When TNA closes...

[Diamonddust 0]

No one knows what TNA does financially. Dixie said they turned a bigger profit last year than the year before...but no one really knows what's going on. Although...with all of their international deals and liscencing deals 2008 should have been a better year than 2007... You have to remember...what this company lacks in basic wrestling knowledge...they're somehow really good at the business part.

 

That is the key to why Paul Heyman might just be a good fit for TNA. He had a good to great mind for wrestling, specifically for what his audience wanted, but he had a terrible mind for business. If he doesn't have to worry about money, then I think he can do a good job, see above statement about him in OVW.

 

The same goes for Cornette. As old school as he is, I wish they would to hell with it and put him in charge of creative. We would then get a true alternative to the WWE product.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I don't expect TNA to die anytime soon as long as Panda and Spike keep financing them, but at their current rate someone is going to have to notice they're not a profitable commodity at the moment.

I would agree. As long as TNA do decent ratings, Jarrett and company will be able to keep the gravy train going, and TNA will still be around, but they'll be doing nothing more than treading water. Unless a miracle happens and either Jarrett comes to his senses or someone clues in Dixie, then TNA will be stick around to provide a woeful product that diehards will watch for free but an ever decreasing amount of them will actually pay for.

[AlaskanHero 0]

If no one knows TNA exists, it doesn't really matter who's booking the show, they'll still get the same 1.2 that they seemed to have maxed out at. Of course, Russo being fired and Heyman getting the book would cause a massive increase in good will towards TNA amongst the IWC, but I doubt their ratings would show much or any improvement unless TNA bothered to advertise. But then again, they really don't need to draw 3.0s and 4.0s to be successful. 10% of their viewing audience buying PPVs would probably make everyone involved with TNA quite happy.

 

Could TNA close this year? Possibly. Not likely, but it could. Probably won't while it's making money, but once the poor product catches up to the company it'll likely suffer a fate similar to WCW in which it simply died slowly with a gradually decreasing number of people watching it happen. I really don't want to see that happen, but it almost feels inevitable.

[The Buzz 0]

They are getting 1.7 million viewers. I really think that if they did Clash of The Champion style specials on the months with no pay-per-views, and hyped up those big shows well they would have one hell of a model. Like someone said, if they can get a percentage of those viewers to start watching pay-per-views they'd be good. In my opinion, which I know doesn't make it right or wrong, they lost a lot of ppv buying "smark or smart fans" when they stopped putting the x-division first with minimal star power on top, and gained more casual fans who don't necessarily buy ppvs when they brought in their Team 3d, Angle, Sting, Christian, Booker, etc. They would be served well to find a happy medium to please everyone.

[dubq 0]

TNA signing Paul Heyman to a giant contract would have about the same effect as when WCW did it with Russo: zero. They've dug out their foxhole. It won't get any bigger, and signing a writer to a wrestling company to double the ratings is a pretty asinine thought.

No it's not. Wrestling is storytelling. Nobody will question the in-ring talent available to TNA, but it's the creative team that sucks - you know the people who script out the shows, the writers.

 

That last time he had full creative control was in OVW three years ago, and it was really entertaining stuff. I would probably watch iMPACT with regularity again. Not sure if others would, though.

Exactly. He made compelling characters of guys who've since flamed out of the wwe. And his critiques of the wwe and TNA for the UK Sun are usually spot on - he still gets it.

 

You're a fool if you think that TNA's writing and angles are what's causing their bad ratings. It's people not knowing they exist and therefore not tuning in. It's bad marketing, plain and simple.

[Chazz 0]

TNA signing Paul Heyman to a giant contract would have about the same effect as when WCW did it with Russo: zero. They've dug out their foxhole. It won't get any bigger, and signing a writer to a wrestling company to double the ratings is a pretty asinine thought.

No it's not. Wrestling is storytelling. Nobody will question the in-ring talent available to TNA, but it's the creative team that sucks - you know the people who script out the shows, the writers.

