10 Ways AEW Is Nothing Like TNA

The major difference between AEW and TNA lies in the numbers. Simply put, AEW has come into the wrestling world with the shiniest of silver spoons in its mouth. TNA was a Jarrett family outing that turned into a wrestling promotion. Both of those origins can be dismissed, criticised and lambasted, but the difference between the two is an important one. If business is the subject, a silver spoon is exponentially more valuable than a fishing rod.

The ramshackle nature of TNA's early days doesn't really get enough coverage. As the dust settled on the death of WCW, Vince McMahon had made it abundantly clear that he had no intention of signing with Jeff Jarrett, one of the biggest stars of WCW's final days and a man who wasn't exactly on the best terms with McMahon and co. Jarrett was 33 at the time, already a veteran but arguably in his prime. Where was he going to wrestle? One fishing trip later, TNA was conceived and the rest is history, wacky wrestling history.

Contrast that with the origins of AEW. The wrestling world was desperate for an alternative to WWE, one that could feasibly be around for a while and provide good quality programming in the process. Talent was never going to enough. What Cody Rhodes, The Young Bucks and Kenny Omega needed was financial backing, preferably from someone with buckets full of both cash and enthusiasm for wrestling.

Enter Tony Khan.

The wealth of the Khan family cannot be understated. Shahid Khan is one of the wealthiest men on the planet, full stop. Put simply, his bank balance that is twice as big as Vince McMahon's, and Khan doesn't have years of bad wrestling-press to go along with it. No matter the wrestling-centric intentions of Jeff and Jerry Jarrett, the mind-bending wealth of AEW's ownership is the biggest reason why AEW is nothing like TNA.