I do not want to hear about those interviews WWE set up. The producers are like three feet away holding the wrestler's kid or sumthin hostage to assure the statements are pro-WWE. Everytime I watched them it seems like they go out of their way to condemn WCW just to look good to Vince. Or they are bitter about mid card status. When did any of those boneheads speak up or try to help WCW or the business? EXACTLY! THEY NEVER DID! They sure did like not having to work that Nitro, even if they did get flown in for nothing.
Nobody needs to hold anyone hostage to bash on WCW, it's failings were widely reported and very well-known. And I wasn't even talking about interviews on WWE DVDs. There are literally hundreds of shoot interviews out there. Just YouTube "shoot interviews WCW" and you'll get a whole bunch of people (including the ones who made the most money and had the most to lose) talking about it's faults. And plenty of people tried to speak up and help WCW while they were being mistreated. Like I said, go read Mick Foley's book. Bret Hart's book. Chris Jericho's book. Rey Mysterio's book. They all talk about trying to speak up, to offer storyline options that would make sense, booking decisions that were rationale and made not only them, but their opponent and the company look good. They tried to constantly to convince management that the decisions they were making would make everyone come out looking bad. Even Eric Bischoff's book talks about his constant struggles with business people that thought they knew anything about the wrestling business.
You're proving every time you post that you are COMPLETELY ignorant to the wrestling business and to the way WCW is proven factually to have operated.
These observers would look at all companies to see if they offerd similar stars and stories.
WCW was still operating as a territory-like business in the early 90s, bro. It looked like a half-assed Southern-man project and was being broadcast out Walt Disneyworld. Nobody wanted to look at it to compare because barely anyone knew it existed and those that did thought it looked like a cheap promotion.
Surely other companies would atleast experience a few fluctuations.. Thats what you had implied.
I implicated nothing of the sort. I said WWF, WCW and ECW all experienced increases in viewers during the Monday Night Wars wrestling was at its biggest boom period and all three companies marketed to that. However, while two still got "high" ratings as we'd view them in comparison to today, those same two companies also faltered and failed because they didn't know how to maintain their product. WWF did, so they stayed around.
your last sentence contradicts your own stance. It also means that companies must work on themselves and not ride the coat tails of others. This does not bode well for you TNA apologists who are always looking for excuses to excuse the struggling product.
I'm not a TNA Apologist, so I don't know what you're talking about here. I also didn't contract any of my argument. I think you're having trouble keeping up here, bra.
So your books have proof Nitro wasn't TNT's top show and WCW in 2001 was doing worser then TNA today?
The Death Of WCW by R.D. Reynolds & Bryan Alvarez does, yes. It's definitely a must-read for any wrestling fan, especially one that tries to argue about WCW. Controversy Creates Ca$h by Eric Bischoff also slightly goes into the ratings and sales of WCW during late 98 (when they were overtaken in the ratings war), all of '99 til September (when he was fired) and mid 2000 (when he came back for a few weeks, but eventually left because the company was in shambles and couldn't be saved).
It was like a better version of Jakked and they did for awile talk about the ppv but the show featured raw and smackdown highlights and two are three matches. Such epic bouts as K-Kwik's quest for the hardcore title..Yea Thunder started out strong but it fail off early too. Just like with WWECW the innitial showz were designed to get you hooked. Classic bait and switch. In 1998 WCW still had too much action for Nitro to contain...
Nobody said epic bouts, just a demonstration of the undercard that most people don't get to see (and that are generally underappreciated), but you need to understand what the purpose of a highlight show is and Heat did not start as one of them. WWF had Shotgun Saturday Night as a highlight show running til summer of 99, WWF LiveWire running until 2001 and WWF Superstars running until mid 2000. That's three highlight shows going from the time Heat was around. When it started, Heat was about wrestling & building up PPVs, it wasn't until other shows were cancelled and everything was consolidated that it became the flashback show. In like 2002.
And you still don't seem to get the purpose of Thunder. There was no bait and switch. It wasn't "too much action for Nitro to contain." At the time, WCW had a Monday night show and a Saturday night show. Saturday night is an awful TV slot for anyone, because barely anyone watches TV on Saturday, they're out enjoying a Saturday night. They wanted a second show (just like Vince would later want for WWF), they wanted a better position in the week, but still not too close to Nitro. Thursday Thunder. It wasn't for overfill or excess, it was for making more money by having a new show in a new timeslot. Like I said, it's the equivalent to Smackdown when it started. It didn't fall off early, either... Bret Hart performed consistently on Thunder through 1999, along with the likes of Chris Benoit, Booker T and Randy Savage. Not exactly small names there, bro.
WHY ARE THE WRESTLERS WHO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF WCW working for TNA if they are mere blood suckers?
Because Dixie Carter and her father don't know anything about wrestling, they're naive and completely ignorant to the business they have partial ownership in. So when a notorious liar and manipulator like Hulk Hogan comes and says he'll sign with them and improve their business and make a name out of the company, they cream their pants. Without even looking into his history. Same thing happened when they signed Vince Russo.
Mick Foley did not leave WCW on good terms.
Yeah, he did. Go read "Have A Nice Day!: A Tale Of Blood & Sweatsocks" by Mick Foley. Here is a direct quote from his book,
"I was in the shower, cleansing not only my body, but three years of memories, when Bischoff approached me. He thanked me for my effort, and told me if I behaved myself, Id be welcome to come back at a later time. He hugged me, and, while the hot water produced its steamy fog around us, we held each other for a long, long time.
Come on, you didnt really buy that, did you? No, there was no shower, no steam, no hug, and no holding for a long, long time. Actually, he caught up to me as I was walking out the door.
He did thank me, did tell me I could come back, and then shook my hand. I then walked out into the cool, autumn breeze-a free man."
Eric Bischoff confirmed in his book and in shoot interviews that Cactus Jack did not leave WCW under any issues other than creative differences.
I would live to see the Nitro ratings fron 1995 and Saturday Night's from 1991-5 and see how Impact matches up. I would like to see Clash of the Champion ratings against Impact ratings. It took them five years to recover if it was that bad and TNA is nearly ten. How many people even had ppv access when WCW started out? Your numbers arent in historical context
Yes, they are. You're more than welcome to pick up issues of The Wrestling Observer from 1990 to 1995 that offer ratings for all wrestling programs during that time. Impact's ratings & buyrates the past ten years can be found with a simple Google search. The Death Of WCW, as I mentioned earlier, lists extensive numbers WCW's last years. Do some research and educate yourself on the subject before you argue about it, don't just read a Wiki page and think you've got it all down.
**Bleh, cut out that Disneyworld part, that's what I get for writing after taking my Ambien. They were simply operating out of stages with cheer/boo signs.