 

That last time he had full creative control was in OVW three years ago, and it was really entertaining stuff. I would probably watch iMPACT with regularity again. Not sure if others would, though.

Exactly. He made compelling characters of guys who've since flamed out of the wwe. And his critiques of the wwe and TNA for the UK Sun are usually spot on - he still gets it.

 

You're a fool if you think that TNA's writing and angles are what's causing their bad ratings. It's people not knowing they exist and therefore not tuning in. It's bad marketing, plain and simple.

 

I agree to an extent. I also think it hurts them to keep broadcasting from The Impact Zone week after week. The Product really comes across as second rate, imo.

[RedJed 0]

TNA signing Paul Heyman to a giant contract would have about the same effect as when WCW did it with Russo: zero. They've dug out their foxhole. It won't get any bigger, and signing a writer to a wrestling company to double the ratings is a pretty asinine thought.

No it's not. Wrestling is storytelling. Nobody will question the in-ring talent available to TNA, but it's the creative team that sucks - you know the people who script out the shows, the writers.

 

That last time he had full creative control was in OVW three years ago, and it was really entertaining stuff. I would probably watch iMPACT with regularity again. Not sure if others would, though.

Exactly. He made compelling characters of guys who've since flamed out of the wwe. And his critiques of the wwe and TNA for the UK Sun are usually spot on - he still gets it.

 

You're a fool if you think that TNA's writing and angles are what's causing their bad ratings. It's people not knowing they exist and therefore not tuning in. It's bad marketing, plain and simple.

 

I'd say its half and half, half the booking which is inconsistent as hell and half the marketing end of it. If they consistently had great booking year after year, there would be more of of a word of mouth towards the company that it's worth checking out, and if the booking wasn't as bad as its been here and there, ppv buys would be much more significant than this, considering well over a million people do check out Impact every week.

[haws bah gawd 0]

Though he recently left TNA, it surprises me that we haven't heard of WWE picking up Lance Hoyt yet. He's got the size they seem to look for, and is fairly agile.

[Diamonddust 0]

TNA signing Paul Heyman to a giant contract would have about the same effect as when WCW did it with Russo: zero. They've dug out their foxhole. It won't get any bigger, and signing a writer to a wrestling company to double the ratings is a pretty asinine thought.

No it's not. Wrestling is storytelling. Nobody will question the in-ring talent available to TNA, but it's the creative team that sucks - you know the people who script out the shows, the writers.

 

That last time he had full creative control was in OVW three years ago, and it was really entertaining stuff. I would probably watch iMPACT with regularity again. Not sure if others would, though.

Exactly. He made compelling characters of guys who've since flamed out of the wwe. And his critiques of the wwe and TNA for the UK Sun are usually spot on - he still gets it.

 

You're a fool if you think that TNA's writing and angles are what's causing their bad ratings. It's people not knowing they exist and therefore not tuning in. It's bad marketing, plain and simple.

 

I'd say its half and half, half the booking which is inconsistent as hell and half the marketing end of it. If they consistently had great booking year after year, there would be more of of a word of mouth towards the company that it's worth checking out, and if the booking wasn't as bad as its been here and there, ppv buys would be much more significant than this, considering well over a million people do check out Impact every week.

 

Agreed. I know about TNA and have from the start, but I cannot bring myself to watch it, even if it does have talent I'd like to see succeed (A.J., Joe, and a couple of others)

[geniusMoment 0]

That observer poll is dumb. How can you have a WCW like fall when you're standing on an ant hill not a mountain?

 

 

Really, there should've only been one option and everyone should've voted for it. And that is that TNA will be in the same place next year, running in the same over-produced Battledome like arena, drawing 1.0-1.3 ratings, and featuring shitty way too fast nonsensical booking that leads to nowhere and no ppv buys. That's the option I vote for.

[Boner Kawanger 0]

TNA signing Paul Heyman to a giant contract would have about the same effect as when WCW did it with Russo: zero. They've dug out their foxhole. It won't get any bigger, and signing a writer to a wrestling company to double the ratings is a pretty asinine thought.

No it's not. Wrestling is storytelling. Nobody will question the in-ring talent available to TNA, but it's the creative team that sucks - you know the people who script out the shows, the writers.

And what are they supposed to do when they sign Paul Heyman? Press release? Sure. Run commercials about their new writer? I hope not. Put him on TV in an angle to prove that he works there? Look...I'm not saying Heyman is a bad writer or anything. He's overrated, especially by people like you. Sure, he's better than what they have. The point is, writers do not matter to television audiences. Do you remember when WCW touted their signing of Russo? How he came in and specifically said he had booked the WWF? When was that? About a year before WCW died?

 

And how is signing Heyman going to double ratings? Word of mouth? The only people watching TNA, outside of people who watch it knowing how bad it is, are incredibly loyal, but whatever they're telling their friends isn't working. "Hey, pal! Sting and Kurt Angle and the Dudleys are main eventing the PPV. You should buy it!! Oh, you still think everything about TNA sucks? Well what if I was to say that Paul Heyman is booking it?!"

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

That's TNA's problem though - who are they advertising to? How are they advertising? What are their methods of expansion? I hear much about WWE as I do about TNA during TNA broadcasts. Surely that isn't right?

[Shylock 0]

TNA signing Paul Heyman to a giant contract would have about the same effect as when WCW did it with Russo: zero. They've dug out their foxhole. It won't get any bigger, and signing a writer to a wrestling company to double the ratings is a pretty asinine thought.

No it's not. Wrestling is storytelling. Nobody will question the in-ring talent available to TNA, but it's the creative team that sucks - you know the people who script out the shows, the writers.

And what are they supposed to do when they sign Paul Heyman? Press release? Sure. Run commercials about their new writer? I hope not. Put him on TV in an angle to prove that he works there? Look...I'm not saying Heyman is a bad writer or anything. He's overrated, especially by people like you. Sure, he's better than what they have. The point is, writers do not matter to television audiences. Do you remember when WCW touted their signing of Russo? How he came in and specifically said he had booked the WWF? When was that? About a year before WCW died?

 

And how is signing Heyman going to double ratings? Word of mouth? The only people watching TNA, outside of people who watch it knowing how bad it is, are incredibly loyal, but whatever they're telling their friends isn't working. "Hey, pal! Sting and Kurt Angle and the Dudleys are main eventing the PPV. You should buy it!! Oh, you still think everything about TNA sucks? Well what if I was to say that Paul Heyman is booking it?!"

No one's talking about Heyman's name value and no one's talking about using his name as a way of saying "hey, this guy is our booker he did ecw, plz watch our show" and trying to capitalize on him like that. It's not him being an active member of the roster or any other such shit that's going to effect them positively. It's bringing him in to book and write the overall product. The quality of the TV would go up and that would roll over into more people buying the PPVs, rather than the 10k that do now. Less shit like Lance Rock, Little Petey Pump, Eric Young and the nonsense that usually goes on during that show wouldn't be anything other than positive for the company.

 

Take Joe for example. Who the fuck, whether casual viewer or hardcore fans, would buy him as the bitch they've booked him to be? It's the same problem they've had for a while (with Styles, MCMGs, Killings, LAX and so on). They can't book those non-WWE guys in a way that makes people give a shit and want to invest their time in them. Heyman, in all likeliness, could overhaul that and maybe turn them into actual bonafide stars. That's not to mention using the veterans on their roster in a way that makes them actually valuable, rather than "just another ex wwe guy" on the roster.

 

Should Heyman be brought in on a permanent basis, two things should be done: Bring in Elijah Burke and push 'em to the moon, and replace Don West as color guy. His voice is just fucking horrible. It's just as bad as, if not worse than, Gabe's.

[Boner Kawanger 0]

whoosh

[dubq 0]

*sigh* Whoosh, indeed!

 

People need to understand that better booking does not equal better ratings. People actually knowing that your product exists and watching it would equal better ratings. Yes, I agree that Heyman writing would probably be a lot better than what they have now.. but it won't make a lick of difference if people aren't tuning in to watch. Why is this so hard for people to grasp?

