WWE telling 'non-essential' talent to not go to house shows?

It's...Baylariat!

Team Finnley Baylor
It's paraphrasing a bit, but apparently, folks like Zeb Coulter and Vickie Guererro aren't going to be at house shows any longer. The reports are that due to Cena being on the shelf, they're cost-cutting.

1) Two people not showing up for a house show is one thing. But when those two don't wrestle or really contribute anything to a house show, it's not a big deal.

2) Is Cena being injured that big of a deal for the WWE?
 
You know since Cena won't be at the house shows, they don't have to pay him for those apparences so why do they have to cut cost?
 
Vickie Guerrero works house shows? Who knew?

This story sounds like it is not complete BS but that it's tying two events that are mutually exclusive.
 
Last time I knew about WWE contracts is thats not guarantee money it is based off of per dates every year and at the end of their fiscal year if you miss dates your salary is pro rated via how many dates you did do
Maybe they have changed the languages of the their contracts recently but thats what I was told a few years ago

With cost cutting now we all can see why VKM went to PG to get these sponsors to help pay for operational expenses
The alarming thing is WWE's operational costs are still very very high after sponsors help them out
Lets see what Q4 earnings reports states to see if the right adjustments have been made going into WM season
 
This isn't the story of the shrinking house show marketplace; that story can be found in the WWE booking less secondary markets, and putting a positive spin on it by hyping their large market events. The whole professional wrestling market is shrinking, and the WWE is no more immune to it than anyone else.

"The WWE booked xx% less house shows in secondary markets over the past three years" is far less entertaining of story, however, than "this company hasn't paid several performers in two months and all of the sudden everyone has paperwork issues", or "this company cancelled multiple house shows with low ticket sales, combined it into one and called it a sellout".
 
Cena being gone isn't the huge deal people make of it. WWE is such a machine that they will do just fine with or without the guy on the roster. I've long since argued you could put almost any main eventer (Orton, Bryan, Punk, RVD, Sheamus) on top and they would do good business regardless, this has already been proven. It's not like the old days where if Hogan got injured they would be in trouble.

As in Vickie and Zeb not showing up (as long as other non essential people) its not a big deal. They don't need to be there so why not cut costs and keep expenses down.
 
Not to mention the probable drop-off in t-shirt sales when Cena isn't on television every week rocking his colours and defending hustle, loyalty, and the American way of life.
 
Even when healthy Cena isn't on at least half of the house shows they do, they still split up rosters for house shows with a group being lead by the WWE champ working one area, while a group lead by the WHC works another area at the same time. It's pretty much the biggest reason why both titles have not been unified yet what I understand.

As for talent like Zeb & Vickie being sent home, it probably has more to do with them being worthless at house shows.
 
The half Cena does do must seem like WrestleMania compared to the ROH gym events the World Champion handles, good grief.
 
Even when healthy Cena isn't on at least half of the house shows they do, they still split up rosters for house shows with a group being lead by the WWE champ working one area, while a group lead by the WHC works another area at the same time. It's pretty much the biggest reason why both titles have not been unified yet what I understand.

As for talent like Zeb & Vickie being sent home, it probably has more to do with them being worthless at house shows.

I'm legitimately asking, no sarcasm, what's the best argument as to why the two major titles should be unified?
 
I went to a house show yesterday and they put out a pretty shitty card. It was still fun, but they were definitely putting lesser talent out. We had Natayla vs. Brie Bella, Prime Time Players vs. Shield, Hawkings vs. Ryder, Fandango vs. Miz, RVD vs. Heath Slater, Ryback vs. Santino, Antonio Cesaro vs. Tyson Kidd, another match I don't remember, and the main event was Bryan vs. Ambrose. It was still a great time, but definitely a step down from other shows I've been to.

EDIT: Extra note, the reaction to Bryan was insane.
 
I'm legitimately asking, no sarcasm, what's the best argument as to why the two major titles should be unified?
Why shouldn't they? Assuming a big money unification match could generate a few extra PPV guys at one point, surely that's more money than has ever been generated by the big gold belt on the secondary tour. This being 2013, I honestly struggle with the concept that the prop belts draw anyone to house shows.

The slim possibility of a marginal increase in PPV buys for one night is what's best for business. Trust me, I didn't go to a second tier house show last weekend to see Alberto Del Rio defending the big gold belt. Nor did anyone I spoke to at that event. I went because the WWE brand is just that strong with or without the prop belts. Anecdotal, but I trust my gut here.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,847
Messages
3,300,827
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top