OVW axed

Vince135792003

From pwinsider:

WWE SEVERS TIES WITH OHIO VALLEY WRESTLING; ALL DEVELOPMENTAL TALENTS BEING MOVED TO FLORIDA
by Mike Johnson @ 12:39:26 PM on 2/7/2008

In a meeting with contracted developmental talent today, World Wrestling Entertainment's Ty Bailey and John Laurinaitis announced that the company was severing its ties with the Louisville, Kentucky-based Ohio Valley Wrestling and that all of the wrestlers stationed there would be heading to Florida Championship Wrestling, which at this point, would be the company's the sole remaining developmental territory.

Laurinaitis told the talents that WWE had decided they wanted all of their developmental talent in one place and from a logistical standpoint, it didn't make business sense to have talents in Kentucky, particularly since so many WWE names live in Florida, giving the developmental talents access to learning from a multitude of current and former stars who reside within a close proximity of FCW.

Talent were told that there will be no releases stemming from OVW shutting down and that they will all be relocated to Tampa after finishing a few more weeks in OVW.

Laurinaitis praised Danny Davis and the track record he had for helping the development of a number of stars including Batista, John Cena and Randy Orton, among others. There's no word yet on the status of OVW trainer Al Snow at this point and he was never mentioned during the talent meeting. Snow and Davis were present during the meeting.

Talent were told the trainers in FCW would be Tom Prichard, Steve Keirn, former WWE star Billy Kidman and one other name I haven't confirmed. FCW is slated to run its first official TV taping later this month and there have been plans in place to run a regular schedule of live events in Florida.

The move had been suspected for some time as the amount of contracted talents working in Louisville had dwindled greatly in the last year and morale in OVW overall had fallen. World Wrestling Entertainment owns the OVW video library, so they will continue to have access to any footage that was produced during its run as a developmental territory.

Bubs101

I wonder is all this focus on Florida coincidental with the rise of TNA?? Sad to see OVW go as it's produced a few of my favourites there at the moment in Morrison, Kennedy and the MIz. In fact, has Florida produced a big name yet. Also hope that Snow lands on his feet

Machismo Fan

Snow was fired.

Fozzy

I think WWE should be looking to have more developmental groups rather than less. There's more chance of finding a new star with more places

Bubs101 wrote: »

I wonder is all this focus on Florida coincidental with the rise of TNA??

I think it's mainly because Steve Keirn was the guy they picked to run the promotion and he's been based in Florida for years. As the article says, there's a lot of WWE officials based there now too, making FCW easier for them to check out than OVW. There was a story a while back about how Johnny Ace wanted Keirn to run the new developmental promotion and not Booker T because he likes the whole scene in Florida, clubs, beaches, etc. I'm sure there's more to it than just that though

Bubs101 wrote: »

In fact, has Florida produced a big name yet.

They only started doing shows a few months ago, it takes time!

Vince135792003

Fozzy wrote: »

I think WWE should be looking to have more developmental groups rather than less. There's more chance of finding a new star with more places

Compare developmental to 7/8 years ago and it's scary. I listened to an old observer show today from 2001 and they were talking so positively about guys in OVW like Randy Orton, John Cena, Shelton Benjamin, Brock Lesnar, Leviathan (Batista) etc...

Today, you hear very little. And a time will come when there will be no Shawn Michaels or Undertaker to keep coming back to.

rossie1977

Bubs101 wrote: »

I wonder is all this focus on Florida coincidental with the rise of TNA?? Sad to see OVW go as it's produced a few of my favourites there at the moment in Morrison, Kennedy and the MIz. In fact, has Florida produced a big name yet. Also hope that Snow lands on his feet

kofi kingston is the first from there. i have no doubt in my mind that young ted dibiase jr will follow soon enough; his appetite for the pro-wrestling business is first-rate, i had to laugh when he said that his dad forced him to study business admin in college instead of letting him wrestling straight out of high-school

Mike Jarvi aka giant titan will probably get called up because of his huge size in the near future

flahavaj

Bubs101 wrote: »

the rise of TNA??

