When will TNA realize their strengths?

[Trill Co$by]

Ok for everyone who has been watching TNA since the early years, or for everyone who wants something different, this is the topic on how TNA can win the Monday Night War... or at least get higher ratings.

First and foremost, they need to take out The Band, The Nasty Boys, and all those other old guys and just keep Angle, Team 3D, RVD, and Hardy... those five can still work solid matches and make them look decent. Jeff Jarret I can understand as it's his company, and Sting I can understand because he was the first big name that went to TNA. But seriously too much clutter of old people leaves less room for younger people.

Secondly, use the damn X-Division. These are the guys who put TNA on the map, the guys who came in from day one and have still continued to show up and put on great matches. People like Christopher Daniels, AJ Styles, Chris Sabin, Amazing Red, and even Shannon Moore all put TNA's X-Division on notice. In fact, when TNA had all its focus on X-Division, there was way more talk than there is now. Why take the focus off the Division that made you who you are. And to liven the X-Division up, bring back Elix Skipper and The Naturals... and of course Petey Williams.

Third, bring back Triple X (Elix Skipper and Daniels) as well as LAX, and Chris Harris. To me, Triple X and AMW will always be the rivalry that got me into tag team wrestling once again. I mean just the chemistry that these two teams had was so amazing and so breath taking that I could literally sit back and watch it over and over again.

Four, advertise the holy high hell out of the X-Division. These guys go in there and bust their asses off for merely nothing. Imagine what they can do if you give them something to be joyful for, like more tv time for example. The X-Division is simply the best pure division in the world, and offers the best matches.

Five, give more X-Division guys a shot at top titles. Guys like Kazarian, Christopher Daniels, and Alex Shelley are all potential Global or World champions, the Machine Guns are perfect candidates for the tag belts. Use these guys to your advantage, and show the world that high flyers can be main eventers.


And there you see it, my five ways for TNA to get fans, and as you can see I didn't even mention the 6 sided ring. I mean to be honest, I hated that thing for a while, and TNA produced top notch weekly ppvs for a whole year before they even thought about going six sided.

 

[WWE Manster03]

I would love for them to realize their strengths, but sadly I just don't see it happening for quite some time. They are to focused on beating WWE that they don't see what they have going for them. Knockouts/X Divsion are highlights that should be showcased but I honestly believe Vince Russo has the McMahon mindset that smaller wrestlers and women don't draw as much as established names. When Scott D'Amore booked the knockouts, they were exciting to watch and I can honestly say I was impressed every single week by Kong vs Gail Kim, ODB vs Roxxi and stuff like that. Now that Russo books them, it seems he makes them a side note on the show. X Division is the same thing. Daniels vs Styles or Petey Williams vs Eric Young or Kaz vs Jay Lethal/Sunjay Dutt were phenominal, but now they shit all over these guys. I have noticed that lately they have been working with the X Division much more, which leads me to believe that Bischoff may be booking them now instead of Russo. But until they get a filter for Russo's ideas, I don't see them realizing what they have to work with, and I could see alot of the talent getting upset and jumping to ROH, New Japan, AAA, or WWE.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

So basically, you want them to revert back to the way things used to be? You want everyone and anyone (besides guys who hit big spots) who came into TNA on or after January 4th to hit the road. But keep Team 3D around, right? Because they aren't just as freaking useless as the Nasty Boys?

What you want from TNA is to go back to way things were before. You want them to focus on a bunch of no-name guys who didn't draw squat. I like guys like Kazarian, Amazing Red, and Daniels. But they do NOT draw tv ratings. And they never will if they don't get some exposure. Hogan is bringing in these old guys so people will start watching again. That's it. You think he believes Scott Hall is the future of TNA? If you actually believe that, you are either A. Bitter because your beloved product is going through some changes, or B. You are smoking crack.

I think the X-Division should be featured more often, certainly. There are tons of spot fest-loving monkeys out there who want to see a stunt show. But that is a minority audience. They tried being totally original, and it didn't work. They were where they were 3 years ago. And still are. Is Hogan making anything a lot better? No. But he is bringing in faces that people know, and care about. That is the ONLY way to introduce those fans to NEW faces. Why can't some of you understand that is just the way it freakin works???

 

[Trill Co$by]

Because it's not how it works. TNA gained exposure through the X-Division, not through the legends that had been there. TNA used the X-Division to sell tickets in the past and they could use them now. I mean if AJ Styles, who molded the X-division, can go off and become TNA world champion then that's just showing how much those "No-Name guys" are drawing in money. And then, for him to go off and do it four times, that's showing just how much more of a draw he is.

