Prophet Posted March 14, 2010 Share Posted March 14, 2010 I thought the 90 day clause only applied to companies with exposure? I believe London, Colt, and Chris Harris all made appearances with other companies soon after their releases, without complication due to the lack of tv exposure ... I could be wrong on the circumstance, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted March 14, 2010 Share Posted March 14, 2010 I thought the 90 day clause only applied to companies with exposure? I believe London, Colt, and Chris Harris all made appearances with other companies soon after their releases, without complication due to the lack of tv exposure ... I could be wrong on the circumstance, though. No I think you're right. I've read here and there that it only applies to companies with national TV or DVD distribution in the states. When the Lesnar case was in the courts there was some extensive reporting done since a lot of the WWE contracts were entered as evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyde Hill Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Yeah it comes into effect when it runs out. You could see those 90 days as paid overrun so to speak. They can't break the 90 days and not get paid though they would be sued for breach of contract even-though the contract has "expired". Also WWE loosened the rules a while back so as long as you don't appear on tv its ok. Tommy Dreamer is a recent example. Still wondering what would happen if someone chose to break the 90 days rule though. But I guess the expenses aren't really worth the extra surprise factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe Hunter Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 IIRC Christian allowed his WWE deal to expire and walked away and still had to wait the 90 days to sign with TNA. So I'd yea..it's just a standard clause the performer has to abide by. Nope, not at all. Christian was in TNA immediately. His last WWE appearance was the taping of the Nov 4 SD!, and he was on the TNA PPV held on Nov 15. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOmniWarrior Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Any word on when (spoiler in white) Joey Mercury is supposed to come back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 I remember hearing a lot about this when I was following the Lesnar court case some years back. As I understand it, WWE pays the talent quite far in arrears for things like royalties, appearance fees, etc; basically everything above and beyond their guaranteed money. These are all termed as 'bonus' payments. If you violate your no-compete, you forfeit any bonuses due. When Lesnar was busy trying to prove that the WWE's no-competes were unfair, this was one of the points he raised...guys losing out on up to hundreds of thousands of dollars for work already completed prior to the termination date on the contracts. He must have been trying to hard not to laugh when he signed that 10-year no-compete :-p Anyway, this would explain why a guy like Christian could just turn up on TNA...it's possible that the amount he was owed was insignificant in comparison to what he would be making in TNA, or that he agreed a signing fee with TNA to compensate him the equivalent for violating the no-compete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eayragt Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Anyway, this would explain why a guy like Christian could just turn up on TNA...it's possible that the amount he was owed was insignificant in comparison to what he would be making in TNA, or that he agreed a signing fee with TNA to compensate him the equivalent for violating the no-compete. The Christian one is purely down to his contract running out - once it ran out, WWE had no say on what he did. Most of the releases seem to happen while they're contract is still running, which is why WWE have a say in what happens. The Lesnar situation is abnormal, as it wasn't WWE releasing Lesnar, it was Lesnar asking for his release. This meant that WWE could (in their minds) ask for any additional clauses (i.e. 10 year no Wrestling / MMA compete clause) that they wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOmniWarrior Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Are FCW workers contracted to WWE? What I mean is do they follow the same 90 day no compete clause as the wwes main roster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Gilmore Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Hall of Fame spoilers... Did anyone hear about Gorgeous George being inducted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 The Lesnar situation is abnormal, as it wasn't WWE releasing Lesnar, it was Lesnar asking for his release. This meant that WWE could (in their minds) ask for any additional clauses (i.e. 10 year no Wrestling / MMA compete clause) that they wanted. And man were they wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bookerman Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 So....for tonight's RAW... What's the over/under on the number of stunners SCSA dishes out tonight? And more importantly, who does he stunner during the McMahon/Hart contract signing? Vince only? Bret only? Both? Neither? I think he gives Vince at least one and gives Bret an out. Plus, I don't think Bret is up to taking a stunner at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Century Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Edit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOmniWarrior Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Steve Austin stunners VKM Cena Orton Triple H Some random guys from the audience Michael Cole Michael Tarver Carlito Christian Zach Ryder Another for Vince One for Shawn One for Taker Another for vince A pair for Legacy Another for Vince One for Swagger Another for Viince JBL shows up with beers. They drink. Stunner to JBL and another to VKM the end. that many stunners all in a row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brashleyholland Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Edit lol.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesterx7769 Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Are FCW workers contracted to WWE? What I mean is do they follow the same 90 day no compete clause as the wwes main roster? 90% sure development contracts are different than main roster ones. Not sure the process as to when you switch over to a real contract but I know the old dev. contracts were a set rate and stuff, cant imagine its much different now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanMcFly Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Edit Umm... What ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Love the Gorgeous George induction. Love hearing Bert Sugar talk about him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantaloons Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Austin doesn't give a Stunner to Vince? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Century Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Umm... What ? It was just a stupid question that I decided to edit out, to save people the hassle of answering it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tha Black Phenom Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Austin doesn't give a Stunner to Vince? Really? I'd bet a fiver he stunnered him after the broadcast. Eh well. Raw was ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Century Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Raw was ok. As was TNA Impact IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stennick Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 It was just a stupid question that I decided to edit out, to save people the hassle of answering it. Your post doesn't say "last edited by" which means that you didn't go back and edit the post you just put "edit" as your post instead of you know....just not posting anything. It should be fun with Austin being the GM we haven't had a Rock, Hogan, Austin, any former top guy be a "host" for the night so this should be interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Century Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Your post doesn't say "last edited by" which means that you didn't go back and edit the post you just put "edit" as your post instead of you know....just not posting anything. It should be fun with Austin being the GM we haven't had a Rock, Hogan, Austin, any former top guy be a "host" for the night so this should be interesting. Seriously, I edited my post. I don't know why it doesn't say that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOmniWarrior Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 He did edit his post. Before that it said something about there not being a spoiler or something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astil Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Edit Modkill: Wrestling Century Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.