No More Primtetime for TNA

[Dimensions 0]

Source: Wrestling Observer

 

TNA's iMPACT! move to primetime in April is no more.

 

Jeff Jarrett apparently told the wrestlers are a pre-show meeting today at the tapings that Spike TV executives have changed their mind and will not be putting the show in a primetime slot.

 

The new timeslot starting on April 13th will be Thursdays at 11 p.m. This will follow the Ken Shamrock/Tito Ortiz season opener of Ultimate Fighter.

 

The change was made as Spike made the decision to move the Ultimate Fighter to 10 p.m on Thursdays.

 

Dave Meltzer reports that on 4/13, the line-up will be CSI at 8 p.m., UFC Unleashed at 9 p.m., Ultimate Fighter at 10 p.m. and TNA Impact at 11 p.m., which is the line-up that by far makes the most sense for everyone.

 

----

 

Didn't see this anywhere else but thought ti was pretty important.

[Dangerous A 0]

Sucks not to be in prime time, but at least you get UF lead in.

 

Guess we'll see how this pans out. I get the feeling it'll pan out to .8 ratings.

[razazteca 0]

So Spike TV fears My Name is Earl and The Office?

[Guest Princess Leena]

Ouch.

 

I would think Saturday 11pm is better than Thursday 11pm.

[Eclipse 0]

Yikes...that has to show how confident Spike TV is with TNA, but hey, they will get that UFC lead in.

[Astro101 0]

Wow, that's a major setback. This was a chance to show what they could do in primetime. I guess the confidence in TNA is slipping.

[Fro 0]

This really means jack. TUF will be a strong lead-in for TNA and lots of shows do good ratings at 11 pm.

 

Sure, they lose the kiddie market but it's still a much better situation than Saturday Night at 11.

[Enigma 0]

Good luck going up against The Daily Show/Colbert Report block.

[claydude14 0]

Doesn't really effect my viewership of it, and I think the UF lead in will help.

[Guest tony manero]

TNA is done.

 

Stick a fork in 'em.

[Astro101 0]

I don't know if that's supposed to be sarcasm or not. If it's not [insert spiel about how they've been around even though everyone has said they'll be done month after month after month since they startd].

[slimm44 0]

Well at least I can watch prime time (if Earl and Office are still running in april). But Spike just seems to be screwing with TNA. First they cancel their prime-time special because of Sting not being a regular. Then they bring in Steiner and they decide not to move it to primetime. Messed up

[Guest El Satanico]

Well it makes sense from Spike's stand point, since TNA does well with UFC as the lead in.

 

Is there any reason why Spike can't show UFC before 10? UFC at 9 and TNA at 10 would be better.

[Placebo Effect 0]

I thought this was awful earlier, but really, it's not a gigantic, company-ending problem. If TNA can up their retention (the percentage of people who watched UFC and then watched TNA for the Saturday and Monday airings), then Spike will be more interested in letting it take the C.S.I. spot.

 

Even though Spike didn't promote their primetime special, the fact that the rating wasn't much higher than the Saturday shows is pretty bad.

[RedJed 0]

Eh I dont really feel sorry for them at this point since it all comes down to ratings and there's gotta be some concern when the trend has been decreasing on the Sat nite ratings lately. I dont see, though, why they couldnt have Impact on instead of CSI and then just do a second Impact later or even the replay that same night, but we'll see what happens. 11pm on Thurs nites is worst than Sat nite at 11pm - the lone exception being TUF, because they had Raw as a lead-in. Spike may find out quick that they have to shift this schedule on Thursdays, with that said. They need to try 2 hours from 9 to 11 of Impact and then TUF at 11, but it will be a process, if ever, to get to that point. It's going to take some crow eaten by Spike to allow that to happen. I think wrestling is a better lead-in to MMA, not the other way around.

 

The only positive from this is that it means TNA needs to clearly try harder (which they do need to do currently) and it might motivate them to turn up the creativeness a little more than its been like lately in hopes of proving themselves more to Spike.

[spman 0]

Ouiy, I would say this is a step down, it's debatable, but I think 11pm on a Thursday is worse then a Saturday. Just another nail in the coffin. I'm calling it now, AMW vs MNM at Survivor Series.

[Golgo 13 0]

Thursday at 11 isn't really much of a step down, if any. Saturdays haven't been good for TV for a long time. With the audience Spike is trying to attract, they're more liable to be home on Thursday rather than Saturday, right? And they have the Ultimate Fighter lead-in.

[Astro101 0]

Yea, I don't think it's much of a step down. I mean, more people are home Thursday nights than Saturday nights. I'm not saying they'll be more awake, but at least they'll be home. I'm sure the core .7/.8 audience will still watch anyway.

