Paid Members garynysmon Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Yeah, it's too late now. For a while it seemed like the idea was that TNA was the parent company, Impact Wrestling was the tv brand, but even that dubious distinction is gone. It's TNA, and the show is Impact. Impact Wrestling doesn't mean anything really. Look at the logo on the website - it's a blue TNA logo.  Yeah, I thought that was the case too. For the casual viewer though, Impact Wrestling doesn't sound a bad name (A bit indy though perhaps). 'TNA' doesn't have that much name recognition to lose though, it's fanbase is pretty hardcore and steady, without really increasing or decreasing much. What's to lose with going the whole hog?  WWE managed to 'get the F out', so what's the worst that can happen? Edited January 30, 2013 by garynysmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Lightyear Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Fuck me, we're talking viewing figures aren't we? I don't watch TNA but it goes out at, what?, 8, 9 PM, Raw goes out at 1am. Go figure! Has multiple timeslots, like RAW. Â TNA is still new to this market, it's only been coming over here for 6 years and only recently got a TV deal with a respectable network. Slow steps for the company. Â Hopefully Australia is next and then they branch out elsewhere and start to become a global success worldwide, because unless something drastic happens in the WWE they will always have the bigger share of the US market. Â The "iMPACT Wrestling" brand idea for me showed TNA perfectly, a short term idea which wasn't thought out correctly. Still amazes me that they changed the name but don't market iMPACT as "THURSDAY NIGHT iMPACT". Edited January 30, 2013 by Buzz Lightyear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 I've always been surprised TNA hasn't tried to grow in the Canadian market, because the Hulkster has always seemingly been over like mad up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thicko Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Ok, do the viewing figures count for all showings? I don't know why but I assumed they only referred to the initial airing. Which was probably a silly assumption on my part..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Lightyear Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Ok, do the viewing figures count for all showings? I don't know why but I assumed they only referred to the initial airing. Which was probably a silly assumption on my part..... Â No individual viewings, either way iMPACT does very good numbers for TNA and Challenge. Yes it's on Free TV but the aim for TNA is long term fans and the more eyes that see the show the better for the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Lightyear Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 I've always been surprised TNA hasn't tried to grow in the Canadian market, because the Hulkster has always seemingly been over like mad up there. Â That's the problem when you change the direction every 5 minutes. Nobody has long term ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 To be fair, i'd argue the product has been nothing but long-term and consistant since Bruce Pritchard steadied the ship. Aren't they booking TV a month in advance now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Lightyear Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) To be fair, i'd argue the product has been nothing but long-term and consistant since Bruce Pritchard steadied the ship. Aren't they booking TV a month in advance now? Â They were always booking TV months in advance, even under Russo. The product has got better but the damage for me has already been done in the US market, far too many short-term changes has really effected the casual viewer in America. Â Here's hoping with the reduction of PPV's (a move I've been calling for years) it allows them to focus on putting good TV week in week out, and helps them build PPV's which fans want to invest in, but once again the US market is so much dictated by the WWE i'm not sure it will have any effect. Â Right now the company should be focusing on getting TNA worldwide and having deals around the world that allows them to gather money from that hardcore fanbase like the UK and using that money in getting iMPACT on the road. The last shows they have done on the road have been very good with really hot crowds. Edited January 30, 2013 by Buzz Lightyear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Yeah, that's the big problem. Its going to take ages (if ever) to delete the years of "LOL TNA" in the viewers mind. Wrestling fans generally just assume they know something, even if they didn't watch it. Like this idea WWE suddenly turned shit when they stopped booking vulgar storylines (forgetting 7 years of ratings declining) and if WWE started booking characters like Naked Mideon again business would be booming. Or that TNA was the greatest promotion on earth before Hogan got rid of the six sided ring. As good as TNA is, its stock in the eyes of the wrestling audience is low right now. It'll take a lot of effort to regain their trust. Edited January 30, 2013 by IANdrewDiceClay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Lightyear Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Yeah, that's the big problem. Its going to take ages (if ever) to delete the years of "LOL TNA" in the viewers mind. Wrestling fans generally just assume they know something, even if they didn't watch it. Like this idea WWE suddenly turned shit when they stopped booking vulgar storylines (forgetting 7 years of ratings declining) and if WWE started booking characters like Naked Mideon again business would be booming. Or that TNA was the greatest promotion on earth before Hogan got rid of the six sided ring. As good as TNA is, its stock in the eyes of the wrestling audience is low right now. It'll take a lot of effort to regain their trust. Â I've been a TNA fan from day one, and they frustrate me! The US market is so shit right now that it's going to take a long long time for them to overcome those problems. Â Another thing that they must grasp, is in order to survive in the current climate, they really do need to look at getting kids to shows & to invest in the product. If the WWE crowd does anything it shows you that 50% of the fans that attend are kids/women, TNA aren't doing anything to attract those. For me rather than getting another 1 hour show on TV in a decent timeslot, they really need to look at having a kids shows focusing on certain talent and having that