What makes TNA/WWE better than the latter?

[Jonnie Walker]

I constantly see fans of TNA and of WWE stating how the one they watch is better. Well what exactly, if anything makes it better than the other. Some say TNA has better wrestling, is more pointed towards adults, some say WWE seems more professional, but my question is what exactly is it? So I want you to tell me exactly why YOU think that TNA or WWE is better than their opponent. And remember, .

 

[WWE Manster03]

I see this thread having more spam in it then the pantry on a battleship. lol..but in all seriousness I will answer honestly.

I think WWE is better because they have more coherent storylines and a better creative team. Do I think their creative team is perfect? Hell no. They could book their show on Mondays much better. Smackdown is booked very well 3 out of the 4 weeks in the month, so that goes to show that their creative dept isn't completely incompetent. However, in TNA you get rushed storylines that seem like they had a dart board with ideas on it and randomly threw wrestler darts at them to find out how they will book their shows. And when they come up with an angle, they don't follow through with it. Joe being kidnapped is a great example. It's been what 3-4 weeks since we have seen him get thrown into a van? Why haven't they mentioned this to us? When he comes back the casual fan that they might of gained will be like who the hell is this guy and why should I care? The Abyss/Hogan thing over the HOF ring is laughable. It's up there with the Katie Vick thing in WWE, and that angle was terrible. Abyss was FINE as the Monster. Then you made him a pussy, and now we are supposed to believe a ring makes him a monster again? He was better off with Mick Foley at his side, because he could get back to his hardcore roots. They scrapped that. World Elite was a VERY solid stable, and they broke that up. My point is the booking in WWE, while predictable alot of the time, is much more consistent. I also think that TNA lets their performers go alot of the times without a net to protect them. What I mean is they try and book Hernandez to be beastly, but his mic work is terrible. Yet they just throw him out and he comes off ******ed. They need someone to work with alot of their talent and if necessary write their material for them. WWE does this, and for the most part it works. Only their performers who may not be the best on the mic(MVP,Mark Henry, Zack Ryder, Morrison,etc) get their promos entirely written for them. The only exception is John Cena. They write his for him because as the face of the company they want him to come across as EXACTLY what they want. Watch his promos before he became THE guy in the company. They were fantastic. HHH/HBK/Taker/Jericho/Edge/Miz all are told roughly what to say but for the most part get to write their own stuff. CM Punk I'm pretty sure has 100% control of what he says, because WWE has no idea about Straight Edge and he knows exactly how to convey his beliefs into a coherent, asshole heel promo. That is why I prefer WWE to TNA. The in ring action to me is basically a draw.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

If I had to pick one over the other, I'd have to pick the WWE at this point. While I do want to see TNA continue to grow, as it does give fans and wrestlers themselves more options, I just view the WWE product as superior overall for a number of reasons.

I suppose I'll start off with matches. In terms of match excitement in TNA, those matches tend to be between X Division wrestlers and are typically loaded down with high spots. That's all well and good, nothing wrong with that if that's what you're into. The problem is that there's almost no psychology in so many of TNA's matches. Week after week on iMPACT!, there'll be these seemingly random matches just thrown together without really any point or a purpose. It just gives me a feeling that the matches are done just in order to have something to fill airtime. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that TNA doesn't have good matches and that good matches don't take place on iMPACT! because that's not true. However, for most TNA matches, there's just no substance about them. The spotfests they have, for instance, are exciting while they're going on but are completely forgettable half an hour after they've taken place. When it comes to match quality on Raw and iMPACT!, it's a toss up. Some weeks, the matches on both will be pretty damn good and some weeks not so much. But, more often than not, I do at least see a point to most of the matches that take place on Raw and they do usually tell a story.

One of the biggest problems I see on TNA is the overall lack of substance and sustainability for most of their feuds. They move so swiftly sometimes from one feud to another that they don't really even feel like wrestling feuds. Sometimes, you'll see wrestlers will have a single match on iMPACT! or maybe one on a ppv before they both move on to something else. It's hard to get an insight into a wrestler's character when they don't really even have any opportunity to build a character. WWE does go overkill with some feuds like Randy Orton and Triple H. Sometimes, they just don't know when to pull the plug on something. But the WWE does often use feuds to build character and elevate wrestlers. Not that TNA doesn't at all, but the only wrestler that I've seen in TNA this year that seems to be getting built up in any believable way without being rammed down anyone's throat is Ken Anderson. And it could very much be argued that Anderson was already a star before he ever set foot in TNA. TNA is full of stars, but most of them were built during their time with other companies.

