The ONLY reasons WWE is #1 - Brand loyalty, addiction, and the Walmart mentality

[LAXtremest]

I could give two shits calling me mark or a "smark". Its my opinion that Hogan and nWo shit killed WCW. Thats what made ME stop watching it. I was tired of seeing all the old guys running the show. I've been a fan since the 80's, and Hulk Hogan has usually been all about himself. He was never quick to put a young guy over. Its only my opinion buddy. I don't really care. I hope both companies do good. Gives me more to watch. Its only a hobby, its not life my friend...

 

[hlhbk]

Hey man, how cushy and profitable was that job you had working at WCW, what were you a road agent or something? A make-up artist, a ring crew member, or were you some groupie that found a way to sneak backstage to an event and somehow crash a production meeting?

I mean, one of those above mentioned scenarios must have happened in order for you to witness this alleged murdering of WCW at Hulk Hogan's hands. I mean you can correct me at any time if I am wrong, but let me ask you bossman, were you there for any of what was going down in WCW? I got a feeling you probably weren't, you just sound like another smark who's "cutting and pasting" the same old speculative BS and passing it off as fact.

Maybe if you rephrased what you said and say "Well, I think Hulk Hogan had something or everything to do with WCW going down the tubes.", I could respect that opinion, because hey who knows maybe that is what really happened. However, I have no idea because I'm just someone that watches wrestling, and I am not in the wrestling business. There are a lot of different opinions, I've got my own, but I'm not going to say that it's a stone hard fact, because well if I did, then it wouldn't be an opinion, it would just be a smark rant.

So your guess would be as good as mine, but do yourself a favor dude, and definitely watch how you state these things, because statements like "Considering how I feel about Hogan (another huge part of why WCW died)", show that you don't know what you are talking about. Don't even say that's an opinion because it's not, that's a total statement, and it's one that you are not backing a thing up with.

Oh I agree it is a total statement, because it is a fact. I have read numerous books about the demise of WCW and consider Eric Bishoff's book to be the definitive version.

Consider how good of friends Bishoff and Hogan are, and even he comments about how hard it was to do bussiness with Hulk in WCW. I said Hogan was one of the big reasons, but not the main reason. The main reason WCW died is the AOL time warner merger. Bishoff says this as a fact in his book, so again I will believe him.

Listen to anyone who was in WCW and knew what was going on and everyone says Hogan along with Hall and Nash's politics are what tore WCW apart because they were in bussiness for themselves and refused to job.

Oh and one last thing, I gotta say I agree with you on both HBK and Bret Hart who probably would be one of my favorites of all time, (if you see my avatar, I don't think that'd be too hard to figure out) but at the same time, I love wrestling period, the athletic side, the theatrical side to me it's an all around great presentation when the two are blended together. Hence why World Wrestling Entertainment going all the way back to its days as the World Wide Wrestling Federation and then the World Wrestling Federation has always been one of the most unique wrestling promotions ever, in my view.

While the styles of Hulk Hogan and John Cena are drastically different and have a greater emphasis on entertainment rather than pure athleticism does not make them inept as wrestlers. While their stronger points aren't going to be scientific based moves like a Bret Hart style worker, that's not to say they can't wrestle at all.

If you think Hogan and Cena can't wrestle worth a lick, then I implore you to go and see if you can do any better than they. Trust me, if these guys were total oafs in the ring, they'd never have lasted a day past their first match. People who can't understand the psychology of the wrestling business and can't perform the moves safely, they never last. Obviously, Hogan and Cena got that much right, even if they can't match someone like Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels move for move.

If you take Cena's and Hogan's persona away from them could they get over on their wrestling ability alone? The obvious anwser to that is no. To me the gimmicks are secondary, and if you can't capivate an audience by your wrestling talent then there is no way you should be considered a top star in professional wrestling.

I have friends in the wrestling bussiness, so I am aware of what it takes to be in the ring. By stance on Hogan and Cena doesn't change, they can't wrestle.

So there's some food for thought man, I can compromise with you on a few points, i.e. the praise of Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart and I agree with you partially on his return. It should not have been a physical storyline with Vince, at least that's how I feel. I do think it's good to see him back, I just think it should have been done differently.

However, your or I beyond just watching professional wrestling, have no real grasp on what it takes to make it in this business or what it takes to run a wrestling company. Therefore, if you want to make any credible points on this forum, I would definitely construct your views a little better, in my opinion, smarks need not apply when it comes to formulating a legitimate opinion.

Good thing that I am basing my opinions on factual information I have either read or been told by people in the know then eh? I really could care less if you agree with my opinions, but don't accuse me of just trying to be a smark when that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

hlhbk, amigo, I'm going to lay it down nice and straight for you.

Oh I agree it is a total statement, because it is a fact. I have read numerous books about the demise of WCW and consider Eric Bishoff's book to be the definitive version.

You're forgetting who published that book, World Wrestling ENTERTAINMENT...note the emphasis on the word Entertainment. These guys are in the business to tell a story, and I have no doubt in my mind creative liberties are taken in ALL these books. I take everything I read in these books, in particularly the ones from WWE with a grain of salt. I wasn't there to witness ANYTHING, am I going to say Hogan's star power didn't have influence? No, like any big star, egos are going to come with that status. But Hogan's not the first to play that card in the entertainment world and he won't be the last. I find tell alls like Controversy Creates Cash and The Death of WCW to be literary hilarity, the former I find to be a mere extension of Bischoff's on air character. I'm not going to believe everything I read because if you believe everything you read, see and hear in the wrestling business, then you are a total idiot.

Consider how good of friends Bishoff and Hogan are, and even he comments about how hard it was to do bussiness with Hulk in WCW. I said Hogan was one of the big reasons, but not the main reason. The main reason WCW died is the AOL time warner merger. Bishoff says this as a fact in his book, so again I will believe him.

Well, at least you explained yourself a bit better in this one, however I still advise the take it with a grain of salt mentality. You will only be disappointed if you believe everything these people tell you.

Listen to anyone who was in WCW and knew what was going on and everyone says Hogan along with Hall and Nash's politics are what tore WCW apart because they were in bussiness for themselves and refused to job.

Don't care, by nature all of these people even my favorite stars have turned into bitter, disheveled people. By nature all celebrities no matter what level of success they have, are not people I'd find to be the most credible of individuals. That even goes for the ones whose careers I follow.

Unless I was there to see what they went through, I'm not going to comment. I am merely going to observe. Some of these people who even accuse guys like Hogan, Hall, and Nash have their own issues to deal with. I'm just an outsider looking in, pardon the unintentional pun. Therefore, I don't feel I have the right to comment on anything that I never saw first hand.

If you take Cena's and Hogan's persona away from them could they get over on their wrestling ability alone? The obvious anwser to that is no. To me the gimmicks are secondary, and if you can't capivate an audience by your wrestling talent then there is no way you should be considered a top star in professional wrestling.

Sadly, my good man, considering the predetermined nature of pro wrestling, wrestling ability only goes so far, sure there have been notable exceptions, i.e. Chris Benoit who didn't need to have the mic skills to carry the WWE title division, but these exceptions are few and far in between. You can't have the personality of a baked potato and expect to be a top draw, no matter how many moves you know. Thank god, you're not in charge of signing talent to contracts because if you had, then wrestling as we know it would be as entertaining as watching paint dry on a wall.

You have to remember professional wrestling is an athletic version of broadway my good man, where athletic ability by itself will not always determine where you go in pro wrestling. You have to have a balance and Hogan and Cena have or in Hogan's case had the right amount of ability to work a match with the charisma and "it factor" to balance the ticket. On a side note I am not a Cena fan at all, but I respect what the guy is doing. I'm going to be the last person to judge his in ring talent, because I myself am not dong it for a living. Otherwise he wouldn't be where he is right now. I'm not in a minority here enough people bought into what Hogan was selling in the 80s and what Cena's been doing for the past few years

Then again maybe I missed something, I could just be imagining the record crowds that Hogan drew in the 80s and the cross over appeal John Cena has been enjoying since the mid 2000's. If I am please find a way to get me back to my reality, where I can see what your actual vision of what professional wrestling should be.

I have friends in the wrestling bussiness, so I am aware of what it takes to be in the ring. By stance on Hogan and Cena doesn't change, they can't wrestle.

You have friends in the wrestling business, but you yourself are NOT in the wrestling business from what I am gathering, I know people who have worked the indy wrestling scene myself. However, that makes neither of us the leading expert on what it takes to make it in pro wrestling. Again, you and I have never worked a match a day in our lives, I know I am not going to say Cena and Hogan can't wrestle, but I'm not going to stop you from having that opinion. However, don't be surprised when you get challenged on such a bold and irrational statement.

Good thing that I am basing my opinions on factual information I have either read or been told by people in the know then eh? I really could care less if you agree with my opinions, but don't accuse me of just trying to be a smark when that couldn't be further from the truth.

You have no opinions, you have second hand information that has more likely than not been homogenized and put into the WWE creative blender as I like to call it. With Vince McMahon I would assume having his final approval on what gets published in these "backstage fairy tales" that you can buy at your local Borders or Barnes and Noble. So my good lad, I would base my opinions more on what I see and experience, not on what I hear, there's a good word for people like you in addition to smark, and that's "lemming". It is more than obvious that you are quite the impressionable individual if you're going to take everyone else's word as gospel.

I'm sorry man, but in my opinion and anyone else is free to agree or disagree but give me an S-M-A-R and K and you got another spelling for an individual known as hlhbk.

 

[billm75]

Sid, you described brand loyalty to a tee. I mean, why do people continue to go to McDonald's or buy Nike shoes, Budweiser Beer or purchase Levi's jeans? It's called BRAND LOYALTY.

This is a stupid thing to rant about if you ask me. There's only 2 wrestling organizations that are nationally televised, and I'm sorry, TNA might have potential, but from what I've seen, they lack the "it" factor in their production. I can get with just about any wrestler if he's entertaining to watch or entertaining to listen to, but TNA is reminding me of the 80's when I was growing up. You had the WWF and you had NWA. I'd tune in for the WWF all the time, and when that wasn't on, I would try to catch the NWA. When I put the NWA on my TV it was like watching a sub-par product. The lighting, the camera work, the crowd involvement...all of it seemed so 2nd class. WWE (and the old WWF) gives you a big-time production feel when you turn it on. It doesn't matter if it's ECW or RAW, both shows are produced with high standards.

Sure, the product itself may have degraded over time, but that's in the eye of the beholder. For example, when I was younger I used to flat-out LOVE a Big-Mac. Now-a-days, I can't stand how McDonald's meat tastes. It's fake tasting. But there are PLENTY of people who still eat there because it's familiar and comfortable to them. BRAND LOYALTY.

When I was younger, I HAD to have Nike shoes. Period. Now that I'm older, I am happy with New Balance. Again, people still flock to Nike, not because it's a superior product, because it simply isnt, but because it's familiar to them.

What's your point, exactly? People should shun the familiar in favor of what YOU prefer because YOU prefer it? That's stupid to even consider, let alone make a post about. You don't have to like the WWE, that doesn't mean the rest of us can't hang on to it because of nostalgia and brand loyalty. And frankly, I think you're a fool if you don't enjoy at least 75% of what's going on in the WWE right now anyways.

Sure, hindsight is always 20/20 and you can always do things differently or better, but this is what they've got right now. You can be assured, deep down in your cynical little heart, that the WWE wants the MAJORITY of their fans to enjoy their product. They're not simply resting on their laurels. But when you're as big as the WWE, you're basically a cruise liner. You can't stop and turn on a dime. It takes a while to navigate that change in direction because it's such a huge ship to deal with. When you're TNA, ROH, or whatever other up and coming fed, you're a speedboat. Small, powerful and can change direction at the drop of a hat.

Think before you bash. You're not comparing apples to apples here. And lastly, what's wrong with nostalgia? Why should you have to change your tastes just because you've gotten older? I still like alot of things (cartoons for one) and I'm 35 years old. I'm not giving them up because in the public's eye (your eye) I should. Screw you and anyone who tells me otherwise. I'm a grown man, with 4 children and a decent job. I pay my taxes, take care of my own and I'm entitled to enjoy what makes me happy. There's so little out there to make us happy, we should grab onto what does and defend it with our lives.

If we listened to the cynics, we'd be watching "real pro wrestling" and not enjoying the show. We'd quit eating at McDonald's and be sitting down to a dinner of fois gras and bean sprouts. We'd stop wearing Nike shoes and instead have docksiders on our feet. We'd be boring, just like those who bash what we love. Go to hell, I'm going to be happy, you can be miserable.

 

[vertigolowe]

Although i wasn't agreeing with cuddlebuns, i was totally getting what he (or she) was saying until i got lost with...

"Arrested Development was a great show, but the ratings sucked, so I had say goodbye to it."

