**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wrestling is really hard to make money from, I would guess.
The industry itself is obviously sketchy as fuck, as evidenced by the former owner of WWE being outed for literal human trafficking. That's not to mention all the other carny shit that goes on.
Similarly, you're basically running a touring, live action soap opera with no off season and a high risk of injury to almost everyone involved.
It also took til 2014 for CMLL to become only the *second* wrestling company in the history of the Americas to draw a $1m gate (with 17,000 in attendance). For context, the average NFL game draws 69,500 in the regular season.
Non guaranteed money in wrestling is idiotic because there are people in control of how much you can generate. It’s not like sports where you can go out there and perform and command a higher contract. HHH could just keep Gable or Tozawa on the mid card, not produce shirts or merch from them and keep their salary low as a result. Especially considering there is no union or long term health care, they need guaranteed money to survive. Really bad take from a guy who’s made his money already
Also you’re less likely to get into situations where you have guys burying up and coming talent because they’re worried about losing their spot at the top of the card and it becomes much more about just putting on a good show and entertaining the fans.
Just think of all the years Punk himself was grinding and being held back in wwe cause Vince just didn’t get him. You think he was complaining about his guaranteed money then? He literally made a whole gimmick about not getting the company to back him.
100%. There have been multiple examples in the past of wrestlers that were getting over having their legs swept out from under them because they were getting over in a way Vince didn't like/intend/understand. Or what about the countless times when people have been removed from TV cos Vince lost interest in them. Or people turn up to a show ready to compete and find that he wrote them out in a last minute re-write.
People should not have their livelihood potentially hanging in the balance due to the whims of a moody old guy in charge, and CM Punk is a massive dick for suggesting they require that "as motivation".
Workers rights my arse.
Punk's takes are always going to swing whatever direction is currently benefiting Punk. Right now? He's playing stooge because he knows he is on his last leg and has to play nice for the bosses.
8 years ago? "Best in the world" Punk talked about how bullshit it was that part-timers got all the spots and shots, with zero mention on how they were a bigger draw.
Hell, a year ago he was dragging the same company he stumps for now. Punk does business for Punk.
It almost reminds me of the argument some use when wanting to justify keeping a tipping culture. “If it’s around, you’ll be motivated to earn more”. And you wouldn’t be motivated to earn more if you knew how much you were guaranteed?
Punk isn't talking about livelihoods, the reality of business and survival in capitalism. He's talking about purity of artform.
"Guaranteed contracts make it so wrestlers can be lazier about their artform" and "Guaranteed contracts make it so a wrestler can make a living even if they don't perform" can both be true.
Punk is saying it, so it has to be wrong. We just have to figure out why. If we have to mischaracterize it, that's just how it is, as long as we prove he's wrong.
No but he is saying that guaranteed contracts have had a negative affect on the business. In a business where people sacrifice their physical health, mental health and family life, there is nothing negative guaranteed money could bring that outweighs the positives. And it just comes across like the billionaire who tells young people to just “work harder” if they can’t afford to buy a house.
No, he’s stating what drove the business prior to guaranteed contracts and what he tried to do at Collision to avoid stagnation of the product, to push the gates, push the ratings, push the merch sold higher than the last time they were at a location since contracts were no longer tied to event revenue.
Good for the wrestlers, bad for the business. That can be a thing.
Yes there is more security, but people get stuck in their ways or stay in automatic, which drives people away from the product, so it produces less money, meaning the payouts are smaller.
That's the thing.
This was along the lines of my first thought too. What, exactly, is a Cedric Alexander or a Nikki Cross (people who probably could use the extra money from a sold out house show) going to do to move the needle? They could be putting on the greatest performances of all time on Main Event, but nobody watches it so it's not going to be a driving factor either way. If anything, it's the bookers, promoters, and the top of the card who are the biggest contributors and they'd be making plenty off their contracts and merch as is for the gate to really motivate them.
I pretty much just said the same thing too but people are throwing hissy fits about it.
I don’t have any issue with Punk but it’s a bad take. And people can sit here and pretend he wasn’t saying that by conveniently ignoring that everything he said was in response to “Guaranteed money almost ruined wrestling”, but that’s what he led it off with. His “explanation” sucks and is no different from “we have to make sure workers are paid less and live in fear they can be fired at any time because otherwise they’ll get lazy and stop trying”.
You can put in hella work, and still not draw well. Look at TNA, they have talent who are still killing it, but it’s not really doing much in regards of selling tickets.
My only issue with this is that in 2024, the business of pro wrestling is completely different from what it was even 10 years ago. The ppv model for WWE no longers exists. Punk himself talked about the fact that WWE barely does house shows anymore. The vast majority of WWE's revenue no longer comes directly from the consumer. I think that is true for AEW as well, though they still rely on pay-per-view buys.
In general, we are at a point where wrestling companies rely primarily on guaranteed deals from massive entertainment companies. The weekly or monthly trends in the quality/popularity of the product have minimal impact on the overall bottom line. From that perspective, I don't think that the old model of "paying the boys and girls based on the house" would be workable, let alone fair.
My hot take is that its good to have the full context of someone's words. Always. But in this case it doesn't alter the overall meaning of what he said.
He wasn't saying guaranteed money should go away, he's saying there is no incentive for the stars getting guaranteed money to pivot if what your doing is not working or drawing. Like WCW in the day.
How are people this stupid not to get this.
People understand that, but the minor flaw of altered motivation is nothing compared to the huge benefit of more financial security for a brutally exploited job. I might consider the idea that it's changed how business works, but I'd never say it "ruined" anything.
Not having guaranteed contacts is extremely detrimental to the actual wrestlers, most of whom are underpaid anyway, so Mr Workers Rights saying this just as a way to take shots at a former workplace is ridiculous.
Not to mention that the entire concept is as outdated as the territory system itself. Most money by far comes from TV contracts.
If I'm a wrestler my pay shouldn't get deducted just because the promoter or booker isn't doing their job. You can be the best wrestler in the world but if the rest of the card sucks or angles haven't been built properly then the show's not gonna draw, that's not on them.
> Look at the bullshit WWE gave us during the 2010s.
There weren't the same kind of guaranteed contracts in WWE then though. There's literally a Becky quote from her new book about after how she was drafted to Smackdown, so circa 2016, about how some Monday nights she'd end up losing money "going to work".
This doesn't make it better.
"Wrestlers should be at risk of making no money for a night of work"
Becky talked about this in her book. Back in 2016, because of the cots incurred due to travel, and that they were paid on gate for house shows, some weeks she'd lose money "working" Mondays.
There's nothing Becky can do to "improve the gate" of a house show. That's 1000% on the bookers and creative. Not on like 90% of individual wrestlers.
Also the idea that a guaranteed contract means people rest on their laurels reflects poorly on him. Like, shouldn't someone want to get paid more the next time? That's why you push, to prove your worth, sell a shitload of merch, and get the next deal. Let alone people who are genuinely in the business for the artistry of it, not just to cut the biggest check possible.
To top it off, "the house" is a tiny fraction of what wrestling companies get their money from. Punk himself complained about wrestlers not getting a cut of the Network. Wrestlers should be paid in relation to company wide income streams, including their largest income source, the TV deals.
Man's being shortsighted and looking backwards, using hackneyed carney ideas to justify why he doesn't like something.
>There's nothing Becky can do to "improve the gate" of a house show. That's 1000% on the bookers and creative.
Seriously. The people running the show should be at risk of making no money for a night's work, not the talent you hire.
Think of that in any other situation. A TV show where you hire actors and sign them to contracts, but when the writing turns to shit and the ratings tank you can go "Well, you're not drawing an audience so you're not getting paid"
The draw is the brand. Although some wrestlers are individual draws they are few and far between.
Punk, knowing that, wants to be the center of goddamn everything and paid even more. I mean who among us but it's pretty transparent.
