|
Post by Clarence "Showstealer" Mason on Jul 13, 2010 22:46:46 GMT -5
I'm kind of in the middle of the whole free tv matches debate. I think it's dumb they give them away for free on Impact but it's not the dumbest thing they do to kill business, not by a long shot
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Jul 13, 2010 22:52:32 GMT -5
Why should I pay money to TNA by ordering ppvs or dvds when I can just watch an illegal ppv stream? Or download an bootleg copy of their dvds? People spending money on TNA makes them healthy and profitable. Freeload too long and there may not be anything left to mooch off. Especially in today's economy climate. But why would a fan complain about getting a free good match? If you were going to buy a new game, a game you really wanted, got to the store and they handed it to you and said "No, don't worry about it", would you sit there and argue with them about it? No, so I don't see why this is any different. TV is obviously TNA's bread and butter right now. Then stop doing ppvs then. Free doesn't come without a price. That's like airing the new Twilight movie on TNT and expecting folks to watch the same movie a few weeks later.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Jul 13, 2010 22:53:11 GMT -5
I don't think people have a problem with high quality wrestling on free TV, but there has to be some other way to provide solid action than giving away potential dream matches.
Once again I am left to ponder this question: Why is Abyss getting a title shot? There isn't a top 10 mention anywhere on these 2 weeks of spoilers. Are we to assume Abyss has somehow jumped Jeff Hardy despite losing fairly cleanly to Jeff on Impact? Further, given that all these ECW guys have beaten the crap out of Abyss, why would we think Abyss has a chance of beating RVD at the PPV?
|
|
josh
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 604
|
Post by josh on Jul 13, 2010 22:53:19 GMT -5
But why would a fan complain about getting a free good match? If you were going to buy a new game, a game you really wanted, got to the store and they handed it to you and said "No, don't worry about it", would you sit there and argue with them about it? No, so I don't see why this is any different. TV is obviously TNA's bread and butter right now. Then stop doing ppvs then. Free doesn't come without a price. That's like airing the new Twilight movie on HBO and expecting folks to watch the same movie a few weeks later. You'd have a point if Joe/Hardy is headlining Hard Justice...but it's not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 22:57:06 GMT -5
"one last night"
I wonder if they'll hold true to that or if they'll drag it out?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 22:57:33 GMT -5
Oh and an ECW PPV? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Jul 13, 2010 22:57:58 GMT -5
Then stop doing ppvs then. Free doesn't come without a price. That's like airing the new Twilight movie on HBO and expecting folks to watch the same movie a few weeks later. You'd have a point if Joe/Hardy is headlining Hard Justice...but it's not. But it could headline a ppv down the line.
|
|
|
Post by Amazing Kitsune on Jul 13, 2010 22:58:52 GMT -5
It doesn't necessarily kill any hype for a Joe/Hardy match headlining a PPV down the line.
If a match is promoted right, it doesn't matter if you've seen it once or twice in the past. The only thing, I think, that really hurts a main events chances is when it's a match we've seen a billion times.
If, six months down the line, Joe and Hardy are in the midst of an awesome blood feud that everybody's dying to see--they won't say to themselves, "Yeah this is great and all, but they had that one match on Impact six months ago."
|
|
josh
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 604
|
Post by josh on Jul 13, 2010 23:00:17 GMT -5
You'd have a point if Joe/Hardy is headlining Hard Justice...but it's not. But it could headline a ppv down the line. And then it'll be different. First matches don't mean as much as you think they do. If this time next year they're kicking off a Joe/Hardy feud for a headlining PPV shot you're not going to go "UGH I saw that match on iMPACT last year not paying for this!". If that's how you feel about repeat matches I shudder to think when the last time you bought a WWE PPV was.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 23:01:15 GMT -5
Then stop doing ppvs then. Free doesn't come without a price. That's like airing the new Twilight movie on HBO and expecting folks to watch the same movie a few weeks later. You'd have a point if Joe/Hardy is headlining Hard Justice...but it's not. Not even really, I mean at least 75% of a decent match involves the feud. They have none so its basically just an exhibition match.
|
|
Krimzon
Crow T. Robot
This guy is the man!
