When is TNA a "success"?

[One to Remember]

What? They need a new set because that's totally what makes you succesful, the iMPACT Zone is fine.


Lethal Lockdown, held in Gainesville Georgia, looked nothing like the iMPACT zone. Bound For Glory to be held in Daytona Beach, will look nothing like the iMPACT Zone. And I still fail to see how this makes you a success or not. If there's a ring it's wrestling.

Gainesville? What is Gainesvlle compared to Hotlanta?!

The impact zone is cheap and generic. Its almost a carbon copy of the old Battledome set up lmao. But the reason why the set is important is because tna must promote a "big time feel" to let the viewer or random channel surfer know that this is a quality show and a top notch orginization.

First impressions are everything and to excel in buissness yu must know the psychology of consumers.. duh..

What? What sort of bullshit are you trying to pull here?

We saw WCW try to lure Mike Awesome over with the ECW title belt still in hand. We saw Medusa dispose of the WWF Women's title on an iconic moment of Nitro. Who in Stamford is truly clamoring for TNA talent that bad? WWE hasn't even tried to lure top TNA names or TNA champions over. WWE has brushed TNA offits shoulder like dirt. We saw the WWF raid the NWA, AWA, and ECW thought quite notably.

What do you call guys like AJ, Joe and Matt Morgan going over guys like Kurt Angle, Booker T, Kevin Nash and Sting?

TNA was soo scared the originals would felt they implemented that classic veteran crutch to bolster the. Withut veterans, originals would have no TNA to rep is how they made it seem to some observers. Thats trifling.

This isn't even something TNA can control, TNA could put out the best product in years, that's not gonna stop Vince McMahon from doing his best to cut them down. How would this measure TNA's success? If anything, the fact that the WWE never acknowledges accomplishments in TNA, but was quite happy to talk about CM Punk being from ROH says that TNA has had success.

No it doesn't it says ROH has risen to some form of prominence and that CM Punk althought new to the WWE Universe does have credentials from ROH that will be honored in WWE.. The WWF has a longhistory of using star power that it did not create. Hogan, Andre, Luger, Flair (c.1992), Steiners, Road Warriors, and Goldberh all came in strong. Name me one TNA worker that could come inwith steam..Keep in mind sometimes this IS NOT EVEN IN WWE'S CONTROL.

What? Oh yeah the WWE does that all the time, I mean none of their stars came from other promotions. Oh wait yes they did, this is just stupid, Not to mention that years ago TNA did this all the time, every week for years. Oh so that means they've fulfilled that criteria.

people outside of wrestling know who Stone Cold, the ROck, Hulk Hogan are, youcan thank the WWF, people know who Ric Flair is you can thank WCW, Bruno, the WWWF, Savage, Andre, household names. As far as WWE originals are concerned that status is determined by a combination of things, tenure, prominence, and recognition being the most vital. Booker T is a WCW guy even thought he was in the GWF, Douglas is an ECW guy eventhough he was in WCW and the UWF, Martel and Hennig are both WWF guys even though they were both AWA World champs respectively.

As far as the earlyyears of TNA which i followed and my understanding of most organizations i found it bizarre that TNA had an NWA title as its top title and NWA tag titles as its own. It tried to capitalize on the NWA name even when there was nohing left of the NWA to leach off of. Even when ECW, WWE, and WCW were members/subordinates of the NWA they did their own thing and had real identities.

It made even lesser since because i believe looking at who founded TNA that the USWA was actually the forerunner to TNA! Why not tout that lineage? The NWA had its belt thrown down by ECW and WCW tried to make it a puppet organization, it got stunted on so badly even by 2002 it was still a debacle..

a regional base? Do you mean a fanbase? If that's the case they've got an international one.

no.. i mean an area where it can retreat to when things are going bad, an area where it has concrete footing. If the WWF had failed to go national it still had the New England, ECW had the tristate area, WCW had the south, USWA had memphis, AWA had the twin cities. Where can TNA always go when the getting gets rough?
ROH also is better off because it has solid footing. It has a following and a form of revenue only older organazations have. Once ROH can capitalize on HDnet it will surpass tna because it was never in danger of really going under in the embryonic stages on the indies. It can only add to past success, TNA is always near that ledge.

Google their highest attendance record, it was at a baseball stadium, looks like you fail again.

why doesnt that baseball stadium be the new TNA Impact Zone then? Could they sale it out 9 more times in a row?
WCW was able to beat the WWF in the ratings when Goldberg cleanly defeated Hogan. It did not mean those ratings should be use to debunk analysis showing WCW was failing and was in decline..

I'm sorry, what the fuck does this even mean? What TNA has to put the WWE out of business to be a success? So the whole time during 96-98 when the WWF was getting their ass served to them on a weekly basis they weren't a successful company? Seriously, this is just pathetic on your part.

No but business is warfare, its dog eat dog usually. TNA does not have to put WWE out of business it must be able to stave off attacks from WWE though. What would happen if SD came back to thursdays? From 1996-8 WCW couldnt damage the WWF enough to cause USA to dump Raw is War. WCW couldnt put the WWF out of business and vice versa ever. If they both had shows in neighboring towns either company could survice that. If WWE began to try to encircle tna it would falter. If WWE tried to bring its prices down to lure TNA fans from whatever facility their show was in it would destroy TNA. TNAcant do that to WWE. That tactic isn't theirs to have yet. If TNA went somewhere WWE could just follow them with one brand perod and have the other brand just continue touring as usual.

P.S. Stop saying "the" WWE, even thought it was the WWF once the the ran away with the F chief. Its english law.

 

[dman1373]

When they can do house shows with more people than roh or chikara, when they can get a stable 2.0, when they don't have to constintly bring in new management, when they can make a hefty profit, when their ppv rival those of wcw when it was on its death bed, when they fire russo, when they make stars that rival those of the dying wcw, and write a fucking good impact. Only after all of that will they indeed be a success.

 

[Rayne]

How soon you forget.

WCW.

Because no major company would ever piss away tons of money on a subsidiary in the hopes that a cash infusion would turn things around. Nope. Never happened anywhere in the history of business. Ever. Anywhere. (Recommended reading: "The Mythical Man Month". It's a bit of a thick read, and it's geared towards software engineers, but the premise holds- adding manpower and money to a project without a plan merely adds more manpower and money to a project without improving the project.)

I know TNA can spend money. And, having an example from less than ten years ago of another company who did the exact same thing (except being better at it), I don't find it too hard to believe that someone would repeat their mistake. Because no one who was successful in one business EVER failed in another business. Nope. Hasn't happened, anywhere, ever. *nod*

And as we all know, a wrestling company would never put a show on TV if it wasn't profitable. (There's a link there for you, but whoever chose the default color scheme for this board obviously didn't want links to be all that visible.)

After the whole "court law" thing (btw- ), I think it's pretty safe to say I'm done here. You're grasping at straws and repeating what you say. I answer a question, you ignore it and act like I didn't say anything. You're not looking to debate, you're trying to construct impossible standards of proof, and then acting as if the absence of a negative proves a positive. (Those are both called "logical fallacies". Ask your teacher parents, who have obviously never heard of the distinction between what a college professor gets paid and what a kindergarten teacher gets paid, and thus obviously must not be that good at what they do, to explain debate to you, right after they finish your drastically stunted lessons in history, ethics, and most importantly, economics.)

When you're ready to stop insisting that a table doesn't stand when you yank the legs off and pretend they were never there, maybe we can go about this again, but this has gotten far too circular for me.

Don't bother responding if you're just doing quote wars again, because I know you only do that because you can't challenge arguments, and can't even really challenge points. Your whole strategy relies upon convincing the reader that if my individual point can't be 100% proven beyond any possible challenge, your point must be correct. You'll convince like-minded idiots that way, absolutely. If you want to take the bottom 50%, you may have them. But without a coherent strategy to prove your point (and, yes, after what you're insisting out of me to prove my point, the standard of proof for you is going to be a bit harder than "Bob Carter would NEVER spend money if he wasn't making it, nuh-uh, because no one ever does that"), you don't really have anything to bring to the discussion.

 

[shattered dreams]

For those saying a steady 2.0 will equal success I would like to know what you think about smackdown because it has not been pulling in a steady 2.0 for a while. On the making money point, I tend to agree but that is almost impossible to measure like people have brought up. I see some of the other things like live shows or traveling as nice additions that might be a means to an end but definitely not pre-requisites to reach the next level. If they can make money and grow the rating better without the additional expenses those things add then that is fine with me. I do eventually see the travel as something that they will likely need for the built in marketing opportunities.

 

[Reddannihilation]

How soon you forget.

WCW.

Because no major company would ever piss away tons of money on a subsidiary in the hopes that a cash infusion would turn things around. Nope. Never happened anywhere in the history of business. Ever. Anywhere. (Recommended reading: "The Mythical Man Month". It's a bit of a thick read, and it's geared towards software engineers, but the premise holds- adding manpower and money to a project without a plan merely adds more manpower and money to a project without improving the project.)

I'm not sure if you remember but as soon as WCW stopped delivering ratings that Time-Warner considered good they pulled the plug. What you're implying is that TNA has gone literally 8 years without turning a profit and the company funding them hasn't noticed this? Not to mention that WCW was funded by a television company as opposed to an energy company who have far less room to make money from TNA. Seriously, explain how you assume Panda is that dumb?

I know TNA can spend money. And, having an example from less than ten years ago of another company who did the exact same thing (except being better at it), I don't find it too hard to believe that someone would repeat their mistake. Because no one who was successful in one business EVER failed in another business. Nope. Hasn't happened, anywhere, ever. *nod*

You still haven't answered my question, do you think that an experienced buisness man would let a subsidary company cost him money for 8 years and not put a stop to it? WCW and TNA aren't in the same situation, when WCW spent money they had to rely on ratings, once those stopped their backers started cutting things. But WCW's financial situation was already bad by the time Time-Warner questioned the ratings, in TNA's situation Panda isn't going to give two shits about ratings, they need hard cash and if TNA hasn't delivered any in 8 years, how could any argument be made to keep it? Answer that.

And as we all know, a wrestling company would never put a show on TV if it wasn't profitable. (There's a link there for you, but whoever chose the default color scheme for this board obviously didn't want links to be all that visible.)

Unfortunately what you're trying to do here isn't working. Read the first setence of that wiki article. "The popularity of WCW in 1996 and 1997 allowed for the creation of a new show, which became WCW Thunder."

Thunder was created in 1998. When WCW was doing fantastically, so actually that would imply that TNA is doing quite well. Networks are seeing success with iMPACT! and have decided to add more to the TNA line up, it has to be popular because Spike wouldn't put a show on if they didn't have solid reason to belive it would draw. No network would. Nice try though, if Thunder had been made when WCW was in a decline, you might have had a point.

After the whole "court law" thing (btw- ), I think it's pretty safe to say I'm done here. You're grasping at straws and repeating what you say.I answer a question, you ignore it and act like I didn't say anything.

You haven't answered anything. All you've tried to do is take examples from WCW that don't sync up with TNA at all and try to use that as justification. It's not working.

You're not looking to debate, you're trying to construct impossible standards of proof, and then acting as if the absence of a negative proves a positive.

No, I'm asking you to provide even the slightest amount of evidence that anything you've said holds any truth to it. I'm sorry, if it's too hard then that means one thing, stop saying things you have no way to back up. It's that simple.

(Those are both called "logical fallacies". Ask your teacher parents, who have obviously never heard of the distinction between what a college professor gets paid and what a kindergarten teacher gets paid, and thus obviously must not be that good at what they do, to explain debate to you, right after they finish your drastically stunted lessons in history, ethics, and most importantly, economics.)

A college professor and a teacher aren't the same thing. Like literally, they're two completely different jobs.

Don't bother responding if you're just doing quote wars again, because I know you only do that because you can't challenge arguments, and can't even really challenge points.

It says a great deal about what your argument, when the best thing you can come up with, is that how I respond to it, is some sort of offence. "Oh stop multi-quoting me, you're taking individual points and proving how each one is inaccurate", I'm an analysis sort of person, sorry I have the ability to take your points and explain how each one is wrong. I mean seriously, from what you've been complaining about regarding multi-quote, it seems to me that your strategy to structuring arguments is "cobble together some ideas and slap them in a text block, if someone separates the ideas tell 'em they suck and should have to address it as the text block or not at all".