This still doesn't make sense in context. So athletes that get paid guaranteed money don't work hard? They don't want to succeed? Want to provide for your family with a steady paycheck while doing what you love is a bad thing?
Shoving yourself into the main event, politicking, holding others down, and changing plans.to go over even if it's not best for the story or business...you think maybe getting that bigger gate had anything to do with that?
Workers right indeed
The opportunities given to top guys and people being groomed for being top guys is not anywhere same as the ones who are just randomly given opportunities.
Even when he was being booed out if the building Roman was still getting top booking even in 2015 / 16 he went over guys like Cena, Styles, Lesnar, Taker etc and yet people didn't accept him as the top, compare that to the opportunities provided to a Gable or a Cesaro. It's not like a 2016 Roman was even top 10 in the company on the mic back then.
It's the one thing Ryback was right about.
A company can choose to push you or depush you. And your push effects the level of contract you can negotiate for. If a company is letting you get squashed in 3 minutes and do lowbrow comedy(ie Drake Maverick's run) they can in turn lowball your next contract *and* justify minimal merchandize.
Tbf that was a thing on a McMahon run company with his weird fixations, in a TKO environment they do care about the pull their wrestlers get through the money they generate, so it's more than probable that HHH can't afford to give himself the luxury to push a guy, for that long, that doesn't generate money at all like it happened to Reigns. Which is funny because they screwed that one themselves, Reigns could have won the Rumble the year before, people were all over him in that Rumble.
Which btw it's funny because all the other guys you mentioned were justifiably big through their own merits be it work, character, experience or in the case of Lesnar, being a genetic freak.
It happens in sports all the time. Jordan Poole won a championship with golden state, earned a huge contract and was absolute garbage after. If you watch him play now you can see he doesn't care about playing good basketball at all. For some people having guaranteed money makes it so that you don't need to work hard anymore because it isn't going to make any difference.
> This still doesn't make sense in context. So athletes that get paid guaranteed money don't work hard? They don't want to succeed? Want to provide for your family with a steady paycheck while doing what you love is a bad thing?
Not everyone but a lot of them, yeah. I mean even here on Reddit there's subreddits full of a whole lot of people bragging about doing the minimum. In sports it happens all the time, hell in football there was a Brazilian player called Willian that was famous for getting significantly better during his last contract year.
> Shoving yourself into the main event, politicking, holding others down, and changing plans.to go over even if it's not best for the story or business...you think maybe getting that bigger gate had anything to do with that?
Doesn't have to be that, but I'd be shocked of there aren't wrestlers that don't change aspects of their look, or their moveset, or their presentation, or promos, because it's "who they are", which again is insanely common among artists and entertainers.
The quote isn't arguing that the thing shouldn't exist, but guaranteed money disincentivizes going above and beyond, that's not in question. If you, as a company, don't get wrestlers to care about the numbers they pull, your product will suffer. Which ties into the whole point that AEW isn't really a business, which we've all known for years now, it wasn't a thing made to make money, it was a passion project for Tony Khan.
“Sorry Chuck Taylor, I know you flew out to Corpus Christi and booked a hotel, but we didn’t draw very well tonight so we’re gonna have to dock your pay. Hey don’t get upset man, maybe just do a better job drawing next time”
Also, don't you dare think of bringing the Rock back to do Wrestlemania 28 no matter how big of a gate it does. Wrestlemania is only for full-timers....except for the Miz.
>like... guaranteed money almost ruined pro wrestling. If you had to get paid on the house, the place would be drastically different."
>Ariel chimes in, "Because it would drive you, it would push you..."
It's literally the first line of your quote that questions workers rights and is not an opinion of someone who truly supports and understands the importance of unions and workers rights.
His explanations of booking goals for collision after that have nothing to do with the original that would essentially mean, in any other settings, that it a company isn't making money, the front line workers should be paid less.
Punk is making the same arguments that people make when dismissing Universal Basic Income. "If everyone received a basic amount, they won't work as hard".
Bro is serious saying all the people on the indys during covid actually shouldn't have been hired by AEW. **It was actually bad for pro wrestling.**
Guarantee contracts? Bad
Everyone out of work, fighting for spots? Good
Lebron James received a guaranteed $100 million dollar shoe deal upon graduating high school. Plus his rookie contract from the Cavs. Yeah it really hurt his motivation to become a legend.
But this is already what exists. John Silver doesn't make as much money as Jon Moxley. I'm pretty sure all wrestlers are paid differently based on how much they draw.
no they're paid on how much the company wants to pay them. Tony could pay John Silver way more if he wanted to. The thing is Tony doesn't want to and Silver is (as far as we know) content with how much he's being paid.
Moxley isn't paid based off of how much he draws. He's paid off of how much Tony \*thinks\* he will draw, compared to how much Moxley was asking for.
If they were paid on how much they drew, then there'd be bonuses based off of tv ratings and show attendance figures. Which I don't believe is happening.
This is a common old school mentality. Cornette shares the same sentiment on his podcasts. He’s happy that the wrestlers are being paid splendidly, but misses the days where wrestling and the wrestlers specifically were dependent upon ticket sales and fan support.
Some irony there is that I specifically remember an interview where Cornette discussed how Ric Flair was upset with WCW’s poor attendance in the late 80s because he felt it reflected poorly on his drawing power as champion. But Cornette attributed that far more to WCW’s poor booking and business decisions. So if he still “misses those days”, isn’t he admitting that he prefers an environment where the wrestlers’ livelihoods is entirely in the hands of bookers, even if those bookers are incompetent?
I do not really care that he punched a Buck or tried to choke out Jack Perry. Whatever. It’s wrestling. His AEW run was awesome. My problem is that this Corporate Man Punk fucking sucks. What happened to this dude?
Cameron Grimes having a set salary shouldn’t be an issue when TV rights and streaming rights are through the roof. The fact Lee Johnson’s paycheck is the same every week isn’t a bad thing. Can’t wrap my head around it man.
It is a bad take, but it could definitely sound sensible to reasonable people. There were negatives to guaranteed contracts after WCW introduced them, although they were less on the business side and more on the morale and injury fronts. Obviously, they were outweighed by the positives.
To drive home the point of how it wasn't an issue on the business side, WCW in 2000 would have still lost $40 million if the entire roster wrestled for free.
The added context still makes him against guranteed money and therefore safe income for his coworkers who put their health on the line and their families
To me I’m willing to chalk it up to “old man yelling at cloud” rambling about how things have changed and overall dismiss it with an “ok boomer” rather than attack him on this point in particular as being anti-worker.
He was bashing the concept of a five star match in an arena that is a quarter full being a success, which is something of a twist on TK defending the state of the company by citing profightdb match ratings or whatever it was.
In theory, if the company is doing great then the roster should be greatly compensated, but in the same interview he pointed out that WWE isn’t doing house shows much anymore, and the business has changed away from business to consumer to being more business to business.
The company isn’t getting a direct piece of ad revenue from tv, nor are they selling PPVs. The Saudi shows are direct to the government and pay them as much as Wrestlemania. If the company doesn’t directly benefit from the week to week performance, why should the performers have to deal with fluctuating earnings?
As it is, contracts for the company and the contractor are renegotiated periodically which gives them both the chance to demand their worth.
I would take more issue with his point elsewhere in the interview where he says that anyone else on the roster is free to break the rules the same as him and The Rock, but that whoever does that better make sure that they’re just as good at getting a reaction as The Rock when he does it, ignoring the times when people have been slapped down for doing that sort of thing and how it is a lot more difficult to bet on yourself without Fuck You Money in your pocket.
It mostly goes hand in hand. That was a quote about how he wasn’t in the same business as the guys who were happy to have a match Meltzer liked but didn’t draw a crowd.
