TNA Leaving Impact Zone Again

[johnbragg]

I find it odd that so many people are full of doom and gloom for TNA, but none have facts to present.

FACT: TNA stopped taping Impacts on the road because it was expensive.
FACT: TNA does not have a "home base" to tape shows from.
FACT: TNA has been shedding high priced contracts, something they haven't done much in the past.
FACT: TNA has gone from 12 live PPV per year in 2011 to 4 live PPV in 2012, to perhaps 3 live PPV in 2013.

None of that means that TNA is dying. But TNA is certainly not thriving.

Will I miss AJ Styles? Yes, just like I miss Petey Williams, Sonjay Dutt, and the Young Bucks. Can TNA still put up the same ratings without them? Yes.

Very true.

As far as Spike goes, according to their last round of contract negotiations, TNA should still be on there until October of this year. And although the haters like to dis TNA's ratings, their ratings are STILL better than a lot of prime time shows, and there will be another network that wants those ratings. They may have to cut more cost, but who knows, they may go to a slightly bigger network and be able to spend more. I'm not going to worry about their network situation until I see proof that they are gone.

October is not that far away. And if Spike TV and WWE make a deal, TNA is toast.

Finding a hospitable TV network for pro wrestling isn't as easy as you think. Otherwise TNA wouldnt have started on weekly PPV and wouldn't have spent a year essentially syndicated on Fox Sports Networks.

For all of the hundreds of channels on your cable package, a half-dozen or so companies control 95% of those channels.

My main point to all of this is, people for years have been wishing for a TNA demise, even when they veil it with "I'm not hating on TNA, but…" (then follow that with something about TNA failing and going out of business)

This is true. Stories about TNA running out of money/facing financial crisis are as old as TNA.

Here is what I think, I think TNA will continue to cut overpriced roster talents that aren't producing ratings. I LOVE Kurt Angle and Sting, but would not be sad if Kurt left. I would like Sting to become GM again, and never wrestle. However, if both of them aren't re-signed, I will continue watching TNA. Now if TNA cut the entire roster and started from scratch, then I might sing a different tune.

Angle's contract is up soon, so he might be gone to WWE for one last run there. (If he can pass the pee test in WWE). I don't think anyone on TNA's roster is worth the money they're paying Sting (in that they could get someone else to do the same job with comparable results.)

 

[Stormlor]

In terms of priority, TNA is losing a lot of things that they should not be losing.

1 - Loosing Jeff Jarrett was a huge deal for the wrestlers as Jarrett was one of the founders of the company. The owner of the company quitting doesn't speak good for the business.

2 - Letting AJ Styles go was a big mistake. Everybody knows that AJ Styles is the reason why TNA was popular with fans. Just like the reason ECW was popular was because of the acts of RVD, Super Crazy, and Tajari. While RVD did not make ECW, he alone enhanced their product. AJ Styles did the same thing for TNA.

3 - The tour dates and schedule are throwing off fans. Taping a month or more of shows is a mistake. Even though everybody can go read the results, when you have news that AJ Styles is longer with the organization and he appears just a few nights on TV it makes everything look bad.

TNA has to re-sign AJ and get either Jarrett back on board or fix their schedule. They are losing the fight on all three, which could put them out of business.

 

[fenderjapan]

It is possible to be in favor of TNA folding but also to be in favor of competition and an alternative to WWE. I DO hope this spells the end for TNA...though I think most people saw it coming after Bound For Glory. If this causes them to fold (it sure looks like it, if its true) then there will be room for someone else to try to make something better with the vacant #2 position and the decently sized (albeit not WCW sized) talent pool that will be left over. Hopefully they'll turn out something better.

 

[ECPirate37]

Hey Johnbragg; I always appreciate your posts!

FACT: TNA stopped taping Impacts on the road because it was expensive.
FACT: TNA does not have a "home base" to tape shows from.
FACT: TNA has been shedding high priced contracts, something they haven't done much in the past.
FACT: TNA has gone from 12 live PPV per year in 2011 to 4 live PPV in 2012, to perhaps 3 live PPV in 2013.

None of that means that TNA is dying. But TNA is certainly not thriving.

