The Official TNA / Impact / GFW Discussion Thread

[Tag01]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Remianen" data-cite="Remianen" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>But to be fair, TNA has the financial staff in place to counter Heyman. Besides, Heyman would probably get more out of the people they already have contracted than anyone else. He wouldn't have money issues with TNA (similar to how he didn't have money issues with the 'E. It was creative differences that led to his departure, wasn't it?). Heyman would be running the onscreen/creative product. The money wouldn't (and shouldn't) be his area of influence.<p> </p><p> There's a vast difference between being CEO and being <strong><em>CHAIRMAN</em></strong> & CEO. Heyman was the former in WWE (creatively, at least for Smackdown) and the latter in ECW (Tod Gordon was a figurehead, for all intents and purposes). I point to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_fiorina" rel="external nofollow">Carly Fiorina</a> (as much as I love her) as an example of what giving a creative person carte blanche can do to an organization (in ANY industry).</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You're Carlyfornia dreamin', are you?</p>

[Hyde Hill]

Dude it was quite clear that in wrestling terms in this example chairmen would equate to headbooker/writer for a show which Heyman was for Smackdown during a critically acclaimed period. Heyman is a very good booker but a crappy owner. In TNA he wouldn't need to handle the owner stuff as Dixie and co do that and Bischoff could help with the non directly wrestling related stuff. Dixie + Bisch + Heyman and Hogan as a figurehead could work very well.

[MattitudeV2]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Hyde Hill" data-cite="Hyde Hill" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Dude it was quite clear that in wrestling terms in this example chairmen would equate to headbooker/writer for a show which Heyman was for Smackdown during a critically acclaimed period. Heyman is a very good booker but a crappy owner. In TNA he wouldn't need to handle the owner stuff as Dixie and co do that and Bischoff could help with the non directly wrestling related stuff. <strong>Dixie + Bisch + Heyman and Hogan</strong> as a figurehead could work very well.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well lets see problems in this?</p><p> </p><p> Heyman hates Bischoff and Hogan's guts.</p><p> </p><p> Dixie is:confused:</p><p> </p><p> Bischoff and Hogan don't even know what direction they wan't to go with this company.</p>

[TommyDreamerFan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MattitudeV2" data-cite="MattitudeV2" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Well lets see problems in this?<p> </p><p> Heyman hates Bischoff and Hogan's guts.</p><p> </p><p> Dixie is:confused:</p><p> </p><p> <strong>Bischoff and Hogan don't even know what direction they wan't to go with this company</strong>.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Your kidding right? They're clearly building towards Bischoff Faction versus Hogan Faction</p><p> </p><p> Hate may be a strong word for Heyman's part. I think Bischoff dislikes Heyman more then Heyman dislikes Bischoff <em>THESE DAYS...</em></p>

[Hyde Hill]

<p>I think Bischoff dislikes the claim Heyman makes about stealing storylines and talent and Heyman resents the fact that Bisch won't own up to it. Them hating each other is a whole other level though. I have asked on the facebook what Bisch's current feelings towards Heyman are after having worked with him in the E but no answer yet. Which is probably a good thing because if he really dislikes him he probably would have said so as he has bashed some he dislikes on facebook so far. HTM, Juve and Vampiro as examples.</p><p> </p><p>

On the direction, I hope they know the direction and we are just not seeing it yet or they are adjusting their direction according to some of the results. Hello and goodbye Nasties lolz.</p><p> </p><p>