Seriously, you could at least try making sense.

Your whole strategy relies upon convincing the reader that if my individual point can't be 100% proven beyond any possible challenge, your point must be correct. You'll convince like-minded idiots that way, absolutely. If you want to take the bottom 50%, you may have them. But without a coherent strategy to prove your point (and, yes, after what you're insisting out of me to prove my point, the standard of proof for you is going to be a bit harder than "Bob Carter would NEVER spend money if he wasn't making it, nuh-uh, because no one ever does that"), you don't really have anything to bring to the discussion.

Every example you have used has been debunked. You can't offer anything to support your claims, literally nothing. Is it so hard to provide anything to back up what you say? Just accept that you have spent this entire time, spouting bullshit that you've got no way to support. You have nothing to support what you're saying, NOTHING.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Yes, I'm terribly sorry I don't have time to reply to every person as soon as they post.

The impact zone is cheap and generic. Its almost a carbon copy of the old Battledome set up lmao. But the reason why the set is important is because tna must promote a "big time feel" to let the viewer or random channel surfer know that this is a quality show and a top notch orginization.

First impressions are everything and to excel in buissness yu must know the psychology of consumers.. duh..

So what? You have some mass consumer market report that says everybody wants to see a "big time feel" whatever the fuck that even is. Tell you something I have seen, complaints about the WWE taking the character out of their sets when they switched to the generic HD sets. In fact it's funny you call the iMPACT Zone generic, what other wrestling organisation sets up their shows like that? I'd say it's rather unique.

We saw WCW try to lure Mike Awesome over with the ECW title belt still in hand. We saw Medusa dispose of the WWF Women's title on an iconic moment of Nitro. Who in Stamford is truly clamoring for TNA talent that bad?

First you're stupid, Madusa doing the women's title belt drop, minor moment in history. Mike Awesome wasn't lured over in an attempt to destroy the ECW belt, he was just brought over. The fact that he had the belt was due to Heyman not paying him. They never even addressed the ECW belt on WCW, beyond saying "he's a champion in another organisation". Beyond that the Women's title issue occured when WCW started to slaughter RAW. What you're suggesting would make more sense if the US champion from WWE came to TNA, not the other way around. Beside that, the days of champions literally getting to hold onto the belts outside of the workplace is gone.

WWE hasn't even tried to lure top TNA names or TNA champions over.

Instead they've empolyed TNA mid-carders, you know Evan Bourne, CM Punk, Chris Harris, Low-Ki, Monty Brown, Consequences Creed, Ron Killings. etc. Not to mention they've offered guys like AJ and Joe contracts before and been told to fuck themselves.

TNA was soo scared the originals would felt they implemented that classic veteran crutch to bolster the.

I highlight this solely because the actual sentence doesn't mean anything.

Withut veterans, originals would have no TNA to rep is how they made it seem to some observers.

Ok, the first time I seriously thought you'd made some typos, but what are you actually saying?

No it doesn't it says ROH has risen to some form of prominence and that CM Punk althought new to the WWE Universe does have credentials from ROH that will be honored in WWE..

Oh God you fuckwit, they didn't honor his credentials, they referred to him as coming from a no-name backyard fed in chicago. Literally, on screen.

The WWF has a longhistory of using star power that it did not create. Hogan, Andre, Luger, Flair (c.1992), Steiners, Road Warriors, and Goldberh all came in strong. Name me one TNA worker that could come inwith steam..Keep in mind sometimes this IS NOT EVEN IN WWE'S CONTROL.

Monty Brown, Ron Killings, Low-Ki, Evan Bourne, CM Punk.

people outside of wrestling know who Stone Cold, the ROck, Hulk Hogan are, youcan thank the WWF, people know who Ric Flair is you can thank WCW, Bruno, the WWWF, Savage, Andre, household names.

So?

As far as WWE originals are concerned that status is determined by a combination of things, tenure, prominence, and recognition being the most vital. Booker T is a WCW guy even thought he was in the GWF, Douglas is an ECW guy eventhough he was in WCW and the UWF, Martel and Hennig are both WWF guys even though they were both AWA World champs respectively.

I'm still trying to work out what your point actually is.

As far as the earlyyears of TNA which i followed and my understanding of most organizations i found it bizarre that TNA had an NWA title as its top title and NWA tag titles as its own.

Because they were members of the NWA.

It tried to capitalize on the NWA name even when there was nohing left of the NWA to leach off of.

No, they were literally a part of the NWA.

Even when ECW, WWE, and WCW were members/subordinates of the NWA they did their own thing and had real identities.

ECW didn't develop an identity until Shane Douglas threw the NWA title in the trash and started developing a non-mainstream style of wrestling. WCW used NWA titles for years before leaving the NWA.

It made even lesser since because i believe looking at who founded TNA that the USWA was actually the forerunner to TNA! Why not tout that lineage?

Do you speak any English? Honestly re-read that sentence and explain to me what the hell you are trying to say? You mentioned some random shit about the USWA? That company has nothing to do with TNA, never will either.

i mean an area where it can retreat to when things are going bad, an area where it has concrete footing. If the WWF had failed to go national it still had the New England, ECW had the tristate area, WCW had the south, USWA had memphis, AWA had the twin cities. Where can TNA always go when the getting gets rough?

Orlando, Florida and Nashville, Tennessee.

ROH also is better off because it has solid footing.

Their current champion is supposedly in talks to leave and every major star they've made has left them. Solid footing.

It has a following and a form of revenue only older organazations have.

Dude, seriously? ROH has a following and TNA doesn't? If you can explain to me how both ROH and TNA started in the same year and yet ROH is nowhere near as big as TNA, yet somehow TNA has no following and ROH does? Explain that, please.

Once ROH can capitalize on HDnet it will surpass tna because it was never in danger of really going under in the embryonic stages on the indies.

Isn't ROH getting a 0.5 average rating? Also, ROH nearly went under when it turned out the founder was a pedophile and got the old Chris Hansen treatment back in 2004.

It can only add to past success, TNA is always near that ledge.

TNA is doing a lot better than ROH.

why doesnt that baseball stadium be the new TNA Impact Zone then? Could they sale it out 9 more times in a row?

Because TNA's headquarters are located in Orlando. It costs less to run TNA out of the iMPACT Zone. They can't book that stadium for every week, literally no one can book a stadium each week of the year, because other people use it. How are you not getting that, the iMPACT Zone is a very cost effective way to present TNA's product.

WCW was able to beat the WWF in the ratings when Goldberg cleanly defeated Hogan. It did not mean those ratings should be use to debunk analysis showing WCW was failing and was in decline..

And? This means what exactly? When Goldberg beat Hogan WCW wasn't in a decline, WCW wasn't in a decline until someone saw fit to put Kevin Sullivan in charge, knowing full well that Kevin Sullivan couldn't book for shit.

No but business is warfare, its dog eat dog usually. TNA does not have to put WWE out of business it must be able to stave off attacks from WWE though.

Attacks from the WWE? What? Are they gonna send good ole DX down to Orlando?

What would happen if SD came back to thursdays?

What would happen if Vince McMahon died in a plane crash? Speculation.

From 1996-8 WCW couldnt damage the WWF enough to cause USA to dump Raw is War. WCW couldnt put the WWF out of business and vice versa ever. If they both had shows in neighboring towns either company could survice that.

Exactly, WCW had the WWF begging for their life and still RAW never got cancelled. TNA has no direct threat to them. So it's a non-issue.

If WWE began to try to encircle tna it would falter. If WWE tried to bring its prices down to lure TNA fans from whatever facility their show was in it would destroy TNA.

Which is precisely why TNA is smart enough to avoid that sort of thing. You think it's a coincedence that TNA's PPV's don't compete with the WWE's directly? You think it's a surprise that a TNA House show is never in the same area as a WWE one? TNA is smart.

TNAcant do that to WWE. That tactic isn't theirs to have yet. If TNA went somewhere WWE could just follow them with one brand perod and have the other brand just continue touring as usual.

See above, TNA are smart enough to read WWE's tour schedule and plan around it. That's how they've been doing it for years.

P.S. Stop saying "the" WWE, even thought it was the WWF once the the ran away with the F chief. Its english law.

Every week, John Cena calls it the WWE. Also, this "Its english law." Is so fucking hilarious.

 

[One to Remember]

So what? You have some mass consumer market report that says everybody wants to see a "big time feel" whatever the fuck that even is. Tell you something I have seen, complaints about the WWE taking the character out of their sets when they switched to the generic HD sets. In fact it's funny you call the iMPACT Zone generic, what other wrestling organisation sets up their shows like that? I'd say it's rather unique.

Maybe generic was the wrong word. Low quality? Vintage? Low budget. Yeah that was a lame move on WWE's end but you can still look at that titantron and see that this is the A league, the big show. Plus that whole look in the I.Z. is some kickback to the early 2000s. I mean its disturbing how TNA seems to adopt WCW's style and etc. That to me is tiresome..

First you're stupid, Madusa doing the women's title belt drop, minor moment in history. Mike Awesome wasn't lured over in an attempt to destroy the ECW belt, he was just brought over. The fact that he had the belt was due to Heyman not paying him. They never even addressed the ECW belt on WCW, beyond saying "he's a champion in another organisation".

I know he wasn't but it would deffinently had been a major coup and a ratings bonanza to see an episode of Nitro with the ECW championship being defended or defaced by the ECW champion. It does not matter why Awesome still had the belt the point is he did.

Instead they've empolyed TNA mid-carders, you know Evan Bourne, CM Punk, Chris Harris, Low-Ki, Monty Brown, Consequences Creed, Ron Killings. etc. Not to mention they've offered guys like AJ and Joe contracts before and been told to fuck themselves.

Yeah maybe those two blew Stamford off but we don't know the reasoning for it. Could it be because they know they might not leave the midcard level or is It because they simply aren't impressed by WWE? As I recall Xpac turned down WWE employment too.. Evan Bourne isn't going anywhere, Monty was shown the door, and R-Truth is slightly less sorry as K-Kwik..

I highlight this solely because the actual sentence doesn't mean anything.

TNA was soo scared that their originals would fail they resorted that classic veteran crutch to bolster themselves. Without veterans, originals wouldn't even have a TNA at all to even rep, because the veterans kept it going. that's how it would seem to some observers. Originals owe the vets..*

Because they were members of the NWA.

TNA was trying TO BE the NWA. WCW always had its own titles. TNA had its heavyweight title simply be the NWA's.

Do you speak any English? Honestly re-read that sentence and explain to me what the hell you are trying to say?

I am saying TNA had no links to the NWA but tried to tap int its lineage. Jerry Jarett was involved with the USWA it would had made more sense to have him try to buy back the USWA then turn that into TNA rather then having TNA try to promote itself as the new soul of the NWA.

Their current champion is supposedly in talks to leave and every major star they've made has left them. Solid footing.

Slow and steady wins the race. TNA's problems stem from how fast its trying to move. When you go a hundred miles an hour thats fine, when you veer off course your gonna wish you were going 30. ROH has slowly but surely reached business stability. Their main income was at one point video sales, that shows the quality of the shows they put on if thats how they were staying afloat through such traditional means. Just imagine what ROH can do with a tvdeal after what its done with DVD sales..

This means what exactly? When Goldberg beat Hogan WCW wasn't in a decline

it was in decline because it was losing the monday night war which lead to the brass beggining to panic. WCW management obviously began tripping as they always do so the ratings were the catalyst for the anarchy behind he scenes.

What would happen if Vince McMahon died in a plane crash? Speculation.

come on we know WWE launching an attack is inenvitable.. We know that SD coming back to thursdays would prove devastating.

Which is precisely why TNA is smart enough to avoid that sort of thing. You think it's a coincedence that TNA's PPV's don't compete with the WWE's directly? You think it's a surprise that a TNA House show is never in the same area as a WWE one? TNA is smart.

My oint again is with several brands wwe could merely use one to randomly show up near a TNA Live event. If TNA can wait for WWE to reveal its travel sceadule then sure the reverse can occur with WWE.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Maybe generic was the wrong word. Low quality? Vintage? Low budget. Yeah that was a lame move on WWE's end but you can still look at that titantron and see that this is the A league, the big show. Plus that whole look in the I.Z. is some kickback to the early 2000s. I mean its disturbing how TNA seems to adopt WCW's style and etc. That to me is tiresome..

