CTDWAT: TNA Edition

[DCH 0]

I find it funny that Jeremy Borash gets a little under double of Velvet Sky and Angelina Love combined. Also why is a referee paid $150k?

[The Buzz 0]

I believe, and I could be wrong, that they've both been with the company since the beginning so more than likely they've been rewarded over time for being there and helping the company grow with a large paycheck. Whereas the two knockouts are relatively new to TNA, although I do agree they should be knocked up in pay.

 

Edit: Nevermind I thought the referee you were referring to was Rudy Charles who is only making 100 grand. Earl Hebner is a famous referee, which is probably why they offered him that much to sign. Once again the Knockouts should be well above both referees. Reading some of these payrates, it's no wonder why TNA has had so much trouble making money over the years.

[DCH 0]

I remember Earl hebner being a Raw ref a while back but seriously, he's more than double both of them and all he does is slam a mat with his hand.

[Silence 0]

I remember Earl hebner being a Raw ref a while back but seriously, he's more than double both of them and all he does is slam a mat with his hand.

 

SLOOOOWLY too.

[dubq 0]

At least with MEM, Angle has a real reason to wear a suit to the ring all the time. I hate when guys wear dressy clothes to the ring for no reason in relation to their gimmick. At least now, all MEM members wear suits so it makes sense to me.

 

Are you new or something?

 

Lol, not to life, but this board? Yes.

 

If you're talking about what I wrote, I'm saying that I hate it when guys who really have no reason to dress up for promos, dress up for them. If you're a Horseman or Evolution or a rich guy, or a McMahon or there's just a special segment, it makes sense. But if you're gimmick is that you are a unstable olympic gold metalist, wearing a suit does nothing for you. What's wrong with wearing your gear or a t-shirt? Everybody wears suits, so it has no meaning anymore. Now, when Angle was GM of Smackdown and when he had the group with Reigns and Jindrak (which came off as a fake SD version of Evolution), the suits were fine. With MEM, it's fine because that's a style that they all have in the group, it makes sense. Dressing up used to add a prominence to a wrestler, and because it was rare, it added personality. It's like bleeding in a match; it used to add so much to the matches, now it's done so much, it isn't that special.

 

If I'm not making sense lol, sorry. I wish there was a way to speak on here, it's easier.

 

I meant new to wrestling as guys have been wearing suits during promos for ages. Angle, prior to the MEM and regardless of his olympic gimmick, wore suits because he was supposed to be seen as a huge money acquisition for TNA and an important figure on the roster - which is what he is/was. Jericho wears them for pretty much the same reason, plus being World Champion. Personally I like it, it adds class to the product..

[LuckyLopez 0]

Borash was pretty heavily involved with production back in the early days. I remember reading stories about how he was basically teaching himself graphic design and video editing on a computer and watching TNA production was basically watching him mature as a student. And I seem to recall reading that his history with WCW included a lot of web stuff and he was in charge of that for TNA. I assume they've moved on and added people since then but I also figure that salary isn't so much for his on air contributions as his backstage. Which isn't to say that he might not still be overpaid, but just saying.

[Steviekick 0]

The following is the payroll for TNA wrestlers for the year 2008.All wrestlers are provided with airfare,accomadation and ground transport for house shows and ppv's held outside TNA studios in Orlando,Florida.In adittion to their salry all wrestlers get 20% of profits of their merchandise sold,1% of profits of the house shows and ppv's they paricipated in,and an annual bonus declared for wrestlers.Also their salary is cut off on a day to day basis for the period they are inactve in the tna roster due to injury or personal problems.The following depicts the dollars earned by tna wrestlers in a one year period for the year 2008.

 

This part was excluded from the salary section. A 20% royalty on merch is pretty sweet.

[Silence 0]

The following is the payroll for TNA wrestlers for the year 2008.All wrestlers are provided with airfare,accomadation and ground transport for house shows and ppv's held outside TNA studios in Orlando,Florida.In adittion to their salry all wrestlers get 20% of profits of their merchandise sold,1% of profits of the house shows and ppv's they paricipated in,and an annual bonus declared for wrestlers.Also their salary is cut off on a day to day basis for the period they are inactve in the tna roster due to injury or personal problems.The following depicts the dollars earned by tna wrestlers in a one year period for the year 2008.