You gotta be kidding me, you looked into the ratings of the show and since they started to drop you decided you should stop watching the show too? You weren't watching the show for its artistic quality!! You weren't watching it for how good it was?? You were tuning in because everybody else was tuning in and you tuned out because everyone else was tuning out!!! This is why you love WWE because everybody else does. Do you know why? It's called imitating group behaviour, it's not called critically enjoying something that is entertaining.

Getting into your head, it's obvious you like many obsessed security blanket WWE fans watch the show because WWE has been the dominant wrestling promotion. You have no idea how WWE destroyed all of the territorial wrestling 20 to 30 years ago and put the people of the real wrestling business out of business. You have no idea what was so amazing and real about the WCW/NWO wrestling revolution, and you have no idea about the concept of "sticking it to the man"..you people only understand butt kissing the big guy in charge. You likely have a mohawk and spiked hair and have no idea what on earth you're rebelling against, so you watch pg wrestling!! That's what's wrong with the kids these days. They only understand image, they don't get emotion. They only get technical stuff like ratings and bland wrestlers who all look and wrestle the same.
Hogan and Bischoff are the last two remnants of the old school left that can take down the corporate WWE which has eaten up all of its competition throughout the years. Fans of real wrestling should be on the side of Hogan and Bischoff, they should want to see them succeed, if not even take down WWE for being such a vulture.

People like you are obviously easily herded sheep, only watching shows based on their ratings. You don't understand how Vince is not loyal to you, you wouldn't know entertainment if it stone cold stunned you, you cheer for the corporate guy on top, you are nothing but a trend follower and little guy squasher. You don't understand that the pg wrestling of today is nowhere near as good as the pg wrestling 20 years ago, and you watch a show for teens and children when you are an adult who should be watching adult programming. That is wrong with WWE fans of today, they are sheltered and extremely immature, they get a kick out of children's programming because they don't understand adult concepts yet because they're maturing slower than any other generation. They have been fed bland television programming for so long and from such an early stage in their wrestling viewing lives that they wouldn't know the difference between boring and excitement. And for those of you who are 28 and older, like myself, and do not agree and still love WWE and think its really entertaining..you guys obviously lack imagination, you tolerate enjoying something most people don't tolerate anymore (check the ratings from today compared to 10 years ago) and the tv rating of .00000000000000001 that you give Vince each week is your stamp of approval that you appreciate his effort to make the lowest cost programming possible.

I'm pretty sure what he was talking about is that Arrested Development was a good show that he liked but because the ratings sucked it got cancelled so he had to say goodbye. Not that the ratings dropped so he stopped watching.

At least that's how I read it.

As for the other point about people stopping watching because the ratings drop, it's really the other way around. When people stop watching a show its ratings drop. That's how ratings work.

 

[pyrusane]

Getting into your head, it's obvious you like many obsessed security blanket WWE fans watch the show because WWE has been the dominant wrestling promotion. You have no idea how WWE destroyed all of the territorial wrestling 20 to 30 years ago and put the people of the real wrestling business out of business. You have no idea what was so amazing and real about the WCW/NWO wrestling revolution, and you have no idea about the concept of "sticking it to the man"..you people only understand butt kissing the big guy in charge. You likely have a mohawk and spiked hair and have no idea what on earth you're rebelling against, so you watch pg wrestling!! That's what's wrong with the kids these days. They only understand image, they don't get emotion. They only get technical stuff like ratings and bland wrestlers who all look and wrestle the same.
Hogan and Bischoff are the last two remnants of the old school left that can take down the corporate WWE which has eaten up all of its competition throughout the years. Fans of real wrestling should be on the side of Hogan and Bischoff, they should want to see them succeed, if not even take down WWE for being such a vulture.

People like you are obviously easily herded sheep, only watching shows based on their ratings. You don't understand how Vince is not loyal to you, you wouldn't know entertainment if it stone cold stunned you, you cheer for the corporate guy on top, you are nothing but a trend follower and little guy squasher. You don't understand that the pg wrestling of today is nowhere near as good as the pg wrestling 20 years ago, and you watch a show for teens and children when you are an adult who should be watching adult programming. That is wrong with WWE fans of today, they are sheltered and extremely immature, they get a kick out of children's programming because they don't understand adult concepts yet because they're maturing slower than any other generation. They have been fed bland television programming for so long and from such an early stage in their wrestling viewing lives that they wouldn't know the difference between boring and excitement. And for those of you who are 28 and older, like myself, and do not agree and still love WWE and think its really entertaining..you guys obviously lack imagination, you tolerate enjoying something most people don't tolerate anymore (check the ratings from today compared to 10 years ago) and the tv rating of .00000000000000001 that you give Vince each week is your stamp of approval that you appreciate his effort to make the lowest cost programming possible.

Interesting. I like what you've done here. You have taken a statement out of one person's post and used it to craft an entire rant about what is wrong with today's wrestling fans. You used a lot of big words, a lot of very impressive sounding phrases, and tried to be as condescending as possible. Even though there is very little substance to what you offer, you tried to at least make it appear like a mature, well thought post.

The problem is, you based this entire rant on a statement that you weren't intelligent enough to understand. Here is the first part of your post...

Although i wasn't agreeing with cuddlebuns, i was totally getting what he (or she) was saying until i got lost with...

"Arrested Development was a great show, but the ratings sucked, so I had say goodbye to it."

You gotta be kidding me, you looked into the ratings of the show and since they started to drop you decided you should stop watching the show too? You weren't watching the show for its artistic quality!! You weren't watching it for how good it was?? You were tuning in because everybody else was tuning in and you tuned out because everyone else was tuning out!!! This is why you love WWE because everybody else does. Do you know why? It's called imitating group behaviour, it's not called critically enjoying something that is entertaining.

Really? Is this really what you believe? And you expect someone to take anything you say after this seriously? Lets take a look at the statement that brought on this whole tirade one more time.

"Arrested Development was a great show, but the ratings sucked, so I had say goodbye to it."

Hmmm. Yeah, I see, he said right there that he checked the ratings, found out they were low, so stopped watching the show because no one else was. Wait, wait, actually, no he didn't. He said it was a great show, but due to low ratings he had to say goodbye. Maybe, just maybe, this was due to the fact that the low ratings caused the show to get canceled after three seasons. Maybe he had to say goodbye because the show he loved watching was no longer on the air. Nah, of course not, because that would make your entire rant that followed this statement worthless.