What rise!? Have I missed something?

Fozzy

flahavaj wrote: »

What rise!? Have I missed something?

Didn't you hear Disco Inferno's interview?! The ratings are up!

Bubs101

flahavaj wrote: »

What rise!? Have I missed something?

I think to have gotten where TNA has in 5 years is phenomenal. Quite a rise if you ask me considering how long OVW has been there for the WWE and how long TNA has been in Florida

Vince135792003

Bubs101 wrote: »

I think to have gotten where TNA has in 5 years is phenomenal.

-- www.wrestlingobserver.com The UFC show on 4/19 in Montreal was almost completely sold out yesterday, before tickets went on sale to the public, and is now completely clean. They are saying it will be a larger crowd than for the 3/1 Columbus, OH show and break the UFC record.

Arguably phenomenal (or at least very impressive).

www.wrestlingobserver.com
--On the other hand, with just as many television viewers, TNA has sold less than 1,500 tickets for Sunday's show at the Bi-Lo Center in Greenville, SC. They are papering like crazy, including $100 tickets being given away to Bi-Lo Center contacts for free.

Not so phenomenal.

flahavaj

Bubs101 wrote: »

I think to have gotten where TNA has in 5 years is phenomenal. Quite a rise if you ask me considering how long OVW has been there for the WWE and how long TNA has been in Florida

Yes is "phenomenal" how they continue to sell out that Impact Zone week in week out....:eek:

I'm hoping you're using the word phenomenal in the AJ Styles sense, as in not at all.

Bubs101

I use the word phenomenal because it is. They're on a low now and I accept that but it doesn't detract from what they did in the past 5 years. I don't see what your saying about selling out the impact zone? Making friends with Universal is hardly a stupid move, getting a 2 hour global TV-deal in 5 years is unbelievable and getting a backer like Panda Energy to cover all your costs while you aggressively try to push forward is phenomenal and getting a computer game which looks alot better than S. v R. is phenomenal

As for the UFC, they've been around for longer than 5 years, their biggest competitor couldn't break America before they collapsed and they caught the wave of dissatisfaction with boxing to reach the next level. I don't know much about the UFC but I'd be curious to see where they were after the first 5 years

rizzla

WWE really is kicking itself in the arse. They should be opening more developmental feds, building the stars of tomorrow and crap like that. I think I read a powerslam where they had an interview with Jim Cornette and he said something like the WWE developmentals turn a profit and there should be more. I'd agree, if the it's making money, making future stars, then why close them down or relocate.

flahavaj

Bubs101 wrote: »

I use the word phenomenal because it is. They're on a low now and I accept that but it doesn't detract from what they did in the past 5 years. I don't see what your saying about selling out the impact zone? Making friends with Universal is hardly a stupid move, getting a 2 hour global TV-deal in 5 years is unbelievable and getting a backer like Panda Energy to cover all your costs while you aggressively try to push forward is phenomenal and getting a computer game which looks alot better than S. v R. is phenomenal

As for the UFC, they've been around for longer than 5 years, their biggest competitor couldn't break America before they collapsed and they caught the wave of dissatisfaction with boxing to reach the next level. I don't know much about the UFC but I'd be curious to see where they were after the first 5 years

Panda Energy's involvement in covering TNA's sinking ship is surely more an indictment of their innate stupidity than any great achievement on TNA's part as a company. So if they are covering all the costs of the comopany, what happens if they see sense tomorrow and withdraw their backing? They'd be like Chelsea if Abramovich ****ed off, completely up **** creek without a paddle, because in their own right they are making nowhere near enough to cover even a fraction of theirtheir costs, not when they're only able to sell 1500 tickets to a PPV in a 14,000 seater arena.

