|
|
Post by Lorenzo Alcazar on Jun 26, 2011 0:43:41 GMT -5
This is going to be AOL/Time Warner all over again and TNA is going to be put out of business when Spike TV decides that NOTHING they can do is going to make this brand a serious money draw. thats a pretty bad comparison No, it's not. AOL/Time Warner merged, they took a look at how much money WCW was losing and decided that A) they didn't want wrestling on their networks, and B) this entity is losing massive amounts of money....and when a company is losing money, that's called going out of business. Especially when corporate is managing the money, they aren't going to get behind a losing project. So if Spike TV takes over TNA, even if they support TNA and want wrestling on their network.....if it's losing money, they aren't going to stick behind it. Which means TNA gets sold again by Spike, probably to McMahon, or TNA just goes away for good. You obviously don't know how corporate business works. |
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Jun 26, 2011 0:53:59 GMT -5
thats a pretty bad comparison No, it's not. AOL/Time Warner merged, they took a look at how much money WCW was losing and decided that A) they didn't want wrestling on their networks, and B) this entity is losing massive amounts of money....and when a company is losing money, that's called going out of business. Especially when corporate is managing the money, they aren't going to get behind a losing project. So if Spike TV takes over TNA, even if they support TNA and want wrestling on their network.....if it's losing money, they aren't going to stick behind it. Which means TNA gets sold again by Spike, probably to McMahon, or TNA just goes away for good. You obviously don't know how corporate business works. How does "losing money" = going out of business? |
|
|
|
Post by Byron F'N Saxton Fan on Jun 26, 2011 0:54:08 GMT -5
I will say, anyone who thinks Cena getting released from WWE will save them is stupid. Tone down his Superman-esque character? Alright, that makes sense.
Anyways, as for Hogan, yes, he's hurting TNA. I have to believe he's commanding a lot more money than people who draw the same on Television but are more valuable in every way possible (Robert Roode, for example). He's been known to hog Television time and next week, what is something getting promoted as a major angle in 2011? Hulk Hogan and Sting cut a promo on each other in the middle of the Ring. No, let's not give the people actually wrestling and under the age of 55 more time to wrestle, let's make sure the amazing Bischoff/Hogan/Sting power struggle/World Title angle gets plenty of time and effort put into it for what? Hogan and Sting wrestling for $35? Sting and Bischoff wrestling for $35?
There is no need for Hogan, who again, is most likely making more money than the entire mid-card in TNA combined. Why do the Knockouts get paid next to nothing when they're major draws and have been on Television? Why are Hogan and Bischoff on Television so much when they get the same ratings as the "vanilla midgets" in the X-Division do and did? TNA is wasting money on Hogan, who is of no value, as fans have shown.
As Slappy and probably others have said, you are a Wrestling fan on the Internet. Don't cast a blanket statement belittling others' opinions when you are in the same category of them in a general sense, which is what you like to use. There are classifications of Internet fans, and the ones who bitch for stuff like Cena to be fired are the lowest-tier fans who are aware Wrestling is scripted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lorenzo Alcazar on Jun 26, 2011 1:05:09 GMT -5
No, it's not. AOL/Time Warner merged, they took a look at how much money WCW was losing and decided that A) they didn't want wrestling on their networks, and B) this entity is losing massive amounts of money....and when a company is losing money, that's called going out of business. Especially when corporate is managing the money, they aren't going to get behind a losing project. So if Spike TV takes over TNA, even if they support TNA and want wrestling on their network.....if it's losing money, they aren't going to stick behind it. Which means TNA gets sold again by Spike, probably to McMahon, or TNA just goes away for good. You obviously don't know how corporate business works. How does "losing money" = going out of business? When you are a business, the point of being a business is to make money. If you stop making money and start losing money, you're on the road to going on of business. You can't just burn money without making any and stay alive. Do you think WWE and TNA just do these shows so we have a good time? No. They are company's trying to stay in business by making MONEY. And to Byron.....Hulk Hogan makes the most money because he has the potential to draw the most money. You eliminate people like Sting and Hogan from TNA, and you've lose people who are going to by PPV's and merchandise JUST for them. The X-Divison, while it is well-liked....none of it's wrestlers are stars or have the ability to cross over into Hollywood and other forms of entertainment like Hulk Hogan. Hulk Hogan is hardly ever on TV! Like I said, he's down to being on the show every other week now. I seriously doubt that if you remove him from the show and eliminate whatever it costs to pay him that TNA changes for the better at all. And after watching the last 2 weeks of Impact...how can anybody say that the Sting/Bischoff angle is bad for TNA? The opening to Impact last week with Sting and Bischoff was the coolest thing in wrestling that I've seen in a while. TNA the last few weeks look like it's really starting to turn the corner with eliminating a lot of the crap from the show, putting focus on the matches, and making sure the angles make sense....bringing in corporate people who all they care about is money is only going to hurt the PRODUCT. |
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Jun 26, 2011 1:14:53 GMT -5
How does "losing money" = going out of business?