If guys like Kazarian, Eric Young, and the Machine Guns are getting a louder reaction than the hasbeens, then obviously they can draw big numbers.

Not to mention, I did say for them to keep Angle, Sting, RVD, Hardy, Dudleys, and Double J. And there's a reason for that. Those men aren't too old to work solid matches and get good ratings. These guys are known from WCW, ECW, WWE, and even Japan... Kurt Angle was one of WWE's biggest draws and so was Jeff Hardy. So I don't mind those guys staying around.

However, people like the Nasty Boys (who limp every time they come down the ramp) have no place in the ring anymore. As much as I loved watching them in WCW, their time is done. Even though they did manage to get Jimmy Hart on weekly television, I still think that Nasty Boys are out dated.

Hall and Waltman, I wouldn't have a problem with staying if they hadn't ditched TNA before. I mean they've been given countless of chances and they always managed to screw it up. Why the hell should I even bother watching them when I know they're going to leave sometime soon?

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Because it's not how it works. TNA gained exposure through the X-Division, not through the legends that had been there. TNA used the X-Division to sell tickets in the past and they could use them now. I mean if AJ Styles, who molded the X-division, can go off and become TNA world champion then that's just showing how much those "No-Name guys" are drawing in money. And then, for him to go off and do it four times, that's showing just how much more of a draw he is.

If guys like Kazarian, Eric Young, and the Machine Guns are getting a louder reaction than the hasbeens, then obviously they can draw big numbers.

Not to mention, I did say for them to keep Angle, Sting, RVD, Hardy, Dudleys, and Double J. And there's a reason for that. Those men aren't too old to work solid matches and get good ratings. These guys are known from WCW, ECW, WWE, and even Japan... Kurt Angle was one of WWE's biggest draws and so was Jeff Hardy. So I don't mind those guys staying around.

However, people like the Nasty Boys (who limp every time they come down the ramp) have no place in the ring anymore. As much as I loved watching them in WCW, their time is done. Even though they did manage to get Jimmy Hart on weekly television, I still think that Nasty Boys are out dated.

Hall and Waltman, I wouldn't have a problem with staying if they hadn't ditched TNA before. I mean they've been given countless of chances and they always managed to screw it up. Why the hell should I even bother watching them when I know they're going to leave sometime soon?

Yes, TNA gained SOME exposure from the X-Division, but not enough to compete with WWE. And like it or not, that is who they are trying to compete with. Selling tickets at house shows is a hell of a lot easier than drawing a good rating on television, which is their goal. Sure, they can fill up almost any 5,000 seat venue in the U.S., Great Britain, and Canada, but can they draw a 2.0 on television focusing on their homegrown guys and the X Division? No, they cannot. If they could have, they would have.

AJ Styles is a draw...sort of. Don't get me wrong here, he's very talented, probably the best guy TNA has outside of Kurt Angle. For house shows, and the Impact zone, he draws. But he is not a household name. WWE probably has 20 guys who are more well known across the U.S., U.K. and Canada. AJ can be a big draw, if he gets the exposure to do so. Can Hogan increase their viewership? I don't know. But I would say they have a hell of lot better chance with him than before he got there. And creating exposure comes a lot easier when you have familiar faces. The company has been around since the summer of 2002, and hasn't even come close to being competition with the WWE. I am not saying they should focus on competing with the WWE, but they are.

The guys like Kazarian, EY, and MCMG's are getting big receptions because the same people go to the impact zone week in and week out, and have been watching some of these "originals" for years. They are die hard TNA fans. Hogan/Bischoff want to make those fans happy, but I guarantee they are more concerned with TV ratings and PPV buys, which will only come by adding new/old fans that do not watch currently. Those guys do not bring in high tv ratings, not yet. Eventually, if they get enough exposure through Hogan bringing in "hasbeens," they will be able to generate the ratings themselves. But that CANNOT happen without mainstream exposure, and that can't happen without familiar faces. I am not sure why this is so hard for you to comprehend.

Nasty Boys need to go. Period. I agree, they stink. They can barely move, and add nothing to the company. But Team 3D isn't far behind them. They are not half as good as they were 10-12 years ago, and need to retire soon as well. I have a feeling you were most likely an ECW mark before it was shut down, but I could be wrong about that. And I never said that you said to get rid of the guys you listed. Sting, Angle, RVD, etc. can wrestle, and more important to TNA management, they can draw tv ratings. It's all about the tv ratings and ppv buys. Small house shows and the impact zone are already established, they need home viewers.

Why bother watching Hall and Waltman because they are leaving soon? I don't know, to try and get some enjoyment out of a good angle? Can Hall wrestle anymore? No. Waltman? Maybe, but who cares. They were brought in to bring back the older crowd that A. Watches WWE, and/or B. Doesn't watch at all anymore. Ratings, as a whole for professional wrestling, are down. Where did those fans go? They're not watching for a reason. I don't know what that reason is, but why not bring back some familiar faces to get them back into it? I hate to break it to you, but TNA isn't concerned with only what you want. They are concerned with getting people to watch their TV show and buy their PPV's. And that will not happen without familiar faces. It just won't. It's not that complicated.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

TNA gained SOME exposure with the X Division among indy and internet fans. The IWC is not nearly enough for TNA to catch up to the WWE. TNA catered to the whims of the IWC before and were no closer to being able to legitimately compete with the WWE than they are now.

TNA's focus right now is increasing the size of its audience. That was the primary purpose for bringing in all these older and more established names. I agree that many of them aren't needed at all, just can't get it up anymore and just need to hit the road. However, there is NOBODY on the TNA roster from the homegrown TNA talent, there's NOBODY from the indy scene that can accomplish what TNA wants right now. Those are just the plain, simple facts.

TNA is a company with an audience primarily of internet fans and fans of the indy circuit and those are the fans that TNA focused on for most of its existence. TNA has some wrestlers that are extremely talented inside the ring, don't get me wrong on that, but most of them can't draw a dime when compared to their competition. TNA decided to "declare war" on the WWE. They wanted to go head to head with the biggest wrestling company in the world and the simple truth of it is that they simply were not and are not ready to do that. They don't have the talent to draw viewers, they don't have the marketing ability, they don't have the production values, they don't have the management.

Now, would I personally like to see more attention be devoted to the X Division? I most definitely would. The fact that TNA has virtually no mid-card scene right now isn't doing it any favors. Most of TNA's attention right now is on the older and more established wrestlers and the main event scene. Everything else is at a distant second. However, just because I would like to see more of the X Division doesn't mean that it's going to draw anymore viewers to iMPACT! than it did before.

 

[PsychoBlack]

TNA in my opinion simply needs better booking bring back scott d'amore and let raven do some booking have bischoff in charge as we all know he can put on a show russo sucked in wcw so why wouldnt he suck in TNA? double j needs tolet him go

 

[psykohurricane]

TNA gained SOME exposure with the X Division among indy and internet fans. The IWC is not nearly enough for TNA to catch up to the WWE. TNA catered to the whims of the IWC before and were no closer to being able to legitimately compete with the WWE than they are now.

Nut that's exactly the reason TNa isn't catching on, because they are in fact trying to get the IWC to watch their show. How many time last monday did Mike Tenay mentions to go and Text your friend during the broadcast? How many time do they mentions the follow Dixie Carter on Twitter or got to their website to see the pre and post show? TNA wants the IWC to watch thier show and then convince their friends to watch TNA so personally, if that's the main focus right now, they should catered to the whims of the IWC because thier the only ones that goes on the wrestling websites and chat anout wrestling and use all these other websites like twitter and facebook to talk about wrestling.

Personally, i'm glad Hogan is there because let'S face it, like him or not, he's still a reconisable name but like i said before, he does need all the crap russo and bischoff are writing right now to make TNA better, TNA was fine before all this crap happened and all they needed was the right big name guy to come in and help TNA out.

 

[Slyfox696]

And another thread whining about how TNA isn't using the guys that no one cares about. How many of these can we have?

The fact is that with the Chris Sabin's and the Elix Skipper's of the world being featured in TNA, they were drawing .3 ratings on Friday afternoon on Fox Sports. Those guys weren't getting TNA anywhere. It wasn't until they started signing the big names like Sting, Christian, Kurt Angle, etc., that they really started to shoot up in prominence. Hell, they're currently going head to head with the number 1 weekly cable television show. Not just in wrestling, but in all of cable. You're telling me that featuring Alex Shelley would have got them this far? Not a chance.

Finally, and what people always seem to fail to remember, is that having the older big names in TNA is nothing new. DDP, Hall, Sean Walton, Randy Savage, Sting, La Parka, Juventud Guerrera, Ken Shamrock, Buff Bagwell, Rick Steiner, etc., all worked in TNA prior to the year 2005. This isn't a new thing, it's just a thing.

And it's working.

 

[philbrooks]

And another thread whining about how TNA isn't using the guys that no one cares about. How many of these can we have?

The fact is that with the Chris Sabin's and the Elix Skipper's of the world being featured in TNA, they were drawing .3 ratings on Friday afternoon on Fox Sports. Those guys weren't getting TNA anywhere. It wasn't until they started signing the big names like Sting, Christian, Kurt Angle, etc., that they really started to shoot up in prominence. Hell, they're currently going head to head with the number 1 weekly cable television show. Not just in wrestling, but in all of cable. You're telling me that featuring Alex Shelley would have got them this far? Not a chance.

Finally, and what people always seem to fail to remember, is that having the older big names in TNA is nothing new. DDP, Hall, Sean Walton, Randy Savage, Sting, La Parka, Juventud Guerrera, Ken Shamrock, Buff Bagwell, Rick Steiner, etc., all worked in TNA prior to the year 2005. This isn't a new thing, it's just a thing.

And it's working.

It is not working they are operating at a loss and they hit Fox Sports Net level ratings last week on the faulty pretense that Monday was Wrestling night. Even with Spike spilting the costs on some of the talent a good number of them are cost prohibitive.

 

[Slyfox696]

It is not working they are operating at a loss

Yeah? Prove it. Provide me with one formal document from TNA's business side they are operating at a loss.

and they hit Fox Sports Net level ratings last week on the faulty pretense that Monday was Wrestling night.

Yes, and I'm sure the Raw after Wrestlemania, with Bret Hart and HBK's farewell had NOTHING to do with that.

Even with Spike spilting the costs on some of the talent a good number of them are cost prohibitive.

What are you basing this on? Are you an accountant at TNA? Please tell me how you seem to have inside information no one else has access to. Last I checked, TNA was not a publicly traded company, and thus, didn't have to make any financial records public.

Please share where you got your information. Oh, for argument's sake, let's say you are right and TNA is operating at a loss...how is that any different than what they were doing years ago before the big names came? You know, aside from the fact that mainstream wrestling fans may actually know who they are now. Basically I want two things from you.

1) Share your sources from TNA that says they are operating at a loss.

2) Explain how, if TNA is indeed operating at a loss, how that is different than before, while also acknowledging the improved visibility these bigger named stars have given TNA.

 

[philbrooks]

Dave Meltzer stated last month they were operating at a loss. Whlie a number of publications have stated that Spike is spiltting contracts with TNA it is practice which goes all the way back to the signings Sting and Angle. It is hardly a secret practice.

Ok last week they were down 50% instead of the 20-30% they achieved on Thursdays. Your point?

 

[Slyfox696]

Dave Meltzer stated last month they were operating at a loss.

Well, if Dave fuckin' Meltzer said it...

Whlie a number of publications have stated that Spike is spiltting contracts with TNA it is practice which goes all the way back to the signings Sting and Angle. It is hardly a secret practice.

That's great, I never disputed Spike splitting contracts, what is your point? I want you to tell me how they are "cost prohibitive".

Ok last week they were down 50% instead of the 20-30% they achieved on Thursdays. Your point?

My point is you never responded to my points. You never provided me with an official document stating TNA's losses, you just gave me Dave Meltzer, a man who has no officials ties with the company, and is loathed by just about everyone in charge currently with TNA. You also never discussed how, even if TNA was operating at a loss, how that is different than what they were doing years ago, except for the increased visibility they now enjoy.

Perhaps you didn't see that part of my post, as I added it later. Feel free to respond now. I'll even repeat for you:

Basically I want two things from you.

1) Share your sources from TNA that says they are operating at a loss.

2) Explain how, if TNA is indeed operating at a loss, how that is different than before, while also acknowledging the improved visibility these bigger named stars have given TNA.

 

[philbrooks]

1) Share your sources from TNA that says they are operating at a loss.

2) Explain how, if TNA is indeed operating at a loss, how that is different than before, while also acknowledging the improved visibility these bigger named stars have given TNA.

1) Like I said Dave Meltzer said they were operating at a loss.

2) They were operating at a profit and they are operating at a loss so I dont see the benifit on TNA's bottom line. Despite the rating on 1/4 which was evidently to do with nostalgia more than anything else TNA has gained very little in the visibility stakes and what visibility they gained was very short lived.

 

[Slyfox696]

1) Like I said Dave Meltzer said they were operating at a loss.

And like I said, Dave Meltzer is not affiliated with TNA in any way, and most, if not all, of the people in charge of TNA loathe him.

2) They were operating at a profit and they are operating at a loss so I dont see the benifit on TNA's bottom line. Despite the rating on 1/4 which was evidently to do with nostalgia more than anything else TNA has gained very little in the visibility stakes and what visibility they gained was very short lived.

Wait...when were they operating at a profit? The only time I saw anything close, was a small profit at the end of 2007, with projections for a profitable 2008...which, by the way, is when they started to bring in more and more star power.

So, why would we drop guys like Scott Hall for guys like Matt Bentley, when the company has done better with guys like Scott Hall? That doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[philbrooks]

And like I said, Dave Meltzer is not affiliated with TNA in any way, and most, if not all, of the people in charge of TNA loathe him.

Wrestlezone seem more than happy to copy and paste from his newsletter so I don’t get why you have should such an attitude about him. Not only he has sources in that company but he has friends which are public knowledge in TNA from main eventers to long standing office staff. He was the first person to go public on the news that TNA broke even and were making a profit in 2007 something which later Dixie herself confirmed later. I doubt you were doing the oh if Dave Meltzer said it act when he reported they were making a profit. Did you?

Wait...when were they operating at a profit? The only time I saw anything close, was a small profit at the end of 2007, with projections for a profitable 2008...which, by the way, is when they started to bring in more and more star power.

Slyfox see my comment above for a partial answer to this comment. Im not arguing against bringing in star power. The issue is very few so called stars have proven they still have star power in TNA in 2010. TNA need to stick with the stars which actually draw and get rid of the rest.

So, why would we drop guys like Scott Hall for guys like Matt Bentley, when the company has done better with guys like Scott Hall? That doesn't make any sense to me.

Some guys dont have star power anymore and Hall is one of them. Show me a segment which has had a significant increase in ratings which Hall was the focus or part focus of outside of the nostalgia rating of the 1/4 show.

 

[Slyfox696]

Wrestlezone seem more than happy to copy and paste from his newsletter so I don’t get why you have should such an attitude about him. Not only he has sources in that company but he has friends which are public knowledge in TNA from main eventers to long standing office staff. He was the first person to go public on the news that TNA broke even and were making a profit in 2007 something which later Dixie herself confirmed later. I doubt you were doing the oh if Dave Meltzer said it act when he reported they were making a profit. Did you?

I've been saying that for years. I've never been a fan of anything Meltzer related, as he is incredibly overrated and has such a bias I don't see why ANYONE takes him seriously.

But, again, you're not addressing my comment. Please direct me to where an official TNA source has said they are losing money with all the stars they now have, more so than they did before they got those stars.

Slyfox see my comment above for a partial answer to this comment. Im not arguing against bringing in star power. The issue is very few so called stars have proven they still have star power in TNA in 2010. TNA need to stick with the stars which actually draw and get rid of the rest.



Some guys dont have star power anymore and Hall is one of them. Show me a segment which has had a significant increase in ratings which Hall was the focus or part focus of outside of the nostalgia rating of the 1/4 show.

I'll include these two together, since they're basically the same thing.

It's not about drawing on individual segments, it's about drawing as a product. Very few workers are individually good draws...but when you put together a product that is known and respected by wrestling fans, then you draw overall. Essentially, the sum is greater than the parts, when it comes to wrestling.

Here's an example. Let's say there was a card, and the only wrestler on that card that you knew was Samoa Joe, and the rest were a bunch of no-names. Would most people go watch that match? Not likely. But let's say that, in addition to Joe, we also throw in Styles, Daniels, RVD, MCMG, Jerry Lynn, and Rhino. Does that not sound like a much more interesting card? Of course it does.

But, let's up the example again. Instead of the ones mentioned before, let's say Samoa Joe appears with Hulk Hogan, AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Mr. Kennedy, Jeff Hardy, Booker T, Team 3D, and Ric Flair.


Now, honestly, which of those groupings do you think most fans would rather see? The last one, of course. That's how guys like Hall and Nash are more productive than guys like Matt Bentley and Elix Skipper.

 

[philbrooks]

I've been saying that for years. I've never been a fan of anything Meltzer related, as he is incredibly overrated and has such a bias I don't see why ANYONE takes him seriously.

Please elaborate.

But, again, you're not addressing my comment. Please direct me to where an official TNA source has said they are losing money with all the stars they now have, more so than they did before they got those stars.

I dont see why an employee would come out publicly in this economy that a private firm was making a loss. I cant provide you with that information for that reason.

Again Dave Meltzer said it. I believe him given his track record, the fact that he has sources in TNA some of whom are public knowledge and that he was the first person to report that TNA were in profit. While simple common sense would tell anyone a company who was mildly profitable before ramping up production and signing some if not the most high price free agents in Wrestling is now operating at a loss.

I'll include these two together, since they're basically the same thing.

It's not about drawing on individual segments, it's about drawing as a product. Very few workers are individually good draws...but when you put together a product that is known and respected by wrestling fans, then you draw overall. Essentially, the sum is greater than the parts, when it comes to wrestling.

Here's an example. Let's say there was a card, and the only wrestler on that card that you knew was Samoa Joe, and the rest were a bunch of no-names. Would most people go watch that match? Not likely. But let's say that, in addition to Joe, we also throw in Styles, Daniels, RVD, MCMG, Jerry Lynn, and Rhino. Does that not sound like a much more interesting card? Of course it does.

But, let's up the example again. Instead of the ones mentioned before, let's say Samoa Joe appears with Hulk Hogan, AJ Styles, Kurt Angle, Mr. Kennedy, Jeff Hardy, Booker T, Team 3D, and Ric Flair.


Now, honestly, which of those groupings do you think most fans would rather see? The last one, of course. That's how guys like Hall and Nash are more productive than guys like Matt Bentley and Elix Skipper.

I get what you are saying there is a halo or syngery effect when you present a group of stars together as a package. But I still think they could be more selective in how many they hired due to diseconomies of scale.

Im not arguing about Matt Bentley and Elix Skipper. All Im advocating for is the right mix of stars and potential stars to enable TNA to grow as TNA is having difficulty drawing as a product/brand and given the reports about their financial situation.

 

[Slyfox696]

Please elaborate.

Not the thread thread for it. It's been a while, but there may be a thread in the Archives about it. Seems like there was once a thread on the subject.

I dont see why an employee would come out publicly in this economy that a private firm was making a loss. I cant provide you with that information for that reason.

Then what you saying is complete conjecture, which has no place in any reasonable debate. I THINK Hulk Hogan is a demi-god, but I can't prove it, and thus, don't say it.

Just an example.

Again Dave Meltzer said it. I believe him given his track record, the fact that he has sources in TNA some of whom are public knowledge and that he was the first person to report that TNA were in profit. While simple common sense would tell anyone a company who was mildly profitable before ramping up production and signing some if not the most high price free agents in Wrestling is now operating at a loss.

Except you have no idea what the business is doing, and how much those guys are getting paid. Maybe the guys like Hall and the Nasty Boys are making very low "per appearance" deals. Perhaps TNA has scaled back their advertising dollars. Perhaps TNA has shut down various lines of merchandise production which cost them money, without profitable return. Maybe they privately re-negotiated a deal with SpikeTV.

When you have no idea what is going on behind the scenes, you simply CANNOT state to a modicum of certainty how much money TNA is or is not making. Which means that any such statements cannot be made by an responsible debater.

Which, finally, means you cannot use such statements to attack the business decisions of TNA, whilst holding any type of respect in the debate.

I get what you are saying there is a halo or syngery effect when you present a group of stars together as a package. But I still think they could be more selective in how many they hired due to diseconomies of scale.

Im not arguing about Matt Bentley and Elix Skipper. All Im advocating for is the right mix of stars and potential stars to enable TNA to grow as TNA is having difficulty drawing as a product/brand and given the reports about their financial situation.

As we have now established, your putting your own personal and unsubstantiated opinions into your debate on what TNA should do.

However, look what TNA has DONE. In only 8 years of business, they've grown to be the undisputed #2 wrestling company in America. They've gone from promoting to a couple thousand viewers each week on PPV, to serving up to 1.5 million viewers each week on cable television. They run house shows, take PPVs on the road, and are now competing head to head (well, for now) with the biggest wrestling show juggernaut in America.


You're presenting unsubstantiated opinion that TNA is not doing well...I'm showing you pure facts that TNA has done very well.

 

[philbrooks]

Not the thread thread for it. It's been a while, but there may be a thread in the Archives about it. Seems like there was once a thread on the subject.

Please link me you know the place better than I do obviously. Im guessing with it being in the archives I cant respond to it. So post it here.

Then what you saying is complete conjecture, which has no place in any reasonable debate. I THINK Hulk Hogan is a demi-god, but I can't prove it, and thus, don't say it.

Just an example.

It isnt conjecture with me one rational reason why a TNA employee in this ecomony would go on record publicly about the state of TNA's finances.

Except you have no idea what the business is doing, and how much those guys are getting paid. Maybe the guys like Hall and the Nasty Boys are making very low "per appearance" deals. Perhaps TNA has scaled back their advertising dollars. Perhaps TNA has shut down various lines of merchandise production which cost them money, without profitable return. Maybe they privately re-negotiated a deal with SpikeTV.

Dave Meltzer does as he is friends & sources with a number of the highest earners and with those in the main office. You are using a lot maybes that would more than likely would have been reported.

When you have no idea what is going on behind the scenes, you simply CANNOT state to a modicum of certainty how much money TNA is or is not making. Which means that any such statements cannot be made by an responsible debater.

Which, finally, means you cannot use such statements to attack the business decisions of TNA, whilst holding any type of respect in the debate.

Apply this to most of the debates on this web site. Sorry but I see no outward sign of TNA generating a level of revenue needed to sign so many name talent which six months seemed to be outside of their budget.

However, look what TNA has DONE. In only 8 years of business, they've grown to be the undisputed #2 wrestling company in America. They've gone from promoting to a couple thousand viewers each week on PPV, to serving up to 1.5 million viewers each week on cable television. They run house shows, take PPVs on the road, and are now competing head to head (well, for now) with the biggest wrestling show juggernaut in America.

ECW did all that (pretty much and better in instances) in six years and they went out of business soon after that. Your point?

You're presenting unsubstantiated opinion that TNA is not doing well...I'm showing you pure facts that TNA has done very well.

It isnt unsubstantiated opinion it was something said by the same person who reported TNA was turning a profit in the first place. I dont want to repeat myself so Ill sumise by saying Dave Meltzer is a reliable source of information on matter such as this.

 

[Slyfox696]

Please link me you know the place better than I do obviously. Im guessing with it being in the archives I cant respond to it. So post it here.

Then start a new thread in the General section if you want. I'm not going to take this thread off-topic, in a non-spam zone.

It isnt conjecture with me one rational reason why a TNA employee in this ecomony would go on record publicly about the state of TNA's finances.

No, what I meant was, if you can't give an official source for your opinion that TNA is losing money, then your opinion is based completely upon conjecture, and thus, retains no credibility.

Dave Meltzer does as he is friends & sources with a number of the highest earners and with those in the main office. You are using a lot maybes that would more than likely would have been reported.

I'm not trying to say any of those "maybes" actually happened, what I'm saying is that, with absolutely ZERO hard evidence to back up your statement, you have no ability to state with an ounce of credibility that TNA is losing money, based simply upon the fact you THINK some of these guys are making a lot of money.

Make sense?

Apply this to most of the debates on this web site. Sorry but I see no outward sign of TNA generating a level of revenue needed to sign so many name talent which six months seemed to be outside of their budget.

Again, you have no idea how much money those name talents are making, not to mention, as you yourself said, how much of that money is being provided by SpikeTV.

ECW did all that (pretty much and better in instances) in six years and they went out of business soon after that. Your point?

ECW was never the #2 wrestling promotion, ECW didn't control 1/10th of the available wrestling audience (whereas TNA currently has about 1/3), and promoted in arguably the most expensive time period in wrestling history, not to mention the number of lawsuits they faced and the fact Heyman was notoriously bad about managing money.

None of those things apply here.

It isnt unsubstantiated opinion it was something said by the same person who reported TNA was turning a profit in the first place.

Which was complete rumor until Dixie Carter said it.

I dont want to repeat myself so Ill sumise by saying Dave Meltzer is a reliable source of information on matter such as this.

No he's not, and certainly not now, with Eric Bischoff in charge who hates Dave Meltzer, and from what I understand, Hogan isn't exactly a fan of his either.

Meltzer is just like any other dirtsheet...sometimes he gets some things right, other times he doesn't.

 

[philbrooks]

Then start a new thread in the General section if you want. I'm not going to take this thread off-topic, in a non-spam zone.

No, what I meant was, if you can't give an official source for your opinion that TNA is losing money, then your opinion is based completely upon conjecture, and thus, retains no credibility.

I'm not trying to say any of those "maybes" actually happened, what I'm saying is that, with absolutely ZERO hard evidence to back up your statement, you have no ability to state with an ounce of credibility that TNA is losing money, based simply upon the fact you THINK some of these guys are making a lot of money.

Make sense?

Dave Meltzer is a credible source like it or not. Nobody in TNA directly refuted what he said.

Again, you have no idea how much money those name talents are making, not to mention, as you yourself said, how much of that money is being provided by SpikeTV.

Which is an arangement reported by Meltzer and others independently, just saying.

ECW was never the #2 wrestling promotion, ECW didn't control 1/10th of the available wrestling audience (whereas TNA currently has about 1/3), and promoted in arguably the most expensive time period in wrestling history, not to mention the number of lawsuits they faced and the fact Heyman was notoriously bad about managing money.

TNA is competiting a company the size of WCW. Also ECW didnt have a parent company funding it.

Which was complete rumor until Dixie Carter said it.

Okay....

No he's not, and certainly not now, with Eric Bischoff in charge who hates Dave Meltzer, and from what I understand, Hogan isn't exactly a fan of his either.

Same Eric Bischoff who was in three time weekly contact with Dave during the Monday Night Wars? Same Eric Bischoff who was giving Dave minute by minute updates of the failed Fusient deal to buy WCW?

Hogan and Meltzer spoke fairly regularly as well.

Meltzer is just like any other dirtsheet...sometimes he gets some things right, other times he doesn't.

Dirtsheet? Are you a professional wrestler from the 1980s or something? You can make that claim of sometimes he gets some things right, other times he doesn't about anyone. Ill never state Meltzer is infallible but his track record on these issues speaks for itself and so does his reputation as a journalist.

 

[LigerBomb]

Ok for everyone who has been watching TNA since the early years, or for everyone who wants something different, this is the topic on how TNA can win the Monday Night War... or at least get higher ratings.

First and foremost, they need to take out The Band, The Nasty Boys, and all those other old guys and just keep Angle (41), Team 3D(38)(37), RVD (39), and Hardy(32)... those five can still work solid matches and make them look decent. Jeff Jarret I can understand as it's his company, and Sting I can understand because he was the first big name that went to TNA. But seriously too much clutter of old people leaves less room for younger people.

Is it about old vs. young or working solid matches? Make up your mind.

Secondly, use the damn X-Division. These are the guys who put TNA on the map, the guys who came in from day one and have still continued to show up and put on great matches.

What map? It's not as if TNA was a ratings and viewership powerhouse and now is a floundering failure of a company

People like Christopher Daniels, AJ Styles, Chris Sabin, Amazing Red, and even Shannon Moore all put TNA's X-Division on notice.

"On Notice". I don't think those words mean what you think they mean. BTW one guy isn't with the company any more and another has been Champion...

In fact, when TNA had all its focus on X-Division, there was way more talk than there is now.

Talk between whom? Wrestling fans already watching the product? And btw, the supposed talking couldn't have mattered that much as it was never reflected in viewership or sales or any kind.

Why take the focus off the Division that made you who you are. And to liven the X-Division up, bring back Elix Skipper and The Naturals... and of course Petey Williams.

What did it make them I wonder? Again, this would mean more if what they were then was somehow better than what they are now, but that's not the case. And actually wouldn't it be: "...made you who you were?"

Third, bring back Triple X (Elix Skipper and Daniels) as well as LAX, and Chris Harris. To me, Triple X and AMW will always be the rivalry that got me into tag team wrestling once again. I mean just the chemistry that these two teams had was so amazing and so breath taking that I could literally sit back and watch it over and over again.

I thought this was how to "Win the Monday Night War or ...at least get higher ratings", yet all you mentioned was how much this group meant to you, personally. One guy sitting there watching the same match over and over again won't accomplish either goal. I mean, since you're already watching they already have your rating point locked up regardless.

Four, advertise the holy high hell out of the X-Division. These guys go in there and bust their asses off for merely nothing. Imagine what they can do if you give them something to be joyful for, like more tv time for example. The X-Division is simply the best pure division in the world, and offers the best matches.

Opinion at best... and opinion that is never reflected by the supposed ratings increase you claim this is all about. BTW, doing dangerous unnecessary spots for merely nothing isn't something to reward or think highly of... in fact it seems pretty stupid.

Five, give more X-Division guys a shot at top titles. Guys like Kazarian, Christopher Daniels, and Alex Shelley are all potential Global or World champions, the Machine Guns are perfect candidates for the tag belts. Use these guys to your advantage, and show the world that high flyers can be main eventers.

Lets see how AJ does first before we rush to any conclusions... which seems to be what they're doing. I know AJ isn't the be all end all of the X-Division, but in the same manner the X-Division isn't all a bunch of AJs either.

And there you see it, my five ways for TNA to get fans, and as you can see I didn't even mention the 6 sided ring. I mean to be honest, I hated that thing for a while, and TNA produced top notch weekly ppvs for a whole year before they even thought about going six sided.

The ring is a moot point. Most of you're five ways haven't worked when tried in the past (why try again?) and others are still on a what and see basis.
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There's no point in being a damn fool about it."
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results."

 

[Foley For Champ]

as much as i would love the young talent in TNA to come to the fore and TNA to be truly competitive with the WWE, forcing the 'E to actually try for the first time since 2001, the simple fact is, you have more of a chance of someone on the street, or even a wrestling fan from a while back who isnt really into it anymore, recognising a Kevin Nash or a Hogan or a Flair than an Alex Shelly or a Robert Roode. When they become somewhat of a threat, build your new stars, but at the moment, a world title match between Amazing Red and Chris Sabin isnt going to sell tickets, from what ive heard they have enough trouble with it anyway.