![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Get a poke on
Posts: 35,234
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You're mostly right, BigCrippyZ, but there are some instances where the creative side effected the business side.
For example, as ECW began to grow, they were in a position where they could get widely merchandised and get a concrete TV deal. Some of this stuff began to happen, but it never fully took off because of the content of ECW. Heyman constantly was at odds with TNN. He was adamant about keeping his product the same creatively, but this ultimately burnt bridges and blocked avenues that could have allowed the company to grow. It jeopardized a shaky tv deal, and definitely prevented moving onto a better one. At the very least, these deals could have kept the company afloat. It was always struggling to make sure the checks didn't bounce, and the phenomenon of ECW wasn't built to last forever the way it was going. It needed stability. Heyman was a visionary, so he couldn't see that some sacrifices had to be made on the creative side to make the business side work. You can make of that what you will. It's probably better for his legacy as a booker that he stuck to his guns and never "sold out." At least among the fans. But for the continued success of his own company, and the job security of his workers, (and countless others who would have followed them and had another place to apply their craft), it wasn't the right choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Posts: 3,033
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Quote:
It also probably would've helped to have someone on the business end dealing with the outside companies, taking their criticism and input, instead of Paul having to take criticism for his creative work from them. I imagine he took it quite personally, as anyone likely would, when a TV or sponsor exec told him his product (writing, etc) wasn't good enough or too violent, etc. |
|
|
|
|