The "let's not take this shyt so seriously" AEW news & fukkery thread

mannyrs13

Compound Kingpin
Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
41,669
Reputation
15,995
Daps
90,383
Reppin
Focusville, USA
Wouldn't such a relationship need to be public knowledge or disclosed given if WB/Discovery was publicly traded? Maybe someone more familiar with stocks and shyt can chime in.

I see some people say yes, but I'm wondering if thats not the other way around. WBD is publicly traded but AEW isn't. Maybe because AEW is broadcast on WBD networks? I would understand a Yes answer if TK owned part of WBD, kinda confused about the WBD owning AEW way instead. Would them owning a part of AEW have an impact on their own stock? I guess its like the Khan family owning the Jags and then the EPL team, it may not have any effect on the business of either team since its separate.
 

KFBF

Superstar
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
13,146
Reputation
4,340
Daps
38,933
Reppin
Eagle, Colorado
I see some people say yes, but I'm wondering if thats not the other way around. WBD is publicly traded but AEW isn't. Maybe because AEW is broadcast on WBD networks? I would understand a Yes answer if TK owned part of WBD, kinda confused about the WBD owning AEW way instead. Would them owning a part of AEW have an impact on their own stock? I guess its like the Khan family owning the Jags and then the EPL team, it may not have any effect on the business of either team since its separate.
Based on my admittedly limited understanding because they're ostensibly using the shareholders money it would need to be disclosed. But I don't know if there are disclosure laws or workarounds so they don't need to make it public.
 

Scottie Drippin

Should Never Mention Me
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
17,459
Reputation
5,421
Daps
63,737
Reppin
The Traps of Unified Korea
I'd like to see a third party verify that AEW is paying out 40% - 50% of revenue to wrestlers. Might be true might not be they have every incentive to lie or fudge the truth.

We have much more knowledge about the TKO model as all that information became public due to UFC lawsuits. If I recall correctly the UFC numbers were 10-15% or less. Would not surprise me at all if WWE was at like 20% and looking to get down to like 12%. I'm sure they'd argue something stupid that basically amounts to "you're also being paid in exposure" which doesn't mean much if you're tied up into the wrestling equivalent of A 360 deal.

Edit: looked into this really quickly and all reporting I saw claims UFC pay at 20% max. Also seen it as low as 15/16%.
All the proof I need is TKO publicly freaking out about Swerve's contract. It makes sense they screamed that he was overvalued as a principle as he was paid on a scale TKO wouldn't dream of. That plus AEW's other ownership model being the literal NFL. It makes sense is that's their practice as that's what they know.
Wouldn't such a relationship need to be public knowledge or disclosed given if WB/Discovery was publicly traded? Maybe someone more familiar with stocks and shyt can chime in.
Nope. Several entities are minority owners of AEW and we know of none of them. All AEW says is no one has more than 10% or any decision-making power.

My #1 conspiracy theory is Cody still has a piece of ownership and that's a big reason why AEW really wants to avoid discovery rn.
 

KFBF

Superstar
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
13,146
Reputation
4,340
Daps
38,933
Reppin
Eagle, Colorado
All the proof I need is TKO publicly freaking out about Swerve's contract.
I absolutely believe that is proof enough for you.
Several entities are minority owners of AEW and we know of none of them. All AEW says is no one has more than 10% or any decision-making power
The other minority owners not being disclosed would only be relevant if they were publicly traded companies.
 
Top