The Hamilton Ave Journal 07.01.10: Volume 2 – Issue 144
Posted by JP Prag on 07.01.2010
Does the WWE believe Martha Hart's lawsuit against them is pejorative nonsense? Has WWE stock held up to the recent market news? Could Ricky Steamboat sell more than current WWE Champion Sheamus? All this and more is answered in this week’s edition of the Hamilton Ave Journal!
THE HAMILTON AVE JOURNAL
By JP Prag
Volume 2 – Issue 144
ABOUT THE JOURNAL
The Hamilton Ave Journal is the only wrestling news report focused solely on the business of wrestling. Here in the Journal we not only look at the stories that are important to the investor and business-minded person, but also delve deeper into stories that most fans of wrestling would overlook. That is because the Journal is about getting the heart of the matters that affect the companies and outlooks of the wrestling world.
And where is Hamilton Ave? That is the location of the WWE Production Studio in Stamford, CT, and thus the most powerful place in the wrestling world. Besides, The East Main Street Journal just does not have the right ring to it.
Who am I? I am JP Prag: consultant, entrepreneur, businessman, journalist, and wrestling fan.
Now, ring the bell because the market is open.
The Journal's front page area known as What's News isn't just about telling you what has happened. The stories in this section are about what will have an effect on the wrestling industry, individual federations, and the wallets of the fans.
Newsbites
With not much happening in the wrestling business world, here are some items of note:
In the follow up to last week's story on Martha Hart's lawsuit against the WWE, WWE lawyer Jerry McDevitt came out with his usual rhetoric responses. According to courant.com:
WWE didn't sue her because she brought the wrongful death claim, he [Mr. McDevitt] said. It did, however, petition a court in Connecticut to hear the claim, instead of the Missouri court where Hart had filed her lawsuit, which was settled before going to trial.
McDevitt objects to the insinuation that WWE coldly sought to deny Hart and her children compensation. In fact, he said, immediately after the accident the company offered to settle "out of humanitarian reasons...[WWE] loved the guy and didn't want to see any harm come to [Hart's] family.''
McDevitt denounced Hart's comments as "pejorative nonsense" and said her current lawsuit is nothing more than "a personal attack" on Republican U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon.
Where TNA usually gets the brunt of criticism for not being on top of their paperwork (such as when they did not know Angelina Love's VISA expired and was forced to release her), the WWE has proven they can do the same. Both Drew McIntyre and Wade Barrett are back in their home countries as their VISAs have expired and they were in the country illegally. In a worst case scenario, the WWE returns to the UK on September 9, 2010.
While some have wondered if Wrestlicious will continue, the company has starting taping new vignettes in Tampa, FL. Meanwhile, the first nine episodes continue in reruns in their various outlets, so the company has airtime when they are ready to use it. There is still no word, though, on when the company will also tape matches.
The WWE stock has been hit with the rest of the market on job news. Though the company itself had nothing to report, stocks are near a six month low, closing yesterday at $15.56, just slightly above the intra-day low of $15.52. On December 31, 2009, WWe stock hit $15.33, the lowest in this past half year.
With the lower share price, Steven Mallas of BloggingStocks.com was enticed to purchase shares of the WWE. He was once again attracted to high dividend yield, but did caution that one has to watch the cash flow statements to make sure the WWE can actually cover their dividends through operations, something they have only been able to do in the past two payouts.
In the Marketplace we look at the trends in television ratings. This section is less for critical analysis by the Journal but more for the reader to see what is really going on and to draw their own conclusions.
As with stocks, here in the Journal we track the progress of television ratings. If ratings are the barometer by which we judge the product, then over the course of time we should be able to see patterns, trends, and anomalies.
For the week ending Wednesday June 30, 2010, here are the current standings of the shows:
Analysis:
After a couple of weeks on the upswing, RAW gave back some of its recent gains by droping 5.5% to a 3.3 rating. They were not the only ones to give back recent gains, as SuperStars failed to recover most of its audience after a time-shift week and only came back to a 0.56 rating. SmackDown has been holding on to is ratings well considering that it is dealing with preemptions and some MyNetworkTV affiliates dropping it before the move to SyFy. Still on SyFy, NXT has failed to garner any new ratings and is instead now trending towards its lowest four-week average rating (something they set only six weeks ago). While this week is up from last week, they are still averaging lower. TNA is also struggling rebuilding their audience, but came in the exact same 0.99 rating as the week before. It will be quite some time before the company can build back up to the 1.3 rating it had before the move to Monday, and focus on selling additional TV shows to Spike is not going to make that happen any time sooner.
