Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted February 26, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted February 26, 2011 You might want to also highlight the part where I said "ever" and "made" as well, because context is a wonderful thing during a discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Yep, agree. I love how TNA re-signing Sting and putting the belt on him points to a reliance on 'short-term fixes' and 'papering over the cracks'. Are people saying that? I've not read the whole thread, but people seem to be arguing that Sting returning to TNA doesn't short-term fix anything or paper over any cracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapnut Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 You might want to also highlight the part where I said "ever" and "made" as well, because context is a wonderful thing during a discussion. Â Sorry, I don't actually get what you mean here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted February 26, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted February 26, 2011 What I said was Sting and Angle are the only two people who have meant anything as far as TNA's growth in audience. I never said in 2011 Sting is a ratings winner. I said TNA's current audience will be more inclined to buy PPV's because of him, because they are the same audience who have followed TNA when he was the champion and drawing far bigger buyrates than TNA do now. That's why I said this: But to that 1.1 - 1.3 who tune into TNA every week, they are far more inclined to buy a PPV with Sting in the main event. Â You said this: I really can't see how he's making a difference to the ratings. Â My point is, is Sting is more likely to create interest in its current audience (which hasnt been buying the PPV's in the numbers it used to since late 2009) than gain a new one. Â Anyway here's Big Show running after his Dad's coffin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapnut Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 My point is, is Sting is more likely to create interest in its current audience (which hasnt been buying the PPV's in the numbers it used to since late 2009) than gain a new one. Â The last PPV Sting main evented IIRC was Slammiversary vs. Rob Van Dam which only got 8,000 buys. Buyrates are so low these days that I'm not sure if he (or anyone for that matter) is as big a draw as he was a few years ago. Maybe his absence and return will generate more interest. Â My problem is the creative side really. I have no problem with them bringing him back, I just think the 3.3.11 video was hideously unoriginal and cheap, even if it was a parody. Hotshotting the title onto him doesn't sit well with me either, as cliche and smarky as that may sound. I've been enjoying the current main event of Anderson, Hardy etc. and, like I said above, I got bored of Sting holding the World Title after the second or third Bound for Glory win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Your Fight Site Posted February 26, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted February 26, 2011 My point is, is Sting is more likely to create interest in its current audience (which hasnt been buying the PPV's in the numbers it used to since late 2009) than gain a new one. Â The last PPV Sting main evented IIRC was Slammiversary vs. Rob Van Dam which only got 8,000 buys. Buyrates are so low these days that I'm not sure if he (or anyone for that matter) is as big a draw as he was a few years ago. Maybe his absence and return will generate more interest. Â My problem is the creative side really. I have no problem with them bringing him back, I just think the 3.3.11 video was hideously unoriginal and cheap, even if it was a parody. Hotshotting the title onto him doesn't sit well with me either, as cliche and smarky as that may sound. I've been enjoying the current main event of Anderson, Hardy etc. and, like I said above, I got bored of Sting holding the World Title after the second or third Bound for Glory win. Sting for me is like Sir Roger Moore: he can be 80 but he'll still be the fuckin' man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblackvinnymac Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 My point is, is Sting is more likely to create interest in its current audience (which hasnt been buying the PPV's in the numbers it used to since late 2009) than gain a new one. Â The last PPV Sting main evented IIRC was Slammiversary vs. Rob Van Dam which only got 8,000 buys. Buyrates are so low these days that I'm not sure if he (or anyone for that matter) is as big a draw as he was a few years ago. Maybe his absence and return will generate more interest. Â My problem is the creative side really. I have no problem with them bringing him back, I just think the 3.3.11 video was hideously unoriginal and cheap, even if it was a parody. Hotshotting the title onto him doesn't sit well with me either, as cliche and smarky as that may sound. I've been enjoying the current main event of Anderson, Hardy etc. and, like I said above, I got bored of Sting holding the World Title after the second or third Bound for Glory win. Â surely u mean 80,000....??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhenom Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Wait, I thought that TNA didn't announce their PPV buyrates becuase they don't have to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapnut Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 My point is, is Sting is more likely to create interest in its current audience (which hasnt been buying the PPV's in the numbers it used to since late 2009) than gain a new one. Â The last PPV Sting main evented IIRC was Slammiversary vs. Rob Van Dam which only got 8,000 buys. Buyrates are so low these days that I'm not sure if he (or anyone for that matter) is as big a draw as he was a few years ago. Maybe his absence and return will generate more interest. Â My problem is the creative side really. I have no problem with them bringing him back, I just think the 3.3.11 video was hideously unoriginal and cheap, even if it was a parody. Hotshotting the title onto him doesn't sit well with me either, as cliche and smarky as that may sound. I've been enjoying the current main event of Anderson, Hardy etc. and, like I said above, I got bored of Sting holding the World Title after the second or third Bound for Glory win. Â surely u mean 80,000....??? Â No, 8,000. TNA's biggest buyrate has only been like 65,000 or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_mole Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Wait, I thought that TNA didn't announce their PPV buyrates becuase they don't have to? Â Nobody knows the exact numbers because they are a private company unlike the WWE and the numbers are usually estimates within the cable industry. Â The WWE does about 90,000-110,000 North American buys and does similar numbers worldwide for most b show PPVs, intrestingly Brock Lesners 2 fights last year did over 2 million buys and the WWE's 13 shows did less than that (North American buys, not worldwide) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Yep, agree. I love how TNA re-signing Sting and putting the belt on him points to a reliance on 'short-term fixes' and 'papering over the cracks'. Are people saying that? I've not read the whole thread, but people seem to be arguing that Sting returning to TNA doesn't short-term fix anything or paper over any cracks. Â This was the post I was refererring to: Â That sums up my thoughts entirely. The pictures of Sting's new attire looks Independent at best I'm afraid, and thats being mild! It all feels like a sloppy turd has been dumped on TNA by themselves with no long term thought. It's right "now" for their company and not the next couple of years and ahead. Short term fix's just paint over the massive cracks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgi86 Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Hardy & Sting's entrances for their match in Fayetteville: Â Â Â Lookin' good and way better than the iMPACT Zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhenom Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Hardy & Sting's entrances for their match in Fayetteville:Â Â Â Lookin' good and way better than the iMPACT Zone. I'm gonna admit it does look great, even though his costume doesn't agree with me. What was Velvet Sky doing on the tron during Sting's entrance though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgi86 Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 What was Velvet Sky doing on the tron during Sting's entrance though? Just your typical TNA production error. It's not the first and it won't be the last, especially if they do in fact have more iMPACTs on the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted February 26, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted February 26, 2011 Thats how wrestling should be. Two big stars in a packed arena with the crowd going mental. The Impact Zone sucks the drama out of anything they try and do. It would be cool if TNA could book two days at an arena and tape two episodes of Impact a night to fill up the months TV tapings. TNA always looks better when it isnt inside that little studio. Â Yeah, his outfit (apart from the jacket, that looks amazing!) might look shit, but he's got himself in great shape again, which must mean he's over his rotator cuff tear. It was shit seeing him wrestle in a t-shirt last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.