A few things that have turned me off at times regarding TNA is the fact that some fans, and TNA themselves somtimes, consistently refer to the company as being a "more adult" or "more innovative" product. It's just something that I find incredibly lame and it just seems like some TNA fans are grasping at straws in order to find something in order to slam the WWE over. Now, it's true that TNA does use blood in some matches whereas the WWE has all but cut it out. It's not that huge of a factor for me because neither company tends to have their wrestlers bleed all that often. However, blood does help in certain situations and matches. I've watched TNA for several years and there's nothing really more "adult" about it than the WWE. Sure, TNA wrestlers will toss around a few dirty words every so often and has a handful of women, namely The Beautiful People, that are keeping the sexpot aspect alive in the Knockout Division. So, a few dirty words and scantially clad women are supposed to make TNA "more adult"? Yeah, I don't think so. If that's all it takes to impress someone, then they're pretty lame to begin with. TNA had an opportunity to do something controversial and groundbreaking with Orlando Jordan but both TNA and Spike decided not to go through with it. It's all a smokescreen that both TNA and Spike pay lipservice to. Groundbreaking or "pushing the envelope" in Spike or TNA doesn't go any further than what the WWE was already doing in 1998.

The WWE is a company that is building towards building new stars and it's been something of a consistent effort on the company's part for close to a year. CM Punk, John Morrison, The Miz, Kofi Kingston, Sheamus, Drew McIntyre, Dolph Ziggler, Cody Rhodes, Ted DiBiase, etc. You also have the NXT concept that does have several interesting wrestlers on the show that could potentially be big stars in the WWE. I'm not saying that all those young wrestlers have worked out or have even reached their full potential yet, but it's there. When I look at TNA, I simply do not see many young stars being made in the company. Desmond Wolfe seemed to be on the fast track to the TNA main event scene. However, since Hulk Hogan's debut in TNA, Wolfe's push has come to a stall. He's gone from wrestling clinics with Kurt Angle to losing to Abyss in about 90 seconds. Now, to be fair, I think that TNA's primary goal right now is to increase its audience rather than really building new talent.

Don't get me wrong, the WWE isn't perfect. I do think that the WWE has concentrated more on the wrestling aspect of their product rather than the "entertainment" part. Building storylines, building up feuds, wrestling matches and promoting ppvs have been what the WWE has focused more on in 2010 thus far and there's been a dramatic improvement to the quality of Raw. While the guest host angle has been hit and miss, Raw hasn't been built around the celebrity guest hosts in 2010 as it was in 2009. This year, they've come out for a few minutes, done their thing and they're off camera. The WWE is no longer trying to dominate Raw with the presence of celebrities. And, perhaps most importantly, Hornswoggle's use has been quite minimal thus far in 2010 and I hope it stays that way. There's still room for improvement on Raw and I'd love to see SmackDown moved to another network on another night. However, I feel that the WWE product overall is significantly been better in 2010 thus far than in 2009. The WWE is using a good formula and I see no reason they can't keep it up.

 

[TellMeWhy]

TNA is just what wrestling should be. TNA is just better. TNA is what wrestling is supposed to be. WWE is a child's company. Only people who like bright lights and eyecandy would say WWE is better than TNA. If you take WWE's exact product and put it in the Impact Zone with the same production values, it would be complete shit. If you take TNA's show and put it in some of the WWE's venues, OMG the roof will be on fire.

TNA has 1 of the most well rounded and diverse roster I've ever seen.
They have the best talented roster:
-The best female wrestlers on the planet: Tara, Sarita, Hamada, Daffney
-They have the best from the indies: Joe, Daniels, Wolfe
-The most decorated stars: Kurt Angle, RVD
-The best young stars WWE had to offer: Hardy, Anderson, Lashley


They use talent better, the stars are hungrier, the show is not a boring and isn't dead like WWE, the talent care for their performance, I can go on and on forever. TNA's only problem is the lack of tv time and promotion. If they can get another tv show and some serious advertising, then things would look brighter for them. WWE to me is basically crap with sprinkles on top. Every dog his day. WWE will surely die in the future when the public opens their eyes. It's only so long you can get away with crap.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

I gotta go with WWE. In the simplest form, they are much better at what they do in an overwhelming number of aspects. First off, the WWE has a much better creative team than TNA, they're stories go somewhere more often than not and even though it's predictable, the story is much more coherent and makes much more sense than a TNA storyline. Their storylines are to convulted and sometimes they can be really hard to follow, most of the time their storylines don't make sense and last about a week. One week 2 guys are feuding, the next they are best buds.

