|
|
Post by REDUNBECK~! on Sept 11, 2007 17:47:02 GMT -5
PROBLEM: 1.3 million people watch the FREE TV show. FOR FREE. How many buy the PPVs? Almost none of them. 20,000 to 30,000 on a good month. TNA fails to convince the vast majority of their TV audience to buy their product. What good is it to have 1, 2, or 10 million people watch your show if 90+ % of them refuse to buy the premium product?
No good. To be a successful business, you have to earn a profit. TNA doesn't do that, because they can't convince enough people to buy what they are selling.
So, let's recap: They have 1.3 million potential customers. They fail to convince the vast majority of them to actually become customers. They don't make any money.
That is a failure on nearly every level.
|
|
Ass Dan
King Koopa
Curious about extra lines
Have you seen me?
Posts: 12,259
|
Post by Ass Dan on Sept 11, 2007 17:50:08 GMT -5
PROBLEM: 1.3 million people watch the FREE TV show. FOR FREE. How many buy the PPVs? Almost none of them. 20,000 to 30,000 on a good month. TNA fails to convince the vast majority of their TV audience to buy their product. What good is it to have 1, 2, or 10 million people watch your show if 90+ % of them refuse to buy the premium product? No good. To be a successful business, you have to earn a profit. TNA doesn't do that, because they can't convince enough people to buy what they are selling. So, let's recap: They have 1.3 million potential customers. They fail to convince the vast majority of them to actually become customers. They don't make any money. That is a failure on nearly every level. Well, to be honest, I've never bought a wrestling PPV, and don't plan to until I get a good job. So that might take a while. However, all youse guys with money to spend, what are you doing sitting on your hands? |
|
|
|
Post by REDUNBECK~! on Sept 11, 2007 17:54:54 GMT -5
They're not sitting on their hands. They're buying WWE and UFC PPVs. Because they're better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Sept 11, 2007 17:56:44 GMT -5
Gee, what's WWE doing that TNA isn't? Hmmmmm...So hard to figure out. One has been a house hold name for 25 years and the other has only been on prime time cable tv for 1? Two years. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Sept 11, 2007 17:58:01 GMT -5
One has been a house hold name for 25 years and the other has only been on prime time cable tv for 1? Two years. I don't think he's counting the 1 year they were on at 11. That's late night, not primetime. At least, according to TV Guide. |
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on Sept 11, 2007 17:58:12 GMT -5
One has been a house hold name for 25 years and the other has only been on prime time cable tv for 1? Two years. prime time. |
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Sept 11, 2007 18:01:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Sept 11, 2007 18:05:24 GMT -5
PROBLEM: 1.3 million people watch the FREE TV show. FOR FREE. How many buy the PPVs? Almost none of them. 20,000 to 30,000 on a good month. TNA fails to convince the vast majority of their TV audience to buy their product. What good is it to have 1, 2, or 10 million people watch your show if 90+ % of them refuse to buy the premium product? No good. To be a successful business, you have to earn a profit. TNA doesn't do that, because they can't convince enough people to buy what they are selling. So, let's recap: They have 1.3 million potential customers. They fail to convince the vast majority of them to actually become customers. They don't make any money. That is a failure on nearly every level. WWE has about 4.5 million people watching RAW, 3 million with Smackdown & 1.5 million with ECW. That's 9 million people or so watching WWE programs. WWE PPVs usually do an average of 200,000 buys, more or less, with Summerslam doing 500,000 & Wrestlemania doing the million. Using the same logic, WWE has failed to get 8.8 million people to buy their regular PPVs, 8.5 for Summerslam, and 8 million for their biggest event, Wrestlemania. Now, anyone with any logic would not call WWE a failing promotion, yet they have about 90% of their own fanbase not watching the PPVs. |
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Sept 11, 2007 18:09:46 GMT -5
I really don't see what's awful in these tapings. And I can't believe we're getting caught up in "why don't they save this match for such and such a time?"
I can appreciate feeling that way if the eventual match ends up feeling short-shifted, but I really don't feel like concerning myself with whether or not TNA should worry about "saving" matches. If they come out well on cable or PPV, I win either way.
I just want to see TNA back on the right track after a good month and a half of shoddy shows, and the last PPV, plus these spoilers, seem like good signs.
|
|
|
|
Post by radicalbuttercup on Sept 11, 2007 18:11:54 GMT -5
No Raven for three weeks? Meh. Guess it's better than seeing him lose to *insert random wrassler here*
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great El' PANDA King on Sept 11, 2007 18:23:26 GMT -5
I might just watch BFG if Machine Guns get a tag match against Team 3D.