Liking the current WWE product more than TNA doe not make someone immature, blindly loyal sheep, unimaginative, unintelligent, or any other insult you want to throw out there. It is all a matter of taste. Some people simply prefer one show over the other.

What I really find interesting about all of this is how one-sided the fight is. Most of the WWE's fans either enjoy watching their product and either A) watch TNA as well, or B) just pretty much ignore it. When pressed, they will tell you what they don't like about TNA, but I have seen very little bashing of the TNA fans, with the exception of the idiot subsection that go to the shows every week and work their asses off to make themselves more important than the action in the ring.

TNA fans, however, seem to be desperate to validate their love for the show, and it seems the only way they can do this is to try to belittle the WWE and anyone who enjoys it. If you enjoy your show better, that's great, more power to you. I hope it does really well and keeps getting better. But don't try to make me feel stupid for not liking it, in an attempt to convert" me; it isn't going to work, and the majority of the people who have tried have ended up just looking stupid in the attempt.

 

[KKarvox]

Honestly, if you dislike WWE so much, why are you so obsessed with bashing it. You're like disgruntled metallica fans who still bitch about them selling out, even though it's been over 10-15 years since they changed. I just don't get it.

I have been watching wrestling since i was little, when my grampa was watching it on TV and i first became aware of it. I'm only 18, but wrestling is something i've always enjoyed, and WWE has always been my favorite. Like WCW, i try to give other brands a chance, and occasionally watch TNA to see how the competition is, and i just don't care for it. Sure their are GREAT workers, Fantastic even, but most are just specks on the radar in the grande scheme, at least at this point, the only three that amount to anything right now are Sting, Angle and AJ, and to an extent the NWO and Flair, but i'm focusing more on current talent. WWE has living legends, along with the new generation, and their new generation looks better to me. They ust have more star power, with the exception of a few like Pope and Mr Anderson, i don't see much star power in TNA's next generation.

As for WWE's current flaws, although there are quite a few, like using Hornswoggle as a viable competitor, which they have since stopped, and Over-emphasizing Cena's dominance, they don't compare to alot of the awful storylines that happened before the PG era, like the Katie-Vick storyling, or the Invasion storyline. Things like that make WWE's current product look amazing. The attitude/post attitude era may have had some good stuff, but it had even worse stuff thrown in along with it. It is a trade off.

In terms of brand loyalty, i prefer WWE, but that doesn't mean i am blindly loyal to everything they do, but they'd have to release Punk, Sheamus, Orton, Kane, Swagger, HHH, HBK, Taker, and Edge before i'd stop watching WWE. How about the fact that they just have overall better stars, not necessarily better workers or wrestlers, but better rounded superstars.

Addiction? now WWE is a drug? It sounds like you are just making up an excuse to explain why WWE is better than TNA.

I was done with my post until i read this:

TNA fans, however, seem to be desperate to validate their love for the show, and it seems the only way they can do this is to try to belittle the WWE and anyone who enjoys it. If you enjoy your show better, that's great, more power to you. I hope it does really well and keeps getting better. But don't try to make me feel stupid for not liking it, in an attempt to convert" me; it isn't going to work, and the majority of the people who have tried have ended up just looking stupid in the attempt.

That is a great point. No, that is THE point. Instead of it being about preference, they (TNA marks) need to overcome some inferiority complex to justify their preference. I don't really care for TNA, but I have no major problems with it, i just prefer WWE.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I added a third element that I was disappointed that I didn't touch base on in the OP earlier on, therefore added it in. I forgot to touch base on the Walmart mentality amongst fans.

Obviously fans see an organization's advertising, touring regularly, and see that the shows are on several nights a week with ample exposure. So this equates into the minds of casuals that the product "HAS to be better in a Creative sense than all others".

When nothing further could be from the truth. Sure, an organization can be big, have ample exposure, and great marketing and advertising efforts given how long the organization has been in existence. But that doesn't mean that it is necessarily a better product creatively speaking.

All this means is that fans are lazy, and they would rather adopt the Walmart approach in that "bigger has to be better" instead of actually branching out a little.

 

[Zeedeevel]

I added a third element that I was disappointed that I didn't touch base on in the OP earlier on, therefore added it in. I forgot to touch base on the Walmart mentality amongst fans.

Obviously fans see an organization's advertising, touring regularly, and see that the shows are on several nights a week with ample exposure. So this equates into the minds of casuals that the product "HAS to be better in a Creative sense than all others".

When nothing further could be from the truth. Sure, an organization can be big, have ample exposure, and great marketing and advertising efforts given how long the organization has been in existence. But that doesn't mean that it is necessarily a better product creatively speaking.

All this means is that fans are lazy, and they would rather adopt the Walmart approach in that "bigger has to be better" instead of actually branching out a little.

TNA should really hire you to do their marketing Sid, you are good with twisting things around. You say 'casuals' watch WWE simply because of a Walmart approach and that they are lazy and don't branch out. Maybe its possible that they just don't know about TNA. There are many casual fans out there that I'm sure don't know about it, and if they are just casual fans I highly doubt they look up websites like this. So if they don't see advertising for it, how are they supposed to know about it? I've been a wrestling fan since 1990, but I didnt know TNA existed til the middle of 07 when I found this site. So with what you are saying since up until 07 I never watched an episode of Impact I was lazy, which is far from the truth.

Also you could think of it this way, maybe they actually have tried TNA and still think WWE is better. Many people are like this and according to you it is because of those reasons that you stated in your original post. While that may be true about some people it is ridiculous to make that assume it is overall. You know what happens when you assume

 

[JJohns]

I'm 29, and the main reason that I watch WWE over TNA isn't because of Brand Loyalty (I was a WCW convert in the late 90s, and was among the many people to change the channel when Schiavone announced Mick Foley winning the title). I watch WWE over TNA because I personally believe that it's the better wrestling product. I watched TNA extensively when Impact was airing on Fox Sports Net. I watched that season's worth of shows that where only aired on the internet. I even went to the first ever house show, where I met Jeremy Borash, Cassidy Reilly and Traci Brooks.

But at the end of the day, I'm not as frustrated over the WWE product. They have more characters that I care about, better writing, and for the most part, better young talent. How many newer guys get the rub in TNA? Not many. WWE does it's best to build up newer talent, and has done so for years.

The most compelling character in wrestling right now, in my honest opinion, is CM Punk. I have a hard time watching TNA and finding a character that is, at least to me, half as compelling as Punk.

