TNA Roster Cuts

[Reddannihilation]

Once again, stop acting like you know what a manager does because you’re making yourself look incredibly stupid. You also should both stop acting like either one of you actually knows what Hogan’s roles are in the running of TNA behind the scenes.

Actually Dixie Carter outlined his role quite clearly when he signed on, he and Bischoff each hold minor chairs on the creative team, they're signed as on-air talent and both began with a minor amount of talent relations which has been scaled back somewhat.

Since when does Jeff Jarrett have any say in anything TNA does anymore?

He's a minority share holder and a member of the creative team. He's also regarded as a managment consultant.

This post right here shows how incredibly ill informed you are about what a manager’s job is. Please stop already. Also, an advertiser may be responsible for getting people to show up but they’re not responsible for the product that those people see and interact with when they DO arrive.

And neither is Hulk Hogan.

So an advertiser may get people to come and see the product, but it’s the management running the store (or in this case TNA’s product) that are going to be the ones directly responsible for all the things that brings a profit from the people when they’re shopping AT the store.

Well it's a good thing Hogan doesn't even hold a share of the company then isn't it, what with him not being a member of management, unless you count his on-air character.

If you don’t think Hulk Hogan falls into that category in his role in TNA you’re a complete idiot.

Considering Hogan plays a very minor role in the creative team and a character no he doesn't. Dixie has even confirmed it herself in statements that Hogan does not run TNA.

Once again, you both really need to stop acting like you know what Hogan’s specific role is in TNA’s product right now.

No, yo need too. Hogan's role has been outlined by TNA on multiple occasions. Learn to separate his character and his actual jobs.

Now you’re blaming Spike TV for the failures of TNA’s product? Come on. Please stop already.

I'm sorry, do you work in the television industry? Because I do. I've spent the last 3 years as a script writer and a production assistant. TNA's television output is entirely reliant on Spike TV, it's Spike TV's job to promote them. This is the same issue the original ECW had with Spike. TNA's situation isn't as bad, which is why they've lasted longer. But outside of January 4th, iMPACT isn't given nearly as much promotion by the network as they should be. All you have to do is look at the endless threads asking why TNA never runs commericals, it's not TNA it's Spike TV.

Spike’s involvement may be influential in people viewing TNA Impact,

"May be influential?" They're the network that shows it, they're entirely responsible for TNA being able to be viewed. When you're a television network you're responsible for getting people to watch your shows. Here's a fine example;

Firefly, a critically acclaimed television series that has a major cult following. Never advertised, pushed around to different time slots. Cancelled in it's first season.

Serenity, film-based continuation of Firefly, heavily advertised, internet campaigns, commercials, tie-in products. 38 million dollars gross revenue. Plus another 9 million in DVD sales in the US alone. You think it's a coincedence that something with fuck all advertising got canned and something with tons made money?

but the sole responsibility of what the viewers see when they do, and whether they’re interested in it enough to tune in and stay on as a customer of the product.. or whether they hate it and never go back to tune it in again.. is entirely on those putting together the product that the viewers receive when they do watch the show Spike advertised.

Except for the fact that outside of the Jan 4th episode Spike's level of advertising for TNA has been incredibly limited.

And if you think Hulk Hogan didn’t/doesn’t have a huge influence in the product being put out, especially over the past 7-8 months, then you’re out of your mind. You’re as clueless as you’re claiming Caitiff is.

Bischoff and Russo have hade the majority influence. Like I said Russo was lead writer for the most part and now it's Dreamer. Not Hogan.

What a load. If people WANTED to see Impact, after having tuned in on January 4th when TNA got their high of 1.5, then they would’ve gone out of their way to locate the show and watch it again.

No they wouldn't. Have a think about this for a second, research television shows that got cancelled and you'll notice a trend, changes in time slots destroy ratings. Again Friday Night Death Slot, look it up. Do you actually think it's just a coincedence that historically when shows move time slots they often lose ratings or gain them depending on the time slot?

Allow me to paint a picture for you; my favourite tv shows currently airing are Glee and the Mentalist. If I were forced to choose between iMPACT and those two shows I would choose those two, because they're my favourite. That doesn't mean I don't like iMPACT, it means I like those shows more. Again look at the comparison of Monday Night iMPACT's and the thursday Replay that followed them. Do you seriously think the exact same people just watched the show twice in one week? Do you live in a fairy tale world where everyone who watches wrestling considers it the highest form of entertainment?

Your arguments are silly, and blaming Spike for the failures of TNA is now another low by a TNA fan whose just making excuses for the failures of TNA’s product.

My arguments are based on actual historical occurences within the television industry. I work within that industry and I can guarantee that I know more about it than you, as you seem to believe that everyone who likes wrestling likes it more than all other things on television.

Another bunch of lies laced with uninformed truth right here. You’re leaving out a ton of details in these statements as if everyone doesn’t have a clue and won’t see right through your babbling.

Really, care to point them out? Last I checked Xplosion was the 4th highest sports program in Australia, apparently those legitimate facts are either lies or uninformed truth. If you seriously disregard the international market then you're an idiot.

Neither do you. Stop pretending otherwise. You both need to just stick to making opinions as clueless wrestling fans and stop pretending like you’re business men and knowledgeable about the ins and outs of ANYTHING.

Reddannihilation: works in television industry.
MisterRob: doesn't.

Trying to pin some massive amount of blame solely on Spike TV is also ridiculous.

Because Spike TV has no history of screwing over non-mainstream wrestling programs?

If people want to cut Hulk Hogan from their imaginary list of imaginary roster cuts then they’re entitled to do so. It certainly wouldn’t hurt TNA to actually lose Hogan and Bischoff, who despite what you seem to be claiming, are very much influential in the direction of the product and how it’s being managed right now (or at least were the past 8 months). Saying otherwise is just plain wrong.

Really? Yeah, sure thing there. Hogan and Bischoff had their spots on creative and a minor amount of time in talent relations which stopped pretty much after RVD and Anderson joined. They don't hold any official positions beyond that. Until May Russo was the head booker. Hogan has no control of TNA from a managerial point of view and neither do Bischoff.

 

[MisterRob]

He's a minority share holder and a member of the creative team. He's also regarded as a management consultant.

Says the guy who clearly works for TNA and knows the breakdown of their company’s employment structure, even whose doing what on the creative team, too!

And neither is Hulk Hogan.

Hogan has more influence on it then an advertiser would.

