Differences in contracts

[castorius]

My understanding is: Pay-Per-Appearance (PPA): -non-exclusive contract (can work for multiple promotions at one time) -paid on a per-appearance basis -non-binding contract (can sign another deal with another promotion while on this contract) Exclusive Pay-Per Appearance (Exclusive PPA) -exclusive contract (can only work for one promotion while on this contract) -paid on a per-appearance basis -non-binding contract (can sign another deal with another promotion while on this contract - however, MUST break the worker's former contract and leave the former promotion) Written Contracts: -exclusive contract -paid on a per-month basis -binding contract (cannot sign another deal or leave the contract until the length of the contract is up) Does that sum it up? The one area of concern I have with this is the non-binding part of the contract. For Exclusive PPAs I wasn't sure if it's okay for a worker to simply break the terms of his former contract and sign another contract with a rival promotion. I know in a written deal - you can't sign with another promotion and are thus stuck with the promotion you have a written deal with (until the length of the written contract is up). So if Steve Austin has an Exclusive PPA with USWA: "He is allowed to sign any other deal with another promotion as long as he leaves (breaks the contract) with USWA: Is this statement correct?

[James Casey]

That is correct. To me, the EPPA option is immensely risky unless you're a pretty big fed or have a lot of non-agression agreements - all it would take is one big ocmpany to come in and you can lose your worker. The bonus is that they [I]are[/I] exclusive and you don't have to worry about them being unavailable on a given day - but then, I'm not sure that's a big enough incentive for me...

[eayragt]

[QUOTE=castorius;452165]So if Steve Austin has an Exclusive PPA with USWA: "He is allowed to sign any other deal with another promotion as long as he leaves (breaks the contract) with USWA: Is this statement correct?[/QUOTE] Yep. Exclusive contracts are best used if you're the biggest promotion in an area (eg Europe or Australia), but not big enough to sign workers to written contract, as workers will normally only leave you to work abroad. See the starting Cornellverse data - 21CW has workers on Exclusive deals, as tehy're the biggest company in the UK, and also larger than European feds. For small promotions in areas where there are larger promotions under National they're basically useless, unless you've got a whole stack of non aggression pacts.

[castorius]

[QUOTE=eayragt;452675]Yep. Exclusive contracts are best used if you're the biggest promotion in an area (eg Europe or Australia), but not big enough to sign workers to written contract, as workers will normally only leave you to work abroad. See the starting Cornellverse data - 21CW has workers on Exclusive deals, as tehy're the biggest company in the UK, and also larger than European feds. For small promotions in areas where there are larger promotions under National they're basically useless, unless you've got a whole stack of non aggression pacts.[/QUOTE] Does a non-aggression pact prevent another promotion from signing your worker to an "Exclusive PPA" contract? Edited: Nevermind, I just tested it, you can't even negotiate with a worker of a promotion in which you have a non-aggression pact with

[D-Lyrium]

[QUOTE=castorius;452165]So if Steve Austin has an Exclusive PPA with USWA: "He is allowed to sign any other deal with another promotion as long as he leaves (breaks the contract) with USWA: Is this statement correct?[/QUOTE] Yup, your entire post was perfectly accurate. As other's have said, EPPA deals are risky if you're in a situation where the worker is likely to be stolen by a bigger company. They're best used for situations where you're the most attractive option he's likely to get, and you don't want to share him.