1 thing I really got to give them credit for is that they are finally trying to build new stars instead of rehashing the same old guys. Sure, there is still plenty of Cena, Orton, Edge, HHH, ect. but there is also plenty of Miz, Morrison, Jericho, Punk, Kingston, Sheamus, ect. They also give me reasons to care about these new guys, the only time TNA makes a star is when they fall ass backwards into one and they usually still find a way to screw it up (Samoa Joe is a good example, I used to love Joe but now he's just another guy). TNA relies way to heavily on the shoulders of a bunch of guys who are past their prime. Right now the show is mostly guys like Hogan, Bischoff, Hall, Nash, Jarrett, Foley, Flair, Styles and Abyss. and these are the guys that they mostly rely on to bring in the ratings, the problem is all but 2 guy on this list are guys who still have a career ahead of them. At least the WWE is starting to give the ball to younger, more athletic guys . I know the old guys don't hold the titles in TNA, but that really doesn't matter because the show still revolves around the old guys, not the young guys with the titles. The older guys may hold the titles in WWE, but the show does not revolve squarely on them, there is plenty of younger guys who are starting to make a name for themselves and get plenty of TV time.

I also think the in ring product is better AT TIMES. TNA's in ring product can be quite superior to the WWE's (especially when it comes to in ring action) but the WWE can put on a much better story in a match, I feel they're matches tell a much better tale than any match TNA has, one thing TNA matches are really lacking is emotion, a lot of times its just 2 guys going at it and exchanging moves until the finish comes, the reason why why matches like Rock/Hogan and HBK/Flair are so memorable is because of the emotion at its ability to draw you into the moment. I also have to say this, the X division is good to watch, but half the time all the spots are so unrealistic that it makes the product look extremely fake. Wrestling is scripted but it is supposed to give the illusion that its legit, the X division very rarely looks legit.

So All in all I gotta give it to the WWE for 3 reasons, their product tells much better stories, they are much better at building new stars and don't always have to rely on guys I've been watching for 20 years (especially when the names Knobbs and Saggs are involved), and lastly their in ring product is far superior when it comes to in ring story telling, in ring emotion makes a match far more meaningful than non stop action does.

 

[WWEIsLife]

I have to go with WWE as well because of the experience they have possesed for years. They have more Energy in their Shows for one thing and make you care about what goes on in the Ring or during a Storyline. TNA doesn't have that when I watch them. They just throw guys out there and say ok here it is. WWE builds on the future with guys like Morrison,Miz,Kofi,Legacy,Sheamus just to name a couple. TNA is too busy relying on Hogan,Hall,Nash,Bischoff,Flair,Foley,and Jarrett,Angle,Hardy,RVD. I do like those guys,normally have but they won't be around forever. I mean what happend to Samoa Joe? Abyss I can't take seriously with the HOF Ring he is wearing which is really Hogan's of course. What happend with Beer Money? I mean they go from Face to Heel without any explanation or reason. They are one of the few good things in TNA.

TNA's Storylines are too confusing as well whereas the WWE's goes from week to week and are not dropped for no reason. TNA's are just to incosistent and full of holes. I like my Wrestling a little more consistent and I still think WWE provides that on a weekly basis. Plus ive been a Wrestling Fan for 20 plus Years and while I have watched other Companies like WCW & ECW I have always prefered the WWF/E.

