The End of "TNA"?

UCJOE

I have a lot of business with the Chinese
Mar 7, 2009
12,813
838
293
NJ
#1
Their deal with Spike is up in 2012 & heavy rumors are Viacom bankrolling a Hogan/Bischoff promotion with other shows produced by them geared towards men
the logical thing would be a TNA buyout
Russo quitting might be the first sign since Dixie was his big supporter
 

fulldevilsoccer

Registered User
Jul 2, 2009
1,596
9
218
#5
From what I remember the rarings are actually down since Hogan was hired. How would it make sense for Spike to drop TNA and go for a Hogan show?
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
Oct 26, 2011
24,899
15,281
303
#6
TNA isn't going anywhere. Still Spike's top rated program by far.

They'll get re-upped for years.
 

UCJOE

I have a lot of business with the Chinese
Mar 7, 2009
12,813
838
293
NJ
#7
TNA isn't going anywhere. Still Spike's top rated program by far.

They'll get re-upped for years.
You missed the point of Spike buying it :action-sm
 

UCJOE

I have a lot of business with the Chinese
Mar 7, 2009
12,813
838
293
NJ
#8
From what I remember the rarings are actually down since Hogan was hired. How would it make sense for Spike to drop TNA and go for a Hogan show?
The are basically the same (ratings) & most of that blame goes on Dixie
Spike wants a show to do more than stay the course & they love Bischoff bec he will bring in other shows to program as well
Spike wants to partner & not with dixie it seems
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
Oct 26, 2011
24,899
15,281
303
#9
Spike doesn't want to buy them. They just want the UFC stuff. They still treat TNA like a 4th rate program but like I said, it is their top rated program. It does well internationally, too.
 

Your_Moms_Box

Free Shit / Socialism 2016
Dec 20, 2004
5,755
468
628
Dover, Delaware
#10
Spike doesn't want to buy them. They just want the UFC stuff. They still treat TNA like a 4th rate program but like I said, it is their top rated program. It does well internationally, too.
Spike loses UFC programming at the end of this year.

viacom bought Bellator, and will probably put that on Spike once the year is out.
 

UCJOE

I have a lot of business with the Chinese
Mar 7, 2009
12,813
838
293
NJ
#11
Spike doesn't want to buy them. They just want the UFC stuff. They still treat TNA like a 4th rate program but like I said, it is their top rated program. It does well internationally, too.
A lot of fail in that
They don't have UFC & they fund some TNA contracts already
Also TNA does good ratings for Spike but the advertising dollars are poor
Also any wrestling in that time slot would draw the same
TNA does under 10k on PPV, they have very few "fans" & Spike always felt they can do better & underachieved

Spike loses UFC programming at the end of this year.

viacom bought Bellator, and will probably put that on Spike once the year is out.
Bellator is sched for fri nights in 2013 on Spike
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,628
5,081
568
Wyoming
#12
Two things killed TNA:

1. Deciding to use, and hanging on to for way too long, the six sided ring. Fans don't associate anything but a square ring with wrestling. Viewers look for the familiar, and that wasn't familiar.

2. Shooting the show (and even PPVs) on a sound stage. I'm sure they do that for monetary reasons, but that kind of shit just isn't going to work in this day and age. The state fairs, National Guard armories and rodeo arenas they use for house shows would have been MUCH better choices. When the setting of the show looks the same every week, you look weak and cheap.

Differentiation is important when competing with a virtual monopoly in any business. TNA unfortunately differentiated themselves in the complete opposite direction from what they should have.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,169
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#13
Two things killed TNA:

2. Shooting the show (and even PPVs) on a sound stage. I'm sure they do that for monetary reasons, but that kind of shit just isn't going to work in this day and age. The state fairs, National Guard armories and rodeo arenas they use for house shows would have been MUCH better choices. When the setting of the show looks the same every week, you look weak and cheap.
It's not just the sound stage. It's also the fact that they try to cram WCW-level production values into that sound stage. ECW ran out of a bingo hall, but Paul Heyman embraced the low-budget punk rock aesthetic instead of trying to run from it. TNA Impact, on the other hand, just looks like WCW WorldWide Thunder. It's fucking awful.
 

transit grinder

Baglin' with the Sex
Apr 16, 2008
9,938
180
243
Tennessee
#14
The six-sided ring did always seem really gimmicky to me for some reason. It was something they could have pulled out for PPVs, or maybe specific "six-sided ring matches," but I agree that a regular ring should have been there from the beginning.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,169
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#15
The six-sided ring did always seem really gimmicky to me for some reason. It was something they could have pulled out for PPVs, or maybe specific "six-sided ring matches," but I agree that a regular ring should have been there from the beginning.
The six-sided ring looked (and most likely was) smaller than a normal ring which made it look cheap in a weird way. From what I understand, it was awkward to work in too. It definitely looked awkward.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,628
5,081
568
Wyoming
#16
The six-sided ring looked (and most likely was) smaller than a normal ring which made it look cheap in a weird way. From what I understand, it was awkward to work in too. It definitely looked awkward.
Want to get really fucked up? Go back and watch an old TNA show with the six sided ring. Take a shot every time a guy tries to hit the ropes and ends up bumping the turnbuckles. The Dudleys did this all the time. Nash too.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,169
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#17
The Dudleys did this all the time.
I see that still call them by their old names like I do. They'll always be the Dudley Boyz to me.

By the way, the Dudley Boyz were one of the first casualties of John Laurinaitis' tenure as Vice-President of Talent Relations. They were let go after being promised for months that creative would have something for them. After they were future endeavored, lawyers for the WWE threaten that they would sue them if they used the Dudley, Dudley Boyz, and Dudley Death Drop names. That's why I will always despise John Laurinaitis (he also stole credit for a lot of moves he learned in Japan). He's a complete piece of shit.
 

UCJOE

I have a lot of business with the Chinese
Mar 7, 2009
12,813
838
293
NJ
#18
I see that still call them by their old names like I do. They'll always be the Dudley Boyz to me.

By the way, the Dudley Boyz were one of the first casualties of John Laurinaitis' tenure as Vice-President of Talent Relations. They were let go after being promised for months that creative would have something for them. After they were future endeavored, lawyers for the WWE threaten that they would sue them if they used the Dudley, Dudley Boyz, and Dudley Death Drop names. That's why I will always despise John Laurinaitis (he also stole credit for a lot of moves he learned in Japan). He's a complete piece of shit.
The chose to leave, they were not let go
Although lack of push/money/etc played into it

Also WWE owned the above names so that does not make Ace a POS ... Heyman/Dudleys signed off on that
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,169
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#19
The chose to leave, they were not let go
Although lack of push/money/etc played into it
I believe that's incorrect. I remember hearing that they had been released along with a few others. Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything from that time on Google (page 1 only, of course) that wasn't Wikipedia or Ask.com.

Also WWE owned the above names so that does not make Ace a POS ... Heyman/Dudleys signed off on that
I understand that, but they didn't have to put on such a strong-arm demeanor. They also could've just let them use it. That's not good business, but it's the right thing to do. That's not WWE's style, though.
 

UCJOE

I have a lot of business with the Chinese
Mar 7, 2009
12,813
838
293
NJ
#20
Actually I stand corrected
It was an official release
Good job AH
 

UCJOE

I have a lot of business with the Chinese
Mar 7, 2009
12,813
838
293
NJ
#22
Thanks. Where did you go to confirm it?
I asked someone in the know
They said it was a mutual decision but WWE did release them officially
I remembered them being unhappy & wanting out

Oh & if they didn't go to TNA & went ROH/Indy, I would think WWE might have let them use the name(s)