The Death (Sale) of TNA ?

LeeJM

Forgot all about her!

Monokne

LeeJM wrote: »

Cant wait for Clare Lynch to return as the secret investor thanks to all the hush hush money she got from AJ. And she will be accompanied by the mysterious ninjas that abducted Joe and drew a penis on his face.

****1/2

Reebrock

LeeJM wrote: »

Cant wait for Clare Lynch to return as the secret investor thanks to all the hush hush money she got from AJ. And she will be accompanied by the mysterious ninjas that abducted Joe and drew a penis on his face.

I found her oddly attractive. Didn't she quit the company / story line half way through because she thought it would be detrimental to her acting aspirations? And or idiots writing to her other employers for ad gigs?

Monokne

Reebrock wrote: »

I found her oddly attractive. Didn't she quit the company / story line half way through because she thought it would be detrimental to her acting aspirations? And or idiots writing to her other employers for ad gigs?

"Odd" being the operative term!!


Here she is as Olive Oil, in Universal Studios Theme Park, which is where TNA found her and presumably where she went back to:

montyrebel

hoping that Paul Heyman has taken it over

hufpc8w3adnk65

montyrebel wrote: »

hoping that Paul Heyman has taken it over

I doubt he has the resources to do that but it would make for some interesting tv

Monokne

It seems unlikely to me that a WWE contracted performer would not be prevented running in opposition to them.

PTH2009

Monokne wrote: »

It seems unlikely to me that a WWE contracted performer would not be prevented running in opposition to them.

unless WWE buys it and Heymen can run it

Imagine if Triple H and Steph bought TNA :eek::eek::eek:

jaykhunter

I don't think WWE (or most businesses) want to assume TNA's massive debt for a dead brand. It would be cool to recreate the Simulcast RAW moment though, seeing Shane on Nitro was crazy!

Monokne

I get your idea brother Jay, but this version of TNA wouldn't really allow that. For a starters TNA isn't live and for seconds, there'd be no one watching when Shane walked out on Impact.

CastorTroy

If they bought TNA, who do you think they would want back and who wouldn't want to go back?
I think EC3 on Smackdown with a differnt name, but needs the same theme.
Bobby Lashley on Raw. He'd be a great heel in the title picture.

Monokne

Lashley is a natural for a Lesnar match down the line.

CastorTroy

Yep, that's the other reason I was thinking of him for Raw.

Blue_Dabadee

I think The Wolves, EC3, Hardys, Lashley, Mike Bennett and Maria are only names worth picking from TNA.

I have always wanted to see Maidson Rayne in WWE, but I don't think she would work with their full time schedule.

riffmongous

CastorTroy wrote: »

If they bought TNA, who do you think they would want back and who wouldn't want to go back?
I think EC3 on Smackdown with a differnt name, but needs the same theme.
Bobby Lashley on Raw. He'd be a great heel in the title picture.

What about, 'The Third Version of Carter'?

Pentecost

Carter the unstoppable suplex machine

CastorTroy

Blue_Dabadee wrote: »

I have always wanted to see Maidson Rayne in WWE, but I don't think she would work with their full time schedule.

Off topic slightly, but didn't she turn heel for a few minutes attacking Gail?

I doubt they'd let EC3 use Carter.

As seen in the Hadys feud, Decay are more like what the Wyatts were meant to be.
Could maybe integrate 1 or 2 X Division guys into the Cruiserweights.
And Allie as well, because she's Allie.

Ben Gadot

Blue_Dabadee wrote: »

I think The Wolves, EC3, Hardys, Lashley, Mike Bennett and Maria are only names worth picking from TNA.

I have always wanted to see Maidson Rayne in WWE, but I don't think she would work with their full time schedule.

I don't typically watch TNA but having watched BFG I'd add DJZ to the Cruiserweights and Decay.

Monokne

Ben Gadot wrote: »

I don't typically watch TNA but having watched BFG I'd add DJZ to the Cruiserweights and Decay.

DELETE DELETE DELETE

Wacky Steve is a nothing, and fat, slow, washed up Abyss would offer zero to WWE in 2016.

briany

When we say the 'death' of TNA, isn't this assuming it would be WWE buying the company (if it does indeed sell and this isn't some protracted head game)? I would think they'd be the main entity who'd have an interest in dissolving the company and cherry picking intellectual property. Anyone else who buys it would, I should think, have an interest in running the company, because they probably wouldn't be out to vanquish competition as WWE would, but would there be many out there with both an interest in running the thing and financial means to not only buy it but, presumably, be able to inject enough funds to ensure stable operation for the foreseeable future? Then again, I'm certainly far from an expert on these matters. Does the most burden for financing fall on the majority shareholder?

