Eric Bischoff's War Against the "10 Percenters"; Calls the IWC "Irrelevant"

I guess it depends on your opinion of failing. if TNA is not better than they were before Hogan and Bischoff, they certainly are not worse.
I never watch TNA before Hogan and Bischoff so I can't comment on how they were before. but I wouldn't call the current product fail. whether some might disagree, I think they are putting out at least good product while maybe not great. it's unfortunate that ratings play such a key way of valuing what they are doing.
if I remember, TNA has had some of the all time best ratings during the Hogan and Bischoff era. while TNA may not be as successful as they had hoped, I still think they are good. you also have to take into account the actual network they are on. instead of comparing TNA ratings to WWE ratings, compare TNA ratings with other shows on the Spike network.
 
SpecialFNK said:
I guess it depends on your opinion of failing. if TNA is not better than they were before Hogan and Bischoff, they certainly are not worse.
I never watch TNA before Hogan and Bischoff so I can't comment on how they were before. but I wouldn't call the current product fail. whether some might disagree, I think they are putting out at least good product while maybe not great. it's unfortunate that ratings play such a key way of valuing what they are doing.
if I remember, TNA has had some of the all time best ratings during the Hogan and Bischoff era. while TNA may not be as successful as they had hoped, I still think they are good. you also have to take into account the actual network they are on. instead of comparing TNA ratings to WWE ratings, compare TNA ratings with other shows on the Spike network.
Click to expand...



While I don't disagree with what you're saying here, I would also ask you to take an honest look at where they are today versus all of the hype that preceeded the changes that have been made since HH and EB arrived. Much ballyhoo was made of the impact the 2 of them signing with TNA would have. Now, on the one hand we could say that they've been successful in that they are remaining relatively flat in ratings, meaning they don't appear to be losing viewers. However, my concern is they aren't growing their audience either. This means that the changes that EB and HH have made over the last year to 18 months have had no appreciable impact in gaining viewers. Can they point to a segment here or there that produced a lot of viewers? Or even an episode or 2? Sure. But there is no way a serious businessman would look at metrics like that and think positively. They need to be growing their audience by now, not simply maintaining it.

But I'll even consider another angle to this. Maybe they were hired to do only that. Maintain their base. If so, I would agree; mission accomplished. However, if that's the thinking at TNA HQ, then I truly feel sorry for those working for TNA.
 
some of the changes that have been made are a matter of opinion, and some may agree or disagree. 2 of the biggest changes they have done IMO have been better. they changed from 6 sided ring to a more normal 4 sided ring like all professional wrestling has used. they don't have as much focus on a style of wrestling(X division) and instead focus on the main event world heavy weight title scene.
I don't know who all the main event wrestlers were before Hogan/Bischoff, but since they have came in you have had Jeff Hardy, Matt Hardy, Anderson, RVD. who have they lost? Nash?
I think the Knockouts are better. I don't know all who was in before to who is in now. I know Kong is gone, and I'm so happy about that. add in Mickie James, Winter, and the HOT Tessmacher.

sometimes I really don't think enough people realize TNA is a television show. while they may not be getting the ratings they want, I don't think it's entirely based on the product they are putting on TV. they could definitely use some improvements, but as a TV show TNA is way better than ROH. what stars that people know do ROH have?
TNA could use better booking and better marketing. it's hard to build a fan base when you don't really advertise or travel.

I sometimes use the term general viewers, but maybe a better word is casual viewers. I think there are a lot of viewers that will watch TNA "Wrestling Impact" but will not take part in any type of internet connection with the company. maybe these viewers don't watch every episode every week, but there are more general/casual viewers than there are hard core viewers.
 
