By definition: Main Entry: mo·nop·o·ly Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p(&-)lE Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -lies Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell Date: 1534 1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action 2 : exclusive possession or control 3 : a commodity controlled by one party 4 : one that has a monopoly
My question was when WWF/E aqquired the WCW why the government of the United States did not come in a mess with Vinnie Mac. The government broke up the phone the giant phone company back in the earily 80's. Then they went after Microsoft...why wasn't the WWF bother because they provide "Sports Entertainment" and they are the only ones on a national or world level. I'm just been wondering this for two years so can somebody give me some input on why his empire wasn't broken up when it came about?
PS: I'm excluding regional promotions and the NWA. I actually asked somebody this once but I never got direct responces.
My dad asked me the same thing when WWF/E bought WCW. My answer to him was that the WWF/E is not the exclusive owner of professional wrestling. They're also not doing anything to keep anyone else from being in professional wrestling (which is part of the reason why anti-trust laws were created in the first place, AND part of the reason the govt went after Microsoft).
The WWF/E just happens to be the biggest, most popular, and most successful wrestling organization in North America.
That's pretty much it. That's the reason why most professional sports are not monopolies; anybody who has the money can try to challenge their dominance. There is nothing to say that Ted Turner, Mark Cuban, or Bill Gates could come in and start a major national wrestling organization; nor does WWF prevent other organizations from trying to attain such status(though one could say they try by trying to sing their talent away...)
Ok, gotcha, clearer understand. Still yet I beg to differ with that last one of not preventing anyone from being in wrestling business. They used to raid promotions for talent. I don't see that much anymore due to them being down right now but it might start happening in profits pick back up and guys on the indies stay hot.
As someone who is somewhat familiar with business law, I can tell you that in order to violate antitrust laws a la Microsoft, a company would have to be shown to be preventing other companies from making it into the business. Though the WWE does raid talent, concepts, etc. from other wrestling companies, they have not prevented anyone from setting up shop. If there was a situation where, say, NWA-TNA was pulled off of pay-per-view because the WWE forced cable operators to drop them (just an example), and NWA-TNA could prove that they were losing money because of it, then the WWE could be considered a monopoly for legal purposes. Possibly. The federal competition regulator in the U.S. looks at all acquisitions (such as WWE's purchase of WCW assets in 2001, and most likely the ECW assets this year) to see whether this will prevent other companies from competing. And seeing as how they haven't blocked either deal, it looks as though the government doesn't see WWE as violating antitrust rules. All they are is the only game in town, which is a world of difference. Hope that helps.
(edited by CANADIAN BULLDOG on 10.4.03 1012) "If I told Mooah to act her age, she'd die." -- Jerry Lawler, 1999
Not only that, but I don't think the government would step in for even if Vince McMahon owned the copyright on wrestling itself to break it up. It's not like anyone NEEDS wrestling like they do with a phone company or an operating system.
Wrestling itself is a competing form of entertainment. I don't think wrestling is technically considered an "industry," even though Eric Bischoff classified it as such.
Its competition would be considered to be other forms of entertainment (or sports entertainment such as American Gladiators, BattleDome, and Professional Boxing).
Originally posted by SKLOKAZOIDNot only that, but I don't think the government would step in for even if Vince McMahon owned the copyright on wrestling itself to break it up. It's not like anyone NEEDS wrestling like they do with a phone company or an operating system.
True, but it doesn't matter. Competition laws are regardless of whether its an essential service or not. The WWE follows the same set of rules that Microsoft, Coke and other industry leaders have to adhere to. Simple as that.
Put it this way: if someone wants to start up a wrestling business, they have every legal right to do so and compete with whomever they want/can.
"If I told Mooah to act her age, she'd die." -- Jerry Lawler, 1999
Ahh...yet take that out of context and you have Sean O'Haire going, "Laws are merely suggestions, live life the way you want to. Hey but I'm not telling you anything that you didn't already know."
I just wanna say that a WWE-themed version of Monopoly might be cool. The properties could be WWE Superstars, TV programs, and PPV events. For example Jail could be Heat or Velocity, the railroads could be the big four PPVs, and Boardwalk could be Steve Austin. You could have Trish Stratus' Chest cards and No Chance in Hell cards.
Originally posted by rockstarI just wanna say that a WWE-themed version of Monopoly might be cool. The properties could be WWE Superstars, TV programs, and PPV events. For example Jail could be Heat or Velocity, the railroads could be the big four PPVs, and Boardwalk could be Steve Austin. You could have Trish Stratus' Chest cards and No Chance in Hell cards.
Or maybe not.
Hell, I like that idea! With one slight change: Instead of having PPV's as properties, they could buy other wrestling groups and tape libraries (WCW, ECW, AWA, etc.). Instead of hotels, place tables, ladders and chairs on `Know Your Role Blvd' `Jabroni Dr' `Stone Cold St' etc. Alter that cartoon millioniare guy to look like McMahon.
And the `deluxe edition' could have a removable glass ceiling that you could place your Triple H gamepiece on top of.... Damn! I told myself I wasn't going to write that last part.
"If I told Mooah to act her age, she'd die." -- Jerry Lawler, 1999
You have to look at wrestling as a major sport like the NBA, NFL or NHL. They are only major game in town and no one is going to stop them. Yet, things like the XFL are given a chance to breath for a short time. You can have anohter major baseball organization or Football, but don't expect it to do well. One could make the argument that entities like the NBA or MLB are monopolies mainly due to being the only game in town.
I have always contended that the major sports will never go away, people will still watch, because there really won't be an alternative. XFL could have worked if Vince did some pre-season games and convinced the NBC that Sunday afternoons are the way to go. Vince did fail on his own, but if the XFL did get popular then the NFL would have called the dogs on them. Yet, they gave Vince enough rope to hang himslef with. Thats all they have to do is wait for the companies to fail on their own or wait till they get popular then raid the players. The WWE is the only game in town until Ted Tuner or someone with another billion dollars and a wrestling fantasy comes along. I don't see TNA lasting too long, Jarrett has never been a main eventer and as long as he keeps the title he is as bad as HHH. I don't need to see two undeserving champions in a three day span. TNA just needs a TV deal it doesn't matter on what network as long as they get exposure. The PPV thing is not working as they are only breaking even at best. The folly for any new wrestling organization is going to be finding a TV deal and I don't think there are many out there.
Originally posted by rockstarI just wanna say that a WWE-themed version of Monopoly might be cool. The properties could be WWE Superstars, TV programs, and PPV events. For example Jail could be Heat or Velocity, the railroads could be the big four PPVs, and Boardwalk could be Steve Austin. You could have Trish Stratus' Chest cards and No Chance in Hell cards.
Or maybe not.
That last sentence is hilarious. No Chance In Hell cards ... LOL. If you bought Triple H Blvd. you'd be forced to put a hotel there before you upgraded any of the other streets.
Originally posted by A FanOne could make the argument that entities like the NBA or MLB are monopolies mainly due to being the only game in town.
Doesn't MLB have an antitrust exemption? Does that have to do with them being a monopoly, or is that something about their labor agreement?
NOTE: The above post makes no sense. We apologize for the inconvenience.
I'm no expert on Antitrust law or baseball, but I'm pretty sure I remember that the exemption for MLB is to allow the seperate businesses which are the teams to work together without being considered anticompetitive.
NFL and NBA teams are seperate businesses that work together too, though. Do they have similar exemption I wonder?
sergei
"A true champion knows how to deal with adversity."-- Kurt Angle
Originally posted by SKLOKAZOIDNot only that, but I don't think the government would step in for even if Vince McMahon owned the copyright on wrestling itself to break it up. It's not like anyone NEEDS wrestling like they do with a phone company or an operating system.
True, but it doesn't matter. Competition laws are regardless of whether its an essential service or not. The WWE follows the same set of rules that Microsoft, Coke and other industry leaders have to adhere to. Simple as that.
Put it this way: if someone wants to start up a wrestling business, they have every legal right to do so and compete with whomever they want/can.
Correct. It's not illegal to HAVE a monoploy-- it depends on how you use it.
Another violation of monoply law is when you use your monopoly to gain ANOTHER monopoly (or an unfair business advantage) in a separate industry. This is what got Microsoft in trouble. Microsoft wanted to only put its Internet Explorer in Windows. It's OK for Windows to be a monopoly, it's not OK for it to allow Microsoft to gain another monoply or have an unfair advantage.
And this is something McMahon should consider as he tries to expand the WWE label.
>And this is something McMahon should consider as he tries to expand the WWE label.
Ah...yet a very good point...the brands are very distinct now. There hasn't been trade since last year has there? I think it's time for them to go a step farther some how. Mabe not in seperate PPV but something better than what we have now.
There hasn't been an "official" trade for awhile, but Johnny Stamboli made the jump from Heat to join the FBI without any explanation given (to my knowledge)...
In the 1st Raw of the New Year we can at least expect one thing to happen Bret Hart & Shawn Michaels will come face to face. I for one am marking out for this!