View Single Post
Old 02-22-2018, 09:22 PM   #51
Emperor Smeat
Former TPWW Royalty
 
Emperor Smeat's Avatar
 
Posts: 66,588
Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Emperor Smeat makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Seems WWE's plan is going to be even worse for non-top stars than previously speculated. Besides losing out on PPV time and likely TV time, they are likely also going to take a huge cut in pay due to lack of appearances and more people on shows means a smaller percentage from the PPV pool of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer
From a money standpoint, for the top talent, the difference in cutting PPVs probably won’t be significant. It could be down, since in the network era, the pay is determined based on what the shows each month did in the pre-network era, and then allocated in a secret and non-existent formula among the talent on the shows. If there is more talent on the shows in the main event position, then the money in theory would decrease. It wouldn’t decrease from the top guys, as the company traditionally always takes care of its top talent. For non-top guys, if there are more people on the show, it would cut down on their money. For mid-level guys who would have been on PPVs eight to ten times a year, and now may not be on PPV at all, or if they are, on fewer shows, the difference will be more significant.
Emperor Smeat is offline   Reply With Quote