We all know that wrestling is a business, but we don't often pay attention to what sells and makes money. Money and Investing looks into the top selling items in the world of wrestling and any interesting figures that may have come out this week.
What are the top selling items for the WWE? WWEShopZone.com releases a list of varying numbers to show what is selling for them:
1. John Cena Never Give Up T-Shirt Package ($37.99)
2. John Cena Never Give Up T-Shirt ($25.00)
3. John Morrison Elite Series #4 Action Figure ($15.99)
4. Kane Elite Series #4 Action Figure ($15.99)
5. The Undertaker's Deadliest Matches DVD ($34.95, on sale $21.50)
6. WWE 11 Piece School Accessories Value Pack ($9.99)
7. John Cena Never Give up YOUTH Basics T-Shirt ($9.99)
8. Randy Orton Lobotomy T-Shirt ($25.00)
9. John Morrison Sunglasses ($12.00)
10. John Cena Never Give Up Baseball Cap ($20.00)
11. John Cena Never Give Up Sweatband Set ($12.00)
12. WWE Red/Blue Reusable Bag ($3.99)
13. The Undertaker's Deadliest Matches DVD Package ($59.95, on sale $29.99)
14. Miz I'm Awesome T-Shirt ($25.00)
15. The Best Pay Per View Matches of the Year 2009-2010 DVD ($21.49)
16. Sheamus Celtic Warrior T-Shirt ($25.00)
17. Ricky Steamboat: The Life Story of the Dragon DVD/T-Shirt Package ($54.95, on sale $25.99)
18. The Undertaker's Deadliest Matches DVD/Pendant Package ($44.95, on sale $22.99)
19. WrestleMania XXVI Shot Glass ($10, on sale $2.98)
20. WrestleMania XXVI ADULT Sunglasses ($10, on sale $4.98)
In the oddity of the sales chart, Kane actually made an appearance and surpassed his brother the Undertake coming in at number four on the list. Most of the rest of the list contained the usual cast of characters in John Cena, The Undertaker, Randy Orton, the Miz, and John Morrison (who also gained a second spot), but Ricky Steamboat also broke in at number seventeen while Sheamus held on to his spot at number sixteen. Trailing off at the end of the list were two WrestleMania discount items, again showing how much the rest of the roster has to catch up to the old items.
TNA sometimes releases a list of top selling items on ShopTNA.com. According to the site the top selling items were:
1. Don's Insane Brown Bag Special ($20)
2. Mr. Anderson... People Are Fake T-Shirt ($19.99)
3. Jeff Hardy Enigma T-Shirt (Glow In The Dark) ($19.99)
4. The Best Of America's Most Wanted DVD ($24.99, on sale $15.99)
5. RVD - Video Wall T-shirt ($19.99)
6. Hogan H Squared Limited Edition T-shirt ($29.99)
7. Destination X 2010 DVD ($19.99, on sale $15.99)
8. Unbreakable 2005 DVD ($9.99)
9. "Hulkamania" T-shirt ($19.99)
10. Beer Money / MMG "FANDIMONIUM" DVD ($19.99, on sale $14.99)
TNA has once again graced us with an update, where Don West's special sale continued to dominate the number one spot (a spot it has not left this year). Jeff Hardy, Mr. Anderson, RVD, and Hulk Hogan continue to be the top sellers, proving once again that they do make their salary at least in sales. Interestingly, though, the TNA originals to hold center stage include Beer Money (who always seem to find a way in), the Motor City Machine Guns (who used to have Beer Money's spot), and Robert Roode's former tag team: America's Most Wanted. A DVD from this year actually made the list in Destination X, while a DVD from five years ago showing up does not bode well for the other PPV events this year.
Wrestling isn't just about watching and reading. The best way to be a wrestling fan is to experience it live. Where is wrestling coming to in the upcoming weeks? The Personal Journal answers that question.
Do you know a wrestling event coming up? Send one in to The Hamilton Ave Journal and we'll be sure to add it to the list.
