justtxyank Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 that's the same broken assumption everyone in wrestling makes. The UFC will eventually level off..but i don't see why they would drop. Neither do I, but I didn't want to get into that argument. UFC has been trending up for a decade now (with dips and peaks). There is no reason to think it is going to just go away like a passing fad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crownsy Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Thats a company that only has shows with top guys on PPV which diffrent from pro wrestling, and UFC and MMA is the fad now so they will drop soon Yes, fads often span a period of ten years and have a massive, rabid fan base installed. The UFC in particular, and mixed martial arts in general are here to stay. People like combat sports, and boxing is an absolute joke right now. OF course fight fans are turning to the UFC. What else are we going to do, sit around and wait for the only fight anyone cares about, floyd-manny, to not get signed again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterJ Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I know UFC has its true fans and it hasn't been ten years this big the last two or three years is when the big MMA boom came and Im a fan my first fight I watched in MMA was a UFC in I think 96? and it was Tank Abbot fight. MMA has people jumping on the bandwagon because right now its "cool" to like MMA/UFC and it will cool down when it gets old like boxing and pro wrestling and will pop back up again like any fighting entertainment or sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justtxyank Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I know UFC has its true fans and it hasn't been ten years this big the last two or three years is when the big MMA boom came and Im a fan my first fight I watched in MMA was a UFC in I think 96? and it was Tank Abbot fight. MMA has people jumping on the bandwagon because right now its "cool" to like MMA/UFC and it will cool down when it gets old like boxing and pro wrestling and will pop back up again like any fighting entertainment or sport. I'm about to blow your mind... Boxing, mma, etc. are not in the same category as pro wrestling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterJ Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I'm about to blow your mind... Boxing, mma, etc. are not in the same category as pro wrestling. Thats why I said Phiscal ENTERTAINMENT and SPORTS which is what i said alot of people who are watching UFC are atitude era wrestling fans who have found a new thing to go to for the moment (Therefore a fad) and once MMA has a cooling down period all sports do they will move on to somthing diffrent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyde Hill Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Guys if we are going into the nitty gritty please move this discussion to the MMA thread. Personally I can not say much on the topic as MMA is not big here. I have watched some both new and old and I like the old stuff a lot better. Otherwise I like K-1 as ground and pound bores me and it has more action and the Dutch rule it hehe. Now back to TNA and screw the rumours about bad ppv buys, low morale, financial trouble etc etc etc. Haters will hate even if they call themselves journalists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I know UFC has its true fans and it hasn't been ten years this big the last two or three years is when the big MMA boom came and Im a fan my first fight I watched in MMA was a UFC in I think 96? and it was Tank Abbot fight. MMA has people jumping on the bandwagon because right now its "cool" to like MMA/UFC and it will cool down when it gets old like boxing and pro wrestling and will pop back up again like any fighting entertainment or sport. Yeah..this is pretty much bs. I mean..the entire post beginning to end makes no real sense and you don't seem to have a solid idea about what your talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Now back to TNA and screw the rumours about bad ppv buys, low morale, financial trouble etc etc etc. Haters will hate even if they call themselves journalists. Hyde, the "rumors" of bad buys have been around since the company began doing the montlhy PPV model. And it's pretty believable since they've only ever made the buy rates public once or twice in the history of the company. It's not "hate"..they just attract a different audience and need to adjust their revenue streams accordingly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoganRodzen Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I was listening to the Pro Wrestling Report after RAW last night and somebody said Victory Road probably got around 10,000 buys. And then one of them said that was "a very generous number". I don't know about any of their PPV buys (does anyone really?), but if they're only getting that many buys then they REALLY need to do something differently. Drop the price or don't do as many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remianen Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I know UFC has its true fans and it hasn't been ten years this big the last two or three years is when the big MMA boom came and Im a fan my first fight I watched in MMA was a UFC in I think 96? and it was Tank Abbot fight. MMA has people jumping on the bandwagon because right now its "cool" to like MMA/UFC and it will cool down when it gets old like boxing and pro wrestling and will pop back up again like any fighting entertainment or sport. Please tell me where anyone has said that UFC's numbers have been "this big" for ten years? What I read is people saying (correctly, I might add) that UFC's numbers have been trending upward for ten years. There's a significant difference between what was said and what you apparently understood it to mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterJ Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Yeah..this is pretty much bs. I mean..the entire post beginning to end makes no real sense. First off, it's a sport..wrestling isn't. (going back to your previous post that somehow 'all the big names' show up on PPV for MMA and not wrestling im not sure if you realize the difference) Secondly, the sport has been growing for ten years plus. It's being covered on espn. It's no more a fad than a sport like hockey or basketball is. Thirdly it took boxing 100 years to "get old" ..so I'm not sure what your point is in terms of MMA's longevity First off just because you dont want to hear out what im saying dont mean its BS:rolleyes: MMA has been around for awhile and while its covered on ESPN because its hot right now and is a legit sport. Boxing has had its ups and downs like I said and it wasn't hot for 100 years and will probly make a come depending on how long MMA is hot. Time will tell though but I agree with Hyde if you want to continue this PM me or go to the MMA thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 First off just because you dont want to hear out what im saying dont mean its BS:rolleyes: MMA has been around for awhile and while its covered on ESPN so is other sport FADS. Boxing has had its ups and downs like I said and it wasn't hot for 100 years and will probly make a come depending on how long MMA is hot. Time will tell though but I agree with Hyde if you want to continue this PM me or go to the MMA thread. No, it's crap. I have no desire to continue with you because you can't tell the difference between a 'sport' on an upward trend and a fad .. you also never responded to the idea that UFC has "top guys on PPV which is