Yeah, what you're saying makes more sense now, but still I don't see how it relates to success. I preferred the old style of ring and arena set up to what you get these days.

I know he wasn't but it would deffinently had been a major coup and a ratings bonanza to see an episode of Nitro with the ECW championship being defended or defaced by the ECW champion. It does not matter why Awesome still had the belt the point is he did. Yeah maybe those two blew Stamford off but we don't know the reasoning for it. Could it be because they know they might not leave the midcard level or is It because they simply aren't impressed by WWE? As I recall Xpac turned down WWE employment too.. Evan Bourne isn't going anywhere, Monty was shown the door, and R-Truth is slightly less sorry as K-Kwik..

It wouldn't have had any effect at all on the ratings, no one watched ECW. Also I'd hardly say Evan Bourne isn't going anywhere, he's been in PPV matches that offer a guaranteed title win and wrestled matches against top stars.

TNA was soo scared that their originals would fail they resorted that classic veteran crutch to bolster themselves. Without veterans, originals wouldn't even have a TNA at all to even rep, because the veterans kept it going. that's how it would seem to some observers. Originals owe the vets..

Along with every company in the world, you think the WWE would succeed without guys like Undertaker, HHH and Michaels to push the young guys. Having veteran performers is a requirement of all companies.

*TNA was trying TO BE the NWA.

No they weren't for one, NWA is an organisation of multiple indie feds, TNA was not trying to be a governing body for multiple organizations.

WCW always had its own titles. TNA had its heavyweight title simply be the NWA's.

No they didn't, not until WCW separated from the NWA and even then they kept both sets of belts until they finally phased out the NWA. Same as TNA they kept the belts until they phased them out.

I am saying TNA had no links to the NWA but tried to tap int its lineage.

TNA was a member of the NWA, that means you get access to the belts. Same as how NWA Wildside does it now. Simple as that, TNA's link to the NWA was that they were members of the NWA.

Jerry Jarett was involved with the USWA it would had made more sense to have him try to buy back the USWA then turn that into TNA rather then having TNA try to promote itself as the new soul of the NWA.

How would that have made sense? "Oh hey Jerry Jarrett instead of our company being a member of the NWA, how about you try and buy the USWA and we'll have TNA become the USWA." I seriously don't get how you think TNA being part of the NWA when it began was bad.

Slow and steady wins the race. TNA's problems stem from how fast its trying to move. When you go a hundred miles an hour thats fine, when you veer off course your gonna wish you were going 30. ROH has slowly but surely reached business stability. Their main income was at one point video sales, that shows the quality of the shows they put on if thats how they were staying afloat through such traditional means. Just imagine what ROH can do with a tvdeal after what its done with DVD sales..

Slow and steady is great until it stops going. ROH has to go slow because as soon as their wrestlers pick up steam someone snatches them away. TNA has business stability, their main income was weekly PPV's after they sold well enough they convinced a network to give them a show and things have just gone up since there. I don't see what was un-traditional about TNA, they built up an audience got given a tv deal. Pretty fucking effective from where I'm standing.

it was in decline because it was losing the monday night war which lead to the brass beggining to panic. WCW management obviously began tripping as they always do so the ratings were the catalyst for the anarchy behind he scenes.

And that point in time the WWF was winning back some ground but in 98 no one though either company was going out of business. Things weren't in a decline until people started leaving, complaining about the terrible state the company was in, people stopped attending shows and their airtime started being cut back.

come on we know WWE launching an attack is inenvitable..

Do we? I thought WWE's plan was to ignore it. Pray tell how would they go about attacking them?

We know that SD coming back to thursdays would prove devastating.

So would Vince dying in a plane crash, doesn't really mean anything because the chances of either event happening are low.

My oint again is with several brands wwe could merely use one to randomly show up near a TNA Live event. If TNA can wait for WWE to reveal its travel sceadule then sure the reverse can occur with WWE.

They couldn't "randomly" show up at an event, they'd have to plan it months in advance. The difference is WWE releases their schedule a lot earlier. This tour they've done in Australia was planned and advertised over a year ago. TNA are very much aware that competing with WWE in terms of live events is a bad idea, so they don't do it.

 

[One to Remember]

Yeah, what you're saying makes more sense now, but still I don't see how it relates to success. I preferred the old style of ring and arena set up to what you get these days.

I know I watched wrestling before this but the oldest longest memory i can remember is me channel surfing and coming across TNT and seeing that Nitro set, massive and flaming. This was c.1995. I was just blown away by the set up and the size of the crowd and the arena. I never before that watching Saturday Night seen that energy. Thats when i truly became hooked to wrestling, it was more then the other childhood infatuations of the era, power rangers fighting megazords, Pokemon stickers, tamagachis, etc. I still watch wrestling to this day. I don't even say it to be mean I just feel like feds on that level should have certain caliber sets the same way certain companies require suits. Buff Bagwell went into this issue in general but the posters will probably have a field day with me quoting that youtube video lol

It wouldn't have had any effect at all on the ratings, no one watched ECW. Also I'd hardly say Evan Bourne isn't going anywhere, he's been in PPV matches that offer a guaranteed title win and wrestled matches against top stars.

We've been down this road before and I would say the most agonizing example to me is the fumbling of Shelton Benjamin. Christian, Regal, RVD, Khali AND Taz , hell even Bubba Ray were in similar situations. Its been seen time and time again. the new kid, high flyer, making a quick impact on the established guys just to only be a flash in the pan. WWE has a very long history of doing that.
The way to say it is wrestling was like our duopaly of a political system. ECW was always the 3rd party, but where as you say they were Ralph Nader I say they were more comparable to say Ross Perot. If you will recall during this era most dream matches, most interpromotional hypothetical fueds ALWAYS involved ECW. I FIRST LEARNED about ECW through Pro Wrestling Illustrated when they were doing some computer tourney and kept feeding in ECW guys and thats when i started to look into it. Wrestling always had a big three for most eras. It does not matter if ECW was a pretty low 3rd place finisher it ays a whole lot to be recognized with two juggernouts going all out.

Along with every company in the world, you think the WWE would succeed without guys like Undertaker, HHH and Michaels to push the young guys. Having veteran performers is a requirement of all companies.

The point of the matter is WCW did nothing with Mark Callous other then brand him "mean", WCW did nothing with Terra Ryzing other then give him a goofy play on words name, the AWA perhaps made the rockers but Michaels' success is from turning into HBK. Those are all WWF creations even if tats not where they started. I don't mean veterans in the sense you think, i mean names established before 2002. The WWWF had Pedro Morales, Bruno Sammartino, they weren't trying to live of of Pat O'Connor, Lou Thesz, or Mad Dog Vachon. They were always depending on guys that had already been to too many companies period and had been used up.

No they weren't for one, NWA is an organisation of multiple indie feds, TNA was not trying to be a governing body for multiple organizations.

Yes that is what the NWA is but a good deal of people don't understand that. TNA was trying to get press and recognition by using some title that was 54 years old because TNA was only est. in 2002. TNA was using the NWA title because people remembered the name and the ECW incident, and WCW having it, and it being defended on TV during the '80s, etc. TNA was from its start trying to piggyback. They are always trying to utilize that last bit of dwendling steam from others to try to gain momentum.

WCW was founded in 1990/91, There was a WCW champ from that date to right before WCW's withdrawal in September of '93. The WWE title dates to 1963 even though WWE had rejoined the NWA and had been apart of the NWA its title remained paramount. They thought they could be WCW by tryngto strong arm the NWA but they didn't have the muscle to flex.

How would that have made sense? "Oh hey Jerry Jarrett instead of our company being a member of the NWA, how about you try and buy the USWA and we'll have TNA become the USWA." I seriously don't get how you think TNA being part of the NWA when it began was bad.

Jerry Jarrett was involved in the USWA and was owner. The USWA has history, their tag title, their heavyweight title, etc. The Jarretts already had their own heritage, why bother to in the year 2002 try to tap into the NWA when the NWA title means nothing. You know his motivation was to try to make a history because even though 8 years has past 2002 aint historical. Everyone values a long history to look back at that is the only reason TNA used the NWA, TNA never needed the NWA. You know this. Whats there titles from 2007? Those are babies, they dont hav a rich history, just too new, so post good ol' days..

Slow and steady is great until it stops going. ROH has to go slow because as soon as their wrestlers pick up steam someone snatches them away. TNA has business stability, their main income was weekly PPV's after they sold well enough they convinced a network to give them a show and things have just gone up since there.

They should look into the concept of a contract. ..
If you have he option of running weekly PPVs in place of a free show on run downed networks and a 2nd rate cable network why would you ever stop selling weekly PPVs? The well was running dry aye?

And that point in time the WWF was winning back some ground but in 98 no one though either company was going out of business. Things weren't in a decline until people started leaving, complaining about the terrible state the company was in, people stopped attending shows and their airtime started being cut back.

Neither one went out of business. WCW had higher standards to meet because duh their last line of defense, Ted Turner wasn't even in power anymore. You realize he only thing that could keep WCW on a network that wasn't trying to promote that type of thing would have to be kiler ratings EVERY time. No one but WCW had some wrestling shunning organazation breathing down their neck every damn day. Thats why when things began to slip the management went haywire andit just opened the flood gates. WCW wasn't even permitted one strike. It wasn't owned by some ex referee or valet or antiquated wrestler or some circus promoter, WCW had big wigs in the real business world to answer to everyday.

So would Vince dying in a plane crash, doesn't really mean anything because the chances of either event happening are low.

that would have no effect, we are out of the Mr. McMahon era, his children already know what to do, its no longer a privitely traded company, there is already a plan and his vision is passe anyways. If SD is moving how do you know what SyFy will put it on? What was your reaction when you heard rumors SD was LEAVING thursdays? Lots of people want to see it back o that day and it would be killing two birds with 1 stone.

They couldn't "randomly" show up at an event, they'd have to plan it months in advance. The difference is WWE releases their schedule a lot earlier.

It doesn't man that near by vanues might not be empty. It doesn't mean WWE couldn't put a show on there. They have the resources to create brands which is basically partitioning the company, WWE can be in 3maybe four places at once. wwe could find out through other men who is gonna be where, they can ake educated guesses based on past history, if the road trip isn' too far they could simply compete in near by states or counties essentially putting a fork in the road for the traveling fan. Is not that hard to close in on them if they wanted to.

 

[Reddannihilation]

I know I watched wrestling before this but the oldest longest memory i can remember is me channel surfing and coming across TNT and seeing that Nitro set, massive and flaming. This was c.1995. I was just blown away by the set up and the size of the crowd and the arena. I never before that watching Saturday Night seen that energy. Thats when i truly became hooked to wrestling, it was more then the other childhood infatuations of the era, power rangers fighting megazords, Pokemon stickers, tamagachis, etc. I still watch wrestling to this day. I don't even say it to be mean I just feel like feds on that level should have certain caliber sets the same way certain companies require suits. Buff Bagwell went into this issue in general but the posters will probably have a field day with me quoting that youtube video lol

I still don't quite see how this reflects whether TNA is a success or not.

We've been down this road before and I would say the most agonizing example to me is the fumbling of Shelton Benjamin. Christian, Regal, RVD, Khali AND Taz , hell even Bubba Ray were in similar situations. Its been seen time and time again. the new kid, high flyer, making a quick impact on the established guys just to only be a flash in the pan. WWE has a very long history of doing that.

The difference is, Evan Bourne isn't a new comer. He spent years as a jobber, he's more akin to Sean Waltman.

The way to say it is wrestling was like our duopaly of a political system. ECW was always the 3rd party, but where as you say they were Ralph Nader I say they were more comparable to say Ross Perot. If you will recall during this era most dream matches, most interpromotional hypothetical fueds ALWAYS involved ECW. I FIRST LEARNED about ECW through Pro Wrestling Illustrated when they were doing some computer tourney and kept feeding in ECW guys and thats when i started to look into it. Wrestling always had a big three for most eras. It does not matter if ECW was a pretty low 3rd place finisher it ays a whole lot to be recognized with two juggernouts going all out.

So? How does that reflect on TNA?

The point of the matter is WCW did nothing with Mark Callous other then brand him "mean", WCW did nothing with Terra Ryzing other then give him a goofy play on words name, the AWA perhaps made the rockers but Michaels' success is from turning into HBK. Those are all WWF creations even if tats not where they started. I don't mean veterans in the sense you think, i mean names established before 2002.

Yeah and AJ Styles was Air Styles in WCW. He made a name for himself in TNA. What's your point?

The WWWF had Pedro Morales, Bruno Sammartino, they weren't trying to live of of Pat O'Connor, Lou Thesz, or Mad Dog Vachon. They were always depending on guys that had already been to too many companies period and had been used up.

Guys who had been in too many companies? That logic is stupid, Kevin Nash was known for being in the WWF and WCW. So he's been in too many companies? But Hogan who had been in the AWA, Japan and the WWF, then WCW, then the WWF again hadn't been in too many companies?

Yes that is what the NWA is but a good deal of people don't understand that. TNA was trying to get press and recognition by using some title that was 54 years old because TNA was only est. in 2002. TNA was using the NWA title because people remembered the name and the ECW incident, and WCW having it, and it being defended on TV during the '80s, etc. TNA was from its start trying to piggyback. They are always trying to utilize that last bit of dwendling steam from others to try to gain momentum.

TNA was introduced as a member of the NWA because the founder has a massive background in "wrasslin". TNA already had their own title the X title. What exactly is "wrong" with TNA having been a member of the NWA? And how does that pertain to whether they are a success or not?

WCW was founded in 1990/91, There was a WCW champ from that date to right before WCW's withdrawal in September of '93.

They still kept the NWA title. Every promotion in the NWA had their own title, just like ECW still had the ECW title when they were NWA. The point of the NWA title was to be the biggest title and while it was moving around the various promotions. When TNA got there, there weren't any other major promotions. So why go to the trouble of joining the NWA having access to their titles and then make your own anyway when you're not going to have to send the NWA title around the country? What TNA was going to join the NWA and have two world titles? Having two world titles in a single company is ******ed.

Jerry Jarrett was involved in the USWA and was owner. The USWA has history, their tag title, their heavyweight title, etc. The Jarretts already had their own heritage, why bother to in the year 2002 try to tap into the NWA when the NWA title means nothing.

Aside from the fact that the USWA closed down in 1997, what does it matter? How does this pertain to the thread?

You know his motivation was to try to make a history because even though 8 years has past 2002 aint historical. Everyone values a long history to look back at that is the only reason TNA used the NWA, TNA never needed the NWA.

That's completely untrue, using the NWA name allowed TNA to gain a fanbase far faster than all the other independents at the time. Which has allowed TNA to become the #2 organisation. Where are CZW, ROH, Chikara etc?

You know this. Whats there titles from 2007? Those are babies, they dont hav a rich history, just too new, so post good ol' days.

I'm not sure if you realise that you spout out this random crap that doesn't make any sense.

They should look into the concept of a contract. ..

What? Explain, yourself.

If you have he option of running weekly PPVs in place of a free show on run downed networks and a 2nd rate cable network why would you ever stop selling weekly PPVs? The well was running dry aye?

Run $10 weekly ppv's vs. 1 million people watching your national show with the advertising bonuses that come with that. Remind me again how weekly PPV's would've made more money than a tv deal?

Neither one went out of business. WCW had higher standards to meet because duh their last line of defense, Ted Turner wasn't even in power anymore. You realize he only thing that could keep WCW on a network that wasn't trying to promote that type of thing would have to be kiler ratings EVERY time. No one but WCW had some wrestling shunning organazation breathing down their neck every damn day. Thats why when things began to slip the management went haywire andit just opened the flood gates. WCW wasn't even permitted one strike. It wasn't owned by some ex referee or valet or antiquated wrestler or some circus promoter, WCW had big wigs in the real business world to answer to everyday.

Still waiting to find out how this determines whether TNA is a success or not.

that would have no effect, we are out of the Mr. McMahon era, his children already know what to do, its no longer a privitely traded company, there is already a plan and his vision is passe anyways.

Really? Vince dying would have no effect? He's the headwriter, everything they do goes through him, not to mention that the morale shot would be massive. Yes I'm sure it would have no effect at all.

If SD is moving how do you know what SyFy will put it on?

Aside from this; "On April 13, 2010, World Wrestling Entertainment announced that they had signed a multi-year agreement that would move WWE SmackDown from MyNetworkTV to Syfy, starting on October 1, 2010 at 8:00PM Eastern/7:00PM Central."

What was your reaction when you heard rumors SD was LEAVING thursdays?Lots of people want to see it back o that day and it would be killing two birds with 1 stone.

my reaction was something like, "Great, maybe I'll get another show like Veronica Mars in its place".

It doesn't man that near by vanues might not be empty.

And with the amount of time it would take to organise and promote the event and have everything set up any attempt at surprising TNA would be lost.

It doesn't mean WWE couldn't put a show on there. They have the resources to create brands which is basically partitioning the company, WWE can be in 3maybe four places at once.

They can be in two. And thanks to weekly broadcasts neither show is far from the other.

wwe could find out through other men who is gonna be where, they can ake educated guesses based on past history, if the road trip isn' too far they could simply compete in near by states or counties essentially putting a fork in the road for the traveling fan. Is not that hard to close in on them if they wanted to.

They can't do any of it. Just accept it.

Anyway, how does any of what you've said disprove that TNA is a successful company. I'll list it again, TNA's accomplishments:

2nd biggest wrestling company in the USA.
2-hour weekly Flagship program.
1-hour weekly secondary program.
1-hour weekly review program.
Broadcast in over 20 countries worldwide.
Running national and international tours.
Running monthly 3-hour PPV's.
Distributing DVD's both nationally, internationally and online.
Exclusive content deal with youtube, the largest video streaming website in the world.
Enough money to sign big name wrestlers.
Currently drawing over a million viewers each week nationally.
Drawing more viewers internationally.

Now you, tell me; how is TNA not a successful company?

 

[One to Remember]

I still don't quite see how this reflects whether TNA is a success or not.

i suppose TNA could do without it. But if successful is what they feel they are then the set up should reflect that. Dress to impress. Thats just whats up.

The difference is, Evan Bourne isn't a new comer. He spent years as a jobber, he's more akin to Sean Waltman.

I've grown fond of the punk since he stood up to nexus. You seem to know more about him, where is your boy going then? Is he gonna go beyond what hes doing now? What was the poin of you bringing the TNA guys up anyways if WWE has cut them down to size or in the case of k-kwik the old status quo hahaha.

So? How does that reflect on TNA?

the point is ECW was at such a level on its own that an ECW title being disecrated on Nitro would had been major news and would had created major buzz. WWE doesn't think twice about the TNA title.

Yeah and AJ Styles was Air Styles in WCW. He made a name for himself in TNA. What's your point?

the oint is even when WWE is using old veterans to bost ratings atleast they could say those were WWF guys. When WCW was using Flair all the time atleast they could say he was a mid-atlantic guy. TNA's back-up fogies aren't even home grown.

Guys who had been in too many companies? That logic is stupid, Kevin Nash was known for being in the WWF and WCW. So he's been in too many companies? But Hogan who had been in the AWA, Japan and the WWF, then WCW, then the WWF again hadn't been in too many companies?

The point is you got hand me downs. TNA has not gotten hand me downs, they have gotten the left overs from wore out used to pieces down hand me downs. The well has run dry with these guys and we got that clown dixie carter stil trying to send a bucket down to get water.

Its over with, the wrestlers have nothing left to offer. They just came into the game sooo late man. They just missed out. Some of these guys who i really like from the past were really hot when i was younger but they've long since gone cold. I'm not trashing the method of trying to utilize the vets but its just too damn late at this point.

Still waiting to find out how this determines whether TNA is a success or not.

i just dont want anyone to ever think the WWF defeated WCW or put them out of business. It does really pertain to TNA I just felt like you misunderstood why WCW is no more and i felt a need to respond to that.

They still kept the NWA title. Every promotion in the NWA had their own title, just like ECW still had the ECW title when they were NWA. The point of the NWA title was to be the biggest title and while it was moving around the various promotions. When TNA got there, there weren't any other major promotions. So why go to the trouble of joining the NWA having access to their titles and then make your own anyway when you're not going to have to send the NWA title around the country? What TNA was going to join the NWA and have two world titles? Having two world titles in a single company is ******ed.

Eastern Championship Wrestling wasn't trying to suck star power or w/e from the NWA. lOOK I think TNA is the only company in the history of the NWA who actually tried to be the NWA. It tried to make the NWA's identity its own. How is having two titles stupid if the NWA title had other territories to be defended in? Of course the reason TNA isn't in the NWA anymore is because they tried to hijack thee NWA titles.

Why try to pass yourself off as the NWA if the NWA still controls what belongs to it? The NWA actually put their asses in check, something I thought I'd never see them do to any federation EVER again lol. TNA thinking they could control the NWA like WCW did for awile was ******ed.

Aside from the fact that the USWA closed down in 1997, what does it matter? How does this pertain to the thread?

It seems like EVERY TIME anyone argues about TNA it always seems like this whole debate over TNA riding on the coat tails of others is always the biggest controversy. I personally don't respect wannabe-ism. My point is USWA was a Jarrett promotion. It had its moments, it had heritage, some notable names in their titles' lineages, why not just reopen it under the TNA name? Why try to link yourself to the NWA's past when your from 2002? TNA came after the good ol days of wrestling,it has no real history because its not from "back in the day" and that simply whats up.

They can't do any of it. Just accept it.

Anyway, how does any of what you've said disprove that TNA is a successful company. I'll list it again, TNA's accomplishments:

2nd biggest wrestling company in the USA.

Being second in a 2 man race means what exactly? And there is still the monday night impact debacle. If thats what drove them back to thursday why should WWE consider SD moving back to thursday then where will tna have to backtrack to? 4AM on Sunday night competing against pos-t-vac infomercials? pwn3d..

 

[MrHashasheen]

I'm not sure if you remember but as soon as WCW stopped delivering ratings that Time-Warner considered good they pulled the plug.

I was too busy enjoying this back and forth, but I had to correct this. WCW still produced ratings better than most of the programs on Time Warner's channels, it was just new managment decided wrestling wasn't the thing they wanted on their channel.

 

[Reddannihilation]

i suppose TNA could do without it. But if successful is what they feel they are then the set up should reflect that. Dress to impress. Thats just whats up.

And I've still yet to see any reasonable argument that says the iMPACT Zone means TNA aren't successful.

I've grown fond of the punk since he stood up to nexus. You seem to know more about him, where is your boy going then? Is he gonna go beyond what hes doing now? What was the poin of you bringing the TNA guys up anyways if WWE has cut them down to size or in the case of k-kwik the old status quo hahaha.

The WWE hasn't cut them down, Evan Bourne/Matt Sydal never won a match in TNA he was literally the definition of jobber, yet the WWE pushes him. My point being that the WWE borrows from everyone just as much as TNA borrows from them.

the point is ECW was at such a level on its own that an ECW title being disecrated on Nitro would had been major news and would had created major buzz. WWE doesn't think twice about the TNA title.

No it wouldn't, no one watched ECW, that's why they failed on television.

the oint is even when WWE is using old veterans to bost ratings atleast they could say those were WWF guys. When WCW was using Flair all the time atleast they could say he was a mid-atlantic guy. TNA's back-up fogies aren't even home grown.

How the fuck is TNA supposed to have "homegrown legends" they're less than a decade old. This is a completely unfair criticism, TNA hasn't existed for long enough to have "homegrown legends, give it 15 years".

The point is you got hand me downs. TNA has not gotten hand me downs, they have gotten the left overs from wore out used to pieces down hand me downs. The well has run dry with these guys and we got that clown dixie carter stil trying to send a bucket down to get water.

Bullshit, Kevin Nash is not a leftover, none of the legends are. Try again.

Its over with, the wrestlers have nothing left to offer. They just came into the game sooo late man. They just missed out. Some of these guys who i really like from the past were really hot when i was younger but they've long since gone cold. I'm not trashing the method of trying to utilize the vets but its just too damn late at this point. i just dont want anyone to ever think the WWF defeated WCW or put them out of business. It does really pertain to TNA I just felt like you misunderstood why WCW is no more and i felt a need to respond to that.

WCW is no more because of the merger, I never denied that. Ever.

Eastern Championship Wrestling wasn't trying to suck star power or w/e from the NWA. lOOK I think TNA is the only company in the history of the NWA who actually tried to be the NWA. It tried to make the NWA's identity its own. How is having two titles stupid if the NWA title had other territories to be defended in? Of course the reason TNA isn't in the NWA anymore is because they tried to hijack thee NWA titles.

TNA left the NWA in 2004 and were permitted to use the titles until 2007. Try again.

Why try to pass yourself off as the NWA if the NWA still controls what belongs to it? The NWA actually put their asses in check, something I thought I'd never see them do to any federation EVER again lol. TNA thinking they could control the NWA like WCW did for awile was ******ed.

They weren't trying to be the NWA, they were a member of the NWA. The NWA took the titles back 3 years later because TNA refused to have guys like Angle show up at some shitty NWA Wildside Event and lose.

It seems like EVERY TIME anyone argues about TNA it always seems like this whole debate over TNA riding on the coat tails of others is always the biggest controversy. I personally don't respect wannabe-ism. My point is USWA was a Jarrett promotion. It had its moments, it had heritage, some notable names in their titles' lineages, why not just reopen it under the TNA name? Why try to link yourself to the NWA's past when your from 2002? TNA came after the good ol days of wrestling,it has no real history because its not from "back in the day" and that simply whats up.

TNA has 8 years of history that beg to differ, no one argues this "coat tails" argument, in 8 years you're the only person I've seen be this stupid about something so inconsequential. USWA was out of business and it was founded by Jerry Jarrett, 90% of TNA was Jeff Jarrett's doing. Allow me to put it simply for you, when WCW folded a ton of their lesser known guys went to NWA Wildside,Jarrett contacted the NWA and asked if his TNA idea would be backed by them, they said yes. End of story.

Being second in a 2 man race means what exactly? And there is still the monday night impact debacle. If thats what drove them back to thursday why should WWE consider SD moving back to thursday then where will tna have to backtrack to? 4AM on Sunday night competing against pos-t-vac infomercials? pwn3d..

I love how you just glaze over information that defeats your argument, it's already been confirmed by SyFy that Smackdown will run on fridays. And as for that stupid 2 man race comment, last I checked there's a lot more than 2 wrestling companies. Unless ROH, Chikara, Dragon Gate, CZW, NWA Wildside etc. don't exist.

Now go back to that list in my post above and tell me how TNA achieving all of that means they aren't successful.

 

[One to Remember]

And I've still yet to see any reasonable argument that says the iMPACT Zone means TNA aren't successful.

Okay okay. Perhaps its better to say its simply not helping. Its promoting a bad image. A first time observer might tune in once see that retro WCW Worldwide set up and off the bad pass it off as bush league. First impressions are vital in life, you gotta concede that much.

My point being that the WWE borrows from everyone just as much as TNA borrows from them.

yeah but WWE doesn't bet the house on 'em like some crazed lunatic with only 1 poker chip left.

TNA views certain performers as their wrestling moses, WWE views wrestlers as just additions to a roster.

No it wouldn't, no one watched ECW, that's why they failed on television

They didn't fail Heyman wasn't negotiating with TNN properly. Oddly TNN in its then form a lot better for ECW then Spike or the National Network. He wasn't getting them to be professional or adhere to whatever agreements they had over when ECW would air, etc. Let me ask you this, if ECW was so damn obscure why was its roster raided in bulk? Every company period will lose workers but there was an effort to get a lot of ECW guys into WCW or the WWF. ECW was on the radar for a damn good reason. Furthermore how can we have a ONS ppv that is a huge success then not conclude from that that ECW's main problem was fiscal misconduct by Heyman? There is no difference between ONS and ECW ON TNN other then a bigger purse. The same could be made comparing ECW on TNN to ECW on Sci-Fi. Were not the ratings better for ECW on Sci-Fi during the period closest to One Night Stand and when Originals were still apart of the show?

Bullshit, Kevin Nash is not a leftover, none of the legends are. Try again

Hall,Steiner(s), Dreamer, are notable examples.

They weren't trying to be the NWA, they were a member of the NWA. The NWA took the titles back 3 years later because TNA refused to have guys like Angle show up at some shitty NWA Wildside Event and lose.

Guess what, NWA Wildside and TNA were on even footing at some point. I am sure some guys from the glory days of the NWA gawked at that title being defended in TNA. If I had headlined a Starrcade I'd laugh at Bound for Glory too.

Okay effectively though TNA was really the NWA's only viable associate. So essentially TNA joined a "one man gang" lol i mean think about it, the NWA cant be a member of itself, all the other territories/asociates are on eternal life support. So basically TNA was it. They thought they could usurp authority and began to be viewed as the NWA. As the only territory with a steady pulse obviously people would naturally look at TNA and think that the NWA is back.

TNA has 8 years of history that beg to differ, no one argues this "coat tails" argument, in 8 years you're the only person I've seen be this stupid about something so inconsequential. USWA was out of business and it was founded by Jerry Jarrett, 90% of TNA was Jeff Jarrett's doing. Allow me to put it simply for you, when WCW folded a ton of their lesser known guys went to NWA Wildside,Jarrett contacted the NWA and asked if his TNA idea would be backed by them, they said yes. End of story.

8 years isn't history, 8 years is nothing. Their title isn't even half a decade old. I am aware that the USWA was out of business but their heavyweight title had alot of names in its lineage as well as their tag team championship. 2002 is a year in which everything good i wrestling has long past. TNA missed wrestling history. A Jarrett is a Jarrett.

2nd biggest wrestling company in the USA.

Again its essentially a 2 man race

2-hour weekly Flagship program.

Flagships are only shown on Mondays, sorry.

1-hour weekly secondary program.

not see in alot of markets anymore.

1-hour weekly review program.

Wow WWF Shotgun..

Broadcast in over 20 countries worldwide.

Ratings results from that please?

Running national and international tours.

One trip abroad with a few stops in Tokyo and Kyoto do not mean TNA has gone global..

Running monthly 3-hour PPV's.

SuperClash III, Beach Brawl. Anybody can put out a PPV.

Distributing DVD's both nationally, internationally and online.

Reach is what that isI want sales figures not reach.

Exclusive content deal with youtube, the largest video streaming website in the world.

YOU TUBE IS A FREE SITE and rippers would had uploaded TNA to it regardless.

 

[MrHashasheen]

Bullshit, Kevin Nash is not a leftover, none of the legends are. Try again.

Actually, I would qualify Nash and Hall as leftovers. They were quickly dropped after their return to WWE after all.

I love how you just glaze over information that defeats your argument, it's already been confirmed by SyFy that Smackdown will run on fridays. And as for that stupid 2 man race comment, last I checked there's a lot more than 2 wrestling companies. Unless ROH, Chikara, Dragon Gate, CZW, NWA Wildside etc. don't exist.

Wildside actually doesn't exist anymore. It's a new fed called Anarchy.

Okay effectively though TNA was really the NWA's only viable associate.

Um, no. There was Wildside/Anarchy, ECCW, NWA UK Hammerlock, New Japan Pro Wrestling, NWA Florida, NWA Mid-Atlantic, NWA East, etc...

Sure, none of them were WCW or ECW, but they were still good names on the independent circuit where people like Bryan Danielson, DDP, Lex Luger and others spent time to this very day.

Flagships are only shown on Mondays, sorry.

... Says who? Saturday night was at one point the time for the flagship show for both WCW and WWF.

SuperClash III, Beach Brawl. Anybody can put out a PPV.

A super-card is different than a PPV.

 

[Davi323]

TNA is not successful, and never will be, and its by their own standards. TNA is like a man with a good job, nice but moderate sized home, and loving family. Most people would consider him successful. However, the man is not content with what he has, he has it set in his mind that he will retire at 45 a millionaire, because his neighbor who lives in a much bigger house, and drives a much more expensive car is on pace to do that. He sees what his neighbor has, and is very jealous. He wants a lot more than he has. He covets his neighbor's stuff.

If TNA had been content with what they had, a small, marginally profitable wrestling company, they could be considered a success. However, once they decided to move to Mondays to compete directly against the WWE, they let everyone know that they were discontented with what they had, and instead wanted what the WWE had.

The man who should have been content with what he had, showed he wasn't by leasing a much more expensive car than he could really afford, to show his rich neighbor how successful he was, and constantly bragged about what a fine car it was to everyone that would listen...problem was, he couldn't afford the payments, and was forced to return it after only a few short months.

After returning the car, when asked, the man told everyone that he returned it because his family didn't like it, and that it had nothing at all to do with the cost. An obvious lie, but one he needed to tell himself in order to maintain the fiction that he could have everything his neighbor has.

And so the man toils, living in his nice but moderate house, with his average car, discontented. Some may say he is a dreamer, and that it is great he has ambition, others may say he should be happy with what he has and not worry about what his neighbor is doing, but in his own mind he will always be a failure until he has what his neighbor has.

This is TNA. Instead of being content to be what it is, where it could be considered successful, it decided to be discontented until it had everything the WWE had. It will never get that, so it will always be a failure.

 

[My Couch Pulls Out But I Don't]

The data is this post is from an article dated July 20, 2010

Both the May and June TNA PPV events (Sacrifice and Slammiversary) drew approximately 8,000 buys each.

In comparison, the company was averaging around 25,000 to 30,000 back in 2005/2006 when they had a Saturday night timeslot at 11:00 p.m. ET as opposed to a Thursday primetime slot. If the numbers are as accurate as stated, it would seem TNA is actually now losing money running these monthly events when you also factor in the costs of running a live PPV. Even TNA's highest buyrates come nowhere close to WWE's lowest buyrates which still hover around 150,000.

One theory was that more people are watching illegal streams of the events online. However, a source that monitors illegal PPV streams online has stated TNA averages about 30 to 50 streams with an average of 1,000 viewers total. Illegal streams for WWE events tend to average 60,000 viewers, while UFC (who has gone after those who illegally stream their events) average in excess of 200,000.

You can't honestly sit there and say that TNA is making money. If people aren't buying their PPVs, let alone watching them for free online, chances are not that many people are watching their TV shows.

You factor in that the Impact Zone holds a mere 1,100 people which is where they spend a majority of their time, and they can't be making much money off of that either.

When you mention they sold out a baseball stadium as their highest ever attendance, MCU Park in Brooklyn the show drew between 5,500 and 6,000 fans. Not very much.

Until TNA can reach the ability to sell out every where including places like MSG (and don't try and tell me only WWE can sell out here because WCW had shows here), Ford Field, Staples Center, Joe Louis, Pepsi Center...they will not be successful.

You tout their highest attendance like it is such a big deal, when its like 85,000 less than the WWE's highest attendance and about on par with what the WWE pulls in for a house show.

 

[Reddannihilation]

Okay okay. Perhaps its better to say its simply not helping. Its promoting a bad image. A first time observer might tune in once see that retro WCW Worldwide set up and off the bad pass it off as bush league. First impressions are vital in life, you gotta concede that much.

First impression's mean nothing. And I doubt a casual fan cares about how a set looks.

yeah but WWE doesn't bet the house on 'em like some crazed lunatic with only 1 poker chip left.

Work on your metaphor, you can't bet the house with 1 poker chip. The fact that you only have one chip means that's all you have. Also TNA hasn't put all their stock in any one person.

TNA views certain performers as their wrestling moses, WWE views wrestlers as just additions to a roster.

Who has TNA viewed as their "wrestling moses"?

They didn't fail Heyman wasn't negotiating with TNN properly.

Off the air, out of business = fail.

Oddly TNN in its then form a lot better for ECW then Spike or the National Network. He wasn't getting them to be professional or adhere to whatever agreements they had over when ECW would air, etc. Let me ask you this, if ECW was so damn obscure why was its roster raided in bulk? Every company period will lose workers but there was an effort to get a lot of ECW guys into WCW or the WWF. ECW was on the radar for a damn good reason. Furthermore how can we have a ONS ppv that is a huge success then not conclude from that that ECW's main problem was fiscal misconduct by Heyman? There is no difference between ONS and ECW ON TNN other then a bigger purse. The same could be made comparing ECW on TNN to ECW on Sci-Fi. Were not the ratings better for ECW on Sci-Fi during the period closest to One Night Stand and when Originals were still apart of the show?

off the air, fail/.

Hall,Steiner(s), Dreamer, are notable examples.

Scott Hall is a leftover? I'd rather watch an overweight Scott Hall in the midcard than a stroke victim in the main event. I'd also rather watch a slightly slower moving Kevin Nash then a guy who has one match and spends the next 3 months out due to a broken face.

Guess what, NWA Wildside and TNA were on even footing at some point.

And now TNA is miles above it, at the time the NWA demanded the belts be dropped to the Wildside, TNA was far beyond them/

I am sure some guys from the glory days of the NWA gawked at that title being defended in TNA. If I had headlined a Starrcade I'd laugh at Bound for Glory too.

Yeah I'm sure Harely Race was fuming when saw guys like Sting and AJ holding the title, it's not as if the title had ever been held by people completely undeserving of it before TNA "cough" Shane Douglas"cough"

Okay effectively though TNA was really the NWA's only viable associate.

Wildside, NJPW.

So essentially TNA joined a "one man gang" lol i mean think about it, the NWA cant be a member of itself, all the other territories/asociates are on eternal life support. So basically TNA was it.

And?

They thought they could usurp authority and began to be viewed as the NWA.

Where do you get this shit from? Seriously? " On May 13, 2007, the NWA announced that it had ended this deal, revoked official World Heavyweight and World Tag Team championship statuses from the current (TNA-based) holders, and announced tournaments for both newly-vacated titles. In reality, both sides wanted to end the arrangement, as TNA wanted to brand its own World titles, and the NWA membership wanted final say on (and control of the booking dates for) NWA-brand champions."

There's what really happened, stop living in your fantasy where TNA was trying to become the NWA.

As the only territory with a steady pulse obviously people would naturally look at TNA and think that the NWA is back.

No people would think, hmm NWA never left, oh and now they have a show.

8 years isn't history, 8 years is nothing. Their title isn't even half a decade old.

So what?

I am aware that the USWA was out of business but their heavyweight title had alot of names in its lineage as well as their tag team championship.

So what, which organisation was still around? NWA, who did Jeff approach? NWA.

2002 is a year in which everything good i wrestling has long past. TNA missed wrestling history.

You cannot fault TNA for not being around years ago. Also plenty of great stuff in wrestling happened during and after 2002.

A Jarrett is a Jarrett.

This is just stupid, Jerry and Jeff are not the same person.

Again its essentially a 2 man race

This is coming from a guy who a few posts up said ROH would soon take over TNA, it's a 3 man race at a minimum and as I've said plenty of wrestling organisations exist, it is not a 2 man race. ROH and TNA started in the same year and TNA has fucking dominated ROH. CZW started before both of them and they haven't done shit, XPW, the XWF, Wrestling Society X, Chikara, Dragon Gate USA, all companies and all less than TNA. 2 man race, my ass.

Flagships are only shown on Mondays, sorry.

No, Flagships are your major program. CSI is the flag ship of the CSI series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer was the flagship of the Whedonverse. It doesn't have to be shown on a Monday to be the flagship show, where the fuck you got that, I have no idea.

not see in alot of markets anymore.

4th highest rated sports show in Australia. Broadcast in almost as many countries as iMPACT.

Wow WWF Shotgun..

Remind me of those other companies who formed in 2002, with 3 shows?

Ratings results from that please?

Xplosion was 4th highest rated sports show in Australia during the FIFA world cup. I'm not going to find over 20 countries ratings for one show. The fact that it's airing is good enough.

One trip abroad with a few stops in Tokyo and Kyoto do not mean TNA has gone global..

2 UK tours, a third one confirmed for next year, a proposed Australian tour, seriously shut up about things yo aren't familiar with.

SuperClash III, Beach Brawl. Anybody can put out a PPV.

How many can put ot 12 per year?

Reach is what that isI want sales figures not reach.

Private company, put it simply they don't dedicate an entire section to wrestling in JB Hi-fi 2 thirds of which is WWE the other third TNA, if they aren't selling.

YOU TUBE IS A FREE SITE and rippers would had uploaded TNA to it regardless.

Ugh, you really are dumb, exclusive content is content specifically designed for youtube, the roundtable show, matches that never aired on TV. Matches that aren't releasd on DVD, interviews etc. EXCLUSIVE CONTENT.

Everytime I prove you wrong, you dance around the situation and make up shit that does nothing to help your argument.

 

[shattered dreams]

TNA is not successful, and never will be, and its by their own standards.

It will never get that, so it will always be a failure

Thank you nostradumbass.

If you bothered to read the OP the question is when would you consider them a success. Something you failed to answer during your prolonged odd metaphor. I agree that the reason people do not view them as a success right now is them having growing pains trying to take the next step. I fail to see how it is clear they never can succeed in such a venture though. This idea that the monday night fiasco proves every TNA dissenter 1000% correct on every opinion is getting really old and played out. If your answer is when they beat WWE then I think you have deluded yourself on TNAs goals. I'd say their highest goal at the moment has to be something like get 1 dollar out of every 5 spent in the prowrestling market and I am sure they would consider themselves succesful with less than that. The monday night move was a failed experiment in trying to grab a chunk of the audience, not defeat WWE. For every person making a weird comment suggesting that there was one saying just give us a chance to grow the audience, in TNA management, in the IWC, everywhere. Was it jealousy when Apple cornered the high end computer market? Should WWE have been content playing second fiddle to WCW? In your metaphor there is no advancement for civilzation, no room for innovation or investment, just discontent for some and status quo. No wonder you like WWEs product.

 

[One to Remember]

Off the air, blah blah

The General's blunders don't mean that he still couldn't of have the best army in the world. I think ECW would had been better off with every wrestler helping run the company. ECW can't be blamed because Heyman was too proud to call an accountant. Lets put it like this, ECW would had flipped a Panda Energy financial investment faster then some rock in a maximum security prison.. If Panda had a choice of ECW or TNA from day one ECW would had gotten the support. Thats one of the good things about 2002, the companies on their way out from 2001 can't get at ya. The data is there to compare TNA and ECW in this regard.

Work on your metaphor, you can't bet the house with 1 poker chip. The fact that you only have one chip means that's all you have.

i meant like your down to one chip and you think maybe that 1 chip can get back everything u lost and then some. METAPHOR FIXED.

Who has TNA viewed as their "wrestling moses"?

Hogan and Eazy E for one. Foley, RVD, Hardy.

Scott Hall is a leftover? I'd rather watch an overweight Scott Hall in the midcard than a stroke victim in the main event.

Watch? Whoa whoa dn't count your eggs before they hatch bro. First we have to make sure he actually uh SHOWS up for the event. Then we need to make sure he can wobble to the ring. Then you may proceed to watch.

"cough" Shane Douglas"cough"

If Race is still of a sound mind he'd agree with Shane's 1994 assessment of the NWA title. He didn't even hold the title for too long, I mean literally 2 or 4 minutes before it hit the mat effectively destroying its few remaining bits of credibility WCW hadn't taken away from it.

Wildside, NJPW.

You said wildside was shitty. NJPW is never ever leaving Japan.. We arent in the land of the rising sun, ive seen AAA, IWA from PR., WWA from Aus., but never have i seen NJPW shown here in America. Their membership maybe led to some talent exchange but it was largely symbolic.

In reality, both sides wanted to end the arrangement, as TNA wanted to brand its own World titles, and the NWA membership wanted final say on (and control of the booking dates for) NWA-brand champions."

Quit trying to fast talk. We know that its a fact that TNA wanted to brand its own title. But most likely that was because it had no authority over the NWA title. How is TNA gonna gripe about NWA titles when everyone since 1948 has had to adhere to the NWA board's decisions over the campionships? They thought they could strong arm a vulnerable organazation still licking its wounds from the lashings WCW had to give it in the early '90s.

You cannot fault TNA for not being around years ago. Also plenty of great stuff in wrestling happened during and after 2002.

They knew history themselves was important thats why they went NWA. The fire was gone in wrestling by 2001, there wee a few burning embers left over though in the WWF. So yeah, like what great stuff? Like I said restart the USWA up, rename your titles, everything, and now your company has got a 1 year history behind it, a nice tape library (i think), and the legal abilities to keep it all. TNA tried to rent or lease the NWA's exstensive history. It was wack from day one.

This is just stupid, Jerry and Jeff are not the same person.

No but sons gotta take after paw just a lil bit, rightt?

This is coming from a guy who a few posts up said ROH would soon take over TNA, it's a 3 man race at a minimum and as I've said plenty of wrestling organisations exist, it is not a 2 man race.

There is a Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party, a Reform Party and still a Communist Party. Yet America is still a TWO PARTY state.. ROH is not trying to take over they are working on doing them. They are working on cementing their stability they are working on making their footing solid as possible. TNA thought it was ready to take on the big boys a week after it was founded. Taking over TNA isn't like trying to take over the whole wrestling scene, only a direct attack on WWE would equal that.

ROH and TNA started in the same year and TNA has fucking dominated ROH. CZW started before both of them and they haven't done shit, XPW, the XWF, Wrestling Society X

What were they even trying to do? How is CZW gonna take over the market with one subdscipline of wrestling featured exclusively? What did XPW do in its life other then try to make themselves the ECW of the wild wild west? WSX was like a reality show or something. It was an MTV production and it showed... ROH is trying to cater to the purist fan who is a dying breed in the era of sports entertainment. They're niche merely cuz they wanna be, i can respect that.

No, Flagships are your major program. CSI is the flag ship of the CSI series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer was the flagship of the Whedonverse.

Quit going back ad fourth. We are talking about in wrestling context. The days of saturday night are confined to a bygone era. Now in wrestlng its MONDAY MONDAY MONDAYYY!!!! The point is if its not on Monday it could be argue the top show doesn't even constitute a flag ship. Thursday or Saturdays aren't even wrestling nights anymore. All about te Mondays, cap it off on them Sundays.
Oh, and it was Angel not Buffy..

Xplosion was 4th highest rated sports show in Australia during the FIFA world cup. I'm not going to find over 20 countries ratings for one show. The fact that it's airing is good enough.

not sure what that truly means. What do Aussies play besides soccer? cricket. Then rugby maybe idk. Then what is left BUT fourth place?! How does this following down under contribute to TNA's PPV sales? Why isn't TNA selling out major arenas if Australia offers it unusually large support? That's where it doesn't add up.Your either exagerating or TNA is too stupid to tap into their own popularity. Au. hasn't even really had wrestling since their WCW collapsed.

2 UK tours, a third one confirmed for next year, a proposed Australian tour, seriously shut up about things yo aren't familiar with.

Okay but are these major cities? Large venues? Europe has armories and one horse towns and converted high school gyms too..

Ugh, you really are dumb, exclusive content is content specifically designed for youtube, the roundtable show, matches that never aired on TV. Matches that aren't releasd on DVD, interviews etc. EXCLUSIVE CONTENT.

Okay is TNA getting paid or what? Is there ad revenue? Or does TNA simply have its own page which even i do..? Youtube.com/TNArulz4lyfe

Thank you nostradumbass.
This idea that the monday night fiasco proves every TNA dissenter 1000% correct on every opinion is getting really old and played out. If your answer is when they beat WWE then I think you have deluded yourself on TNAs goals.

The monday night move was a failed experiment in trying to grab a chunk of the audience, not defeat WWE. For every person making a weird comment suggesting that there was one saying just give us a chance to grow the audience, in TNA management, in the IWC, everywhere. Was it jealousy when Apple cornered the high end computer market? Should WWE have been content playing second fiddle to WCW? No wonder you like WWEs product.

It was not a fiasco and it was a debacle. The bottom line is this is the wrestling biz. This is not the territory days. We are in that new era that started in the '80s still. There is no room for little fiefdoms with geographical pockets of control. At minimum you need 25% of the pie to be considered a success. Atleast when WCW and the WWF wenthead to head it helped both of their bottomlines. TNA can not afford to engage WWE in combat. After the first few blows major cracks in the foundation would begin to show.

Your taking us out of context bud. We aren't TNA bashers all we are saying is theybit off more then they could chew. Your trying to say its wrong for a heavyweight to fight a welterweight but the welterweight chose to compete higher and that backfired. TNA opened a can of worms, we have a right to critisize them for not comprehending the obvious consequences. It bit off more then it could chew just like a little kid lol.

You factor in that the Impact Zone holds a mere 1,100 people which is where they spend a majority of their time, and they can't be making much money off of that either.

When you mention they sold out a baseball stadium as their highest ever attendance, MCU Park in Brooklyn the show drew between 5,500 and 6,000 fans. Not very much.

would had been quicker to just quote you lol. I believe it was him claiming they get some gate cut from the studio grounds or whatever. I believe 5,500-6k are the numbers WWE got at Axxess lol. When ECW had its own tour rout away from the other brands i think they had higher numbers. 5,500 ot 6,000 would be alright if those were the impact zone numbers but those simply aren't good enough at this point.

 

[Davi323]

Pretty sure I did answer whether or not I thought TNA was a success or not when I flat out stated they weren't a success. In fact, you quoted it, "nostradumbass". I suggest you bitch out your high school english teacher for failing to teach you reading comprehension skills.

TNA is a failure, because they have a goal, and no matter what they do, they don't get any closer to it. ROH doesn't pretend to be anything but what it is. They are a success, because they are what they are, and are fine with it. They don't pretend to be anything they are not. If this was my previous analogy, ROH lives in a small house down the road from TNA and the WWE, drives an old beat up car, but is happy. They have a job that allows them to keep the roof over their head, and put food on the table, and that is all they need.

TNA is not a success, because they aren't what they want to be. That is what you completely failed to grasp about what I was saying. By TNA's own standards, they are not successful. If they hadn't opened their big mouths and declared war on the WWE, only to get beat down thoroughly, they might be a success. But they threw down the gauntlet, and did a lot of trash talking...so did TNA fans like you. And then it failed in a giant way.

TNA wants to be the WWE. Getting Hogan and Flair was an attempt to steal WWE viewers. Moving to Mondays was an attempt to steal WWE viewers. Signing all those ex-WWE midcarders was an attempt to steal WWE viewers. The constant mentions of WWE, vintage, etc is a deliberate attempt to take a jab at the WWE. TNA compares itself to the WWE, not to an indy like ROH. To deny that is complete bullshit.

If TNA hadn't been constantly trying to compete with the WWE, they probably would be considered moderately successful. In truth, up until late 2009, they probably still could have been considered successful, even by me. But they changed their standards of what success meant. I didn't do that, the WWE didn't do that, TNA did it to themselves. It is by their current standards that I judge them a failure. Had there been a pre-January 4 timeline, my original post might have looked completely different. When TNA set their bar higher by trying to compete with the WWE, so too must the standards by which they are held be raised. It wasn't that they competed against the WWE, its that they did well before they were ready, made outrageous statements that they couldn't follow through on, and tried to spin their turning tail and running back to Thursdays as "giving the fans what they want" instead of manning up and admitting that Mondays flat out wasn't working. Nobody believed the bullshit Tenay was spewing, I suspect even you knew it was a total bullshit excuse. There is a difference between a healthy ego, confidence built on reality, and an unhealthy ego, overconfidence built on fantasy. If you are going to talk as big as TNA did, you need to make damn sure you can back it up. They are a failure because they did precisely that. They talked the talk, but couldn't walk the walk. They aren't a failure because Impact gets 1.0 ratings, they are a failure because they aimed for 2.5-3.0 ratings and got 1.0s. TNA set their expectations higher than they had any business doing, that is why they are a failure. It isn't based on what they have done, its based on what they have done compared to what they told everyone they were going to.

 

[Reddannihilation]

The General's blunders don't mean that he still couldn't of have the best army in the world. I think ECW would had been better off with every wrestler helping run the company. ECW can't be blamed because Heyman was too proud to call an accountant. Lets put it like this, ECW would had flipped a Panda Energy financial investment faster then some rock in a maximum security prison.. If Panda had a choice of ECW or TNA from day one ECW would had gotten the support. Thats one of the good things about 2002, the companies on their way out from 2001 can't get at ya. The data is there to compare TNA and ECW in this regard.

ECW = Out of business, TNA = In business.

i meant like your down to one chip and you think maybe that 1 chip can get back everything u lost and then some. METAPHOR FIXED.

Still in accurate.

Hogan and Eazy E for one. Foley, RVD, Hardy.

Hogan and Eric were brought in as some major acquisition and they were there to expand TNA not lead it out of slavery. The other three were barely announced.

Watch? Whoa whoa dn't count your eggs before they hatch bro. First we have to make sure he actually uh SHOWS up for the event. Then we need to make sure he can wobble to the ring. Then you may proceed to watch.

Name one time Scott Hall no showed during his latest run. Scott can still talk, still perform the Outsider's Edge and still move fairl well. The excellence of stroke victims can't do anything any more.

If Race is still of a sound mind he'd agree with Shane's 1994 assessment of the NWA title. He didn't even hold the title for too long, I mean literally 2 or 4 minutes before it hit the mat effectively destroying its few remaining bits of credibility WCW hadn't taken away from it.

So Harley Race is cool with a title he spent years working for being thrown in the trash but not seeing people he worked with like Sting hold it and show it respect? Ok then.

You said wildside was shitty. NJPW is never ever leaving Japan.. We arent in the land of the rising sun, ive seen AAA, IWA from PR., WWA from Aus., but never have i seen NJPW shown here in America. Their membership maybe led to some talent exchange but it was largely symbolic.

This doesn't change the fact that TNA was not the only member of the NWA.

Quit trying to fast talk. We know that its a fact that TNA wanted to brand its own title. But most likely that was because it had no authority over the NWA title. How is TNA gonna gripe about NWA titles when everyone since 1948 has had to adhere to the NWA board's decisions over the campionships? They thought they could strong arm a vulnerable organazation still licking its wounds from the lashings WCW had to give it in the early '90s.

Stop pretending you know what was going through the minds of the people in TNA and the NWA, when you admit that you're basing it off nothing.

They knew history themselves was important thats why they went NWA. The fire was gone in wrestling by 2001, there wee a few burning embers left over though in the WWF. So yeah, like what great stuff?

Hollywood Hogan vs. the Rock, Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit breaking the glass ceiling, the rise of the world's greatest wrestler Kurt Angle. Need I go on?

Like I said restart the USWA up, rename your titles, everything, and now your company has got a 1 year history behind it, a nice tape library (i think), and the legal abilities to keep it all. TNA tried to rent or lease the NWA's exstensive history. It was wack from day one.

Restart dead promotion that went out of business and link something that completely failed to TNA. No you fuckwit, the USWA was shit, it's titles meant nothing you need proof? Try the fact that Jerry fucking Lawler a comedy jobber for life was USWA champion, yeah there's some great history to tout, "NWA title held by legends like Harley Race and Ric Flair" "USWA title held by Jerry Lawler" I wonder which is more impressive?

No but sons gotta take after paw just a lil bit, rightt?

No he doesn't, that's why Jeff's promotion has lasted 8 years and Jerry's shut down.

There is a Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party, a Reform Party and still a Communist Party. Yet America is still a TWO PARTY state..

American politics plays no part in determining how many wrestling companies there are.

ROH is not trying to take over they are working on doing them.

Speak English.

They are working on cementing their stability they are working on making their footing solid as possible. TNA thought it was ready to take on the big boys a week after it was founded.

What? TNA didn't even attempt to compete with the WWE until years after it's existence. You sir are an idiot.

Taking over TNA isn't like trying to take over the whole wrestling scene, only a direct attack on WWE would equal that.

ROH isn't taking over TNA, TNA is far better off than ROH.

What were they even trying to do? How is CZW gonna take over the market with one subdscipline of wrestling featured exclusively? What did XPW do in its life other then try to make themselves the ECW of the wild wild west? WSX was like a reality show or something. It was an MTV production and it showed... ROH is trying to cater to the purist fan who is a dying breed in the era of sports entertainment. They're niche merely cuz they wanna be, i can respect that.

Oh so, if you only cater to a niche audience that means everythings ok? TNA caters to a niche audience, disillusioned WWE/WCW/ECW fans. But I guess that niche doesn't count because it defeats your argument, right? Pathetic.

Quit going back ad fourth. We are talking about in wrestling context.

No we're talking telelvision.

The days of saturday night are confined to a bygone era. Now in wrestlng its MONDAY MONDAY MONDAYYY!!!! The point is if its not on Monday it could be argue the top show doesn't even constitute a flag ship.

Definition of flag ship; "A flagship is the lead ship in a fleet of vessels, a designation given on account of being either the largest, fastest, newest, most heavily armed or, for publicity purposes, the best known."

TNA iMPACT the largest of TNA's shows, the best known of TNA's shows and the show with the largest amount of content. FLAGSHIP.

Thursday or Saturdays aren't even wrestling nights anymore. All about te Mondays, cap it off on them Sundays.

Wrestling is played on Thursdays, looks like Thursday is a wrestling show.

Oh, and it was Angel not Buffy..

lol you're a fuckwit, Buffy was the flagship show, Angel was a spinoff that started during Buffy's 4th season after Angel the character left at the end of season 3. Don't fuck with a Whedon fanboy.

not sure what that truly means. What do Aussies play besides soccer? cricket. Then rugby maybe idk. Then what is left BUT fourth place?!

AFL, FIFA, A-league, Cricket, Hockey, Rugby League, Rugby Union, International rugby i.e The Tri-Nations cup, Tennis, Tour De France, Golf, International rules, NBL, don't try talk about things you don't understand.

How does this following down under contribute to TNA's PPV sales?

Private company. However I can vouch for 30 people who bought Hardcore Justice, 31 if I count myself. And that's just people I know, for a show as highly rated as TNA the numbers would be equally high.

Why isn't TNA selling out major arenas if Australia offers it unusually large support? That's where it doesn't add up.Your either exagerating or TNA is too stupid to tap into their own popularity. Au. hasn't even really had wrestling since their WCW collapsed.

WCW? What? Australia is one of the biggest countries that supports all forms of wrestling. WWA, WWE, Hogan v. Flair Tour, WCW back in the day. A lot of wrestling. TNA is having a tour of Australia, it was announced for this year but was held back once Hogan joined and they refocused on US work. It's due out next year and considering the level of advertising that promoted it the first time through, it will more than likely be huge.

Okay but are these major cities? Large venues? Europe has armories and one horse towns and converted high school gyms too..

Just stop pretending like you know how things work.

Okay is TNA getting paid or what? Is there ad revenue? Or does TNA simply have its own page which even i do..? Youtube.com/TNArulz4lyfe

TNA gets unlimited hosting services, allowing them to post videos anywhere between 10 minutes and 2 hours. They also get youtube only shows of which the number of traffic contributes to a cut of Youtube's ad revenue. So suck it.

It was not a fiasco and it was a debacle. The bottom line is this is the wrestling biz. This is not the territory days. We are in that new era that started in the '80s still. There is no room for little fiefdoms with geographical pockets of control. At minimum you need 25% of the pie to be considered a success. Atleast when WCW and the WWF wenthead to head it helped both of their bottomlines. TNA can not afford to engage WWE in combat. After the first few blows major cracks in the foundation would begin to show.

WWE RAW averages 3-3.5 on the ratings.

TNA iMPACT in the past month has averaged 1.2. During the Monday night event TNA's ratings went down but Raw's didn't go up. Therefore it is relatively safe to assume that the 3.5 who watch RAW also make up the 1.2 who watch TNA.

As such TNA controls more than a third of the current wrestling audience shared in their supposed "2 man race" so by your logic they are more than a success.

Your taking us out of context bud. We aren't TNA bashers all we are saying is theybit off more then they could chew. Your trying to say its wrong for a heavyweight to fight a welterweight but the welterweight chose to compete higher and that backfired. TNA opened a can of worms, we have a right to critisize them for not comprehending the obvious consequences. It bit off more then it could chew just like a little kid lol.would had been quicker to just quote you lol. I believe it was him claiming they get some gate cut from the studio grounds or whatever. I believe 5,500-6k are the numbers WWE got at Axxess lol. When ECW had its own tour rout away from the other brands i think they had higher numbers. 5,500 ot 6,000 would be alright if those were the impact zone numbers but those simply aren't good enough at this point.

60,000 people enter the Universal Orlando Themepark each day. For each of those people money from their entry goes to TNA. End of story.

 

[shattered dreams]

Pretty sure I did answer whether or not I thought TNA was a success or not when I flat out stated they weren't a success. In fact, you quoted it, "nostradumbass". I suggest you bitch out your high school english teacher for failing to teach you reading comprehension skills.

