“They’ve both been big stars, but The Undertaker is on a different level not just above Sting — Sting never had the opportunity to be on Undertaker’s level because he made excellent money – maybe not as much as ‘Taker would have made because I don’t see how – just that three years of Bischoff spending money like a drunken sailor in WCW, but Sting never got the chance. He only worked for Crockett for a little over a year and then they sold to TBS. And from ’88 — ’89 was still a decent year and ’90 was ok — but from ’90 – ’96 WCW was a non-entity, drew no major money, no major crowds, it was a television product and a mismanaged company.

While Undertaker was starting the streak at WrestleMania and becoming one of the biggest names in the history of the biggest wrestling promotion in the history of the world, and ‘Taker stayed there, Sting was out of the business for a while and then went to TNA. And once again they paid him well for the work he did but he never had the opportunity to draw major crowds with TNA. He didn’t have the opportunity to do major pay-per-view buy rates. So in any quantification, The Undertaker is a bigger star, any quantification besides in-ring talent and performance is subject to your interpretation, my knowledge my vary. But there’s no way to objectively quantify Sting in a business metric, big crowds, major matches, longevity, huge buy-rates, there’s no way anyone can compare — a lot of the guys who worked for a long period of time in the WWF can’t compete with Undertaker so there’s no comparison there.”