Edit: If Bisch and Russo can work together again why not Bisch and Heyman?</p>

[TommyDreamerFan]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>from John Marzatelli:<p> </p><p> Much ado has been made by those within TNA to make sure fans DVR</p><p> Impact on Monday nights if they plan on watching something else (like</p><p> Monday Night Raw) as to ensure they don’t miss out on the latest</p><p> developments in the soap opera that TNA storylines have become.</p><p> The March 8th DVR ratings have now been revealed and contain a few surprises…</p><p> The 3/8 edition of Impact featuring the in ring returns of Hulk Hogan</p><p> and Ric Flair had 68,000 homes choose to DVR Impact, which equals out</p><p> to a 7 % increase in the rating for that night, thus moving from a</p><p> 0.98 to a 1.05</p><p> Meanwhile Raw that night had 188,000 homes DVR Raw which brings the</p><p> final rating up from 3.38 to 3.57. The interesting note here is the</p><p> comparison to the week before and normal numbers who DVR Raw, As on</p><p> March 1st unopposed, Raw had 189,000 homes DVR the show and usually</p><p> average a 5% DVR viewing audience and thus little to no fans chose to</p><p> watch Impact live that night and DVR raw instead.</p><p> The Thursday night editions of Impact had averaged a 15% viewing</p><p> increase, and the big January 4th show had a nearly 20% DVR viewing</p><p> increase, Dave Metzler thus came to the conclusion that in actuality,</p><p> less people watch Impact later on DVR that are watching Raw on Monday</p><p> than people who just did it on the Thursday show to catch it later.</p><p> </p><p> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Anyone make sense of this gibberish? I assume it's bad news for TNA but hell if I can understand it.</p>

[Hyde Hill]

Yeah their DVR numbers are apparently down if they are correct and the Observer is bashing TNA (what else is new).

[fatallylost]

DVR numbers are bull. I don't mind them adding live and dvr views, but, it's meaningless. Sometimes people have things to do on Monday night, not every week, so, the numbers can fluctuate in any number of ways.

[TommyDreamerFan]

I'm more curious to see the ratings of any other television show Spike has put in that time slot in the past. Really thats the only true thing TNA has to beat for the mean time (and by that I mean, December they should be back in the 1.0s)

[fatallylost]

That would also depend on IF they had a TV show in the slot. Not movies, specials, or reruns. Which I don't recall them having. I could be wrong though, my memory ain't what it once was.

[Hyde Hill]

As far as I know via reporting on the net the programming in that slot used to be in the 0.8 range or something

[brashleyholland]

<p>I've said it before and I'll say it again, DVR numbers are meaningless. Ratings are used for one reason and one reason only; advertising sales. What's advertised, when it's advertised and how much they charge for it. They don't take DVR ratings into account for that. </p><p> </p><p>

Plus, just because you DVR something doesn't mean you watch it. I have a ton of stuff that DVR's automatically, that I never watch.</p>

[LucianCarter]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="brashleyholland" data-cite="brashleyholland" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I've said it before and I'll say it again, DVR numbers are meaningless. Ratings are used for one reason and one reason only; advertising sales. What's advertised, when it's advertised and how much they charge for it. They don't take DVR ratings into account for that. <p> </p><p> Plus, just because you DVR something doesn't mean you watch it. I have a ton of stuff that DVR's automatically, that I never watch.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The times are changing. Yes, DVR #s are looked at differently than regular numbers because advertisers know they customer has the capacity to fast forward through commericals. But to say these numbers are ignored is an outdated statement. And, by the way, tracking of DVR #s is done based on those who claim to actually watch the show later. Not those who record it and never watch it.</p><p> </p><p> Also the rise of in-show product placement is, in part, to counter DVRs. So advertisers do care who DVRs since those are people who the in-show placements matter more to. Orlando Jordan showing up with a bottle of 5-hour Energy in his hand is something the viewer, theoretically, won't fast forward through.</p>

[Hyde Hill]

Yeah Jan 4th was plastered with that energy drink I almost forgot.

[jesterx7769]

<p>this weeks impact looks like it will have solid matches,</p><p> </p><p>

- Solid womans bout</p><p>

-X-Division Gauntlet</p><p>

-Wolfe vs. Pope</p><p>

- Angle vs. Anderson</p>

[Blackman]

i like, i like.

 

i'll give them another chance then

[Hyde Hill]

Last two weeks have been very solid actually despite the ratings.

[TommyDreamerFan]

As far as I know via reporting on the net the programming in that slot used to be in the 0.8 range or something

 

Then isn't that all they have to produce to keep Spike happy?

 

Okay sure, they could just throw on a viacom owned movie on there and get the same rating, but if you believe in the Turner philoshpy, content is worth more then advertising.

 

TNA is also shown on Spike TV's website, for those of you who don't know, doesn't that mean any money they made from the extra internet traffic is pure profit?

 

Not to mention, I remember a while ago someone said that TNA wasn't cheap programing for Spike. I'm confused by this, cause I know back in the heyday wrestling got on TV because it was cheap content, it's part of how Turner built his TV stations no?

 

It really seems like TNA is in a psuedo WCW spot right now where the only way it can die is Spike canceling their TV contract of Panda Energy saying "Screw this noise". We also don't know a damn thing about how the carters feel about wrestling, for all we know they may be like Turner, wanting their own wrestling promotion and never caring if it ever makes a dollar. Hell TNA is just starting to break even now, no?

[Hyde Hill]

Nah have been making profit for around one and a half or two years. Even if Spike pulls the plug with a proven record of 1.0 ish ratings unopposed TNA could find another home. As long as the Carters want TNA around it doesn't matter.

 

TNA sells the television right fees to Spike and Spike then tries to make money using ads and the internet traffic apparently. TNA gets a flat rate with bonuses for high ratings.

 

Wrestling was cheap content comparatively in those days and was a very proven draw in those days. The promoters did the tv for near free and Vince would even pay the stations and use it as an ad for their House shows and big events. TNA makes the most of their money off the television rights fees percentage wise.

[Linsolv]

<p>re: Wrestling being cheap programming</p><p> </p><p>

On one hand, you're right in that wrestling's not really as expensive to produce as other programming, if you look at most television shows.</p><p> </p><p>

However, if you look at <strong>Spike's</strong> other shows, you'll find that they have a bunch of UFC reruns and "best of" shows that barely cost a dime, for the most part.</p>

[jesterx7769]

As has been said before, Spike has also invested in various aspects of TNA, so thats money they wouldn't have to spend for a movie or other regular sindicated show

[Linsolv]

Last night I had a dream about TNA. It was weird. I dreamt that they moved out of the iMPACT Zone and into what looked remarkably like someone's basement -- seated about 100, and had concrete walls. And they signed Roderick Strong away from ROH, which was weird cause I think I've only seen him once.

[pate]

<p>CHRISTOPHER DANIELS UPDATE</p><p>

By Mike Johnson on 2010-04-04 13:18:34</p><p>

Since a few readers have asked, Christopher Daniels was indeed released from TNA this past Wednesday. He immediately contacted Ring of Honor and made the deal to debut at last night's Big Bang PPV.</p>

[Hyde Hill]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="pate" data-cite="pate" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>CHRISTOPHER DANIELS UPDATE<p> By Mike Johnson on 2010-04-04 13:18:34</p><p> Since a few readers have asked, Christopher Daniels was indeed released from TNA this past Wednesday. He immediately contacted Ring of Honor and made the deal to debut at last night's Big Bang PPV.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF******************CCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK. Credible as its PWI.</p>

[brashleyholland]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="pate" data-cite="pate" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25170" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>CHRISTOPHER DANIELS UPDATE<p> By Mike Johnson on 2010-04-04 13:18:34</p><p> Since a few readers have asked, Christopher Daniels was indeed released from TNA this past Wednesday. He immediately contacted Ring of Honor and made the deal to debut at last night's Big Bang PPV.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Say whaaaaaaat? What a huge, huge waste! Still, at least they have a guy peddling a bi-sexual gimmick that will go down just great, and a dude who could very well end up in court on a moments notice, and his buddy who has never managed to make people care about him for the past 10 years, right?</p>