shown during the day at the weekend. Â They might have lost the current generation of fans, so start planning for the next generation and have them invest long-term. Edited January 30, 2013 by Buzz Lightyear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) I don't know if the brand is that toxic, it's just that a certain (large) spectrum of fans will take one look at the comparative TV ratings and the size of the impact zone 'LOLZ TNA SUCKS', and that's that. There's a lot of people out there who are only too happy to sack off TNA as being shite, while being happy enough to sit through three hours of Raw and another two of Smackdown. Edited January 30, 2013 by garynysmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Lightyear Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) I don't know if the brand is that toxic, it's just that a certain (large) spectrum of fans will take one look at the comparative TV ratings and the size of the impact zone 'LOLZ TNA SUCKS', and that's that. There's a lot of people out there who are only too happy to sack off TNA as being shite, while being happy enough to sit through three hours of Raw and another two of Smackdown. Â Probably because those fans grew up watching WWE and feel loyal to the company. TNA have a very popular guy with the young kids/women and they don't use him to attract new viewers in he way he does best. (Jeff Hardy) Â Wherever TNA fans (myself included) like it or not, the company is going to have to change if they want to succeed long term. In order to start taking TV on the road long-term they need every fan possible and if that means brining in younger fans then it's a sacrifice worth making. Edited January 30, 2013 by Buzz Lightyear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) At the risk of sounding overly smarky, an idea hit me as to how they could possibly decide the name in a final, significant manner and possibly get some viewings out of it. Simply have a "brand civil war" - a storyline similar to wCw/nWo where the entire promotion splits down the middle (yes, I know, but please bear with me). Jarrett comes back to take control of TNA, recruiting the likes of Daniels, Styles, Storm, and arbitrarily chuck in bigger names like Hardy or RVD, whilst Hogan takes control of "Impact Wrestling", with Roode, Aries, Sting, and what-have-you. Â They could market it along the lines of Marvel's Civil War storyline or like Whizzer & Chips, never having 100% clear splits between heels and face, with the slogan "Pick A Side" or whatever. With social media and the internet, there are myriad possibilities for really fleshing it out with the hardcore fanbase, and using TV, they can draw in the casuals by maybe splitting the colours - TNA taking red, Impact taking blue. It's also the only time I'd advocate bringing back the dual entranceways, although not in the same way they did before. Â Have it all run over a year and then culminate in a big match like a WarGames at BFG, with the winning faction taking control of everything, naming rights and all. With the use of internet tech, they can ascertain which name would be more popular, and if they split the roster right down the middle, with an even mix of popular homegrowns and legends on each side, there could be a genuine split of opinion, where people would make their choice based on the storylines, the character work and the booking. Â Only one problem: could they be trusted not to fuck it up badly? Edited January 30, 2013 by Carbomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members neil's bitch Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 Didn't they do that in the early TNA days between TNA and "Sports Entertainment Xtreme?". Plus i believe on a smaller scale it was done to a degree a few years later with TNA vs NWA things popping up. Â TNA cannot be trusted with anything, other than trying to outdo WWE at WWE's own game. I was a fan of TNA initially, dropped out after it went a bit down hill and got back on board a year or so ago. Loved everything that was going on with Bobby Roode, Austin Aries etc. Â For me its just the fact they need to realise what they have. The whole Bobby Roode angle was amazing, and he clearly was the best thing going. He should still be champion now in my eyes. James Storm seems to have lost momentum, and Austin Aries was pushed a little bit to soon, now lumping two of the most talented workers in some sort of "comedy" style tag team. Â A lot of fans read the result hoping the product gets better, but when it sounds like shit, why would you watch it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted January 30, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) I've actually been enjoying the TV product over the past couple of years. It's not been the most solid, but it's been entertaining. They don't have the big-time feel of WWE, but they've managed to do a good job of using what they have and made stars of Aries, Roode, and, to a lesser degree, Storm. Even Anderson was really quite entertaining during his early months, and they've even managed to start turning him around with Aces & 8s storyline, which, let's face it, is one of the few good things to come out of what should've been a much better and stronger thing. Â And yes, there was TNA vs. S.E.X., but that was just a very poor re-hash of wCw/nWo. The scenario I'm suggesting would be, I think, an unprecedented variation on that theme, i.e. that the storyline actually leads to significant and permanent change in the company. I don't think any company has ever used a storyline to completely re-name itself. Â SPOILER - Highlight the black box to read Also, whilst I agree that A-Dub and R-Dub are looking like they're in danger of heading down the comedy route, there's also a discernible resemblance to the Two-Man Power-Trip in there. What I'm hoping for is that Roode gets the World belt back and Aries gets the X-belt back, in addition to the tag belts they already have. It would go some way to re-establishing their stock as perennial main-eventers, and would give them extra momentum for other storylines. Â Â Â Â Â EDIT: An idea pulled over from the Smackdown thread - Â Idea (not properly thought out, so most likely rubbish, but it'd be nice to discuss): Â What if there was a MITB match for a shot at the Undertaker's Streak? I think that would be a good way to add a bit of dimension to it. "All these men went to war to try and destroy the greatest legacy in WWE history", blah blah. Â Thoughts? Edited January 30, 2013 by Carbomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts