Due to some issues with the other company, we really couldn't book any venues in Pittsburgh.When TNA announced they were going on the road I never really gave this particular issue much thought, but Shore stated the following:
This is no real surprise as the word going around when TNA announced going on the road that WWE was flexing its muscle to make things difficult for TNA. WWE is within their legal right to do show as many contracts with venues include exclusivity clauses, but it doesn't make it any less dirty.Where I disagree with this is the idea that it is "dirty" behavior on WWE's part. It is shrewd, but I do not think it is dirty. Honestly, running in smaller venues/arenas/towns may very well benefit TNA. My cousin and I went to see a TNA show in Atlanta. It wasn't held at Philips or the Dome (obviously), but at The Tabernacle which is a small concert venue that used to be a House of Blues if I'm not mistaken. It was an awesome environment, it was filled up and it was a fun show.
Shore went on to say...
If TNA is no legitimate threat to WWE, as has been claimed, then WWE should leave them alone.You would have to be naive to think that was really the case, but I do get his point. WWE's actions clearly seem to fly in the face of their public stance on TNA. Then again I really have no issue with that. If you want to be one of the big boys then the 600 pound gorilla is going to treat you like one. I would like to think that if someone asked WWE why they were doing this they would respond with the words of the great philosopher Mark Henry and say, "Because I can!" and "THAT'S WHAT I DO!"