I really do want to see Shelley and Sabin, now...as babyfaces..., destroy the most annoying and dull tag-team in TNA history.
|
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Sept 11, 2007 18:24:43 GMT -5
Those spoilers do seem to tease that the bookers realize the kind of reactions Sabin and Shelley are getting.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great El' PANDA King on Sept 11, 2007 18:25:48 GMT -5
Those spoilers do seem to tease that the bookers realize the kind of reactions Sabin and Shelley are getting. Especially seeing as Shelley was easily the biggest guy over in the Tag Royal on Sunday. Maybe it's because there was a BIG part of the crowd who were ROH fans that gathered to cheer for him, but still, he's over as hell. |
|
|
|
Post by REDUNBECK~! on Sept 11, 2007 18:33:24 GMT -5
PROBLEM: 1.3 million people watch the FREE TV show. FOR FREE. How many buy the PPVs? Almost none of them. 20,000 to 30,000 on a good month. TNA fails to convince the vast majority of their TV audience to buy their product. What good is it to have 1, 2, or 10 million people watch your show if 90+ % of them refuse to buy the premium product? No good. To be a successful business, you have to earn a profit. TNA doesn't do that, because they can't convince enough people to buy what they are selling. So, let's recap: They have 1.3 million potential customers. They fail to convince the vast majority of them to actually become customers. They don't make any money. That is a failure on nearly every level. WWE has about 4.5 million people watching RAW, 3 million with Smackdown & 1.5 million with ECW. That's 9 million people or so watching WWE programs. WWE PPVs usually do an average of 200,000 buys, more or less, with Summerslam doing 500,000 & Wrestlemania doing the million. Using the same logic, WWE has failed to get 8.8 million people to buy their regular PPVs, 8.5 for Summerslam, and 8 million for their biggest event, Wrestlemania. Now, anyone with any logic would not call WWE a failing promotion, yet they have about 90% of their own fanbase not watching the PPVs. But does WWE turn a profit? Yes. a huge one. Does TNA turn a profit? Why no. That's why they had to beg Panda Energy to bail them out and why Panda is dumping their money into a black hole. If TNA could turn a profit with their barely-there PPV audience, I'd be happy for them. But they can't. And they could do well if they'd stop doing BS that turns people off. They're just killing themselves by stubbornly refusing to improve. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Sept 11, 2007 18:49:07 GMT -5
WWE has about 4.5 million people watching RAW, 3 million with Smackdown & 1.5 million with ECW. That's 9 million people or so watching WWE programs. WWE PPVs usually do an average of 200,000 buys, more or less, with Summerslam doing 500,000 & Wrestlemania doing the million. Using the same logic, WWE has failed to get 8.8 million people to buy their regular PPVs, 8.5 for Summerslam, and 8 million for their biggest event, Wrestlemania. Now, anyone with any logic would not call WWE a failing promotion, yet they have about 90% of their own fanbase not watching the PPVs. But does WWE turn a profit? Yes. a huge one. Does TNA turn a profit? Why no. That's why they had to beg Panda Energy to bail them out and why Panda is dumping their money into a black hole. If TNA could turn a profit with their barely-there PPV audience, I'd be happy for them. But they can't. And they could do well if they'd stop doing BS that turns people off. They're just killing themselves by stubbornly refusing to improve. Growing their timeslot over the years from Late Night on Saturday to Late Night on Thursday to Primetime on Thursday to 2 Hours in Primetime on Thursday is not improving? Doing house shows & PPVs outside the iMPACT Zone is not improving? Having licensing deals with Marvel Toys, Hot Topic, Midway Games, and other places is not improving? having steadily increasing ratings is not improving? Yeah, they aren't doing shows that are completely "IWC Friendly", and don't have ratings in the double digits, but they're growing. Slowly growing, but growing nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocky Van Heineken on Sept 11, 2007 18:52:51 GMT -5
.... Rikishi AND the stinkface in TNA?
Welp, it was nice knowing you, TNA.