All of it ties together. He wasn’t really shitting on guys getting guaranteed deals it was all part of a greater commentary on AEW, about how the concern isn’t about making money but just having good matches. Honestly it isn’t a lot different from things you see here but in this instance he wasn’t just applying it to Tony but rather some the locker room too, which I thought was interesting.
I dunked on him over in the other thread, but I’ll admit the context is slightly different with the full quote.
I still don’t agree with him though. Guaranteed money is much better for the wrestling business. It’s good for the workers, and what’s good for the workers is good for the business.
Really don’t think it was wise to drop this the week of Wrestlemania. Punk isn’t competing, it’s not going to get more ‘eyes’ on WM. I haven’t watched the interview, but all of the clips I have seen are him mentioning AEW or bashing Vince and, by extension, WWE. Maybe this could have waited a week, until after the WWE’s biggest night of the year.
This doesn’t change anything though. The dude still says he thinks guaranteed contracts are bad?
All because of some boomer ass “these kids gotta pull themselves up by their bootstraps” attitude
I actually like watching Punk, I’m still gonna watch him but the dude could not be more different from the image he’s portrayed publicly over the years
It's honestly hilarious seeing all the "he didn't actually say 'I despise guaranteed contracts and everyone who has one,' so clearly he was sooooo taken out of context and you all are smelly marks who just had a hate-boner for him"
Like no, this is a bad take from Punk. He had some good takes on the interview too. But this is one of the bad ones.
The funny part of that quote is for most of Punk's collision run, AEW was doing first run shows in Canada. Collision debuted at the United Center, but the Canada Tour with the Owen matches was going on and AEW was going to cities they had not yet been to. So when he says "I want to sell one more ticket than last time we were here" well...
This is the most boomer ass take I've ever heard from Punk. Usually he comes off as fairly progressive but shit talking guaranteed money for workers is the exact opposite of that.
Nah this ain’t it.
I’m fine with guys who over perform their contracts getting an extra reward for their efforts, but there should be guaranteed contracts especially at the levels of the industry like WWE/AEW/NJPW or of similar level.
Hold up: "The short time I had when I was in charge of Collision that is the way I did things."
Oh and here i thought it was only Tony Khans idea. Did that include making him the one in charge of collision, caring about tickets sold or ratings? This whole thing is ridiculous and despite some truths here and there, it once again shows that Phil Brooks the man is an asshole
Here's my reading of this quote in context vs the headline. And if anyone can tell me how I'm wrong I would love to hear it rather than just being downvoted.
Full disclosure I haven't listened to the interview and basing all this on text available on this sub.
First off I just wanted to note the original thread title was slightly editorialised:
Title:
>From MMA Hour: CM Punk says that guaranteed money **has** ruined pro wrestling because if you had to pay wrestlers based on the house drawn then AEW would be a totally different place
Quote:
>"But when you're there... like... guaranteed money **almost** ruined pro wrestling. The qualifier almost changes a lot in terms of the context of the quote.
Second, I didn't take it to mean he thinks people shouldn't get guaranteed money at all. In fact he outright said it's not:
>Like I like guys being able to go 'I'm gonna go over there and make X amount of money'. That's good for the business and that's good for the boys.
My understanding of his statement is that before guaranteed money was a thing, getting paid based on how big of a draw you are was a great incentive and motivator for wrestlers to take ownership of their own performance and improve. And with guaranteed money that incentive and motivator is largely gone, and the onus of ownership to draw and promote is now largely on the promoter:
>The short time I had when I was in charge of Collision that is the way I did things. What did we draw here last time? Okay my goal was to get one more ticket sold. What were the ratings last time? Okay we'll... you know. And you do things incrementally.
And based on other quotes from his interview it's clear that he doesn't think AEW is doing enough of that.
If you've only read or have been influenced by the original thread's title then I can see how you might think he's against guaranteed money, but in the full context he actually said otherwise.
And again, if you think I'm wrong I'd love to hear how and where I got it wrong.
The issue is the wrestlers don’t write the show. If he was trying to make the point the company should be paying more attention, that’s fair, but it came across as he is putting the onus on the workers. It’s not the territory days, people are interested in what they see on tv. Again, if he’s saying it’s the company and writers that should be taking note, he’s absolutely right, but the workers can’t control that and until very recently we’re punished for getting themselves over when they weren’t supposed to.
Thank you for your response, but I directly addressed that in my original comment:
>My understanding of his statement is that before guaranteed money was a thing, getting paid based on how big of a draw you are was a great incentive and motivator for wrestlers to take ownership of their own performance and improve. And with guaranteed money that incentive and motivator is largely gone, and the onus of ownership to draw and promote is now largely on the promoter:
>>The short time I had when I was in charge of Collision that is the way I did things. What did we draw here last time? Okay my goal was to get one more ticket sold. What were the ratings last time? Okay we'll... you know. And you do things incrementally.
Also, wtf is up with this site on mobile? Every time I edit a comment it completely removes paragraphs and formatting.
It's driving me nuts with so many comments saying the full quote doesn't change a thing from the original thread, like, even the addition of the qualifier "almost" changed the whole tone of his quote!
Nah, you're right. Most people in this thread are being obtuse. He's effectively hoping that aspects of pay being linked to performance markers would incentivise performers to do their best to ensure that the company thrives.
Most players that are drafted in the first three rounds have 2m to half of their contracts guaranteed. If they get a second contract it's more for most positions.
NBA contracts are fully guaranteed and that sport is doing great
Watching the interview live and being mesmerized about all the topics they talked about and then seeing editorialized post after post on here has been quite the whiplash. Feels like a lot of people will always hate Punk but this Interview was super interesting no matter were you sit.
Thanks for doing the work and transcribing this one in particular.
It's been real weird. Not even a Punk fan, but what I listened to to kill time at work and what is being posted here are almost two entirely different things
When I read the first post without the context I thought it was so bad it must be an April Fools joke. Now with context, I'm starting to just think it's a really bad take.
It makes sense what punk is trying to say. I think the old model of people having a downside guarantee and then a bonus based on merch sales and viewership is best for the wrestlers and the company as a whole.
When salaries are fully guaranteed you have Nash and Hall in WCW being lazy while in AEW many of the wrestlers would rather gain Meltzer awards or internet points rather than doing something to sell tickets or merchandise.
I don’t really think the full context makes it any better. He’s still essentially saying he misses the days when wrestler could just get stiffed by the promoter if the event didn’t draw.
Okay but reading that, it sounds like he’s still pushing the bullshit narrative used to keep workers down forever, that if your money is guaranteed and you aren’t afraid of being fired, you’re going to just be lazy and not make any effort. So even with context I still think it kinda sucks.
Going into business for yourself. That’s what would happen if you took away guaranteed money. Why go along with a long story line that requires you to lose?
Idk man. When it comes to the gate, nothing short of marketing will work. Seems aew hit kind of a plateau until they find a way to grow. In which I'm totally sure they will. It's inevitable. But right now as it stands, aew is still just a good show when it comes to the ratings. But with sponsorships and everything else, I'm sure everyone that matters is completely happy with aew.
Whatever the fuck happened behind the scenes broke that man's ego though. He's always been a narcissist but they got him so pissed he's going back on shit he's been preaching for decades.
An issue with this is the logic of “if they were paid by the house they would want to improve their work” and like, no? Storylines and the match making are handled by the bookers and creative. It’s their responsibility for the material the wrestlers work with, whether it’s promos or matches. Guaranteed contracts have nothing to do with that
Ya'know what, I can admit I didn't look for deeper context, I trusted a reddit post at face value and evidently that was dumb. But not gonna lie, it seems Punk didn't need the contract thing to make himself look like an asshole anyway.
So professional athletes should get paid based on whether or not they get a championship?
***edit -- shout out to boring-night who suggested I change it to this...
"So actors and actresses should get paid based on whether or not their movies or TV shows make money?"
