|
|
Post by Velkontés on Apr 14, 2010 2:47:56 GMT -5
Eh, it's not Scott Hall's fault, so I started a new thread.
Just to recap:
Scott Hall: $3,000 per appearance
Kristy Hemme: $125,000 per year - to be an interviewer
Awesome Kong: $400 per appearance - to wrestle. She complained and she was fired.
It's not like WWE. Nobody buys TNA ppvs or dvds. The only "thing" TNA does is its TV shows, and the Knockouts are just as big a draw as most of the men. Essentially the women in this company are being paid a fraction of the amount the men are making, for the same work. Like, a tiny fraction. I'm not a lawyer but it seems like pretty blatant sex discrimination.
So my prediction is that TNA is going to have a lawsuit on its hands sooner or later. Or, more likely, a crapload of awful PR when some media outlet picks up on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by MasterSnit on Apr 14, 2010 14:45:21 GMT -5
I don't care to look up the ratings all the time, but I'm sure I've read that the segments with the Knockouts are often the most viewed parts of the show. So they are essentially rewarding their main draws with next to nothing. It is bullshit.
Especially when you realise that while Daffney is getting chokeslammed into thumbtacks for a few hundred quid, Scotch Hall is blowing his three grand in a bar somewhere after spending a few minutes in the ring slurring his lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by Naitch on Apr 14, 2010 15:17:07 GMT -5
TNA is trying to make a profit while paying the performers as little as possible. Think of it as your boss and you. If they could they would pay Scott Hall $200 a night too. But Scott Hall has made a name for himself. If Kong had stuck around she probably would have gotten paid more when it came time to negotiate a new contract.
|
|
|
|
Post by Champ on Apr 15, 2010 23:10:15 GMT -5
you all have good points.
Like I mentioned on the other thread, when I look back, if it's only going by guys NOT under contract, it makes more sense now that Hall makes the most out of everyone.
However, the men are always going to get paid more than the women. The men are the biggest attraction regardless of ratings. Let's be real. But that doesn't mean an experienced knockout deserves the shaft
|
|
|
|
Post by Velkontés on Apr 16, 2010 1:20:25 GMT -5
Here's a link from a few years ago about (alleged) WWE salaries: www.wrestlescoop.com/info/salaries.shtmlHHH made $2m/year, Cena $1.7m (that was when he was just getting huge). Those are the uber-draws. If you look a little lower down the card, then you have Edge, Orton and Kane in the 700-800k range. The top women like Lita, Victoria and Torrie made $250-300k. So a mid-upper card man in the WWE makes 3x as much as the top women. TNA, on the other hand, a promotion that hardly sell any PPVs or DVDs or tickets, apparently feel justified in paying their top female performer, Awesome Kong, a tenth as much as a middling attraction like Scott Hall. Was she making 1/25th as much as (say) Kevin Nash? I was stunned at just how much more money the men were making than the women in TNA. An upper-card man in WWE gets paid 3x as much as the women because he brings in much more money. Are TNA really getting 10x as much value from Scott Hall as Awesome Kong? And Naitch, I understand your point about how they would pay everyone $200 if they could. But if they're prepared to let their popular female performers walk because they refuse to pay them more than peanuts, out of principle (whilst having no qualms about pissing $3000 a pop on a washed-up has-been, for negligible benefit), then it's still sexist bullshit. |
|
|
|
Post by Naitch on Apr 16, 2010 7:44:18 GMT -5
Is it sexist or is Gail Kim only worth $3000 night to them? I'm going to speak in total assumptions here. Kong was on her first contract with TNA. First contract people are all going to get paid very little if they come in as unknowns anywhere. When I first came in the Air Force I was making $600 a month. Why pay a lot for someone you don't know if they will perform well or have backstage problems?
I'm sure Scott Hall's first contracts back in the 80s were very similar to Kongs TNA contract.
|
|
|
|
Post by Velkontés on Apr 16, 2010 19:45:24 GMT -5
Well, they don't have a problem paying a lot for Scott Hall, who is the dictionary definition of questionable performamce and backstage problems.