SpecialFNK said:
some of the changes that have been made are a matter of opinion, and some may agree or disagree. 2 of the biggest changes they have done IMO have been better. they changed from 6 sided ring to a more normal 4 sided ring like all professional wrestling has used. they don't have as much focus on a style of wrestling(X division) and instead focus on the main event world heavy weight title scene.
I don't know who all the main event wrestlers were before Hogan/Bischoff, but since they have came in you have had Jeff Hardy, Matt Hardy, Anderson, RVD. who have they lost? Nash?
I think the Knockouts are better. I don't know all who was in before to who is in now. I know Kong is gone, and I'm so happy about that. add in Mickie James, Winter, and the HOT Tessmacher.

sometimes I really don't think enough people realize TNA is a television show. while they may not be getting the ratings they want, I don't think it's entirely based on the product they are putting on TV. they could definitely use some improvements, but as a TV show TNA is way better than ROH. what stars that people know do ROH have?
TNA could use better booking and better marketing. it's hard to build a fan base when you don't really advertise or travel.

I sometimes use the term general viewers, but maybe a better word is casual viewers. I think there are a lot of viewers that will watch TNA "Wrestling Impact" but will not take part in any type of internet connection with the company. maybe these viewers don't watch every episode every week, but there are more general/casual viewers than there are hard core viewers.
Click to expand...


Well at one time they also had Christian as part of their roster and he spent some time as World Champion. They lost him, Kong, Gail Kim, for a time they lost Christopher Daniels (who is now back.), and I saw a video today from several years back of Randy Savage who made an appearance.

Now, I'll agree with you that moving to a 4-sided ring was the right move to make. No question about that. But I also think they should have maintained the X division seperately from the heavyweights. They could have placed more prominence on the X/lightweight title and hence given it more prestige during PPV events. Now they're moving back toward the X division now as Abyss is the champion, and we're seeing more tv time for members of the x division.

I like TNA because it's different. I like it because they have Sting and Kurt Angle. I like guys like AJ Styles, whom I'd never heard of before TNA. Nor Joe, Kaz, Jay Lethal, Christopher Daniels, etc.

As for the KO division, it's a shell of what it once was. Losing Kong and Gail Kim set them back a bit and they've struggled to find that dominant force for the KO division since then. So enter Mickie James, who I'm sure wanted to have the strap put on her asap as part of her agreement. She had a great feud with Tara, but since then it's really stagnated in my view.
 
Kofi Orton said:
Eric Bischoff Calls Internet Wrestling Community "Irrelevant"
by Chris Cash
Jun 02, 2011
Eric Bischoff posted the following on his official Twitter page (@EBischoff):

"Seems like 90% of the audience loves what the loudest 10% hates. So who really matters? The 10%er's can't get over the fact that they are irrelevant. Ratings don't lie. Research doesn't lie. IWC smarks need to get over it."



well there you have it. we're all idiots and don't know what we want in a wrestling product.

all kidding aside i am curious what everyone thinks about this. personally Bischoff needs to get over himself. he's not the great innovator and booker he thinks he his. although i would like to know what ratings and research he's talking about.

thoughts?
Click to expand...
I'm sorry! Research and ratings don't lie??! Really? Research and ratings are the modern manipulated basis of force-fed false statistics in the business world. Any group or company that want to discredit or disclaim any fact can manipulate the "research" to suit their opinion, even if the opinion provides nothing. It's a matter of being right. I'm not saying that the IWC reigns supreme in any way but for sure saying that Eric Bischoff is taking a dump on something or someone is in no way a surprise. Ratings and research, yes? What demographic have they "researched"? What region have they "researched"? The internet? You mean the few people that actually came online to answer their questions?? What portion of their "researched" individuals constitutes the whole? To tell me in my face that I'm a stupid ass for saying something stupid is one real and credible thing but to tell me that I'm a stupid ass because of "research and ratings"? That's downright lame! No, sorry. Bischoff lame!
 
Ok. He can call us irrelevant all he wants. That is fine. The thing is though, the difference between Bischoff calling us irrelevant and Vince calling us irrelevant is that Vince's company is doing quite well. I'm not saying Bischoff doesn't know the business or anything but surely he has to realize that if he wants the company to get bigger and to prosper more that the current formula likely will not work? They keep on having the same rating every single week just about. Something has to change.
 