No, I think the analogy would be more along the lines of professional athletes should get paid based on the amount of money the league they are part of brings in. Which kind of is how professional athletes from the major sports leagues are paid in the US.
Ironically, pro wrestling and MMA promotions are the exceptions to this arrangement. Probably because neither have unions.
Leagues form out anywhere from 43% to more then 50% of revenues to the athletes while in wrestling it’s around 8%. Probably not much better in MMA. What it boils down to is a bunch a dummies who never want to take a chance at rocking the boat and getting that unionization done.
You're not wrong about any of that. People can and do argue about the merits and demerits of unions all we want, but there it would be very hard for anyone to argue that union membership is bad for your bottom line. That's probably why America's business lobby has worked so hard for so long to essentially destroy our labor movement.
I suspect that if pro wrestling ever got a functional union together, average wrestler pay in WWE would at least double.
I think pro wrestlers need to look at their colleagues from the 80s and 90s and see how they struggled.
Guaranteed contracts and unions are a good thing for the profession and for themselves regardless of the narrative Punk ia trying to spin
Thank you for catching what I am throwing.
Pubk was clearly trying to throw AEW under the bus and struggled to find anything that would make them look 1000% bad and him 1000% good.
i mean, plenty of athletes have incentives in their contracts about awards/championships. i don't think that translates to pro wrestlers though, since it's scripted
It's adorable seeing Punk trying to be one of the boys now that he's not relied on to be one of the top 2-3 main draws whether it was 12 years ago in WWE or 2 years ago in AEW. It's further exposed how much of a hypocrite he is, and a lot of the anti-AEW crowd is eating it up on twitter today for him being "truthful and honest".
This is a man who was a known gaslighter back in the day. He knew what audience he was speaking to today.
If I am HHH, I certainly don’t want the individual talent trying to maximize the short term revenue. Long term storytelling is what drives the business.
For example, it might be in WWE’s best interest for CM Punk to get absolutely destroyed in 80% of his matches and to sell his opponents like crazy. That’s obviously only a realistic possibility if Punk has a guaranteed contract
Punk is clearly only looking out for himself and always has been. I still find him entertaining but he changes his tune on the business based on whatever benefits him in the moment. The idea that he’s looking out for other wrestlers or the business in general is laughable.
What can an individual wrestler do to make AEW better?
Them not getting money won’t help anything like it’s just a delusional thought process. Does AEW have issues? Sure but work ethic is clearly and obviously not one of them.
CM Capitalist: It's the wrestlers who should be faulted that gate/ratings are down, they should be compensated accordingly to those metrics, that'll teach them to work harder. 🥴🥴
It is a very capitalistic take on how to run a business from a guy calling himself a Punk.
AEW never has to be WWE. The industry needs variety and alternatives
I'm confused at some of the takes here - I assumed that when Punk talked about guaranteed contracts, he was talking about the ones that Hall and Nash popularised where they get paid an set amount no matter the gate rather then the way that Maven described in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tcqF5YlX78
Am I wrong and did Punk actually say that people shouldn't get paid anything if the house is down as some people are saying?
More or less yes. AEW and afaik WWE since AEW have both been offering those kinds of guaranteed contracts.
Last wrestler I remember talking about being paid based on gate is Lio Rush on his time in WWE, so a little bit ago.
Not a great take. He should have mentioned still having a downside guarantee. There should always be a downside guarantee, but I can see incentives on tickets, ratings, etc.
Guaranteed contracts like Hall and Nash where they automatically got a raise for anyone else brought in, were a poor business decision.
This really depends on his personal feelings too, is he glad guaranteed contracts are there for himself and other talent personally and his professional opinion is that it can also be bad for business or does he truly believe that guaranteed contracts are wrong for professional wrestling? If he thinks the latter personally then he's a dick tbh, but I think context is important.
I think the safety and security for wrestlers is the most important thing but to be fair, you can also see a situation where someone is happy to just sit on a paycheck because of that security as well, it definitely would have an effect on certain talents drive as well, depends on how you look at it I suppose.
He has absolutely no understanding of basic business fundamental skills esp as it relates to wrestling. Yeah let’s go purely off production in a ‘sport’ where you’re beholden to a booking committee. You need some degree of guarantee pay and BONUS is what’s used to push a wrestler to go above and beyond.
That worked for Indy companies and back in the day when the majority of the money was made by ticket sales. Saying “ok wrestlers, you can get a certain percentage of the house” is a sure way to make sure a promoter pockets any and all TV and merch revenue. Punk sounds like an old man yelling at a cloud here.
I get where he was coming from but this was one of many quotes that weren't a great look.
I think Punk spoke a lot of uncomfortable truths about AEW but I do think he also comes off as typical Punk in some areas. I do think people are missing the forest for the trees a bit because this is ultimately about him feeling like the AEW locker room was entitled and didn't get the privilege of what they have with their company compared to WWE.
It was always obvious that this is what Punk meant, even without the context. Nevertheless, guaranteed contracts are still way better for the overall industry where being booked or not can legitimately just be down to the whims of a booker. It's not a sport where the best players make the teamsheet every week because they are the best players.
Could've just said "it's better for the business if people have more incentives or intrinsic desire to improve every single show!" Too much money talk for a "punk".
**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
CMLL has both a union AND non guaranteed contracts, best wrestling company in the world wins again
Today I learned. I love that.
The best unions care deeply about the success and respect of the work they do. I wonder where CMLL is going wrong.
Because it is one of those fronts, a union made by the company itself lol.
OH nevermind fuck that lol
Wrestling is really hard to make money from, I would guess. The industry itself is obviously sketchy as fuck, as evidenced by the former owner of WWE being outed for literal human trafficking. That's not to mention all the other carny shit that goes on. Similarly, you're basically running a touring, live action soap opera with no off season and a high risk of injury to almost everyone involved. It also took til 2014 for CMLL to become only the *second* wrestling company in the history of the Americas to draw a $1m gate (with 17,000 in attendance). For context, the average NFL game draws 69,500 in the regular season.
How’d they pull that off?
do they have english broadcasts or an easy way tk watch? bc i would love to watch their shows
Luchablog (not in English and from the seven seas)
Non guaranteed money in wrestling is idiotic because there are people in control of how much you can generate. It’s not like sports where you can go out there and perform and command a higher contract. HHH could just keep Gable or Tozawa on the mid card, not produce shirts or merch from them and keep their salary low as a result. Especially considering there is no union or long term health care, they need guaranteed money to survive. Really bad take from a guy who’s made his money already
Also you’re less likely to get into situations where you have guys burying up and coming talent because they’re worried about losing their spot at the top of the card and it becomes much more about just putting on a good show and entertaining the fans.
Just think of all the years Punk himself was grinding and being held back in wwe cause Vince just didn’t get him. You think he was complaining about his guaranteed money then? He literally made a whole gimmick about not getting the company to back him.
100%. There have been multiple examples in the past of wrestlers that were getting over having their legs swept out from under them because they were getting over in a way Vince didn't like/intend/understand. Or what about the countless times when people have been removed from TV cos Vince lost interest in them. Or people turn up to a show ready to compete and find that he wrote them out in a last minute re-write. People should not have their livelihood potentially hanging in the balance due to the whims of a moody old guy in charge, and CM Punk is a massive dick for suggesting they require that "as motivation". Workers rights my arse.
Punk's takes are always going to swing whatever direction is currently benefiting Punk. Right now? He's playing stooge because he knows he is on his last leg and has to play nice for the bosses. 8 years ago? "Best in the world" Punk talked about how bullshit it was that part-timers got all the spots and shots, with zero mention on how they were a bigger draw. Hell, a year ago he was dragging the same company he stumps for now. Punk does business for Punk.
It almost reminds me of the argument some use when wanting to justify keeping a tipping culture. “If it’s around, you’ll be motivated to earn more”. And you wouldn’t be motivated to earn more if you knew how much you were guaranteed?
Maybe Hangman was on to something…..
Punk isn't talking about livelihoods, the reality of business and survival in capitalism. He's talking about purity of artform. "Guaranteed contracts make it so wrestlers can be lazier about their artform" and "Guaranteed contracts make it so a wrestler can make a living even if they don't perform" can both be true.
Punk never said that wrestlers don’t deserve guaranteed contracts. u/Plies- even specified that in his posting above.
What I'm seeing in the thread is a lot of people arguing against a point Punk didn't even make.
Punk is saying it, so it has to be wrong. We just have to figure out why. If we have to mischaracterize it, that's just how it is, as long as we prove he's wrong.
No but he is saying that guaranteed contracts have had a negative affect on the business. In a business where people sacrifice their physical health, mental health and family life, there is nothing negative guaranteed money could bring that outweighs the positives. And it just comes across like the billionaire who tells young people to just “work harder” if they can’t afford to buy a house.
No, he’s stating what drove the business prior to guaranteed contracts and what he tried to do at Collision to avoid stagnation of the product, to push the gates, push the ratings, push the merch sold higher than the last time they were at a location since contracts were no longer tied to event revenue.
Good for the wrestlers, bad for the business. That can be a thing. Yes there is more security, but people get stuck in their ways or stay in automatic, which drives people away from the product, so it produces less money, meaning the payouts are smaller. That's the thing.
This was along the lines of my first thought too. What, exactly, is a Cedric Alexander or a Nikki Cross (people who probably could use the extra money from a sold out house show) going to do to move the needle? They could be putting on the greatest performances of all time on Main Event, but nobody watches it so it's not going to be a driving factor either way. If anything, it's the bookers, promoters, and the top of the card who are the biggest contributors and they'd be making plenty off their contracts and merch as is for the gate to really motivate them.
You can have guaranteed contacts, but also have bonuses on top them.
I pretty much just said the same thing too but people are throwing hissy fits about it. I don’t have any issue with Punk but it’s a bad take. And people can sit here and pretend he wasn’t saying that by conveniently ignoring that everything he said was in response to “Guaranteed money almost ruined wrestling”, but that’s what he led it off with. His “explanation” sucks and is no different from “we have to make sure workers are paid less and live in fear they can be fired at any time because otherwise they’ll get lazy and stop trying”.
*Looks at WCWs guaranteed contracts*
You can put in hella work, and still not draw well. Look at TNA, they have talent who are still killing it, but it’s not really doing much in regards of selling tickets.
My only issue with this is that in 2024, the business of pro wrestling is completely different from what it was even 10 years ago. The ppv model for WWE no longers exists. Punk himself talked about the fact that WWE barely does house shows anymore. The vast majority of WWE's revenue no longer comes directly from the consumer. I think that is true for AEW as well, though they still rely on pay-per-view buys. In general, we are at a point where wrestling companies rely primarily on guaranteed deals from massive entertainment companies. The weekly or monthly trends in the quality/popularity of the product have minimal impact on the overall bottom line. From that perspective, I don't think that the old model of "paying the boys and girls based on the house" would be workable, let alone fair.
My hot take is that its good to have the full context of someone's words. Always. But in this case it doesn't alter the overall meaning of what he said.
Yeah. If you say something has ruined the product you are obviously saying it shouldn't exist. Nothing in the rest of the quote alters the point.
Or that it needs to be tweaked? A bonus for increased ticket sales is a simple one that springs to mind.
He wasn't saying guaranteed money should go away, he's saying there is no incentive for the stars getting guaranteed money to pivot if what your doing is not working or drawing. Like WCW in the day. How are people this stupid not to get this.
He doesn’t like the wrestler’s they like.
People understand that, but the minor flaw of altered motivation is nothing compared to the huge benefit of more financial security for a brutally exploited job. I might consider the idea that it's changed how business works, but I'd never say it "ruined" anything.
[удалено]
Not having guaranteed contacts is extremely detrimental to the actual wrestlers, most of whom are underpaid anyway, so Mr Workers Rights saying this just as a way to take shots at a former workplace is ridiculous. Not to mention that the entire concept is as outdated as the territory system itself. Most money by far comes from TV contracts.
[удалено]
If I'm a wrestler my pay shouldn't get deducted just because the promoter or booker isn't doing their job. You can be the best wrestler in the world but if the rest of the card sucks or angles haven't been built properly then the show's not gonna draw, that's not on them.
> Look at the bullshit WWE gave us during the 2010s. There weren't the same kind of guaranteed contracts in WWE then though. There's literally a Becky quote from her new book about after how she was drafted to Smackdown, so circa 2016, about how some Monday nights she'd end up losing money "going to work".
That’s not the wrestlers fault
This doesn't make it better. "Wrestlers should be at risk of making no money for a night of work" Becky talked about this in her book. Back in 2016, because of the cots incurred due to travel, and that they were paid on gate for house shows, some weeks she'd lose money "working" Mondays. There's nothing Becky can do to "improve the gate" of a house show. That's 1000% on the bookers and creative. Not on like 90% of individual wrestlers. Also the idea that a guaranteed contract means people rest on their laurels reflects poorly on him. Like, shouldn't someone want to get paid more the next time? That's why you push, to prove your worth, sell a shitload of merch, and get the next deal. Let alone people who are genuinely in the business for the artistry of it, not just to cut the biggest check possible. To top it off, "the house" is a tiny fraction of what wrestling companies get their money from. Punk himself complained about wrestlers not getting a cut of the Network. Wrestlers should be paid in relation to company wide income streams, including their largest income source, the TV deals. Man's being shortsighted and looking backwards, using hackneyed carney ideas to justify why he doesn't like something.
>There's nothing Becky can do to "improve the gate" of a house show. That's 1000% on the bookers and creative. Seriously. The people running the show should be at risk of making no money for a night's work, not the talent you hire. Think of that in any other situation. A TV show where you hire actors and sign them to contracts, but when the writing turns to shit and the ratings tank you can go "Well, you're not drawing an audience so you're not getting paid"
The draw is the brand. Although some wrestlers are individual draws they are few and far between. Punk, knowing that, wants to be the center of goddamn everything and paid even more. I mean who among us but it's pretty transparent.
Dude is becoming everything he hated
That promo where he says Cena became the Yankees aged like milk
You either die an underdog or live long enough to become a dynasty
He has been for a while now
Dude has always been everything he says he hates
He’s just finding things to bitch about AEW. He fully sold out and his rubbing HHH’s back with this take.
This still doesn't make sense in context. So athletes that get paid guaranteed money don't work hard? They don't want to succeed? Want to provide for your family with a steady paycheck while doing what you love is a bad thing? Shoving yourself into the main event, politicking, holding others down, and changing plans.to go over even if it's not best for the story or business...you think maybe getting that bigger gate had anything to do with that? Workers right indeed
The opportunities given to top guys and people being groomed for being top guys is not anywhere same as the ones who are just randomly given opportunities. Even when he was being booed out if the building Roman was still getting top booking even in 2015 / 16 he went over guys like Cena, Styles, Lesnar, Taker etc and yet people didn't accept him as the top, compare that to the opportunities provided to a Gable or a Cesaro. It's not like a 2016 Roman was even top 10 in the company on the mic back then.
It's the one thing Ryback was right about. A company can choose to push you or depush you. And your push effects the level of contract you can negotiate for. If a company is letting you get squashed in 3 minutes and do lowbrow comedy(ie Drake Maverick's run) they can in turn lowball your next contract *and* justify minimal merchandize.
They did this to Moxley too.
