TNA Question

[Black Swagger]

I read at www.wrestlezone.com that TNA has lost 20 Million Dollars. How long do you think it will be before they go out of business?

[Wrestlecrap's 13th listener]

I would hope that it would be sooner than later. However, I read earlier that Dusty had been dropped as TNA's head booker and I now I have hope.

Now if they can find a better color commentator, ring announcer, some better(younger) heavyweight contenders and take the belt off Jarrett I'll be happier.

Panda Energy is the financial backers for TNA and they suppose to have so much money that 20 million doesn't mean very much.

[Rocky Van Heineken]

Don't believe wrestlezone.com. They like to make crap up.

[stephendame]

rockygotfingered said:

Don't believe wrestlezone.com. They like to make crap up.

I hear that in order to avoid lawsuits, the dudes over at wrestlezone read the Observer upside down and in the dark and then toss whatever they can decipher up on the website.

[rdreynolds]

sigep111482 said:

I read at www.wrestlezone.com that TNA has lost 20 Million Dollars. How long do you think it will be before they go out of business?

I would not be shocked at all to find out they've lost that much money. It ain't cheap to pay for TV time.

RD

[Phoenix]

However, I read earlier that Dusty had been dropped as TNA's head booker and I now I have hope.

The best thing that could happen to TNA well besides Styles beating Jarret at the PPV

[Lenny: Smooth like Keith Stone]

Here are a few things that could really turn around TNA:

1. Better time slot, probably even on a different channel. The reason why Raw took off so well in the early 90's was because it was on during prime time, and many people found it while channel surfing. FSN may not be able to air something like this during prime time, because of "real" sports that they have obligations to such as basketball and baseball. Therefore another network may be beneficial.... possibly even a network like Spike TV.

2. More TV time (on TV, not PPV). An hour a week just isn't that much, frankly. I know that Raw was originally just an hour, although WWE/F also had Superstars and some other syndicated shows. People (read: casual fans) are not going to pay to see a wrestling PPV with guys they have never heard of.

3. More mainstream publicity. TNA needs to get their wrestlers names out there in the public. To quote Spaceballs, "Merchandising, merchandising, merchanding! Where the REAL money from the movie is made!" If a person saw enough hats, posters, and bumper stickers with a TNA logo, that person is more likely going to wonder "hmm, what is that?". I'm not saying they need ridiculous merchandise quite yet... they just need the basics. They could start out with TNA logo T-Shirts and hats, and wait until later to make up oven mitts with Abyss on them, and other "Somebody Bought This" articles.

4. We know that the "old" guys provide the name recognition. A casual fan might say "Kevin Nash? DDP? The New Age Outlaws? Of course I remember those guys! Hey, they're back on TV!" However TNA could use these big-name guys to draw the initial interest, and use the younger solid talent to *keep* the interest. Someone may tune in because they heard Scott Hall was back on TV. However when they tune in, that viewer should be wow'ed with A.J. Styles or Fallen Angel so much, that they keep watching.

And there you have it.... my armchair analysis.

[Wheresmy5bucks]

I'll add:

Don't obsess with competing with WWE- WCW did this near the end, and you can see what happened.

[Phoenix]

agrees whole heartedly with above post