Why Would You Purchase A TNA PPV?

[Y 2 Jake]

Honest question. I'm confused. Over here we get them on Bravo, so we don't have to pay £15 for a show like I guess Americans have to. But if I had to pay that why would I?

You get title matches on PPV. Yet the majority of the time the title is defended successfully on PPV. Then the next week on iMPACT they change the title. So you get that for free, instead of on the show that you pay to see.

Kong defeated Gail Kim on iMPACT. The tag titles were vacated on iMPACT. Angle won the title on iMPACT. Petey Williams won on iMPACT. I could probably go all day.

If people return at the PPV they say they'll make an announcement on iMPACT. I understand that they might want you to tune in on the next episode, but if the PPV is good anyway then won't that entice people to watch the show? And if people buy the show then won't they probably watch iMPACT either way?

Sure they have gimmick matches on PPV. But they also have them on TV.

Thye also have almost the same matches on PPV for months on end. I don't think Eric Young has ever had a feud that hasn't gone on forever. Booker T vs. Roode is eternally long. We're approaching two years with the Joe/Angle matches.

 

[misskim]

I'm gonna order Sacrifice for the main event, I so so so hope Scott Steiner wins the belt I don't care how he does it but he would be the best TNA champ ever not like fat ugly Joe who can't even do a promo.

Also I think the womens match will be interesting to watch altough I really wonder if they will go through with actually shaving someones head bald.

I order every TNA ppv aslong as it's outside of Orlando OR if Scott Steiner will be on it imo TNA's ppv's are much more entertaining than WWE's ppv's solely because of the fact that when I watch one I get that cool feeling I got when I watched ECW's ppv's. They're much closer to the audience, and it doesn't look like the ppv was produced on a bandwagon

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I'm gonna order Sacrifice for the main event, I so so so hope Scott Steiner wins the belt I don't care how he does it but he would be the best TNA champ ever not like fat ugly Joe who can't even do a promo.

Don't get me wrong. I love Scott Steiner. But you'd prefer him over Joe as Champ? Steiners promos are intresting. In an Ultimate Warrior kind of way. Even if you don't like Joes promos at least he's tangible.

You also say thatr Joe is fat and ugly. True. But Scott Steiner is the most muscular fat guy ever. If Joe juiced he would have exactly the same physique.

And being ugly doesn't make the slighted bit of difference. Kurt Angle could kill most people in a fight. Yet I'd prefer to to fight him over Joe. Because Joe is uglier and more intimidating.

Also I think the womens match will be interesting to watch altough I really wonder if they will go through with actually shaving someones head bald.

Well isn't that what's wrong with TNA? They constantly offer stipulations, yet never really offer a satisfying outcome.

My guess is that the female, if in fact does get shaved bald, won't get shaved bald until iMPACT. Which is kind of the point of the thread. They promis something on PPV then deliver it several days later. Yet most people will buy the PPV to see a women getting shaved bald. Thus wasting the fans money.

 

[misskim]

You also say thatr Joe is fat and ugly. True. But Scott Steiner is the most muscular fat guy ever. If Joe juiced he would have exactly the same physique.

I'm sorry that is simply wrong. Anabolic steroids only work if the user actually works out which Samoa Joe apparently doesn't. If the user doesn't work out he will just gather extra fat.

Also it's all about genetics, Scott Steiner has awesome genetics, if you use anabolic steroids and don't have the genetics to get a nice body and you work out.. Yeah you will get nice muscles but in no way can you just assume that by simply using steroids you will get a body like Scott's, it doesn't work like that. Guys like Mr Perfect, Bret Hart, Neidhart, even Regal all admit to use steroids and while getting muscular and bulky none got as nicely ripped as Scott or Buff Bagwell to name a few. Now if I'm wrong and Samoa Joe actually works out his genetics to get a muscular body are so bad there is no way he should use anabolics since he'd just get fatter.

Well isn't that what's wrong with TNA? They constantly offer stipulations, yet never really offer a satisfying outcome.

I don't really think they offer constant stipulations do you have any recent examples? Only time i was really disappointed was the match on lockdown last year with blindfolds.

 

[Kfabe]

The reason you would (should) order a TNA PPV is the same as why you order a WWE PPV.

The weekly wrestling shows (RAW/IMPACT etc) are the shows for the storytelling and buildups.
The PPV's are the place for WRESTLING. Even WWE PPV's have very little mic time and are wrestling orientated.
You order a TNA PPV so you can watch 3 hours of back to back matches, where the wrestlers get to pull out all the stops and give us what we are sometimes denied on weekly shows; great spots.

I'm glad I get the PPV's free, however I would have NO problem paying for every TNA PPV.
Fans order WWE PPV's to see the culmination of a feud/some great matches. TNA do exactly the same, yet have FAR SUPERIOR matches/wrestling. This leads me back to my idea that WWE only lead TNA in buyrates because 1) TNA's marketing sucks and half of America still haven't heared of them, 2) casual fans are swayed by WWE's polished look with their bigger arenas and titantrons...

 

[TheOneBigWill]

If I stopped to order a wrestling Pay Per View because of its quality, instead of my intense love for Professional Wrestling as a whole.. I wouldn't order T.N.A. p.p.v.'s. Hell, I'd barely order half of what W.W.E. produces.

But I order T.N.A. Pay Per Views because I love watching wrestling as a whole. I don't care the outcome, its still the child-like thrill to know you're watching a p.p.v. to me. Sure, you get better outcomes on iMPACT! more often than not, and you get a lot more gripping storyline development on iMAPCT! than you get conclusions at a p.p.v., but that not withstanding, its still the very fact that you don't order wrestling p.p.v.'s unless you love watching wrestling as a whole.

Sure, you'll have a lot of people order one here or there because (using Misskim as an example) their favorite Superstar is getting a World title shot. When I first gave an interest to T.N.A., its because I wanted to see what it was about. (back during the weekly $10.00 shows mind you) I ordered about collectively 8.. couldn't bother to pay $10.00 a week for shows that ran like Raw and Smackdown back then, so I stopped.

I gave them a second chance for Victory Road because of two reasons. 1. Jeff Hardy v. Jeff Jarrett, with Kevin Nash & Scott Hall. 2. It was their debut 3-hour Pay Per View and I wanted to see if they could hold up to W.W.E.-ish standards. After that p.p.v. I didn't order another one until Destination X the following year for the Diamond Dallas Page v. Jeff Jarrett Main Event. From there, I ordered every T.N.A. p.p.v. since for two reasons.

1. Christopher Daniels blew me away.
2. Random guys I knew, (Former W.W.E. guys) kept showing up.

So all in all.. I order T.N.A. p.p.v.'s because I love wrestling. But if I were only to order because of selective things.. it'd have to be a great line-up, or a gimmick match being revealed. (which in T.N.A. happens 10 times outta the year)

 

[IrishCanadian25]

For me, Pay-Per-Views are social experiences. I don't order them and watch them by myself - I watch WWE PPV's at a bar and order TNA shows if my friends are up for it and want to chip in.

For us, it's a change of scenery. We're all wrestling addicts, and TNA gives us a fresh option and the potential for some great matches and funny shtick on off-WWE nights. It also beats watching the same DVD's again.

And why not purchase a TNA PPV? It's $10 cheaper than WWE for the same length of time, plus I get to see some of my all time favs like Cage and Angle. Invariably, some upstart winds up enthralling me, like Frankie Kazarian or MCMG.

 

[Lithium66]

I am so glad i dont have to pay for tna ppv.Lockdown should be rename Letdown dont get me rong i enjoy wacthin tna but there has been nothing that me thinks wow this was the best ever we always have then blaggin wow this was the best ppv ever after another it gets boring.they change titles on impact to improve ratings or to show who won what in briefcase match that was a majour insault to the ppl that order that ppv to see who won what on the night.but hey i cant moan too much cos i get it for free so i dont wanna bite the hand that feeding me my wrestling needs.

 

[RVDgurl]

I sincerely think that TNA puts on fairly good PPV's. There is always one match that really sucks and one match that is fantastic, so it all evens itself out. I buy them each month and have never really been disappointed. I'm sure that some of it has to do with that fact that it is a social gathering for me and my friends.

 

[WWEIsLife]

I saw one TNA PPV in 2006 somehow for free,I think the September one where they Announced Kurt Angle was coming in and I was not impressed. It was decent but it just had no energy behind it to me and was hard to get into even thought I prefer WWE.

 

[McCobbM]

I'm a big fan of TNA.... but I'm also a big fan of keeping my money.
but if i was going to buy a PPV, it would be TNA
because at least, TNA is exciting, they push new talent, they let stuff fly in from left field

RE: Title Changes
at least all their titles are defended on a regular basis, unlike the intercontinental, Tag titles, and US title.
a title change here and there on TV is cool, but the World heavyweight title changed on ppv.
PPVs are a huge deal the wrestlers put mroe into it, the company puts more time in planning, the spots are bigger, it's better than TV

 

[africonda]

I would not buy a TNA or WWE pay per view. To be honest though, WWE has put on some great ppvs this year. TNA does not push any of its talent and although they have title matches, its the same damn people over and over again....... the x division has been the same people fighting, its like 3 people , lethal devine, petey williams. Sonjay hasnt gotten a shot, the machine guns are both x division, both being buried, sharkboy and curryman arent getting title shots, so the x division is worthless. Tag division, they have matches promising teams title shots and they never get um, or they screw a team over and couple it with another tag team, i miss those americas most wanted and triple x feuds from back in the day. The world title , dont get me started, in the past few months i can only remember kurt angle fighting either joe or christian cage, if not that its just the same group in the main event, those 3 with tomko and aj..... sting should not be in the main events he is too old, nash is painful to watch, he cant even run.

WWE has the same problem, always the same few fighting for the title, they need to bump someone else into the mian event and i agree that they need to use the IC and US title. The big problem is the separate brands, imagine if it was one, they would have maybe 10 stars going for the world title and 10-15 going after the IC title, and they could have maybe 15 tag teams. It would be good.

dont bother spending your money on either , just download it the next day off bit torrent

 

[McCobbM]

I agree with not spending my money,..... BUT if everyone does that even for good ppvs then PPVs won't be around anymore.

For all intents and purposes WWE is a 2 title franchise. World Heavyweight which has been Batista Edge ( maybe khali, ahahahaaha) and Taker since Last wrestlemania. the World tag champions who haven't defended in over 4 months, and RARELY show up on TV, the ECW title is a joke. The IC title only changed hands b/c Jeff Hardy was suspended. the US title wasn't defended for something like a year, and then in it's first defense against the number 1 contender who had been no.1 contender for almost a whole year with or without an injury. The Miz and Morrison never defend on ppv. the equivalent to an X division title was last held by HORNSWAGGLE, then retired. the Women's title, is ludacris when is the last time that was defended on a PPV? probably before Candice
Everyone pretty much knows that Cena was set to retain unless he was injured.
So both companies have the same problems, they shun new things, and throw their titles away because they think they can get away with it.