As far as the brand being loyal to me, I'll give TNA credit when Hogan came out and basically told everyone that they weren't loyal to the fans.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

TNA should really hire you to do their marketing Sid, you are good with twisting things around. You say 'casuals' watch WWE simply because of a Walmart approach and that they are lazy and don't branch out. Maybe its possible that they just don't know about TNA.

That's precisely the point I am making, as well. Fans who embrace the Walmart approach to the wrestling business are either aware that TNA exists, but feel that because it is smaller, then it doesn't produce a more creative and entertaining television product ....

or

they are ignorant to the wrestling business in general and just happen to only be aware of WWE's existence ... and aren't interested in branching out to find something else. So it is either willful ignorance or it's laziness.

So it is the Walmart approach no matter which way you look at it.

There are many casual fans out there that I'm sure don't know about it, and if they are just casual fans I highly doubt they look up websites like this. So if they don't see advertising for it, how are they supposed to know about it?

Again, this is no different than the uninformed voter, who obtains their news in snippets, who shows no interest in finding out about their political candidates other than what they see and hear on television. And they let the talking heads do all of their thinking for them.

It's laziness. Plain and simple.

I've been a wrestling fan since 1990, but I didnt know TNA existed til the middle of 07 when I found this site. So with what you are saying since up until 07 I never watched an episode of Impact I was lazy, which is far from the truth.

Well, I feel it is a combination of laziness and ignorance, because you showed no desire to branch out of your bubble. If you were on the Internet, how could you not have known that TNA existed?

You are the classic, uninformed casual fan that I am referring to.

Also you could think of it this way, maybe they actually have tried TNA and still think WWE is better.

Doubtful that they have tried the show in a majority of cases. Fans who sit there like a bump on a log and show the same interest in watching paint dry at the WWE events don't strike me as "informed" wrestling fans. They strike me as a bunch of mindless drones.

Much like your case, I am willing to bet I could stand outside an arena for a show and survey how many of the fans have actually heard of and are familiar with TNA and anything that has ever occurred in it at any time, and I dare say probably less than 30% of today's WWE audience is likely even aware of it's existence.

The bottom line is that Casual fans are lazy fans by nature. But that is still nonetheless an obstacle that TNA needs to find a way to overcome, granted.

Many people are like this and according to you it is because of those reasons that you stated in your original post. While that may be true about some people it is ridiculous to make that assume it is overall. You know what happens when you assume

Well, in my case, I have extremely good instincts ... and understand the complexities of the wrestling business very well. So call it assuming, call it logical thinking, call it whatever you will, but I do it well and can defend those views to the end by making sound arguments.

The bottom line is that my logic stands.

 

[Via Armbar]

People want familiarity. They want what is comfortable, what is known and what they have been accustomed to. There comes a point in almost every wrestling fans life when they cross a certain point. That point is where you start caring about particular performers or storylines to the point where you legitimately care what becomes of it. Sure there are you casual fans who will tune in for an episode of Raw every other week or two. But more prominent than those fans are the fans who have been watching for years an a weekly basis. They have grown with the product and adapted the the changes in the business. To abandon something that has been a part of their life for years, even decades leaves such said person with incompleteness. Ths is true in almost every form of entertainment, in every form of lifestyle.

There was a famous period in time where if you had asked a group of wrestling fans which promotion was number one, there would most likely be two answers. Either World Wrestling Federation or World Championship Wrestling. It was a matter of opinion, and at the same time there was a true number one in different facets of the business. Whether it be ratings, pay per view buyrates or merchandise sells, both of the top promotions had a a larger cut of these areas then the other. It's obviously no secret what would become of WCW, and there was a void left in the market. Some of the WCW fans already watched both, some of the diehard fans stopped watching wrestling weekly and through time stopped watching all together. The majority of the market is now dominated by the WWE. There is a clear number one.

Because there has been a notable decrease in ratings since WCW went out of business, it's clear that professional wrestling doesn't have the footing in mainstream culture it had a decade ago. Though they are still pulling in good ratings, the flagship show in Raw has decreased in veiwership. There are a number of things that have attributed to this. Many of the stars of yesteryear, the Stone Colds and The Rock's, have all retired. The familiarity is gone. The performers the then casual fans had tuned in to watch are no where to be seen and are now replaced with the next generation. The storylines are recycled, but the faces have changed. Watching Raw is no longer a must for these fans, they have no personal attachment to John Cena or to Batista. Of course there are fans of current performers, if there weren't any there would be dismal ratings. But the fact that the landscape of the WWE is so different today than it was during say the attitude era or even the golden age says alot in terms of the decrease in ratings. As with many television shows, when the cast changes so does your audience. This is what led to the decline of viewership from the fans that weren't diehards, the fans that tuned in because it was THE thing at the time. The fans that outgrew something they didn't grow up with.

This shows a direct relation to how popular and profitable the WWE was, is, and will be in the future. There will always be the fans that have grown up with the product. The fans that had the Hulk Hogan posters on the wall. The fans that had The Rock t-shirts. Those same fans are still watching to this day because the WWE is familiar. There are changes, there are new guys and there are new storylines. But the setting is what they know. The WWE is what they grew up with. I believe a majority of the WWE's ratings and profitability comes from these fans. Their dedication, their addiction to what held nostalgic value to them, has chained them to the WWE product. They aren't the fair weather fans who came and went. These are the fans that have become engrossed in what they have watched for years. This is undoubtedly a huge contribution to making the WWE number one.

 

[Zeedeevel]

Well, I feel it is a combination of laziness and ignorance, because you showed no desire to branch out of your bubble. If you were on the Internet, how could you not have known that TNA existed?
You are the classic, uninformed casual fan that I am referring to.
Doubtful that they have tried the show in a majority of cases. Fans who sit there like a bump on a log and show the same interest in watching paint dry at the WWE events don't strike me as "informed" wrestling fans. They strike me as a bunch of mindless drones.

