don't. Most of the wrestling companies who use the 90 Day No Complete Clause are in business for themseleves. Their wrestlers don't roam the country looking to be booked in a match in front of 50 people. They don't care whether the other company will get a little shock-value from one of their wrestler's showing up. There's nothing wrong with the 90 Day No Compete Clause. Would you want your emloyees showing up on a rival promotion the day after you gave them a World Title opportunity? I wouldn't. It isn't necessarily about the titles more so about "we don't want to give you the momentum we've built up for said superstar."

 

[One to Remember]

You won't have ur name, theme music,archival footage, or a history.. After the loss of those things why take even more away from the supposed independent contractors we call pro wrestlers? If the new company is big enough and the steam from jumping ship propels them far enough i'd just breach it anyways and let my new employer's legal team hammer it out. It might cost the wrestler fifty Gs but who cares if your big enough from past momentum to sell out arenas with 65k seats and make 125,000 bux annually.

As far as titles are concerned it does nothing . Madusa still dropped her WWF Womens' title in a garbage can on Nitro and 89 days after the fact we were still callin that shit a good burn.. so yeah..

 

[Peoples_Champ]

90-day non-compete clauses are a bit mild. The corporate world often has 5-year non-compete clauses for CEOs, where they can't work for a competitor in their industry for 5 years.

Considering how athletes can use dirtsheets, websites like Wrestlezone, twitter, facebook and youtube to interact with fans and keep their personal brand high, 90 days isn't too bad.

 

[One to Remember]

90-day non-compete clauses are a bit mild. The corporate world often has 5-year non-compete clauses for CEOs, where they can't work for a competitor in their industry for 5 years.

Considering how athletes can use dirtsheets, websites like Wrestlezone, twitter, facebook and youtube to interact with fans and keep their personal brand high, 90 days isn't too bad.

Most wrestlers arent privy to the type of infothat would say make it a bad idea for the ex CEO of IBM to become the new CEO of Dell. I hope WWE has assured their released or departed employees that they will be able to pay rent and eat for those three months. Who is to say that this supposed momentum built up from the former company wasn't the wrestler's on doing? Who is to say WWE or whoever wasn't stunting growth triggering the departure? Wrestlers need better lawyers and more protection.

 

[Dagger Dias]

The 90 day no compete clause can be annoying when one is impatient on waiting to see someone from WWE's future endeavoured list start a TNA run. We will never again see shocking federation jumps the way we did during the Raw/Nitro war, but it is better for the companies because they won't have to worry about someone taking the momentum or even any of their titles when they jump to another federation. Annoying as it may be, it is a necessary evil.

 

[FlairFan2003]

This whole thing was invented in the 90's to protect the companies from being burned by talent working for rival promotions. It was not as evident even in the 80's between NWA & WWF.

There were some embarrassing incidents such as Luger walking out on the debut Nitro the night after working SummerSlam, Rick Rude's simultaneous appearance on RAW & Nitro trashing the WWE live while they showed him taped from a week earlier, and of course having the big gold belt paraded around WWE TV proclaiming the arrival of "The Real World's Champion" even as fans were boycoting WCW shows because the just fired "The Real World's Champion".

Today, with no major US outlet to go too the clause does little. In 1999 it meant a lot. However if Vince let it go and someone started a promotion that became a national sucess (much bigger than TNA right now) then it might be hard to bring it back, guys would fight against it. For the sake of his business practice if Im Vince Im keeping the clause.