TNA Impact rating this week.

Discussion in 'Smack Down!' started by abztrakt, Jan 4, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    Wait for it...


    Wait for it....


    [1.1]

    No, seriously.
    test
  2. catching up with velocity there huh?
    test
  3. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,469
    From now on, whenever Impact gets a 1.1 we all scream "SNAKE EYES~!"

    Yes, I came up with that myself. See I can do more than just write for TNA.
    test
  4. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    It's amazing that TNA will never not get a 1.1, which means that 1.5 million or so people will watch TNA EVERY week, yet 98-99% of them don't buy the PPVs. People will loyally watch TNA, will defend it TO THE DEATH on the internet, but will not ever spend money on it. There's a sort of poetic justice in that.
    test
  5. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,469
    "They lost 100,000 viewers though. Only 1.4 million this week."- Chico Alvarez
    test
  6. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    Must have been more rounding involved in that 1.1 then. Probably because the AJ thing was retarded.
    test
  7. chop stick

    chop stick Mr President

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Messages:
    26,127
    before i even came in here, i knew this was going to be negative.

    who is to say 1.1 is bad? people keep comparing everything TNA does to WWE .. that's the most annoying shit in the world.
    test
  8. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    That's mostly because TNA keeps trying to be WWE and failing.

    Nobody ever said a 1.1 is bad. A 1.1 is what they get every week, without fail. Their ratings aren't their problem, the fact that people just don't buy PPVs is their problem.
    test
  9. We compare TNA to wwe cuz they started out wanting to put WWE out of business and blow them out of the water, TNA is way out of leugue hell WCW was pulling more visitors than TNA and still went under competing with WWE plus ted turners money. i dont think tna will be around another 3 years... hell they might not even make it passed this year.. im not even worried about the wrestlers that left wwe for tna cuz you and i know they'll be back..
    test
  10. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,469
    It's not bad, it's possibly the lowest possible rating they're going to get based on chance. Hence, SNAKE EYES~! The thing about it is the highest possible rating they can get isn't much higher, and the shows don't draw any PPV buys. If Impact was canceled, and they kept doing PPV's they'd still get the same (low) buyrates. The only thing TNA Impact is at this point is a slot on Spike TV's lineup, and a number for them on the Nielsen Ratings sheet.


    I don't know what makes you think that other than their shitty creative department. Spike TV is happy with the ratings that Impact is getting. TNA is happy with putting out the most shitty product possible for having a roster full of talent and household names. Panda is still funding it, and I can't predict the end of TNA in the foreseeable future. Just my thoughts.
    test
  11. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,469
    The 1.1 rating is an extremely good rating that surprises me, I can't figure out why all these people watch it... week... after... week... after... week. It's a blip on the screen. I get less entertainment out of watching it than I do reading/talking/listening about it on the internet. When I actually watch it I get irritated.
    test
  12. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    It's true, talking about TNA is so much more fun than actually watching it.

    Also, TNA lives and dies by Panda's funding. They'll never get cancelled because their ratings are good enough, but they're definitely not profitable and could never make it on their own. But for some reason, Dixie and her people seem to be sticking with TNA. Don't ask me why.
    test
  13. what dose smackdown get, not much better about the same, what? i think impact was better than smackdown this week.. the beat the clock was pretty solid tho especially the chavo vs funaki match i wasnt expecting that to be that solid

    maybe panda and dixies people feel its a good long term investment. Healthsouth was the primary backing till they pulled out and panda took over
    test
  14. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    Smackdown usually gets around high 2's, but that's network ratings, which are a little different. So a 3 on a network is better than a 3 on cable. ECW is doing almost as low of ratings as Impact, but that's because WWE doesn't care about ECW.
    test
  15. Nam Dekan

    Nam Dekan i got a tip in my pocket

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 1998
    Messages:
    60,983
    depends on the network also. Smackdown's rating is good for CW but if it was on CBS or something then it would be a pretty bad rating
    test
  16. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    Yeah, I just meant that a 3.0 network rating is more viewers than a 3.0 cable rating because they're based on more households.
    test
  17. Nam Dekan

    Nam Dekan i got a tip in my pocket

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 1998
    Messages:
    60,983
    The funniest thing about the consistent 1.1 is that no matter what they do they don't do any better but never do any worse. I think a promised appearance of Jesus and 2pac wouldn't get them a higher rating. Well maybe a 1.2
    test
  18. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    That would be a 1.15 though, not a full 1.2.


    The funniest thing about the 1.1 to me is that 1.5 million people will NEVER miss a show, but like 1.47 million people will NEVER order a PPV either.
    test
  19. chop stick

    chop stick Mr President

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Messages:
    26,127
    show me proof.. ive never seen TNA try to be WWE.. i think TNA is aware of what they are.. they just dont know how to grow.. so maybe just maybe, they try and take bits and pieces of the bigger company.. to expand. But , i wouldnt consider that trying to be like the WWE.

    again, this is the internet talking for you.
    test
  20. abztrakt

    abztrakt the impossible cool.

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    16,511
    They book their shows like a bad episode of Raw where it's all backstage segments and shit, but they don't have the writing or production values to pull it off. TNA wasn't like that before, so it became obvious when they started trying to be more like WWE.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)