Guest MikeSC Report post Posted May 16, 2004 Of course it makes a difference. It lets people know of the promotion where they wouldn't have otherwise and even outlines the timeslot. TNA had "exposure" on ESPN with the Urlacher thing. TNA had "exposure" with Fairplay's previous appearances. You have this belief that Johnny Fairplay DRAWS A CROWD --- a premise as faulty as assuming that giving David Arquette the World Title will do anything but harm to your company. "Survivor" fans who don't watch wrestling won't start because Fairplay is there. You cannot seriously suggest that there won't be a few additional people who tune into the TV show. It's never increased before --- I see no reason to expect it to be different NOW. If he's hated enough for people to vote them as Survivor's best villain, then surely some would be interested to see what he's like in another environment. You assume TNA marks didn't flood the poll to skew it. You assume that Fairplay marks --- and, yes, there are some --- didn't vote REPEATEDLY to put him "over the top". You assume that the results are indicative of anything. From there, if it's decent, then some of those will buy the PPVs. That's a difference - gaining viewers that would not otherwise have seen the show. They've tried it before --- with this same useless slug. It didn't work then. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AnonymousBroccoli 0 Report post Posted May 16, 2004 You assume TNA marks didn't flood the poll to skew it. You assume that Fairplay marks --- and, yes, there are some --- didn't vote REPEATEDLY to put him "over the top". You assume that the results are indicative of anything. The poll used to vote for best villain was the same one used to award a million-dollar prize, so I assume they had some sort of protection against vote tampering. Considering what he did on the show, compared to the other nominees, it's not that big of a shock. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TNABaddboi 0 Report post Posted May 16, 2004 It's never increased before --- I see no reason to expect it to be different NOW. It's different now because these potential new viewers won't have to spend $10 to sample an unfamilar product. Anyone would be more likely to try something that's free then something they have to pay for. So they can watch the FSN show and if they like it, can become PPV buyers. It's a world of difference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbondrage99 0 Report post Posted May 16, 2004 A plug on Survivor is a plug on Survivor, even if it dosent help it sure as hell wont hurt it, espically when the plug is free, and letting people know that The WWE isnt the only wrestling promotion anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Donners Report post Posted May 16, 2004 You have this belief that Johnny Fairplay DRAWS A CROWD --- a premise as faulty as assuming that giving David Arquette the World Title will do anything but harm to your company. "Survivor" fans who don't watch wrestling won't start because Fairplay is there. ... You assume that Fairplay marks --- and, yes, there are some --- didn't vote REPEATEDLY to put him "over the top". Hang on...if there are Fairplay marks, as you state, who are apparently so interested in him that they would be able to have a large impact on something involving many thousands of votes, how on earth is it so outlandish to believe they won't tune into a TV show to see him? As for Urlacher, it's impossible to tell just what impact he had on buys because, last I checked, there were no exact week-by-week PPV buys figures available. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