And I find it laughable that you think that a computer game's graphics is in some way something for which to heap praise upon a WRESTLING company!? They must be ****ting themselves in Stanford, i can see Vince firing his computer programmers now....:eek:

I love the way you fail to mention the TV ratings that have not budged in over 2 years, the frankly pathetic average of around 30,000 PPV buys, these being the true indicators of how less than phenomenal TNA are performing, but hey as long as that computer game looks good.....;)

Vince135792003

Bubs101 wrote: »

I don't know much about the UFC but I'd be curious to see where they were after the first 5 years

Well let's focus on when Zuffa purchased the company in 2001. The Fertitta's bought it for 2 million dollars. They had no tv deal and hadn't returned to ppv. It was a company bleeding money and continued to bleed money for about 2 years.

Fast forward to 2006 (5 years later) and well everyone knows the story but in a sentence, they began to make LOTS of money and continue to do so.

Maybe the same will happen for TNA someday. Under the current people in charge though, it'll be down to more luck than skill.

I guess to be still around after 5 years is an achievement and the fact that they are on prime time tv. Theres's nothing about the company that's phenomenal leaving aside some of their wrestlers. Not tv numbers. Not ticket sales. Not house show numbers. Not ppv buys. And that's what it all boils down to.

Bubs101

flahavaj wrote: »

Panda Energy's involvement in covering TNA's sinking ship is surely more an indictment of their innate stupidity than any great achievement on TNA's part as a company. So if they are covering all the costs of the comopany, what happens if they see sense tomorrow and withdraw their backing? They'd be like Chelsea if Abramovich ****ed off, completely up **** creek without a paddle, because in their own right they are making nowhere near enough to cover even a fraction of theirtheir costs, not when they're only able to sell 1500 tickets to a PPV in a 14,000 seater arena.

And I find it laughable that you think that a computer game's graphics is in some way something for which to heap praise upon a WRESTLING company!? They must be ****ting themselves in Stanford, i can see Vince firing his computer programmers now....:eek:

I highlighted the key word for you there . There's mo indication that they are going to leave so that's a brilliant move on the part of TNA. They effectively have a blank check. And obviously the PPV ticket sales and buy rates are crap. There's no defending them and the excuse that they're moving into new territory with their PPVs is not an excuse but it is an example of their ambition that they're willing to hold them outside of Florida and sometimes risks don't pay off.

As for the Video game, I actualy think it could be a massive boost to TNA. I wasn't just talking about the graphics of the game but the previews seem to be speaking of it very highly and if kids start buying the game because they want to have another wrestling game, I'd be surprised if they didn't start chooning in. It's a very effective way to tap into a younger audience and TNA are clearly taking it seriously. If you look at the WWE game, the newest roster member was Cor Von who was there a good 11 months before the game came out but TNA have Booker in there despite the fact he's only been there for 3 months. If it gets good reviews it could have a big impact

Bubs101

Vince135792003 wrote: »

Well let's focus on when Zuffa purchased the company in 2001. The Fertitta's bought it for 2 million dollars. They had no tv deal and hadn't returned to ppv. It was a company bleeding money and continued to bleed money for about 2 years.

Fast forward to 2006 (5 years later) and well everyone knows the story but in a sentence, they began to make LOTS of money and continue to do so.

Maybe the same will happen for TNA someday. Under the current people in charge though, it'll be down to more luck than skill.

I guess to be still around after 5 years is an achievement and the fact that they are on prime time tv. Theres's nothing about the company that's phenomenal leaving aside some of their wrestlers. Not tv numbers. Not ticket sales. Not house show numbers. Not ppv buys. And that's what it all boils down to.

In fairness you seem to be saying longer than 5 years and they also had the added benefit that there was no bigger Ultimat Fighting company for them to compete with. I also think it's a bit harsh to criticize the guys in charge because they were the guys who got TNA of the ground in the first place.

As for the numbers, well their TV numbers had to be good enough because they were given an extra hour along with an extended contract by Spike and they've just been moved from Bravo 2 to Bravo 1 (admittedly not the BBC). The TV companies seem to be happy with the numbers so I see no problem there. Obviously the others you mentioned are terrible but alsong as Panda are willing to cover them for the money they lose I don't think it's as serious as it seems

Vince135792003

Bubs101 wrote: »

just been moved from Bravo 2 to Bravo 1

It's been a phenomenal 5 years alright.

Spike can be happy with a 1.2 because all Spike cares about is Spike. They don't care if TNA is doing crap ppv buys.

Chanel four can be happy with Endemol if Big Brother draws 5 million people each night. But if Endemol are only getting 100 people to text in their vote at 30p a pop each week, does that make the show successful from Endemols perspective? Not really if the year before they were getting 10000 people to vote in. Not a perfect analogy but I hope you get my point.

Can TNA be happy (after getting stars like Angle, Booker T etc.., getting 2 hours and being on at 9 o'clock) if out of those 1.5 million tv viewers, 30000 buy their shows?

Back to UFC, I just feel what they have done is phenomenal. This was a company that couldn't even get on ppv (never mind basic tv) when Dana White took over. Nobody would touch them. And look where they are today and it wasn't easy. It didn't happen overnight but the guy clearly had a plan and with a bit of luck thrown in he succeeded.

Maybe the **** will hit the fan and they'll take a nose dive someday but from a business perspective, it is phenomenal period for UFC.

The fact that they had no competition is a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing because when they made it big, they didn't have to share the boom with anybody really.

However, it was a curse because for all intents and purposes, at the very begining they had to create an audience for their shows. MMA was new to basic tv and they had to find many new fans. There was always a segment that was going to watch but thats not the reason they get 500000 plus for a ppv. They had to capture many more fans.

In comparison, there is a pool of wrestling fans out there who TNA can get and not just those who watch WWE. In fact I'd say there's nearly just as many ex-wrestling fans as there are people watching the shows right now. Just llok at the numbers even when WCW and WWE weren't doing great business in the mid 1990's. I mean when WCW was around (even when it was brutal) they were still getting a 2.1 plus). They need to find a way to get those people back.

Bubs101

Vince135792003 wrote: »

Back to UFC, I just feel what they have done is phenomenal. This was a company that couldn't even get on ppv (never mind basic tv) when Dana White took over. Nobody would touch them. And look where they are today and it wasn't easy. It didn't happen overnight but the guy clearly had a plan and with a bit of luck thrown in he succeeded.

Maybe the **** will hit the fan and they'll take a nose dive someday but from a business perspective, it is phenomenal period for UFC.

The fact that they had no competition is a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing because when they made it big, they didn't have to share the boom with anybody really.

However, it was a curse because for all intents and purposes, at the very begining they had to create an audience for their shows. MMA was new to basic tv and they had to find many new fans. There was always a segment that was going to watch but thats not the reason they get 500000 plus for a ppv. They had to capture many more fans.

In comparison, there is a pool of wrestling fans out there who TNA can get and not just those who watch WWE. In fact I'd say there's nearly just as many ex-wrestling fans as there are people watching the shows right now. Just llok at the numbers even when WCW and WWE weren't doing great business in the mid 1990's. I mean when WCW was around (even when it was brutal) they were still getting a 2.1 plus). They need to find a way to get those people back.

I don't see the UFC taking a nosedive and I have alot of time for the comapny and have just started getting into it as well but if Pride was as big as the WWE is now in America surely the UFC would have had much more trouble getting to were it is now and from the looks of Wikipedia it is 14 years old. Also, the Pro Wrestling audience has probably gotten smaller since the UFC took off so much so TNA could be overestimating the potential audience

Vince135792003

Bubs101 wrote: »

Pride was as big as the WWE is now in America surely the UFC would have had much more trouble getting to were it is now

In some ways if Pride had been established it might have been easier. UFC had to break alot of big doors down on it's own (getting MMA back on mainstream tv, getting back on ppv, getting states to regulate them as well having to overcome the stigma of "human cock fighting" as well as how MMA was marketed in the past). I take your point though.

