|
|
Post by PureHatred on Mar 14, 2006 19:36:21 GMT -5
Source: Wrestling Observer TNA's iMPACT! move to primetime in April is no more. Jeff Jarrett apparently told the wrestlers are a pre-show meeting today at the tapings that Spike TV executives have changed their mind and will not be putting the show in a primetime slot. The new timeslot starting on April 13th will be Thursdays at 11 p.m. This will follow the Ken Shamrock/Tito Ortiz season opener of Ultimate Fighter. The change was made as Spike made the decision to move the Ultimate Fighter to 10 p.m on Thursdays. Dave Meltzer reports that on 4/13, the line-up will be CSI at 8 p.m., UFC Unleashed at 9 p.m., Ultimate Fighter at 10 p.m. and TNA Impact at 11 p.m., which is the line-up that by far makes the most sense for everyone. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe losing Shannon Moore back to the WWE was the last straw.  |
|
|
|
Post by BDS on Mar 14, 2006 19:41:09 GMT -5
Ouch. Just ouch.
I wonder how much this has to do with their ratings dropping back down to where they were.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe on Mar 14, 2006 19:42:42 GMT -5
This will be the death knell for TNA.
I know people scoffed at the possiblity of a good audience for Impact with a Saturday night at 11 timeslot, but there is no they will draw numbers on a Thursday at that time.
The best thing for TNA would have been to start each Impact immediately after RAW goes off the air. During the Monday Night Wars, a lot of people seemed to watch RAW live and then Nitro on the repeat, so it is possible this could work.
Then again, people might watch TNA for a few minutes after RAW and turn it off, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 14, 2006 19:42:48 GMT -5
wow...I'm shocked...and by shocked I mean I told you so...this fed sucks...
so what's the over-under on when this flea-circus closes it's doors for good?
|
|
hawk
Prelim Bum
Posts: 12
|
Post by hawk on Mar 14, 2006 20:05:39 GMT -5
There’s an old saying Swarm...If you've got nothing nice to say, say nothing at all. Or should I say relevant to the discussion at hand.
Onto the subject at hand, TNA is like a cockroach. People have been predicting its death since it began, myself included. They should have died during the PPV era. They should have died when they couldn't get on TV from the PPV's. They should have died when they couldn't find a station to take them after FSN.
TNA flat out will not die now. Spike's invested too much, TNA's invested too much. So their on at a worse time slot on Thursday, those are the breaks, but it's far better then having no TV whatsoever, which is what they did have at one point.
If anything, this takes the pressure OFF TNA. Spike's basically telling them "Hey, we're not putting you on the frontlines because you aren't ready.". SPIKE isn't Fox; they won't cut and run as long as TNA can draw at least a .5, which they've proven they can do better then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe on Mar 14, 2006 20:13:29 GMT -5
Hawk-
I wouldn't exactly say TNA won't die and compare it to a cockroach. It's not even four years old, and the reason it stayed in business was because Jeff Jarrett found a "friend," who didn't mind losing a bunch of money.
If the venture proves less than profitable for Spike for too long, they will definitely "cut and run," just like anyone else would.
|
|
|
|
Post by BDS on Mar 14, 2006 20:17:34 GMT -5
Thursday at 11 is still probably an upgrade over Saturday at 11, just not near the upgrade that prime time would have been. They're still going to have a strong lead-in from UFC and they ought to do well for themselves there. This is still an undeniably big blow, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by tafkaga on Mar 14, 2006 20:23:25 GMT -5
Ouch. You know I don't really have any feelings about this one way or another. I really want WWE to have some good competition, but I am not sure that TNA is ready to do that right now. I'm not ready to say that this is the "death knell" for TNA. It might be and it might not be... but what would be even more devastating in my view is if it got a prime time slot and performed poorly. If TNA can stay on the air, that might give it enough time to work out its problems and become the company that it should be rather than the reincarnation of WCW.
|
|
hawk
Prelim Bum
Posts: 12
|
Post by hawk on Mar 14, 2006 20:25:26 GMT -5
The difference is, Spike isn't a major TV force like a national broadcasting company. Spike will deal with .5's or whatever TNA will draw for awhile.
