|
Post by slappy on Oct 19, 2013 1:13:30 GMT -5
What's TNA doing in the Impact Zone?
|
|
|
Post by DZ: WF Legacy on Oct 19, 2013 4:20:11 GMT -5
They should just keep the Resident Evil motif if they go back to Universal.
|
|
|
Post by El Cokehead del Knife Fight on Oct 19, 2013 9:11:36 GMT -5
Baltimore show is confirmed cancelled
|
|
khali
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,648
|
Post by khali on Oct 19, 2013 10:47:35 GMT -5
The explanation on F4W:
|
|
mrbananagrabber
King Koopa
Paul Heyman's unofficial joke writer
Posts: 11,828
|
Post by mrbananagrabber on Oct 19, 2013 12:13:45 GMT -5
You know, we all make jokes about TNA going broke and everything, but reading the news here is pretty sad. I don't like or watch TNA but I certainly wouldn't want them to fold.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2013 13:25:22 GMT -5
I know TNA is a nice punching bag for everyone here, but is this really worth giving them shit over (other than the complete lack of planning, which they deserve to get railed for)? I mean, they tried something in order to grow their brand. It failed. Now they are cutting costs and regrouping. Isn't that more common sense than anything else? Would you rather they have never tried? Would you rather they stay on the road and keep losing money/not drawing? If Vince never took a huge financial risk, then WrestleMania never would have existed. Sure he has had the XFL, and WBF, and all his other failed ventures, but you have to take chances to succeed in any facet of life. TNA just lacks the business mind that Vince has/had, as I can't imagine anyone not being able to forecast expenses prior to embarking on a huge company-altering venture.
Going back to the Impact Zone is more troubling for me because the Impact Zone sucks, not because it is an admission of failure. Who cares? They tried to grow, they found out they weren't ready, and went back to their most cost effective strategy. That's business.
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Oct 19, 2013 13:28:07 GMT -5
Most importantly The Impact Zone should return them to a place of stability. I hope I get a chance to visit in Jan/Feb ish.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Oct 19, 2013 13:40:54 GMT -5
I know TNA is a nice punching bag for everyone here, but is this really worth giving them shit over (other than the complete lack of planning, which they deserve to get railed for)? I mean, they tried something in order to grow their brand. It failed. Now they are cutting costs and regrouping. Isn't that more common sense than anything else? Would you rather they have never tried? Would you rather they stay on the road and keep losing money/not drawing? If Vince never took a huge financial risk, then WrestleMania never would have existed. Sure he has had the XFL, and WBF, and all his other failed ventures, but you have to take chances to succeed in any facet of life. TNA just lacks the business mind that Vince has/had, as I can't imagine anyone not being able to forecast expenses prior to embarking on a huge company-altering venture. Going back to the Impact Zone is more troubling for me because the Impact Zone sucks, not because it is an admission of failure. Who cares? They tried to grow, they found out they weren't ready, and went back to their most cost effective strategy. That's business. There is no harm in failing and regrouping. The problem was that TNA didn't fully plan out this endeavor and have a backup plan in case the worst happen. WWE has as many failures as success. TNA's failure though will have long lasting effects instead of a short term loss. TNA should had did baby steps into taking the show on the road instead of jumping into the ocean without a life vest.
|
|
Madagascar Fred
El Dandy
TAFKA roidzilla and SUFFERIN' SUCCOTASH SON!
Posts: 8,784
|
Post by Madagascar Fred on Oct 19, 2013 13:44:10 GMT -5
yup, TNA can't afford doing too many big(ger) mistakes, WWE can. simple as that
if they knew about the big costs for Impact going on the road, they really shouldn't have considered doing it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2013 13:52:08 GMT -5
I know TNA is a nice punching bag for everyone here, but is this really worth giving them shit over (other than the complete lack of planning, which they deserve to get railed for)? I mean, they tried something in order to grow their brand. It failed. Now they are cutting costs and regrouping. Isn't that more common sense than anything else? Would you rather they have never tried? Would you rather they stay on the road and keep losing money/not drawing? If Vince never took a huge financial risk, then WrestleMania never would have existed. Sure he has had the XFL, and WBF, and all his other failed ventures, but you have to take chances to succeed in any facet of life. TNA just lacks the business mind that Vince has/had, as I can't imagine anyone not being able to forecast expenses prior to embarking on a huge company-altering venture. Going back to the Impact Zone is more troubling for me because the Impact Zone sucks, not because it is an admission of failure. Who cares? They tried to grow, they found out they weren't ready, and went back to their most cost effective strategy. That's business. There is no harm in failing and regrouping. The problem was that TNA didn't fully plan out this endeavor and have a backup plan in case the worst happen. WWE has as many failures as success. TNA's failure though will have long lasting effects instead of a short term loss. TNA should had did baby steps into taking the show on the road instead of jumping into the ocean without a life vest. I agree they should have planned it better. I think that is the one aspect TNA should be mocked for because it showed a complete lack of foresight or analysis on their part. Risks have to be calculated risks, not careless ones. My point was, taking a risk which they felt they could handle (for whatever reason), and then going back to the Impact Zone when it failed is really not a big deal. They tried something, it failed, and they went back to what worked before in order to get their books back in order. Pretty basic stuff.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Oct 19, 2013 13:55:50 GMT -5
There is no harm in failing and regrouping. The problem was that TNA didn't fully plan out this endeavor and have a backup plan in case the worst happen. WWE has as many failures as success. TNA's failure though will have long lasting effects instead of a short term loss. TNA should had did baby steps into taking the show on the road instead of jumping into the ocean without a life vest. I agree they should have planned it better. I think that is the one aspect TNA should be mocked for because it showed a complete lack of foresight or analysis on their part. Risks have to be calculated risks, not careless ones. My point was, taking a risk which they felt they could handle (for whatever reason), and then going back to the Impact Zone when it failed is really not a big deal. They tried something, it failed, and they went back to what worked before in order to get their books back in order. Pretty basic stuff. They're lucky the Impact Zone was available. What would they have done if Universal Studios told them "No"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2013 14:10:35 GMT -5
I agree they should have planned it better. I think that is the one aspect TNA should be mocked for because it showed a complete lack of foresight or analysis on their part. Risks have to be calculated risks, not careless ones. My point was, taking a risk which they felt they could handle (for whatever reason), and then going back to the Impact Zone when it failed is really not a big deal. They tried something, it failed, and they went back to what worked before in order to get their books back in order. Pretty basic stuff. They're lucky the Impact Zone was available. What would they have done if Universal Studios told them "No"? Find another place. Maybe I'm giving TNA too much credit, but I'm guessing they were looking for single locations before going back to the Impact Zone (Las Vegas was rumored). The Impact Zone is likely ideal for them and their talent roster, but if that failed, they would have had to find another spot. I'm not in that business so I can't suggest any alternatives, but I'm sure they would have found one.
|
|
|
Post by katiemorgan67212 on Oct 19, 2013 18:14:52 GMT -5
I agree they should have planned it better. I think that is the one aspect TNA should be mocked for because it showed a complete lack of foresight or analysis on their part. Risks have to be calculated risks, not careless ones. My point was, taking a risk which they felt they could handle (for whatever reason), and then going back to the Impact Zone when it failed is really not a big deal. They tried something, it failed, and they went back to what worked before in order to get their books back in order. Pretty basic stuff. They're lucky the Impact Zone was available. What would they have done if Universal Studios told them "No"? The Panda Energy break room.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2013 18:04:42 GMT -5
You know, we all make jokes about TNA going broke and everything, but reading the news here is pretty sad. I don't like or watch TNA but I certainly wouldn't want them to fold. daf** are you doing here then?
|
|