|
|
|
|
Post by REDUNBECK~! on Sept 11, 2007 18:57:20 GMT -5
But does WWE turn a profit? Yes. a huge one. Does TNA turn a profit? Why no. That's why they had to beg Panda Energy to bail them out and why Panda is dumping their money into a black hole. If TNA could turn a profit with their barely-there PPV audience, I'd be happy for them. But they can't. And they could do well if they'd stop doing BS that turns people off. They're just killing themselves by stubbornly refusing to improve. Growing their timeslot over the years from Late Night on Saturday to Late Night on Thursday to Primetime on Thursday to 2 Hours in Primetime on Thursday is not improving? Doing house shows & PPVs outside the iMPACT Zone is not improving? Having licensing deals with Marvel Toys, Hot Topic, Midway Games, and other places is not improving? having steadily increasing ratings is not improving? Yeah, they aren't doing shows that are completely "IWC Friendly", and don't have ratings in the double digits, but they're growing. Slowly growing, but growing nonetheless. Having toys, two hours, and T-shirts at Hot Topic does not have jack shit to do with the quality of the program. The program sucks. It's directed by a retarded drool monkey named David Sahadi who thinks the best course of action is to miss as much of the action as possible. Who wants to see the finish of the match anyway, right? We needed a shot of the tunnel instead! It's written by a bunch of guys who are utterly out of touch. The only good thing is the actual wrestling, and it's hidden under horrible angles, stupid gimmicks, and dreadful direction. It's like TNA is actively trying to sabotage their wrestlers. Oh, but they have toys and t-shirts. That means the show is automatically GREAT by default. Wonderful logic. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Sept 11, 2007 19:05:27 GMT -5
Growing their timeslot over the years from Late Night on Saturday to Late Night on Thursday to Primetime on Thursday to 2 Hours in Primetime on Thursday is not improving? Doing house shows & PPVs outside the iMPACT Zone is not improving? Having licensing deals with Marvel Toys, Hot Topic, Midway Games, and other places is not improving? having steadily increasing ratings is not improving? Yeah, they aren't doing shows that are completely "IWC Friendly", and don't have ratings in the double digits, but they're growing. Slowly growing, but growing nonetheless. Having toys, two hours, and T-shirts at Hot Topic does not have jack crap to do with the quality of the program. The program sucks. It's directed by a retarded drool monkey named David Sahadi who thinks the best course of action is to miss as much of the action as possible. Who wants to see the finish of the match anyway, right? We needed a shot of the tunnel instead! It's written by a bunch of guys who are utterly out of touch. The only good thing is the actual wrestling, and it's hidden under horrible angles, stupid gimmicks, and dreadful direction. It's like TNA is actively trying to sabotage their wrestlers. Oh, but they have toys and t-shirts. That means the show is automatically GREAT by default. Wonderful logic. If they did have "horrible angles, stupid gimmicks, and dreadful direction", they wouldn't be having better ratings than before, now would they? They have to be doing SOMETHING right to be in that position, don't they? Plus, all the stuff I said is just showing that TNA is trying to get the name out, trying to get money in other places. That's the reason for business, right? to make money? People aren't buying shirts with chickens and eggs. They're paying cash for it. That's good. |
|
|
|
Post by slasher911 on Sept 11, 2007 19:28:45 GMT -5
But does WWE turn a profit? Yes. a huge one. Does TNA turn a profit? Why no. That's why they had to beg Panda Energy to bail them out and why Panda is dumping their money into a black hole. If TNA could turn a profit with their barely-there PPV audience, I'd be happy for them. But they can't. And they could do well if they'd stop doing BS that turns people off. They're just killing themselves by stubbornly refusing to improve. Growing their timeslot over the years from Late Night on Saturday to Late Night on Thursday to Primetime on Thursday to 2 Hours in Primetime on Thursday is not improving? Doing house shows & PPVs outside the iMPACT Zone is not improving? Having licensing deals with Marvel Toys, Hot Topic, Midway Games, and other places is not improving? having steadily increasing ratings is not improving? Yeah, they aren't doing shows that are completely "IWC Friendly", and don't have ratings in the double digits, but they're growing. Slowly growing, but growing nonetheless. Spending more money does not mean they're making a profit, especially when they're cutting costs in other areas to make up for it. ECW (for example) had all of those, but wasn't making any money in return. Steadily increasing ratings? Haven't they been in the exact same ballpark for like....a year now? They've been riding 1.1-1.2's since December of '06. It's an increase from before (thank god), but their rating's are still not impressive (unless you're a representative from Spike apparently), especially when you look at their roster. They should be thanking Buddha every day that they have a company willing to fork out loads of money at every turn. |
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Sept 11, 2007 20:12:27 GMT -5
a wrestling company not making a profit like the wwe after being around for five years? that is a fail. seriously if it is so easy for a company to do what the wwe does, and tna is bad business for not being as big as wwe, then why aren't there tons of other people competing with the wwe? why? because it is hard work to get notice and it took the wwe 65 years to get where they are today. just because wwe does things one way does not mean everyone should follow suit.
and redunbeck i am glad you enjoy wwe pay per views more than tna. if it weren't for people like you vince wouldn't have the money he does today. just because you have these opinions though, does not make you an expert at business.
|
|