I did not know TNA existed because I did not have the time at that point in my life to sit around looking for stuff. That wasnt me not willing to branch out of my bubble its simply TNA not giving a real chance for me to know about them. Also I try to not waste my time on the internet too much, this is about as close as I get. I never see any of those youtube videos that became internet favorites and I dont go around on facebook myspace or twitter wasting my time either. You make it seem like theres something wrong with people that don't love TNA and like WWE, and yea if thats your opinion then fine but stop presenting it as fact. I havent made it to a TNA live event since they dont make it to new jersey much, but the last few WWE events I went to were actually very entertaining. People who like WWE are not mindless drones, and there are some extremely intelligent WWE fans. There is a mix with both sets of fans, yet you only like to point out the WWE ones. What about all the people that only like TNA just because its not run by Vince? Some people only watch TNA simply because it is not WWE, has nothing to do with product quality only a name. Those people are much worse than what you say I am, yet I'm sure you will find some flawed logic to defend them

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The "Walmart Mentality" is simply the wrong analogy... its more akin to a McDonalds/MCdowalls (anyone not seen coming to America?) ... You want something that will "do the job" so you hit the drive thru for a Big (Vinny) Mac. It's not the best wrestling you ever but deep down they make you feel good and once in a while you get one thats awesome... TNA is the one trying to copy without being busted for copying, but in the end its the little differences that make it viable and people give em a chance. ROH is the diner down the other end of town, you know you'll know what you get is top notch, but you have to go out of your way for it and invest some time and effort to enjoy something more akin to what you like.

The laziness is not on the part of the viewer, but on the part of those producing the product... For a long time WWE wallowed in dullness... They allowed the product to get stale. no matter how many of us bitch, we will always go there cos of our memories, much like most people go to mcdonalds cos we had a kids party or something there back in the day...what WWE isn't catering for well at the moment is those who were once kids and loved their product in the past... basically they are being lazy and feeding the adults a Happy Meal!

TNA are lazy too, they didn't push new talent and just bought it in until it became clear that the fans were tired of the guys like Booker and Steiner being shoved down their throats.

ROH try harder but are always gonna be the 3rd choice... until someone comes in with a lot of money, which in turn would ruin the thing anyway...

Anyone else hungry now?

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

Sid, you do this again and again and again, and you still seem to be missing it. You really have to stop pretending you know for a fact why people enjoy a product that you don't. I'm not saying the WWE has been a perfect product - it's been completely mediocre at times. It has nothing to do with loyalty, or addiction, or any of this crap you mentioned.

I quite frankly resent you calling fans of the WWE sheep, that they'll defend it to the end no matter what. It has nothing to do with any of that.

The problem is you haven't adapted to the quick change in pace the WWE has given you since the attitude era. I like the WWE because I have adjusted and refined my taste in the business, and it's kept me entertained since then. You refuse to believe that anyone can possibly have different tastes in wrestling than you, and that any difference in opinion must come from some sort of magical hypnosis that the WWE puts on every night. It's *just* a difference in opinion. You haven't "found out" or "discovered" why WWE fans actually enjoyed the product. You made up some wild, baseless, and frankly INSULTING theory.

These are truly the only reasons that WWE has been able to stay #1. Loyalty from fans. Loyalty, I might add, that Vince McMahon does not show back in return. And addiction because fans, for whatever reason can not give it up, no matter how disgusted they get.

You see it all around the message boards and elsewhere on the Internet ... fans who will absolutely defend WWE to the very end, no matter how awful the programming.

It has nothing to do with addiction or loyalty. Perhaps they enjoy the product.

I have noticed, however, that the trend seems to be fans who are generally older have shown that their tolerance is wearing more thin, and even more thin, as time goes by.

For example, if you started watching in the Hogan Era, you are generally most disgusted with it.

If you began in the Attitude Era, you are still pretty disgusted by it. Especially since this product is complete opposite of the type of show you see on WWE today.

And if you started in the Post Attitude Era from 2001-2006, then you aren't quite as bad yet. Yeah, it's a different product today, but generally speaking your patience hasn't been worn quite as thin yet.

And of course, if you began in the PG Era, then you are none the wiser, and think everything is as right as rain.

You were spot on with this one, but for a completely false reason. This happened because the demographic has changed. The times have changed. The target demographic enjoys different things, and older generations of fans have moved on, but they occasionally tune in to see Bret appearances, or Hall of Fame segments.

We have a survey of about 350 people in the General WWE Complaining / PG Rating Sticky thread, which you can see the data on that.

I would be pissed off too if a company I've been following all my life decided to abandon my generation to focus on another one. And I was pissed, but I'm over it now, and I've accepted that I'm watching a different product than I was watching during the early years of the attitude era when I started watching. The WWE is doing a lot better than they would be if they stuck to catering to OUR generation.

Now, yes, there are still stragglers out there from the Hogan, New Generation, and of course Attitude Eras that stuck around, but that is because of brand loyalty and because WWE had such a tremendous effect on their childhoods. So many years have been invested in it, so why quit now?

Because it's a business, and Vince McMahon is a businessman. It's always been a business. While you may believe that the golden era of wrestling, or even the attitude era had some sort of boyish charm, and that everything he was doing was for you, that simply wasn't the case.

Ever since the franchise was CREATED, when it was called the WWWF, it's been a business, and it's purpose was to trade entertainment for money to the type of people who would subscribe to this particular brand of entertainment. So when you have 5 groups of people, and group 2 contains the most amount of people who watch your show, you're probably going to cater to group 2. In this case, many of Vince's audience comes from the 11-16 crowd, with millions more in the older generations beginning to stray away from the product.

TNA hands down is the more adult product of the two companies. And where as it does not come up anywhere near to the adult programming The Attitude Era brought about, it is still hands-down the more adult product.

Sure, it's the more adult product, but look at which product is doing better these days. Back in the '90s, wrestling became a trend that blew up because of the Monday Night Wars. Since the trend died out, we have the core wrestling fans left who are now older, and probably watch TNA, because it's more like the WWF(E) was during the attitude era then the WWE is right now. The WWE would be doing only slightly better numbers than TNA right now if they catered to our generation + the production value.

I personally think TNA is fine where it is. It's not the "#2 product," it's the different product. It shouldn't even try to compete with the WWE, only because it caters to a completely different generation. I don't think TNA is trying to win-over the WWE, I think it's just trying to get more of WWE's adult following in order to level out the playing field just a bit, so that there are two tiers of wrestling. WWE for the younger crowd, and TNA for when the generations switch again.

You see Bret Hart appear on TV, and well over half the live audience, and I dare say perhaps even 75 percent or more of the live audience, never saw Bret Hart before in their lives. They may have heard of the guy, but that's it.

Now this is ironic, because Vince himself is the one who essentially abandoned the very fans this angle is supposed to appeal to, over the past couple years. And now, he brought Bret Hart back, and he is astonished that Bret Hart isn't drawing better ratings.

Hello!

That's because you pissed off your older audience Vince and many of them left you. You still have some stragglers around, but they are few and far between, and they are barely audible in arenas.

