Who's the Target?

[gd]

Target Audience that is. With the WWE recently changing to the PG rating and pushing so called "kid friendly" superstars such as John Cena and Jeff Hardy, the consenus is that they are marketing toward the kiddies. That being said, what do you think TNA's target audience is? I think TNA managment is more interested in the 18-35 demographic.

Many of their top stars' primes were in the late 90s when wreslting was at it's peak. I'm sure that they are hoping to attract some of those fans with names like Nash, Booker, and Sting. Some of TNA's storylines can be considered more "edgy" and probably wouldn't be seen in the WWE today. For example, Madison Rayne sleeping with Slick Johnson. In my opinion, it looks like TNA is focusing on the 20 year old male demographic, and I think that is a good thing. It gives us a different type of wrestling program where we can expect to see anything.

What is your opinion? What group do you think TNA is targeting and do you think it is the right decision?

 

[Nascarman]

I comply agree with you. WWE is hurting the product with PG TV. TNAwould be wise to be edgy. BUT didn't Raw leave spike because they wouldn't lett them be eddgy. so Spike might hold them down.\

They need to use some of there talent from the 90's tho.
I like the MEM but they Domnonate the TNA guys. and never have lagit comtishion.
I Know he is washed up and old but i think jerret folly aj should get some money and hire nash to there side. he is to good on the mic to have him stand in kurt angle's shadow. and he allways says he goes where the money do. I say if they gave Foly a title run then Nash could have a little one. could not hurt Sting vrs Angle has been done to deth.

 

[s-dog]

I comply agree with you. WWE is hurting the product with PG TV. TNAwould be wise to be edgy. BUT didn't Raw leave spike because they wouldn't lett them be eddgy. so Spike might hold them down.

I find it very hard to believe that WWE would leave Spike if they weren't allowed to be edgey, WWE didn't just think up the whole PG TV thing overnight, trust me. It would have been a few years in the making as they most likely realised "Q: Hey, how did we get a cult following in the first place? A: During the 80's when we had Hulk Hogan having kids by the edge of their seats cheering for him." Now if you tell me THAT wasn't PG TV then i don't know what is.

Back to the thread, in my opinion i believe that TNA is trying to aim more towards 18-30 males as they are fans that were most likely around during the "Attitude Era" and through the NWO storyline, so this current storyline would be like a bit of nostalga which would then get them hooked on the current product IF TNA remain "edgey". I also seriously doubt that Spike would hold TNA down because if they gave it some thought TNA is really on the way up, and WWE has become stagnant until it is challenged. So TNA would be a wise investment in my opinion.

 

[gd]

I comply agree with you. WWE is hurting the product with PG TV. TNAwould be wise to be edgy. BUT didn't Raw leave spike because they wouldn't lett them be eddgy. so Spike might hold them down.\

First of all, learn to spell. Second of all, I never said WWE was hurting itself with the PG rating, in fact and didn't even imply it. I just made the statement that WWE was doing one thing, and it appeared that TNA was doing something different. As far as Spike TV being edgy, I believe that is the same channel that features MANswers, which is basically just about booze and sex. The only thing I've heard Spike is against is man on woman violence, but there are plenty of other things TNA can do to be edgy.

 

[My$terio_Fan]

I say they are targeting the older audience for sure. Males 18-40, seeing how this is the key demographic for Spike TV viewers. It makes sence that they are catering to these fans since it's men this age that usually watch Spike to begin with. Also Spike is an "edgier" channel to begin with, the majority of the shows are for a older audience.

With that said, I wouldn't be surprised if they started targeting a younger audience sooner or later just because teens/kids=merchandise. But I think it's smarter to try and attract the older crowd since the WWE is obviously edging towards the kiddies. It gives the older crowd something else to watch if they find the WWE to PG.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

As far as "edgy" goes, I don't particularlly see anything all that edgy about Slick Johnson coming out of a shower, inferring he was getting a little somethin' somethin' from Madison Rayne. TNA doesn't throw around very many 4 letter words, with the exception of damn or hell sometimes and an occassional ass. There's hardly ever any blood shown on Impact, though I do admit that they pull it out more for ppvs than the WWE does now. Probably Impacts overall audience is in the 18-40 male demographic since that's basically Spike's target audience.

Overall, I don't particularly see anything all that different in terms of edgy content. The term PG doesn't automatically mean "just for the kiddies" these days, particularly since 10 year olds these days are more like 10 going on 20. Back when I was 10, PG was exactly that, completely harmless without any risk of anyone being offended or harmed. That's not what PG is today, not in many cases at least. If anything, I think the WWE has tried to broaden the demographic a bit because, in the audience now, you see college kids, 10 year olds, high school kids, young parents, etc. and the WWE seems to be doing ok. In terms of ratings, Raw is doing better than they were before the Monday Night Wars really took off. It wasn't until around mid 1998 that Raw was regularly seeing 4's and greater on a regular basis.