Vince McMahon would never have asked a WWE talent to take a pay cut, according to former WWE writer and producer Chris Dunn, who says McMahon would have either kept someone he valued or simply released them.
Dunn made the claim during an appearance on the Public Enemies Podcast while discussing roster cuts, contracts and the criticism TKO has faced from fans during the current era of WWE.
talent decisions continuing to draw attention, Dunn argued that cuts are nothing new for the company. The difference, in his view, is how McMahon handled people he no longer wanted at their existing price. Dunn then explained what he believes separated McMahon’s approach from the current environment.
“Vince was making these cuts too. There was always spring cleaning. actually think Vince, like, you know, I think the difference is, like, Vince never would have asked anyone to take a pay cut. He would have either fired the person, or they would have been somebody like The New Day who he considered a national treasure.”
That is a blunt assessment of how McMahon handled contracts during his time running WWE. Dunn’s point was not that jobs were safer under McMahon. It was that, according to him, there was less middle ground: either WWE wanted to keep someone around, or that person was gone.
The conversation came up as Dunn was asked whether the TKO era has created a major shift in WWE and whether fans are beginning to want something different from the company. Dunn pushed back on the idea that every rough stretch in WWE can be traced back to TKO, saying the company has always gone through strong periods and frustrating ones.
“I think it’s ebbs and flows. I also think TKO is a bit of a boogeyman and, like, a bit of an excuse.”
Dunn said weekly wrestling television is difficult to maintain because WWE has to keep producing new episodes throughout the year while protecting matches, stars and long-term storylines.
“Sometimes creative is not good and, like, sometimes the show isn’t working and, like, it happens with a 52-week-a-year show and it’s a really hard show to figure out. Anyone can put together an excellent night of Raw, and then you got to do it the next week. And then, did you burn all your matches from the week before if you put that great show together, and what are you building towards?”
He also suggested that TKO may sometimes become a convenient target when WWE television does not connect with fans.
“I think, like, some people may be, like, saying stuff to the dirt sheets to make TKO look bad. Like, ‘Oh, TKO is making the show look real rough right now,’ you know, to make themselves look better.”
Dunn did acknowledge that pay cuts and roster moves hit differently when they involve wrestlers putting their bodies through punishment for the company. Still, his argument was clear: WWE was cutting talent long before TKO arrived, and McMahon’s method may have been even more final.
The claim gives fans another perspective on how WWE contracts may have been handled under McMahon compared to the current regime. While TKO will continue to face scrutiny over roster and financial decisions, Dunn believes blaming the ownership group for every issue is missing part of the bigger picture.
Do you think WWE talent were better off with Vince McMahon’s all-or-nothing approach to contracts, or is the current system preferable? Leave your thoughts in the comments.