R.I.P. Deadpool
Posts: 43,870
|
Post by Krimzon on Jul 13, 2010 23:01:43 GMT -5
You know, one would think that during his travels, Tommy Dreamer would've run into Justin Credible at an Olive Garden and recruited him.
|
|
Hawk Hart
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sold his organs.
The Best There Is, the Best There Was, and the Best That There Ever Will Be
Posts: 15,296
|
Post by Hawk Hart on Jul 13, 2010 23:04:27 GMT -5
You know, one would think that during his travels, Tommy Dreamer would've run into Justin Credible at an Olive Garden and recruited him. Or wandered into whatever pharmacy Sabu was hanging out in.
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,479
|
Post by metylerca on Jul 13, 2010 23:07:20 GMT -5
But it could headline a ppv down the line. And then it'll be different. First matches don't mean as much as you think they do. If this time next year they're kicking off a Joe/Hardy feud for a headlining PPV shot you're not going to go "UGH I saw that match on iMPACT last year not paying for this!". If that's how you feel about repeat matches I shudder to think when the last time you bought a WWE PPV was. And thus we have the obligatory WWE-dig of the evening. If the next time Joe/Hardy happens is in a year, things will most def. be different. But if they throw Joe/Hardy on No Surrender or BFG, it'll take away some steam from the allure of a first match, because people will point to their match on Impact. Granted, at least this was a time-limit draw so there's a chance this might build up more interest in a PPV match. So, yes. I agree with you here, I just dislike the idea that "If you're not always pro-TNA, you're a hater, therefore I'll treat you as such." TNA's not perfect, accept it.
|
|
|
Post by Threadkiller [Classic] on Jul 13, 2010 23:11:16 GMT -5
Why should I pay money to TNA by ordering ppvs or dvds when I can just watch an illegal ppv stream? Or download an bootleg copy of their dvds? People spending money on TNA makes them healthy and profitable. Freeload too long and there may not be anything left to mooch off. Especially in today's economy climate. But why would a fan complain about getting a free good match? If you were going to buy a new game, a game you really wanted, got to the store and they handed it to you and said "No, don't worry about it", would you sit there and argue with them about it? No, so I don't see why this is any different. TV is obviously TNA's bread and butter right now. I think the problem many fans have with free TV matches (or, at the very least, MY problem with free TV matches of a PPV caliber) is not that they like to think of themselves as bookers or are looking for something to nitpick. In short, we want TNA to succeed. And the simple truth of the matter is that they very likely could have done pretty good PPV numbers (by TNA's standards) if they'd saved some of these matches that they're just giving away. I know, personally, I want TNA to succeed, because I want there to be more places for guys to get work, more alternatives at a national level, etc. As a wrestling fan, it's healthy for there to be more options. Hell, it's more healthy for the business if the monopoly is at least somewhat broken up. So when I say that I wish they'd have saved Joe vs. Hardy or Joe vs. RVD for PPV, I say it because I want them to turn a profit and be around for a while. I want them to build a match like that and make it special, as opposed to haphazardly throwing it out there in the second quarter hour with no build up the week before. I want TNA to succeed, and they're blowing their money matches to pop a rating when a Samoa Joe vs. Shannon Moore squash match would probably do the same numbers. At least, if you're going to give away a match of that magnitude on free TV, give it two to three weeks of build up. Or, at the very least, announce the match the week before it happens and get fans excited and anxious to tune in to see it. I mean, sheesh, I just want to know how this is hard, how it's THAT difficult to grasp that these matches could be making them more money than the quarter point ratings pop it'd likely get. Build a compelling story around a compelling match-up, and pay it off on PPV, and people will tune in for the fallout. Perhaps the best build they ever did for a PPV main event was Kurt Angle vs. Samoa Joe at Lockdown a few years back, because it was built like an athletic contest, like an MMA fight. They showed training videos, cut serious promos, did background pieces on the fighters. It was a lot like the build to Rock vs. Brock at Summerslam in 2002. The match was given a big fight atmosphere, and while they tacked on the needless stipulation that Joe would have to retire if he lost, the match/angle/PPV numbers (allegedly) ultimately delivered. How such tactics didn't become standard practice in TNA, I'll never know. I just want them to be doing better than they are, so that they can really become viable. Not as a threat to WWE, but as a number two national promotion that serves as a genuine alternative to VKM's product. That's not going to happen if they continue putting on PPVs where the matches are rehashes of what we've been given for free on