Why? Of course some of this is TNA's fault...just like most is WWE's fault for their reasons their product sucks though.
Sure, we can agree that the problems with WWE and TNA's products are internal. It goes without saying though...
When did they promise this? I remember them saying that they were going to...I don't remember them sitting everybody down and promising them things though. WWE does the same thing all the time. Any business does. It's called "positive outlook". Did you want them to come out and say "Alright everyone...we're going to be mediocre for a little while but hopefully we're going to build it up to above average after a few months...you might not want to watch us or wait for that but I wanted to be honest with you all because that's what everybody appreciates the most."
They constantly said or implied through their marketing that this was the case. Just because they didn't literally say word for word to everyone in the Impact Zone individually doesn't mean that it wasn't what was promised. Since you brought up WWE doing the same thing... when was the last time you heard someone from WWE tweet about how every signing or change they make will change the company forever, only for it to disappoint? I know that WWE and any company will overexagurate their announcements, but if they don't deliver, why don't they deserve to be criticized?
I don't remember this either. I think the fans wanted them to move to Monday Nights more than anything and they listened to what the fans wanted...which was a mistake. Because as I have witnessed on this site (for the most part...not everyone) but a lot of people don't know jack diddly squat about the business world...but they certainly think that they do.
A big part of the reason they moved to Mondays was because they got a big one night ratings boost from Hogan and thought they could keep it up, but ratings showed that viewers didn't think so, or at least not enough to turn off Raw. I highly doubt that the few thousand fans who bother posting on Twitter, Facebook or the TNA website were that much of a factor. If that was a top reason for the move, whoever signed off for that should be fired.
And I agree about people acting like they know more than what they do know...
So? They were and still are an alternative to the WWE. That wasn't a lie. They are in the same industry of business...and they are alternatives to one another.
But once again, you know what was implied. Hell, it's implied on this site almost every day from the TNA fans. That TNA is an alternative to the boring WWE product. By alternative I instantly think something completely different within the same medium. Now, you and I know about the wrestling world a bit more than the average fan, but how would a new TNA viewer feel about switching to TNA expecting something different, only to see guys like Anderson and Hardy on the screen who were just in the WWE 6 months to a year prior? Does that mean that WWE from January was an alternative to WWE in August because Edge was gone until then? No, of course not, and that's how a new viewer would see it.
Putting Hogan on screen was needed, because name recognition is important, but make people like Styles the highlight of the show, not Hogan, (like he was at the time.)
I've answered everything here in previous posts above...as well as in this very post. They didn't promise anything. They spoke very confidently about being able to bring something to the table...but nobody can predict who's going to watch it. People jumped to conclusions...felt immediately that the "old guard" was taking over and holding the younger generation's heads underwater...so they made up their minds and all hell broke loose instead of giving it a shot.
Of course they didn't promise. Once again, it was just heavily pushed and implied. It's just spin so they can backpedal if it doesn't go their way. But if it did go their way, most companies would tout it and brag about how they always deliver, and I'm sure TNA would've been no different.
They say first impressions are the most important. I still watch TNA every now and then so I don't fall into this category, but if someone is watching a program expecting something new, only for the show to highlight older talent, why would they keep wanting to watch? They gave it a chance by tuning in. They're not obligated to force themselves to watch something they don't like.
When you're the main invester in something - like McMahon was witht he XFL - you can choose to do whatever you want with your product. He cut his losses immediately and moved on to something else. TNA isn't at the point the XFL is and neither are their investors. The XFL was something brand new and extremely different than the NFL. They tested it and it failed. TNA isn't something entirely different and brand new to the market.
We're not talking about investors though. We're talking about viewership. You say TNA has only implemented it's changes for 7 months and that people aren't giving it enough time. XFL had a season to implement changes to the NFL formula and it failed in less time regardless as to who pulled the plug. What about TV shows? Should shows go 2 seasons before getting cancelled so they can get a fair chance?
The XFL wasn't something entirely new either though. If anything, I'd say the XFL was more comparable to TNA 5 years ago. It took the elements of an established product and put it's own spin on it. That's gone from TNA which is why I'm not as much of a fan as I once was.
Like I said, I don't hate WWE at all. I just never could understand how it's alright for them to put out a shitty product...having all the resources in the world...while TNA, with significantly LESS resources, are supposed to put out a product that's significantly better? I just can't seem to understand it...can somebody please tell me why this is???
I honestly don't think you hate WWE for the sake of hating it. The thing is that your scenario about the WWE putting out a shitty product is objective to your opinion.
To try and answer your question, they may not have the financial resources, but they definately have the talent and national exposure. I think that if you showcase the talent properly,there should be some kind of ratings increase. Even though I like WWE more right now, I still think TNA has the better talent overall with guys like AJ and Joe, but if they're not used right then they essentailly don't matter. If you ask me, they CAN and DO have the resources to compete on a talent level, but they blow it every time.
"
