steve Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 What was with Austin not saying 'Redneck Island' in the open to his show? He kept saying, "the other project for CMT", but he would never call it by name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromatagon Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 Damn it Steve ask Steve 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 Honestly, I've never watched an episode of Redneck Island nor do I care to, so I'm not sure why I asked period. Guess it's because I didn't take my Alpha Brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromatagon Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 I gotta tell you guys, don't take Alpha Brain I did and it worked but then it started giving me these crazy headaches. I think I developed a choline intolerance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 I hear Alpha Brain's side effects include "not knowing whether to shit or wind your watch." Can you confirm? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev Ray Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 But were you at full salute? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromatagon Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 I am always at full salute 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTTW Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 They can't really have that anymore though. TNA has been in business longer than they were. The story of TNA will actually be "Who in the fuck spent all this money to keep this shitty promotion going for so long?" As I get older my interest in wrestling has basically disappeared, but my fascination with the business side of things has grown exponentially. As I follow the story of TNA, it's ratings failure, and utter incompetence by upper management I am very interested in that question. It has to be making money for someone right? Why else would it still be in business otherwise? Every other wrestling organization that wasn't making money is gone. Yet there is so much negative associated the company I can’t grasp how it continues to be profitable. Where is/was the money being made and for whom? Talent has openly complained about not getting paid, ditto for production crew, so where is the profit going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxB Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 The profit is keeping Dixie out of the Panda energy office. Nothing more, nothing less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I think it's been pretty widely reported that TNA's only made a profit for one or two years out of its whole existence. Their backing from Panda is what's kept them from declaring bankruptcy. For all that TNA likes to brag about how popular their product is overseas, they're remarkably vague when it comes to discussing specific revenue streams or any other monetary figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwoy2j Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 They can't really have that anymore though. TNA has been in business longer than they were. The story of TNA will actually be "Who in the fuck spent all this money to keep this shitty promotion going for so long?" As I get older my interest in wrestling has basically disappeared, but my fascination with the business side of things has grown exponentially. As I follow the story of TNA, it's ratings failure, and utter incompetence by upper management I am very interested in that question. It has to be making money for someone right? Why else would it still be in business otherwise? Every other wrestling organization that wasn't making money is gone. Yet there is so much negative associated the company I can’t grasp how it continues to be profitable. Where is/was the money being made and for whom? Talent has openly complained about not getting paid, ditto for production crew, so where is the profit going? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurningBeard Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 As far as I remember it was gonna go bust before Panda bought it out. I wonder if they wrestling landscape would be different at all if the Jarrett's had just folded... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brysynner Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I think it would be similar to now. There's WWE and then there's everyone else in different levels of relevancy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph2112 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I wrote it in the other thread too, but I think Jingus is correct. Meltzer and others were reporting that TNA actually turned a profit in 2009. Up to that point, despite all of the BS, I think you could see an upward arc from where they started to where they were. So the logical next step? Why, spend a whole lot of money on Hogan, Bischoff, Bubba the Love Sponge...in other words, re-create the Monday Night Warz. Its the future of wrestling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Sweetser Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 TNA thought that by turning a profit, they were now in position to go for the brass ring and try to compete directly with WWE, and holy shit, were they wrong. I forget where I read it (LOLTNA?) but they apparently spent over four million dollars on all the talent they brought in for the big Monday debut, and within six months, almost if not all of them were gone from the company with nothing to show for it. All TNA really has done long-term is keep a few people out of WWE that might've ended up there. I'm pretty sure Sting is the best example - without TNA dangling the easy contract carrot in front of him every time his expired, he would've either been in WWE years earlier or, conversely, might've just said fuck it and stayed retired altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I'm so sad Sting got hurt, man. Every second of that Rollins match until that injury proved that he could still go. I am utterly convinced that had they brought him in instead of, say, Scott Steiner way back in 2003, he could've had a career resurgence rivaled only by maybe Shawn or Flair. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTTW Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 They can't really have that anymore though. TNA has been in business longer than they were. The story of TNA will actually be "Who in the fuck spent all this money to keep this shitty promotion going for so long?" As I get older my interest in wrestling has basically disappeared, but my fascination with the business side of things has grown exponentially. As I follow the story of TNA, it's ratings failure, and utter incompetence by upper management I am very interested in that question. It has to be making money for someone right? Why else would it still be in business otherwise? Every other wrestling organization that wasn't making money is gone. Yet there is so much negative associated the company I can’t grasp how it continues to be profitable. Where is/was the money being made and for whom? Talent has openly complained about not getting paid, ditto for production crew, so where is the profit going? That clip is so accurate in that it explained nothing and I wish I hadn't watched it. Can you explain how it is wise to write off millions of dollars in a venture that seems unprofitable? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MORELOCK Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 That clip is so accurate in that it explained nothing and I wish I hadn't watched it. Can you explain how it is wise to write off millions of dollars in a venture that seems unprofitable? Tread lightly, dude, that's Seinfeld you're shitting on. It's more valuable to the company to keep Dixie in her own unprofitable wing rather than allowing her to ruin any of the profitable portions of the business. They can afford it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLaw Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 You write off losses on paper so you don't have as much profit on paper, thus paying fewer actual taxes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph2112 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I think the actual reason companies write thing off is because of the possibility of future gains, through selling the enterprise or the enterprise actually turning around and becoming profitable. Different pieces of a conglomeration could be unprofitable year to year based on different circumstances. In the case of TNA its the daughter of the owner trying to make something out of it so I am sure they are way more forgiving than another venture. Plus, the losses are probably peanuts compared the rest profits, I'm sure it's comparable to whatever Paris Hiltons dad gives to her to do whatever it is she does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwoy2j Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 They can't really have that anymore though. TNA has been in business longer than they were. The story of TNA will actually be "Who in the fuck spent all this money to keep this shitty promotion going for so long?" As I get older my interest in wrestling has basically disappeared, but my fascination with the business side of things has grown exponentially. As I follow the story of TNA, it's ratings failure, and utter incompetence by upper management I am very interested in that question. It has to be making money for someone right? Why else would it still be in business otherwise? Every other wrestling organization that wasn't making money is gone. Yet there is so much negative associated the company I can’t grasp how it continues to be profitable. Where is/was the money being made and for whom? Talent has openly complained about not getting paid, ditto for production crew, so where is the profit going? That clip is so accurate in that it explained nothing and I wish I hadn't watched it. Can you explain how it is wise to write off millions of dollars in a venture that seems unprofitable? Did you ever notice how men always leave the toilet seat up? .................. That's the joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brysynner Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I'm so sad Sting got hurt, man. Every second of that Rollins match until that injury proved that he could still go. I am utterly convinced that had they brought him in instead of, say, Scott Steiner way back in 2003, he could've had a career resurgence rivaled only by maybe Shawn or Flair. Shawn and Flair were not part of WCW in the eyes of WWE. Sting was the face of WCW, they would've jobbed him out so fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I'm so sad Sting got hurt, man. Every second of that Rollins match until that injury proved that he could still go. I am utterly convinced that had they brought him in instead of, say, Scott Steiner way back in 2003, he could've had a career resurgence rivaled only by maybe Shawn or Flair. Shawn and Flair were not part of WCW in the eyes of WWE. Sting was the face of WCW, they would've jobbed him out so fast. That's a great point. I want to believe they would've treated him better than Steiner, Booker, Goldberg, or Nash just because he did such huge business in 97 and 98, but you're probably right. On the other hand, even if they did job him out to reign of terror era HHH, I really don't know that he would've fallen far enough to feud with Test like Steiner or form a comedy team with Goldust like Booker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt McGirt Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Joker Sting and Goldust would have been magic. You know it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakk_Sabbath Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 That actually would have been really cool I bet. But assuming they brought him in before WM XIX we could've also gotten Sting vs. Angle, Brock, Rock, Austin, Shawn, Jericho, Foley or even A healthy Undertaker. Edge would've been a good one. He and Eddie would've tore it up. Even him vs. flair or Hogan in a WWE ring would've been a treat. He probably could've had a super fun street fight with Vince like those two did. And assuming he stuck around, he could've been part of getting Orton, Cena and Batista over. Ok sorry guys that's enough of my fantasy 2003 Sting booking, I promise 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts