Thread: Impact Wrestling: World Champion Tessa Blanchard (Air Date Spoilers Only)
View Single Post
Old 01-17-2019, 11:45 PM   #1760
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 60,919
Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simple Fan View Post
Pursuit is best for them at the moment because it keeps them on TV. As I said it also brings everything in house for Anthem and allows Impact some freedoms. They have gained fans if you'd get past the TV numbers. This is a company that sold no tickets to shows for almost 2 years straight in Orlando and are now back to touring and selling tickets.

It's small steps yeah but this company was pretty much dead filming 3 months of TV in a week to a free audience not knowing if they'd be able to put on 2 PPVs. They now film about 2-4 weeks per taping to paying crowds all over and have the money to put on PPVs and Twitch specials. They've rebult how the company operates and have rebult the perception of the company to an extent. There are still people like Noid who'll hold stuff that happened with former regimes against them and that's part of the rebuilding process. I just find it weird to be a wrestling fan and hata a promotion so much that you don't even follow.
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.
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote