Monday Night Ratings

[jagilki]

Except those of us who don't get HDnet.

[Conor]

Except those of us who don't get HDnet.

http://www.youtube.com/rohbrazil

I got you covered, man.

[Christian Montiero]

Monday's Impact showed that, with Bischoff and Hogan finally showing some of their influence, the company is now well and truly fucked.

I've tried for an hour to comment on TNA and that's as best as I can come out with.

WWE put out a terrible Raw and still topped five million viewers. TNA's got as much chance in trouncing them in the ratings as I have sleeping with Brooke Hogan in a legal and consensual way.

[Alex Smiley]

Monday's Impact showed that, with Bischoff and Hogan finally showing some of their influence, the company is now well and truly fucked.

Truly the best analysis I've seen yet.

[Triple B]

The thing is... is that Impact has been doing the same average rating for YEARS now.  They said they needed some big names, so they got Nash, Sting, Angle, Hardy and NONE of that improved it.

They said they needed to expand out the women's division.  So they added a bunch of them, and added some Women's Tag Titles and NONE of that improved it.

They said they needed to run house shows adn get out of Orlando, so they did... and they have to cancel shows because they can't sell enough tickets.

They have now said that they have to bring in MORE names so they bring BACK Hardy and now Hall, X-Pac, Bischoff, Hogan, RVD, Flair and NONE of that improved it.

They said that they need to go head to head with WWE.  What OTHER purpose to go head to head with them to "improve" their product than they THINK they'll suck viewers off of RAW?  They've BARELY been able to beat ECW in the ratings, a show that was the FOURTH tier show.

The thing is... TNA has been making money.  They, however, have been able to do that because they keep expenses down.  They pay less because of less dates a month.  They don't have to pay the high avenue fees because they stick in one  place that's already set up for them by Universal.   4 million people watch RAW, at least, a week.  Of that, WWE can sucker anywhere from 300-500 thousand people to buy the PPVs that they have every 3 friggin weeks.  So... a good 20% of their viewing audience of ONE show, and that doesn't include people who don't watch RAW but watch the other shows, is shelling out the $50 they charge for a PPV.  TNA has been getting about 1 million people a week... TOTAL... to watch their show.  And can barely get 35k to buy a PPV.  That is less than 4% of their viewing audience. 

I am not arugeing who is putting on better wrestling.  TNA can do that, because WWE restricts the styles.  But it's obvious that while WWE has evolved to get the maximum amount of people to watch their show and buy their PPVs (they don't care if these people have internet or not), TNA has gone backwards.  You CANNOT convince me that the best decision for me to sell snow cones... is to move my struggling snow cone wagon next door to the largest snow cone store in the country. 

I think that they are spending WAY too much money on pulling these people in that they DON'T need, while they aren't bringing in any NEW revenue.  The guys have trouble getting 4% of the people who watch for free to plunk down a few bucks a month to watch a PPV, and they have trouble getting people to come in and watch their shows that are FREE.  They have trouble selling out a few hours shows in PHILLY, one of the wrestling MECCAS out there. 

They should have brought in Hogan if that's what they wanted to do, and stayed on Thursday.  I think they'd have more success in bringing people to eat their snow cones where there IS no other snow cone salespeople, and continue to build a base, and then... 6 months down the road... THEN maybe try and take on the big boy.  But as of now, I don't see this as working out for them.  They've screwed over too many things already in the short time that they've been in charge (Hogan).

You have someone who has a HUGE following and who the TNA fanbase would get behind... RVD.  You debut him to get a 2 second "fluke" win over Sting, then get his ass handed to him for 10 minutes.  On the next week, he then steps aside so Hogan can get "his" revenge. 

You have Christopher Daniels, who was HEADLINING PPVS a few months ago, get jobbed out to Sean Morley and is squashed in 30 seconds to Kurt Angle, who is now supposed to be a viable contender for the X-title.  And Morley is gone too.

You have Awesome Kong and Whatshername, stripped of their belts with no real explanation, and they aren't released to go elsewhere.

You have Eric Bishcoff making Jeff Jarrett clean bathrooms.  Give it a month and he'll be in "rehab" with Ric Flair and Hall.

You have "The Band" running around, and apparently Scott Hall won a match by just handcuffing Nash to the ropes.  They aren't in TNA... but they've been allowed to run around left and right and do what they want.  Next time I want a job and I don't get it, I'll just show up at that place and do what I want.  I'm sure they won't call the cops.

You have the Nasty Boys wrestling 3D.  Nuff said on that.

Mark.  My.  Words.  The current storyline going of people telling Hogan he can't wrestle and shouldn't do it (while he wears black, btw) is just a lead up to where the "Power of Hulkamania" helps him to become the TNA Champion.

You can sit here and say that TNA puts on a better product, and yeah, to the Internet community they may.  But you can't continue to argue that the WWE sucks when they pull in over four TIMES the views on ONE of their FOUR weekly shows, and are able to get 10-20 TIMES the PPV buys that their nearest competition can.  Not to mention the fact that their assets are diversified.  If they lost Smackdown, they aren't dead in the water.  If USA blew up tomorrow, they have other networks and shows to fall back on.  If they lost their PPV contract, they could carry on making money for a time.  If John Cena is injured, they have ways to fall back on that blow.  TNA, in my opinion, does NOT have that luxury, which means they SHOULDN'T be taking risks until they CAN afford to lose something.