I think Bret Hart was supposed to appease the older generations as well as throwing the IWC a bone for once. The older generations who have stopped watching wrestling have tuned in to see Bret Hart, had a few minutes of nostalgia, and tuned out. I honestly don't think bringing back Bret Hart was a business decision, at first. There are times when Vince is clearly listening to the fans and does things, but 99% of the times, the decisions he makes are purely financial.

But my question goes out to the newer fans as well as the stragglers out there who still support Vince and consider themselves loyal to him.

I need to understand why you feel this "Need" that you have to be loyal to Vince McMahon. Even though WWE may have been an important part in your childhood, you have to recognize that when you see Raw, you are virtually seeing the same show every week. Nothing noteworthy happens.

I don't feel a "need" to be loyal to anybody. Like I said, I enjoy the product for what it is. I watch TNA occasionally to see if I enjoy the product, and it just seems second-rate compared to the WWE, and I just don't enjoy it. It has nothing to do with your pretend "addiction" or any "loyalty" I have to the company.

What's even worst is that you don't want competition to rise, and nor in many cases will "loyal" viewers even give it a chance, when it is well-established that competition makes the entire industry better, as all organizations are more motivated to put out better programming to compete against the other. However, these types of fans will not give competition a chance, and will actually even go as far as to try to prevent it from even rising in the first place.

I'm only going to refer to what happened with the IWC, in terms of viral marketing for TNA.

The reason fans are so hesitant to watch TNA is because of people like you, Sid.

The people who sit on the spam, LD, or TNA forums and berate people for watching the WWE, call them all kids, shareholders, sheep, etc. Instead of saying, "Hey, come check out TNA, I'm sure you'll like it, let's hop in the LD and have a good time," you sit in the WWE LD forums and berate and insult people, get angry, start hounding people as to why they like a certain segment that you didn't. And it's not just you.

Another example is the Jan 14th episode of Raw, the night Impact went mondays. People were leaking over to the WWE forums being general douches.

When you do that, it makes people hold a tighter grasp on their product, defend it more, and hate whatever it is you're trying to promote.

You ever get into a discussion about movies with a friend, and your friend completely hates a movie you find mediocre, but you defend it because you don't share the same opinion he does? All of a sudden you like it more than you did before the discussion? It's kind of like that.

The first night Bret returned to RAW, it was a pretty mediocre experience. He came out, hugged Shawn, talked for a few more minutes, got kicked in the dick by Vince, and it was over. When the TNA floodgates opened, you guys came in talking about how shit the return was, and how TNA was so much better of a show, and all of a sudden, the Bret Hart return was the most epic thing to ever happen in the history of television.

And lastly, why is it important to squash competition and prevent it from even rising, when you are essentially doing more harm to the wrestling business because of your missplaced brand loyalty, then you are helping it by creating a healthier market?

I genuinely want to get into your minds to understand your thought process better and see what makes you tick as far as your wrestling interests are concerned.

I hear a lot more "WWE SUCKS!" from TNA fans than I do "TNA SUCKS!" from WWE fans, to be honest. I hear a lot of legitimate criticism from both sides, but in terms of being complete marks with no real argument, that usually comes from TNA fans. Except what most of you seem to be forgetting is it's not supposed to be a competition between the fans. It's supposed to be competition between the companies. The fans are here to enjoy both the shows, not fight about which match was better at whatever-certain time slot. I enjoy the matches on TNA, but I enjoy the story and production value on WWE, even though they may have dropped the ball a little bit.

TNA went into "LET'S BRING BACK EVERY WRESTLER THAT HAS BEEN OFF TV FOR MORE THAN A MONTH" mode, and they came out too strong. Turns out not every wrestler has been as epic as their return, and I didn't enjoy the show's aftermath.

 

[RavensFlock1990]

WWE is #1 because they are better than TNA in every possible way. TNA is living off of over the hill stars right now. They've been around for 8 years and they have yet to create 1 single homegrown star. And no people AJ Styles is not a star to anybody outside of the Impact Zone. He will never be a crossover star cause despite how good he is in the ring (I think he's overrated) he has no personality and can't cut a promo to save his life. In WWE he would be Evan Bourne.

WWE is playing it safe right now but the fact is they can step it up and blow TNA out of the water anytime they want.

What happens to TNA when Hogan and Bischoff realize they made a mistake and leave cause they can't compete with TNA? I'll tell ya what happens. They lose their Monday timeslot and go back to Thursdays and are back to square one.

WWE on the other hand has a great future once guys like Taker and HBK call it quits. They are building new stars all the time. They have Cena, Orton, Edge, Christian, Punk, Kofi, Miz, Morrison, Sheamus, McIntyre to build the next decade around. Sounds good to me. What does TNA have to build around once all the veterans are gone? Evan Bourne 2.0 and alot of guys that would be in WWE if WWE would have signed or kept them.

Plus WWE has things like better video games, big stores carrying their merchandise, better at marketing, much better TV presentation, they travel all over the country and the world performing in front of millions of fans. TNA just stays in the Impact Zone in front of a few hundred tourists.

And as far as TNA being aimed torwards a more adult audience I don't really care. I seen everything possible in the Attitude Era and ECW that wrestling can get away with on TV. There's no shock value anymore. WWE keeps moving on with the times and that's why they will always be succsessful. TNA is stuck in 1998 and like alot of people I moved on from that era.

 

[Yrrab]

The ONLY reason WWE is #1 is because TNA refuses to put on a quality product. TNA just needs a bit more time before they can actually compete. Until then, I'm fine watching Raw.

Also, OP makes it seem like brand loyalty is a bad thing. I also can't say that I know anyone who is "addicted" to the WWE as opposed to just wrestling in general. The Walmart mentality bit is spot on I guess, but as long as I know I'm not supporting Dixie Cock-Eye and a company that just a few months ago started to draw higher ratings than ECW, I can sleep well at night.

 

[Jpeart]

Lord Sidious, I'll try and answer your questions as best I can.

I am a 25 year old male and have been a fan of wwe since around 1994.

I still watch WWE today even though I don't enjoy the show as much as I used to.

There are several reasons for this.

Habit. I usually watch WWE programming even though I'm not particulary looking forward to it. I guess this would come under the 'addiction' side of which you speak.

I am also still a fan of a lot of the induviduals that appear on WWE programming. I am a fan of Jericho, HBK, Taker, Kane, Miz, Punk, Orton, Edge and a few others, so I like to watch them.

I still enjoy many parts of the show, mostly the in ring action, but sometimes the talking segments are enjoyable, although a lot less so than a few years ago.

I guess I also watch because I don't want to miss out. I know its just wishful thinking but I always hope that a moment will happen that will be unforgettable, or a guy will debut who you know will be a megastar.

I probably enjoy about 40-60% of your typical Raw and 60-75% of Smackdown, its a pity its not higher but I would be depriving myself of a lot of thing I enjoy if I didn't watch.

I'm not sure if I feel loyalty to WWE or not, perhaps I do, as I've grown up with it.

I'm not adversed to competition at all, I enjoy TNA very much and would watch an episode of Impact! over RAW, given the choice.

I don't feel I am duped by the Walmart mentality as I don't think WWE is any better than TNA, I enjoy them both.

I hope I've given you some insight into a WWE fan there.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

I'm a huge TNA fan now. It's reminding me of the Attitude Era I really wish I was able to watch live. Seeing how I was 12 when the attitude era ENDED, I wouldn't have understood it anyway.

I have one big problem with the 'E, regardless of the creative being crap and all the issues everyone gripe about, and that's how utterly condescending they are. Sure, it's a PG rating, but the announcers talk to the fans like they're uneducated, and morons. There's a fine line between using a simpler vocabulary and talking to people like they're slow.

The only reason I still watch WWE is that I have a fear. A fear that if I stop watching, it'll get better. That happens with a lot of stuff for me, and I'm guessing a lot of the older WWE fans, who have been watching for a while now. While I don't watch the weekly shows as much as I used to, I can't miss a PPV. EVER.

 

[Miko]

Oh good, another WWE sucks and you suck for liking it thread.

All I can say is, some people just like WWE, some people genuinely like the programming that they put out, sure it's not "edgy" or "adult" but it doesnt fucking need to be, there is some compelling television right there, some people like John Cena in the Main event, some people like the idea of a Cena/Batista rematch at WrestleMania.

Wrestling fans go far beyond the nerds like us that post here, WWE tried to do edgy and adult for a long time after the attitude era was done, and it wasnt working anymore, fact is most of the older fans who made Vince rich "abandoned" him long before he "abandoned" us, so he found a new audience.

 

[GetsHeat]

I grew up a hardcore WWF fanboy, Brett Hart was my favorite wrestler and really one of my earliest memories was the Montreal Screwjob (as it was one of the rare PPVs we bought, my brothers was a huge Michael's fan) even at a young age I knew wrestling was scripted so I didn't think too much of it.. I think it was the next Raw that the announcer said Brett had gone to WCW.. damn that sucked.

Anyway.. despite that I watched TNA on January 4th live... I've watched just about every impact since and nearly everytime I think "Wow that was pretty bush league" The poor production values hurt it.. but more so the wrestlers just lack character and thus the storylines and most promos tend to be so below the WWE and that is really saying something because the WWE has been pretty mediocre.

Bottom line is, I've given TNA a chance. I wanted TNA to be great, I wanted TNA to be a savior.. but it simply hasn't been. I think there is talent but there is a serious lack of direction and it's extremely evident in the product and I can only imagine it will get worse with it going live.

 

[maar130]

Well I am 30 now and I am going to answer all questions.

First, my "addiction" to wrestling as whole begun when I was 3 or 4 years old, now I can't say I watched WWE (or WWF at the time) since that age because it was not available at the time. Until 1987 I was able to do so and started asking an aunt to buy tapes and send them over here so I could watch what I have missed from the past. So I watched a lot of Hogan's history over the time and watched PPV as soon as they were available.

To make long story short Wrestling has been a big part of my life, at some point tried it and it was great until I got fucked up by some bad decisions I made but I don't blame wrestling, Those were my mistakes.

With that said, I am a loyal fan of the WWE but more than anything a wrestling fan, I watched all shows but now that TNA will be on Mondays, I am pretty much sure I will start with Raw and will be flipping channels through the night. I mean if Raw gets something like the Jerry Springer segment believe me that TNA will be on for a while.

Now on being loyal to Vince, who does not has any obligation to be loyal to anyone because he is running a busisness and a company, just as Dixie Carter has no real reason to be loyal to TNA fans, if something works it works and that is it, no company really pays loyalty to anyone, does Microsoft pays loyalty to its users by increasing software prices and installing spyware on it users to see what they do with their PCs? No. Do Networks pays loyalty to their viewers when they cancel TV shows that got a steady following but were not a rating breakers? No. Do Banks pay loyalty to their clients when they double charge or increse interest and charges to their clients at this difficult times? No.

I am more loyal to the wrestlers I than anything. I am a fan of a lot of guys there and I like a lot of wrestlers but my favorite besides Eddie Guerrero, who unfortunately I can only watch on tape now, is The Undertaker, so every show he is on I watch, For me even when Raw was stacked with more talent, I watch Smackdown more than Raw, an even when he is not on that show has the likes of CM Punk who is really great, they have Edge and Jericho and is a more solid show than any other in my personal view.

Now don't get me wrong, but TNA storyline wise, does not bring anything new to the table, if you have watched at least since the Attitude era you now that both companies are using way recycled storylines or even parts of it. The wrestling is good for me but from all even with recycled things, Smackdown is the best wrestling show right now.

The thing about squash the competition is just an ilusion within TNA eyes, I mean I am not saying that WWE is not aware of TNA, but do you really thing Vince wants to take it down? that is only a sentece that Dixie Carter used to help her case because if the WWE really wanted to take down TNA, they would have done it already by putting money and deals for wrestlers.

I mean, there were rumors that they prevented Charlie Hass from coming to TNA, Hass? for real? no disrespect but they have never really give that much about Hass, if they really wanted to take people fro it, they could have take the Pope, Anderson and any other guy if the wanted to. Hell fromm what has being said about what the Knockouts earn if they really wanted the could get all the knockouts a big raise and pay them to seat at home, which suck because that is also something that TNA is doing now, less

The only real reason why Hogan is in TNA is because WWE has no real use for him, and he is trying to get back at them. It has been well over a decade and a half that the WWE has not needed Hogan, eventhough he is the most famous wrestler in the world. WWE has use him but they didn't need him.

Hopefully TNA will get it together after this transition period because right now, they getting a copy of the Attitude era format from the WWE and little mixed with the WCW format.

And well yes, the more companies the better, but for some reason they all have the felling that they should destroy each other and than there should be only one, that is crap, competition is the key ot success, but don't fool yourself, like I said before, this goes more from TNA than WWE, if WWE wanted to kill TNA lika everyone claims, the could have done it 2 or 3 years ago, for sure.