Stevie Richards Blasts Hogan & Bischoff

[shattered dreams]

Actually I do know how much Hulk Hogan makes in TNA. If you bothered to do a little bit of research yourself, maybe you wouldn't sound like you're on TNA's payroll all the time. Hogan makes $30,000 per appearance on TNA television according to a report put out by the Wrestling Observer Newsletter about a year ago. If he appears on TNA television each week, that comes to well over a million dollars. While not confirmed, it's thought that Hogan gets more if he makes an appearance on a pay-per-view. If Hogan & Bischoff were bringing in big business in TNA, then TNA would shout it from the roof tops, privately held company or not, just like they do whenever they accomplish anything no matter how grand or insignificant. So save all the you don't get the business bullshit until you bother to actually get your facts straight.

Since when did googled dirt sheets become researching facts? If you are so in to facts then why don't you do some more research and provide me an estimate of what Hogan brings in to TNA. That is the far more important part of the equation that no one seems to want to discuss in an educated manner. Instead opting for silly intangible statements like must be less because I am awesome and this is my opinion.

Tangible successes aren't "I like the product more!" They aren't "I think this guy is responsible for this." That's intangible. I am looking at things at which anyone can see and say "this is better than that". We have ratings information in the US, which is flat.The information we have been repeatedly expected to accept about the international market is "of course it's up, they say it is!" We don't have merchandising information, but you've already expected me to believe that Hulk Hogan must have improved that, based on absolutely nothing.

No, I expect you to believe Hogan moves more merchandise than Stevie Richards for example. You can easily make an educated guess about this type of thing in much the same way that we have a good guess of who does well with merch in WWE. We don't have the specific numbers but that shouldn't be an excuse to ignore clear differences. I think it might come down to fundamentally how our brains work. I have a lot of interest and formal training in predicting under uncertainty. You are coming at it from your background. What I don't understand is why you consistently ignore things that you do know matter quite a bit in the name of not actually knowing them for sure. You know who does know all of the things you wish you knew? That "money mark."

I can point to stagnant ratings in this country as a sign of TNA's lack of growth. I have actual figures I can point to. You have "the international market", but no figures there. You have Hogan's "track record of success", which doesn't say anything about what he's done over the past two years. You have "Bischoff's ideas". You have "increased merchandising", but absolutely no evidence to back that up- which, in fact, would fly in the face of the rule-of-thumb that says merchandise sales roughly correlate to television ratings. You have your "more programming deals"- and here's where your lack of business sense is showing- they don't necessarily even imply more money. The quality of those deals is far more important than how many of them that you have. (Seriously, don't talk to me about the merits of risk-taking in business. I literally gut-laughed. You're out of your element on THAT one, Donny.)

I have heard your rule of thumb before and think it is a terrible rule of thumb for the wrestling industry. By your logic TNA moved the same merch with random wrestler X opposed to what Jeff Hardy moves.

As far as quality of deals go. Of course that matters but at some point even you have to admit that it is unlikely these deals are leading to less money. They are taking a product they already have created and simply selling it to more places. They weren't getting any money for the product in these areas of the world and now they are likely getting some. The quality is most important but that doesn't make them irrelevant. To suggest there is no evidence that TNA is improving internationally is silly IMO. How much is certainly debatable/unknown but that is no grounds to dismiss it entirely.

I have actual numbers, which are representative of actual people viewing a product. Look, you've always had a hard-on for defending TNA, even when they didn't deserve it. Like I said two years ago, Hogan and Bischoff were going to worm their way so deeply into TNA that the ignorant would be unable to tell the difference between the two, and that's come to pass. You can support TNA without supporting the Hulk and Eric Show! All it requires you to do is be honest about the state of the product, instead of constantly trying to sell people on it. You don't work there, quit working for them.

I am not trying to sell anything other than for people to look beyond an overly simplistic number that isn't particularly hip with the times and consider the bigger picture. Hell, you know much better than me that because of how those deals work it isn't like the week to week ratings have any bearing on TNA financially. The longer term stuff is important to an extent but even then it is much more complicated than you are claiming.

Hogan still does and gets more mainstream press than anyone in the company. Are we really pretending that has no value?

You also completely misunderstand the concept of "reasonable doubt" and how it applies to two people expressing opinions. We are not in a United States court of law; Hulk Hogan doesn't get to continue being a leech simply because it can't be conclusively proven that he is. Saying "your opinion might not be completely true... so people should believe that mine is!" is only an effective debate technique amongst the impotent and ignorant.