Bischoff is kinda right, but also VERY wrong.

First off, why all the self-loathing? Calling each other marks and minorities. Saying our own opinions don't matter. The ICW is reasonably informed on a subject we know a bit about just through years of observation.

Now then, the vocal 10% is not who a company should aim at, but they're who you ought to pay at least a little attention to. They're the 10% that will be with you until the gory end. We watched WCW when it was unwatchable. We talk alot of crap about TNA, because we want it to be better. Some of the ICW is unreasonable, irrational, and belligerent, but not all.
 
Bischoff can easily use his 10% argument because many of the people who comment on his Facebook do so with vile and nasty comments. It's easy to spin his argument that everyone who hates TNA are a loud 10% minority who are simply stupid wrestling fans.
 
Eric Bischoff continued his campaign of spin today:
WZ.com said:
Eric Bischoff continues his ranting toward the Internet Wrestling Community, this time in response to the recent ratings breakdown for last week's addition of Impact Wrestling. Last week's show lost upwards of 300,000 viewers overall from the previous week. Those within TNA believe Game 2 of the NBA Finals was a big part of the reason while some wrestling critics weren't willing to give the game much credit for the loss in viewers.
On Eric Bischoff's Facebook page yesterday, he posted the following: "What the 10%'ers and the dirtsites that feed them don't want to report: Per Spike TV, Impact Wrestling was the #1 cable show in its time period among M18-49 despite under-delivering its STD average among key demos and TNA increased from its Jail (rpt) lead-in by +129% in M18-49 (.78), with an additional +6% gain in the following quarter hour. TNA peaked in the 10:15p quarter with a .99 in M18-49."
He furthered explained his opinions toward the IWC, this past week's Impact Wrestling rating and much more on the latest episode of the Monday Night Mayhem radio show. During his segment on the show, he pointed out the fact that Impact Wrestling is Spike TV's number one rated show each week and that they "outperform the UFC".
Click to expand...
Sounds great, right? Let's examine the statements.

129% looks like a big number, and TNA/IW has become fond of expressing themselves in percentages instead of totals. What that means is their lead-in- a fairly idiosyncratic name as TNA/IW is a tentpole show- drew around a 0.35. If TNA/IW isn't clearing 129% off that, they aren't around anymore.

Eric also expressed how TNA/IW was the top performing cable show for males ages 18-49 in their timeslot. Again- sounds impressive! Until you look at the word "cable" and "males" in there. The competition TNA/IW has on cable on Thursday nights is essentially Jersey Shore. I sometimes tell people about the wrestling tournament I won in high school- what I neglect to tell people is that there were three people in my division, and one of them had the flu. I am not surprised that there are more males that want to watch professional wrestling than watch Jersey Shore.

The claim about outperforming the UFC is technically true, but it's much narrower of a race than Eric Bischoff would have you think. Here are the ratings of UFC's Ultimate Fighter Season 13:
mmajunkie.com said:
The full season ratings for "TUF 13" included:
Click to expand...
Each ratings point equals approximately 1.3 million viewers. TUF13 finale this Saturday (Saturday is a dead night for television) drew a .9, which outdrew TNA/IW this week. TNA/IW is outperforming the UFC's programming, but it's a narrow race. (For what it's worth, the Ultimate Fighter series is another one that's looked at as underperforming.)

What Eric Bischoff isn't talking about, however, is the ratings compared to before he took the helm. To think that TNA/IW hired him and overhauled their company to gain .1 in the ratings is absurd. Is TNA/IW doing better than other shows on SpikeTV? Yes, but that's not a tough competition. But is TNA/IW performing up to the expectations that were set for them upon his hire? It's hard to say they are when they're spending a summer experimenting with different formats to "see what works".

Like any good con artist, Eric Bischoff feeds people impressive looking information that doesn't mean much, so that people don't pay attention to the details that do matter.
 