[RedJed 0]

Yeah, but if the booking is bad, and they DO get people to tune in, those people won't stick around and ultimately, nothing matters. The booking, as well as the marketing/advertising/promotions to get people to check out the shows, need to go hand in hand.

[Shylock 0]

"whoosh"? There's no "whoosh" there. I understand they need to improve their advertising and promotion. Even then if people knew TNA existed, what makes you think they'd stay tuned in if what was airing sucked? And who is to say that Heyman couldn't create some programs that start giving the promotion, and it's stars, a buzz? WCW had a bunch of stars, but with the Russo booking and overall nonsense they started tuning out. Having good promotion and advertising will only go so far if you don't have the quality of programming to follow through on. Better booking, writing and overall presentation of the show and their stars could go a long way in an of itself to get their existing audience putting more money into their promotion. If the 10-14k number is correct, then they still have a very small portion of their overall TV audience buying their PPVs.

[cabbageboy 0]

TNA really needs to get out of Orlando and take the show around the country. Or at least around a regional area in the south. Just something besides that same stale arena with annoying fans. Then they can create some buzz if the shows are good.

 

As far as the comparisons to WCW go, bear in mind WCW was tanking horribly well before Russo ever signed. There's a reason why WCW wanted Russo so bad...they sucked.

[DarKnight 0]

I agree to an extent. I also think it hurts them to keep broadcasting from The Impact Zone week after week. The Product really comes across as second rate, imo.

 

You hit the nail right on the head. If someone has never seen TNA and they were channel surfing, and came upon it, they would immediately change the channel within the next 10 seconds due to the over-produced look of the impact zone, Tenay and West's horrible loud commentary, and maybe even the six-sided ring. 2nd rate indeed. I don't really think TNA is going to suffer financially for the time being though, as I think the past 2 years, they finally have turned a profit. That idea of the mock DVD of TNA would be quite funny, with WWE making fun of all of Russo's horrible shit the past 2 years like that Sting/Abyss feud, the reverse battle royal, and the rat-on-a-pole match. Oh, and anyone remember that horrible show where Angle went around at bars picking up those weird chicks? Yeah, that was bad.

[Silence 0]

Oh, and anyone remember that horrible show where Angle went around at bars picking up those weird chicks? Yeah, that was bad.

 

Brother Ray:"Sorry Kurt, I accidentally used D-Von's phonebook."

 

Just terrible.

[DarKnight 0]

Brother Ray:"Sorry Kurt, I accidentally used D-Von's phonebook."

 

Just terrible.

 

I think that was the worst episode of TNA I've ever seen. That whole show was full of that horrible shit, as it seemed like there were no matches, and it was only that stuff. Not only was that stuff a bad attempt at comedy, but it couldn't draw a dime, as it couldn't lead to a match or anything, it was simply Brother Ray telling Angle about D-Von's weird hangouts and nothing more.

[Silence 0]

I think that was the worst episode of TNA I've ever seen. That whole show was full of that horrible shit, as it seemed like there were no matches, and it was only that stuff. Not only was that stuff a bad attempt at comedy, but it couldn't draw a dime, as it couldn't lead to a match or anything, it was simply Brother Ray telling Angle about D-Von's weird hangouts and nothing more.

 

It also was about Angle, as usual.

[Karc 0]

The booking will only change when the rating drops.

 

If WWE were to get TNA, only the thin blonds (Taylor, Angelina, Velvet, maybe Cheerleader Melissa to replace Victoria) would make it to the end of the first year. No one else has a shot. As far as Vince would be concerned, they are all like Christian, and will be treated as such until they quit or are fired.

[TheFranchise 0]

I'd be pretty interested in seeing AJ Styles on ECW as an upper midcard act. Occasionally wrestling the champion but mostly wrestling the likes of Morrison and Mark Henry.

[thecitythesky 0]

*sigh* Whoosh, indeed!