Actually I would say that claiming you are correct because the numbers to prove you wrong don't exist as common knowledge (even though they do exist in actuality and the people making these decisions have access to all of them) is ignorant. What if my opinion is simply that you made a statement that you can't support without rampant conjecture and oversimplification, ironically the same thing you are accusing me of doing as you continually misinterpret my opinion on the subject. I hope Dixie gets some gut busters out of your business "savvy." You mistake this as a debate between me and you. If you want to claim you win the bar room discussion then I could care less but you seem to be glossing over your real claim. You suggest that you know how to run TNA better than Dixie Carter does. I find that highly amusing since your only evidence is the US rating and the only thing you really know about her is what disgruntled wrestlers claim. You are the same as the wrestlers that think they know it all because they have some expertise in one of the areas that are important in running such a business. The problem is that understanding the whole picture is what really matters and you seem content to ignore most of it in this case.

 

[Rayne]

Be amused by evidence all you want. I'm the one between the two of us who's actually using it. I'm just as amused by the fact that you expect people to believe whatever you say about TNA because anything else can't be absolutely, conclusively proven.

But you've got the "big picture", brother! We should overlook things like statistics that are available and focus on how Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff have changed TNA! You can see Bischoff's ideas! That's what's important- not actual sales figures. Which, again, you are expecting people to assume that they are up, despite all available evidence suggesting that they are flat. And despite all available evidence that Hulk Hogan is, indeed, not working for Stevie Richards money. Since people can't know. Is that right?

Hogan still does and gets more mainstream press than anyone in the company. Are we really pretending that has no value?

Are we really pretending that the press he's getting them is doing anything for the company? If you're so adamant that has value, where's what you can actually point to that demonstrates that it does? Hate to break your Hogan crush, but besides TNA, the "mainstream press" Hulk Hogan has is ads for Rent-a-Center and collect calling companies. If he even still does those. Or we could talk about the reality shows that disappeared after a season, perhaps?

If you've got any actual figures to show, or anything real that people can look at, this might be an "interesting discussion" as you put it, but right now it's turning into a bit of a one-sided firing gallery.

I got another gutlaugh when you accused Jack-Hammer of sinking to looking up facts online, btw. This one is not going well for you. Intangibles, brother!

 

[shattered dreams]

Be amused by evidence all you want. I'm the one between the two of us who's actually using it. I'm just as amused by the fact that you expect people to believe whatever you say about TNA because anything else can't be absolutely, conclusively proven.

Would you care to recite what you think it is that I want people to believe? Legitimately curious just how much you have warped it in your mind at this point.

But you've got the "big picture", brother! We should overlook things like statistics that are available and focus on how Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff have changed TNA! You can see Bischoff's ideas! That's what's important- not actual sales figures. Which, again, you are expecting people to assume that they are up, despite all available evidence suggesting that they are flat. And despite all available evidence that Hulk Hogan is, indeed, not working for Stevie Richards money. Since people can't know. Is that right?

I said the Bischoff ideas comment in response to something I thought you were suggesting the two having no tangible success beyond just TNA. Your use of "all evidence" is hilarious. When Jack-hammer throws out conjecture at best about how TNA would be shouting from the rooftops you say he is dropping pipe bombs yet you just purposefully ignore everything I say that doesn't have an actual number attached to it. Interesting double standard. I look at this whole thing much like Rayne is in a smarky crowd chanting fire Russo and high fiving Jack-hammer about how cool they are for believing what their heroes the wrestler have sold to the IWC. Meanwhile Dixie Carter doesn't have to be a Mensa member to know who actually came up with what is getting blasted and news flash it wasn't Russo. But shattered the only thing we actually know is Russo has a large amount of say in creative. Exactly, that is the only thing.

Are we really pretending that the press he's getting them is doing anything for the company? If you're so adamant that has value, where's what you can actually point to that demonstrates that it does? Hate to break your Hogan crush, but besides TNA, the "mainstream press" Hulk Hogan has is ads for Rent-a-Center and collect calling companies. If he even still does those. Or we could talk about the reality shows that disappeared after a season, perhaps?

Who that is in TNA is doing more than that in the mainstream? You act like the A list is lining up to help TNA with its marketing issues. Now saying Hogan isn't worthless means you have a crush on him? I think you need to reevaluate how much your hate crush taints your opinions.

If you've got any actual figures to show, or anything real that people can look at, this might be an "interesting discussion" as you put it, but right now it's turning into a bit of a one-sided firing gallery.

What was the TNA payroll before Hogan came in and after? I think it is hilarious you are suggesting you have sufficient hard evidence to prove your point. You have one piece of the puzzle and don't even know the specific implications other than an "educated" guess. You keep using your lack of knowledge as the main reason you are correct while criticizing me for all the things I don't know. The best part is you are completely blind to the hypocrisy.

Please educate me more about how you figured out the financial situation of TNA better than those in charge of the company simply by reading one number on the Internet. You know what I know, which is practically nothing. I don't know enough to prove anything about their financial condition just like you don't. The difference is one of is claiming they do and in case you haven't noticed it isn't me.

I got another gutlaugh when you accused Jack-Hammer of sinking to looking up facts online, btw. This one is not going well for you. Intangibles, brother!

Are you seriously suggesting what dirt sheets report are facts?