Latest
  • Welcome!

    We're a UK based community of cult entertainment fans - so whether you're into WWE, Marvel, DC, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Star Trek and more - join us!

    It's free to register, so why not sign up and discuss whatever you're into...

1PW Cut Ties With The Wrestling Channel

Status
Not open for further replies.

DraVen

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,399
Points
83
1PW have this morning announced that they are cutting ties with The Wrestling Channel, with next week’s weekly TV show set to be the last that airs.

A brief statement was released stating that ‘TWC’ had not paid them for over two months, and although there have been several issues between the two parties, 1PW have taken the decision this morning largely based on them not being paid. Promoter Steven Gauntley this morning released a brief statement revealing that 1PW will be looking to return to UK television in 2007 on a new channel.

WrestleMag.com has recently learnt that The Wrestling Channel were claiming that viewing figures were extremely low for 1PW’s weekly show and it’s replays throughout the week, citing this this as the main reason for not paying the Doncaster based promotion, who have been providing weekly TV without pay for close to three months.
Credit: www.wrestlemag.com
 

Nimf

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Messages
11,278
Points
83
Low figures is no reason not to pay someone, what a cop out!
 

Rog

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,389
Points
63
Hmmm, does this mean that TWC are in financial difficulty, or is this a once off?
 

MojoPogo

New Member
Messages
6,059
Points
0
Dammit! Suck ass TWC! Ah well, just means i'll have to go to the shows personally more often. And thats probably a good thing....
 

Rog

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,389
Points
63
I just get the DVDs, I never really watched the TV show, because really, whats the point. It came across really cheap in terms of presentation and had nothing to offer that you cant get on DVD
 

Nimf

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Messages
11,278
Points
83
I just get the DVDs, I never really watched the TV show, because really, whats the point. It came across really cheap in terms of presentation and had nothing to offer that you cant get on DVD
Plus the repeats were WAY too often... It's a shame, for sure, but 1PW could do with the exposure.
 

Dusty Finish

New Member
Messages
466
Points
0
Low figures is no reason not to pay someone, what a cop out!
When your income and cashflow is based on advertising revenue, as TWC's (and pretty much every non-subscription channel in this country not run by the BBC) is, and the contract between the station (TWC) and programme provider (1PW) is based on this, as Sean Herbert has already emphasised, it's actually a pretty watertight reason.
 
Last edited:

Nimf

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Messages
11,278
Points
83
When your income and cashflow is based on advertising revenue, as TWC's (and pretty much every non-subscription channel in this country not run by the BBC) is, and the contract between the station (TWC) and programme provider (1PW) is based on this, as Sean Herbert has already emphasised, it's actually a pretty watertight reason.
Surely if 1PW was doing so badly, the should have just pulled the show then, rather than keeping on showing it without paying 1PW?
 

Sazzle

New Member
Messages
410
Points
0
Surely if 1PW was doing so badly, the should have just pulled the show then, rather than keeping on showing it without paying 1PW?
i agree with you there, why not just tell them that the show is not doing very well, pay them what they owe them and stop showing it, surely that would be easier?
 

Dusty Finish

New Member
Messages
466
Points
0
Surely if 1PW was doing so badly, the should have just pulled the show then, rather than keeping on showing it without paying 1PW?

Without knowing the specifics (Dan Edler posts on here, perhaps he can clarify, assuming IPW:UK have a similar deal), I would imagine that TWC were contractually obligated to air a specific number of weeks/hours of 1PW TV as long as 1PW continued to provide it. Once that deal was up, what you suggest would then become the likely scenario, if 1PW programming wasn't generating enough advertising revenue through ratings to at least offset the cost of airing it.

What they won't have been obligated to do is pay 1PW outside of what their contract stipulates. My original point was, TWC has not "copped out", as you put it- they've done nothing wrong here. It appears as though 1PW didn't understand what the deal entailed when they entered into it.
 