 

This part was excluded from the salary section. A 20% royalty on merch is pretty sweet.

 

Sorry I didn't include that earlier.

 

Anyway, the people over at DVD are saying that the numbers are likely inflated.

 

sorry, but those salary numbers aren't legit, or else Gail Kim would've stayed. They only offered her 60 grand ($60000) These numbers are quite exaggerated at least for the women. Angelina Love is not making 60 G's when Gail Kim is getting released for refusing a contract similar to that.

[Jingus 0]

If those numbers are even proportionately correct, some of the women could have a decent basis for a gender discrimination lawsuit. Note that not a single man on that list makes less than $75,000, but seven women do make less than that. Meanwhile, none of the girls get more than 100K on the high end, while even goddamn Black Reign was getting double that.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Their wouldn't be a basis for a lawsuit unless the rest of the industry shows a major differential in pay scale as it relates to TNA.

 

There is NO WAY a WWE diva makes in the realm of the top WWE Entertainers...

 

And the indys don't always even book the ladies...

 

If we are to take TNA as the #2 and RoH as the #3... Something tells me that Danielson and Del Ray aren't even close with either pay or bookings...

 

...

 

Something tells me that they wouldn't get far...

[Jingus 0]

Probably not, no. Wasn't a serious suggestion. Though depending on where such a hypothetical law was filed and what the local regulations are, they do easily have proof that men get paid consistently and significantly more than women do in this company.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Well...I think we can all agree that some sweeping changes in the industry have been needed for some time now. But until the E implements them...nothings doing.

 

...

 

I do however, believe 100% that TNA should have paid Gail Kim to stay...whatever the cost. You can't justify the New Age Outlaws making that much and not cut them and give it to your top ratings draw at the time.

[2GOLD 0]

 

And what made it worse is Gail WANTED to stay and gave them tons of extra time to offer her something even close to a positive number to stay. Whereas Kip and BG have been trying to leave and begging the E to take them back since DX was reformed. So to recap, TNA thought it was a better idea to keep two guys who didn't WANT to be in the company on the roster and would probably start shit then bumping the pay of your top Knockout who is a ratings draw AND loves the company.

 

God damn genius.

[luke-o 0]

 

"Makes sense to me!"

[LuckyLopez 0]

Again, I think its just a matter of practical financial demands. Even assuming TNA cuts the people we feel are useless and a waste of money that's only 1 part of it. If Gail Kim gets bumped up to $150K then Kong wants the same, maybe more since she recognizes her unique worth. Then the Beautiful People and ODB are not only being underpaid compared to the men but compared to the top women and they want raises. Now the average female salary is up and a number of women are making more than some men. The Motor City Machine Guns realize they're making no more than some Knockouts (or maybe less) despite working for the company longer, wrestling in more and longer matches, working harder on the house show circuit, and traditionally being a more important part of the show. At which point a James Storm or LAX realize other salaries are going up for people who have done less in the company and don't have as high a profile. And naturally once enough salaries go up then even the guys making the most start to demand compensation for the changes that have occurred.

 

From a practical sense I'm just not sure how you raise the women's salaries without raising the men's. And while the firing of some dead weight might compensate for some of that it seems like you're devoting yourself to a potentially MUCH higher budget on talent for the long term. Men have just been the basis for wrestling for so long with women as a side that it seems like one company can't change that because of a year of higher profiles for women. If the wrestling market as a whole doesn't reflect women as equals to men then I'm not sure TNA has the financial stability to make that progressive statement with their check books. And marginal movements in ratings (even if they do seem consistent) don't seem to be enough to demand they act. Even if they DO lose their "biggest ratings draw" how does that actually negatively affect TNA? A 1.0 instead of a 1.1? Is that worth the financial burden?

 

Certainly doesn't mean I don't agree that Gail Kim should have gotten a deal making more than Earl Hebner and Don West and that Kip James is an albatross. Just that I imagine its not a simple as raising 6-12 salaries and being done with it.

[dubq 0]

I feel a certain sense of satisfaction to know that I make more money than some people/wrestlers that are on TV every week.

[Jingus 0]

From a practical sense I'm just not sure how you raise the women's salaries without raising the men's.