Is it possible that TNA can keep going?  Sure.  But by just KEEPING the viewers they DO have... keep in mind how much they SPENT on talent and advertising when moving to Monday nights... all for the same result.  That... is a failure.  TNA might still be on Monday Nights, but that isn't a win.  You don't move out of your house and into... the same house down the street and call it an "upgrade."

I imagine when the ratings come out, it'll be similar to last week's performance. 

[Drama Queen]

You have the Nasty Boys wrestling 3D.  Nuff said on that.

I do not understand everyone's problem with this. The Nasty Boys actually look decent in the ring and they play their gimmick backstage with 100% conviction. I think people are writing them off and not even looking at the end result. The feud with 3D is one of the few genuinely entertaining things right now! And there are Nasty Boy t-shirts in the audience as well. What exactly is the problem here?

I get the whole thing about being pissed off about a bunch of former WWE has-beens taking over, but targeting the Nasty Boys in particular when they are working as hard as anyone as far as I can see is just plain smarkiness at it's best.

BBB, you gave reasons for the rest of the things you had problems with, and your reason for this was "nuff said"? Though this is not just directed at BBB, lots of people here seem to have a chip on their shoulder about the Nasty's.

[Hondo]

BBB, you gave reasons for the rest of the things you had problems with, and your reason for this was "nuff said"? Though this is not just directed at BBB, lots of people here seem to have a chip on their shoulder about the Nasty's.

Do we really need a reason why the Nasty Boys are a bad idea? I mean, even in their prime, they weren't exactly settin' the woods on fire.

If we're bringing in teams on nostalgia value alone, why not bring in a team like Demolition? Or The Bushwhackers? Bring in a team that were over with the fans at least. Shoot, I may actually watch MORE if the Bushwhackers were on.

[Duckman]

Plus that beat down of Jesse Neal was fucking awesome!  Kicked the shit outta that guy.

I don't see Nasty Boys as a long term thing in TNA probably finish this feud with 3D and then move on.

I'd much prefer Generation Me or MCMG's to be in this situation but that's just not going to happen at the moment.

The Nasty's are serving a purpose.  While they look like they might explode at any minute, I don't hate them that much but I ca see why people do.

Peace

Duckman

[MMAfanatic]

Considering Impact got even LOWER in ratings... thats a problem.

As for the nasty Boys.. they are NOT serving a purpose. AT ALL! They sucked in 1991, they suck even worse in 2010. There is NO, absolutely NO reason for Knobbs and Saggs to be on my tv, wrestling in 2010.

Fuck, team 3D is so played out and past being over that they shouldn't be on tv.

[Drama Queen]

Do we really need a reason why the Nasty Boys are a bad idea? I mean, even in their prime, they weren't exactly settin' the woods on fire.

If we're bringing in teams on nostalgia value alone, why not bring in a team like Demolition? Or The Bushwhackers? Bring in a team that were over with the fans at least. Shoot, I may actually watch MORE if the Bushwhackers were on.

But are you actually watching the end product? This is the point I'm making. They are doing fine in the ring and backstage. They are ENTERTAINING. I'm not talking about nostalgia, I am talking about now. When I heard the Nasty Boys were coming back I had the same groan reaction as everyone else. But at least I'm actually judging them now based on the performance they are giving.

[Hondo]

But are you actually watching the end product? This is the point I'm making. They are doing fine in the ring and backstage. They are ENTERTAINING. I'm not talking about nostalgia, I am talking about now. When I heard the Nasty Boys were coming back I had the same groan reaction as everyone else. But at least I'm actually judging them now based on the performance they are giving.

I've seen it, and Im not impressed. And believe me, its definitely a nostalgia pull. And its not entertaining. All that *I'M* saying is, if they're gonna bring in someone to play the fodder role, at least make it someone who fans can connect with in some way, ie. The Bushwhackers.

I'd mark like a eight year old for a Bushwhackers return.  I can't lie.

Yeeeah! F the Bolsheviks!!!

Oh come on, who WOULDN'T mark for this?! I'd buy every PPV for a year. YOU HEAR ME BISCHOFF?? YOU HEAR ME HOGAN?? GIVE US THE BUSHWHACKERS, WE GIVE YOU BUYRATES!!

[Triple B]

My problem with the Nasty Boys is that there are a few things that TNA had that made them Unique, and a good alt to WWE:

1) Good Women's Wrestling with a Deep Roster
2) Good Tag-Team Wrestling with a good Tag Division
3) X-Division with good Cruiserweights
4) Six-Sided Ring

You can't tell me, in regards to Tag Teams, that the TNA roster wasn't deep enough that they had to bring in the Nastys to feud with 3D.  I would have LESS problem with it if they brought in Nastys to put over some tag team like Beer Money, MCMG, British Invasion, etc.  TNA didn't NEED to have the Nastys there, and I don't care how blindly you follow the TNA Product or Hogan, you can't give me a convincing arguement for it.  All it does is suck up TV time for someone to push.  And I think it's telling when the highest rated part of your show is with the Beautiful People.  That's pretty sad.