different from wrestling" is a completely ass backwards statement. EDIT: Listen..going back to how this relates to TNA...if the problem with the buy rates is that PPV is a dying medium then UFC wouldn't be growing so fast using PPV as the backbone of it's revenue. Period. Regardless of your opinion on MMA/UFC as a sport, the two things don't jibe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterJ Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 No, it's crap. I have no desire to continue with you because you can't tell the difference between a 'sport' on an upward trend and a fad .. you also never responded to the idea that UFC has "top guys on PPV which is different from wrestling" is a completely ass backwards statement. I said thats the reason there PPV's do better than wrestling because in wrestling now you can see the same people same matches on TV now and all your big guys are on TV. When was the last time you saw a lesnar fight live on Spike TV or an Oritz fight live on TV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I said thats the reason there PPV's do better than wrestling because in wrestling now you can see the same people same matches on TV now and all your big guys are on TV. When was the last time you saw a lesnar fight live on Spike TV or an Oritz fight live on TV Ohhhh..that's not actually what you said. This... Thats a company that only has shows with top guys on PPV which diffrent from pro wrestling ..is misleading. If that was your point then it makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterJ Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Ohhhh..that's not actually what you said. This... ..is misleading. If that was your point then it makes sense. Yea thats what I meant about that I should made that alot more clear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysin Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Why not take the MMA talk to the MMA Thread? I don't see why this thread has to be filled with petty arguments not even concerning the topic of the thread itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Why not take the MMA talk to the MMA Thread? I don't see why this thread has to be filled with petty arguments not even concerning the topic of the thread itself. Because... EDIT: Listen..going back to how this relates to TNA...if the problem with the buy rates is that PPV is a dying medium then UFC wouldn't be growing so fast using PPV as the backbone of it's revenue. Period. Regardless of your opinion on MMA/UFC as a sport, the two things don't jibe. TNA probaby doesn't *need* PPV to survive, but if they're going to throw them out there every month they need to do something to help the buys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterJ Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I think were done know:) On Topic now I do think that the PPV numbers are pretty low as they dont do to much or for what I have seen promotion for them on TV outside of Spike TV and they dont have the fan base (IWC) that will buy alot PPV's and some will just stream them online but like you said Hyde we dont have the numbers so we could be off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyde Hill Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Hyde, the "rumors" of bad buys have been around since the company began doing the montlhy PPV model. And it's pretty believable since they've only ever made the buy rates public once or twice in the history of the company. It's not "hate"..they just attract a different audience and need to adjust their revenue streams accordingly I know that the buys are very low or bad in comparison to the E, but I am talking about bad buys for TNA standards. The Slammiversary 7k one for example which was complete bs and I do view as "hate" along with the other stuff I mentioned. And yes agree on the revenue streams and those are improving given that tv rights are their main source of income and they just expanded to the middle east. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyde Hill Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Well their buyrates have never been that high, the question is if they are up in comparison to the last two years and are they high enough for ppv to be the most profitable option in comparison to tv specials. Any info I have had from non Meltzer sources say they are. This remains the most important. No matter how low their buys if it is more profitable to do ppv then television specials or nothing then from a short term profit standpoint they should keep doing ppv. Even if ppv is more profitable if the margin is not to big then it might be smart to move to more television specials as an aide to growing their fanbase. But this has been covered a lot. Too bad a certain ref doesn't work in the ppv division or we could have asked maskedpropaganda lolz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 I know that the buys are very low or bad in comparison to the E, but I am talking about bad buys for TNA standards. The Slammiversary 7k one for example which was complete bs and I do view as "hate" along with the other stuff I mentioned. And yes agree on the revenue streams and those are improving given that tv rights are their main source of income and they just expanded to the middle east. If they can't get the buys up around 20 K buys, they'd be better off working out a deal with Spike to do big shows every other month with some kind of bonus deal for the rating and ad revenue that 'special even't would draw. Two hours on a Thursday night special where they can pay off their major storylines featuring much longer matches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHilton Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 This remains the most important. No matter how low their buys if it is more profitable to do ppv then television specials or nothing then from a short term profit standpoint they should keep doing ppv. Even if ppv is more profitable if the margin is not to big then it might be smart to move to more television specials as an aide to growing their fanbase. But this has been covered a lot. Too bad a certain ref doesn't work in the ppv division or we could have asked maskedpropaganda lolz. damn..i posted while you were posting this. totally agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyde Hill Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Still as no one knows when TNA's ppv deals expire it is kind of moot talking about it just yet. Still as you know I agree with you on that Peter that it should be seriously looked into. Still I hope Xplosion becomes a full fledged B show on a different day with Reaction before or after it. That could really help revenue etc. BTW is Explosion in the new format shown in the US already or not? Would be interesting to know its ratings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyde Hill Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 damn..i posted while you were posting this. totally agree Thoughts so. And yes this is padding the post count lolz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyde Hill Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 AJ Styles has been named the top wrestler for 2010 on Pro Wrestling Illustrated's annual PWI 500 list. He becomes the first wrestler in TNA history to rank #1 on that list. Congratulations to the Phenomenal One! The issue hits newsstands August 3. Credit to Pro Wrestling Scoops from TNA Asylum. If this is true: "excellent" Mr Burns finger motion. Hope Angle comes in second hehe. They are the two best out there atm in a major US promotion imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.