Guest MikeSC Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 I decided to e-mail Meltzer and ask him what are the rough number of buys TNA gets each week. According to him --- about 7,500. Damn! How on Earth can ANY company hope to stay afloat with buyrates that low? Heck, did Heroes of Wrestling get more buys? -=Mike
Michrome Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 The numbers took a nosedive after Mantell took over. That much was obvious--the lack of activity here, the massive drop in feedback to the observer and the torch. When you're charging 10 bucks, you can't have a 4 month streak of bad shows. That will kill you. They need to run another 1 cent show--it's their only hope.
JoeDirt Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 Yeah, weren't they getting 10,000-15,000 before Mantel started as booker? They need TV NOW.
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 Correction: They need to fire Dutch "Lets build the show around our core audience of 50 year olds" Mantels old wrinkled untalented ass.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 Meltzer had always said their average was about 10,000 - 12,500. With the recent string of about 6 months of shit, it has definitely gone down. They need great show after great show after great show to get it going again.
Corey_Lazarus Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 Well, at least we have the good news in that Russo has returned, is agreeing with the "keep it wrestling-oriented" approach, and the shows have been very good for the past month or so.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 You know, I've liked the shows lately too. But I wonder if we think they're really good because they've been so bad and now that they're not horrible we think they're good, or if they are infact, really good.
Guest OSIcon Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 Not to be overly negative or anything, but I don't think a television deal OR more consistent (good) shows will help them. Basically, at this point more than any other point, they are sinking and eventually will drown. First off, a television deal is anything but an automatic solution to their problems. 7,500 people a week buy their shows. I think is a safe assumption that the majority of those 7,500 buys are from the same people every week. 7,500 buys a week for weeks a month is 30,000 buys a month. If they get a TV deal, they plan on moving to one Sunday PPV a month. In order to equal the number of buys they are currently getting, they would have to gain an additional 22,500 people to buy the show per month through television. No matter how good their shows are, that kind of increase doesn't seem too probable. Not to mention that right now, it costs 40.00 a month for TNA PPV's. If they get TV and go to the one PPV a month, it is reported they plan on charging 29.99 per show. So that means they will actually need more than an additional 22,500 buys in order to match their current revenue. None of that looks very likely. The bottom line is they have lost a ton of money their whole existence and are just staying afloat because Panda is being VERY patient. A lot more patient then their initial investors who got out after three months. Panda could keep this going for another year (who knws), but eventually they are going to get tired of losing money.
Michrome Posted April 3, 2004 Report Posted April 3, 2004 Their only hope is to run another 1 cent show and win a lot of people back over again. Once you lose those paying customers, they're not going to get burned on that 9.99 again.
BoboBrazil Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 First off, a television deal is anything but an automatic solution to their problems. 7,500 people a week buy their shows. I think is a safe assumption that the majority of those 7,500 buys are from the same people every week. 7,500 buys a week for weeks a month is 30,000 buys a month. If they get a TV deal, they plan on moving to one Sunday PPV a month. In order to equal the number of buys they are currently getting, they would have to gain an additional 22,500 people to buy the show per month through television. No matter how good their shows are, that kind of increase doesn't seem too probable. Not to mention that right now, it costs 40.00 a month for TNA PPV's. If they get TV and go to the one PPV a month, it is reported they plan on charging 29.99 per show. So that means they will actually need more than an additional 22,500 buys in order to match their current revenue. None of that looks very likely. Not true. They would only need 25% more buys for the monthly ppvs than they currently get for one weekly ppv to make the same profit, which would equal about 10,000 buys if this 7500 number is correct. The reason for this is due to the fact of doing taped shows being cheaper than running live every week and the higher price tag for the ppv. They should be able to easily get that many buys with national tv.
Michrome Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 You don't comprehend. These are the same 7,500 weekly, adding up to 30,000 a month. That means these same 7,500 will buy the monthly ppv, but they will need 22,500 more to hit the 30,000 buys a month number they're getting currently. The same 7,500 people are not going to buy the monthly show 4 times.
BoboBrazil Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 You don't comprehend. They don't need 30,000 buys a month. They only need 10,000 buys at $30 to make the same profits as they currently are doing 4 ppvs at $10 due to the lower costs.
Michrome Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 You're right, I missed that, but the Sunday slot will cost a lot more than a Wednesday night slot.
BoboBrazil Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 Maybe maybe not. I don't keep up with ppv time purchasing costs. I do know doing one ppv live a month and not having to buy ppv time 4 times a month is going to be alot cheaper. Plus cable companies will most likely market it more when it is 1 time a month at 29.95 in their cable guides and such. I also know the cost of doing a taped show weekly is alot cheaper than doing a live one.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 Is the TV show a 1 hour or 2 hour? Because if it's 1 hour, and of course it has commercials, I don't see how in the hell you can build a ppv with 40 minutes of TV every week. I know they also have xplosion, but that's just not going to work.
