What can TNA realistically do to improve their rating ?

[HeavyT]

OOutside of poaching Cena, there's fuck all they can do IMO

[ClassicsGuy]

- Get rid of Hogan, Bischoff, Sting and most of the WCW/WWE retreads that are washed up and just there for a paycheck. TNA did the same 1.0 rating before they came and ratings certainly wouldn't drop if they left. TNA have their core audience at the moment and that's it. All these names do is take up tons of cash. Such a waste of money.

 

You could possibly make that argument for Sting (though I wouldn't as I love Sting) but Hogan and Bischoff aren't really there to pop a rating. Why would Bischoff pop a rating? Bischoff's there as someone who's been involved in wrestlign and involved in reality television. Hogan's there because he's a fantastic ambassador for the company (see hsi interviews over here before TNA were about to tour) and I'd imagine he's a great name to roll out in meetings. So how Hogan and Bischoff are a waste of money I'm not really sure. They do what they're there to do. I should imaging Sting's a great guy to have around backstage as well. He's been there forever now, eh clearly respects them like they respect him, and I'd imagine he's a sound guy for the locker room to respect and things.

 

Hogan isn't just an ambassador though. Of course Hogan is there to 'pop a rating' - the whole promotion & tv show is built around him. Aged 59. He's the top babyface and the top feud in the promotion is him vs Bully Ray. They can't even have a decent payoff match.

 

The points you make about Sting are fine, except he's another guy (aged 54) who is the number 2 babyface, main eventing the next ppv vs Bully Ray.

 

Bischoff pulls the strings. The Aces & Eights idea is his baby, which is why it's not being axed anytime soon despite meaning nothing to anyone. Again, if it was my promotion, if something still isn't working or drawing after nearly 12 months, I'd scrap at and go with a new idea. Bischoff & his ideas haven't improved TNA one iota.

 

This thread asked 'What can TNA realistically do to improve their rating?' - my opinion is ditch the guys the show has been built around to date, who haven't improved things at all, and go with new younger guys on top.

 

Hogan and Sting are not draws at this point. They are years (at least a decade plus?) past their peaks. Name recognition and 'being a great guy' isn't translating into tv ratings, ppv buyrates or house show business. From a revenue point of view, they add nothing in the key indicators.

 

They may give long time fans a warm and fuzzy, nostalgic feeling inside who remember their primes, but they're doing nothing for the upcoming generation of fans, nor even the casuals and non-TNA fans that TNA need to boost their ratings and grow as a company.

[Vamp]

Yeah, but you can't look at it that way when you're running a business. I'd want Hogan on board because the media give a shit about Hogan and he can go out there and put anything over if he's motivated to do so. You only have to look at the interviews he did when he was over here. I'd want Hogan on board because I could mention his name or trot him out to meetings with business partners, sponsors, media companies and so forth. Who else are they going to send to that sort of thing? AJ Styles? A wrestling promotion isn't just about the ratings. Bischoff got that back in the early 90s, Hogan didn't make that much difference to the PPV buyrates but he was good at other things. Hogan's still a brand, a a stronger one than TNA, I'd want to latch onto that. You could make the argument that "ah, that doesn't boost the ratings which is what this is about" or the popular "but I'm a fan, I don't care about that" but neither are quite true. Hogan bringing a recognised brand and adding credibility to non-fans is a good thing for the company that gives you the base to do other things with. The idea of throwing Hogan away and bringing in loads of you indy guys isn't really going to take the company up either. It's just not. It's a silly way of chasing ratings. If I was on the road and I looked like I wasn't going to draw a dime somewhere I'd want to send Hogan out there to talk them into the building. There'd be nobody else I'd want. Well, Cena obviously, but that's not really an option.

 

 

The points you make about Sting are fine, except he's another guy (aged 54) who is the number 2 babyface, main eventing the next ppv vs Bully Ray.

 

I think the points I make about Sting are weaker than my points about Hogan. I'd want Sting because he's a good hand to have. I'd want somebody on my roster who everybody else would look up to. I reckon Sting's that man. A man's worth in a wrestling promotion isn't dependent on the TV ratings he brings in, or the vast majority of wrestlers would be worth fucking squat.

 

This thread asked 'What can TNA realistically do to improve their rating?' - my opinion is ditch the guys the show has been built around to date, who haven't improved things at all, and go with new younger guys on top.

 

Hogan and Sting are not draws at this point. They are years (at least a decade plus?) past their peaks. Name recognition and 'being a great guy' isn't translating into tv ratings, ppv buyrates or house show business. From a revenue point of view, they add nothing in the key indicators.

 

Do you want to explain how "get rid of these guys, bring in loads of young no names" is actually a "realistic" way of boosting TV ratings? It isn't. Wrestling is about balance. My point is that getting rid of Hogan and Sting isn't going to improve ratings. It might not dent them much either. But they're worth more than that in other areas. Even your key indicators of revenue don't quite fit. PPV buyrates? Nah. WWE's struggling there. TV ratings? TNA do very well for Spike, Spike are invested in having them. Chucking away your ambassadors, your big guys in the locker room, throwing away your association with a brand so that you can free some money up to splash around on young guys in a ratings quest is a short sighted thing to do. I know the point of this thread it to be short sighted to a certain extent, but in the real world it's not a thing I'd do and I don't really see how it'd boost TV ratings any. In fact don't Spike pay half of Sting's contract or have done so in the past? I bet they're Hulkamaniacs too. I bet they ring up Dixie sometimes and say "yeah, yeah, the show was alright but where was Hulk Hogan brother?" and send her memos in the morning saying "More Hulk. More Sting."

 

Bischoff pulls the strings. The Aces & Eights idea is his baby, which is why it's not being axed anytime soon despite meaning nothing to anyone. Again, if it was my promotion, if something still isn't working or drawing after nearly 12 months, I'd scrap at and go with a new idea. Bischoff & his ideas haven't improved TNA one iota.

 

I'm surprised that Bischoff is involved all that much to be honest. I'd still want him around. I'd want him around because he gets wrestling and he's involved in producing his own shows for other genres and so presumably understands TV pretty well too. Yeah, I'd want that guy around.

 

The long and the short of it is that I don't believe getting rid of them and going with something new is going to make much of an increase to ratings. It certainly isn't going to in twelve months which according to you is some kind of deadline. So given that I think the ratings would probably stay pretty similar either way, if I was going to go talk to another company I wanted to work with, or a sponsor or whatever else, I'd rather walk into that room and say "We get a pretty good rating for Spike TV, we've got Hulk Hogan and we've got a guy who's involved in all these television shows and helped produce one of the hottest wrestling television shows (actually I might leave out the last bit, but I'd mention he had experience) than just say "We get a pretty good rating for Spike TV and we're going with something new." At the end of the day, TNA don't have the brand. That's the big thing against them. Part of that's to do with money, part of that's to do with longevity, part of that's to do with the way the market looks now. If I've got people who are assets in other areas than I'd keep them around.

[Magnum]

Hogan and Sting are not draws at this point. They are years (at least a decade plus?) past their peaks. Name recognition and 'being a great guy' isn't translating into tv ratings, ppv buyrates or house show business. From a revenue point of view, they add nothing in the key indicators.

 

They may give long time fans a warm and fuzzy, nostalgic feeling inside who remember their primes, but they're doing nothing for the upcoming generation of fans, nor even the casuals and non-TNA fans that TNA need to boost their ratings and grow as a company.

 

How many in wrestling really are, at this point? There's Cena, and after that you're looking entirely at part-timers from wrestling's boom periods like Rock, Undertaker, Lesnar etc. With far more exposure than anyone in TNA will get, the WWE have struggled to make any of their younger talents like Sheamus, Miz, Del Rio, Ryback etc. into legitimate draws who have any sort of positive impact on TV ratings.

