Sure the presence of a sports franchise will enhance the economy.
Sounds like we agree after all.
Without a collective front against owners and shareholders whose sole concern is the bottom line, it always turns into a race to the bottom. A question of who will take more risk for less money?
Only in wrestling you say? Not possible in the Majors?
As myself and others have pointed out WWE is a bloody terrible comparison primarily because IT IS NOT A SPORT. Pro wrestling is a group of actors playing a role.
Further to that there is no real competition for the WWE so the actors are somewhat interchangeable and have no real leverage.
Why not use more apt comparisons like REAL SPORTS, where there are no unions involved.
How about using the PGA?
Are the golfers used and abused by the tournament directors.
What about NASCAR
http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/26/does- ... rmula-one/
Their Drivers seem prety happy and dont want a union at all.
As was the case during NASCAR's formative years, officials have always hung their hat on an "open door policy" for any driver with a legitimate concern. In the past year NASCAR has even taken the unprecedented step of holding "town hall" meetings with owners and drivers to give them all an informal forum.
Just this summer, NASCAR team owners came together on their own to discuss the state of the sport and the direction it was going.
And it's apparently enough progress to satisfy those most significantly affected.
"I feel that for all the frustration that we have with NASCAR at certain times, in the end, they have done a good job through dictatorship of creating this sport we have,'' Edwards said. "It's still by far the most successful sanctioning body on planet Earth.''
Sounds like the "owners" in that industry treat their drivers pretty well.