I don't see why that would be an issue. Call a company meeting, say "hey, we feel the women are being disproportionately underpaid, since they're nearly all making less money than all the guys yet they're working just as hard as the guys are". The macho pigs in the locker room don't like it? Tough shit. Go try to Braden Walker yourself with the WWE if you feel so slighted here. The simple fact that the women not only work as hard as the guys but in fact tend to draw higher television ratings would seem to indicate that the company is basically exploiting them by paying them less than the men. I mean, here we have tangible proof in the form of Nielsen numbers that these chicks are more valuable assets to the company than most of the swinging dicks they employ. How can you justify paying the draws less and the deadweight more?

[2GOLD 0]

And correct me if I'm wrong here but didn't a lot of the guys in the locker room even feel Gail got screwed?

It's simply giving someone a raise they rightfully earned. Gail was a proven ratings draw, was a constant solid worker, every one of the ladies seemed to enjoy her company, helped build the TNA knockout division into an actual wrestling division and she enjoyed working for the company. She actually earned a raise. There shouldn't have been a problem giving her extra money she literally earned with her work.

[Joseph2112 0]

Even if they DO lose their "biggest ratings draw" how does that actually negatively affect TNA? A 1.0 instead of a 1.1? Is that worth the financial burden?

 

The only thing I would say is on the flip side of this, is that without some of those other names mentioned as overpaid the ratings go from 1.1 to a 1.1.

 

And either these numbers are inflated, or the WWE numbers I have seen on the internet in the past are under-inflated. Otherwise the "go to WWE for a payday thing" are wrong.

[LuckyLopez 0]

I agree that not too many people could probably affect TNA's ratings in the short term at least, But at the same time I think a drastic change in programming where the women make up a larger part of the show due to necessities created by salary changes... or a considerable loss of the "depth" of TNA that makes up what draws people to house shows or PPVs... that any such change risks hurting the company. Meanwhile its kind of safe for TNA to say "we're stable and we've seen slow but steady growth, stay the course." Trying to change the way women are compensated in this business is a pretty substantial step off course. It could prove positive results but it could prove negative.

 

From a practical sense I'm just not sure how you raise the women's salaries without raising the men's.

I don't see why that would be an issue. Call a company meeting, say "hey, we feel the women are being disproportionately underpaid, since they're nearly all making less money than all the guys yet they're working just as hard as the guys are". The macho pigs in the locker room don't like it? Tough shit. Go try to Braden Walker yourself with the WWE if you feel so slighted here. The simple fact that the women not only work as hard as the guys but in fact tend to draw higher television ratings would seem to indicate that the company is basically exploiting them by paying them less than the men. I mean, here we have tangible proof in the form of Nielsen numbers that these chicks are more valuable assets to the company than most of the swinging dicks they employ. How can you justify paying the draws less and the deadweight more?

Nielson numbers have margins of error larger than the jumps the women see. And the men can easily argue that the stagnate ratings show that those jumps are meaningless and thus using them to justify raises is silly. Meanwhile I'm willing to bet that the men work longer and more matches in the grand scheme of things when you add up TV time, PPV time, and house shows. And of course any undercard tag work or X division worker potentially has a way to move up the card. They have more utility to TNA under its current format than the women do. Even with an increased presence than WWE the TNA Women's division is still limited to 1 or 2 short matches a show, usually 1 match a PPV, and I suspect no more than 2 matches a house show. With the women unlikely to ever find use in the X division, tag division, or heavyweight division (Russo jokes aside).

 

And ultimately I suspect that if James Storm and MCMG walk away from TNA because they feel they're getting screwed by making less than Awesome Kong and barely more than ODB then TNA will see that as a bigger loss than if they lose ODB. And I'm not sure I blame them. Even as a fan of TNA's women's division I'm not sure how much of the program it can be before it becomes over exposed. And IF men were to buck from such a change in payscale it would be more likely the talented guys making up the under and mid card and less the "deadweight." Kip James isn't going to walk away unless he has a better job out there. But James Storm may very well try to "Braden Walker" his way in WWE. And maybe avoiding getting fat and amazingly unmotivated in record time would work out better for him.