[Bruce Blank 0]

it may not be much of a step down from what it is now

 

But you can't deny that it's a step down from the original Prime Time plans, it won't spell their doom any more than the Saturday spot does.

 

But then again if it's about the same as Saturday night (or maybe a slight step down) then it certainly doesn't HELP TNA one little bit either.

[eirejmcmahon 0]

I'm not so sure it's a terribly bad thing - if they'd gotten the original slot, without any kind of UFC lead-in, I reckon they'd have been creamed in the ratings.

[Ced 0]

Saturday late-night isn't a great TV spot ratings-wise, so a bump to Thursday late-night won't hinder TNA's viewership much, if any. Though the loss of the primetime slot is a tough blow for them seeing as they were probably banking on attracting more viewers in that slot. Pretty much a zero-sum situation for now, so it's up to TNA to step-up their game and keep that lead-in watching.

[Silence 0]

Saturday late-night isn't a great TV spot ratings-wise, so a bump to Thursday late-night won't hinder TNA's viewership much, if any. Though the loss of the primetime slot is a tough blow for them seeing as they were probably banking on attracting more viewers in that slot. Pretty much a zero-sum situation for now, so it's up to TNA to step-up their game and keep that lead-in watching.

 

That means TNA will have to get rid of the jobber-squash format of Impact, which it seems like they're too reluctant to do.

[geniusMoment 0]

I tried to like TNA, I really did. But, I fail to see how anyone could like their product more than WWE (and I think WWE sucks). Their show is so sterile and antiseptic, it's like watching Battledown on acid, mixed with the dorkiness of wrestling. The smell of warm puke engulfing my nostrils for an hour is more appealing than watching an hour of action from the impact zone.

[Guest El Satanico]

That means TNA will have to get rid of the jobber-squash format of Impact, which it seems like they're too reluctant to do.

Actually, they have improved on that.

[Dangerous A 0]

TNA's format will continue to not work for them if they continue to put out 12 PPV's a year. IMO, it is extremely stupid for TNA to do 12 PPV's in an already saturated PPV market. WWE already puts one out a month and have 4-5 very established PPV's that will get big buyrates because they are big shows that have taken years to establish.

 

 

For TNA TV to improve, they need to scale down to 4-6 PPV's a year.

 

That way, you can have an hour of TV that doesn't come off as forced while trying to get 40 people on a show that no one remembers. TNA needs to establish shows on the PPV market like WWE had to in the past. Everyone knows that Rumble, WM, Summerslam, and Survivor Series are important because at their early points, they were the only shows.

 

If TNA were a little smarter about things, they would trim down to 4-6 PPV's a year and do them when WWE isn't doing one of their big 4. Then, you may get some buys off of people who may not feel like shelling out dough for a throwaway WWE show, but might for a 2-3 month built up TNA show that delivers.

 

Bottom Line: With only an hour, they have to rush storylines to build to a PPV. Until they get a second hour, they should do less PPV's and get their TV to become more compelling.

[TNABaddboi 0]

Keller posted this analysis:

 

Spike TV informed TNA this week that it is shifting its timeslot on Thursdays next month to 11 p.m. rather than 9 p.m. It moves them out of what is traditionally thought of as "prime time" and into the same timeslot they're not in on Saturdays.

 

The decision was made by Spike TV officials after analyzing the demographics of the ratings for CSI, which was scheduled to be TNA's lead-in. CSI draws good ratings, but not in the demographic that is likely to stay tuned to TNA. As a result, TNA would have to bring in its entire audience rather than also draw from a strong lead-in.

 

With the new 11 p.m. timeslot, Impact will follow The Ultimate Fighter (TUF) series, which is expected to draw not only strong numbers in the 1.5-2.0 range each week, but match closely the proven demographics of what TNA draws. In the short-run, TNA is likely to draw bigger ratings because of the timeslot change, and thus be in better standing with Spike TV when opportunities arise to expand or shift to a different day in true prime time.

 

Pro vs. Joes drew a strong 1.3 rating in its debut because it had the lead-in of a UFC-branded show. UFC's The Ultimate Fighter drew its initial strong following by following Raw and drawing from it's strong ratings in January 2005. TNA Impact is still considered an emerging show by Spike TV without the built-in audience to draw its peak ratings without a strong lead-in.

 

When The Ultimate Fighter reality series, which resembled Tough Enough, but with MMA fighters instead of pro wrestling trainees, ends in 12 weeks, it's likely that Impact would be moved into full-fledged prime time - 10 p.m. Thursday nights - if it has been drawing strong ratings in the 11 p.m. timeslot.