Kong came in as an unknown, but by the time she left she had 2+ years' service under her belt and was probably one of the more recognisable performers on their roster. Is that really worth barely-above-minimum? I would make the argument that her VORP is comparable with many of the men on the roster, in the sense that the most of the men aren't making this company any money either. Again, it's the sheer size of the gulf that amazes me, and leads me to draw the conclusion that it's sexist BS. Even the Fed pays their women well, relative to the men.
I guess my annoyance at this also feeds into my bemusement at how this company makes money. Really, TNA should be paying everyone peanuts, because they have no visible income. Yet they can give Kristy a $125k salary and Scott Hall $3,000 a pop. Somebody, somewhere (Spike TV? Dixie?), is losing a crapload of money on TNA. They have to be. TNA is the Portsmouth FC of wrestling companies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Champ on Apr 16, 2010 21:44:34 GMT -5
I do feel there is an EXTREME difference. They should meet a little more halfway. Hall basically does next to nothing. So Hogan should say, ok Scot, you have to get back into shape and step up if you want your $3,000 per appearance.
In other words, even though Hall has a name for himself, he's doing next to nothing for that money while people are breaking their asses for 1/10 of that. The problem is TNA isn't taking work ethic into consideration when they pay their guys. If Hall is only going to be stumbling around and cutting promos and rarely taking bumps, he should only be getting $1,500 - $2,000 per appearance and distribute an extra $200 per appearance for 5 or 6 guys/knockout that really earned it.
In a nutshell, I agree with both of you because Naitch is right, Scot earned the name so he deserves to make more than the newer guys. But I agree with V that the fractions of what people make compared to Hall is a little ridiculous, especially when they have a lot to offer and proved it
|
|
|
|
Post by Velkontés on Apr 18, 2010 7:14:12 GMT -5
Yeah, like I said right at the top, I don't begrudge Hall making all that money. Good for him.
Now I just have to save up $300 to hire Daffney for the night.
|
|
|
|
Post by Champ on Apr 18, 2010 23:18:03 GMT -5
I didn't even think of it that way! ;D
Here's another prediction,
Waltman misses TNA Lockdown because he's an undependable douche
|
|
|
|
Post by Naitch on Apr 19, 2010 11:24:41 GMT -5
Waltman can't have too many chances left with people that have mainstream TV in the US left. I hope if you gets another chance he makes the best of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Champ on Apr 20, 2010 0:27:06 GMT -5
They said Taz took shots at him at the PPV for missing it. So he probably got the go ahead to sort of expose him
|
|
|
|
Post by Velkontés on Apr 20, 2010 6:27:58 GMT -5
So apparently TNA is finally debuting their ranking system next week.
My prediction is it's going to be so complex and logic-defying that only the world's most-powerful super-computers will be able to figure it out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Champ on Apr 20, 2010 13:06:34 GMT -5
Waltman can't have too many chances left with people that have mainstream TV in the US left. I hope if you gets another chance he makes the best of it. The latest word is that Waltman was telling friends over the weekend that he had no intentions of showing up. So he knew he was going to screw them. It looks like his chances are up. I'd like to give Scot Hall credit for at least showing up. But how do you give credit to someone simply for showing up to work? Especially when he makes like $500 a minute |
|
|
|
Post by Naitch on Apr 20, 2010 13:21:11 GMT -5
Waltman can't have too many chances left with people that have mainstream TV in the US left. I hope if you gets another chance he makes the best of it. The latest word is that Waltman was telling friends over the weekend that he had no intentions of showing up. So he knew he was going to screw them. It looks like his chances are up. I'd like to give Scot Hall credit for at least showing up. But how do you give credit to someone simply for showing up to work? Especially when he makes like $500 a minute What an asshole. Scott Hall is bound to no show again sometime soon though. Its like thats his little adrenaline rush. |
|
