Thread: FB/Twitter plays part of DECLINE in ratings/PPV buys?
View Single Post
Old 10-19-2011, 07:53 AM   #24
Kane Knight
Ron Paul 4 EVA
 
Kane Knight's Avatar
 
Posts: 152,467
Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock Bottom View Post
I don't get how them using something handed to them from god to actually communicate with their fans to do so makes them any less of a star. Getting a tweet is the next best thing to getting an autograph.
Yes, that's exactly what they think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCrippyZ View Post
PPV numbers from TNA are poor because of the poor product.

UFC's PPV numbers are reportedly in decline too in recent months. However, I would argue their numbers have been great (and are still great) due to the variety in the cards and the UFC product, from PPV to PPV, even with their close schedule.
TNA has had a poor product for ages. It didn't lead to an actual decline prior.

Selective dismissal does not invalidate the point, nor does it validate the notion that the problem is the number of PPVs WWE has. The number of PPVs WWE has had has been rather stable for a while, and does not correlate to declines. There have been declines with so many PPVs, and there have been notably non-declining periods with the same.

Clearly, there is another factor involved. As the number of PPVs does not seem to impact buyrates consistently.
Kane Knight is offline   Reply With Quote