The W
Views: 98290249
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.8.14 2355
The W - Pro Wrestling - Offer to buy TNA rejected + 3rd Promotion possibly coming
This thread has 22 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.36
Pages: 1
(5266 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (12 total)
Kawshen
Liverwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: Bronx, NY

Since last post: 1894 days
Last activity: 154 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.20
OK, if you haven't heard, the head of NWA Ohio offered to buy TNA from Panda Energy. This guy is also apparently a good friend of Jeff Jarrett. Ultimately, Panda said no. This is what he posted on his site:

    Originally posted by Dave Nelson, CEO of NWA Ohio
    As of Noon on May 31, 2005, the offer to purchase TNA Wrestling from Panda has been withdrawn. The 10 Million dollar offer has been retracted as the deadline has passed and no response was given. We feel that more then adequate time was given for Panda Energy to respond and at this time will move forward with the start of a new Wrestling Company to kick off in early Fall of this year.

    We recognize the fact that TNA has lost the deal with WGN and currently has no Television Deal to carry the company except for the Pay Per Views they do monthly which do not clear enough revenue to keep the company afloat.

    We are aware that there could be a possible deal with Spike down the road, but with the current deal that was in the works with Spike it would not benefit the company in a long term Network deal, and it would prove fatal to TNA to make a deal that is contingent on ratings.

    We do wish TNA the very best and hope that there will be a light at the end of the tunnel, but it would appear that TNA has a rough road ahead.

    Now on the NWA Ohio side, we will move forward in the next few months with the announcement of the next big company, and will at that time disclose the names of the two wrestling figures backing Dave Nelson and his venture to build yet another Federation here in North America, and open a new avenue for professional wrestling today. Together with Old School and new age wrestling, we will design a product that offers the best of both worlds, tradition and Extreme wrestling, offering good story lines, and well maintained Events that come to small towns and big cities alike, to bring the fans a show that gets up close and personal like no other company has yet to offer.

    A new beginning, and a Fresh product for the people who matter most, YOU THE FANS.....


Maybe it's me - but this guy is coming off as "I'm the only one that can save this promotion. Give it to me."

The bolded text is significant since Dave Meltzer says that the negotiations for Impact to be on WGN are still ongoing:

    Originally posted by Dave Meltzer
    Dave Nelson posted on his NWA Ohio website that his group has pulled out of negotiations to buy TNA yesterday when Panda Energy turned down the latest falling offer of $10 million. He claims they will start a new promotion in the fall. The key is Nelson said that the WGN deal with TNA has fallen through, which was the rumor going all day yesterday. However, that story is not true. What we've managed to ascertain is negotiations between the sides are continuing, but it is doubtful anything will be finished this week. There are a lot of negatives from a TNA side to the deal as it is currently done, but TNA officials were hopeful of a deal being completed next week. Still, having been around wrestling, "we hope to make an announcement next week" usually turns out to be overly optimistic. Even people in a need to know basis in TNA don't know this, but inside the office yesterday, there were mixed signals. One person said they couldn't believe on something so big the office was kayfabing them. Jeff Jarrett was saying the story isn't as bad as it sounds, although Jeff may wind up aligned with Nelson. Nelson also posted the possible deal with Spike couldn't benefit the company and would prove fatal to them.


Either way you look at it, TNA doesn't look in good shape right now. Panda should just go ahead and cut their losses and give it to the NWA Ohio dude. Quit losing the tons of $$$ they already have on it.

(edited by Kawshen on 2.6.05 1655)



"The way I feel right now, I'd trade my mother if the right deal came along." -- Isiah Thomas.
Promote this thread!
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 415 days
Last activity: 415 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.41
    Originally posted by Kawshen
    Quit losing the tons of $$$ they already have on it.

