|
|
Post by kyledow on Feb 16, 2007 22:09:48 GMT
TNA Impact drew a 0.6 rating and around 850,000 viewers. Down from Monday's 1.1 and last Thursday's 1.1.
|
|
|
|
Post by born2beskinny on Feb 16, 2007 22:29:50 GMT
That's what happens when you compete with RAW.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevenuk1 on Feb 16, 2007 22:38:04 GMT
Wow, bet TNA will think again before going head-to-head with Raw. But atleast they know the have around 850,000 loyal viewers.
|
|
|
|
Post by JimmyJackJericho on Feb 17, 2007 0:09:55 GMT
They didn't get owned. They didn't get pwned. They got SONNED!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill Covington on Feb 17, 2007 0:17:29 GMT
Sorry JJJ, I don't get it?
|
|
|
|
Post by JimmyJackJericho on Feb 17, 2007 0:25:12 GMT
You know how when you're being condescending, you say "Son"?
Well, that's what it means. TNA got SONNED.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill Covington on Feb 17, 2007 0:32:10 GMT
Oh. Nice JJJ.
|
|
|
|
Post by rashadz2 on Feb 17, 2007 1:04:20 GMT
Last time I checked, TNA wasn't going up against the WWE, it was the other way around.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill Covington on Feb 17, 2007 1:24:16 GMT
Last time I checked, TNA wasn't going up against the WWE, it was the other way around. I think the point they're tying to convey is that TNA is in no way, shape, or form competition to the WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by rashadz2 on Feb 17, 2007 1:26:23 GMT
Last time I checked, TNA wasn't going up against the WWE, it was the other way around. I think the point they're tying to convey is that TNA is in no way, shape, or form competition to the WWE. No, really.  |
|
|
|
Post by Bill Covington on Feb 17, 2007 1:30:21 GMT
Shocking (I know), but true.
|
|
|
|
Post by rashadz2 on Feb 17, 2007 2:05:08 GMT
Yes, I'm still surprised.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchhaire on Feb 17, 2007 20:26:13 GMT
TNA went down like Lita on El Dandy.
|
|
|
|
Post by +Donald $. Carlos+ on Feb 17, 2007 20:28:45 GMT
TNA went down like Lita on El Dandy. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by quoipourquoi on Feb 17, 2007 23:52:10 GMT
Think about it this way:
TNA lost about .6 of its audience, right? WWE only did a 3.0 on Thursday. That means that if TNA can give those .6 a reason to watch TNA over RAW before this time next year, it'll be closer to 2.4 and 1.2 than last Thursday's 3.0 and .6
They've got the tools to win those .6 over, they just need to use them.
|
|
|
|
Post by +Donald $. Carlos+ on Feb 18, 2007 0:00:46 GMT
TNA is never going to do anything of the sort. People say that they can, but the fact of the matter is that they cannot; it's pure & simple.
They do have all the right tools to attempt to do so, but their whole behind-the-scene situation is just terrible. It's like they picked up where WCW was forced to leave off, changed the name, & just kept on trucking. For God's sake, they've got Vince-FUCKING-Russo as a booker. How, I have no idea . . . as if I were in any position of power upon reviewing his work in WCW, I wouldn't give him the time of day . . . but that just proves their inherent fucktardedness, & unwillingness to change.
Plus; they ruined the biggest thing they had going, in Samoa Joe, by jobbing him out to a guy who used to wrestle for the competition. If nothing else equals subconsciously self-PWNING yourself, then I'd like to see it . . . |
|
|
|
Post by kyledow on Feb 18, 2007 0:01:04 GMT
Think about it this way: TNA lost about .6 of its audience, right? WWE only did a 3.0 on Thursday. That means that if TNA can give those .6 a reason to watch TNA over RAW before this time next year, it'll be closer to 2.4 and 1.2 than last Thursday's 3.0 and .6 They've got the tools to win those .6 over, they just need to use them. You do understand Raw was on a different night, right? |
|
|
|
Post by Nathan Versus on Feb 18, 2007 0:59:13 GMT
TNA is never going to do anything of the sort. People say that they can, but the fact of the matter is that they cannot; it's pure & simple.
They do have all the right tools to attempt to do so, but their whole behind-the-scene situation is just terrible. It's like they picked up where WCW was forced to leave off, changed the name, & just kept on trucking. For God's sake, they've got Vince-FUCKING-Russo as a booker. How, I have no idea . . . as if I were in any position of power upon reviewing his work in WCW, I wouldn't give him the time of day . . . but that just proves their inherent fucktardedness, & unwillingness to change.
Plus; they ruined the biggest thing they had going, in Samoa Joe, by jobbing him out to a guy who used to wrestle for the competition. If nothing else equals subconsciously self-PWNING yourself, then I'd like to see it . . . Very well said, Mr. Carlos, and I totally agree with your comments about Joe being jobbed out to Angle. The same goes for Jeff Jarrett and Christian Cage. Obviously most people dislike Jarrett, and that’s fair enough, but the man dominated the entire TNA roster for four years, then gets jobbed to a WWE midcarder that never went beyond the Intercontinental Championship. TNA should’ve jobbed Cage out a few times and given the impression that TNA talent is on a par with WWE talent, but no, TNA just had to go ahead and own themselves. Great booking. |
|
|
|
Post by quoipourquoi on Feb 18, 2007 1:32:51 GMT
TNA is never going to do anything of the sort. People say that they can, but the fact of the matter is that they cannot; it's pure & simple.
They do have all the right tools to attempt to do so, but their whole behind-the-scene situation is just terrible. It's like they picked up where WCW was forced to leave off, changed the name, & just kept on trucking. For God's sake, they've got Vince-FUCKING-Russo as a booker. How, I have no idea . . . as if I were in any position of power upon reviewing his work in WCW, I wouldn't give him the time of day . . . but that just proves their inherent fucktardedness, & unwillingness to change.
Plus; they ruined the biggest thing they had going, in Samoa Joe, by jobbing him out to a guy who used to wrestle for the competition. If nothing else equals subconsciously self-PWNING yourself, then I'd like to see it . . . I know how bad their booking is, but if they can draw 1.0-1.2 every Thursday, then there are obviously people that want to see TNA Impact, no matter how bad it currently is. Pointing out what we all know they do wrong doesn't change that they typically get that 1.0-1.2. All TNA has to do to get the numbers I mentioned (2.4 against 1.2) is get the people that watch both RAW and Impact to decide to watch Impact instead, next year. It's not as impossible as you're saying it is, because they don't have to get new fans to achieve those numbers. They just have to get the fans that they do have to prefer their product to the competition's. And yes, kyledow, I know that RAW was on a different night (Thursday), but that doesn't change the fact that 1/5 of RAW's Thursday audience would've watched TNA, had TNA put on a more exciting show this year. It's closer than it looks, and if TNA hypothetically uses its talent to full efficiency, next year's RAW v. TNA Thursday night matchup will show that. |
|
|
|
Post by President Skroob on Feb 18, 2007 1:46:56 GMT
TNA is never going to do anything of the sort. People say that they can, but the fact of the matter is that they cannot; it's pure & simple.
They do have all the right tools to attempt to do so, but their whole behind-the-scene situation is just terrible. It's like they picked up where WCW was forced to leave off, changed the name, & just kept on trucking. For God's sake, they've got Vince-FUCKING-Russo as a booker. How, I have no idea . . . as if I were in any position of power upon reviewing his work in WCW, I wouldn't give him the time of day . . . but that just proves their inherent fucktardedness, & unwillingness to change.
Plus; they ruined the biggest thing they had going, in Samoa Joe, by jobbing him out to a guy who used to wrestle for the competition. If nothing else equals subconsciously self-PWNING yourself, then I'd like to see it . . . I know how bad their booking is, but if they can draw 1.0-1.2 every Thursday, then there are obviously people that want to see TNA Impact, no matter how bad it currently is. Pointing out what we all know they do wrong doesn't change that they typically get that 1.0-1.2. All TNA has to do to get the numbers I mentioned (2.4 against 1.2) is get the people that watch both RAW and Impact to decide to watch Impact instead, next year. It's not as impossible as you're saying it is, because they don't have to get new fans to achieve those numbers. They just have to get the fans that they do have to prefer their product to the competition's. And yes, kyledow, I know that RAW was on a different night (Thursday), but that doesn't change the fact that 1/5 of RAW's Thursday audience would've watched TNA, had TNA put on a more exciting show this year. It's closer than it looks, and if TNA hypothetically uses its talent to full efficiency, next year's RAW v. TNA Thursday night matchup will show that. That still won't do TNA much good financially wise. They need to get NEW fans to watch their product (or that's one of the things they need to do). Simply stealing back the fans that Raw took on Thursday night won't mean much. |
|
