|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Aug 31, 2009 18:01:19 GMT -5
TNA president Dixie Carter says she is not a fan of the current once-a-month PPV format and she would like to see the formula shaken up.
“I’m not a big fan of monthly PPVs, quite honestly, but you have contracts that keep you held in and bound at times,” Carter told John Pollock of Live Audio Wrestling on Sunday night. “We’re definitely talking about trying to shake things up and do things differently in the future.”
Carter’s statement was in response to Pollock’s question about whether TNA will focus on six big PPV events in the future rather than 12 per year that tends to water down the product.
Carter stressed the company will be addressing many of the elements of the product that have become stagnant or too formula.
“I work very, very closely (creatively). I’m not going to profess to be a wrestling writer. I am good at challenging people. It’s not just ratings, but other things as well,” Carter said. “We’ve made a lot of changes internally to present the product more real and focusing on these young guys.”
Carter was also asked what area of their business TNA needs to address the most. She said top on the list is adding more TNA programming to compete against WWE in the U.S. market.
===========
Finally! Dixie needs to get it reduced to 6 a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy on Aug 31, 2009 18:03:29 GMT -5
Agreed with about 6 a year, and they should all be outside of Orlando.
|
|
|
|
Post by White Trash Lucha on Aug 31, 2009 18:06:03 GMT -5
That would be better and Like Jimmy be said it would be cool if they weren't in the iMPACT! Zone
|
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Aug 31, 2009 18:07:46 GMT -5
Agreed with about 6 a year, and they should all be outside of Orlando. Yeah, if they do 6 a year. They'll only be adding two extras to the road. The ones they should keep are the four big ones and two "smaller ones". They could also try and get some two hour specials (or even use a one hour one) as like a "major" non-PPV event. |
|
|
|
Post by Ace Bennett on Aug 31, 2009 18:08:22 GMT -5
Great idea actually, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was more of a cost cutting measure rather than they want to only do six a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattoriginal on Aug 31, 2009 18:09:21 GMT -5
how about 6 pay per views, and one or two "iyh" deals?
|
|
|
|
Post by AdamBomb on Aug 31, 2009 18:17:10 GMT -5
Wait, did I read MORE TNA programming? Saturating the market anymore isn't going to get people like me, who can't stand the  ing show they already put on, to watch. I was really hoping (seeing from the main page) this was going to say: Dixie Carter not a fan of the current product. |
|
eddie eddie
Main Eventer
Joined on: Aug 17, 2009 17:54:26 GMT -5
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by eddie eddie on Aug 31, 2009 20:48:28 GMT -5
legit, a really good idea. i dig it.
|
|
|
|
Post by XHW on Aug 31, 2009 22:21:50 GMT -5
ya I think this is good b/c they can actually build up these feuds instead of doing them in a few weeks
|
|
|
|
Post by specterkev on Sept 1, 2009 4:48:44 GMT -5
I like the idea myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by laythvandam on Sept 1, 2009 4:53:13 GMT -5
I hope they downsize, it's too much to watch when it's mostly similar cards anyway.
They could do two or three in your house type shows though between the PPV's.I hope TNA leaves the Impact zone ASAP, it makes it look dead bush league and small budget.
|
|
Deep Shadows
Main Eventer
MXW 6 is here! https://youtu.be/LiDlNuiKmjA
Joined on: Jul 7, 2006 2:39:30 GMT -5
Posts: 3,504
|
Post by Deep Shadows on Sept 1, 2009 11:33:10 GMT -5
I think maybe more programming such as iMPACT! could help TNA a lot. They would have more air time and help with the exposure of people that aren't getting enough or any. But if they were to get more air time and continue to do what they're doing it could be a huge disaster.
Also, I wish Dixie Carter would stop worrying about competing with WWE. I mean, sure we would all like to see the 'E' get some competition...I think it would improve the product. But TNA is nowhere near where they need to be to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lita's Lover on Sept 1, 2009 16:51:45 GMT -5
The old idea of "less is more" and in this case it makes sense. WWE should also look at this, as they are putting out 14 PPVs in 09...
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 29, 2024 8:27:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2009 10:33:30 GMT -5
I reckon TNA should keep a PPV once a month. I mean the PPVs are not that bad. WWE are making money from them so can TNA. I do not feel this will increase PPV buys at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Sept 2, 2009 10:36:55 GMT -5
I reckon TNA should keep a PPV once a month. I mean the PPVs are not that bad. WWE are making money from them so can TNA. I do not feel this will increase PPV buys at all. It's not just about making buyrates go up. Your making pay-per-views feel special. Like, "must see" shows. THey'll just need to make every card awesome tbh. No Cody Deaner vs ODB bullcrap. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 29, 2024 8:27:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2009 10:41:38 GMT -5
I reckon TNA should keep a PPV once a month. I mean the PPVs are not that bad. WWE are making money from them so can TNA. I do not feel this will increase PPV buys at all. It's not just about making buyrates go up. Your making pay-per-views feel special. Like, "must see" shows. THey'll just need to make every card awesome tbh. No Cody Deaner vs ODB bullcrap. I understand what your saying but they could still have 4 or 5 big PPVs that stand out and a bunch of mini PPVs. Lets see if she does change the PPVs to 6 a year? Then we will see how things work out. I mean one thing I can not understand is why so many less fans order PPVs? TNA has some great PPVs and some which looked better on paper then WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by The Silent Flute (joepetree) on Sept 2, 2009 11:10:40 GMT -5
6 PPV's a year might hurt the company considering they make money off of the buys
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 29, 2024 8:27:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2009 11:13:52 GMT -5
6 PPV's a year might hurt the company considering they make money off of the buys TNA feel it will get more buys because of making the PPVs feel more special. I do not think that will work but right now we still get a PPV a month. You can have 4 PPVs a year the wrestling fans will not pay if they are not any good. |
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Sept 2, 2009 11:26:15 GMT -5
The old idea of "less is more" and in this case it makes sense. WWE should also look at this, as they are putting out 14 PPVs in 09... WWE truthfully has enough going on for it to work for them. TNA at this point doesn't need 12 PPVs. They would do much better with doing each one with a lot of build up. TNA seems to have an older fan base that can wait these things out. WWE does not. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 29, 2024 8:27:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2009 11:27:37 GMT -5
The old idea of "less is more" and in this case it makes sense. WWE should also look at this, as they are putting out 14 PPVs in 09... WWE truthfully has enough going on for it to work for them. TNA at this point doesn't need 12 PPVs. They would do much better with doing each one with a lot of build up. TNA seems to have an older fan base that can wait these things out. WWE does not. We will find out if this helps TNA if it happens. I mean nobody is said it will happen just that she does not like the idea right now. |
|