Well it's a good thing Hogan doesn't even hold a share of the company then isn't it, what with him not being a member of management, unless you count his on-air character.

Hence why I said you both need to stop arguing about it as if either of you have a clue.

Considering Hogan plays a very minor role in the creative team and a character no he doesn't. Dixie has even confirmed it herself in statements that Hogan does not run TNA.

Who the hell said Hogan ran TNA?

No, yo need too. Hogan's role has been outlined by TNA on multiple occasions. Learn to separate his character and his actual jobs.

Says the guy who needs to learn that lesson just as much as I do. I’m not confusing Hogan’s character with his actual jobs, hence me not claiming Hogan should be gone from TNA. You’re the one claiming you have inside information on everything about the make up of TNA, including Hogan’s actual influence behind the scenes. Your facts are not real facts.

I'm sorry, do you work in the television industry? Because I do. I've spent the last 3 years as a script writer and a production assistant. TNA's television output is entirely reliant on Spike TV, it's Spike TV's job to promote them. This is the same issue the original ECW had with Spike. TNA's situation isn't as bad, which is why they've lasted longer. But outside of January 4th, iMPACT isn't given nearly as much promotion by the network as they should be. All you have to do is look at the endless threads asking why TNA never runs commericals, it's not TNA it's Spike TV.

I’m sorry, do you know anything about me? Once again you assume you do, to the same degree you assume you know how the entire television business works, as you assume you know the entire make up of TNA’s company and everyone’s role in it. You don’t know shit.

And your reference would be good, if ECW and TNA were even remotely comparable. They’re not. ECW got no advertising whatsoever and were just an experiment by Spike to see if a wrestling company could work on their network before they brought in the WWE. ECW was ignored and in fact buried by Spike, while TNA gets lots of advertisement and Spike is entirely behind them. I see commercials for Impact all the time on Spike, so you’re full of shit.

And regardless of that, that has nothing to do with how or why TNA lost a chunk of their audience in the following months after January 4th, even though that audience knew exactly where to watch them on Thursdays and had already been there watching on Thursdays. Nice try! That fact proves it had everything to do with the PRODUCT they were giving their AUDIENCE, which has nothing to do with Spike’s involvement.

"May be influential?" They're the network that shows it, they're entirely responsible for TNA being able to be viewed. When you're a television network you're responsible for getting people to watch your shows. Here's a fine example;

Firefly, a critically acclaimed television series that has a major cult following. Never advertised, pushed around to different time slots. Cancelled in it's first season.

Serenity, film-based continuation of Firefly, heavily advertised, internet campaigns, commercials, tie-in products. 38 million dollars gross revenue. Plus another 9 million in DVD sales in the US alone. You think it's a coincedence that something with fuck all advertising got canned and something with tons made money?

Your irrelevant examples aside (because they aren’t comparable with TNA’s situation), the problem isn’t the network getting viewers to watch the show the problem, as I just stated above, was the product that people were turned off by.

Except for the fact that outside of the Jan 4th episode Spike's level of advertising for TNA has been incredibly limited.

Prove it.

Bischoff and Russo have hade the majority influence. Like I said Russo was lead writer for the most part and now it's Dreamer. Not Hogan.

Because an internet website said so? Oh, you and your assumptions.

No they wouldn't. Have a think about this for a second, research television shows that got cancelled and you'll notice a trend, changes in time slots destroy ratings. Again Friday Night Death Slot, look it up. Do you actually think it's just a coincedence that historically when shows move time slots they often lose ratings or gain them depending on the time slot?

TNA was still showing Impact on Thursdays! Maybe TNA wouldn’t have increased their audience (as they didn’t) but there was no reason they should’ve lost a chunk of their loyal fan base when they were still showing the same thing on Thursdays every week as well. You claimed yourself that the Thursday slot was still getting the same numbers, and yet slowly they dropped their audience despite that. That has nothing to do with what you’re claiming it does. And I'm of course referring to after they went BACK to Thursdays without Monday a factor at all.

Allow me to paint a picture for you; my favourite tv shows currently airing are Glee and the Mentalist. If I were forced to choose between iMPACT and those two shows I would choose those two, because they're my favourite. That doesn't mean I don't like iMPACT, it means I like those shows more. Again look at the comparison of Monday Night iMPACT's and the thursday Replay that followed them. Do you seriously think the exact same people just watched the show twice in one week? Do you live in a fairy tale world where everyone who watches wrestling considers it the highest form of entertainment?

Man you’re clueless.

My arguments are based on actual historical occurences within the television industry. I work within that industry and I can guarantee that I know more about it than you, as you seem to believe that everyone who likes wrestling likes it more than all other things on television.

You can’t guarantee shit mister assumptions. If you do in fact work in the television industry I have to seriously wonder what little corner in the shadows you work in. And since when does what you’re accusing me of here have anything to do with what I’ve actually said in this thread? Impact failed miserably on Mondays going head to head with RAW, yes, but they also lost a chunk of their audience on Thursdays where NOTHING changed. So what made them stop watching, even after the Monday experiment was over?

Really, care to point them out? Last I checked Xplosion was the 4th highest sports program in Australia, apparently those legitimate facts are either lies or uninformed truth. If you seriously disregard the international market then you're an idiot.

I’m not disregarding the international market at all. I’m disregarding your blind assumptions and claims when comparing TNA to WWE in the international market.

Reddannihilation: works in television industry.
MisterRob: doesn't.

I’m sorry, do you know anything about me? Do you know my education and what my career is? I didn’t think so. And I’ll certainly use that as a clear example of how you constantly assume you know things you don’t as fact, to the same degree you assume you know how the entire television business works (like the referee in WWE assumes he knows the ins and outs of running the Corporation that is WWE), as you assume you know the entire make up of TNA’s company and everyone’s role within it. Like I said before, you don’t know shit so stop acting like you do.

Because Spike TV has no history of screwing over non-mainstream wrestling programs?

You’re comparing apples to oranges, man. Completely irrelevant.

Really? Yeah, sure thing there. Hogan and Bischoff had their spots on creative and a minor amount of time in talent relations which stopped pretty much after RVD and Anderson joined. They don't hold any official positions beyond that. Until May Russo was the head booker. Hogan has no control of TNA from a managerial point of view and neither do Bischoff.

Oh, so you know the dates of when Hogan and Bischoff’s spots on creative and talent relations stopped? Even though you stated before that Hogan wasn’t even ON creative! But yet now you know they don’t hold any official positions beyond that. You know for a fact though that Vince Russo isn’t head booker and Tommy Dreamer is, and with that change the entire fallout of what the new creative team looks like. You also know what Hogan and Bischoff’s influence is on the product and most certainly on Dixie Carter because you’re always around them. By God I wish I was in the television industry on the same level as YOU! You should work for Wrestlezone with all the insider information you’ve got!


Yeah. No.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Says the guy who clearly works for TNA and knows the breakdown of their company’s employment structure, even whose doing what on the creative team, too!

It's not as though TNA hides who they employ.

Hogan has more influence on it then an advertiser would.

He doesn't have more influence than the network in charge of putting the show to air.

Who the hell said Hogan ran TNA?

you did.

Says the guy who needs to learn that lesson just as much as I do. I’m not confusing Hogan’s character with his actual jobs, hence me not claiming Hogan should be gone from TNA. You’re the one claiming you have inside information on everything about the make up of TNA, including Hogan’s actual influence behind the scenes. Your facts are not real facts.

I'm sorry when have I claimed I have insider information? I have what is released by the company that employs him.

I’m sorry, do you know anything about me?

You're a giant douche.

Once again you assume you do, to the same degree you assume you know how the entire television business works,

Never said that, just said I know more about it than you, which is evidenced by how little knowledge you've demonstrated regarding your rebuttals.

as you assume you know the entire make up of TNA’s company and everyone’s role in it. You don’t know shit.

The only person making assumptions here is you, it isn't my fault you can't take 10 minutes to find some official statements from TNA regarding certain employees and their positions.

And your reference would be good, if ECW and TNA were even remotely comparable.

Both wrestling companies. both wrestling companies that cater to a niche smark audience, both wrestling companies that push their product as an alternative to mainstream wrestling, both aired on TNN/Spike TV. Do I have to go on?

ECW got no advertising whatsoever and were just an experiment by Spike to see if a wrestling company could work on their network before they brought in the WWE.

No shit, which is why I made a point that TNA's situation isn't as bad as ECW's just that it isn't good either.

ECW was ignored and in fact buried by Spike, while TNA gets lots of advertisement and Spike is entirely behind them. I see commercials for Impact all the time on Spike, so you’re full of shit.

Ugh, you're thick and you don't even realize it. I've already said that TNA are on better terms with Spike than ECW. However, the level of advertising offered by Spike leading up to Jan 4th is not the same as it is currently. At that point in time they had Billboards, interviews, cross promotion and commercials run during on other channels. There was a thread months ago when it all began stating that TNA commercials were being run during WWE programming. Does that still happen? No, it doesn't.

And regardless of that, that has nothing to do with how or why TNA lost a chunk of their audience in the following months after January 4th, even though that audience knew exactly where to watch them on Thursdays and had already been there watching on Thursdays.

"Hi, here's a show on Monday, let's advertise the hell out of it. Now it's over quickly mention it'll be on next week Thursday". During the week commericals run on Spike TV but not other networks, 1.3 instead of 1.5 pretty simple.

Nice try! That fact proves it had everything to do with the PRODUCT they were giving their AUDIENCE, which has nothing to do with Spike’s involvement.

No it doesn't and it's not even a fact. Again utilizing television ratings, one week CSI draws 30 million viewers, the next week it draws 28 million, has the show's quality dropped or are people doing something else? Are their external factors? Highly likely.

Your irrelevant examples aside (because they aren’t comparable with TNA’s situation),

Pray tell, how is an example that demonstrates exactly what I'm arguing irrelevant. Simple equation time-slot alteration + less advertising = less viewers.

the problem isn’t the network getting viewers to watch the show the problem, as I just stated above, was the product that people were turned off by.

Sure thing there.

Because an internet website said so? Oh, you and your assumptions.

What that Vince Russo is head writer? He was, he said he was burnt out and took a break. Go read his twitter page. He announced it himself. Or maybe your argument is Dreamer? Again, all signs point to Tommy.

TNA was still showing Impact on Thursdays! Maybe TNA wouldn’t have increased their audience (as they didn’t) but there was no reason they should’ve lost a chunk of their loyal fan base when they were still showing the same thing on Thursdays every week as well.

Oh my fucking God you are idiotic, same show broadcast 2 nights a week. Half of audience watches X-program on Monday. Other half watches iMPACT. On Thursday, audience group who watched on Monday watch other program, other grop watch iMPACT. Total iMPACT audience, split in half.

You claimed yourself that the Thursday slot was still getting the same numbers, and yet slowly they dropped their audience despite that.

No at the time, the audience was split. Some were watching Monday, others Thursday, so unless your argument is that everyone watching Monday were the same people watching Thursday, then the evidence suggests the time slots split the audience.

That has nothing to do with what you’re claiming it does. And I'm of course referring to after they went BACK to Thursdays without Monday a factor at all.

with decreased advertising and an already split audience, plus viewer choice being factored in, it is highly reasonable to believe that the Monday audience had filled their Thursday slot with a new television preference or alternate activity.

Man you’re clueless.

Fantastic rebuttal, I take it this how you accept you're wrong?

You can’t guarantee shit mister assumptions.

Last I checked every time you've accused me of making assumptions you've been proven wrong. Good job.

If you do in fact work in the television industry I have to seriously wonder what little corner in the shadows you work in.

The corner where you have no knowledge of the industry on the most basic level of knowledge.

And since when does what you’re accusing me of here have anything to do with what I’ve actually said in this thread?

back pedal faster.

Impact failed miserably on Mondays going head to head with RAW, yes, but they also lost a chunk of their audience on Thursdays where NOTHING changed. So what made them stop watching, even after the Monday experiment was over?

I've already explained it, but since you don't read well; When you split the audience due to running the same program on two different time slots a week it isn't unreasonable for the audience to fill the extra time slot with a new activity. If one group watches Monday, they don't need to watch Thursday, so they pick a new program. Monday disappears, but they've grown attached to the program they wacthed on Thursday. Now here's the best part of all that lends even more support to my argument, TNA's ratings have risen lately and interestingly this is at the same time that most shows have ended their seasons. Could it be that the group who had watched during Monday and filled their Thursday time with something else have fallen back to iMPACT now that the other show has ended? nah couldn't be.

I’m not disregarding the international market at all. I’m disregarding your blind assumptions and claims when comparing TNA to WWE in the international market.

Blind assumptions? It was released as a statement by TNA's president.

I’m sorry, do you know anything about me?

Yes, you're an idiot.

Do you know my education and what my career is?

It's obviously not tv.

And I’ll certainly use that as a clear example of how you constantly assume you know things you don’t as fact,

great point accept everything I've said is confirmed. (oh I'll let you have Tommy Dreamer as an assumption. Now you have 1.)

to the same degree you assume you know how the entire television business works

Considering what I've discussed in this thread is the sort of thing you learn in first year college, it's not as if it's hard info to come by.

as you assume you know the entire make up of TNA’s company and everyone’s role within it.

You keep trying to hide behind this idea of "assumptions', these people's jobs are one of the few pieces of public info released by the company.

Like I said before, you don’t know shit so stop acting like you do.

I know a lot more than you do. I think you're just butthurt that you're fall back argument of "assumptions" isn't working.

You’re comparing apples to oranges, man. Completely irrelevant.

No I'm not. You're just stupid.

Oh, so you know the dates of when Hogan and Bischoff’s spots on creative and talent relations stopped?

They're both still on creative. And yeah when Dixie announced on twitter that she was the major force behind signing talent after being called out about Hogan bringing his buddies. Sorry if it's too much for you to keep up with, in the future you might just want to avoid topics you don't know about.

Even though you stated before that Hogan wasn’t even ON creative!

Umm, I said he held a minor role on the creative team at the very begining of my previous post. Fuck you can't even keep up with one post.

But yet now you know they don’t hold any official positions beyond that.

Becase that information was confirmed by Dixie Carter months ago.

You know for a fact though that Vince Russo isn’t head booker

He announced he was taking a break in May. Bischoff announced that Russo was in charge for the night while creative was away the week after Victory Road. Either keep up with company announcements or don't challenge them when you don't know.

You also know what Hogan and Bischoff’s influence is on the product and most certainly on Dixie Carter because you’re always around them.

It's publicly announced knowledge, made on behalf of the company.

By God I wish I was in the television industry on the same level as YOU!

Probably be better than that burger joint you're doing time at.

You should work for Wrestlezone with all the insider information you’ve got!

No wrestlezone's news section is more your area. You know, posting completely incorrect statements that the companies they're about refute. Yeah defintely your deal. Like I said, if you can't keep up with TNA's official announcements that's your fault but that also means you can't talk about it, because by your own admission you don't know.

 

[Caitiff]

The simple fact of the matter about Hulk Hogan is that he has full creative control over any aspect of his character. This control, in turn, extends to any storyline that he's ivolved in, since those storylines are what shape his character, in the first place. And, given the sheer volume of storylines that Hogan is involed in, he therefore has a major say in how many people are being booked. Frankly, this is just another example of why no-one on the booking team should ever be on camera.

And, Red, outside of saying that you watch David Letterman, I notice that you didn't actually answer any of my other questions. Also, both of my ratings comparisons were direct. And, in both comparisons, TNA has had a net loss over the time that Hogan has been an active participant on-screen. Granted, that can, almost entirely, be blamed on the catastrophe that was their attempt at Monday Night. However, since that move was championed by Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff........

Also, I used to work at a shoe store. One of my jobs was to clean the bathrooms after the store closed. So, I used to work on the maintenence of retail property. Without saying exactly what you do for a living, saying that you work "in an industry" is kinda pointless. Fetching the program director's coffee each morning, and washing the cup for him technically would put you "in the television industry." Vague is not an asset, in that case. It simply leads to, what I admit, is likely a very inaccurate assumption. And, not just from me.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

The simple fact of the matter about Hulk Hogan is that he has full creative control over any aspect of his character. This control, in turn, extends to any storyline that he's ivolved in, since those storylines are what shape his character, in the first place. And, given the sheer volume of storylines that Hogan is involed in, he therefore has a major say in how many people are being booked. Frankly, this is just another example of why no-one on the booking team should ever be on camera.

He is? He does?

1. How do you konw that he has full creative control over anything

2. He's involved in a storyline with Abyss...and that's about the only storyline that Hulk HOgan regularly appears in.

And, Red, outside of saying that you watch David Letterman, I notice that you didn't actually answer any of my other questions. Also, both of my ratings comparisons were direct. And, in both comparisons, TNA has had a net loss over the time that Hogan has been an active participant on-screen. Granted, that can, almost entirely, be blamed on the catastrophe that was their attempt at Monday Night. However, since that move was championed by Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff........

Direct my ass. The direct comparison would be the ratings immediately before Hogan showed up, not the ratings a year ago, when circumstances could have been very different.

Also, I used to work at a shoe store. One of my jobs was to clean the bathrooms after the store closed. So, I used to work on the maintenence of retail property. Without saying exactly what you do for a living, saying that you work "in an industry" is kinda pointless. Fetching the program director's coffee each morning, and washing the cup for him technically would put you "in the television industry." Vague is not an asset, in that case. It simply leads to, what I admit, is likely a very inaccurate assumption. And, not just from me.

Pretty sure he explicitly said he has been a script writer and production assistant for three years. It's not vague jsut because you have no reading comprehension.

 

[MisterRob]

I’m going to focus on the key parts here and not respond to the unimportant regurgitations of Red that aren’t very relevant to the argument.

It's not as though TNA hides who they employ.

No, but you’re still wrong. Up until May of 2010 Vince Russo, collaborating with Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff were the bookers and creative team. Jeff Jarrett also was removed and put on leave by Dixie Carter herself, and since he HAS come back to the company there’s never been anything made clear about what role he plays if any backstage or what influence he has. Nice try, though.

He doesn't have more influence than the network in charge of putting the show to air.

Are you telling me the network is sitting in on creative meetings and deciding what’s happening on the product every week? Does a network do that with all their shows on their network, instead of leaving it to the writer’s to write the show, or the bookers is in this case (which Hogan was a part of at that time)?

You work in the television business my ass.

I'm sorry when have I claimed I have insider information? I have what is released by the company that employs him.

Yes you do, as everyone does, and over the span of time that this whole argument is about you have no proof Hogan wasn’t a huge influence on everything that took place in the product. I mean, he was on the CREATIVE TEAM. He was a consultant to Dixie Carter whose said time and time again at that time that she was listening and using Hogan’s knowledge, etc, to help with the product.

You're a giant douche.

Only because you’re upset for being wrong.

The only person making assumptions here is you, it isn't my fault you can't take 10 minutes to find some official statements from TNA regarding certain employees and their positions.

Oh, I have, and Hulk Hogan was a key influence on the creative team and closely working with Dixie Carter from the time he entered TNA until at least May 2010. Don’t act as if you’re privy to knowing how much that’s changed or how little influence he may still have with Carter. You pretending you know everything based on something quite general is hilarious.