I find it amusing that you are making fun of my reading comprehension skills because you cannot tell the difference between a future hypothetical and a current assessment. Yes, some comments did stray onto the subject of the current "level" of success but the OP and my last question to you were about when would you personally consider TNA a "success?" Like I said before you re-typed everything for whatever reason, I actually agree in a relative sense with most of what you are saying about the current product situation. I would chose less harsh and biased words and tones but the sentiment is essentially similar. I do disagree with your conclusions about shooting for the stars being foolsplay and the ridiculous notion that you know TNA is going to fail. Like I said before I strongly disagree that TNA's goal is to exceed WWE anytime soon, if ever. They just want to capture a chunk of the market share that makes them viable as a more mainstream company.

 

[One to Remember]

60,000 people enter the Universal Orlando Themepark each day. For each of those people money from their entry goes to TNA. End of story.

I'm not sure its something to be too proud of but you got paid. I guess its just whatever.

TNA iMPACT in the past month has averaged 1.2. During the Monday night event TNA's ratings went down but Raw's didn't go up. Therefore it is relatively safe to assume that the 3.5 who watch RAW also make up the 1.2 who watch TNA.[QUOTE/]yeah but thats different. If they had stopped watching WWE productions period to tune in to TNA you could count that but even after Raw most people are pumped up and eager to see more wrestling even as early as 11:30. I wanna see more wrestling as soon as Raw is over, SD is over, Impact is over, thats just the nature of the beast we call wrestling fans. TNA needs to be able to have those same fans no matter who is on the other channel. This goes back to my question now that you've presented that data what happens if WWE produces a show for thursdays?

Hogan and Eric were brought in as some major acquisition and they were there to expand TNA not lead it out of slavery. The other three were barely announced.

They wanted to see if Easy E could do what he did for WCW in 1996. They likewise wanted Hogan to try to utilize any '80s and/or '90s steam he had left. Hardy wasnt given great title runs in WWE but they wanted to see if they could try to put him on top and simply not try to hold him down like McMahon/creative did. They wanted to see if they could take advantage of the Hardy pop every time I'd see him on WWE. He'd just stand i the ring, pause for a minute, all the girls would scream. hey wanted to see if they could copy WWE's handling to a t with the exception of giving him restraints or judging him for things outside of the business. Same thing for RVD. "Dixie: If we just don't make him sign a moral clause or adhere to the wellness policy, he'll take off here and keep going!! WWE was just too prudish.."

Name one time Scott Hall no showed during his latest run. Scott can still talk, still perform the Outsider's Edge and still move fairl well. The excellence of stroke victims can't do anything any more.

Look, I love him to death he and not Randy Savage would had been my favorite of all time but hes always trippin. he always always starts tripin at some point. Its a tired story.
Bret Hart has an inpeckable work ethic and respect for the fans. Hart has Heart, end of sentence.

So Harley Race is cool with a title he spent years working for being thrown in the trash but not seeing people he worked with like Sting hold it and show it respect? Ok then.

Never saw him stand up to WCW strong arming the NWA and manipulating history and promoting misconceptions about their title's lineage. Don't recall that happening. Besides Douglas didn't throw down that title, the NWA did when they let it become an antiquated relic.

Stop pretending you know what was going through the minds of the people in TNA and the NWA, when you admit that you're basing it off nothing.

they still fuckin knew the NWA was gonna control its own titles because duhdaduh THEY OWN THEM. And of course TNA had to look so WCW in the whole process of wrangling with them over the title control situation.they are copy cats even when they dont mean to.

This doesn't change the fact that TNA was not the only member of the NWA.

well from a strict standpoint of course not.

Hollywood Hogan vs. the Rock, Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit breaking the glass ceiling, the rise of the world's greatest wrestler Kurt Angle. Need I go on?

Kurt Angle was already near the top, and Benoit had gotten a World title in WCW he was just too bitter to work with it. Those were gret moments and TNA had nothing to do with any of 'em.

No he doesn't, that's why Jeff's promotion has lasted 8 years and Jerry's shut down.

Jerry's lasted 8 too. How ominous lmao.Jarrett is an ex wrestler, any know-how in regards to promoting he learned from daddy, nothing to be ashamed of.

"NWA title held by legends like Harley Race and Ric Flair" "USWA title held by Jerry Lawler" I wonder which is more impressive?

Scott Hall is in that lineage.Junk Yard Dog, Terry Funk, Savage, Owen, etc. What you don't respect that?

Speak English.

dont tell me this hillbilly dOESN'T understand urban talk. ROH is doing ROH. That's why they are doing so great.

Oh so, if you only cater to a niche audience that means everythings ok? TNA caters to a niche audience, disillusioned WWE/WCW/ECW fans. But I guess that niche doesn't count because it defeats your argument, right? Pathetic.

How are WCW fans niche? You know how many WCW fans there were? If TNA had just 1/5 of that TNA would be in a whole new league. There was nothing niche about the big time. There are too many EX- WWE/ECW/WCW fans out there, I'd love to see TNA try to get 1/10 of them.

you're a fuckwit, Buffy was the flagship show, Angel was a spinoff that started during Buffy's 4th season after Angel the character left at the end of season 3.

Yea I know it was a spin off but it was the best and ultimately outlived the Buffy program.

Private company. However I can vouch for 30 people who bought Hardcore Justice, 31 if I count myself. And that's just people I know, for a show as highly rated as TNA the numbers would be equally high.

Wait are you an Aussie mate? look Australia has an untapped market, if TNA has any following there what so ever it would be doing major tours and selling out major arenas. Like I said Australia like America has an armory circuit too. TNA will probably be right at 'em.

 

[Reddannihilation]

I'm not sure its something to be too proud of but you got paid. I guess its just whatever.

Oh so now it doesn't matter that TNA makes more from the iMPACT Zone than they could ever make from touring. Back pedal faster.

yeah but thats different. If they had stopped watching WWE productions period to tune in to TNA you could count that but even after Raw most people are pumped up and eager to see more wrestling even as early as 11:30.

So because people watch both it doesn't matter that more than 25% of the total wrestling audience watches TNA? What the fuck is that shit, I liked watching WCW and the WWF, does that mean that people who watch both TNA and RAW don't count and you only count if you watch one show and not the other? Grasping at straws.

I wanna see more wrestling as soon as Raw is over, SD is over, Impact is over, thats just the nature of the beast we call wrestling fans. TNA needs to be able to have those same fans no matter who is on the other channel. This goes back to my question now that you've presented that data what happens if WWE produces a show for thursdays?

WWE already does produce a show for Thursdays it's called Superstars and no one watches it.

They wanted to see if Easy E could do what he did for WCW in 1996. They likewise wanted Hogan to try to utilize any '80s and/or '90s steam he had left.

They wanted to raise awareness and in all honesty they did because people who never watched TNA tuned in, they might not have stayed but there are a lot of factors that can be attributed to that. Not to mention that it doesn't mean TNA is unsuccessful.

Hardy wasnt given great title runs in WWE but they wanted to see if they could try to put him on top and simply not try to hold him down like McMahon/creative did.

No they didn't, Jeff Hardy isn't even in the Main Event, he's not the champion, he debuted in TNA during an X-division match. The only main event's he's been in was a fatal fourway and a 5 on 5 tag team match. TNA is well aware that right now Hardy is a potential liability which is why he's not a major part of any angles and hasn't had any real shots at a championship. Try again.

They wanted to see if they could take advantage of the Hardy pop every time I'd see him on WWE.

No they didn't, they didn't even put him in the main event.

He'd just stand i the ring, pause for a minute, all the girls would scream. hey wanted to see if they could copy WWE's handling to a t with the exception of giving him restraints or judging him for things outside of the business.

TNA isn't judging him or limiting his freedoms? You think it's a conicedence that he can only be in multi-person main events and has no titles? Jeff Hardy is under constant watch.

Same thing for RVD. "Dixie: If we just don't make him sign a moral clause or adhere to the wellness policy, he'll take off here and keep going!! WWE was just too prudish.."

Speak more bullshit, TNA does not advocate illegal drug use. Stop reading baseless internet reports and get a fucking clue.

Look, I love him to death he and not Randy Savage would had been my favorite of all time but hes always trippin. he always always starts tripin at some point. Its a tired story.

So the answer to my question is "Scott Hall never no showed and is currently off TV while he deals with a legal issue unrelated to wrestling". That's what you should've said.

Bret Hart has an inpeckable work ethic and respect for the fans Hart has Heart, end of sentence.

*impeccable. Bret Hart can barely move at all, his eyelids are crippled.

Never saw him stand up to WCW strong arming the NWA and manipulating history and promoting misconceptions about their title's lineage. Don't recall that happening. Besides Douglas didn't throw down that title, the NWA did when they let it become an antiquated relic.

pretty sure he threw it down...
[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/waBUA6Vfxt8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/waBUA6Vfxt8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

they still fuckin knew the NWA was gonna control its own titles because duhdaduh THEY OWN THEM. And of course TNA had to look so WCW in the whole process of wrangling with them over the title control situation.they are copy cats even when they dont mean to.

Ugh you're an idiot.

well from a strict standpoint of course not.

not a strict stanpoint, an accurate stand point.

Kurt Angle was already near the top, and Benoit had gotten a World title in WCW he was just too bitter to work with it. Those were gret moments and TNA had nothing to do with any of 'em.

And did you say what great moments happened in TNA? Nope. You wan't a great moment in TNA, try Samoa Joe vs. Christopher Daniels vs. AJ Styles Unbreakable 2005. There's a great moment in wrestling history.

Jerry's lasted 8 too. How ominous lmao.

No Jerry's closed down in 8. Jeff's company is already over 8 years old and has no sign of going anywhere, because get this...TNA is a SUCCESS!!!!

Jarrett is an ex wrestler, any know-how in regards to promoting he learned from daddy, nothing to be ashamed of.

Jeff Jarrett learnt a lot more about promoting from his time in WCW then he learnt from his fathers failed federation.

Scott Hall is in that lineage.Junk Yard Dog, Terry Funk, Savage, Owen, etc. What you don't respect that?

I don't respect a title that has been held close to 50 times by Jerry Lawler and is not regarded as a presitgious title. Also, I thought you said 8 years means nothing, USWA lasted 8 years but apparently they have a great history yet TNA has had 8 years of "not history" make up your mind.

dont tell me this hillbilly dOESN'T understand urban talk.

Urban talk? Speak English, please.

ROH is doing ROH.

It's a hemaphordite?

That's why they are doing so great.

There current world champion is leaving in 6 weeks. Yeah doing great, man.

How are WCW fans niche?

Dissillusioned WCW fans, as in people who stopped watching when WCW stopped existing.

You know how many WCW fans there were?

Not many by the end.

If TNA had just 1/5 of that TNA would be in a whole new league.

The highest rating nitro ever recieved was a 6, do you know what 1/5th of 6 is? 1.2. Where's that new league at?

There was nothing niche about the big time. There are too many EX- WWE/ECW/WCW fans out there, I'd love to see TNA try to get 1/10 of them.

The highest rating for ECW was a 1.2, the highest rating for RAW was a 8.1 and the higest rated Nitro was 6. add those highest ratings together and you get 15.2, 1/10th of that is 1.52. If you subtract the 3.0 average from RAW you get 1.2+5.1+6.0 = 12.3, 12.3/10= 1.23.

So seeing as the highest rated TNA show got a 1.5 and this past month TNA has draw 1.2 each week. I'd say they've got a pretty good shot of getting some of those ex-fans. At the very least TNA has drawn the exact same number of fans as ECW's biggest draw, consistenly for a month. Which means at least one group is counted for. So suck it.

Yea I know it was a spin off but it was the best and ultimately outlived the Buffy program.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer ran 7 seasons and ended as opposed to being cancelled, Angel was cancelled at 5. Who out lived who now?

And seriously as off topic as this is; Buffy's ratings;
1= 3.7 million
2= 5.2 million
3= 5.4 million
4= 4.7 million
5= 4.4 million
6= 4.6 million
7= 4.2 million

Angel
1= 4.9 million
2= 4.1 million
3= 4.4 million
4= 3.65 million
5= 3.97 million

Who was the flagship of that again?

Wait are you an Aussie mate?

Racism, good job.

look Australia has an untapped market,

No it isn't, it's a massively tapped market.

if TNA has any following there what so ever it would be doing major tours and selling out major arenas.

TNA has a massive following and is planning a major tour.

Like I said Australia like America has an armory circuit too.

No, they don't.

That's one of the planned stops http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Laver_Arena

TNA will probably be right at 'em.

Just give up, you've lost.