Eric Bischoff likes to spin numbers in his favor oh well were doin better then ufc were number 1 on spike tv its a bunch of bull yea Bischoff IW may be the number one show on spike tv but your RIVAL the WWE is one of the top ten watched shows in all of cable television week in and week out proof is here

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/tag/wwe-raw-ratings/

so as much as i love TNA Bischoff when they start pullin top ten numbers then you can trash talk all you want but the way i see it Bischoff right now is trash talking his main fanbase not a good idea IMO
 
Although he did make interesting points why does he take so much time to address the fact that the IWC (the 10 percenters) are irrelevant. In the long run the statement is avccurate but him saying that 90 percent of their fans love their programming has to be the biggest joke I've ever heard. Whether its on the internet or on the street I don't hear too many people who love impact.

In regards to his facts against the ultimate fighter and UFC programming I only have one thing to say and that is this. Bischoff, until your ppv buys are at the level of the UFC's u need to keep your mouth shut because if hundreds of thousands of people pay 80 bucks to see the ufc and only a few thousand pay 40 bucks to see your crappy product it shows u aren't even in the same league. Ratings mean nothing in comparison to ppv buys. But tell yourself that u are doing everthing right.
 
Let's see people were saying that football hurt WWE RAW ratings during the season and it was a legitimate reason, but now Bischoff makes a point that there was a very good basketball game on opposite IW but it's not a good reason. Yeah there is no bias against TNA/IW from the IWC.
 
sfury2005 said:
Let's see people were saying that football hurt WWE RAW ratings during the season and it was a legitimate reason, but now Bischoff makes a point that there was a very good basketball game on opposite IW but it's not a good reason. Yeah there is no bias against TNA/IW from the IWC.
Click to expand...
Who's saying that besides Eric Bischoff? This is what we call a "strawman", when you make up an argument for your opponent, and then argue against that as if they said that.
 
Rayne said:
Who's saying that besides Eric Bischoff? This is what we call a "strawman", when you make up an argument for your opponent, and then argue against that as if they said that.
Click to expand...
The line about some critics who refused to take the game into account was the writer of the story writing that not Bischoff I believe. What Bischoff said started at the part where it shows what he posted on his facebook page.

Do you see anyone pointing out the rating might be lower than usual because of the game? Did you take the game into accuont or even mention it in your explaination? Although the amount of the drop isn't like losing a million viewers or so but to TNA/IW 300,000 viewers is a lot. I guess we shall see this Thursday if those viewers are back or not and that is what will tell the whole story.

Now when RAW went up against Monday night Football I saw it mentioned several times as an excuse for lower ratings so thta s why I mentions IWC bias.

The only point I'm making is there is some bias with the critics and story writers on here and that can't be denied. Should Bischoff be starting a war with the IWC is another question and it's probably not a good idea. He can't win it because they are the only ones who really report anything much on wrestling.

As to your post about the overall numbers I don't disagree with you on it. One thing I do believe though is they did have some higher rated shows and have dropped some since the whole Hardy Fiasco and Sting return video stuff I think. Didn't thye at one time hit close to 1.5 but were unable to sustain it because of dumb tings they did?

I do find it ironic Bischoff or Hogan was talking about needing to help build Spikes audience so their audience could get bigger as well and then Bischoff starts a war with and offends people who actually watch the show. To me that's not a smart move.
 
sfury2005 said:
The line about some critics who refused to take the game into account was the writer of the story writing that not Bischoff I believe. What Bischoff said started at the part where it shows what he posted on his facebook page.