Do you think WWE and TNA just do these shows so we have a good time? No. They are company's trying to stay in business by making MONEY.And to Byron.....Hulk Hogan makes the most money because he has the potential to draw the most money. You eliminate people like Sting and Hogan from TNA, and you've lose people who are going to by PPV's and merchandise JUST for them. The X-Divison, while it is well-liked....none of it's wrestlers are stars or have the ability to cross over into Hollywood and other forms of entertainment like Hulk Hogan. Hulk Hogan is hardly ever on TV! Like I said, he's down to being on the show every other week now. I seriously doubt that if you remove him from the show and eliminate whatever it costs to pay him that TNA changes for the better at all. And after watching the last 2 weeks of Impact...how can anybody say that the Sting/Bischoff angle is bad for TNA? The opening to Impact last week with Sting and Bischoff was the coolest thing in wrestling that I've seen in a while. TNA the last few weeks look like it's really starting to turn the corner with eliminating a lot of the crap from the show, putting focus on the matches, and making sure the angles make sense....bringing in corporate people who all they care about is money is only going to hurt the PRODUCT. There isn't any reason to be an ass nor to "explain" the point of a business, when all I did was ask a simple question. I'm well aware what the point of a business is, but there is a difference between "going out of business" and "losing money". Every business has a bad month/year/etc but it doesn't mean they're about to go out of business. It just shows that their business model needs tweaking to try and have a better month/year. I love how you are defending (pretty much) Hulk Hogan having a job [and more than likely the highest paycheck] all because he has the "potential" to draw. You just told me that "You can't just burn money without making any and stay alive" - So, using the exact logic of you, Hulk Hogan needs to be the first one out the door as he's just a paycheck that isn't bringing money back in the door. |
|
|
|
Post by Random Hero Est. 2003 on Jun 26, 2011 1:36:37 GMT -5
This could be the money TNA needs to get on the road more.
|
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Jun 26, 2011 1:45:30 GMT -5
This could be the money TNA needs to get on the road more. Yeah, but they could still do this, without buying into the company. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but it's not really a good thing either, if it comes down to releasing people that aren't hogging all the money. The best bet? Tell the big money guys [Hogan, Sting, etc] that they're wanting them to take a pay cut, or either work more dates. |
|
|
|
Post by Lorenzo Alcazar on Jun 26, 2011 2:03:52 GMT -5
When you are a business, the point of being a business is to make money. If you stop making money and start losing money, you're on the road to going on of business. You can't just burn money without making any and stay alive.
