Quote:
Originally Posted by Noid
That is like saying that getting your arm cut off is good because it means you get to keep your head. Not getting your arm chopped off would be even better. Is being on TV necessarily a good thing? There’s some debate to be had there. Someone could argue that being on TV with 60,000 viewers is a big, big perception problem. Can you cultivate a star, for example, on a show Which existence proves that no one watches that individual? It’s a valid question. Are they spending money or making money on this TV? Just having TV and calling it good is very simplistic.
You still haven’t explained what more freedoms even means? Can Sami Callihan and Eddie Edwards now try to kill themselves in a forest...more? Is Scarlett going to actually get fully naked and start using a dildo? What does that mean? And what does it mean if 60% of the audience you had stick around?
Have they managed to get 40,000 people to pay for attendance? Because if so, I’s Like to know how they got almost everyone that watches them on TV to go and see them. That is the only way they could be perceived to have grown fans, by the way. They just lost 40,000. Do you know what growing means? And is TNA making this money, or are they getting it from another parent company?
Yes, they have a stigma to overcome. It’s their stigma. They have earned it. They have burnt out over 90% of people willing to give them a chance. That there are previous regimes at all says something. And they further pushed the Vince McMahon monopoly. That is why I hate them. You want to buy TNA, you buy everything that comes with it, including brand perception.
And I tried to give them a shot and I saw Eddie Edwards and Sami Callahan moaning in the woods as music played over the top. Fuck them. You can enjoy it, just don’t tell me that it’s good or that it is fucking growing when they are getting more than decimated in their main business metrics.
Also, you’re not a smart or reasonable guy, Simple. Don’t play that card.
|
So you think no TV would be better than Pursuit? I don't get that, promotions like Lucha Underground and MLW have been able to create stars on channels less prominent than Pursuit. ROH has created multiple stars being on syndication with no set timeslot at all. People that want to watch will find a way to.
Yeah it allows them the freedom to take risk with their product. Whatever that may be from Scarlett to more violent looking matches and such. Pop wouldn't air the OVE/LAX Barbwire Massacre match which honestly wast all that gruesome.
I don't think the logic you are using about gaining the 40,000 lost fans from TV to live crowds makes any sense. I see you ignored the part about this company doing nothing but TV to non paying crowds as well. How is it not considered growth when you go from having no live events and doing 4 tapings a year to now doing live events all year and tapings every few weeks? It's nothing big but the company is getting back to the basics after spending years being solely dependent on TV money.
I get not liking the cinematic stuff that they've done, it doesn't seem to be your cup of tea between the Hardy's and Lucha Underground. It's not something everyone is going to like but it doesn't happen every week. It's just on segment of the show as well and not like everything is done that way. Certain stories are helped by it, I will say the LAX/OGz street fight one they did was bad but it did progress that story. I don't dig into their business metrics, I just watch the shows and can see the difference between now and a few years ago.
I never claim to be smart, I'm not stupid but I am pretty reasonable. I mean I carry on with you even though we disagree on most things.