Do you see anyone pointing out the rating might be lower than usual because of the game? Did you take the game into accuont or even mention it in your explaination? Although the amount of the drop isn't like losing a million viewers or so but to TNA/IW 300,000 viewers is a lot. I guess we shall see this Thursday if those viewers are back or not and that is what will tell the whole story.
Click to expand...
I didn't address this weeks rating in comparison to last weeks. I addressed the figures that Eric Bischoff posted. In fact, I didn't even mention this weeks rating, with the exception of the 129% figure. Why? Because, no shit, audience share is going to drop with that kind of competition against it. Are you expecting someone to post a thread saying "TNA/IW's ratings were down, but it was because of this?" Aren't the TNA diehards defensive enough already?
sfury2005 said:
Now when RAW went up against Monday night Football I saw it mentioned several times as an excuse for lower ratings so thta s why I mentions IWC bias.
Click to expand...
But I haven't seen ANYONE criticizing TNA for their recent rating. You're acting as if people are going off on TNA for pulling a .79, and I haven't heard word one on these boards about it. Explain to me how no one discussing it shows IWC bias.
sfury2005 said:
The only point I'm making is there is some bias with the critics and story writers on here and that can't be denied.
Click to expand...
For the sake of the argument, I'm denying it. Prove your argument with statements that people actually made, not that Eric Bischoff said they made.
sfury2005 said:
As to your post about the overall numbers I don't disagree with you on it. One thing I do believe though is they did have some higher rated shows and have dropped some since the whole Hardy Fiasco and Sting return video stuff I think. Didn't thye at one time hit close to 1.5 but were unable to sustain it because of dumb tings they did?
Click to expand...
TNA/IW has proven that they're able to pop a big rating once, but haven't been able to translate that into a larger viewership. They have the capacity to show something that a broader audience wants, but are unable to keep those ~500,000 fans tuning in each week.
 
If we're so irrelevant, why does he keep talking about us?

Seems we've gotten under the skin of one Mr. Eric Bischoff.

Good!!!

Maybe it will actually produce more positive results for TNA than we've seen so far.
 
You know what's funny, Bischoff say's that the 10 percent of IWC Smark's don't matter, then Impact's rating is down 10 percent from last week.

We can aply the blame game all we want, but if people wanted to watch Impact, they would've. RAW usually has low three's to mid three's all year long, even during the NFL Season. If Impact provided a show people who want to watch with, or instead of a NBA Final's game, their rating's would've been higher, but they are'nt.

And of the what Bischoff was saying earlier I have no clue ehat he's talking about. The only thing I know is they got a 1.1, which was what they were getting last year without any NBA Final's, or NHL Stanley Cup series.
 
Rayne said:
.

For the sake of the argument, I'm denying it. Prove your argument with statements that people actually made, not that Eric Bischoff said they made.
Click to expand...

Not going to even try to prove bias as it is basically unprovable in my opinion. Bias is basically a personal perception and depending on what your predilection towards a product is you may see it differently than others do. Just like many perceive FOX News to be bias while many other perceive CNN and the major news network's to be bias. Both sides can come up with many examples to support their side but can one really prove their point to the other? Personally I think the only ones they can prove their point to are the people who already agree with them so basically they are preaching to the choir.

I will give a few examples of my perceived bias though but no need to argue them because you can agree or not it won't change my opinion as it is just my opinion and the way I see them.


I wasn't going by anything Bischoff said I was going by this line in Chris Cash's report which you quoted in your post. I believe it was Chris Cash saying it not Bischoff.

"Last week's show lost upwards of 300,000 viewers overall from the previous week. Those within TNA believe Game 2 of the NBA Finals was a big part of the reason while some wrestling critics weren't willing to give the game much credit for the loss in viewers."

I was speaking of the critics that he mentioned. I did a google search and several sites in reporting the numbers mentioned the drop was possibly due to the game.

As for the bias I guess I see it that way because I personally like TNA/IW and don't find it to be as horrible as some make it out to be. Yes it has a lot of bad parts but I've seen improvement and enjoy it weekly. I'm really not a fan of Hogan or Bischoff and don't know if where they're heading is the right direction or not. But I tend to let the angles play out before I hate on them. I guess truth is I'm not a complainer or someone that argues so I just sit back and enjoy it if it entertains me without thinking too deep into it. But than again Law and Order reruns I've seen several times entertain me so that might not be saying much.

