Impact wrestling thread - It's a Don West tribute thread now!

[IANdrewDiceClay]

Tommy Dreamer's DM to someone who claimed TNA was another company that went under on his watch.

[FireBrand]

JR's blog was speculating that Spike could do what TBS did and that is to purchase TNA like Turner did with WCW. Be good if this was to happen, Spike do not seem to be upset with the ratings but a lot of the stink eminates from Dixie Carter herself. I don't know how much work or for how long it would take for TNA to erase half the dirt from its' reputation but surely removing Carter from the company would great. I am pretty sure they could get Jarret back in and he could drop this side project of his that will never happen.

 

It just strikes me as weird that Spike would just drop TNA without a thought when not only is it one of it's few shows that scores over a million viewers but also an important way in which to get it's MMA project (Bellator) promotion.

 

Just feels a little like they are ethier playing tough or want everything TNA has to offer.
 

[Psygnosis]

Nice to see I'm not the only one who quietly thinks Viacom/Spike are trying to get rid of the Carters and buy TNA at a bargain price, there is some international appeal there and decent ratings recently.

Edited July 29, 2014 by Psygnosis

[Powerful_Fox]

Is that not an insanely big risk to take though? It is a good tactic if Spike are the only party to be interested but all this does is leave TNA wide open for other TV Networks to agree a deal.

 

TNA will now be cut-price and a show that does pull a constant 1m+ (going by Firebrands figures there, I don't know myself) viewers will surely turn a few heads.

 

If that is the tactic of Spike and they actually want TNA, they could be cutting their nose off spite their face as all they are doing is advertising the fact that TNA TV will be going for cheap. They will have to be exceptionally confident that they can complete the purchase before anyone else even begins to sniff around.

[herbie747]

Is that not an insanely big risk to take though? It is a good tactic if Spike are the only party to be interested but all this does is leave TNA wide open for other TV Networks to agree a deal

 

 

Nobody wants it. WWE couldn't even get Main Event renewed, and it had the same ratings as iMPACT. And that's WWE.

[King Pitcos]

TNA will now be cut-price and a show that does pull a constant 1m+ (going by Firebrands figures there, I don't know myself) viewers will surely turn a few heads.

Nope. One million wrestling viewers are worth far, far less to advertisers than one million viewers of proper television shows and sports. Trailer park trash don't buy many sports cars and fancy aftershaves. This is why WWE's TV deal is way lower than the numbers they dishonestly promised, and that's the mainstream company. Shitty, pathetic, TNA is rungs below that. Spike is probably the only network that's got a profile that fits tawdry wrestling and also has the money to pay for it.

Edited July 29, 2014 by King Pitcos

[Bosco Blick]

TNA should sign a deal with the WWE Network.

[Powerful_Fox]

Huh, I suppose I have never thought of wrestling (as in mainstream wrestling) being considered as a show no-one would want to take on, given purely the numbers. It makes sense though I suppose considering the whole saga with WCW and the low price WWE got in their negotiations.

 

Having said that, it would still be a bit of a gamble that Spike would be making, risking that with the thought of "no-one will want it so we will sack the show off and get it back for cheap", they mustn't be too fussed about it in the first place if they are happy to play such games. Though that is already proven given their lack of promotional work for the TV show apparently.

[Undefeated Steak]

Can somebody clear this up for me? - What's the deal with the names TNA and IMPACT? You go on their site and you're directed to impactwrestling.com but there's a TNA logo at the top of the screen. It just seems like an awful mess where they're neither here nor there with their name.

[Bosco Blick]

Can somebody clear this up for me? - What's the deal with the names TNA and IMPACT? You go on their site and you're directed to impactwrestling.com but there's a TNA logo at the top of the screen. It just seems like an awful mess where they're neither here nor there with their name.

 

They finally realised what a shit name TNA is and attempted to rebrand as Impact Wrestling.

 

Everyone still calls it TNA.

[Powerful_Fox]

Just an update on Rajah:

 

They are saying that "TNA tried playing hardball in hopes of landing a good TV deal and somebody at Viacom leaked the news to "call their bluff" and essentially put TNA in checkmate."

 

I like the Russo story better though.

 

For what it's worth, on Rajah, it also states that if WWE did fancy the tape library "The going rate for tape libraries is approximately $500 per hour of footage. TNA has approximately 1,000 hours of Impact Wrestling footage, so an offer of $500,000 is what they would likely receive."

 

Chances are TNA will go back to Spike, cap in hand, and take what they can get.

[UK Kat Von D]

Crazy. They should be begging to stay on the air and taking what they can get in the first place. Trying to get themselves a better deal when they would be lucky to stay on the same deal is classic TNA stupidity. I wonder how the lockeroom is reacting to all of this

[herbie747]

What baffles me out of all this is why anyone would still hire Russo in 2014 - yet TNA have done it numerous times over the last few years! Genuinely confusing.

 

 it would still be a bit of a gamble that Spike would be making, risking that with the thought of "no-one will want it so we will sack the show off and get it back for cheap", they mustn't be too fussed about it in the first place if they are happy to play such games. 

 

You're assuming that's their plan though. I don't think they want to buy it. Sure, it bumps up their average rating - but a) they can't sell the airtime for the going rate because the audience is considered low income, b) Bellator is likely going to 1 show per month now (as opposed to weekly) so TNA is not needed as a lead-in anymore, and c) they were lied to about Russo being employed. Blatantly deceived. That'd be the deal breaker for me personally if it was my call & I wasn't pushed either way.

[Ant]

I'm sure Russo has previous for being involved in situations he shouldn't be involved in, legally or by agreement.

 

For example, Andrew McManus put "Produced By Vince Russo" or something similar on Australian and/or UK tour posters/newspaper ads. He then had to remove it when it turned out that Russo wasn't legally permitted to work for a wrestling promotion at that point in time, I'm imagining he had some form of post WCW no-compete clause, and that's when Borash took his place as booker (albeit I'd not be surprised if Russo was e-mailing the strategy/script to him).

 

What a mess this is anyway. If I was TNA I'd consider hiring someone like Jim Ross or Bill Watts in as a business consultant, as they'll have dealt with this kinda thing in the territories and WWE, and will know any remaining pertinent points that may have favour with the other side.

[King Pitcos]

Yeah, Bill Watts is the bloke you go to when you want lessons in how to get back onside with TV executives.