How much is Vince tied down by investors?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by seabs, Mar 15, 2013.

  1. I've often heard and used the theory of Vince won't change the companies ethos as they are required to adhere to certain markets by their investors however I've been listening to a Paul Heyman shoot where he mentions anyone who invests in the company will have faith in Vince's visions for the companies future so would essentially go with any pushing of the envelope.

    The video in question go about 2 minutes in.
  2. Well, I know Daniel Bryan got fired in 2010 because he choked Justin Roberts and supposedly, that was insensitive in regards to the Benoit murders. I also heard investors complained about the sexual stuff (bra and panties matches, which were always meh anyway) and the blood and stuff.

    I still don't think it should be a big deal if the product is TV-14 or PG. It's not like you're ever gonna hear the word Fuck or Motherfucker on the shows regularly. You're not gonna see sex scenes or murders or even people getting naked (though you did see that at Armageddon 1999, but that was PPV and a one time thing.) Some of these whiny investors need to deal with it. As long as they're getting their money, why do some of them care? Many don't even watch the show, they simply invest because of how profitable the company is.
  3. It comes down to how much we know about Vince. There's stories about him being the ruthless leader everyone fears, and that he isn't scared of anything. He has taken on the world in the past with his company, but there were also stories on how he has softened up recently. Would he still be willing to take a huge risk changing the company direction at his age, at a time where it's making a lot of money and has huge investors? You can compare it to the SmackDown situation. The brand split is dead and there is no reason for SmackDown to exist in its current entity, but why change something that tops its network ratings week in week out and makes them lots of money and has no competition? Everyone knows it needs to change and needs a revamp, but if it's making money and has no competition on threat, why change it?

    I see the reason for not changing the company direction being the latter, and not him specifically fearing investors and other powerful personalities.