 

Thursday nights are also a much better night in general than Saturday nights, so even though the timeslot isn't changing the new night should make a big difference in the potential audience level. Having TUF as a lead-in should boost the rating even more.

 

TNA officials reacted negatively to the move at first because they had their hearts set on being in traditional "prime time." The timeslot shift is being seen as potentially embarrassing and a sign that Spike is losing faith in the show. The string of 0.7 ratings lately for the Saturday night show, below the 0.8 average for the series and well below the 1.0-plus ratings it drew earlier this year, may have played a factor. However, the move could be better for the promotion in both the short-run and long-run.

 

It's also possible that when TUF's season ends in 12 weeks, not only will TNA Impact begin in TUF's timeslot at 10 p.m., but it could get that coveted second hour it ultimately needs to not only feature established, known names, but also develop new stars who will be main eventing when the crew of fortysomethings they're building around now are needed to be replaced. How TNA Impact draws at 11 p.m. for the next 12 weeks will have a major influence on the future make-up of the industry.

 

Thoughts?

[razazteca 0]

When TNA moves to the Thursday timeslot will Jeff Jarret, AJ Styles, AMW be the champions?

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

TNA is lucky because if they went to Prime Time their only excuse for their ratings not improving would have been "We need 2 hours!", now they can say "We need 2 hours!" AND "We need Prime Time!", both of which are far away from "We don't know what we're doing!", which is probably more accurate, but that actually puts the blame on TNA...

[TNABaddboi 0]

TNA's format will continue to not work for them if they continue to put out 12 PPV's a year. IMO, it is extremely stupid for TNA to do 12 PPV's in an already saturated PPV market. WWE already puts one out a month and have 4-5 very established PPV's that will get big buyrates because they are big shows that have taken years to establish.

For TNA TV to improve, they need to scale down to 4-6 PPV's a year.

That way, you can have an hour of TV that doesn't come off as forced while trying to get 40 people on a show that no one remembers. TNA needs to establish shows on the PPV market like WWE had to in the past. Everyone knows that Rumble, WM, Summerslam, and Survivor Series are important because at their early points, they were the only shows.

If TNA were a little smarter about things, they would trim down to 4-6 PPV's a year and do them when WWE isn't doing one of their big 4. Then, you may get some buys off of people who may not feel like shelling out dough for a throwaway WWE show, but might for a 2-3 month built up TNA show that delivers.

Bottom Line: With only an hour, they have to rush storylines to build to a PPV. Until they get a second hour, they should do less PPV's and get their TV to become more compelling.

 

I agree wholeheartedly that less PPV would make Impact way better, but I can't see TNA doing it, simply because they don't make any money on Impact. Spike keeps all the ad revenue, so TNA's only concern with ratings is keeping them happy. Of course, the argument could be made (rightfully so) that a more compelling Impact would lead to more PPV buyers, but I don't think you'll see TNA give up their monthly revenue. The other solution, which I've been saying since they got on FSN, is to beef up the syndicated network (or stream it online like they did before Spike) and actually use Xplosion, kinda the way ECW used Hardcore TV when they were on TNN. There's simply no need for Xplosion to be a recap show when there's a replay of Impact every week. They'd be much better off using that show to further develop storylines, giving talent more time to get over.

 

Another thing they need to fix is that Impact is nothing like the PPV product, which have been drawing good reviews since they started. The PPV feature athletic matches, the TV features three moves squashed. If you've never seen a TNA PPV, nothing about Impact gives you the impression that its worth paying for. They've got to change that. They shouldn't feature 20 minutes matches, but even doing four 5 minute competitive matches that leave viewers wanting more is better than watching Joe, Abyss and Monty wrestle the same match every week. TNA has done much better with developing angles since being on Spike, but they need to find the balance, because people solely interested in angles already have their company. I almost get the feeling that the last three months have been a steady over-reaction to the first primetime specials disappointing rating. While they did need to make some changes after that, b/c the workrate is not enough to bring in the type of audiences they want, but the biggest thing that has separated TNA from WWE has been the in-ring action. You were almost guaranteed one great match every time you tuned in. The last memorable match on Spike was the X-Division 6 man from the first episode of the year. They are doing a little better recently, with the tag title match last week and looking at this week's spoilers, but it has to change totally for Impact to take off. It can't be an informercial for the PPV if it doesn't resemble the PPV product at all. Just my two cents...

[Astro101 0]

Yea, TNA's PPVs are totally different from Impact, and they're not gonna give it up because that's where part of the revenue comes from.

 

Now with the explanation of why Spike has decided to move back Impact, it makes sense. If they're expecting UFC to bring in 1.0-1.5 each week, then I think TNA can keep a sizable chunk of that rating rather than CSI's.