These conclusions are very poor. If you promote a match for months and then cancel it a week out it's very simply a negative unless there is a superior replacement match lined up. This is assuming that AEW wouldn't agree to an outcome other than Page winning, but having a match in which Page doesn't win does not stop AEW from putting on a good show, it does not mean that a match has a bad finish, and it does not mean that it achieves nothing or is not worth doing. I know that it's the angle that Meltzer is leaning toward but people don't need to simply swallow whatever he says.
Yeah, cancelling a match is a negative, no one is saying it isn't. But assuming you NEED to change the match, cancelling it is the better option than having a bad match with a non-"booking positive" result.
On the bolded:
It doesn't, but AEW isn't just about being a good show. The match has to fit in with their booking plans going forward, as well as having Dragon Gate and Pac agree to it. So you are limited on what you can do. There are many ways they could have a good no-result finish in a vacuum, but they are not in one.
AEW might have come up with a new plan for Hangman that they want to get started on this show, but nothing they came up with was accepted by DG. There were finishes that DG would do, but maybe they wouldn't work with what AEW wanted to do.
Maybe something like this happened:
-AEW and DG agree to a match and finish, AEW began promoting it.
-AEW signs Moxley, and want him to work with Hangman.
-AEW want to start the Hangman-Moxley program on the PPV with a run-in, so try and re-book the Pac match.
-DG don't like what AEW offer and can't agree on a finish.
-AEW decided that Hangman-Moxley is more important than the Pac match, so cancel it and to do something to set the program up up.