Also the UFC under Meyrowitz in the early years is to be honest a completely different one than today. Just a totally different focus and perspective. They marketed in a way that was successful short term and damaging long term.

The UFC of today began in 2001 when Zuffa took it over.

Bubs101

Vince135792003 wrote: »

In some ways if Pride had been established it might have been easier. UFC had to break alot of big doors down on it's own (getting MMA back on mainstream tv, getting back on ppv, getting states to regulate them as well having to overcome the stigma of "human cock fighting" as well as how MMA was marketed in the past). I take your point though.

Did McCain's comments not get the UFC more media attention then it ever could have hoped for and help it out in the long run?

Fozzy

Bubs101 wrote: »

Did McCain's comments not get the UFC more media attention then it ever could have hoped for and help it out in the long run?

His comments lead to it getting taken off tv and most PPV providers, so I don't think it helped out in any way. Their audience dropped and didn't grow again for many years

Machismo Fan

UFC was founded in 1993.

Fozzy

Machismo Fan wrote: »

UFC was founded in 1993.

Did you read Vince's posts?

Vince135792003

Bubs101 wrote: »

Did McCain's comments not get the UFC more media attention then it ever could have hoped for and help it out in the long run?

No, not the kind of attention your gonna make a sport mainstream. He started making negative comments about UFC in 1995 and they didn't get a deal with Spike tv until 2003ish

Bubs101

I know that but I would have thought that those type of comments would have garnered alot of attention in the 15 states it wasn't banned in for the sport (needless to say I've been at Wikipedia ). Free advertising

Fozzy

But what's the advertising worth if your buyrates go down?

Vince135792003

Bubs101 wrote: »

I know that but I would have thought that those type of comments would have garnered alot of attention in the 15 states it wasn't banned in for the sport (needless to say I've been at Wikipedia ). Free advertising

Well getting a tv show proved to me much better advertising that McCain saying negative things.

Machismo Fan

My point was that by the end of those first 8 years it was failing miserably.

Fozzy

Machismo Fan wrote: »

My point was that by the end of those first 8 years it was failing miserably.

Yes it was, but then different people took charge, basically starting from scratch

Bubs101

I'm not saying it was good in the short term. Keep in mind I do like the UFC and am starting to get into it but I would have thought that those comments were the reason it got mentioned in Friends and that's where most people heard of it first

Fozzy

What does it matter if people had heard of it though if they weren't buying the product?

Vince135792003

Exactly. I didn't start buying any MMA related products because there was an MMA guy on Friends.

I got into it when I started seeing it on tv, specifically their first reality show like millions of others did. In other words, tv matters so use it well.

Bubs101

Because it builds product awareness. The same way as advertising. If, on Friends, they say that the UFC is the most violent agressive sport which sticks two people in a cage and is exciting, it's much better advertising then anything else. keep in mind how much ads were costing at that point during friends so to get one for free in the show itself is massive publicity. People who have heard of the product are infintessimally more likely to buy it than those who haven't

Fozzy

But they didn't buy it! Buyrates went down!

Bubs101

Fozzy wrote: »

But they didn't buy it! Buyrates went down!

After it was mentioned on Friends? I wasn't talking about the McCain incident and I never claimed that that had short term benefits

Fozzy

Bubs101 wrote: »

After it was mentioned on Friends? I wasn't talking about the McCain incident and I never claimed that that had short term benefits

Friends mentioned it in mid-1997, they were forced off most PPV providers a few months before that, so buyrates were down the whole time. Two years later they couldn't even get their shows released on video

Vince135792003

Bubs101 wrote: »

After it was mentioned on Friends? I wasn't talking about the McCain incident and I never claimed that that had short term benefits

What is your point bringing all of this up anyway (Friends, McCain etc...)?

Remember this all started when you said what TNA had done in 5 years is phenomenal.

Bubs101

Vince135792003 wrote: »

What is your point bringing all of this up anyway (Friends, McCain etc...)?

Remember this all started when you said what TNA had done in 5 years is phenomenal.