Both wrestling companies. both wrestling companies that cater to a niche smark audience, both wrestling companies that push their product as an alternative to mainstream wrestling, both aired on TNN/Spike TV. Do I have to go on?

Good job. But once again in your stupidity you failed to grasp that there’s nothing comparable about the two companies in terms of their time on TNN/Spike tv, except for the fact they were both ON the same network. The details within that, though, are entirely opposite from one another in this case.

Ugh, you're thick and you don't even realize it. I've already said that TNA are on better terms with Spike than ECW. However, the level of advertising offered by Spike leading up to Jan 4th is not the same as it is currently. At that point in time they had Billboards, interviews, cross promotion and commercials run during on other channels. There was a thread months ago when it all began stating that TNA commercials were being run during WWE programming. Does that still happen? No, it doesn't.

And you think networks constantly promote every show, for the entire duration of their run on that network, to that large degree? You also fail to realize that Spike isn’t the sole source of advertisement and there’s nothing stopping TNA from going out and advertising themselves more, with their own money! They’re running a damn business, they’re not run by Spike tv. I’m really questioning your knowledge of the television industry here.

No it doesn't and it's not even a fact. Again utilizing television ratings, one week CSI draws 30 million viewers, the next week it draws 28 million, has the show's quality dropped or are people doing something else? Are their external factors? Highly likely.

We’re not talking about one week. And please show me where CSI’s ratings dropped 2 million viewers in one week and go on to show me whether it went back up the next week or anytime at all afterwards.

Pray tell, how is an example that demonstrates exactly what I'm arguing irrelevant. Simple equation time-slot alteration + less advertising = less viewers.

Because Firefly didn’t have the same loyal and constant viewership for years that Impact has. Firefly wasn’t advertised, that hasn’t been the case at all with Impact which gets plenty of advertisement comparable to other shows. Impact was also not pushed around to different time slots constantly before they ever could grab a stable following, they’ve had a stable following for years, long before they moved to Mondays.

As I stated before, the problem wasn’t the viewers they were gaining by Spike’s advertising, etc, the problem was the product which audiences took a look at and then walked away from. That was even the case on the very first Monday Impact on January 4th when you look at the breakdown of the shows ratings.

Your arguments are irrelevant because they’re totally wrong.

Sure thing there.

Glad you agree with me.

What that Vince Russo is head writer? He was, he said he was burnt out and took a break. Go read his twitter page. He announced it himself. Or maybe your argument is Dreamer? Again, all signs point to Tommy.

All signs point to is not a fact. I’m not arguing he’s not, I’m stating you don’t have a clue who the ACTUAL creative team consists of right now and whose running it so to pretend you do is silly (and certainly not proven to be fact).

Oh my fucking God you are idiotic, same show broadcast 2 nights a week. Half of audience watches X-program on Monday. Other half watches iMPACT. On Thursday, audience group who watched on Monday watch other program, other grop watch iMPACT. Total iMPACT audience, split in half.


No at the time, the audience was split. Some were watching Monday, others Thursday, so unless your argument is that everyone watching Monday were the same people watching Thursday, then the evidence suggests the time slots split the audience.

I’m the idiot? How stupid can you be? Even after the switch to Mondays the TNA Impact replay on Thursdays was gaining the same ratings as they had been before the Monday switch. As proven, for example, by the second week of March:

“- Thursday night's iMPACT replay on Spike TV scored a 1.0 rating with 1,303,000 viewers, rounded up from an 0.97. This is almost the same exact rating from the original show on Monday night.”


How the hell can the audience TNA previously had be split in fucking half, then? By your logic and math there’s somehow TWO TIMES the audience during that time period compared to BEFORE and AFTER TNA jumped to Mondays (and its somehow was now split between Mondays and Thursdays.) You’re claiming (and only you) TNA’s combined audience was a 2.0 at this time and now they’ve lost .8 of that audience and somehow that wouldn’t have anything to do with the poor quality of their product? Somehow that wouldn’t prove TNA is total crap right now?

What the fuck company in the television industry do you work for?

with decreased advertising and an already split audience, plus viewer choice being factored in, it is highly reasonable to believe that the Monday audience had filled their Thursday slot with a new television preference or alternate activity.

Your logic astounds me, it really does. You’re telling me that loyal fans of TNA chose to watch the product on Mondays instead of Thursdays. Then you’re telling me that when Mondays became non existent and Thursdays were the only opportunity to watch the product they supposedly enjoy and are fans of, they instead didn’t go back to watching it and instead chose to watch a different program they preferred more? And then you’re trying to tell me that choice had NOTHING to do with the content and quality of the product?

Yeah, hopefully you can see how that entirely destroys every bit of your argument and makes absolutely no sense…

It was completely Spike’s advertising that already established fans of TNA, who knew where to find the show, didn’t go BACK to watching the product. Great argument!

Fantastic rebuttal, I take it this how you accept you're wrong?

No it was me having already proven you wrong a few lines above and instead of repeating myself I took the time to state how utterly clueless you are.

Last I checked every time you've accused me of making assumptions you've been proven wrong. Good job.

Actually, you haven’t proven me wrong on a thing. All you’ve done is assume and make arguments that don’t hold up in the least, which I’ve proven fact in this very post.

The corner where you have no knowledge of the industry on the most basic level of knowledge.

Says the guy whose arguments are so flawed that I’m believing your claim to being in the television industry is about as factual as all the other wrong statements you’ve been making.

back pedal faster.

That’s not back pedaling, that’s pointing out that what you made up and tried to pretend I said was in fact just made up and not factual in the least (much like most of the things you’ve been saying).

I've already explained it, but since you don't read well; When you split the audience due to running the same program on two different time slots a week it isn't unreasonable for the audience to fill the extra time slot with a new activity. If one group watches Monday, they don't need to watch Thursday, so they pick a new program. Monday disappears, but they've grown attached to the program they wacthed on Thursday. Now here's the best part of all that lends even more support to my argument, TNA's ratings have risen lately and interestingly this is at the same time that most shows have ended their seasons. Could it be that the group who had watched during Monday and filled their Thursday time with something else have fallen back to iMPACT now that the other show has ended? nah couldn't be.