television, because nobody will buy them (and this is ignoring the fact that they occasionally give away rematches from the PPV as early as the fallout show from the PPV, essentially telling the fan that their loyalty was worthless because the people who didn't pay are still getting it for free; and don't even get me started on how they build a match for the next PPV by giving away that match on TV at some point during the build up). If TV is going to be their focus from here and out, they need to scrap PPVs, because they're becoming redundant in light of what they're giving away on TV. I want TNA to succeed. I cannot stress that enough. But it seems like TNA is going the way of Mel Gibson. I WANT to like Mel, I really do. But he's just done so many boneheaded things in the past few years that he's making it really hard to even want to try.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 23:12:02 GMT -5
Let's all stop kidding ourselves here with this Joe/Hardy argument.
We all know Jeff Hardy does not have the ability to put on a "PPV Caliber" match so its really a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jul 13, 2010 23:14:17 GMT -5
But why would a fan complain about getting a free good match? If you were going to buy a new game, a game you really wanted, got to the store and they handed it to you and said "No, don't worry about it", would you sit there and argue with them about it? No, so I don't see why this is any different. TV is obviously TNA's bread and butter right now. I think the problem many fans have with free TV matches (or, at the very least, MY problem with free TV matches of a PPV caliber) is not that they like to think of themselves as bookers or are looking for something to nitpick. In short, we want TNA to succeed. And the simple truth of the matter is that they very likely could have done pretty good PPV numbers (by TNA's standards) if they'd saved some of these matches that they're just giving away. I know, personally, I want TNA to succeed, because I want there to be more places for guys to get work, more alternatives at a national level, etc. As a wrestling fan, it's healthy for there to be more options. Hell, it's more healthy for the business if the monopoly is at least somewhat broken up. So when I say that I wish they'd have saved Joe vs. Hardy or Joe vs. RVD for PPV, I say it because I want them to turn a profit and be around for a while. I want them to build a match like that and make it special, as opposed to haphazardly throwing it out there in the second quarter hour with no build up the week before. I want TNA to succeed, and they're blowing their money matches to pop a rating when a Samoa Joe vs. Shannon Moore squash match would probably do the same numbers. At least, if you're going to give away a match of that magnitude on free TV, give it two to three weeks of build up. Or, at the very least, announce the match the week before it happens and get fans excited and anxious to tune in to see it. I mean, sheesh, I just want to know how this is hard, how it's THAT difficult to grasp that these matches could be making them more money than the quarter point ratings pop it'd likely get. Build a compelling story around a compelling match-up, and pay it off on PPV, and people will tune in for the fallout. Perhaps the best build they ever did for a PPV main event was Kurt Angle vs. Samoa Joe at Lockdown a few years back, because it was built like an athletic contest, like an MMA fight. They showed training videos, cut serious promos, did background pieces on the fighters. It was a lot like the build to Rock vs. Brock at Summerslam in 2002. The match was given a big fight atmosphere, and while they tacked on the needless stipulation that Joe would have to retire if he lost, the match/angle/PPV numbers (allegedly) ultimately delivered. How such tactics didn't become standard practice in TNA, I'll never know. I just want them to be doing better than they are, so that they can really become viable. Not as a threat to WWE, but as a number two national promotion that serves as a genuine alternative to VKM's product. That's not going to happen if they continue putting on PPVs where the matches are rehashes of what we've been given for free on television, because nobody will buy them (and this is ignoring the fact that they occasionally give away rematches from the PPV as early as the fallout show from the PPV, essentially telling the fan that their loyalty was worthless because the people who didn't pay are still getting it for free; and don't even get me started on how they build a match for the next PPV by giving away that match on TV at some point during the build up). If TV is going to be their focus from here and out, they need to scrap PPVs, because they're becoming redundant in light of what they're giving away on TV. I want TNA to succeed. I cannot stress that enough. But it seems like TNA is going the way of Mel Gibson. I WANT to like Mel, I really do. But he's just done so many boneheaded things in the past few years that he's making it really hard to even want to try. So, you want TNA to fail? Really, it's a time limit draw. It's no big deal. In fact, it kind of adds more hype, don't it?
