TNA draws lowest rating of 2014

[Forrest OAKADA]

As ive said before close down TNA Dixie

As I've said before, Close this Account down Crayo, before it goes bankrupt.

 

[Crayo]

TNA's ratings go up and down. new!

didn't see Crayo around to discuss their highest rating last week now did we

they were already posted you asslicking fgt

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

they were already posted you asslicking fgt

That's right smurf. And we always post ratings in the Rate TNA thread, but when you saw a bad rating you just haaaaaaad to make a thread specially for it didn't you homo ass bitch. sit on 12 dicks you homo

 

[Crayo]

everyone meet Dolph's: Testify's #1 brown noser, WWEF'S biggest hypocrite fgt face.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

How about I rape your entire family and eat your girlfriends liver???

 

[ShaRpY HaRdY]

Just got around to watching it actually, pretty solid show.. I can only imagine the Olympics fucking with some of the viewers or something.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Just got around to watching it actually, pretty solid show.. I can only imagine the Olympics fucking with some of the viewers or something.

It was a really good show. Gunner is the shit and Bobby Roode is >>> than anything going on in the 'E atm.

 

[Crayo]

Just got around to watching it actually, pretty solid show.. I can only imagine the Olympics fucking with some of the viewers or something.

Could ignite a good debate. I remember when TNA was producing arguably its greatest content but ratings were getting worse. There was discussion whether what the IWC considers its best content is actually worse for the business, and that might explain some of the more moronic booking that sometimes occurs in TNA. Who's to say while the IWC enjoyed this show, that the majority didn't? It happened so often when I was an active watcher that episodes that the majority of us, members of the IWC, thought were incredible, were receiving the worst ratings.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Could ignite a good debate. I remember when TNA was producing arguably its greatest content but ratings were getting worse. There was discussion whether what the IWC considers its best content is actually worse for the business, and that might explain some of the more moronic booking that sometimes occurs in TNA. Who's to say while the IWC enjoyed this show, that the majority didn't? It happened so often when I was an active watcher that episodes that the majority of us, members of the IWC, thought were incredible, were receiving the worst ratings.

I feel like the majority of TNA's fans are IWC smarks. What 'casuals' even know what TFA is, let alone watch the product?

Not to mention ratings and show quality don't correlate. If anything ratings are an indicator of how much the audience liked or disliked the past few shows, not the show they are on.

 

[Crayo]

I feel like the majority of TNA's fans are IWC smarks. What 'casuals' even know what TFA is, let alone watch the product?

Another classic discussion that has occurred many times. If TNA's fanbase really is the majority of IWC, then why do the ratings reflect otherwise? Shows the IWC has generally seemed to prefer generally don't get as good ratings. I feel like there are far more casuals than people in the IWC like to think there is.

I'm not sure if this means anything at all, but the only friends I have who watch any sort of wrestling are the ones that sometimes catch TNA on while they're bored. That's probably because in the UK it's far easier to watch TNA than it is WWE, but regardless of that, it might mean something.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Another classic discussion that has occurred many times. If TNA's fanbase really is the majority of IWC, then why do the ratings reflect otherwise? Shows the IWC has generally seemed to prefer generally don't get as good ratings. I feel like there are far more casuals than people in the IWC like to think there is.

I'm not sure if this means anything at all, but the only friends I have who watch any sort of wrestling are the ones that sometimes catch TNA on while they're bored. That's probably because in the UK it's far easier to watch TNA than it is WWE, but regardless of that, it might mean something.

Definitely just a UK thing. In the US nobody knows wtf TNA is, seriously. And TNA ratings are up and down, always. The one constant with the ratings is they are not constant. I don't think you trying to connect dots from IWT approval to ratings is anything other than odd chances. No real correlation IMO. Some weeks a few hundred thousand more people watch TNA. I imagine it has to do with outside circumstance such as what else is on TV or plans people have, not is TNA's product slightly better or worse now compared to the norm.

Maybe some weeks more people catch it after the fact on watch wrestling? who knows. I think about 1.5 million people follow TNA, and between 1 and 1.5 mill watch in on spike each week. THat's about all there is to it.

 

[Crayo]

Business minded individuals don't tend to believe in coincidences. If TNA had a smart marking team they'd really knuckle down to see what sort of fanbase they really have. I personally think the IWC vastly underrates TNA's casual population. I think it definitely has a larger internet fanbase in terms of ratio's than WWE, but that's only because of how many fucking casuals watch WWE. I think there is definitely a correlation between bad ratings and shows the IWC find enjoyable. Obviously it's not 100% consistent because there can be shows both demographics enjoy, but there is some relation there in my opinion. As a booker, you need to find a balance, and that's sometimes the hardest thing.

 

[Dolph'sZiggler]

Business minded individuals don't tend to believe in coincidences. If TNA had a smart marking team they'd really knuckle down to see what sort of fanbase they really have. I personally think the IWC vastly underrates TNA's casual population. I think it definitely has a larger internet fanbase in terms of ratio's than WWE, but that's only because of how many fucking casuals watch WWE. I think there is definitely a correlation between bad ratings and shows the IWC find enjoyable. Obviously it's not 100% consistent because there can be shows both demographics enjoy, but there is some relation there in my opinion. As a booker, you need to find a balance, and that's sometimes the hardest thing.

Funny you would bring up TNA's marketing team, since I and many others will still argue that the inconsistent ratings #1 reason for continuing to happen is in fact there complete lack of marketing in general. But you always said it was because of Hogan lol :

Obviously if TNA knew how to market themselves the ratings would likely improve from the depths of 1.0 hell and become more consistent. More people hearing about your product and some people will check it out, and of those checking it out some will stick. But when nobody knows who you are how can you improve ratings? TNA doesn't even advertise the house shows in the cities they do them in ffs, they simply don't understand the values of advertising which is baffling. :dafuq:

 

[ShaRpY HaRdY]

It was a really good show. Gunner is the shit ,,,

Gunner is the man, built like a champ no doubt.

 

[Crayo]

"you always said it was because of Hogan" -- and I'm done. Such a Blue thing to say lol