As for examples I think if CSR had received the same e-mail about a WWE product they wouldn't have posted it as WWE Screwing over fans. They may have even tried to get hold of WWE to see if it could be rectified for the fan. I could be wrong because I didn't watch the show and never do so I don't know them or how they would react. But if I were them that is what I would have done no matter what company it was. Maybe I just expect to much out of people because I prefer to be helpful and usually am. Personally I didn't care about this issue though so I just read the title and when I saw it was CSR I went on to the next article and didn't watch it.

My problem is mostly with the critics who don't appear to be even handed in my opinion. But as I said earlier I do enjoy some of whats going on with TNA/IW and it does entertain me so I don't say a whole lot. I tend to think people nit-pik a lot things that aren't nearly as bad as they make them out to be. For instance the stuff about Daffney and her injury suit is something some critics really went after them on about how it made them look second rate when it's the same in all wrestling companies I believe. I also think people were to hard on them over the supposed MEM return. Booker had already told them no so they knew he wasn't going to be part of it from the start but I don't think you can blame them for it failing when Nash who was under contract suddenly asked out of his contract. I guess they could have said no you're under contract and we started an angle but they were nice and let him go. I think it went a better way anyway until Hardy screwed up and left Immortal without a good heel leader. Don't get me wrong they deserve a lot of criticism because they make some pretty big screw ups but I just think some go overboard on them.

I could be wrong, Critics and people may do the same thing to WWE but since I don't watch WWE I don't read the news or forum about them to know if they are treated the same way or not. Also why I don't comment much on WWE because I don't watch it so I wont bash it.

Rayne said:
.
TNA/IW has proven that they're able to pop a big rating once, but haven't been able to translate that into a larger viewership. They have the capacity to show something that a broader audience wants, but are unable to keep those ~500,000 fans tuning in each week.
Click to expand...
That's basically the same thing I said. They did some higher numbers and followed it up by doing something stupid that dropped the ratings back down. Hopefully they will stop doing the stupid stuff and the ratings can go up and stay up.

PS. Don't answer me back for the arguments sake because I'm not one to argue so there wont be an argument. I tend to make my points and move on I'm not going to spend a lot of time posting back and forth with people on a subject that is basically my opinion comapred to someone elses. I have other things I would much rather do than post back and forth on a wrestling forum, such as watch paint peel off a wall. (Just kidding)

By the way Have wonderful day and talk at you later.
 
sfury2005 said:
Not going to even try to prove bias as it is basically unprovable in my opinion. Bias is basically a personal perception and depending on what your predilection towards a product is you may see it differently than others do.
Click to expand...
I wasn't asking you to prove bias. I was asking you to demonstrate where all these people were that were jumping all over TNA/IW for pulling a .79 during the NBA finals. I haven't seen them. I suspect they don't exist.
sfury2005 said:
I will give a few examples of my perceived bias though but no need to argue them because you can agree or not it won't change my opinion as it is just my opinion and the way I see them.
Click to expand...
That's a shame. Despite how forceful I am in my opinions, I read what other people have to say, even if they disagree, and several times here I have had my opinion changed by a well conceived argument that made me view things in a different light than I had before.
sfury2005 said:
PS. Don't answer me back for the arguments sake because I'm not one to argue so there wont be an argument. I tend to make my points and move on I'm not going to spend a lot of time posting back and forth with people on a subject that is basically my opinion comapred to someone elses. I have other things I would much rather do than post back and forth on a wrestling forum, such as watch paint peel off a wall. (Just kidding)

By the way Have wonderful day and talk at you later.
Click to expand...
On a message board, that's what people do. People discuss opinions, try to support their own point of view, and hopefully learn something along the way. It's called a discussion. If you aren't willing to discuss things with other people, you are essentially just shouting into netherspace. Maybe I'm too old. I still remember the internet as a dream where you could meet people you otherwise never would have come in contact with, and be exposed to ideas you were unfamiliar to. I don't see the point in simply saying "I believe in this, and won't change my mind!" I am here to both expose people to my ideas, and expose myself to theirs.

I don't take it personally, and neither should you.
 
I will be short here.