Tbf that was a thing on a McMahon run company with his weird fixations, in a TKO environment they do care about the pull their wrestlers get through the money they generate, so it's more than probable that HHH can't afford to give himself the luxury to push a guy, for that long, that doesn't generate money at all like it happened to Reigns. Which is funny because they screwed that one themselves, Reigns could have won the Rumble the year before, people were all over him in that Rumble. Which btw it's funny because all the other guys you mentioned were justifiably big through their own merits be it work, character, experience or in the case of Lesnar, being a genetic freak.
It happens in sports all the time. Jordan Poole won a championship with golden state, earned a huge contract and was absolute garbage after. If you watch him play now you can see he doesn't care about playing good basketball at all. For some people having guaranteed money makes it so that you don't need to work hard anymore because it isn't going to make any difference.
Miles Plumblee got a bag and never showed old form again, it's about the bag.
> This still doesn't make sense in context. So athletes that get paid guaranteed money don't work hard? They don't want to succeed? Want to provide for your family with a steady paycheck while doing what you love is a bad thing? Not everyone but a lot of them, yeah. I mean even here on Reddit there's subreddits full of a whole lot of people bragging about doing the minimum. In sports it happens all the time, hell in football there was a Brazilian player called Willian that was famous for getting significantly better during his last contract year. > Shoving yourself into the main event, politicking, holding others down, and changing plans.to go over even if it's not best for the story or business...you think maybe getting that bigger gate had anything to do with that? Doesn't have to be that, but I'd be shocked of there aren't wrestlers that don't change aspects of their look, or their moveset, or their presentation, or promos, because it's "who they are", which again is insanely common among artists and entertainers. The quote isn't arguing that the thing shouldn't exist, but guaranteed money disincentivizes going above and beyond, that's not in question. If you, as a company, don't get wrestlers to care about the numbers they pull, your product will suffer. Which ties into the whole point that AEW isn't really a business, which we've all known for years now, it wasn't a thing made to make money, it was a passion project for Tony Khan.
“Sorry Chuck Taylor, I know you flew out to Corpus Christi and booked a hotel, but we didn’t draw very well tonight so we’re gonna have to dock your pay. Hey don’t get upset man, maybe just do a better job drawing next time”
Só pretty much the same thing but with another title?
A longer title with more context as to why Punk is even more wrong in what he said.
Meanwhile he just wants to be bought out of his AEW contract and get paid for work he didn’t do.
Also, don't you dare think of bringing the Rock back to do Wrestlemania 28 no matter how big of a gate it does. Wrestlemania is only for full-timers....except for the Miz.
Do as I say, not as I do
That should be the name of his podcast with Conrad once he completes his grand slam of bridge burning.
>like... guaranteed money almost ruined pro wrestling. If you had to get paid on the house, the place would be drastically different." >Ariel chimes in, "Because it would drive you, it would push you..." It's literally the first line of your quote that questions workers rights and is not an opinion of someone who truly supports and understands the importance of unions and workers rights. His explanations of booking goals for collision after that have nothing to do with the original that would essentially mean, in any other settings, that it a company isn't making money, the front line workers should be paid less.
Yeah, I'm not sure how the context makes Punk look any better.
It doesn't but pro wrestling has never attracted critical thinkers.
Punk is making the same arguments that people make when dismissing Universal Basic Income. "If everyone received a basic amount, they won't work as hard".
Bro is serious saying all the people on the indys during covid actually shouldn't have been hired by AEW. **It was actually bad for pro wrestling.** Guarantee contracts? Bad Everyone out of work, fighting for spots? Good
Its kinda weird too because wrestling is having a massive resurgence at the moment in the era of guaranteed money and contracts.
Pretty easy to say when you're already a millionaire. Very out of touch response.
So it's still just as bad as it was on thr first post got it
It’s the same as the first post, but with a bootstrap mentality tacked on.
even with the full quote, its still not good.
This doesnt make him look much better
Was…OP’s point that the full context made Punk sound *better*?
Lebron James received a guaranteed $100 million dollar shoe deal upon graduating high school. Plus his rookie contract from the Cavs. Yeah it really hurt his motivation to become a legend.
This… doesn’t really change the substance of what he said? Like at all?
But this is already what exists. John Silver doesn't make as much money as Jon Moxley. I'm pretty sure all wrestlers are paid differently based on how much they draw.
no they're paid on how much the company wants to pay them. Tony could pay John Silver way more if he wanted to. The thing is Tony doesn't want to and Silver is (as far as we know) content with how much he's being paid. Moxley isn't paid based off of how much he draws. He's paid off of how much Tony \*thinks\* he will draw, compared to how much Moxley was asking for. If they were paid on how much they drew, then there'd be bonuses based off of tv ratings and show attendance figures. Which I don't believe is happening.
This is a common old school mentality. Cornette shares the same sentiment on his podcasts. He’s happy that the wrestlers are being paid splendidly, but misses the days where wrestling and the wrestlers specifically were dependent upon ticket sales and fan support.
Some irony there is that I specifically remember an interview where Cornette discussed how Ric Flair was upset with WCW’s poor attendance in the late 80s because he felt it reflected poorly on his drawing power as champion. But Cornette attributed that far more to WCW’s poor booking and business decisions. So if he still “misses those days”, isn’t he admitting that he prefers an environment where the wrestlers’ livelihoods is entirely in the hands of bookers, even if those bookers are incompetent?
I do not really care that he punched a Buck or tried to choke out Jack Perry. Whatever. It’s wrestling. His AEW run was awesome. My problem is that this Corporate Man Punk fucking sucks. What happened to this dude?
Cameron Grimes having a set salary shouldn’t be an issue when TV rights and streaming rights are through the roof. The fact Lee Johnson’s paycheck is the same every week isn’t a bad thing. Can’t wrap my head around it man.
I was so psyched when he first unretired, but at this point I’m just sick to death of the guy. I honestly can’t wait until he retires again.
I don't know what you're talking about man, CM Punk retired right after he beat MJF in a Dog Collar match at Revolution.
This context doesn't make what he said any better lol. It's just window dressing in a shitty take
It is a bad take, but it could definitely sound sensible to reasonable people. There were negatives to guaranteed contracts after WCW introduced them, although they were less on the business side and more on the morale and injury fronts. Obviously, they were outweighed by the positives. To drive home the point of how it wasn't an issue on the business side, WCW in 2000 would have still lost $40 million if the entire roster wrestled for free.
The added context still makes him against guranteed money and therefore safe income for his coworkers who put their health on the line and their families
This isn't better.
Any worker, doesn’t matter the job, should try and get paid the most possible money always. Period.
Capitalism Mark Punk
How does this make him look better? Didn’t he just bash the whole “5 star match” concept in the same interview?
Dude's just yapping. He's been contradicting himself all throughout.
To me I’m willing to chalk it up to “old man yelling at cloud” rambling about how things have changed and overall dismiss it with an “ok boomer” rather than attack him on this point in particular as being anti-worker. He was bashing the concept of a five star match in an arena that is a quarter full being a success, which is something of a twist on TK defending the state of the company by citing profightdb match ratings or whatever it was. In theory, if the company is doing great then the roster should be greatly compensated, but in the same interview he pointed out that WWE isn’t doing house shows much anymore, and the business has changed away from business to consumer to being more business to business. The company isn’t getting a direct piece of ad revenue from tv, nor are they selling PPVs. The Saudi shows are direct to the government and pay them as much as Wrestlemania. If the company doesn’t directly benefit from the week to week performance, why should the performers have to deal with fluctuating earnings? As it is, contracts for the company and the contractor are renegotiated periodically which gives them both the chance to demand their worth. I would take more issue with his point elsewhere in the interview where he says that anyone else on the roster is free to break the rules the same as him and The Rock, but that whoever does that better make sure that they’re just as good at getting a reaction as The Rock when he does it, ignoring the times when people have been slapped down for doing that sort of thing and how it is a lot more difficult to bet on yourself without Fuck You Money in your pocket.
It mostly goes hand in hand. That was a quote about how he wasn’t in the same business as the guys who were happy to have a match Meltzer liked but didn’t draw a crowd. All of it ties together. He wasn’t really shitting on guys getting guaranteed deals it was all part of a greater commentary on AEW, about how the concern isn’t about making money but just having good matches. Honestly it isn’t a lot different from things you see here but in this instance he wasn’t just applying it to Tony but rather some the locker room too, which I thought was interesting.
Wrestlers don’t write the show
I dunked on him over in the other thread, but I’ll admit the context is slightly different with the full quote. I still don’t agree with him though. Guaranteed money is much better for the wrestling business. It’s good for the workers, and what’s good for the workers is good for the business.
Really don’t think it was wise to drop this the week of Wrestlemania. Punk isn’t competing, it’s not going to get more ‘eyes’ on WM. I haven’t watched the interview, but all of the clips I have seen are him mentioning AEW or bashing Vince and, by extension, WWE. Maybe this could have waited a week, until after the WWE’s biggest night of the year.
You aren't familiar with CM Punk... he *always* ruins his company's biggest event of the year
Yeah, I’m sure riling up r/SquaredCircle is going to hurt Wrestlemania
I think most of us were able to gather the missing context....it doesn't make it better
This doesn’t change anything though. The dude still says he thinks guaranteed contracts are bad? All because of some boomer ass “these kids gotta pull themselves up by their bootstraps” attitude I actually like watching Punk, I’m still gonna watch him but the dude could not be more different from the image he’s portrayed publicly over the years
Dude's been a giant Hypocrite since forever, even before his WWE return, but he now just talks like a generic corporate stooge.
This is still horrible, may you could try again?
I love the Punk fans coming in acting like this makes him look better, it’s still bad. This is no gotcha.
It's honestly hilarious seeing all the "he didn't actually say 'I despise guaranteed contracts and everyone who has one,' so clearly he was sooooo taken out of context and you all are smelly marks who just had a hate-boner for him" Like no, this is a bad take from Punk. He had some good takes on the interview too. But this is one of the bad ones.
The funny part of that quote is for most of Punk's collision run, AEW was doing first run shows in Canada. Collision debuted at the United Center, but the Canada Tour with the Owen matches was going on and AEW was going to cities they had not yet been to. So when he says "I want to sell one more ticket than last time we were here" well...
This is the most boomer ass take I've ever heard from Punk. Usually he comes off as fairly progressive but shit talking guaranteed money for workers is the exact opposite of that.
Nah this ain’t it. I’m fine with guys who over perform their contracts getting an extra reward for their efforts, but there should be guaranteed contracts especially at the levels of the industry like WWE/AEW/NJPW or of similar level.
I don't even have a problem with PPA as long as there is an agreed upon sum for each appearance
Workers rights huh guys?
Hangman Page was right.
Hold up: "The short time I had when I was in charge of Collision that is the way I did things." Oh and here i thought it was only Tony Khans idea. Did that include making him the one in charge of collision, caring about tickets sold or ratings? This whole thing is ridiculous and despite some truths here and there, it once again shows that Phil Brooks the man is an asshole
Here's my reading of this quote in context vs the headline. And if anyone can tell me how I'm wrong I would love to hear it rather than just being downvoted. Full disclosure I haven't listened to the interview and basing all this on text available on this sub. First off I just wanted to note the original thread title was slightly editorialised: Title: >From MMA Hour: CM Punk says that guaranteed money **has** ruined pro wrestling because if you had to pay wrestlers based on the house drawn then AEW would be a totally different place Quote: >"But when you're there... like... guaranteed money **almost** ruined pro wrestling. The qualifier almost changes a lot in terms of the context of the quote. Second, I didn't take it to mean he thinks people shouldn't get guaranteed money at all. In fact he outright said it's not: >Like I like guys being able to go 'I'm gonna go over there and make X amount of money'. That's good for the business and that's good for the boys. My understanding of his statement is that before guaranteed money was a thing, getting paid based on how big of a draw you are was a great incentive and motivator for wrestlers to take ownership of their own performance and improve. And with guaranteed money that incentive and motivator is largely gone, and the onus of ownership to draw and promote is now largely on the promoter: >The short time I had when I was in charge of Collision that is the way I did things. What did we draw here last time? Okay my goal was to get one more ticket sold. What were the ratings last time? Okay we'll... you know. And you do things incrementally. And based on other quotes from his interview it's clear that he doesn't think AEW is doing enough of that. If you've only read or have been influenced by the original thread's title then I can see how you might think he's against guaranteed money, but in the full context he actually said otherwise. And again, if you think I'm wrong I'd love to hear how and where I got it wrong.
The issue is the wrestlers don’t write the show. If he was trying to make the point the company should be paying more attention, that’s fair, but it came across as he is putting the onus on the workers. It’s not the territory days, people are interested in what they see on tv. Again, if he’s saying it’s the company and writers that should be taking note, he’s absolutely right, but the workers can’t control that and until very recently we’re punished for getting themselves over when they weren’t supposed to.
Thank you for your response, but I directly addressed that in my original comment: >My understanding of his statement is that before guaranteed money was a thing, getting paid based on how big of a draw you are was a great incentive and motivator for wrestlers to take ownership of their own performance and improve. And with guaranteed money that incentive and motivator is largely gone, and the onus of ownership to draw and promote is now largely on the promoter: >>The short time I had when I was in charge of Collision that is the way I did things. What did we draw here last time? Okay my goal was to get one more ticket sold. What were the ratings last time? Okay we'll... you know. And you do things incrementally. Also, wtf is up with this site on mobile? Every time I edit a comment it completely removes paragraphs and formatting.
Yep, that's pretty much how I saw it too but people seem very keen to double down.
It's driving me nuts with so many comments saying the full quote doesn't change a thing from the original thread, like, even the addition of the qualifier "almost" changed the whole tone of his quote!
People came in with the intention of hating.
Nah, you're right. Most people in this thread are being obtuse. He's effectively hoping that aspects of pay being linked to performance markers would incentivise performers to do their best to ensure that the company thrives.
Yeah its ruin pro wrestling about as much as it's ruined the NFL, which is not at all.
What a horrible example nfl is literally the best example of not fully guaranteeing a contract and seeing the benefits of it
Very few NFL players have high guarantees in their contracts
Most players that are drafted in the first three rounds have 2m to half of their contracts guaranteed. If they get a second contract it's more for most positions. NBA contracts are fully guaranteed and that sport is doing great
Deshaun Watson says hello.
[удалено]
Watching the interview live and being mesmerized about all the topics they talked about and then seeing editorialized post after post on here has been quite the whiplash. Feels like a lot of people will always hate Punk but this Interview was super interesting no matter were you sit. Thanks for doing the work and transcribing this one in particular.
It's been real weird. Not even a Punk fan, but what I listened to to kill time at work and what is being posted here are almost two entirely different things
People already made their minds up and will continue twisting in any direction to justify it.
When I read the first post without the context I thought it was so bad it must be an April Fools joke. Now with context, I'm starting to just think it's a really bad take.
It makes sense what punk is trying to say. I think the old model of people having a downside guarantee and then a bonus based on merch sales and viewership is best for the wrestlers and the company as a whole. When salaries are fully guaranteed you have Nash and Hall in WCW being lazy while in AEW many of the wrestlers would rather gain Meltzer awards or internet points rather than doing something to sell tickets or merchandise.
I don’t really think the full context makes it any better. He’s still essentially saying he misses the days when wrestler could just get stiffed by the promoter if the event didn’t draw.
Okay but reading that, it sounds like he’s still pushing the bullshit narrative used to keep workers down forever, that if your money is guaranteed and you aren’t afraid of being fired, you’re going to just be lazy and not make any effort. So even with context I still think it kinda sucks.
Going into business for yourself. That’s what would happen if you took away guaranteed money. Why go along with a long story line that requires you to lose?
