>>19196025
Oh, like Rhea? Like Vaquer? That kinda of developmental crickets because WWE developmental doesn't work according to you?
Or the massive pops they get when are in front of an actual paying AAA crowd and not some lonely internet smarks screen? You know you are pathetic right?
>>19196366
It was so profitable they had to sell it to keep it going but also according to other smarks it's a small insignificant sideshow for kids that can't hold a candle to CMLL
Make up your fucking minds, which is it? Profitable or a mudshow?
Don't say it's profitable it manages to pay the salaries and venues so it's not on a loss. If you call that profitable you ain't fucking fit run a ice cream stand let alone talk about a wrestlingshows profits.