The Editorials section is designed for you, the readers, to respond to the views presented in the Journal, send an important news item, or talk about another overlooked business related item in wrestling. Just beware: the Journal reserves the right to respond back.
From the commentary section last week, Trashy has some plans for the WWE's new partnership with YouTube:
I'm curious to see just how much of the WWE library ends up on YouTube.
Some companies are finding the DVD market so unprofitable they're happy to at least see some kind of profit from online access that's free to the consumer.
For example, I just noticed 12 seasons of "King of the Hill" are available for steaming on Netflix while only six have actually seen home video release.
There are probably many pieces of film the WWE has that would not sell enough to put on DVD, but YouTube could work. Much like the micro-transaction system they are testing in South Korea with the video games, getting advertising dollars from YouTube (who has the carrying cost of hosting the film data) on a micro-basis can make uploading worthwhile.
What is really interesting is that this week Hulu announced that they are launching a tier for paid content. The WWE may to add content to there to get yet another stream of data. According to Hulu, that tier will work like traditional cable and be a blend of paid for content that is shared with providers and then advertising dollars on top of that.
Speaking of Hulu, Guest#7771 says:
The YouTube move is an interesting one. Diversifying from Hulu may end up being a clever move, although it does mean they stray from the NBC family.
More interesting is the fact that they don't offer RAW on either Hulu or YouTube, not even after a week's delay. This tells me they aren't really sold on the internet as a profitable distribution medium.
There may be more to that, as Hellpop asks:
Is there a particular reason that the WWE doesn't include Raw as part of their streaming offerings? Is it simply because it's "the flagship" so they don't want to potentially dilute the ratings by offering Raw through alternative sources, or are they contractually prevented from doing so? It seems to me that Raw is much more heavily bootlegged than any other WWE show, so if their reasoning is to get out in front of that, not including Raw is a self-defeating move.
The contract for RAW is also a lot older than SmackDown, SuperStars, or NXT, so there maybe rules they have with USA. Come next contract negotiations, expect a lot of that to change.
Moving away from television contracts, we go into the fun world of legal contracts and Owen Hart. Max says:
Nice breakdown of the Martha "Bitch" Hart lawsuit versus the WWE.
To which Karatgold24 responds:
How is she a bitch? She has a legally binding contract that states they are not to use his likeness and entitles her to royalties in the event that they did. The WWE did not honor that deal. They even admitted to it. They are in the wrong.
Well, let's be clear: the WWE has admitted to using Owen's likeness in a number of areas; they have not admitted that they should have paid out royalties and did not. As far as the WWE is concerned, they used footage that they own and that they can do anything they want with. Since they do not have a talent or legends contract with Owen Hart or his estate, they may be assuming that they owe nothing.
Guest#2536 continues:
The Martha Hart lawsuit is very interesting. While it seems a certainity WWE will have to make a pretty big royalty payment, I REALLY hope she doesn't succeed in her efforts to prevent WWE from using or mentioning Owen Hart without permission, as it will simply lead to WWE never mentioning Owen Hart again and his career and legacy being forgotten.
As much as I understand why she is doing this - in her eyes WWE killed her husband - it is robbing the fans of Owen's matches and character. It also sets a precedent which may lead to other wrestlers being excluded from future releases and recognition because of fear over lawsuits.
The precedent you bring up is the most worrisome part. The WWE owns 90% of all North American wrestling footage of any kind, so if an estate or a person says they want to block the WWE from using their image based on this case, a good deal of that footage could prove useless and waste away.
Going down the pike, there was plenty of discussion about if TNA's name hurts or helps their brand awareness. Among the diatribes was this from Guest#3906:
And what exactly is the name TNA going to stop them from achieving? A national cable TV deal? They already have that. A video game? Been there, done that. Action figures for kids? Guess what, TNA has that too.
The concept that the name TNA is holding the company back in any capacity is just a delusion dreamed up by internet fanboys that somehow fail to see TNA is an incredibly successful organization.
It would seem that the other side of the argument is that TNA has achieved those things IN SPITE of their name and that if their name were something else they would have an easier time doing it. The name could be slowing down and hurting their brand awareness, but at the end of the day the brand is what you make of it. Do you think if one said "Apple" forty years ago that people would think of the worldwide leader in peripheral personal electronics? TNA can make their brand stand for anything; their biggest problem is the "message" associated with the brand is so disjointed that nobody knows what "TNA" is supposed to be.
Of course, there are other factors to consider as Guest#6883 points out:
I don't think that the name is what is holding TNA back. The lack of market awareness hold them back. Even when the South was pretty much Coca Cola country, people knew about Pepsi Cola as an alternative. Same with McDonalds and Burger King, Wendy's, etc.
Being an alternative that (may) fill a market need doesn't do much good if people don't know you exist.
Exactly. The name is not a problem if people have never heard it.
Going over to the merchandise side of the table, Guest#1231 says:
I don't think Sheamus having a t-shirt in the WWE best-selling list means much when it as at no. 16. Sheamus must be one of the least over multiple-time world champions ever.
If sales are an indication, you should look more closely at Chris Jericho who rarely ever finds his way on the top selling list. Edge, too, has often struggled to hold on to a place. Rey Mysterio goes in sprints and until recently the Undertaker hardly ever showed up. More than all of them is the Big Show who has made one appearance in the nearly three years of the Journal.
But Guest#5350 brings up a more valid point:
Considering what is above Sheamus, the sheer number of items offered by WWE, and the weak first championship reigns that are standard in WWE now, I think it shows plenty.
On the other hand, consider who isn't above him. For that matter, the IWC love's Orton's new face turn and look where he is, only one item at #11.
Let's go one step further. Between RAW, SmackDown, and NXT there are nearly 100 WWE performers. Of them, Sheamus is outselling 95%. Given that, isn't being anywhere on the list a huge accomplishment?
And to wrap it all up this week, the question that this reporter is sick of and will just finally answer, via Guest#4150 (who may or may not be the same person who has asked multiple times before):
If grammar mattered, then "The World Wrestling Entertainment" doesn't make as much sense as "The World Wrestling Federation" did prior to the forced name change in 2001.
With that in mind, why do you always put a "the" before WWE, but not before TNA or any other wrestling organization in your report, when you should be more consistent and not either put or not put a "the" prior to any wrestling organization's name?
Because if you read the public relations material from The WWE, The WWE often writes and speaks the company name as The WWE. Yes, "The Entertainment" does not necessarily make sense, but it is grammatically correct because "Entertainment" is used as a noun and a title, therefore can be "The". And yes, the "The" is carryover from an older name of the company, but it is part of the brand awareness. TNA, on the other hand, has never called themselves "The" anything. Neither do those other organization like ROH, CZW, AAA, NJPW, etc....
To sum it all up, here is the tagline of the WWE's corporate website:
Official site of the parent company of the WWE brand.
The End.
Plenty more was written, so be sure to take a look. And if you enjoy the Journal, why not bookmark 411mania.com and make it your home page? You can do that by clicking here.
This concludes Issue #144 (Volume 2) of THE HAMILTON AVE JOURNAL. Join us next week as we get ready to ring the bell again.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but the name "TNA" has done nothing for the growth of the company.
They got a video game-it bombed and the maker is nearly bankrupt. They got a TV deal-have not improved ratings in years and bombed on Mondays.
IF, IF, if they had a different name, I think things would be a LITTLE bit better. For all the casuals out there, they hear "TNA" and either say, "Huh?" or think of 'tits n' ass'. Plain and simple.
Posted By: Nick for Hick (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 02:22 AM
i know u do the business said only but do u follow the products? wwe? tna? god forbid, roh? like? dislike?
Posted By: pro life (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 02:23 AM
I hate to beat a dead horse, but the name "TNA" has done nothing for the growth of the company.
They got a video game-it bombed and the maker is nearly bankrupt. They got a TV deal-have not improved ratings in years and bombed on Mondays.
IF, IF, if they had a different name, I think things would be a LITTLE bit better. For all the casuals out there, they hear "TNA" and either say, "Huh?" or think of 'tits n' ass'. Plain and simple.
Posted By: Nick for Hick (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 02:22 AM
Actually, if you look at the charts above, you can see that TNA had reached a 1.5 recently. They seemed to be consistently above 1.1 before the move to Mondays.
If, as you say, the casual fan would say "huh" or think "tits 'n' ass" when hearing TNA it actually reflects the larger problem of not having raised product awareness among potential fans. That is not the fault of the name, but in marketing.
Because let's face it, your average fan hasn't heard of Dragon Gate either and they have good wrestling. Or the Mexican promotions if they didn't stumble across them.
Posted By: Guest#4518 (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 03:05 AM
Whether the onus lies with the employer or employee it seems ridiculous that work permits are allowed to expire. I have no trouble remembering when to renew my passport, driving license, life policy etc, and considering Barrett's position in the company at present 5 minutes oversight could set him back months, just how difficult is it to draw a big red circle on a calendar?
Posted By: V (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 05:44 AM
Do we know why the WWE's Youtube channel isn't available in the UK? I've subscribed and every new video which goes up, apart from the ppv adverts, say video unavailable
Posted By: Jonberg (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 06:32 AM
Sadly the WWE youtube channel doesn't seem to be available in Australia either
Posted By: joe blow (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 08:52 AM
I am sure you meant to say James Storm's former tag team AMW in the merchandise sales. Also unbreakable 2005 being in there is no real indicator as it is the DVD of the best TNA match so far.
Posted By: Hyde_Hill (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 09:00 AM
Hey JP, that's James Storm's tag team, not Robert Roode! Robert Roode's former tag team is Team Canada, with Eric Young as his tag team partner, it was James Storm's former tag team, America's Most Wanted, with Chris Harris as his tag team partner! Also, nice mention about Angelina Love's situation from last year to compair it to Drew McIntyre and Wade Barrett. It really sucks for them, but it's the law. Although, WWE Smackdown diva Tiffany, tweeted on her twitter account that she misses Drew.
Posted By: Miss Lindsie (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 09:23 AM
For better or for worse, when people think of wrestling they think WWE.
Hell, I was in Blockbuster awhile back and that Kurt Angle Jenna Morosco movie was in there and it said "WWE wrestler Kurt Angle", not FORMER, and it was made long after he left WWE, and they brought that chick in there because she made tha movie with him. So either they (TNA) or the marketing department for the movie used WWE (lawsuit?) and no mention of TNA was on that movie box.
Wrestling is like Porn. It all gets lumped into the same 'tawdry' (will use Vince's word for him) pile. There isnt any brand comparison. it is just wrestling. Just like it is just porn. Only losers and internet freaks or 'fans' (and I am sure porn has fans somewhere other than a dark lit basement) know who works for what company. Because the only porn company I know by name is Vivid. So WWE is the Vivid of the wrestling world or vice versa.
So it is hard (no pun) for any wrestling company to break from that, and it certainly doesnt help TNA when they continue to bring in and promote names that are basically synonymous with WWE. Hogan being the most obvious. And while Hogan had months before he went to TNA to promote the name, he spent most of his time talking about the book or the divorce or his son, or his daughter's album or whatever.
I see more of hogan talking about rent to own shit than I do him talking about TNA. How hard would it be to cut a couple commercials where he gives the time and night of TNA and put them on a few channels, even at off hours? You know all it an alternative to WWE even if you want to.
Seems to me TNA relies way too much on word of mouth, second hand info, their relationship with WWE, or the internet, dixie twitter account and shoot videos to promote their product. Rather than spending a little bit of money on advertising. I mean I have seen more ads for half pint brawlers in the past 3 months than I have for TNA wrestling in the past 3 years. Just because TNA is 8 years in doesnt mean anyone has heard of them, and that might be their biggest mistakes, they think more peopel know about them than actually do.
IMO the best way to start a new promotional barrage would be to get a new show 9which they desperately need). And even though you dont think they can get one, it would serve a couple things. Get them the 'excuse' to start promoting their product and maybe get some package deals on advertising where they can promote both shows. And not some reaction or lead in show, but a whole new show devoted to wrestling, they have too much talent to run them out there one every couple weeks and try to keep any story line coherent.
I really thought that was why they brought Bishoff in in the first place, to get a second time slot.
Posted By: Rich (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 10:11 AM
It is true if you have never heard of TNA... the first thing you think of is Tit's 'N' Ass. I think the name is detrimental to the company's growth.
Posted By: Andrew Barbarash (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 11:30 AM
Youtube channel isn't available in the UK (and probably other markets) because of the TV deals in place. To receive WWE programming you have to be a skysports subscriber (a pay service). Youtube is free, thus WWE would be screwing over those customers and themselves if they were to give WWE programming content free. No such thing as a free lunch in this world.