Bischoff is wrong. My reasoning is I don't believe this 90%, 10% crap. I think nearly everyone who watches TNA/IW are the IWC if not all their viewers. WWE is a larger company and a tradition in America on monday nights so people may watch it just because its the norm and therefore are not all hardcore wrestling fans.

TNA/IW is much smaller and people only watch their product if they really like wrestling as it has not been marketed correctly for the non wrestling fan to even know of its existence. Therefore I would say TNA/IW is more like 90% IWC and 10% channel surfers. So Mr Bischoff be careful what you say as you may lose your viewers just because you are being a dick.

Finally all of you people who keep posting "I 100% agree with Bischoff". You my dear little cretins are the IWC, I know this as you are posting on a wrestling site, therefore you are calling yourselves dumb and useless. You're much like the dumb ass people who put the bags over their heads after Cody Rhodes calls them ugly fuckwits who should cover their faces, you guys need to educate yourselves.
 
Cheddarboy said:
I will be short here.

Bischoff is wrong. My reasoning is I don't believe this 90%, 10% crap. I think nearly everyone who watches TNA/IW are the IWC if not all their viewers. WWE is a larger company and a tradition in America on monday nights so people may watch it just because its the norm and therefore are not all hardcore wrestling fans.

TNA/IW is much smaller and people only watch their product if they really like wrestling as it has not been marketed correctly for the non wrestling fan to even know of its existence. Therefore I would say TNA/IW is more like 90% IWC and 10% channel surfers. So Mr Bischoff be careful what you say as you may lose your viewers just because you are being a dick.

Finally all of you people who keep posting "I 100% agree with Bischoff". You my dear little cretins are the IWC, I know this as you are posting on a wrestling site, therefore you are calling yourselves dumb and useless. You're much like the dumb ass people who put the bags over their heads after Cody Rhodes calls them ugly fuckwits who should cover their faces, you guys need to educate yourselves.
Click to expand...

Actually, you ARE wrong. Bischoff cleared up what he meant by "10%-ers" on Monday Night Mayhem's show. By 10%-ers he meant the portion OF the IWC (not THE IWC), that love to bitch moan and complain all the time, sitting at home every Thursday with a stop-watch, measuring how long or short every match was, and so on. Basically, the boobs of the IWC are the 10%-ers. The trolls, the haters (i.e "itssoeasy123", "WWEisLife2", just to name a few). If you don't believe me, listen to it yourself. Starts at 2:40 or something.

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=htt.../060611TheHotSeatWithEricBischoff.mp3&h=0880f

When he puts it THAT way - yes, those people - the ones lacking common sense - ARE irrelevant.
 
Rayne said:
I wasn't asking you to prove bias. I was asking you to demonstrate where all these people were that were jumping all over TNA/IW for pulling a .79 during the NBA finals. I haven't seen them. I suspect they don't exist.

That's a shame. Despite how forceful I am in my opinions, I read what other people have to say, even if they disagree, and several times here I have had my opinion changed by a well conceived argument that made me view things in a different light than I had before.

On a message board, that's what people do. People discuss opinions, try to support their own point of view, and hopefully learn something along the way. It's called a discussion. If you aren't willing to discuss things with other people, you are essentially just shouting into netherspace. Maybe I'm too old. I still remember the internet as a dream where you could meet people you otherwise never would have come in contact with, and be exposed to ideas you were unfamiliar to. I don't see the point in simply saying "I believe in this, and won't change my mind!" I am here to both expose people to my ideas, and expose myself to theirs.

I don't take it personally, and neither should you.
Click to expand...
Chris Cash in his article is the one who said some critics didn't accept that as an excuse so some must have been or it wouldn't have caused Bischoff to go off about it. So if Chris Cash was wrong and Bischoff went off about nothing then I accepted wrong information from them. But when people go off like that they usually have something that at the time set them off so I took Chris Cash at his word.