|
|
josh
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 604
|
Post by josh on Jul 13, 2010 23:21:15 GMT -5
And then it'll be different. First matches don't mean as much as you think they do. If this time next year they're kicking off a Joe/Hardy feud for a headlining PPV shot you're not going to go "UGH I saw that match on iMPACT last year not paying for this!". If that's how you feel about repeat matches I shudder to think when the last time you bought a WWE PPV was. And thus we have the obligatory WWE-dig of the evening. If the next time Joe/Hardy happens is in a year, things will most def. be different. But if they throw Joe/Hardy on No Surrender or BFG, it'll take away some steam from the allure of a first match, because people will point to their match on Impact. Granted, at least this was a time-limit draw so there's a chance this might build up more interest in a PPV match. So, yes. I agree with you here, I just dislike the idea that "If you're not always pro-TNA, you're a hater, therefore I'll treat you as such." TNA's not perfect, accept it. That was hardly a WWE dig, it was actually a reference to how their main event scene repeats matches, including matches we've gotten on free TV. I never said it was a bad thing, so quit trying to spin my words around. I disagree with your statement that if they threw it on a PPV even a few months down the line it'd hurt the build as long as the build was good. The build to a PPV is what matters, I don't care if I saw the match two weeks ago(Angle/AJ on the Jan 4th show and again at Genesis and those weren't even their first two encounters) is the perfect example of this. I've never once in my entire existence claimed TNA was perfect, if you'll go over my posts I even acknowledge their obvious criticism targets but I say this isn't one of them. So don't twist my words or ignore certain things I say to try to help your point out.
|
|
|
Post by Threadkiller [Classic] on Jul 13, 2010 23:22:05 GMT -5
I think the problem many fans have with free TV matches (or, at the very least, MY problem with free TV matches of a PPV caliber) is not that they like to think of themselves as bookers or are looking for something to nitpick. In short, we want TNA to succeed. And the simple truth of the matter is that they very likely could have done pretty good PPV numbers (by TNA's standards) if they'd saved some of these matches that they're just giving away. I know, personally, I want TNA to succeed, because I want there to be more places for guys to get work, more alternatives at a national level, etc. As a wrestling fan, it's healthy for there to be more options. Hell, it's more healthy for the business if the monopoly is at least somewhat broken up. So when I say that I wish they'd have saved Joe vs. Hardy or Joe vs. RVD for PPV, I say it because I want them to turn a profit and be around for a while. I want them to build a match like that and make it special, as opposed to haphazardly throwing it out there in the second quarter hour with no build up the week before. I want TNA to succeed, and they're blowing their money matches to pop a rating when a Samoa Joe vs. Shannon Moore squash match would probably do the same numbers. At least, if you're going to give away a match of that magnitude on free TV, give it two to three weeks of build up. Or, at the very least, announce the match the week before it happens and get fans excited and anxious to tune in to see it. I mean, sheesh, I just want to know how this is hard, how it's THAT difficult to grasp that these matches could be making them more money than the quarter point ratings pop it'd likely get. Build a compelling story around a compelling match-up, and pay it off on PPV, and people will tune in for the fallout. Perhaps the best build they ever did for a PPV main event was Kurt Angle vs. Samoa Joe at Lockdown a few years back, because it was built like an athletic contest, like an MMA fight. They showed training videos, cut serious promos, did background pieces on the fighters. It was a lot like the build to Rock vs. Brock at Summerslam in 2002. The match was given a big fight atmosphere, and while they tacked on the needless stipulation that Joe would have to retire if he lost, the match/angle/PPV numbers (allegedly) ultimately delivered. How such tactics didn't become standard practice in TNA, I'll never know. I just want them to be doing better than they are, so that they can really become viable. Not as a threat to WWE, but as a number two national promotion that serves as a genuine alternative to VKM's product. That's not going to happen if they continue putting on PPVs where the matches are rehashes of what we've been given for free on television, because nobody will buy them (and this is ignoring the fact that they occasionally give away rematches from the PPV as early as the fallout show from the PPV, essentially telling the fan that their loyalty was worthless because the people who didn't pay are still getting it for free; and don't even get me started on how they build a match for the next PPV by giving away that match on TV at some point during the build up). If TV is going to be their focus from here and out, they need to scrap PPVs, because they're becoming redundant in light of what they're giving away on TV. I want TNA to succeed. I cannot stress that enough. But it seems like TNA is going the way of Mel Gibson. I WANT to like Mel, I really do. But he's just done so many boneheaded things in the past few years that he's making it really hard to even want to try. So, you want TNA to fail? Really, it's a time limit draw. It's no big deal. In fact, it kind of adds more hype, don't it? I suppose. More of a build-up to the eventual PPV encounter. I guess I'm more miffed that this is after giving away Joe vs. RVD. It just seems like back-to-back buffoonery that isn't even in the service of an angle since Hardy is apparently facing Lethal at the next PPV while RVD is facing Abyss.
|
|
josh
Bubba Ho-Tep
Posts: 604
|
Post by josh on Jul 13, 2010 23:25:53 GMT -5
I think they're just trying to build a reputation of having big matches every week.
Joe/AJ Joe/RVD Hardy/Lethal Joe/Hardy
Not to mention the Beer Money/MCMG Bo5 Series going on. But I don't think any of these matches affect Hard Justice at all, RVD/Abyss wasn't at all tainted by any matches announced so far, etc etc, you know? There are things wroth complaining about but I'll never complain about an interesting TV show.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Jul 13, 2010 23:30:06 GMT -5
I'm kind of in the middle of the whole free tv matches debate. I think it's dumb they give them away for free on Impact but it's not the dumbest thing they do to kill business, not by a long shot Well it is when they do little to improve ratings and while there PPVs suffer. You can't expect fans to order a PPV when the matches they want to see are given away for free with no story. It like if you put RVD vs. Joe or Hardy vs. Joe on PPV it has been done for free no so the specialness is lost regardless how good that PPV match is. Other post someone talked about the rematches will draw and somewhat it will. But it not going to have the same effect as the first match on PPV. Example you think Rock vs. Hogan at WM X8 would be as special as it was if they did a one on one match on Raw a couple weeks before it? No. I mean lets look at it like this for real proof. Rock and Hogan was a huge thing for WM X8 it was made that PPV big and the selling point. Did No Way Out in 03 the next year after the first match feel as special? No and heck nobody even talks about that match nor did it have the same rave reviews as the first one. It really a simple business deal going on here. It doesn't take much of a wrestling mind or a business education to figure out how to draw. Right now the only match they can really put on now that could draw a good number. Is really Hardy vs. Angle. Which I can see TNA giving that up on free TV too at the next tappings.
|
|