Hulk Hogan at 6 months

[Richard]

Apr 30, 2010 20:08:41 GMT -5 GaTechGrad said:

Pass, but not with flying colors.

TNA now has four hours of programming per week, with every other week's show live.

Also, if we're going all the way back to October of last year, you have to give Hogan credit for the highly esteemed Wolfe/Angle program and the AJ/Daniels/Joe rematch from last year. We also had the longest title reign from a "TNA original" in TNA history.

I am. They used that period to set up things for when Hogan became an on air persona.

[Arturo Classico]

Fail. 0.6 and 0.5 ratings are unacceptable. They have pleanty of great talent and to spend on so much to get ratings from a 1.0 -0.5 has to look like a failure. The lowest Raw ever had was 1.9 and that was during the darkest years WWE ever had.

Same thing with WCW Nitro the lowest they had was also a 1.9 but that was before they established themselves as a top show and before they got the nWo started or had any good feuds in 1995. Lets think about that again, even putting the belt on Russo and Aquette, having Rick Steiner attack himself and Oklahoma still drew better ratings than TNA.

Now with ECW the original wrestling show on Spike (than TNN) they even had better ratings than TNA's last one of a 0.5. Although not saying that ECW had the best ratings basically the same as TNA's typical ratings prior to Hogan coming. The bad ratings came when TNN officials started undermining the show and prevented anyone from knowing when it was on so you can't blame ECW for that. But Still the point has to be made that no time in the history of ECW on TNN did they get a .5 rating.

This shows the mass ineptitude of TNA management. Competing with Raw is the stupidest thing ever and they deserve to be cancelled for that crap. So in honor of the Hogan era of TNA, I present this:

[mysterydriver]

Well, when Hogan started, I watched TNA regularly.

Six months later, I haven't watched in weeks.

Guess that makes it a fail for me.

[SAJ Forth]

For now, somewhere in between.

[The OP]

I don't know. I guess if a D is passing...

[Deleted]

Apr 30, 2010 17:38:34 GMT -5 Steveweiser said:

If they were brought in to lose half their audience, then it's a pass.

That's a pretty big hyperbole there. On Thursday's they were doing around 1.0-1.3 on average. On Monday's, head-to-head with the biggest wrestling promotion in the world for at least one hour, their ratings are around 0.8-1.0 most weeks. This week it went to 0.5 up against a 3-hour Raw (and even Raw's ratings were bad for them). Unless you have the actual number of viewers/share that prove otherwise, I highly doubt it is a loss of half the audience. A dip in audience was expected going H2H with Raw, but for the most part the dip hasn't been substantial. If they kept Impact on Thursday's, the ratings would have hovered around the same as they always were, maybe an increase for a live show if they did that every other week. The problem, if anything, is that the TNA talent/booking was not able to capitialize on the ratings that Hogan brought in on 1/4. Hogan's first appearance scored Impact's highest rating and highest TV segment rating ever. Hogan brought attention to TNA.

As far as success or failure, what was the live gate for Lockdown? What were the buyrates for the last few PPV's? That's where the money comes in, not TV ratings. Hard to figure attendance since they are in Orlando 90% of the time.

I would say pass for now. I never heard of TNA prior to Hogan coming in so I think whatever they lost in diehards they gained in casuals and it more or less evened out. Now they need something to put them over the top.

[golding]

Judging by the "am I entertained and compelled to keep watching" scale, definite pass. Ratings are something that are tough to control.

[Can you afford to pay me, Gah]

To me there should be an average option because that how I see the first 6 months. When you look at the signing of RVD (Who so far been good overall), The pushing of the Pope, The signing of Mister Anderson (Who been a awesome heel.) was pushing guys like Doug Williams who better off as a singles guy then a tag guy. That just me seeing his work before hand.

I'm still up in the air on Jeff Hardy. The trial later this month will decide that. If he clear he will be another postive. Because there is no denying his popularity and how hot of a star he is. BUt if he guilty it will hurt TNA.

Also the Angle vs. Anderson was a great feud that gave us great matches. The promos where good. The best thing is at the end Mr. Anderson came off looking like a MEer.

Then you have the bad which a lot of the bad is no longer there as in signing. I'm talking about bring in the Nasty Boys. Which just saw BTLS get is walking papers. All is left is really the Band.

The release I agree the Knockouts that left shouldn't have. That divison should been more focused on in the way they where before Hogan came in. Why screw with a working formala that the Knockouts have that was working great. If that was drawing ratings built on that. Don't take away the goods.

That and Daniels leaving was bad. Daniels should have a more major role in TNA. He a great worker and talker if given the time and more of a character.

The other bads are trying to get AJ over as Nature Boy Junior. Not working. He should be a face because that what he ring style is working best as. Then the whole Abyss non sense. Abyss is a joke now as being Evad 2.0. Abyss needs to turn heel to gain creditablity back and become a dominate monster like he was when he first came in.

[Deleted]

May 1, 2010 12:16:38 GMT -5 @conebone69 said:

Apr 30, 2010 17:38:34 GMT -5 Steveweiser said:

If they were brought in to lose half their audience, then it's a pass.

That's a pretty big hyperbole there. On Thursday's they were doing around 1.0-1.3 on average. On Monday's, head-to-head with the biggest wrestling promotion in the world for at least one hour, their ratings are around 0.8-1.0 most weeks. This week it went to 0.5 up against a 3-hour Raw (and even Raw's ratings were bad for them). Unless you have the actual number of viewers/share that prove otherwise, I highly doubt it is a loss of half the audience. A dip in audience was expected going H2H with Raw, but for the most part the dip hasn't been substantial. If they kept Impact on Thursday's, the ratings would have hovered around the same as they always were, maybe an increase for a live show if they did that every other week. The problem, if anything, is that the TNA talent/booking was not able to capitialize on the ratings that Hogan brought in on 1/4. Hogan's first appearance scored Impact's highest rating and highest TV segment rating ever. Hogan brought attention to TNA.

As far as success or failure, what was the live gate for Lockdown? What were the buyrates for the last few PPV's? That's where the money comes in, not TV ratings. Hard to figure attendance since they are in Orlando 90% of the time.

I would say pass for now. I never heard of TNA prior to Hogan coming in so I think whatever they lost in diehards they gained in casuals and it more or less evened out. Now they need something to put them over the top.

a 1.2 on Thursday is 1.6 million people
This past Monday was a .5 rating with 739000 viewers.

Its OVER half.

[The Ichi]

Putting aside my hatred towards TNA's new direction...it's still a fail. The man claimed he would turn the company around completely and "dominate Monday nights"...that did not happen. At all. Sorry but Hogan's mouth is his own worst enemy and I think this has proven that there's not as much interest in seeing Hulk Hogan in 2010 as he (and his defenders) would like to tell you.

[Spudz]

Apr 30, 2010 20:08:41 GMT -5 GaTechGrad said:

Pass, but not with flying colors.

TNA now has four hours of programming per week, with every other week's show live.

Except for periods of time last year and this year... TNA has always has 4 hours of programing since Impact went 2 hours.

Combining those ratings now are not any better than when the replay was played in the morning or late night. Live shows haven't got them thousands of new viewers.

The only positives is that house shows numbers are doing slightly better this year than last year and the UK ratings are up but with the cost of going live and adding talent like Jeff Hardy and RVD they probably aren't making much of profit.

[erisi236]

I'd mark Hogan as a 57/100, which is still an F but at least he put some effort into it instead of just turning in a blank paper.

[jfrogg007]

Pass for me. It feels like there is more star power. RVD, Mr Anderson, the emergence of Pope, Flair all really good imho.

Lockdown was an awesome PPV.

For me and my personal enjoyment, it's B+. I don't watch WWE at all anymore now. It's so boring in comparison to TNA.

[Square]

I think in this 6 months they have set some firm foundations on which to build on. The world title is seen as a major thing, they have a strong main event scene, they have some of tomorrows world champions on the verge of main eventing, the tag division is getting back on it's feet, the X Division is set to have a rocket shoved up it's ass and the production seems better. So yeah, I think he's done good.

There are things that I don't like about TNA, Rob Terry's push as a prime example, but for the future of the company I can't fault Hogan with anything that has damaged TNA

[rnrk supports BLM]

Apr 30, 2010 20:04:11 GMT -5 comahan said:

I read this as Hogan out 6 months.

My first thought was that this would be a thread of pictures of a baby with a handlebar mustache and doo-rag.

[Krimzon]

I'm beginning to enjoy TNA less and less with each passing week. Gotta say fail for me.

[jakemcclain]

Pass at B- to C+

Told a buddy of mine once that I knew things might get worse, ratings wise, before getting better. I knew that Hogan was going to get rid of everything the niche indy product stood for, and that meant losing the niche indy audience. Audience has gone down because the hardcore fans are gone, and they haven't made up for it yet with enough of a new fanbase. I also knew him saying it'd be a 3.0 on January 4th was typical Hogan.

Now, what's good?

Russo's garbage writing is nowhere near the product. Yeah, the product's a bit ADD, no question about it, but as I have said before, feuds are being built nice and slow, and have a great climax. Also, as I've said, heels are heels and faces are faces. I do agree that AJ probably isn't the best for Nature Boy Jr., but he's making the best of it, and he's become a MUCH MUCH better heel character, and is much better on promos. Also, when AJ turns back face, his mic skills will have exponentially improved.

You can hear the music - Very important. When I saw TNA before, other than a couple of guys, I couldn't understand most of the music played. Now I hear it loud and clear.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not giving Hogan an A at all. Still picked the wrong guy as a protege(Abyss instead of Morgan, although Morgan's an awesome heel), still shows up too often at times, and still brought in Bubba The Love Sponge, which is awful. I just know and realize that WWE is very boring, and absolute garbage at times, and know that Vince has to be pushed to put a good product out there, so I admire the guts Hogan has to go head to head with McMahon. Hasn't worked yet, but TNA also needs a consistent product week in and week out.

[Deleted]

May 1, 2010 12:36:15 GMT -5 @personman01 said:

May 1, 2010 12:16:38 GMT -5 @conebone69 said:

That's a pretty big hyperbole there. On Thursday's they were doing around 1.0-1.3 on average. On Monday's, head-to-head with the biggest wrestling promotion in the world for at least one hour, their ratings are around 0.8-1.0 most weeks. This week it went to 0.5 up against a 3-hour Raw (and even Raw's ratings were bad for them). Unless you have the actual number of viewers/share that prove otherwise, I highly doubt it is a loss of half the audience. A dip in audience was expected going H2H with Raw, but for the most part the dip hasn't been substantial. If they kept Impact on Thursday's, the ratings would have hovered around the same as they always were, maybe an increase for a live show if they did that every other week. The problem, if anything, is that the TNA talent/booking was not able to capitialize on the ratings that Hogan brought in on 1/4. Hogan's first appearance scored Impact's highest rating and highest TV segment rating ever. Hogan brought attention to TNA.

As far as success or failure, what was the live gate for Lockdown? What were the buyrates for the last few PPV's? That's where the money comes in, not TV ratings. Hard to figure attendance since they are in Orlando 90% of the time.

I would say pass for now. I never heard of TNA prior to Hogan coming in so I think whatever they lost in diehards they gained in casuals and it more or less evened out. Now they need something to put them over the top.

a 1.2 on Thursday is 1.6 million people
This past Monday was a .5 rating with 739000 viewers.

Its OVER half.

Yeah, in ONE week. It is not a trend (yet). Saying TNA lost half its audience after the Hogan acquisition would be like saying a baseball team lost half its fanbase because they drew poorly in one game. Look at the trend. If the trend says they dropped half in people, then fine, but after one week it would be pretty pointless to make that sort of statement.

[Parrish]

the creative aspect of the promotion is the same as it has been for the last 2 years. nothing has changed except for adding some bigger name free agents. Sure we get a live show every other week but who cares about that? They could go old school Raw and tape 6 weeks worth and if it was a great show I wouldnt care if it was taped or live. They have lost audience and I haven't seen one damn leg drop yet!

[tarheelfan]

May 1, 2010 12:16:38 GMT -5 @conebone69 said:

Apr 30, 2010 17:38:34 GMT -5 Steveweiser said:

If they were brought in to lose half their audience, then it's a pass.

That's a pretty big hyperbole there. On Thursday's they were doing around 1.0-1.3 on average. On Monday's, head-to-head with the biggest wrestling promotion in the world for at least one hour, their ratings are around 0.8-1.0 most weeks. This week it went to 0.5 up against a 3-hour Raw (and even Raw's ratings were bad for them). Unless you have the actual number of viewers/share that prove otherwise, I highly doubt it is a loss of half the audience. A dip in audience was expected going H2H with Raw, but for the most part the dip hasn't been substantial. If they kept Impact on Thursday's, the ratings would have hovered around the same as they always were, maybe an increase for a live show if they did that every other week. The problem, if anything, is that the TNA talent/booking was not able to capitialize on the ratings that Hogan brought in on 1/4. Hogan's first appearance scored Impact's highest rating and highest TV segment rating ever. Hogan brought attention to TNA.

As far as success or failure, what was the live gate for Lockdown? What were the buyrates for the last few PPV's? That's where the money comes in, not TV ratings. Hard to figure attendance since they are in Orlando 90% of the time.

I would say pass for now. I never heard of TNA prior to Hogan coming in so I think whatever they lost in diehards they gained in casuals and it more or less evened out. Now they need something to put them over the top.

WCW even pre Eric Bischoff in control was still a more established wrestling franchise even if WCW had been losing money. Most(not all) people who were mainstream wrestling fans watched both WWE and WCW in the early 1990s. So basically WCW was a household name especially since a lot of core WCW fans were fans of the old school NWA. TNA is not even on par to being a namebrand that WCW was even WCW pre Monday Night Wars.

The problem is that no matter how subpar the WWE has become it has an astronomical headstart on TNA in history, production, mainstream popularity and established stability. TNA could have five star matches and superb storylines and fueds the next 6 months and the WWE will still be in control. TNA IMHO needs to focus less on competing with WWE but rather establishing itself.