 

Again, its not that I disagree that TNA has dead weight they can cut. I think we all could look at that list and save them a few million without even tangibly affecting the show by cutting guys like Kip, BG, Rave, Hoyt, and Hebner. But ultimately pay raises don't exist in a vacuum. There's a payscale that probably isn't even determined by TNA as much as it is the industry as a whole. And you can't really change one part of it without changing the rest. You CAN start paying the women more just like you can start paying the X Division more. But unless you intend to make them larger parts of your company its probably going to eventually impact the rest of the roster. Even if it takes a few months when LAX are up for contract renewal and use the Beautiful People's salaries as a reference point or when Consequences Creed gets frustrated that he's making less than basically every woman on the roster.

 

TNA does have financial limitations and I think its just a matter of deciding that losing Gail Kim is less damaging than running the risk of pissing off the men by raising the women's salaries and not theirs exponentially. And if small fluctuations in Nielson ratings that the Nielson Media Research deems unreliable is the primary justification that's not going to carry well at the negotiating table. Because ultimately I think its safe to assume some "swinging dicks" are going to push the issue and not all of them will be "deadweight."

 

TNA is a business and paying women as much as it takes to employ them is what's best for the company. Without knowing what WWE pays their women or how much a woman can make on the indies I'm not sure how to fairly judge TNA's salaries. Because the relative pay scale of women in wrestling is as relative as the relative pay scale of wrestlers in TNA, men and women.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

I haven't watched TNA at all this year, they've simply lost my interest. I've tried several times and just left it - has this been a bad year for TNA or am I missing out on gold?

[Toxxic 0]

There are nuggets amidst the crap, but there's a lot of crap. Unfortunately the MEM vs TNA Originals programme has now pretty much subsumed the nuggets into the crap.

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

Is it another stable feud similar to the NWO/New Blood?

[LuckyLopez 0]

Similar to the New Blood thing with the roles reversed. The veterans are trying to hold down the kids.

 

It has been a pretty rough year for TNA. I think they had a great build to Lockdown but even the biggest fans of the company I know soured on it through the summer. Joe's run was underwhelming and they really seemed to be dragging out stories until Bound For Glory in October. Since then there's been some new sparks of stuff with the MEM story but it hasn't captured my attention back completely. All in all I think its safe to say 2008 was a bad year for TNA creatively.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Yeah...not their best year.

 

The Joe/Angle buildup month was their peak IMO.

 

The X Cup had some decent stuff in ring wise.

 

Sting's been fascinating to me for a while.

 

Other than that...it's been pretty meh. Angle's been having good matches this year (Christian, Joe, AJ, JJ, Abyss at the last show)...but everyone else seems to have had their balls cut (LAX, MCMG, X division guys)

 

Oh...and Beer Money rules.

[LuckyLopez 0]

Yeah, there's been good stuff obviously. I think it would be hard for a company to not have anything worth watching. The X Cup was fun and one of the few chances for the Guns to shine as well as great performances from Speed Muscle, Los Guerreros del Infierno, and Averno. Beer Money has been a great surprise. LAX had a brief run where TNA was treating them well again. Curry Man had some great stuff. The Beautiful People really came into their own as heels. I know some didn't like it but I really enjoyed the Kong Challenge and Taylor Wilde's debut, even if she got boring pretty quick after winning the title. And I do agree that the Sting stuff has been fairly interesting even if TNA kind of dragged it out at the end of the summer. And the Angle/AJ series of matches stand out to me especially the Last Man Standing at Hard Justice where Angle did the somersault from the stage.

 

But all in all its been a very uneven product and a lot of stories and feuds that people weren't that interested in when they started were dragged on for months. Which TNA always has a tendency to do with 1 or 2 midcard feuds but during the summer/fall they just seemed to be doing it with the whole card to try and avoid starting anything new until after BFG/October.

[Chazz 0]

Is Frank Trigg still with the company?

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Is Frank Trigg still with the company?

Yes, and Trigg has recently said he's returning soon.

[Toxxic 0]

Returning to do what? Look rather like Angle, hit people with kendo sticks and have one fairly bad attempt at a MMA match with a wrestler who should have been doing something far more entertaining somewhere else?

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Don West's Black Friday Sale, 50-75% off over 100 items

 

lol