I really don't think the move to Thursday will kill TNA, or really hurt their ratings much. Granted, Thursday has some serious competition, but MMA and wrestling fans will watch that block, which is exactly what SPIKE wants. They'd like to see TUF bring in more fans for TNA, which is highly possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 14, 2006 20:37:19 GMT -5
There’s an old saying Swarm...If you've got nothing nice to say, say nothing at all. yeah I have an old saying for you too...it's called I'm not really worried about it... |
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 14, 2006 20:40:45 GMT -5
Ouch. You know I don't really have any feelings about this one way or another. I really want WWE to have some good competition, but I am not sure that TNA is ready to do that right now. I'm not ready to say that this is the "death knell" for TNA. It might be and it might not be... but what would be even more devastating in my view is if it got a prime time slot and performed poorly. If TNA can stay on the air, that might give it enough time to work out its problems and become the company that it should be rather than the reincarnation of WCW. 4wiw, I agree with all of this...except that I do think this is it's death... I had hoped a long time ago TNA would succeed...because that would make (hopefully) the WWE try harder to be better... |
|
hawk
Prelim Bum
Posts: 12
|
Post by hawk on Mar 14, 2006 20:43:55 GMT -5
Ahh, the joys of randomly walking into discussions and trying to ruin them. You must really enjoy that a lot.
Look, if you aren't going to have a legitimate response to this situation beyond "omg TNA suxxorz" then you really are wasting your time. I doubt anyone really takes you seriously on this forum after some of the stuff you've spouted, and most likely ignore you.
As for why I reply? I guess I just enjoy giving you attention, you so oh desperately crave it and all. I wouldn't want you to feel left out, would I?
Edit: and of course, you added something to the discussion...damn you.
|
|
|
|
Post by PureHatred on Mar 14, 2006 20:59:03 GMT -5
Well maybe Spike wasn't as impressed by an hour full of squash matches as some of the people on this board were.
I want TNA to suceed, but much like Raw lately, Impact ddoesn't make you feel like you can't miss an episode. There is no imperative to watch. Seriously, youcan read the results on-line and since the matches are totally worthless, why tune in?
I loike a lot of the talent on the TNA roster, but with the WWE losing viewers they should've been trying to make Impact be ...um...impactful. Important. Something that all wretling fans -and not just TNA marks - would want to tune in to.
The company isn't going to die. UFC ios going to give it a strong lead in and the ratings probably won't dip any more. But there was an opportunity here to set themselves up as genuine competition for the E or at least be in the conversation. But back to being irrelevant again.
Crap...and with no competition, there's there no reaosn for the WWE to improve, either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Omen on Mar 14, 2006 21:19:25 GMT -5
If Spike continue to show replays on monday nights after RAW. It's fine with me. I still tape RAW and TNA to watch together while playing my fed (ISWF). So I can watch hockey or baseball live on Mondays. but your right WWE won't have any reason to improve if TNA dies.
|
|
|
|
Post by LWPD on Mar 14, 2006 22:00:45 GMT -5
It was a shocker that TNA ever got the free time slot from Spike TV in the first place. Not only is it a negligible pick up (pro wres tends to generate low ad dollars way out of wack with it's ratings and demo) but network execs were in the middle of 're-branding' the entire channel at the time of the signing. Finding a way to 'squeeze' into a time slot they didn't have to pay for was a major coup for Panda.
The deal stipulates that TNA produces the content out of pocket in the form of an infomercial intended to sell the monthly PPV's and branded merch...while Spike agrees to air the shows gratis in exchange for keeping all of the ad revenue. The Saturday 11 PM slot did numbers on par with Velocity but didn't bring in nearly the ad revenue and was propped up by a deal with supplement company Morphoplex (which brought $600k worth of time a show).
While Spike has 'partnered' with Panda financially in some cases (such as helping with the money to sign Sting to gain more eyeballs) there has been cases where they blatantly dropped the ball. The approach of signing 'guys people know' does little for the structure of the TNA Wrestling product itself and at times runs counter to it's long term interests. The refusal to air a TNA Prime Time special during the WWE Raw/Dog Show preemption was the biggest opportunity lost in the history of their relationship.