Posted By: Andrew Barbarash (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 11:34 AM
I hate to be annoying Internet pedant guy, but it was James Storm who was in AMW, not Robert Roode.
Posted By: BringTheNoise (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 01:46 PM
Also unbreakable 2005 being in there is no real indicator as it is the DVD of the best TNA match so far.
Posted By: Hyde_Hill (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 09:00 AM
It has also been available for about 5 years, the first 2 or 3 of which were in a much better economy.
As the "Long Tail" suggests, the majority of sales would be in the beginning, when it first became available. Sales normally taper off significantly after the first few months. The fact that it ranks so high now, even at a discount, should mean that the items below it are doing rather poorly. I doubt the items above it are doing so well either.
Posted By: Guest#2413 (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 01:59 PM
Rich is right. Why doesn't TNA place their stars in more mainstream outlets in order to promote their product? I've seen WWE stars at auto shows and at Nascar events. Cena even got to be a part of the Fiesta Bowl for crying out loud!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Spike owned by the Viacom network? What's wrong with a little crossover appeal? Think they can't put guys like the MCMGs, AJ Styles, or even Desmond Wolfe on other Spike TV shows or even in commercials to give the appearance that they exist to the casual fan.
WCW may have went under due to poor management, but everyone knew who they were back in the late 90's. TNA needs to stop relying on the highly sensitive IWC for promotion and take care of their own marketing.
Posted By: JR (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 02:31 PM
Rich is right. Why doesn't TNA place their stars in more mainstream outlets in order to promote their product? I've seen WWE stars at auto shows and at Nascar events. Cena even got to be a part of the Fiesta Bowl for crying out loud!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Spike owned by the Viacom network? What's wrong with a little crossover appeal? Think they can't put guys like the MCMGs, AJ Styles, or even Desmond Wolfe on other Spike TV shows or even in commercials to give the appearance that they exist to the casual fan.
WCW may have went under due to poor management, but everyone knew who they were back in the late 90's. TNA needs to stop relying on the highly sensitive IWC for promotion and take care of their own marketing.
Posted By: JR (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 02:31 PM
Well, this has to do with the feedback effect. WWE can be everywhere because WWE is synonymous with wrestling. So any outlet that is okay with wrestling automatically thinks of WWE when they want or will accept a wrestling personality at their event.
TNA does not have that name recognition and until they do, it would be much like your local indy fed trying to get their people into an event.
TNA has had some people on other Spike programming, namely UFC. I don't know what the other shows in the Spike lineup are, but the probably don't all have crossover demographics. Neither does Spike make their own programming. It would take some of their influence to get TNA wrestlers on another show.
Posted By: Guest#3446 (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 04:37 PM
hogan and eric are working together with WWE to destroy TNA. shhh.
Posted By: Guest#2300 (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 08:46 PM
"While some have wondered if Wrestlicious will continue, the company has starting taping new vignettes in Tampa, FL. Meanwhile, the first nine episodes continue in reruns in their various outlets, so the company has airtime when they are ready to use it. There is still no word, though, on when the company will also tape matches."
They taped matches at the end of May in Minneapolis.
Posted By: Mark (Guest) on July 02, 2010 at 01:11 AM
"To sum it all up, here is the tagline of the WWE's corporate website: Official site of the parent company of the WWE brand."
But that sentence is gramatically correct because it says "WWE brand", not just "WWE"; i.e. the "the" is in relation to the word "brand", not the words "World Wrestling Entertainment". It would be wrong *not* to have a "the" in that sentence.
Posted By: Grammar Pedant (Guest) on July 02, 2010 at 08:38 AM
Also unbreakable 2005 being in there is no real indicator as it is the DVD of the best TNA match so far.
Posted By: Hyde_Hill (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 09:00 AM
It has also been available for about 5 years, the first 2 or 3 of which were in a much better economy.
As the "Long Tail" suggests, the majority of sales would be in the beginning, when it first became available. Sales normally taper off significantly after the first few months. The fact that it ranks so high now, even at a discount, should mean that the items below it are doing rather poorly. I doubt the items above it are doing so well either.
Posted By: Guest#2413 (Guest) on July 01, 2010 at 01:59 PM
Yeah maybe I was a bit too sweeping in that statement. Just meant that it means less as it is now on sale. Contains their best match ever and TNA has possibly seen a change in fanbase to one that will buy more and now discovers this gem.
