Guest nikowwf Report post Posted March 24, 2003 I don't have it in front of me right now, but it seemed preliminary buyrates on the latest shows seemed better, as well as increased interest in BUYING tickets. Meltzer said if all of these things were true, it would have almost closed the financing gap, if not completely closed it. (That is bringing in more money per show than the show cost.) Good stuff for you TNA loyalists. niko Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunk 0 Report post Posted March 24, 2003 I don't have it in front of me right now, but it seemed preliminary buyrates on the latest shows seemed better, as well as increased interest in BUYING tickets. Meltzer said if all of these things were true, it would have almost closed the financing gap, if not completely closed it. (That is bringing in more money per show than the show cost.) Good stuff for you TNA loyalists. niko Indeed, that is excellent news. How did they manage to last so long without making a profit? ChUnK! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mecha Mummy 0 Report post Posted March 24, 2003 Financial backing from Panda Energy, I suppose. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunk 0 Report post Posted March 24, 2003 Why would Panda willingly plow money into an organisation that wasnt making a profit? I dont get it. ChUnK! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest webmasterofwrestlegame Report post Posted March 24, 2003 Chunk - I do not mean this in a sarcastic manner, but have you ever studied business? Panda invested in NWA:TNA on the premise that they saw growth in the company in the future and would reap any profits derived from operation in the future. Basically, they believed in NWA:TNA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest swan Report post Posted March 24, 2003 WHen I see actual official data from the dish providers and the final numbers on NWA: TNA accountants letterhead I'll believe it. Anyone can claim to make money or break even. (Example Enron and World Com.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest nikowwf Report post Posted March 24, 2003 If your general argument (chunk) is this must be bullshit cause nobody would support something that wasn't breaking even, thats just not a valid point. And i agree we shouldnt all jump up and down or anything, but good news is better than bad news. niko Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Blue Bacchus Report post Posted March 24, 2003 They honestly cant make much off the gate as they comp most of their tickets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest oldschoolwrestling Report post Posted March 24, 2003 They honestly cant make much off the gate as they comp most of their tickets. They are cutting back on comp tickets and since people are being turned away at the door they will fill those seats with paying customers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted March 24, 2003 There have been rumors about them doing away with the comp tickets completely some time in the near future, but most people think that could hurt the crowd quite a bit. I think a lot of it could depend on how much they charge for general admission seating. If it remains $10 per seat, well, as one person put it to me, why pay $50 to bring your entire family to the show instead of just paying $10 to watch it on TV? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunk 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2003 Chunk - I do not mean this in a sarcastic manner, but have you ever studied business? Panda invested in NWA:TNA on the premise that they saw growth in the company in the future and would reap any profits derived from operation in the future. Basically, they believed in NWA:TNA. Actually, Im studying business in the first year of my joint degree. I wont lie, i hate the subject, and cant wait to drpo it at the ened of the academic year I see your point about the possibility of making money in the future, and I will go along with it as you most likely have more business knowledge than me. However, from my point of view, I wouldnt like to invest money in an organisation that is struggling to stay in business on the premise that it 'might' make money and be profitbale in the future. It misht be just me? ChUnk! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest nikowwf Report post Posted March 25, 2003 Take away the WRESTLING part of it and think about investing in a struggling business that might take off... YAHOO at one point fit that mold, as did IBM, APPLE computers, etc. I agree though...financing a struggling wrestling company doesnt seem like my idea of a good investment. but lets be glad they do Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunk 0 Report post Posted March 25, 2003 but lets be glad they do Ill go along with that. ChUnK! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ulysses Everett McGill Report post Posted March 26, 2003 If I'm not mistaken, (which I might be) some companies can actually use a division of their corporation losing money to their advantage. For example, at one point, I heard that Turner was getting tax breaks from WCW losing money (in the pre-Bischoff days). So Panda probably got into this accepting that they were going to lose money for a few years, but getting a tax break, or being able to stay in a lower tax bracket because of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunk 0 Report post Posted March 26, 2003 Off topic. Ulysses, whats the deal with the Odyssey stuff. Just wondering cos I had to read that damn book for my A-Levels. lol ChUnK! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ulysses Everett McGill Report post Posted March 26, 2003 Hey bud, I think the great thing is, that if you have to read The Odyssey, you could just watch "O Brother" and get the short musical version...complete with hot chicks! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest swan Report post Posted March 26, 2003 If it remains $10 per seat, well, as one person put it to me, why pay $50 to bring your entire family to the show instead of just paying $10 to watch it on TV? Well thats one way to look at it, but look at all the folks that go to Raw or Smackdown that can watch for free. Same goes for any sporting event. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunk 0 Report post Posted March 26, 2003 Hey bud, I think the great thing is, that if you have to read The Odyssey, you could just watch "O Brother" and get the short musical version...complete with hot chicks! Really? My teacher actually tried to get us to go to see that film when it came out, but none of us made it. I thought it was only very losely based on the Odyssey anyway. I know were goign off topic here, but have you read the book? How does it compare to the film? ChUnK! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted March 26, 2003 Well thats one way to look at it, but look at all the folks that go to Raw or Smackdown that can watch for free. Same goes for any sporting event. No, actually it's quite different. Raw and Smackdown only come to town once or twice a year at most, it's a special occasion to go down to the arena and see Rock, Austin, Hogan, etc. live and in person. TNA runs the same building in the same town in front of the same crowd every week, with considerably less high-wattage star power than most WWE shows. I know were goign off topic here, but have you read the book? How does it compare to the film? Very different. The movie is VERY loosely based on the book, with only a few specific references every now and then. Also, a big difference with old classics like the Odyssey is who the translator was. Personally, I prefer Robert Fagles, as his writing tends to be the most dynamic and simple, lacking the cumbersome poetry of other versions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunk 0 Report post Posted March 26, 2003 Very different. The movie is VERY loosely based on the book, with only a few specific references every now and then. Also, a big difference with old classics like the Odyssey is who the translator was. Personally, I prefer Robert Fagles, as his writing tends to be the most dynamic and simple, lacking the cumbersome poetry of other versions. Yeah, thats what I thought. I read the Fagles translation as well. To tell the truth it wasnt actually that bad a book. (Thats saying something for me to say I like a book ive been made to read ). It beat all of those tragedies and 'comedies' we had to read anyway. ChUnK! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest subliminal_animal Report post Posted March 26, 2003 Will the great Fagles be coming to TNA?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Basswitch Report post Posted March 27, 2003 This is good news. But IMO, TNA still needs a new building. they are turning away like 400 people a week. Thats a lot of tickets they could be selling. Plus the more tickets you sell one week, the more you'll probally sell the next. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