Once again I point out, since you can’t seem to grasp the facts: The replays on Thursday’s Impacts were garnering the same ratings as the actual shows on Mondays. When Mondays became non existent the ratings on Thursdays didn’t change (or they dropped). You are right that the ratings have increased lately, back to the same mundane numbers they were doing long before Hogan and Bischoff came on board. But what you seem to fail to realize is that they haven’t gained any NEW audience.

Even more so, which totally defeats your argument smart guy, is that IF the fans that weren’t watching were watching another show on Thursdays because of the whole Monday night fiasco, then clearly the reason they didn’t go BACK to watching Impact until your “assumed” shows season’s were over had NOTHING to do with advertising. It actually had EVERYTHING to do with the quality of the product because they chose to watch something they thought was better over TNA Impact.

So for all those months the audience chose to watch something they deemed as “better” and more worth their time then watching Impact. Who do you think the blame for that falls back on if it’s not the CREATIVE TEAM and the bookers of the product (who included HOGAN and BISCHOFF!)

Probably be better than that burger joint you're doing time at.

I make almost 50 thousand dollars a year (ain’t it beautiful?), I don’t think I work at a burger joint, thanks. And by the wrong logic and blatantly asinine arguments you’ve been making in this thread I question you work anywhere near the television industry.

 

[Caitiff]

Direct my ass. The direct comparison would be the ratings immediately before Hogan showed up, not the ratings a year ago, when circumstances could have been very different.

Yeah. I did that one, too. Learn to read. I actually did the average for the full 7 months prior to Hogan's arrival, sincethat's how long he's been in TNA. I already provided the links, so you can check the "immediately before" for yourself.

Pretty sure he explicitly said he has been a script writer and production assistant for three years. It's not vague jsut because you have no reading comprehension.

Huh? He did say that. Kinda lost it in a very lage wall of text. So, I sit comfortably in my computer chair corrected. Well, assuming, of course, that you can take the guy completely on his word. And, frankly, I have no reason to do so, with no evidence. Since his entire arguement stems from that "experience," he really does have a very good reason to fabricate that expereicne for the sake of his arguement. But, if you take him at his word, that's fine with me. Not saying the guy's lying. Just saying that he has a valid reason to do so, and no evidence to the contrary.

Edit: Oh, and Hulk, how's about you answer the questions that I posed last night? They were directed at you, after all.

 

[Reddannihilation]

I’m going to focus on the key parts here and not respond to the unimportant regurgitations of Red that aren’t very relevant to the argument.

Also known as "I can't answer some things because they're fact so I'll just ignore them".

No, but you’re still wrong. Up until May of 2010 Vince Russo, collaborating with Hulk Hogan and Eric Bischoff were the bookers and creative team.

Umm yeah I know, I said that. I also said Russo was head writer. Learn2Read.

Jeff Jarrett also was removed and put on leave by Dixie Carter herself, and since he HAS come back to the company there’s never been anything made clear about what role he plays if any backstage or what influence he has. Nice try, though.

Except for the whole, his share holding and influence within the company having returned. What you think that Tenay, Don West and Eric Young have still have jobs for a reason other than Jarrett having their backs? God, you're dumb.

Are you telling me the network is sitting in on creative meetings and deciding what’s happening on the product every week?

Considering Spike released a statement months back that they wanted Hogan to feature in more segments, yeah.

Does a network do that with all their shows on their network, instead of leaving it to the writer’s to write the show,

Is this a serious question? Like, honestly? You think networks don't sit in on their programs? Here's just a basic example of Spike's influence on TNA's product, "male wrestlers can not physically harm the Knockouts" That's why the don't have mixed tags. Spike refuses to show male on female violence and that had a direct effect on a current storyline between Kip James and the BP's. So if you don't understand how much influence networks have on their programming you really shouldn't be talking.

You work in the television business my ass.

Your opinion means a lot considering you don't even understand what a network actually does.

Yes you do, as everyone does, and over the span of time that this whole argument is about you have no proof Hogan wasn’t a huge influence on everything that took place in the product.

Sure I do, Russo was head booker. Therefore anything that happened went through him. So Hogan's part would've been minimal unless Vince Russo suddenly decided that after 11 years of being himself he decided to take orders from someone beneath him.

I mean, he was on the CREATIVE TEAM.

So were a bunch of other guys when Paul Heyman booked Smackdown that didn't stop it from being a show controlled almost exclusively by Paul. Your suggestion is that TNA's head writer routinely let himself be overruled by an underling.

He was a consultant to Dixie Carter whose said time and time again at that time that she was listening and using Hogan’s knowledge, etc, to help with the product.

Listening and using his knowledge =/= creative control.

Oh, I have, and Hulk Hogan was a key influence on the creative team and closely working with Dixie Carter from the time he entered TNA until at least May 2010.

Really Hogan was a key influence was he? So he was such a key influence that he worked underneath the head writer? Man, must've been a major player.

Don’t act as if you’re privy to knowing how much that’s changed or how little influence he may still have with Carter.

If Hulk Hogan had as much of an influence as you're claiming, he'd have Russo's job. He doesn't because you're wrong.

You pretending you know everything based on something quite general is hilarious.

You pretending you know anything is quite hilarious. Time and time again you've gone to the well with this "you makez assumpshinz" bullshit every time I've countered it with fact and you've tryed to put make up on it.

Good job. But once again in your stupidity you failed to grasp that there’s nothing comparable about the two companies in terms of their time on TNN/Spike tv, except for the fact they were both ON the same network. The details within that, though, are entirely opposite from one another in this case.

No they're quite similar. Which is why you haven't presented any examples as to how TNA's situation isn't similar to ECW's.

And you think networks constantly promote every show, for the entire duration of their run on that network, to that large degree?

No they don't and that's the problem. If they did, ratings would be higher. You ever seen a show that recieved mass advertising and then had it drop but continued to deliver solid ratings? No, because it's never happened.

You also fail to realize that Spike isn’t the sole source of advertisement and there’s nothing stopping TNA from going out and advertising themselves more, with their own money!

Really? Tell me, how would TNA go about funding advertisements without utilizing the Spike name? All their advertising has to go through Spike, it's part of that whole networks having control thing that you seem to believe is a fairy tale.

They’re running a damn business, they’re not run by Spike tv.

For all intents and purposes, TNA iMPACT is run by Spike TV.

I’m really questioning your knowledge of the television industry here.

You shouldn't be, considering you don't even know what a network does.

We’re not talking about one week. And please show me where CSI’s ratings dropped 2 million viewers in one week and go on to show me whether it went back up the next week or anytime at all afterwards.

http://tvbythenumbers.com/2007/11/18/csi-ratings-2007-2008/1818

4th episode that seaon 21.22 million viewers, following episode 19.06, episode after 21.94. And it goes on like that.