 

You could possibly argue that the reason TNA maintain even the rating they have in a market with an ever-decreasing appetite for wrestling is because of that nostalgia factor. They spent much of 2012 giving huge pushes to their most talented and charismatic 'homegrown' performers in Bobby Roode and Austin Aries, and it barely shifted the numbers. My opinion is that TNA have tried both approaches and plateaued, but they shouldn't be ashamed of that. There's simply not that big an audience out there for wrestling these days.

[Professor Paul's Bin]

I don't agree with the mention of getting rid of Hogan or Sting. The two have been excellent lately and yes, they do go on autopilot for most of the year but they are still great faces to have. I really love how Sting feels for TNA and you can tell the bloke gives a shit about the company.

 

Basically TNA need to continue what they are doing. They are putting on some cracking TV at the moment. They need to continue working on improving the X-Divison concept until they have something better than what they've got. I'd love to see the TV title contested on a regular basis, a division formed and a purpose for the belt. In 2010 there was a strong rumour that they were going to introduce a Hardcore title which would be great. It'd be interesting for casual fans to watch "oh look a weapons match, reminds me of the attitude era". You know shit like that. They need to avoid pop culture as they can only get shit celebrities and can't get the names the WWE does.

 

They need to be different, an alternative.

[Rosler28]

Knockouts wrestle whilst naked ;-)

[Dirty Eddie]

Knockouts wrestle whilst naked ;-)

 

 

The TNA Knorks-Out Division?

[PowerButchi]

Isn't Hulk Hogan not paid through TNA anyway or something? Or was that Flair that brokered the different deal through Panda?

[Maverick]

Think it was Flair who did the deal with Panda to ensure he'd be paid in full for his contract even if the company went bust during his tenure. Shows the faith he had going in I suppose.

[simonworden]

I have to agree above there is not much TNA can do at this point in terms of "radical changes" bringing people in wouldnt work unless it is WWE's top guys who get pissed off and leave. If Punk finally got fucked off enough to go then they may grab him and he could do some good but there are not many others who would make a difference or would actually go there.

 

The only thing I would say is if they came up with an awesome storyline and had a new top face to capitalise on it with then they could boost the company but to be honest noboddy knows when that person will show up if they do at all. In terms of storylines I would say now is the time to look back to the early 90's and even further into the regional days to see what hot angles they could re-use with a vibe of today. Very few casual fans would know the storylines and they make for easy booking which looks original if done right.

[TheShowOff]

I have to agree above there is not much TNA can do at this point in terms of "radical changes" bringing people in wouldnt work unless it is WWE's top guys who get pissed off and leave. If Punk finally got fucked off enough to go then they may grab him and he could do some good but there are not many others who would make a difference or would actually go there.

 

I don't think Punk would make a long term difference. That's not a knock on Punk, I think he is incredible. But at this point in time it's safe to say no one person going to TNA is going to make the difference. They have an uncanny knack in making a big deal seem normal after just a few weeks and Punk would be no exception.

[Vamp]

I was just typing more or less exactly the same as TheShowOff. Punk wouldn't make a difference. The problem really isn't personnel here, its brand.

[Doctor Whos Next]

I was just typing more or less exactly the same as TheShowOff. Punk wouldn't make a difference. The problem really isn't personnel here, its brand.

 

Best thing TNA can do is find celebrity fans who tweet about it, creating a buzz that forms the next "rock and wrestling" revolution. Not just a nascar driver who waves at the fans, but a celebrity who's charisma and name value gets the media's attention.

[Southside crew]

I think TNA is a million miles from WWE but really think they should have been snapping up major hot indie guys . The problem is that AJ , Joe , Daniels etc have been there so long and been seen doing so much

 

Sack Anderson - awful

 

Only ex WWE guys worth bringing in are maybe Morrison , maybe at a push MVP

 

Hot Indie talent ( they have missed out on Genericho , Callihan etc ) but Adam Cole , Sameray Del Sol , Davey Richards , AR Fox would really ignite the show with great matches , could one or two Dragongate guys work there ?

[Loki]

Just watched Adam Pearce's Gutcheck (I missed the Impact) and thought he looked great. Needs to get a tan and some more definition, but everything else looked more than good enough for TNA.