    (edited by Kawshen on 2.6.05 1655)








Losing money might be the purpose for Panda to own the company. TNA is a write-off that in the long run does more good for the Panda bottom line than making $10 million selling it. That's the only reason I could understand Panda buying a large stake in a struggling company.
As for the TV negotiation side: The person whose deal was rejected says the company is dying? That's a shock. Maybe someone without any financial stake either way saying it would be more credible.

(edited by redsoxnation on 2.6.05 1933)
Deputy Marshall
Liverwurst








Since: 28.6.04
From: Troy, NY

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 32 min.
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.13
$10 million wasn't enough to buy TNA, but McMahon was able to purchase WCW for about $3 million. What that tells me more than anything is that there's a Panda Energy executive who is just a humongous money mark. I mean, wouldn't Time Warner have kept WCW around if it was able to use it as a write-off? I remember Paul Heyman claiming on Byte This that TNA lost more money in 2004 that WCW did in its final full fiscal year, and considering that TNA actually paid Fox Sports Net to air the Impact show (making it basically a glorified infomercial with commercials to add to FSN's revenue), so I find that argument a little hard to swallow.

Then again, I'm no expert at business.

(edited by Deputy Marshall on 2.6.05 2236)


Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 387 days
Last activity: 348 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.12
Personally, I don't understand how running a business that loses money can be good from a financial perspective. Obviously you'll get a write-off, but is that write-off going to be bigger than the amount that you lost?



NOTE: The above post makes no sense. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Hogan's My Dad
Andouille








Since: 8.6.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.41
The problem with "money marks", whether they be employed in Panda or whether they are aligning with Nelson in his new venture, is that unless the money marks are, quite literally, billionaires, they don't have enough money to run a wrestling company. That's why Ted Turner was such a great money mark, he had a lot of cash to burn, and there was almost no way he could lose enough that it would become a problem for him. If he didn't get muscled out of the higher management of his own company, and it is a sin that it is even legally possible for this to happen to anyone, WCW would still be in business. Someone needs to ring his bell, because with fortunes down in McMahonland, I'm sure offering one hundred and fifty days and guaranteed money will have the same effect on Vince's crop now that it had in 1995. Especially since Vince has returned to the anal-fisting business tactics he used back in the 80's when he was the only real game in town, including but not necessarily limited to: firing guys on I.R., making guys fly halfway across the planet in coach on overseas tours that are always financially successful, giving himself six-figure "performer bonuses" while holding meetings telling guys they need to work harder, and so on.



Hot Virgins-The World's Most Steadily Shrinking Commodity
Corajudo
Frankfurter








Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 42 days
Last activity: 1 day
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.16
    Originally posted by Mr. Boffo
    Personally, I don't understand how running a business that loses money can be good from a financial perspective. Obviously you'll get a write-off, but is that write-off going to be bigger than the amount that you lost?


All else equal, it's not. And, no. Having said that, if there are some synergies between the two companies that add value or revenue to the one company without affecting the money losing company, then there is a case to be made for running a business that loses money.



"The translation is literally. "Your City. Your Equipment." So I guess this means that you can use this channel as your equipment to take over the city. Great."

-Americans for Legal Immigration (a group whose members think that Channel 62 in LA is using a billboard to advertise that they're available to help attack the U.S. and claim it for Mexico.)
BigSteve
Pepperoni








Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2777 days
Last activity: 2505 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.09
I can believe that TNA lost more money than WCW did mainly because, as atrocious as the product was, WCW still brought in lots of revenue. Not enough to offset the big contracts and other expenses, but they had tons of merchandise, TV ad revenue, ticket sales, PPV orders, etc. TNA doesn't sell tickets to its events. From what I've seen their merchandise (shirts and DVDs, mainly) is very limited, and they have about as many PPV orders as WCW had in its dying days. Add to that the fact that they've got guys demanding lots of money in contracts, and I find it pretty easy to believe that they are in a bad, bad way financially.


thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 18 min.
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 10.00
It's not even close. WCW lost $50 million in it's worst year. TNA would be out of business if they lost a third of that.

WCW salaries were much higher than TNA, on average and on peak.



thecubsfan.com - CMLLBlog
KJames199
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: #yqr

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 57 min.
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.61
    Originally posted by Deputy Marshall
    I remember Paul Heyman claiming on Byte This that TNA lost more money in 2004 that WCW did in its final full fiscal year


I think you mean that TNA lost more money in 2004 than ECW did in its final full fiscal year. Which is certainly possible.




JK
Deputy Marshall
Liverwurst








Since: 28.6.04
From: Troy, NY

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 32 min.
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.13
    Originally posted by KJames199
      Originally posted by Deputy Marshall
      I remember Paul Heyman claiming on Byte This that TNA lost more money in 2004 that WCW did in its final full fiscal year


    I think you mean that TNA lost more money in 2004 than ECW did in its final full fiscal year. Which is certainly possible.


Certainly possible that I'm mis-remembering the quote.

    Originally posted by Carajudo
    All else equal, it's not. And, no. Having said that, if there are some synergies between the two companies that add value or revenue to the one company without affecting the money losing company, then there is a case to be made for running a business that loses money.


Yeah, but what sort of synergy does TNA provide to The Panda Group/Panda Energy? It certainly doesn't seem to fit in with anything else that company does. It's the only entertainment venture I know of that they have ownership of, although I've found that getting a list of what exactly they own is a little tricky. I did find that they made $5 billion last year, so they're obviously not hurting too much for money.

So TNA got no money from Impact, and ticket sales are minimal (I don't think they comp every single ticket to an event as was implied, but I'd imagine they heavily paper a lot of their outings). So, basically, their only sources of revenue are: merchandise (I'd imagine they aren't that great) and PPVs. Their PPV buys are, as someone pointed out, equal to WCW at their lowest. Then you have all these expenditures, and even though they don't have guaranteed contracts the size of WCW's, they certainly shilled out a lot of money for guys like Nash and Page. I have to assume they're still losing a ton of money.

Has anybody had any luck on getting any sort of financial figures for TNA?


Edit - Just noticed that Dave Nelson's announcement of starting a new promotion in the fall has gotten zero response in this thread. Pretty telling of how much faith we have in that idea.

(edited by Deputy Marshall on 3.6.05 2101)

CTX
Italian








Since: 11.5.02

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.00
    Originally posted by Deputy Marshall
    ...So TNA got no money from Impact, and ticket sales are minimal (I don't think they comp every single ticket to an event as was implied, but I'd imagine they heavily paper a lot of their outings)...

TNA aren't allowed to charge for tickets under their deal with Universal Studios or else I've no doubt they'd be charging for every PPV they run. WCW had to let everyone in for free when they taped there too.

The double edged sword in this situation is there's no other facility that can provide TNA with as much as Universal Studios do (lights, production, guaranteed crowds etc.), but on the flipside they are unable to build any sort of paying fanbase while taping every single show there.
KJames199
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: #yqr

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 57 min.
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.61
    Originally posted by Deputy Marshall
    Certainly possible that I'm mis-remembering the quote.


Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure the idea was that TNA lost more money in 2004 than ECW did during its entire run, and that if ECW had been able to get its PPV revenues in a timely fashion, it could have survived. But then, it was Paul E saying it, so take it with a grain of salt.




JK
Thread rated: 4.36
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Fashion Advice for TNA - c'mon, you know you're curious
Next thread: your beloved WWE SMACKDOWN COMIX- 6/2/2005
Previous thread: John Cena - "Too Hot for MTV"?
(5266 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Didn't they point him out when he was in the crowd for a Raw not too long ago? I seem to remember them pointing him out, but not bringing up his illustrious wrestling career.
- Eradicator, Former World Champ (2002)
Related threads: TNA Comments going into Slammaversary - TNA to go head to head with RAW's first hour? - DDP Gone from TNA. - More...
The W - Pro Wrestling - Offer to buy TNA rejected + 3rd Promotion possibly comingRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.389 seconds.