Because Firefly didn’t have the same loyal and constant viewership for years that Impact has.

Yeah Firefly didn't have a loyal viewership at all, I mean it was all casuals who forked out the 40 billion+ to see the movie.

Firefly wasn’t advertised, that hasn’t been the case at all with Impact which gets plenty of advertisement comparable to other shows.

No they don't because one of the most important requirements, is to advertise on affliated and even opposing networks. To draw viewers who have access to your network but may not watch the specific show you want them too.

Impact was also not pushed around to different time slots constantly before they ever could grab a stable following, they’ve had a stable following for years, long before they moved to Mondays.

Veronica Mars had a stable following for years and they still ended up being fucked over with time slot changes. So did Malcolm in the Middle. So have a lot of shows.

As I stated before, the problem wasn’t the viewers they were gaining by Spike’s advertising, etc, the problem was the product which audiences took a look at and then walked away from. That was even the case on the very first Monday Impact on January 4th when you look at the breakdown of the shows ratings.

Umm, yeah the breakdown of the Jan 4th implies that people stopped watching after Hogan left. So really that supports the idea that people wanted to see Hogan.

I’m the idiot? How stupid can you be? Even after the switch to Mondays the TNA Impact replay on Thursdays was gaining the same ratings as they had been before the Monday switch. As proven, for example, by the second week of March:

“- Thursday night's iMPACT replay on Spike TV scored a 1.0 rating with 1,303,000 viewers, rounded up from an 0.97. This is almost the same exact rating from the original show on Monday night.”

And?

How the hell can the audience TNA previously had be split in fucking half, then?

I didn't say the previous audience. I said the current audience.

By your logic and math there’s somehow TWO TIMES the audience during that time period compared to BEFORE and AFTER TNA jumped to Mondays (and its somehow was now split between Mondays and Thursdays.)

There is two times the audience. It states it right there in your quote.

You’re claiming (and only you) TNA’s combined audience was a 2.0 at this time and now they’ve lost .8 of that audience and somehow that wouldn’t have anything to do with the poor quality of their product?

No I'm not claiming it, your little quote proves my point those were the ratings unless you're suggesting everyone who watched monday, watched it 3days later. And no they didn't lose viewers due to product quality, the lost viewers due to the split. With TNA being available twice a week and then returning to a single day, the viewers who's day had been removed were not as keen to switch back after filling the time slot with an alternate show or activity.

I'll re-state it so you understand. iMPACT, broadcast Monday and Thursday. On Monday I watch iMPACT, on Thursday I watch The Mentalist. iMPACT stops playing Monday. However I really like the Mentalist, when forced to choose I pick the Mentalist as I would pick it over any wrestling show, you could send me back in time to 1997 WCW and I would pick The Mentalist over Nitro, over the WWF, over anything. Because it is a show I enjoy a lot, it doesn't say anything about TNA's quality, rather it says the Mentalist is of a much higher quality than anything else. Lots of TV viewers think that way, it's why entire shows cater to specific demographics unfortunately the demographic TNA is after is one of the most popular and as such they have a lot of indirect compteition.

Somehow that wouldn’t prove TNA is total crap right now?

see above.

What the fuck company in the television industry do you work for?

One HD.

Your logic astounds me, it really does. You’re telling me that loyal fans of TNA chose to watch the product on Mondays instead of Thursdays.

Who the fuck said anything about "loyal" fans? I didn't say Diehards exclusively watched. A lot of it was more than likely casuals.

Then you’re telling me that when Mondays became non existent and Thursdays were the only opportunity to watch the product they supposedly enjoy and are fans of, they instead didn’t go back to watching it and instead chose to watch a different program they preferred more?

Your entire argument is on the basis that everyone who watches TNA is a diehard wrestling fan? They aren't, the diehards are the people who always watch. When some people don't that tends to point to those people being casual fans. Again, not everyone who watches wrestling considers it their favourite thing. Case in point, myself.

And then you’re trying to tell me that choice had NOTHING to do with the content and quality of the product?

Sure there's more than likely a group of viewers who didn't enjoy the program at all. But they're not the viewers who have since come back. Casuals may have tuned in seen it once and tuned out. You offer no conisderation for external factors, of which there are many.

Yeah, hopefully you can see how that entirely destroys every bit of your argument and makes absolutely no sense…

mmm, don't think so sunshine.

It was completely Spike’s advertising that already established fans of TNA,

never said it was the be all end all reason.

who knew where to find the show, didn’t go BACK to watching the product. Great argument!

As much as I've already explained it and you're just too stupid to get it. The established fanbase has returned. Not just that but the established fanbase is not made up of diehards. The established group were split just like everyone else. You're the one who can't seem to grasp the relatively simple concept of viewer's choice.

Actually, you haven’t proven me wrong on a thing. All you’ve done is assume and make arguments that don’t hold up in the least, which I’ve proven fact in this very post.

Proven you wrong plenty of times.

Says the guy whose arguments are so flawed that I’m believing your claim to being in the television industry is about as factual as all the other wrong statements you’ve been making.

My arguments; based on analysis and historical facts relativeto the television industry.
Your arguments; the biased rantings of a baby who can't wrap their head around the concept of what a network actually does.

That’s not back pedaling, that’s pointing out that what you made up and tried to pretend I said was in fact just made up and not factual in the least (much like most of the things you’ve been saying).

Except all my facts have sources and yours don't. Cheerio.

Once again I point out, since you can’t seem to grasp the facts: The replays on Thursday’s Impacts were garnering the same ratings as the actual shows on Mondays. When Mondays became non existent the ratings on Thursdays didn’t change (or they dropped).

viewers choice.

You are right that the ratings have increased lately, back to the same mundane numbers they were doing long before Hogan and Bischoff came on board. But what you seem to fail to realize is that they haven’t gained any NEW audience.

remind me again why a new audience is needed? It isn't.

Even more so, which totally defeats your argument smart guy, is that IF the fans that weren’t watching were watching another show on Thursdays because of the whole Monday night fiasco, then clearly the reason they didn’t go BACK to watching Impact until your “assumed” shows season’s were over had NOTHING to do with advertising.

How do you expect TNA to gain a new audience when they only people seeing TNA advertisements are people who already watch the show?

It actually had EVERYTHING to do with the quality of the product because they chose to watch something they thought was better over TNA Impact.