And would WWE even have a genuine interest? I thought I heard that WWE doesn't even view TNA as a competitor. For all I know, it could be in WWE's best interest for TNA to continue existing as a promotion that nurtures both future WWE talent and often a harbour for its castoffs who could return better than before. All in a package that WWE doesn't have to pay for, sort of like a free NXT.

Bounty Hunter

briany wrote: »

When we say the 'death' of TNA, isn't this assuming it would be WWE buying the company (if it does indeed sell and this isn't some protracted head game)? I would think they'd be the main entity who'd have an interest in dissolving the company and cherry picking intellectual property. Anyone else who buys it would, I should think, have an interest in running the company, because they probably wouldn't be out to vanquish competition as WWE would, but would there be many out there with both an interest in running the thing and financial means to not only buy it but, presumably, be able to inject enough funds to ensure stable operation for the foreseeable future? Then again, I'm certainly far from an expert on these matters. Does the most burden for financing fall on the majority shareholder?

And would WWE even have a genuine interest? I thought I heard that WWE doesn't even view TNA as a competitor. For all I know, it could be in WWE's best interest for TNA to continue existing as a promotion that nurtures both future WWE talent and often a harbour for its castoffs who could return better than before. All in a package that WWE doesn't have to pay for, sort of like a free NXT.

The only3 names i've heard were the WWE, The guys behind ROH and Billy Corgan and even with him I heard talk he would like to re-brand it so TNA would potentially be gone or dead if any of them were the buyers.

Apparently nobody is sure where from but they got money for BFG (obviously) and their tapings though so it could be a while before sale talk is concluded what with those tapings supposedly being enough to last them till near the end of the year.

briany

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

The only3 names i've heard were the WWE, The guys behind ROH and Billy Corgan and even with him I heard talk he would like to re-brand it so TNA would potentially be gone or dead if any of them were the buyers.

Apparently nobody is sure where from but they got money for BFG (obviously) and their tapings though so it could be a while before sale talk is concluded what with those tapings supposedly being enough to last them till near the end of the year.

That's interesting because I wouldn't think that the guys behind RoH are particularly loaded. They might be able to get a controlling share in TNA for a relative bargain, but would it be at such a large financial cost to them that it wouldn't be worth the risk? That's just how it looks to me, given that RoH seems like a company of roughly the same size.

Monokne

FITE TV have come to the table but are believed to be too late to the party, so to speak. It's Corgan or bust in all likelihood. Aroluxe have walked.

sky88

Monokne wrote: »

FITE TV have come to the table but are believed to be too late to the party, so to speak. It's Corgan or bust in all likelihood. Aroluxe have walked.

Surely corgan wouldnt have the money on his own to buy if the company has as much debt that is rumoured. he must have investors backing him.

With the debt he would almost be better starting a new company but then im sure he needs the tv deal with pop and thats why he is trying to save it.

Monokne

That's exactly it. Keller mentioned Corgan's net worth was in the $50m range, in which case with the debt and the company you're still talking a fifth of his fortune. FWIW he claims it is his own money.

J. Marston

JR and some other journalist saying that WWE are buying the video library but Corgan is buying the company and rebranding.

briany

J. Marston wrote: »

JR and some other journalist saying that WWE are buying the video library but Corgan is buying the company and rebranding.

That's a great deal for all sides, really. WWE gets the rights to nearly 15 years of stuff, while the promotion formerly known as TNA gets a big cash injection and the opportunity to start fresh, but with established talent.

My main concern would only be does Corgan know what he's doing, long-term?

Sirsok

What exactly is corgan buying if he isnt inheriting the tape library, the wrestler contracts and the ring? Would it be cheaper to start on his own fresh? Can corgan use any footage?

Monokne

The TV contracts in the UK, India and USA. That is literally the only thing of value the company possesses other than the tape library (which Corgan can't monetize anyway).

Lord TSC

I would guess he keeps the wrestler contracts as well?

I can't imagine WWE will want to be advertising whatever the new TNA is on the network, but it will make for some awesome network specials on the likes of Joe, Styles et al.