Do you think WWE and TNA just do these shows so we have a good time? No. They are company's trying to stay in business by making MONEY.And to Byron.....Hulk Hogan makes the most money because he has the potential to draw the most money. You eliminate people like Sting and Hogan from TNA, and you've lose people who are going to by PPV's and merchandise JUST for them. The X-Divison, while it is well-liked....none of it's wrestlers are stars or have the ability to cross over into Hollywood and other forms of entertainment like Hulk Hogan. Hulk Hogan is hardly ever on TV! Like I said, he's down to being on the show every other week now. I seriously doubt that if you remove him from the show and eliminate whatever it costs to pay him that TNA changes for the better at all. And after watching the last 2 weeks of Impact...how can anybody say that the Sting/Bischoff angle is bad for TNA? The opening to Impact last week with Sting and Bischoff was the coolest thing in wrestling that I've seen in a while. TNA the last few weeks look like it's really starting to turn the corner with eliminating a lot of the crap from the show, putting focus on the matches, and making sure the angles make sense....bringing in corporate people who all they care about is money is only going to hurt the PRODUCT. There isn't any reason to be an ass nor to "explain" the point of a business, when all I did was ask a simple question. I'm well aware what the point of a business is, but there is a difference between "going out of business" and "losing money". Every business has a bad month/year/etc but it doesn't mean they're about to go out of business. It just shows that their business model needs tweaking to try and have a better month/year. I love how you are defending (pretty much) Hulk Hogan having a job [and more than likely the highest paycheck] all because he has the "potential" to draw. You just told me that "You can't just burn money without making any and stay alive" - So, using the exact logic of you, Hulk Hogan needs to be the first one out the door as he's just a paycheck that isn't bringing money back in the door. No trust me, if you want to start to bring money in the door, people like Hulk Hogan and Sting need to stay in TNA and try and keep the fans who were kids in the 90's while the younger fans turn the young wrestlers of today into the Hogan's and Sting's of tomorrow. By your logic, anybody who makes a lot of money should be cut. That's stupid. Those people make money because they either do draw, or have the potential to draw the most money. So should movie producers refuse to hire Leonardo DiCaprio because if we hire an unknown actor the movie will make more money because they'll be saving on Leo's salary? No. Because his name is what's getting people to buy tickets to the movie......just like Hogan and Sting and other established veteran wrestlers names are supposed to attract fans to watch the show and buy the PPV's. That's why every movie, every TV show, every play.....for the most part they try and have at least 1 or 2 big name stars so that you draw some people in who are going to see the movie/show/play JUST because that star is in it. Let's look at the Green Lantern movie. You automatically know you have all the Green Lantern fans.....so when you cast the role of the Green Lantern, will you cast the role as an unknown to save money? Or do you cast somebody like Ryan Reynolds who brings in his own fan base and potentially a significant number of people who will now see and spend MONEY on your movie simply because of HIM when they would have otherwise never shown any interest in anything Green Lantern related? Just like it's hard to draw money with unknown actors on tv shows, movies and plays......it's equally as hard to do it in wrestling with unknown wrestlers. You gotta spend money to make money, but making money is the ultimate goal, and you're only going to do that with some star power! So getting rid of everybody who has the biggest paychecks is not only NOT the answer, it's actually the worst thing you can do....because then you're still bleeding money, you're just bleeding it SLOWER, you're still not MAKING any money, and without stars, you never will. |
|
|
|
Post by Byron F'N Saxton Fan on Jun 26, 2011 2:40:30 GMT -5
The highest TNA PPV buyrate in history (projected to be, at least) is Genesis 2006, which featured not Hogan, Bischoff, Flair or the Hardys, and Sting didn't even Main Event the show. However, Kurt Angle facing Samoa Joe as the headline Match drew 60,000 buys (they would also draw 55,000 for their LockDown Cage Match for the World Title Title in 2008, where Sting was in a 10-person Cage Match). TNA's average PPV buyrates in North America for a year in 2007 were around 27,250. In 2010, Hogan and Bischoff's first-year, the number was around 17,000.
What all the info available on TNA's PPV business tells me is that it wasn't great to start out with, but once Hogan, Bischoff and all their people with likely large salaries came in with the potential to draw, the PPV buyrates have gotten worse or stayed even, going as low as a projected 7,000 for Sacrifice a couple months ago. Bound for Glory 2010 looks to have drawn even with, and in some cases, lower than all previous BFGs, TNA's biggest event. Sting seems to be fine for TNA, so I'll concede him, who I didn't even have on my "cut list". Kurt Angle also does well, which I'm not surprised by, since he's a product of the 2000s and can still put on amazing Matches.
TV ratings haven't moved enough, either, to justify all the big salaries that the new-to-TNA old stars command.
|
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Jun 26, 2011 2:53:16 GMT -5
There isn't any reason to be an ass nor to "explain" the point of a business, when all I did was ask a simple question. I'm well aware what the point of a business is, but there is a difference between "going out of business" and "losing money". Every business has a bad month/year/etc but it doesn't mean they're about to go out of business. It just shows that their business model needs tweaking to try and have a better month/year. I love how you are defending (pretty much) Hulk Hogan having a job [and more than likely the highest paycheck] all because he has the "potential" to draw. You just told me that "You can't just burn money without making any and stay alive" - So, using the exact logic of you, Hulk Hogan needs to be the first one out the door as he's just a paycheck that isn't bringing money back in the door. No trust me, if you want to start to bring money in the door, people like Hulk Hogan and Sting need to stay in TNA and try and keep the fans who were kids in the 90's while the younger fans turn the young wrestlers of today into the Hogan's and Sting's of tomorrow. By your logic, anybody who makes a lot of money should be cut. That's stupid. Those people make money because they either do draw, or have the potential to draw the most money. So should movie producers refuse to hire Leonardo DiCaprio because if we hire an unknown actor the movie will make more money because they'll be saving on Leo's salary? No. Because his name is what's getting people to buy tickets to the movie......just like Hogan and Sting and other established veteran wrestlers names are supposed to attract fans to watch the show and buy the PPV's. That's why every movie, every TV show, every play.....for the most part they try and have at least 1 or 2 big name stars so that you draw some people in who are going to see the movie/show/play JUST because that star is in it. Let's look at the Green Lantern movie. You automatically know you have all the Green Lantern fans.....so when you cast the role of the Green Lantern, will you cast the role as an unknown to save money? Or do you cast somebody like Ryan Reynolds who brings in his own fan base and potentially a significant number of people who will now see and spend MONEY on your movie simply because of HIM when they would have otherwise never shown any interest in anything Green Lantern related? Just like it's hard to draw money with unknown actors on tv shows, movies and plays......it's equally as hard to do it in wrestling with unknown wrestlers. You gotta spend money to make money, but making money is the ultimate goal, and you're only going to do that with some star power! So getting rid of everybody who has the biggest paychecks is not only NOT the answer, it's actually the worst thing you can do....because then you're still bleeding money, you're just bleeding it SLOWER, you're still not MAKING any money, and without stars, you never will. I didn't say that, nothing close to that. You're the one who stated: "You can't just burn money without making any and stay alive" and stated Hogan has POTENTIAL to be a draw for TNA, thus... he's making a ton of money, yet only has the "potential" to draw money. I'm not saying to fire people who make a lot of money, why? Because they're not paying for those talents. The contracts of Sting, Hulk Hogan, Kurt Angle, and possibly Ric Flair are all being paid for by Spike. The point that I was trying to make is, you're sitting here saying that Hulk Hogan deserves his high-paid contract, yet he hasn't done [nor will do] anything that draws people into TNA. Sure, people know who Hulk Hogan is, but they don't know where he is. Why? Because, Spike is more worried about having TNA using these "big names" (Hogan, Sting, Flair) than telling them and helping them straighten out their marketing. Big names don't do crap, without marketing... thus Hogan is a waste of money for Spike right now, until they (and TNA) start marketing right. |
|
|
|
Post by SodaGuy on Jun 26, 2011 2:56:28 GMT -5
The highest TNA PPV buyrate in history (projected to be, at least) is Genesis 2006, which featured not Hogan, Bischoff, Flair or the Hardys, and Sting didn't even Main Event the show. However, Kurt Angle facing Samoa Joe as the headline Match drew 60,000 buys (they would also draw 55,000 for their LockDown Cage Match for the World Title Title in 2008, where Sting was in a 10-person Cage Match). TNA's average PPV buyrates in North America for a year in 2007 were around 27,250. In 2010, Hogan and Bischoff's first-year, the number was around 17,000. What all the info available on TNA's PPV business is that it wasn't great to start out with, but once Hogan, Bischoff and all their people with likely large salaries came in with the potential to draw, the PPV buyrates have gotten worse or stayed even, going as low as a projected 7,000 for Sacrifice a couple months ago. Bound for Glory 2010 looks to have drawn even with, and in some cases, lower than all previous BFGs, TNA's biggest event. Sting seems to be fine for TNA, so I'll concede him, who I didn't even have on my "cut list". Kurt Angle also does well, which I'm not surprised by, since he's a product of the 2000s and can still put on amazing Matches. TV ratings haven't moved enough, either, to justify all the big salaries that the new-to-TNA old stars command. Let us not ignore the fact, that Hulk Hogan worked his first live event in TNA History, which drew 2,000 fans. This is around the same number that TNA shows that don't feature him do, but more importantly, this was at the same venue that last year... TNA pulled in 4,500-5,500 fans for a house show. I guess Hogan isn't living up to his "potential". |
|
Mr.Amazing
Superstar
Joined on: Jan 16, 2011 13:15:09 GMT -5
Posts: 605
|
Post by Mr.Amazing on Jun 26, 2011 4:16:19 GMT -5
Here are some fixes to TNA:
Give the X-Division a rebirth, if it wasn't for the X-Division TNA would be bankrupt at this time.
Get rid of this whole immortal crap, its pointless.
Turn Hogan face, it looks like it's going to happen soon. But after doing that, limit his air time. No reason to fire him, I gurantee he draws more than half the roster.
Give Mr.Anderson his freakn rematch
AJ Styles- He is the best talent there. Make him your big time guy.
End this Bully Ray crap, this guy makes me want to punch somebody in the throat.
Do not put Angle in a large storyline, he is training for the olympics and will miss some shows.
Stop making Eric Young look like a canadian Santino, another thing that makes me want to punch somebody in the throat.
Develop a main event scene, I honestly don't know who is in contention for the belt.
Gunner? Guy attacks a heel, yet is in a heel stable. Ok, what is he? I thought he was security?
Get the Beautiful People back together, I miss them<3
Austin Aries and Christopher Daniels pushed. I don't care if Aries is only for a chance at a contract, have him win it. Make them part of the X-Division.
X-Division title, why is Abyss holding it? Just take all the prestige outta that belt that made your company.
Those are just some of my ideas. But hey what do I know?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lewscher on Jun 26, 2011 5:24:32 GMT -5
Too bad Spike Executives are the people who ejaculate all over themselves when they see THE Sting, Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair and Eric Bischoff on their Network. I mean, maybe they get rid of Flair, but he's the least of TNA's worries in terms of older stars taking up time. Anyways, cut the following: Anarquia Brian Kendrick Bully Raymore entertaining than ever, could be a good main eventer (like hhh?) Devon Earl Hebner Eric Bischoff Mike Tenay no, just no. he's the only voice of tna left along with borash but even hemme is announcing now. Generation ME way to much potential and tallent to let go. Hulk Hogan Jeff Hardy Matt Hardy Mr. Anderson Murphy great potential to build a character/persona to be a main guy. Rob Terry Robbie E Rosita The Sangriento character Scott Steiner Shannon Moore ink inc very entertaining and moore is a good-great x-division athlete SoCal Val why, just why? The Suicide character no major money loss if kaz/daniels continue to double act. Taz no, he provides great commentary with mike.. |
|
TheXtremisT
Main Eventer
10 Year Member
This is the way
Joined on: May 3, 2008 8:03:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,951
|
Post by TheXtremisT on Jun 26, 2011 7:04:29 GMT -5
I always wonder what TNA would have been like in 2010 without Hogan and Bischoff coming in.
My guess would be that guys like Tomko, Jay Lethal, Christopher Daniels would never have been released.
We would have had a main event tier with Styles, Morgan, Hernandez, Daniels, Tomko, Pope, Joe, Angle, maybe even Storm and Roode.
Hopefully this could happen if Spike have more say in the product
|
|
|
|
Post by Rule 30 on Jun 26, 2011 7:21:35 GMT -5
The highest TNA PPV buyrate in history (projected to be, at least) is Genesis 2006, which featured not Hogan, Bischoff, Flair or the Hardys, and Sting didn't even Main Event the show. However, Kurt Angle facing Samoa Joe as the headline Match drew 60,000 buys (they would also draw 55,000 for their LockDown Cage Match for the World Title Title in 2008, where Sting was in a 10-person Cage Match). TNA's average PPV buyrates in North America for a year in 2007 were around 27,250. In 2010, Hogan and Bischoff's first-year, the number was around 17,000. What all the info available on TNA's PPV business tells me is that it wasn't great to start out with, but once Hogan, Bischoff and all their people with likely large salaries came in with the potential to draw, the PPV buyrates have gotten worse or stayed even, going as low as a projected 7,000 for Sacrifice a couple months ago. Bound for Glory 2010 looks to have drawn even with, and in some cases, lower than all previous BFGs, TNA's biggest event. Sting seems to be fine for TNA, so I'll concede him, who I didn't even have on my "cut list". Kurt Angle also does well, which I'm not surprised by, since he's a product of the 2000s and can still put on amazing Matches. TV ratings haven't moved enough, either, to justify all the big salaries that the new-to-TNA old stars command. That's why I'm hoping (much like Triple S, I think) more people that simply watch the shows on crappy streams buy Destination X, to wake them up with a huge slap in the face. |
|
|
|
Post by totti on Jun 26, 2011 7:33:17 GMT -5
thats a pretty bad comparison No, it's not. AOL/Time Warner merged, they took a look at how much money WCW was losing and decided that A) they didn't want wrestling on their networks, and B) this entity is losing massive amounts of money....and when a company is losing money, that's called going out of business. Especially when corporate is managing the money, they aren't going to get behind a losing project. So if Spike TV takes over TNA, even if they support TNA and want wrestling on their network.....if it's losing money, they aren't going to stick behind it. Which means TNA gets sold again by Spike, probably to McMahon, or TNA just goes away for good. You obviously don't know how corporate business works. spike obviously want tna on their network, spike must see tna as a business that can make a profit if they want to buy into it. what screwed up wcw was poor management, spike in all likely hood would want to see changes to tna. |
|
|
|
Post by roddypiper on Jun 26, 2011 9:04:11 GMT -5
Jesus Spike just let TNA die already.
And yes Hogan shouldbe cut first, he is making the most money. While TNA is not getting any benefit from him being there.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 22:25:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2011 9:46:41 GMT -5
Lorenzo clearly has no idea what he's talking about and rides Hulk Hogan's jock all day.
The WCW/AOL-Time Warner argument is flawed. WCW was owned by a corporation for nearly its entire life and it was once of the top wrestling business in the world. What killed WCW was horrible backstage politics and the fact that AOL-Time Warner didn't want wrestling on their programming. Spike, on the other hand, wants TNA on their channel and even wants to go as far as buying them and helping them succeed. Lorenzo is just pissed off that everyone wants Hogan cut.
|
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Jun 26, 2011 10:40:33 GMT -5
how much does hogan cost to employ?
the ONLY TIME hogan was valuable to tna was getting hit by jarrett by a guitar in japan like 3 years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Jun 26, 2011 10:54:09 GMT -5
Nobody's paying their hard earned money to watch Hogan talk.
|
|
