So now you are agreeing that there was a time that WCW had a consistent leader, even though you stated otherwise earlier.
Really? Let's go back to what I stated earlier...
IC25 said:
Eric Bischoff received different rules from different bosses and execs as a result of the merger. Despite a downturn, Vince McMahon remained the leader of WWF and didn't have to answer to people at Time Warner or anywhere. Yet another reason the merger was a bigger reason for the failure of WCW - the removal of consistent, top-level executive leadership in WCW after the merge. Prior to the merge, when Eric worked with Ted Turner, they succeeded. He had money, he had creative freedom. The merger ended that.
So what I said is quite clear. When Eric was getting his signals from Turner, they had consistent leadership. When the Time Warner merger gave Eric some new bosses, the signals became mixed and the leadership was no longer consistent.
I've said the same thing the entire time. If you're going to accuse me of contradicting myself, at least be able to back it up.
To recap- Pre merger, WCW had some form of consistent leadership with Eric Bischoff, and that enabled them to get on prime time, sign Hogan, Savage, Luger, Hall, and Nash, as well as the Cruiserweights, and successfully make a solid run at the WWF. When the merger occured, the leadership was forced into a constant state of flux, and that inconsistency ruined the company. So again - DOWNFALL of WCW = MERGER.
And this is where I completely disagree. You say they were organized
but where they really?
Yes, they were. Said organization allowed them to get a live program on prime time Monday Nights, sign away WWF's top stars, develop the mid-card and cruiserweights, build your talent via the Power Plant, market the involvement of main stream stars such as Dennis Rodman and Jay Leno, etc.
I would have to disagree with this. The downturn came when WWF was rising in popularity because WCW was just re-doing things like the multiple re-incarnations of the nWo for instance. WWF was putting out a great fresh product while WCW was just stale and people were just bored of seeing the same damn things over and over and over
and over.
I know, I've already said this. But the part you're leaving out, most likely because it is detrimental to your argument, is the fact that WCW kept recycling storylines BECAUSE of the fact that the post-merger Time Warner execs essentially handcuffed Eric Bischoff from using pro wrestling's movement to the attitude era in WCW. As a result, his creative ideas got scrapped because of the "brand image" Time Warner wanted to maintain.
Here is the thing though
WCW was doing great business for a nice period of time and he was allowed to do what he wanted as long as he was making a profit. But once the company starting losing money because of his booking of the shows, the higher-ups had to step in and do something about it because they were losing millions and millions of dollars. What else would you have expected them to do? Just sit there and see the millions go down the drain because of WCW?
The "higher ups" stepped in before they started losing money, though, ST. They didn't give Eric carte blanche and then jump in when the money was on the way out. Even when WCW was profitable, Time Warner was concered about the overall effect professional wrestling was having on its brand.
And businesses do not close because they have a couple down years. Look at GM and Ford. They've had quite a few down years, but they didn't scrap everything, did they? No, they assessed where things were going, made changes, and kept moving. Why? Because the people in charge were committed to the product and the company. When the Time Warner merger occured, people atop WCW (aside from Turner) were not committed to the pro wrestling program, and that showed in funding. When WCW had some down years, Time Warner didn't come in and help fix it. They did everything they could to shut it down and sell it off.
When WWF needed some money to expand, Vince McMahon was able to make the decision, because HE supported the company, and HE was the one with the power to make the decision. WWF went public, sold an IPO, and had millions in capital to work with. WCW had nobody to turn to, not because of internal bullshit, but because the folks at Time Warner and later AOL Time Warner didn't give a lick. Do you think the billionaire execs wo were now in control actually cared if Billy Kidman was the US Champion???
During the Hogan Era, the WWF boomed in business but once the New Generation era happened, they lost some popularity. But after the New Generation, the Attitude Era arrived and a new boom period happened. But what happened after the Attitude Era? Wrestling again lost some of its popularity.
Yes, professional wrestling is violently cyclical. Similar to the car business, actually. During the Hogan era, WCW was actually in a down cycle - especially when Flair went to WWF in 1992. During the New Generation, WCW rebounded and developed its product. Before the Attitude Era, WCW was innovative and profitable. When the merger occured, the unsupportive executive leadership, coupled with the flexibility in leadership Vince McMahon gave to the WWF and the ability to use risky storylines, profanity, and sex, WCW wasn't able to keep up.
WCW died because of things like them spending ridiculous amounts of money and not making a profit for a couple of years. They were LOSING money and a lot of it. How can you expect for a company to go on much longer if they are losing millions of dollars a year?
Ask General Motors. In the early 90's and again in the post-9/11 2000's, GM posted losses in the billions. Everyone gawks at the $20 million loss WCW posted one year; that's a drop in the bucket compared to GM. Anyway, during BOTH the early 90's and early 00's, GM bled money from a gaping wound in consumer confidence and overspending. Do you know what they did? They made cuts to costs. They renegotiated, and closed unprofitable sections, they cut profit sharing, and they held layoffs. Why were they able to do this? Because the executive leadership was behind the measure to save the company. Eric Bischoff wanted to buy WCW so he could keep it alive - Time Warner had no such aspirations, and they let it die. Plain and simple.
I dont really know much about TCM but before I actually do say something about it, does running TCM cost them just as many millions as WCW was losing?
Nope. On the flip side, TCM, since it runs no commercials, generates dick. When you look at WCW from 1994-2000, it was actually profitable overall. They made enough, especially from 1996-1998, to cover the losses from 1999-2001. So if the company was profitable overall during a 5-year period, why let it shut down? Because Chris Benoit left? Nope - it was because the Time Warner people wanted nothing to do with a product that was contrary to their brand image.
Rest assured that if the internal forces of WCW didnt kill it because of the things I said in my first post in this thread, then they would probably still be alive.
If "internal forces" had that much of an effect on the business, WWF would have closed down two or three times already.
. Nah I am kidding you IC. But ST,, good job here, you did well.