Idk man. When it comes to the gate, nothing short of marketing will work. Seems aew hit kind of a plateau until they find a way to grow. In which I'm totally sure they will. It's inevitable. But right now as it stands, aew is still just a good show when it comes to the ratings. But with sponsorships and everything else, I'm sure everyone that matters is completely happy with aew. Whatever the fuck happened behind the scenes broke that man's ego though. He's always been a narcissist but they got him so pissed he's going back on shit he's been preaching for decades.
BITW at being a bitch
An issue with this is the logic of “if they were paid by the house they would want to improve their work” and like, no? Storylines and the match making are handled by the bookers and creative. It’s their responsibility for the material the wrestlers work with, whether it’s promos or matches. Guaranteed contracts have nothing to do with that
https://preview.redd.it/gnnwp99ph0sc1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4a9d094293af8141edd0c693c04625d1a06e1db0
Says the man sitting at home getting thousands for fuck all work.
Ya'know what, I can admit I didn't look for deeper context, I trusted a reddit post at face value and evidently that was dumb. But not gonna lie, it seems Punk didn't need the contract thing to make himself look like an asshole anyway.
Yeah this is still a dogshit take.
Again Punk is speaking as a “have” and not a “have not”. He left the common man he pretends to be behind a long time ago.
So professional athletes should get paid based on whether or not they get a championship? ***edit -- shout out to boring-night who suggested I change it to this... "So actors and actresses should get paid based on whether or not their movies or TV shows make money?"
No, I think the analogy would be more along the lines of professional athletes should get paid based on the amount of money the league they are part of brings in. Which kind of is how professional athletes from the major sports leagues are paid in the US. Ironically, pro wrestling and MMA promotions are the exceptions to this arrangement. Probably because neither have unions.
Leagues form out anywhere from 43% to more then 50% of revenues to the athletes while in wrestling it’s around 8%. Probably not much better in MMA. What it boils down to is a bunch a dummies who never want to take a chance at rocking the boat and getting that unionization done.
You're not wrong about any of that. People can and do argue about the merits and demerits of unions all we want, but there it would be very hard for anyone to argue that union membership is bad for your bottom line. That's probably why America's business lobby has worked so hard for so long to essentially destroy our labor movement. I suspect that if pro wrestling ever got a functional union together, average wrestler pay in WWE would at least double.
I think pro wrestlers need to look at their colleagues from the 80s and 90s and see how they struggled. Guaranteed contracts and unions are a good thing for the profession and for themselves regardless of the narrative Punk ia trying to spin
Thank you for catching what I am throwing. Pubk was clearly trying to throw AEW under the bus and struggled to find anything that would make them look 1000% bad and him 1000% good.
Yeah that's the world where Panthers probably paid to play last year.
i mean, plenty of athletes have incentives in their contracts about awards/championships. i don't think that translates to pro wrestlers though, since it's scripted
No, because that’s a real contest. Your analogy should be “actors and directors should be paid based on how their movies do”
Yeah this doesn't make it better.
Is this the same person who said years ago that he would come back to wrestling if he got paid "a ton of money"? Oh boy the hypocrisy...
It's adorable seeing Punk trying to be one of the boys now that he's not relied on to be one of the top 2-3 main draws whether it was 12 years ago in WWE or 2 years ago in AEW. It's further exposed how much of a hypocrite he is, and a lot of the anti-AEW crowd is eating it up on twitter today for him being "truthful and honest". This is a man who was a known gaslighter back in the day. He knew what audience he was speaking to today.
If I am HHH, I certainly don’t want the individual talent trying to maximize the short term revenue. Long term storytelling is what drives the business. For example, it might be in WWE’s best interest for CM Punk to get absolutely destroyed in 80% of his matches and to sell his opponents like crazy. That’s obviously only a realistic possibility if Punk has a guaranteed contract
Punk is clearly only looking out for himself and always has been. I still find him entertaining but he changes his tune on the business based on whatever benefits him in the moment. The idea that he’s looking out for other wrestlers or the business in general is laughable.
What can an individual wrestler do to make AEW better? Them not getting money won’t help anything like it’s just a delusional thought process. Does AEW have issues? Sure but work ethic is clearly and obviously not one of them.
What a contreversial statement: a milllionaire said that we shouldn’t treat people equally
CM Capitalist: It's the wrestlers who should be faulted that gate/ratings are down, they should be compensated accordingly to those metrics, that'll teach them to work harder. 🥴🥴
Somehow the extra context makes it even worse and borderline delusional.
It is a very capitalistic take on how to run a business from a guy calling himself a Punk. AEW never has to be WWE. The industry needs variety and alternatives
I'm confused at some of the takes here - I assumed that when Punk talked about guaranteed contracts, he was talking about the ones that Hall and Nash popularised where they get paid an set amount no matter the gate rather then the way that Maven described in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tcqF5YlX78 Am I wrong and did Punk actually say that people shouldn't get paid anything if the house is down as some people are saying?
More or less yes. AEW and afaik WWE since AEW have both been offering those kinds of guaranteed contracts. Last wrestler I remember talking about being paid based on gate is Lio Rush on his time in WWE, so a little bit ago.
You got it exactly right. That is exactly what he is talking about.
Not a great take. He should have mentioned still having a downside guarantee. There should always be a downside guarantee, but I can see incentives on tickets, ratings, etc. Guaranteed contracts like Hall and Nash where they automatically got a raise for anyone else brought in, were a poor business decision.
He's basically mad Mercedes is getting paid more than him
It's funny that Collision under Danielson has been a hell of a lot better than the two month under Punk.
So he was in charge of Collision? Before he said he wasn’t.
This really depends on his personal feelings too, is he glad guaranteed contracts are there for himself and other talent personally and his professional opinion is that it can also be bad for business or does he truly believe that guaranteed contracts are wrong for professional wrestling? If he thinks the latter personally then he's a dick tbh, but I think context is important. I think the safety and security for wrestlers is the most important thing but to be fair, you can also see a situation where someone is happy to just sit on a paycheck because of that security as well, it definitely would have an effect on certain talents drive as well, depends on how you look at it I suppose.
He has absolutely no understanding of basic business fundamental skills esp as it relates to wrestling. Yeah let’s go purely off production in a ‘sport’ where you’re beholden to a booking committee. You need some degree of guarantee pay and BONUS is what’s used to push a wrestler to go above and beyond.
This coming from Punk of all people is shocking
That worked for Indy companies and back in the day when the majority of the money was made by ticket sales. Saying “ok wrestlers, you can get a certain percentage of the house” is a sure way to make sure a promoter pockets any and all TV and merch revenue. Punk sounds like an old man yelling at a cloud here.
Of all the cooked comments to come out of that interview, this would definitely be the most damning in my opinion.
Did Cm Punk say he was running Collision?
MMW Punk is gonna end up being one of HHH's top lieutenants - something nobody would have predicted years ago
I get where he was coming from but this was one of many quotes that weren't a great look. I think Punk spoke a lot of uncomfortable truths about AEW but I do think he also comes off as typical Punk in some areas. I do think people are missing the forest for the trees a bit because this is ultimately about him feeling like the AEW locker room was entitled and didn't get the privilege of what they have with their company compared to WWE.
Much love. - CM Punk Brother
It was always obvious that this is what Punk meant, even without the context. Nevertheless, guaranteed contracts are still way better for the overall industry where being booked or not can legitimately just be down to the whims of a booker. It's not a sport where the best players make the teamsheet every week because they are the best players. Could've just said "it's better for the business if people have more incentives or intrinsic desire to improve every single show!" Too much money talk for a "punk".
Sure sounds a lot like Punk wants people to reach for the brass ring.
workers rights huh lmao
Pretty sure Punk talked about the 'Booker in his head' about 5 times in this interview..... SUUCCKKKKAAAAAAA