 

[LigerBomb]

WWE:
Better company with longer overall history and history of success, better market penetration, brand recognition, higher production values and network affiliations, fiscally more stable with multiple revenue streams, better money making potential for the talent and employees, potential for better career legacy/"memory", potential for transition to other forms of entertainment (books, music, movies etc). As an investor I would only be a WWE shareholder, natch .
As a wrestler my goal would always be to eventually ride out a career in WWE. As anyone in production I would try to build a career at WWE as well just to get my work see by the most people. The wrestling business has such a high cost benefit ratio (for the talent at least) that the only way to make it really worth the sacrifices in my opinion would be to strive for heading "up north".
BTW, as a question this, 'What makes TNA/WWE better than the latter?', makes no sense. You haven't given a 'latter' or 'former'; 'other' would have worked though... Or perhaps: Between TNA and WWE which is better, and why, the former or the latter? But I digress.
Moving on, from an educated fans perspective, I find WWE to be the more entertaining show at times and at others at least the less worse of two evils. Rarely do I see things in TNA that hold my interest, or don't leave me scratching my head in a state of sheer nonplus. Call me crazy but I employ a bit of common sense and logic to how I understand the storyline and booking of wrestling so as you could imagine I often left dazed and confused by both the backstage and the front of house decisions of TNA. Truth be told WWE isn't wowing me a whole lot either these days but they are better. Also as far as the actual quality of wrestling is concerned I find, in general, WWE talent has better overall story telling ability, while TNA, for me, is usually comprised of tales told by idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Yea, I just butchered Shakespeare... what of it? Anyway, there are exceptions in both companies, but clearly they're not the rules. Along the same lines I find the ring work of TNA guys a bit more sloppy (at least recently) as compared to their competition.

 

[WWE Manster03]

TNA is just what wrestling should be. TNA is just better. TNA is what wrestling is supposed to be. WWE is a child's company. Only people who like bright lights and eyecandy would say WWE is better than TNA. If you take WWE's exact product and put it in the Impact Zone with the same production values, it would be complete shit. If you take TNA's show and put it in some of the WWE's venues, OMG the roof will be on fire.

TNA has 1 of the most well rounded and diverse roster I've ever seen.
They have the best talented roster:
-The best female wrestlers on the planet: Tara, Sarita, Hamada, Daffney
-They have the best from the indies: Joe, Daniels, Wolfe
-The most decorated stars: Kurt Angle, RVD
-The best young stars WWE had to offer: Hardy, Anderson, Lashley


They use talent better, the stars are hungrier, the show is not a boring and isn't dead like WWE, the talent care for their performance, I can go on and on forever. TNA's only problem is the lack of tv time and promotion. If they can get another tv show and some serious advertising, then things would look brighter for them. WWE to me is basically crap with sprinkles on top. Every dog his day. WWE will surely die in the future when the public opens their eyes. It's only so long you can get away with crap.

I'll try and be nice..

I'm a 25 yr old man, but because I prefer WWE I'm a child? Grow up. I don't like bright lights and eye candy, I enjoy wrestling matches that have PSYCHOLOGY! Do you know what that is? It means there is a logical progression to the match, leading to the finish. Do they do this in every match? No. Do they do it 70% of the time? yes. A World Championship match on a ppv that is being put on by a company that is trying to become big time, and we get a DQ finish? Are you serious? You think that is psychology? What did that match accomplish?
They do have a diverse roster, I will give you that. Their Women's division is better, only in the sense they can wrestle. Problem is they don't book the Knockouts correctly, so they come off as cheesy. They haven't been the same since Gail vs Kong,and that is a fact. They do have good guys from the Indies, well Wolfe was in the Indies RECENTLY, but Joe and Daniels haven't been there for some time. The most decorated stars? I will give that to Angle, Sting, Hogan, Flair, 3d. If you include RVD in that I might piss myself. He is what a 3 time World Champion? HHH/HBK/Jericho/Taker/CM Punk/Edge all are MULTIPLE time world champs as well, so as I said before the talent is a wash. The best young stars huh? Pretty sure they fired Anderson, Hardy is a jail sentence waiting to happen, and LASHLEY DOESN"T WORK THERE ANYMORE!!! You should of included the Pope in there, because I could take you semi seriously, but you included The Boss Bobby Lashley? lol. Of course their talent is hungrier, a good bit of them don't have contracts and if they do alot of them make shit for pay, no insurance(same as WWE) and have to pay their way to every show even if they arent' used. RVD at Desitnation X comes to mind. Samoa Joe is easily one of the top 3 talents they have on the whole roster, but where the hell has he been for the last month? Why has Daniels not gotten a shot at the X Division Title? Why are the Nasty Boyz more relivent to the CURRENT tag team pecking order then Beer Money? Please explain that to me. How is that using your talent better? I'm glad you get entertained by 15 backstage segments involving Eric Bischoff, Hulk Hogan, BTLS, Abyssamania(don't get me started on that stupid fucking gimmick) or Jeff Jarrett. They do need better advertising, but they need to climb above a 2.0 in the ratings before Spike would ever THINK about giving them a 2nd show. They didn't even want to put Smackdown on when they had Raw. What makes you think they would put a 2nd show on when the ratings are piss poor? They have a big roster, but not a talented enough roster to evently split up and have 2 shows that draw ratings. It would be like having Raw and ECW, it just wasn't a fair comparision. Son, if you think WWE is going ANYWHERE in the next 20 years, you are delusional. They are a publicly traded company, so they are financially stable. They have name recognition, a brand that people trust, and while their weekly shows might have a lull in quality occasionally(the last 3 weeks have been pretty bad I'll admit) they are going to put on one of the best 5-6 Wrestlemanias EVER this Sunday. I want to see the haters faces when they look at the buyrate for Mania, the ratings for Raw this coming Monday compared to TNA's rating, and then how they CONTINUE their storylines from Mania moving forward, and then they will start fresh storylines that people will become involved in. I understand you are a TNA fan, but keep the slander on the other side of your "line" that you all want us to cross, cuz it's not gonna happen.