 

People need to understand that better booking does not equal better ratings. People actually knowing that your product exists and watching it would equal better ratings. Yes, I agree that Heyman writing would probably be a lot better than what they have now.. but it won't make a lick of difference if people aren't tuning in to watch. Why is this so hard for people to grasp?

 

 

I would assume then that your favorite shows/movies are such because of their compelling/marketing campaigns. And that you judge books, exclusively, by their covers.

 

I think what you're failing to understand is that people (literally target demographic-type people) are aware of TNA and Impact. Wrestling fans, though certainly not all of them, do know that TNA exists and I would say in more cases than you seem to even entertain consciously choose to not watch the show. And judging by the percentage of their audience that carries over to pay money for the shows I think says a lot about the interest of the remaining audience. I even know exactly when the show is on and frequently scroll past it; because it's terrible - they air a show not worth fast-forwarding through. Heyman is not the end all and be all but to say that improved writing doesn't matter if people aren't watching ignores the fact that that same improved writing is absolutely necessary when people do. Marketing a wrestling program this (generally) bad in a better way is the worst way to spend company money; you're attempting to draw attention to a steaming pile.

 

There's a reason that the highest rated scripted shows on television are the ones that people seem to think have the stories that interest them most, and clearly the answer must instead be better public relations.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

The booking will only change when the rating drops.

 

Are they really that happy with the basically completely stagnant ratings they've had ever since debuting on Spike?

[DarKnight 0]

Are they really that happy with the basically completely stagnant ratings they've had ever since debuting on Spike?

 

Apparently, they must not have expected much from TNA.

[Thanks for the Fish 0]

TNA signing Paul Heyman to a giant contract would have about the same effect as when WCW did it with Russo: zero. They've dug out their foxhole. It won't get any bigger, and signing a writer to a wrestling company to double the ratings is a pretty asinine thought.

No it's not. Wrestling is storytelling. Nobody will question the in-ring talent available to TNA, but it's the creative team that sucks - you know the people who script out the shows, the writers.

And what are they supposed to do when they sign Paul Heyman? Press release? Sure. Run commercials about their new writer? I hope not. Put him on TV in an angle to prove that he works there? Look...I'm not saying Heyman is a bad writer or anything. He's overrated, especially by people like you. Sure, he's better than what they have. The point is, writers do not matter to television audiences. Do you remember when WCW touted their signing of Russo? How he came in and specifically said he had booked the WWF? When was that? About a year before WCW died?

 

And how is signing Heyman going to double ratings? Word of mouth? The only people watching TNA, outside of people who watch it knowing how bad it is, are incredibly loyal, but whatever they're telling their friends isn't working. "Hey, pal! Sting and Kurt Angle and the Dudleys are main eventing the PPV. You should buy it!! Oh, you still think everything about TNA sucks? Well what if I was to say that Paul Heyman is booking it?!"

 

Writers don't matter? "Lost" wasn't expected to be a huge hit, but it had solid writing and the viewership exploded. Guess what - the writing for the show has really fallen off, and the ratings are plummeting. You could market the hell out of TNA right now,. folks would tune in see that it's the drizzling shits, and never tune in again.

 

You don't think it wouldn't have mattered whether Joe vs Angle was held off for a year versus being rushed like the current crew decided to book it?

 

Heyman would double ratings because he's book a much more compelling product.

[The Truthiness 0]

Heyman would not double the ratings, please stop saying that.

[bob_barron 0]

Writers don't matter? "Lost" wasn't expected to be a huge hit, but it had solid writing and the viewership exploded. Guess what - the writing for the show has really fallen off, and the ratings are plummeting. You could market the hell out of TNA right now,. folks would tune in see that it's the drizzling shits, and never tune in again.

 

Nope. LOST was always expected to be a big hit, it was one of the most hyped shows of the fall

 

Heyman would double ratings because he's book a much more compelling product.

 

Explain. What would make his product so compelling? Why did ratings not double when he was the primary writer on Smackdown!? Why did ratings not double for OVW?

 

What does Heyman have up his sleep that would cause TNA ratings to start being in the 2s. Where would all these wrestling fans come from?