I'll have a further breakdown when it's available, but just further proof of my point that TNA is NOT making the right moves.

-----
Credit 411mania.com

* Monday's Impact rating of .84 is the lowest rating for Impact since November of 2006. Back then, Impact was airing in a late-night Thursday timeslot, not in prime-time.

* Not a single quarter hour segment of Impact reached the 1.0 mark. The highest rated segment was the fourth quarter hour (9:45PM ET-10PM ET) which featured the Beautiful People, Hulk Hogan calling out Sting, and RVD appearing. The segment drew a .96. It's probably worth noting that the Beautiful People were also in one of the highest rated segments of Impact last week.

* After the .96 in the fourth quarter hour, every segment dropped in the ratings all the way up to AJ Styles vs. Jeff Hardy doing a show-low .72. The overrun saw a slight increase up to a .74.

* TNA lost 15% of the audience they opened with, going from a .87 opening quarter hour to a .74 for the overrun.

[Triple B]

Because if the movie bombs, it's already done.  You aren't expecting a new movie next week.

With TV, you don't have The Office from the UK going head to head with The Office from the US. 

With wrestling, fans are interested because there are multiple companies putting on similar products, and attempting to do it the best to get you to watch THEIR show.  And if you don't watch their shows, you won't buy their PPVs.  And if you don't buy their PPVs you don't buy the merch, or DVDs, etc etc, and eventually that product goes out of business and then you have nothing but 1 company again.

I'll continue on a thought though...

I WANT TNA to succeed.  Success isn't necc "beating" WWE, but just being a profitable company that doesn't screw it up.  But from what I see, they're screwing it up.  Their highest rated segments and matches are ones NOT involving Hogan's crew.  My friend, who I was argueing this with for an hour today, asked me if I was in charge what would I do?

I would define CLEARLY who is feuding in the Main Event with my World Champ.  I wouldn't muddle it with Flair/Sting/Hogan/RVD/Hardy/Abyss/Styles.

I would change the stupid Global Belt to something that defined a region of their territory (North American Champion) and have it actually used and defended in the normal shows as a second tier belt.  Unfortunately, the X-Division belt is a niche belt that has been watered down and screwed with for too long.

My basic structure would use the EXISTING talent they already had, and put on some good stuff.

WORLD TITLE
AJ Styles w/Ric Flair Vs. Jeff Hardy

NORTH AMERICAN TITLE
Pope Vs. Samoa Joe Vs. Christopher Daniels

Ken Anderson Vs. Kurt Angle

Desmond Wolffe Vs. Abyss w/Mick Foley

TAG TEAM TITLES
Beer Money Vs. Morgan/Hernandez Vs. British Invasion

Team 3D Vs. MCMG

KNOCKOUTS TITLE
Tara Vs. Daffney

WOMEN'S TAG TITLES
Beautiful People Vs. Other Misc Women Tag Teams

X-DIVISION TITLE
Amazing Red/Brian Kendrick/Shannon Moore/Homicide/Kazarian/Jay Lethal/Creed/Eric Young and RVD

Other Misc Feuds/Enhancement Talent
Rhyno
Raven
Stevie Richards
Mick Foley (Manager)
Generation Me
Sting
Jeff Jarrett
Tyson Tomko

IMO... that's a decently stacked card.  You only spend more on bringing in Flair as a manager, and NOT having him wrestle, if only for maybe an occasional tag where AJ can carry most of the load here and there.  Don't turn Sting face because it won't work.  And.... you have this deep X-Division... so you move your show up an hour so it doesn't go head to head, but overlaps.  They have 1 hour before RAW to put on some tag action, some segments, and as RAW starts each week, you throw up a nice X-Division match while WWE has the same old opening speech for 20 minutes.  Give the fans a REASON to stick with you.  That roster there DOESNT bring in Brian Kendrick, The Nastys, Jimmy Hart, Hulk Hogan, Eric Bishoff, Orlando Jordan, Sean Morley, etc.  You use the names of the old guys (Sting, Foley, Flair) to put over and help out the younger guys.  Not have old guys feud with old guys.  You can book people in those feuds right now.  And there's PLENTY of people listed on their roster that I didn't even mention.

TNA has the tools.  They just continuously piss them away.  If they continue on this trend, I anticipate a year from now, Vince will be rolling around in the TNA Video Library after he buys it.

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

Business fact for all those concerned...

it takes time to establish a company

END FACT

This post did a 2.6 rating

[Black Death]

Business fact for all those concerned...

it takes time to establish a company

END FACT

This post did a 2.6 rating

Ian the company been around since 2002 ,  it takes 8 years to establish a company?   if they were like a year old or something yeah  that saying holds true... but it been 8 years and truth be told they are heading in the wrong direction