 

[Star-ratz]

they are going to put on one of the best 5-6 Wrestlemanias EVER this Sunday.

Well that didn't happen!!

I myself prefer TNA as it makes me smile and it's fun to watch. WWE just seems like a chore to watch at times (ie: Wrestlemania 26) and it's nowhere near as much fun to watch!!

 

[WWE Manster03]

Well that didn't happen!!

I myself prefer TNA as it makes me smile and it's fun to watch. WWE just seems like a chore to watch at times (ie: Wrestlemania 26) and it's nowhere near as much fun to watch!!

Maybe not 5-6th best ever, but I challenge you to run down the card and compare it to the other 25 and tell me it isn't in the top 10-12...It easily made my top 10. It actually ranks as my 7th best ever, with one of the top 5 matches ever.

 

[cod500]

Honestly since Pro wrestling is not a real sport and is meant to entertain, I have to pick WWE, they seem to pull it off better. I see some people calling it the E (and if you want to leave out the wrestling part, what about the world part?) which makes no sense because TNA is not a real sport last time I checked. It too has predetermined outcomes and storylines, hardcore wrestling, sexuality, promos, profanity, over the top characters, and match gimmicks. Seems like entertainment to me and it seems like thy actually try harder than WWE to entertain.They emphasize more on entertaining than "wrasslin" which again is not even competition. I just don't think they do it as well, but it is still ok to watch occasionally on youtube.

TNA has good things that WWE does not have, like a lot of what I just listed. But sometimes it comes off as cheesy or they just try too hard.

 

[DRock99]

WWE vs TNA is kinda like Mac vs PC, one is more popular and the fans love it becuz of it's gimmicks while the other is more efficient on bringing you a better product. WWE has been out for over 50 years so of course they will have a bigger fan base than the fledgling TNA. I'm a die-hard wrestling fan who used to tune in to RAW and Smackdown every week. I LOVED the Monday night wars with WWF vs . But wrestling post 2001 has been on a decline. There's less wrestling on TV unless you get all the PPVs you ONLY have the choices of WWE and TNA. If you're lucky you might catch a few indie circuits. But whether you like or hate the way RAW is going you're still gonna watch. TNA was an off shoot of what was left of and NWA. They actually had potential UNTIL Hogan showed up. Now it's just a mess. if RAW would get rid of the celebrity guest host crap they would be more watchable. and TNA needs to fix it's in-house problems(Vince Russo) and not worry about "being popular" but that just my 2 cents

 

[bretfan316]

You know after watching tonites main event on impact, I think wwe is better cause they don't ever have a wrestler win a title by opening a F@CKING BOX!! That is possibly the dumbest way to ever win a title belt, and there is nothing you can tell me that will change my mind. Wwe is better because they actually do make stars and they have logical storylines. Maybe not the best storylines, but the thing is they are logical, and doesn't insult your intellegence. TNA does stuff so out of the box so they can draw ratings, and that is sad. TNA is relying on stars that wwe made, with the exception of aj styles. Wwe will never do that, cause they can make stars and don't need to rely on other companies stars. They have always been able to take a wrestler and make them a star on their own, and have never needed to steal a top star from another wrestling company. TNA just seems so bush league, and this hogan regime so far (and i said so far, so don't tell me to wait a few months to see what happens, because it's been long enough to have a first impression on them) is a big fat FAILURE! Wwe is better right now plain and simple. There is no argument.