I was just wondering why the UFC didn't reach such heights in their first 5 years . I was just curious as to the start of the UFC and when it got big. Seems to have exploded out of nowhere

Fozzy

It really just took off when they got a weekly tv show that they could use to build to something

Charlie

Without having a pop Bubs, you're logic about awareness being the be all and all, regardless of buys, is very much in line with the 'pac man jones' attitude that is killing TNA.

Edit just read this The mind boggles.

Bubs101

charlie mchugh wrote: »

Without having a pop Bubs, you're logic about awareness being the be all and all, regardless of buys, is very much in line with the 'pac man jones' attitude that is killing TNA.

Well considering that I like TNA i wouldn't be that surprised but i never said it was the be all and (end?) all, I simply said that someone who's aware of the product is more likely to buy it then someone who's not

Charlie

I know you're posts didn't say be all and end all, but this one conveyed such

Because it builds product awareness. The same way as advertising. If, on Friends, they say that the UFC is the most violent agressive sport which sticks two people in a cage and is exciting, it's much better advertising then anything else.

I think the Ultimate Fighter has proven that wrong. Numerous other mediums would be much more effective. Getting featured on ESPN's sportscenter is a much bigger deal to Dana white than a shout out on Friends.

Bubs101

What i meant was that in 97 or whenever that episode aired, there was no way that the UFC could have gotten better advertisemnt. Friends was probably second only to Seinfeld in ratings at the time and keep in mind that the company was much smaller back then. Also, that's nothing like the Pacman Jones angle, which I never supported

Charlie

Bubs101 wrote: »

Also, that's nothing like the Pacman Jones angle, which I never supported

What hasn't? If you're talking Friends, then no, of course not. That didn't take up any on air time on UFC programming.

If you're talking about the story I linked, then I would strongly disagree. That's arguably even worse as they are letting NASCAR take over every aspect of that segment, no TNA wrestler will gain any draw from it. This is what is killing TNA. They spent $250,000 on Pac-man yet (from what the lads on BTR say) they are tight as fook when it comes to spending a dime on marketing their PPV's or house shows.

Vince135792003

charlie mchugh wrote: »

Wt hasn't? If you're talking friends, then no, of course not. that didn't take up any on air time on UFC programming.

If you're talking about the story I linked, then I would strongly disagree. That's arguably even worse as they are letting NASCAR take over every aspect of that segment, no TNA wrestler will gain any draw from it. This is what is killing TNA. They spent $250,000 on Pac-man yet (from what the lads on BTR say) they are tight as fook when it comes to spending dime on marketing there PPV's or house shows.

I actually think the other part that you linked to is worse. From the observer:

Recently a TNA wrestler approached members of the creative team to address problems he sees with the company's booking - logic gaps, overbooking, unrealistic stuff and poor build for Pay-Per-Views. The wrestler was told, "We can't be UFC, so we try to be the exact opposite.

Charlie

Vince135792003 wrote: »

I actually think the other part that you linked to is worse. From the observer:

Possibly, but i would take that with a pinch of salt. Seems like its a comment designed to stir up anti-TNA feelings (as if they need any help)

Vince135792003

charlie mchugh wrote: »

Possibly, but i would take that with a pinch of salt. Seems like its a comment designed to stir up anti-TNA feelings (as if they need any help)

Well it's a quote from this weeks observer and honestly I'd believe it from looking at the bits of the show I see. Glen Gilberrti more or less said it on that debate with Konan.

Charlie

Vince135792003 wrote: »

Well it's a quote from this weeks observer and honestly I'd believe it from looking at the bits of the show I see. Glen Gilberrti more or less said it on that debate with Konan.

Can't argue with that then.

Man o man I just wish they'd get it right, the potential they had 2 years ago to do something brilliant :rolleyes: Anyone remember when TNA used to be chanted at WWE shows.

Fozzy

When I first clicked that link it said a WWE wrestler. I just assumed it meant TNA though. It's so frustrating when you hear things like that. The biggest thing that they're opposite with the UFC in is success