I wouldn't say that they are thriving, but I think they are a ways away from bankruptcy. I cannot prove any of this this, but I think they realized they were spending all of this money, and weren't moving the ratings needle. And they said, "We've overspent and nothing is happening, so screw it, let's cut costs and see what happens". I own a production company (although one much smaller than what puts on Impact). I know that if I am spending X amount and getting Y for return, then when I double my expenses (Hogan/Bischoff and going on the road) I'm at 2X and still getting Y. After a trial period I would not be happy. There has to be a certain amount of time to see if it works. It didn't. So I feel they are overcorrecting and going from 2X to 1/2 X to see if they will still equal Y. And honestly, if they go to 1/2 X and even end up at 4/5 Y then I think that would be a win. But again, I do not know their reasoning. It is just from a production side, I know that when I can cut expenses, but get the same presentation I am a very happy producer.

As far as not having a home base; I'm rather confident they can find another one. There are a lot of great places in NC and NY that they could film, and get a crowd out each week. I'm sure other places too. I mean, any theme park that has an empty sound stage would be a welcoming place.

I am confused by them not upping their pay per views back to 6 this year. Even if a lot of people aren't buying them, that is still extra income. This is the only thing that confuses me. Are the one night onlys doing better than I expect?

October is not that far away. And if Spike TV and WWE make a deal, TNA is toast.

Finding a hospitable TV network for pro wrestling isn't as easy as you think. Otherwise TNA wouldnt have started on weekly PPV and wouldn't have spent a year essentially syndicated on Fox Sports Networks.

For all of the hundreds of channels on your cable package, a half-dozen or so companies control 95% of those channels.

I don't think that it is easy finding a network that will take them on, but I do think another network would pick them up. My first thoughts are the Esquire network, Tru TV, or Fxx. Esquire might not want it since it is supposed to be "upscale", but they do have the fighting show on there. TRU TV could use TNA. Their "HIT" show is getting 1.5 million viewers a week. If that is a hit for them, then Impact would be right in line with that. And finally Fxx. I know it is more for just comedy, but as a new network that the most current info I can find says averaged 135k viewers a night might would take on Impact. I know it is only in 72 million homes compared to Spike's 99 million, but still Impact could be one of their higher rated shows.

Thanks for taking the time to write, I always appreciate your posts!

 

[ABMorales787]

It is possible to be in favor of TNA folding but also to be in favor of competition and an alternative to WWE. I DO hope this spells the end for TNA...though I think most people saw it coming after Bound For Glory. If this causes them to fold (it sure looks like it, if its true) then there will be room for someone else to try to make something better with the vacant #2 position and the decently sized (albeit not WCW sized) talent pool that will be left over. Hopefully they'll turn out something better.

Yeah. Sure. Why not? Because pray tell TNA was holding ROH back. If TNA folds another company will surely pop out and somehow attain a worldwide audience, well known talent, a prime-time television slot and such in no time. Clearly, right? It only took TNA about 10 years and ROH is barely close. Can't be that hard, can it?

 

[johnbragg]

Hey Johnbragg; I always appreciate your posts!

I wouldn't say that they are thriving, but I think they are a ways away from bankruptcy.

With Panda's sponsorship, bankruptcy probably isn't happening--there's not a lot of debt. But there's the eternal specter of Panda deciding that TNA will never show a profit, and stop financing TNA.

That assumes that TNA operates consistently in the red. I think that's true, but I don't know that it's true at all.

I figure that Panda has lost a significant amount of money on TNA over the years--$5M one year, $10M another year adds up over 10 years, even if there were some break-even years in there. It's very possible that the end of the Hogan-Bischoff experiment says to the folks in Dallas that TNA/Impact Wrestling is never going to be more than it is now--it's not going to "take off."

I cannot prove any of this this, but I think they realized they were spending all of this money, and weren't moving the ratings needle. And they said, "We've overspent and nothing is happening, so screw it, let's cut costs and see what happens". I own a production company (although one much smaller than what puts on Impact). I know that if I am spending X amount and getting Y for return, then when I double my expenses (Hogan/Bischoff and going on the road) I'm at 2X and still getting Y. After a trial period I would not be happy. There has to be a certain amount of time to see if it works. It didn't. So I feel they are overcorrecting and going from 2X to 1/2 X to see if they will still equal Y. And honestly, if they go to 1/2 X and even end up at 4/5 Y then I think that would be a win. But again, I do not know their reasoning. It is just from a production side, I know that when I can cut expenses, but get the same presentation I am a very happy producer.

That logic sounds about right. They had about a million, million and a half people watching Impact in the early years on Spike, and they have about the same now. Sting and Hogan and Bischoff and Russo a couple of times and Jarrett and Nash and Booker T and RVD and Jeff Hardy have been on and off TNA tv and it hasn't really mattered, different bookers haven't really mattered. So yeah, if you can get Al Snow to do what Jeff Jarrett's been doing at 10% of the salary, and you can get Magnus at 1/4 the price of AJ Styles, and you can let Dixie be the onscreen commissioner basically for free instead of paying Sting and Hogan $2-3M a year you might as well.

As far as not having a home base; I'm rather confident they can find another one. There are a lot of great places in NC and NY that they could film, and get a crowd out each week. I'm sure other places too. I mean, any theme park that has an empty sound stage would be a welcoming place.

They should be able to. But the problem is that they don't. That strikes me as not-very-good planning.

I am confused by them not upping their pay per views back to 6 this year. Even if a lot of people aren't buying them, that is still extra income. This is the only thing that confuses me. Are the one night onlys doing better than I expect?

I think it's that the PPVs are a complete financial disaster. Live PPV costs more than tape-delayed PPV, so the One Night Only thing might be just a way to try to stop the bleeding. The only way the ONO idea makes sense is if TNA is legally obligated to keep producing monthly PPV content and this is the cheapest way to burn it off.

I don't think that it is easy finding a network that will take them on, but I do think another network would pick them up. My first thoughts are the Esquire network, Tru TV, or Fxx.

TruTV is a Turner network, I don't know if anyone in power is still there from the WCW and end-of-WCW days. The Fox networks are a possibility--they're launching Fox Sports 1, FX is a possibility.

 

[johnbragg]

Yeah. Sure. Why not? Because pray tell TNA was holding ROH back. If TNA folds another company will surely pop out and somehow attain a worldwide audience, well known talent, a prime-time television slot and such in no time. Clearly, right? It only took TNA about 10 years and ROH is barely close. Can't be that hard, can it?

To nitpick, TNA had pretty much everything it has today in 2006 or so, so it took them 4 years to get where they are today.

But, just like TNA never got to where WCW/WWF were, if TNA were gone tomorrow, I don't think ROH or anyone ever gets to where TNA is now.

 

[ABMorales787]

To nitpick, TNA had pretty much everything it has today in 2006 or so, so it took them 4 years to get where they are today.

Only mostly. They certainly did not have as many TV deals in countries like they have these last few years. Not to mention their revenue and notoriety. TNA is done growth in a different aspect since then changing from a large indie promotion to a small major federation.

But, just like TNA never got to where WCW/WWF were, if TNA were gone tomorrow, I don't think ROH or anyone ever gets to where TNA is now.

It took major financial backing and about 7 years to get WCW from fresh off the box to de-throning the WWF. No one will ever come close to such a fast rise again.

 

[Robert Roode Fan]

It is possible to be in favor of TNA folding but also to be in favor of competition and an alternative to WWE. I DO hope this spells the end for TNA...though I think most people saw it coming after Bound For Glory. If this causes them to fold (it sure looks like it, if its true) then there will be room for someone else to try to make something better with the vacant #2 position and the decently sized (albeit not WCW sized) talent pool that will be left over. Hopefully they'll turn out something better.

So you are hoping that tna folds for someone to come take over, STOP DREAMING IN DREAM WORLD. Tna was lucky to get where it was, and plus so you are telling the tna orginals to wait for anothor company to start why should they be forced to take crappy paychecks for your wish that some company MAY start that pays the same, why make the wrestlers who bust thier ass suffer to make something you want to happen that probably won't happen. Makes me think the indy fanboys are getting as bad as wwe fanboys.

 

[ECPirate37]

http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/442689-jeff-jarrett-possibly-announcing-new-promotion

Just read this, and it comes from Konan, who isn't the most reliable source in my opinion, but if it is true; NOW I am worried about TNA's financials. Panda may be done with losing money on it. I would be excited to see a new promotion with Jeff and Jim Ross. This could be big.

I would still hope that TNA can make it, and that this new promotion can compete with them. The more competition the better!