Round 6: Riaku -vs- Digging4Plunder

[D-Man]

Paul Heyman strongly believe the lack of a TV deal was the main cause of ECW’s demise, is this statement true?

This is a sixth round match in the Debater's League. Riaku is the home debater and gets to choose which side of the debate they will be on and who debates first, but they have 24 hours to make their choice.

This thread is for DEBATERS ONLY and will end on Friday at 2pm EST.

Anyone that posts in this thread besides the debaters, league admins, and judges will be infracted!

Good luck.​

 

[ABMorales787]

I'll go second and choice that Paul Heyman strongly believes the lack of a TV deal was the main cause of ECW’s demise, is not true.

 

[ABMorales787]

Well it's been well over 24 hours and my opponent isn't here. I guess I'll go then.

Apparently, Paul Heyman believes ECW died because it never really had a good national TV deal. I cry bullshit. ECW left NWA and went solo in 1994. It started with Shane Douglas' infamous tossing of the NWA title and the rest was hardcore history. They plugged their first PPV supercard event in 1997, Barely Legal. That alone says something. A small indy company with a TV deal that only got small late night exposure (around 2 a.m.) in Philly and NYC, somehow got to plug a national PPV. Not just one, actually. They had one every 2 or so months. About one every month or more. That means it was getting revenue via PPV buys. If you know your wrestling, you know this is one of WWE and TNA's main revenue sources. ECW went for 6 years without a national TV deal. I find it funny that those 6 years happen to be the bulk of their popularity. The company rose in fame even more with their 4 week stint on WWF's Monday Night RAW. Still no national TV deal back then. Yet you had the Manhattan Center crowded with ECW fan's and their signature chants. Clearly, ECW did not need a TV deal to live.

I'll leave it here for now. I'll wait until tomorrow for a response, if not, I continue.

 

[ABMorales787]

I guess I'll pick up where I left off then.

Paul Heyman wasn't exactly a financial or business guy. He really didn't do good deals. He had problems just to get his first ECW PPV running. As a matter of fact, there were times where the ECW alumni would go for months without a paycheck. Let's just take a look at what left ECW crumbling just a few months after the deal with TNN fell:

In August 1999, ECW began to broadcast nationally on TNN (for what was initially a three year contract). Despite no advertising and a low budget, ECW became TNN's highest rated show. ECW on TNN was canceled in October 2000 (with the final episode airing on October 6, 2000) in favor of WWF Raw moving to the network. On the The Rise and Fall of ECW DVD, Paul Heyman stated that he strongly believed that the lack of a national television deal (especially after the TNN ordeal) was the main cause of ECW's demise.


ECW struggled for months after the cancellation, trying to secure a new national TV deal. On December 30, 2000, ECW Hardcore TV aired for the last time and Guilty as Charged in 2001 was the last PPV aired on January 7, 2001. Living Dangerously was scheduled to air on March 11, 2001, but because of financial trouble it was canceled before March 11. Despite help from the WWF, Heyman could not get out of financial trouble and filed for bankruptcy on April 4, 2001. Heyman supposedly had never told his wrestlers that the company was on its dying legs and was unable to pay them for well over a month before finally filing for bankruptcy.

The company was listed as having assets totaling $1,385,500. Included in that number was $860,000 in accounts receivable owed the company by In Demand Network (PPV), Acclaim (video games), and Original San Francisco Toy Company (action figures). The balance of the assets were the video tape library ($500,000), a 1998 Ford Truck ($19,500) and the remaining inventory of merchandise ($4). The liabilities of the company totaled $8,881,435.17. The bankruptcy filing included hundreds of claims, including production companies, buildings ECW ran in, TV stations ECW was televised on, travel agencies, phone companies, attorney's fees, wrestlers, and other talent. Wrestlers and talent were listed, with amounts owed ranging from $1 for Sabu and Steve Corino to hundreds, and in some cases, thousands of dollars. The highest amounts owed to talents were Rob Van Dam ($150,000), Tommy Dreamer ($125,000), Joey Styles ($50,000), Shane Douglas ($48,000), and Francine Fournier ($47,875). These assets were eventually purchased by the WWF, now World Wrestling Entertainment

They had their competition holding them up. Unbelievable. You would never see that done to WCW or to TNA. Probably because they don't (didn't) need it. No matter what ECW did, they were falling in the pit of debt. No way would TV deal save them. And it was for many reasons.

1) Most importantly, they were not suitable programing for prime time TV.

2) They had a bad reputation when doing business.

3) Carried many problems from past incidents such as the "Mass Transit" Incident the "Sandman Crucifixion" and the Mick Foley/Terry Funk Heat Wave chair incident.

Let's put it blunt. They could've probably survived by a limb, if a major prime time network, like CBS, ABC or FOX picked them up. But do you really think they would be with their current image? Do you really think they would have the same appeal if it were censored to fit said air time? NO! ECW hammered the first few nails on its coffin with it's bad business decisions. Sooner or later, the casket would be shut. A TV deal would and did prolong it. No matter how, ECW was gonna fall. By debt or loss of appeal.


I'll leave it here for now.

 

[ABMorales787]

Speaking of hammering caskets shut, I think I should end this with a closing argument. I'll recap everything said via bullet points as I see no reason repeat myself for a 4th occasion.

Why would ECW not survive without a TV deal?

• It would've and was shortening their funds. They needed a major financial backer. A major network company would definably fit that bill. However, one would wonder just how far would said company go for the raunchy bunch.

• The exposure would've helped with the selling of PPV's. Sadly the PPV companies owed from previous events.

Why would ECW not survive, even with a TV deal?

• Before TNN picked them up, they were having lots of problems. Past incidents causing legal issues, PPV companies, toy companies and videogame companies owed them money and Paul Heyman was occasionally "forgetting" pay day. That among other things.

• They had one with TNN. They were given small funds, a late slot and no advertising. The result, they were TNN's highest rated show. To add to the results, they were scrapped in favor of Monday Night RAW. ECW on TNN, while successful within TNN, made zero impact outside of it.

• They are not "TV appropriate". This is a company that lived on ultra-violence and "Sunday language". Do you really believe a major TV deal would fall on them without it involving heavy censoring? How would Extreme Championship Wrestling look without the "Extreme"? Let's ask WWE's ECW brand. Wait, where is it? Oh, right. Dead as well.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

Riaku wins all 5 points by default.

 

[Miko]

KilljoyKu 5 - 0 in a truly heated debate

 

[Phoenix]

Riaku gets 5 points from me. He is the victor on 20 points to Digging4Plunder's 0.