The last part was meant more as a joke but it didn't come off that way. Basically what I was saying was in such cases as it comes to personal bias it usually doesn't do any good to continue arguing over little things. Truthfully I don't have the desire to try and change your mind about something so little. If we were discussing something of a much gander scale that I believe in wholeheartedly it would be different. But I refuse to spend hours typing back and forth about whether or not Chris Cash was right when in his article he wrote that some critics wouldn't take into account the game as a factor for the ratings drop. I figure he knows more about it than I so I took his word for it.

If it was something I was passionate about I would argue all day with you about it but, this quite frankly to me is little stuff that means nothing to me. If it was something earth shattering I would be more likely to spend the time trying to discuss it with you. But the little things I tend to not spend much time on.


And frankly I hope you don't take this as an insult because it's not meant to be but when someone says "For the sake of argument" I tend to stop because I think they might argue just for arguments sake.. If you hadn't put that line in there I most likely would have just answered you back and not said as much. Those words to me say someone wants to argue whether they believe what they're saying or not because I had a friend who was like that. He would argue the opposite side even if he really agreed with you just for the arguments sake. I'm not saying that's what you were doing but that it is what came to my mind when I saw those words. I tend to shy away from people who enjoy arguments that much and sorry if I put that off on you when it isn't what you meant.
 
itssoeasy123 said:
You know what's funny, Bischoff say's that the 10 percent of IWC Smark's don't matter, then Impact's rating is down 10 percent from last week.

We can aply the blame game all we want, but if people wanted to watch Impact, they would've. RAW usually has low three's to mid three's all year long, even during the NFL Season. If Impact provided a show people who want to watch with, or instead of a NBA Final's game, their rating's would've been higher, but they are'nt.

And of the what Bischoff was saying earlier I have no clue ehat he's talking about. The only thing I know is they got a 1.1, which was what they were getting last year without any NBA Final's, or NHL Stanley Cup series.
Click to expand...

that is exactly what I don't get. They been going up and down the ratings, and they still haven't been able to get 2.0. They always get 1.1. That is because the number that shows are the fan base. Its very small. I can't even say blame the basketball game, because they been getting 1.1 in ratings for a very long time. This is one of those examples like when guys like Hogan needs to stay away from media. Didn't he blame Spike TV for the reason why the ratings were down. He can't seem to take the blame for himself, always looking for somebody to blame when he was the one that brought the nasty boys with him and look what happen
 
rondiesel2005 said:
that is exactly what I don't get. They been going up and down the ratings, and they still haven't been able to get 2.0. They always get 1.1. That is because the number that shows are the fan base. Its very small. I can't even say blame the basketball game, because they been getting 1.1 in ratings for a very long time. This is one of those examples like when guys like Hogan needs to stay away from media. Didn't he blame Spike TV for the reason why the ratings were down. He can't seem to take the blame for himself, always looking for somebody to blame when he was the one that brought the nasty boys with him and look what happen
Click to expand...

Exactly they are trying to find excuses for their ratings being so low as much of a tna fan as i am yes i prefer it to wwe hogan needs to sit back and look at himself and bischoff and say maybe were taking to much focus on ourselfs instead of the true stars of TNA shocase the true talent and ratings might just go up
 
Its a work.

He knows the IWC makes up a majority of the veiwership, he is a heel, trying to piss people off, or gauge how much he can piss people off.

I would say that 15 pages and two threads later, he did it with good reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
The 10%---IWC That is
Replies
18
Views
4K
maxparrott
M
C
Breaking: Eric Bischoff is Talking Nonsense About the IWC
2
Replies
41
Views
3K
Brian in Austin
B
Mitch Henessey
Eric Bischoff's Son Is In TNA
Replies
24
Views
10K
shattered dreams
S
T
Daniel Bryan - The Ultimate IWC Babyface
Replies
19
Views
6K
deslok
D
T
Definition of the IWC?
Replies
14
Views
5K
Kidpolean
K

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 0 (members: 0, guests: 0)

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 56 (members: 0, guests: 56)

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,834
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego

Share this page

Back
Top