First up - I can't believe that we are 7 pages in and no-one has mentioned a couple of the variables that has been affecting Impact's ratings in recent times. The yearly post WrestleMania lull and the moving of their time-slot both had detrimental effects.
Now, the "Live on the road" discussion. I don't know how much it costs but logic would dictate that it may not be as severe as many are painting it out to be. Why?
I think we can agree that it costs more than taping in the Impact Zone but and it is a massive BUT - they received ZERO ticket sales in Orlando and, as anybody who watched the show regular back then would have noticed, limited merchandising. On the road, they have substantial ticket sales PLUS as they are in different parts of the country - a far greater merchandising potential. This additional revenue is bound to offset much of the additional taping costs (if it didn't why would they bother with the live UK tapings that traditionally don't pull great US viewing figures?).
PPVs vs Impact 'Specials'. This model makes much more sense, whether I liked it or not, buyrates of 10k and less makes the maths very simple - less than 1 person in every 100 where aware what had happened the previous Sunday night once the following Impact aired. It was also repeated that the buys didn't cover the costs of the events and, with PPV, you don't have the advertising revenue to offset. As to people just not liking the concept of themed episodes... well, it seems to work okay for the market leader so I'd say that is just silly PLUS, it leaves the door open for said episode to possibly return to the PPV timetable down the line.
Finally, as to who should or shouldn't be champion or even on the roster.
- As much as I feel that Crimson and Morgan had potential or that Tara was always value for money and as much as I may think that Garrett, Wes and Brooke are only there for who their parents are - watching the shows tells me that they get a reaction that those released could only dream off.
- As to TNA's reliance on stables... well, that is very simple - one weekly 2 hours slot and a large roster. By having stables, you give more guys air time so that they are constantly in the public consciousness (something WWe doesn't have to worry about with several weekly TV hours).
- The veterans... I find it quite funny that people will take shots at Hulk and Sting when you just know that Vince would sell Shane to get the two of them to fill similar positions for him.
- Bully Ray - he gets extreme heat from live crowds and people were also hot for him as a face prior to the LockDown screwjob, I still believe that the Prez has great mileage in the main event.
- Chris Sabin - Bully, Hardy, Aries, Roode... TNA has shown respect to who it puts the belt on from BFG '11 after the blip of the early Bischoff / Hogan regime and, as a fan, I hope to see that trend continue. I like the idea of supporting someone you can see has gone that extra mile to get themselves over with the crowd all round (ie with their onscreen work, not with their Twitter bitching or YouTube series).