 

[gd]

I think at this point the only reason TNA is seen as better by some is simply the fact that it's something different. The WWE has been pretty formulaic for the past few years and people simply want to see something different. Throw in a few big names, some guys that can do flips, and you have something that is very attractive to some people.

As for the WWE, there are about a million reasons you can point to as it being better. The superior production quality, the multitude of big stars, booking that actually makes sense, etc. I think Wrestlemania may be the biggest advantage of them all. It's such a big event that TNA can't even begin to challenge. Their biggest event, BFG, isn't even 1/10 as big of a deal as that.

 

[psykohurricane]

Personally not to continue my bashing of TNA that i've been doing for the last 4 month but what makes WWE better then TNA is pretty much the booking. Just look how everything was book on RAW and Smackdown for since the beginning of the year. Long drawn out feud, great matches they doesn'T necessarily involve the make the story advance even if they don'T face each other week in and week out, good comedy segments to change the mood, pretty much everything wrestling should be. The best exemple i could give you is the Cena/Batista feud. 2 guys that pretty much the entire IWC hates but for some strange reason, these 2 guys togethers did a tremendous job at putting each other over and make this feud work in the eyes of the fans. Batista is probably the best heel in the WWE and Cena is Cena, always good but somehow when you put him with batista, it's like he's better then he should be. It's like when the Rock wrestles HHH or Stone Cold.

Tna on the other end have the talents but they don'T use them properly. I could give you so many exemple of bad booking on TNA's part but i going to give only one exemple and that from last night's show. The 8 knockout lockbox Challenge. If there ever been a way to kill a division TNA found the way, this was such a complicated mess that nobody came out of this looking better. Madison Rayne look really weak by losing to Tara that quickly, Daffney and HAmada looked like an afterthough because Daffney won during the commercial break, ODB lost all credibilty see had left for losing to Velvet Sky and Lacey Von Erich pretty much look like she always somebody that shouldn'T be in the ring. Just look at the botch spot she did to end the match, even Tazz and Tenay didn'T know what was going on and were trying to call something about that spot. Thank goodness Angelina love ended that match because it was horrible. Then to make matter worst, instead of giving the belt back to Tara, they gave the belt to Angelina who wasn'T able to be Tara the last time she wrestled her and Tara get Poison back. Velvet forget that Angelina is the new champ and challenge Angelina to a non title match and Daffney is forced to strip in the ring to one of the worst music in the world only to have Lacey beat her and take Daffney Place before getting forgotten in the ring because something was going on with Tara and Angelina.

That's bad booking and it's been like this for a while in TNA, BAd Booking decision that don't make sense and just destroy the product and the talented roster they have. Where Samoa Joe i really would love to know, how about why Sting turn Heel, that mystery isn'T solved yet, how about why Hogan who is supposed to be in charge let's Bischoff pretty much screw everybody over and doesn'T do a thing to stop him.

That's why the WWE is better, the product might be boring but at less it makes sense and i don'T have to be a brain surgeon to understand what's going on like i do with TNA.

 

[I Suck Ass]

I have watchedTNA a few times during the commercials of Raw and kept it on there for a while. TNA has a lot of good, young talent but they talk way too much. And what's with the old guys getting all the cam time? Let your wrestlers do the talking, like WWE. Edge and Triple H are 2 of the best talkers. TNA doesn't really have one. Bischoff maybe, or Hogan, but that's it. Also, TNA has a 10-minute time limit on their matches. So if an awesome PPV quality match is happening, you will stop it at 10 minutes? Stupid. The one thing that used to be really cool about TNA was the 6-sided ring. That was an awesome idea, and they took it away. But overall, TNA would be improved if they kept the talk down and the action up. Total Nonstop Action? More like Total Nonstop Talking.