|
|
Post by mysterydriver on Sept 22, 2007 7:37:02 GMT -5
TNA Impact last Thursday did a 1.08 cable rating.
Gerweck.net
Edited a bit from the site's reporting that said "last night" and "1.1" since the next news post labeled it as "1.08."
Might as well be specific, right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2007 7:37:40 GMT -5
Does it ever change?
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Sept 22, 2007 7:55:09 GMT -5
It varies from 1.0-1.2 most of the time.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Sept 22, 2007 11:52:03 GMT -5
Maybe it'll increase when Impact gets 2 hours...
|
|
|
|
Post by Diddly on Sept 22, 2007 12:00:15 GMT -5
It's not much, but at least the ratings are remaining constant. Personally I thought it was the best Impact in ages.
|
|
|
|
Post by REDUNBECK~! on Sept 22, 2007 12:24:53 GMT -5
Maybe it'll increase when Impact gets 2 hours... The logic of this is...? If anything it'll probably stay the same or go down a little bit. I doubt a whole slew of new people will be like "Two hours!? Holy cow! That show is awesome now, let's tune in~!" Maybe I'm wrong, but I have this hunch. |
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Sept 22, 2007 14:09:26 GMT -5
Maybe it'll increase when Impact gets 2 hours... The logic of this is...? If anything it'll probably stay the same or go down a little bit. I doubt a whole slew of new people will be like "Two hours!? Holy cow! That show is awesome now, let's tune in~!" Maybe I'm wrong, but I have this hunch. Maybe TNA thinks that 1.0 + 1.0 = 2.0  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2007 14:16:22 GMT -5
The logic of this is...? If anything it'll probably stay the same or go down a little bit. I doubt a whole slew of new people will be like "Two hours!? Holy cow! That show is awesome now, let's tune in~!" Maybe I'm wrong, but I have this hunch. Maybe TNA thinks that 1.0 + 1.0 = 2.0 In a way that's true. Even if TNA continues to only get 1.0's. Double the time, means double the advertising dollars. Not that I'm aware of the specifics of TNA's deal with Spike. |
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Sept 22, 2007 14:44:20 GMT -5
Maybe it'll increase when Impact gets 2 hours... The logic of this is...? If anything it'll probably stay the same or go down a little bit. I doubt a whole slew of new people will be like "Two hours!? Holy cow! That show is awesome now, let's tune in~!" Maybe I'm wrong, but I have this hunch. the logic is that with more time to showcase their amazing talent they have on the roster, they can increase more viewers, whereas now they struggle to get everyone adequate time. |
|
|
|
Post by REDUNBECK~! on Sept 22, 2007 14:56:30 GMT -5
The logic of this is...? If anything it'll probably stay the same or go down a little bit. I doubt a whole slew of new people will be like "Two hours!? Holy cow! That show is awesome now, let's tune in~!" Maybe I'm wrong, but I have this hunch. the logic is that with more time to showcase their amazing talent they have on the roster, they can increase more viewers, whereas now they struggle to get everyone adequate time. The problem isn't the time. It's that they don't know how to write. Right now they write like it's a two hour show, and then they speed it all up to cram it into one hour. Chances are that they'll keep writing that way when they go two hours, only it'll be four hours of stuff crammed into two. I'd love to be wrong, but they give me no reason to believe I am. And I don't know how much of the talent they'll be able to get in. They're only adding more wrestlers to the roster lately, which seems to suggest they think they don't have enough people...which probably means they think they're using who they have properly right now. And I still fail to see how they're going to boost their ratings. I mean, yeah, they have some great wrestlers...they also have horrible writing. Most people ain't going to watch a poorly-written show. Would you watch a two hour Ed Wood movie just because your favorite actor was in it? Probably not because, you know, it would still be Ed Wood and it would suck. |
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Sept 22, 2007 14:59:11 GMT -5
the logic is that with more time to showcase their amazing talent they have on the roster, they can increase more viewers, whereas now they struggle to get everyone adequate time. The problem isn't the time. It's that they don't know how to write. Right now they write like it's a two hour show, and then they speed it all up to cram it into one hour. Chances are that they'll keep writing that way when they go two hours, only it'll be four hours of stuff crammed into two. I'd love to be wrong, but they give me no reason to believe I am. And I don't know how much of the talent they'll be able to get in. They're only adding more wrestlers to the roster lately, which seems to suggest they think they don't have enough people...which probably means they think they're using who they have properly right now. you ever think that maybe the reason they write like they have two hours and compress it into one is because they want to use their talent and give people time instead of having it slow paced and leave a bunch of guys out? try thinking about it. |
|
|
|
Post by REDUNBECK~! on Sept 22, 2007 15:04:54 GMT -5
you ever think that maybe the reason they write like they have two hours and compress it into one is because they want to use their talent and give people time instead of having it slow paced and leave a bunch of guys out? try thinking about it. The problem is that it doesn't work the way you think it does. Writing the way they due makes matches real short and means that people have very, very little time on screen. What good is it to have guys onscreen for like two minutes doing a million-mile-an-hour match? It gets so fast that it's a blur and it makes no impact on the viewer (pardon the pun). I'd much rather they slowed down. They don't need to use a ton of guys every week. The main eventers can be there every week, sure, but why not slow down the undercard matches and just, you know, rotate those guys on and off the show week-by-week? I don't need to see Shark Boy two weeks in a row, you know? |
|
superfoe
Dennis Stamp
Post count: altered. Date: irrelevant. Always being a n00b: priceless.
Free posting for life.
Posts: 4,703
|
Post by superfoe on Sept 22, 2007 15:09:29 GMT -5
The problem isn't the time. It's that they don't know how to write. Right now they write like it's a two hour show, and then they speed it all up to cram it into one hour. Chances are that they'll keep writing that way when they go two hours, only it'll be four hours of stuff crammed into two. I'd love to be wrong, but they give me no reason to believe I am. And I don't know how much of the talent they'll be able to get in. They're only adding more wrestlers to the roster lately, which seems to suggest they think they don't have enough people...which probably means they think they're using who they have properly right now. you ever think that maybe the reason they write like they have two hours and compress it into one is because they want to use their talent and give people time instead of having it slow paced and leave a bunch of guys out? try thinking about it. This logic is counterproductive and is hurting the company. Using your talent poorly weekly isn't the same as rotating them through a two-three week cycle where you can actually give them time to shine. Giving a guy a bit of on-tv time really doesn't do that much for him unless he is being used effectively. It's hard to use someone effectively when everything is in fast forward. |
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Sept 22, 2007 15:19:58 GMT -5
you ever think that maybe the reason they write like they have two hours and compress it into one is because they want to use their talent and give people time instead of having it slow paced and leave a bunch of guys out? try thinking about it. This logic is counterproductive and is hurting the company. Using your talent poorly weekly isn't the same as rotating them through a two-three week cycle where you can actually give them time to shine. Giving a guy a bit of on-tv time really doesn't do that much for him unless he is being used effectively. It's hard to use someone effectively when everything is in fast forward. yes i understand that and i am not saying that is a good idea by tna. rather what i am saying is that is why they do it trying to keep the roster happy by not just featuring a few select guys. that is my opinion for why they book like they do. i am in no way saying it is a good idea. if this is the reason then an expansion to two hours will have a chance to improve ratings because just like you said it's hard to use someone effectively in fast forward and when they didn't have to they have potential. |
|