BoboBrazil Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 Noone has really said whether the deal is for a 1 hour or 2 hour show. I would assume two hours.
Internet Warfare Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 Maybe they should lower their prices. 10 bucks a week for a 2 hour show really isnt worth it. Fire Dutch and maybe then company can get back on its feet.
BoboBrazil Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 How is $40 for 8 hours of wrestling not worth it if you buy WWE ppvs for $34.95 for 3 hours? TNA is 34.95 too if you buy the monthly package, which means you even get 10 hrs of wrestling for that price in some months.
Internet Warfare Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 Its not worth it when the product sucks.
BoboBrazil Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 I watched the show Wednesday and it didn't suck. It was simply alright. It was the first TNA I'd watched since October though and from what I've been reading on the internet it appears I've started watching again in an upturn.
Guest OSIcon Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 You don't comprehend. They don't need 30,000 buys a month. They only need 10,000 buys at $30 to make the same profits as they currently are doing 4 ppvs at $10 due to the lower costs. You are forgetting that the revenue from the monthly PPV will have to at least partially pay for the expenses of their television tapings. Unless they can some how fill up a full building with paying customers, but they haven't come close to that yet. So they will still have the expenses of flying in wrestlers, renting out an arena, ect. at least two times a month for television tapings (I can't imagine them taping a months worth at one time).
BoboBrazil Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 All of the figures for the weekly tapings were accounted for in the numbers I gave.
Vyce Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 This particular folder is amazing. Nearly two years after the promotion started, and people here are STILL waiting eagerly for the company to fold.
ISportsFan Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 How is $40 for 8 hours of wrestling not worth it if you buy WWE ppvs for $34.95 for 3 hours? TNA is 34.95 too if you buy the monthly package, which means you even get 10 hrs of wrestling for that price in some months. But the thing is WWE's PPVs have 7 or 8 matches that have been built for weeks/months on free TV, and will be long. TNA is basically charging the same price over the course of a month for 4 episodes of Raw, with the build-ups to matches and angles that have no business on PPV. I mean, TNA's made great strides and much farther than many people thought it would, but I don't know why people buy TNA for $35 a month when they can watch the same thing on Raw. Not criticizing those who like it, but I just wouldn't do it (unless there's a guaranteed MOTYC on a show, which is why I bought the replay of the first tag title cage match). Jason
Guest OSIcon Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 All of the figures for the weekly tapings were accounted for in the numbers I gave. Okay.... Not true. They would only need 25% more buys for the monthly ppvs than they currently get for one weekly ppv to make the same profit, which would equal about 10,000 buys if this 7500 number is correct. The reason for this is due to the fact of doing taped shows being cheaper than running live every week and the higher price tag for the ppv. They should be able to easily get that many buys with national tv. Nope, not seeing those numbers. Somehow you are assuming that doing taped television shows will equate to them just needing 25% more buys a month. You are basically pulling that out of your ass. It is cheaper putting taped shows on the air then broadcasting live, but I don't think the difference is that great. There is still post prodcution costs and all that good stuff. Not to mention that they will have an added show now every month (5 total). Unless you have some numbers that say otherwise, your "25%" means nothing. I have trouble believing that they will be saving 200,000 dollars a month by doing two less live shows a month (right now they are doing three and they will still be doing one - - the monthly PPV).
Internet Warfare Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 I dont really like the Idea of TNA doing monthly PPV's. The WWE is already doing this and I dont think People will want to buy 2 PPV's at about 30 bucks each in the same month.
thuganomics Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 Everyone's questioning TNA's revenues, but I do believe everyone's forgetting advertising dollars. As soon as they go to Fox Sports, either they will be given time to promote their own set of advertisers, or Fox Sports itself will help pay for the show with their advertising. The weekly show becomes much more cost effective. And if they can up attendance for PPV shows by going on the road to bigger venues, that will make them all that much more cash.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 It is cheaper putting taped shows on the air then broadcasting live, but I don't think the difference is that great. There is still post prodcution costs and all that good stuff. Not to mention that they will have an added show now every month (5 total). The difference between putting on a live show and a taped show is HUGE.
Fro Posted April 4, 2004 Report Posted April 4, 2004 I dont really like the Idea of TNA doing monthly PPV's. The WWE is already doing this and I dont think People will want to buy 2 PPV's at about 30 bucks each in the same month. Did you forget when WCW and WWF both ran a PPV a month? They did pretty well. ECW even did fairly well on PPV.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now