The idea that placing TNA Impact on prime time as a lead in would be more profitable than slotting in an already existing 'sponsor friendly' series like CSI and then running a specialty block at a later time was ludicrous. That the idea ever made it out of the board room and into a press release doesn't speak well of the decision makers. That sanity later later set in and the move was rescinded is a huge embarrassment for Panda, TNA and everyone involved with it. One of the worst 'reality checks' I've seen for a pro wres company in recent memory.
Like Watching Paint Dry (despite rumors to the contrary the new UPN/WB merged Network hasn't re-signed Smackdown either...given the weak state of pro wres ad revenue power and the reality that more 'attractive' content to sponsors can draw more revenue with lower ratings... don't be shocked if SD's next stop isn't just a bump to a new time slot...but a 'reality check' in the form of a bump off of network television entirely)
|
|
|
|
Post by gwffantrav on Mar 14, 2006 22:45:45 GMT -5
Yeah, when they refused to put a TNA primetime special against the Dog Show, you knew they looked at TNA as more of a "filler" program. That had to be the most wasted opportunity ever for TNA/Spike. I try and watch TNA as much as possible, but on Saturday night with a kid and being married, it's really hard to watch it all the time. But man, they have to succeed in order for the WWE to become even watchable. But it looks like neither will happen....  But to be honest, if I had my choice, I'd rather be rolling the dice on a Monday, Friday or Saturday than watching any of the programming. |
|
|
|
Post by STEVIE~! on Mar 15, 2006 1:41:32 GMT -5
This is HARDLY the death blow to TNA. Anyone who thinks that why is foolish in that regard.
No, this will not kill TNA. In fact, this is a better move in the long run. The big complaint regarding the original time slot was that it would be the lead-in to TUF, when in reality it should have been the other way around. (It's been proved that UFC programming is a great lead-in to TNA programming.)
You gotta understand, that there is very little pressure from Spike TV on TNA to be doing anything higher than what it's doing. However, with a Prime Time slot, you'd have to assume that there would be a lot of pressure to do something higher than a 0.9 I would assume that Spike would want a 1.5 at the least, and that number just isn't possible right now.
As I said, this slot is much more beneficial to TNA in the long run. They maintain their same time slot (On a different night, mind you). They can only gain by having the lead-in of The Ultimate Fighter, which without question, will appeal and draw in crossover fans wanting to see the pro-wrestling style feud between Tito Ortiz and Ken Shamrock.
So, believe what you want. You want to think this is the guillotine that severs the head of TNA? Fine. but you'd be wrong.
TNA's biggest asset is having a strong backer behind them, willing to lose a lot of money. And the fact that they lost a lot of money has NO bearing what so ever on the company. The fact is, you need several million dollars of losses before you can even BEGIN to turn a profit. I mean if you wanna project a company's success based on its finances, then you'd probably look at WCW and question how that [censored] didn't go down sooner.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mad Dog on Mar 15, 2006 2:23:41 GMT -5
This is actually a very good move for them. Whenever they've followed a live UFC event they've scored really strong ratings as a good portion of the UFC audience sticks around. The worst ratings the show has scored on Saturdays has been during UFC PPVs. So now they no longer have to contend with the UFC for the fanbase and they're on after "live" UFC programming every week.
|
|
|
|
Post by LWPD on Mar 15, 2006 10:38:34 GMT -5
That's the only reason why TNA is still in existence. There is no positive cash flow and they operate at a loss. I wouldn't say the losses suffered have 'no bearing' on the company's future. Red ink is red ink. The more it mounts the greater the likelihood that it will be dropped as a wasting asset. Belief in pipe dreams seldom lasts forever.
That's just not true. In any business you don't need to lose millions of dollars before you start to turn a profit. Nor does investing at that level guarantee you anything other than the accruing of huge levels of debt. The goal should be to operate on a reasonable scale and market accordingly. From it's inception that was never a part of TNA's business plan as they have followed one failed format after another with over 8 figures of debt to show for it.
First they experimented with weekly PPV sans television expenses. While it was a revolutionary concept reality showed from the start the project was a financial failure that put the company deep into debt and led the original money backer to pull out. To his credit Jeff Jarrett got a new money mark who fell for the 'spend millions to make millions' theory and enabled the project to keep going. The spending part Panda has down pat...it's the making that money back part they are struggling with.
TNA finally gave up on the weekly PPV (which was the _ONLY REASON_ the company was ever created in the first place) and went the down the path JERRY JARRETT HIMSELF SAID COULDN'T WORK WHEN HE STARTED THIS THING. That being the 'pay for a TV slot' infomercial route...again meeting with more debt and financial failure.
Today they have a partnership with Spike TV where they have a free time slot. They no longer 'lose money' at the rate of when they ran the monthly PPV or paid for weekly television. It's the 'make a profit' part that hasn't materialized. The prime time deal was to be their next big break because it would increase their potential universe of viewers beyond anything it had heretofore enjoyed simply because there are more viewers on Thursday prime time than Saturday at 11 PM. Losing that opportunity is crushing and there is no way to sugarcoat it.
They already had a TUF original as a lead in on the more desirable 'wrestling night' Monday in addition to a full UFC block of programming as a lead in on Saturday at 11 PM. A slot on at 11 pm on a Thursday is not a great leap forward by any stretch of the imagination...and becomes even less so once the TUF 3 originals turn into re-runs. All the while money _STILL_ isn't being made.
WCW survived because Ted Turner was a billionaire who had a national television outlet (negating a core expense) and had a willingness to bleed money to keep it going. It was never structured to 'make a profit' as it ran as a television program and not as a wrestling company (based on commissioned pay outs and a rational touring/marketing structure). This is why the bust after the boom was logically inevitable. The percentage of costs that went to labor was always far out of wack with what was sustainable and when revenue dropped the money was 'guaranteed'...you just can't do that with any commission based business.
Reality in the form of the AOL Time Warner merger killed it dead when they looked rationally at the numbers. Had WCW not been owned by a cable television powerhouse who's owner didn't act rationally in the face of losing money Vince would have had his monopoly on the pro wres business 17 years earlier than he did.
Like Watching Paint Dry (Lucha Va Voom runs successful tours across the country and Women's Extreme Wrestling does more PPV Buys than TNA has ever done _WITHOUT_ any investment of television time or a long trail of debt...proving even in this day and age pro wres start ups 'can' make money 'if' they target their market and the scope of their operation prudently)
|
|
|
|
Post by STEVIE~! on Mar 15, 2006 18:57:58 GMT -5
I think most people in business will tell you the exact opposite. There is a saying that you have to lose big bucks before you make big bucks... Now, I'm not defending TNA's spending at all. Their early concept was incredibly foolish, and would have killed any other company. Today, TNA's made great strides to curve their budget.
There was also very subtle increases in the Monday rating for iMPACT over time. And it's already been proved that roughly 15% of the UFC viewership stays tuned to Spike when iMPACT comes on.
What's so different between Turner and Panda, other than the distinct monetary assets the two had/have? In the short term, I don't see that big of a difference between a Billionaire and a Muliti-Millionaire. Panda shares that same willingness to "bleed money", and has stuck around longer than anyone expected.
And in the long term, I don't think it's fair to equate TNA with WCW just yet. Their pay scale is hardly as bad as WCW became.
Which again, I don't think it's fair to compare the two right now. WCW was losing money hand-over-fist when the Time Warner execs pulled the cord. You also have to keep in mind that these executives saw how much money this company was making years prior, only to lose it ALL within a two year period. WCW lost around $80,000 alone in 2000. That is HARDLY anywhere near TNA's debt.
The problem with your theory is both of those companies have niche markets, and aren't, and never will make anywhere close to the money WWE is making. The same goes for a Ring of Honor. That is TNA's eventual target, it seems. TNA has only been around for four years or so. But you have to keep in mind that WWE wasn't making WWE money in their fourth year either.
|
|