Actually it has more to do with the quality of the other show than it does TNA. You just don't seem to understand that if one person prefers one thing to another it doesn't imply the latter product is of low quality, but that the former product is of immensely high quality.

So for all those months the audience chose to watch something they deemed as “better” and more worth their time then watching Impact.
Who do you think the blame for that falls back on if it’s not the CREATIVE TEAM and the bookers of the product (who included HOGAN and BISCHOFF!)

Wow an exclamation mark, the blame falls on multiple parties, viewers for being casuals, the network for altering time slots and not providing advertisements to inform Monday viewers the switch had occured, also the network for not informing new target audiences of the show's existence. And if you need that explained I'll put it simply, many people assumed that once TNA stopped airing Monday's it had been cancelled entirely, Spike did nothing to rectify that thought.

So trying to pin all of TNA's supposed failures on two guys is a lot more absurd than taking into account numerous factors that each played a part in the situation.



I make almost 50 thousand dollars a year (ain’t it beautiful?), I don’t think I work at a burger joint, thanks. And by the wrong logic and blatantly asinine arguments you’ve been making in this thread I question you work anywhere near the television industry.[/QUOTE]

 

[MisterRob]

Also known as "I can't answer some things because they're fact so I'll just ignore them".

Also known as being exactly what I said it was. I’ll let you make huge posts consisting of useless banter and weak regurgitation; I’m just going to be focusing on responding to the important parts that have to do with the ARGUMENT.

Except for the whole, his share holding and influence within the company having returned. What you think that Tenay, Don West and Eric Young have still have jobs for a reason other than Jarrett having their backs? God, you're dumb.

There’s been nothing defined or made clear about what role Jeff Jarrett is playing behind the scenes or what influence he has there since he returned from Dixie Carter forcing him on a ‘leave of absence’. Jarrett doesn’t run the company anymore, he doesn’t have the power he once did anymore. And I highly doubt Jarrett is the only reason Tenay is TNA’s lead announcer. And Don West has gone from being color commentator to all but disappearing, clearly proof Jarrett has a lot of stroke!

Eric Young went from a strong push where he was a serious character, leading a stable that were being pushed rather prominently on the overall product to being a joke of a character who is rarely used now, the stable itself disappearing overnight, clearly Jarrett’s got a ton of stroke and influence in the product!

Is this a serious question? Like, honestly? You think networks don't sit in on their programs? Here's just a basic example of Spike's influence on TNA's product, "male wrestlers can not physically harm the Knockouts" That's why the don't have mixed tags. Spike refuses to show male on female violence and that had a direct effect on a current storyline between Kip James and the BP's. So if you don't understand how much influence networks have on their programming you really shouldn't be talking.

Networks have expectations and certain demands from the programs on their network, no doubt about it and no denying that. The Sci fi network had the same sort of wishes and expectations with WWE when ECW was on the network. But taking into consideration certain ‘wishes’ and incorporating certain ‘wants’ into their program is a lot different then the networks controlling the entire direction of a program and how it’s being written as a whole.

Sure I do, Russo was head booker. Therefore anything that happened went through him. So Hogan's part would've been minimal unless Vince Russo suddenly decided that after 11 years of being himself he decided to take orders from someone beneath him.


So were a bunch of other guys when Paul Heyman booked Smackdown that didn't stop it from being a show controlled almost exclusively by Paul. Your suggestion is that TNA's head writer routinely let himself be overruled by an underling.

Paul Heyman constantly fought and struggled with Vince McMahon and his ‘people’ over creative differences. The very reason Paul Heyman eventually left the WWE was because of those creative differences and the fact that Vince pushed his creative vision over Paul’s wishes when it came to the creative direction of the product. But of course Russo runs the company and no one interferes or influences his creative writing. Of course not. Not even when Hogan and Bischoff are labeled as ‘collaborators’ instead of the usual terms used for the creative team under the creative writer.

Yeah Firefly didn't have a loyal viewership at all, I mean it was all casuals who forked out the 40 billion+ to see the movie.

Maybe you missed the part where I said “the same loyal and constant viewership for YEARS”. Learn to read.

Umm, yeah the breakdown of the Jan 4th implies that people stopped watching after Hogan left. So really that supports the idea that people wanted to see Hogan.

For one night, yes. It also proves that TNA’s product didn’t keep the viewers interested enough to stay and continue to watch.

No I'm not claiming it, your little quote proves my point those were the ratings unless you're suggesting everyone who watched monday, watched it 3days later. And no they didn't lose viewers due to product quality, the lost viewers due to the split. With TNA being available twice a week and then returning to a single day, the viewers who's day had been removed were not as keen to switch back after filling the time slot with an alternate show or activity.

Well by your logic, not only did they lose HALF the audience they were getting at that time with the combined shows (which would’ve been at least a 2.0) they in fact dropped to the .8’s when the Monday fiasco was over so they lost well OVER half their audience. In that small a time frame? In one swell swoop? By your logic TNA Impact and Spike tv were far bigger failures then I EVER thought they were. You’ve certainly opened my eyes, thanks!

Although I still find it ridiculous to claim it’s solely on advertising and has nothing to do with a combination of things, including the quality of their product.

I'll re-state it so you understand. iMPACT, broadcast Monday and Thursday. On Monday I watch iMPACT, on Thursday I watch The Mentalist. iMPACT stops playing Monday. However I really like the Mentalist, when forced to choose I pick the Mentalist as I would pick it over any wrestling show, you could send me back in time to 1997 WCW and I would pick The Mentalist over Nitro, over the WWF, over anything. Because it is a show I enjoy a lot, it doesn't say anything about TNA's quality, rather it says the Mentalist is of a much higher quality than anything else. Lots of TV viewers think that way, it's why entire shows cater to specific demographics unfortunately the demographic TNA is after is one of the most popular and as such they have a lot of indirect compteition.

Yes, thanks for proving my point. You choose Mentalist over Impact for the quality of it’s show. And since TNA hasn’t reached anywhere near the assumed overall audience you claim they had during the Monday night experiment when their audience was split, then clearly all of that audience is choosing to watch something else because they don’t think the quality of Impact is enough to make them watch it over their preferred shows. I agree entirely.

So trying to pin all of TNA's supposed failures on two guys is a lot more absurd than taking into account numerous factors that each played a part in the situation.

I don’t know about anyone else, but never once in this thread did I claim Hogan and Bischoff were or are the sole reasons for TNA’s failures.