Nimf

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Messages
11,278
Points
83
I think until we know the full contents of the contract, though, it will be assumed that TWC are the bad guys in all this-looking at it in its basic form, then they sure come out looking the nastiest!
 

DraVen

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,399
Points
83
It's win-win as far as I can see. I haven't watched 1PW since I saw one of the shows and found it nauseating (I only watch LDN now), and Sean Herbert is an abrasive dickhead embarrassment to any corperate company of any size or form.

Seeing either of them in a bad light suits me fine.
 

Nimf

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Messages
11,278
Points
83
It's win-win as far as I can see. I haven't watched 1PW since I saw one of the shows and found it nauseating (I only watch LDN now), and Sean Herbert is an abrasive dickhead embarrassment to any corperate company of any size or form.

Seeing either of them in a bad light suits me fine.
It's weird, the live shows are so much better than the tv shows... I think they put a filter on it so it's lamer...That's my logic anyway...
 

Paul

Well-Known Member
Messages
36,529
Points
113
What they won't have been obligated to do is pay 1PW outside of what their contract stipulates. My original point was, TWC has not "copped out", as you put it- they've done nothing wrong here. It appears as though 1PW didn't understand what the deal entailed when they entered into it.

Well reading it I have to disagree. Nowhere does it state that TWC have lived up to their side of any deals. You are assuming they have and that 1PW are in the worng.
 

Swipemonkey

New Member
Messages
186
Points
0
For me, 1PW were making an attempt to put a reasonably professional presentation together. Trouble is, it always seemed to be aired around 5pm or a silly time like that. Either way, it never seemed to be on at a time when I can get to the tele. The 'Best of Samoa Joe' thing, on the other hand, I keep on falling over...
 

Tio

New Member
Messages
335
Points
0
I don't know if this is relevant, but TWC have been repeating IPW:UK'S "week 9" episode for 3 weeks and not showing "week 10"
 

Daniel Edler

New Member
Messages
79
Points
0
Without knowing the specifics (Dan Edler posts on here, perhaps he can clarify, assuming IPW:UK have a similar deal), I would imagine that TWC were contractually obligated to air a specific number of weeks/hours of 1PW TV as long as 1PW continued to provide it. Once that deal was up, what you suggest would then become the likely scenario, if 1PW programming wasn't generating enough advertising revenue through ratings to at least offset the cost of airing it.
TWC works on a basis of X amount of shows in a 'series'. That's why you'll see episodes numbered. For us (and IWW) it was 12 episodes (3 months), which is why next week is our season finale.

The reason for our show repeating *last* week was because our episode didn't reach TWC in the required timeframe to prepare it to air. It was due to air last night, but i'm unaware why that isnt the case.
 

Dusty Finish

New Member
Messages
466
Points
0
Here's what both sides have to say on the matter:

http://www.britwres.com/news/165772999.shtml

Well reading it I have to disagree. Nowhere does it state that TWC have lived up to their side of any deals. You are assuming they have and that 1PW are in the worng.
Well, it wouldn't be the first time that 1PW have had an overblown, knee-jerk reaction to something they didn't immediately agree with, and wound up looking a bit silly (remember that whole CCJ business a few months back?). I choose to believe the side that doesn't have a track record of doing this kind of thing.
 

Nimf

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Messages
11,278
Points
83
Here's what both sides have to say on the matter:

http://www.britwres.com/news/165772999.shtml



Well, it wouldn't be the first time that 1PW have had an overblown, knee-jerk reaction to something they didn't immediately agree with, and wound up looking a bit silly (remember that whole CCJ business a few months back?). I choose to believe the side that doesn't have a track record of doing this kind of thing.
Kind of like "the boy who cried wolf" sort of situation maybe??
 

Paul

Well-Known Member
Messages
36,529
Points
113
Yeah I read both sides last night after posting in here and 1PW do seem to me to be in the wrong here! They do get a lot of stick online and dont deserve most of it, but in this case they do seem to be wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top