Wrote that part just to make clear that it is not like a random DVD from a random year suddenly popped in the list.
Posted By: Hyde_Hill (Guest) on July 02, 2010 at 09:17 PM
"They got a video game-it bombed and the maker is nearly bankrupt. They got a TV deal-have not improved ratings in years and bombed on Mondays."
The game did not bomb at all. Well, critically perhaps, but I recall the sales were quite solid, and it was actually one of the few positives for the struggling developer
Posted By: Donners (Guest) on July 03, 2010 at 08:11 AM
EVERYBODY knows what TNA is and NOBODY associates it with wrestling, well maybe jello wrestling.
It's a seriously stupid name. They might as well be called Pizza, that also something EVERYONE knows but doesn't associate with wrestling.
Posted By: Its me its me its AARP (Guest) on July 03, 2010 at 09:39 AM
The fucking name doesnt matter it actually makes them stand out abit.And at this point-unless they change the name to iMPACT! its gonna hurt them.
They just need to emphazise the names stands for Total Non Stop Action..
And I agree with rich 100 percent.WWE is Coca Cola everybody else is automatically second bananna even when they are in first place.
Until someone puts them out of business are at least of TV perhaps the general public will always see the WWE=Wrestling and vice versa.
Every other company in this business should honestly run for cover and stay away from their warparth and build their own audience.
Posted By: MacDollarz. (Guest) on July 03, 2010 at 05:06 PM
No one knew who WCW was before Hogan,they were that other company/the tbs show/the ric flair one.
lol.No one knew about WCW at all,they knew about flair,sting and the hrsmen ..thats about it.
Hogan put them on the mainstream map and hall and nash made them HUGE.
WCW didnt do much right.Tna does some things right but they dont have the money WCW did to go sign the world,book huge venues even if they papered half the crowd,get tv shows on command.
TNA is similar position to WCW in 93 imo(even if they have Hogan now).They have the stars,their booking is just retatrded.
Posted By: MacDollarz. (Guest) on July 03, 2010 at 05:12 PM
No one knew who WCW was before Hogan,they were that other company/the tbs show/the ric flair one.
lol.No one knew about WCW at all,they knew about flair,sting and the hrsmen ..thats about it.
Hogan put them on the mainstream map and hall and nash made them HUGE.
WCW didnt do much right.Tna does some things right but they dont have the money WCW did to go sign the world,book huge venues even if they papered half the crowd,get tv shows on command.
TNA is similar position to WCW in 93 imo(even if they have Hogan now).They have the stars,their booking is just retatrded.
Posted By: MacDollarz. (Guest) on July 03, 2010 at 05:12 PM
Back in the '80s, NWA was big and those you name were a large part of that. WCW was formed from the biggest NWA promotion at the time, so I'm guessing a fair part of the wrestling public knew who they were.
When Hogan went to WCW, wrestling was at a low point. It is arguable whether he raised their ratings much, since many older former WWF stars also went. Because combined WWF and WCW ratings were so low, it isn't as if Hogan raised the popularity of wrestling much. So instead of improving the market for wrestling, you had two companies fighting over the same smaller market.
What TNA doesn't have that WCW did is the backing of a top cable network. Spike is down there at about 20. USA and TNT are and were top 5. So even promoting on Spike doesn't have the impact of WCW running commercials on TNT. Commercials need to reach the largest number of potential customers.
Having a larger checkbook isn't needed. The talent base of TNA is good enough. Besides, if Panda feels like it, TNA can have more cash on hand to spend than WCW ever had.
What doesn't exist are the accumulating stars and storylines that make wrestling interesting to the mainstream public. There is no budding Austin (it isn't Orton, no matter what the IWC thinks), Hall/Nash (but who could have predicted they would have had the impact they did), or attention grabbing story lines. I do believe that a combination of WWE settling for keeping their audience instead of growing it combined with a lack of over the top charisma holds back the industry.
TNA isn't anywhere near where WCW was in 93. WCW had the old popular stars getting the same ratings as WWF with new stars that were getting popularity. TNA isn't two steps away from taking off as WCW was. WCW was already neck and neck with WWF when nWo happened.
Hogan hasn't been the draw his supporters say. He popped ratings once and that was it.
Posted By: Guest#3037 (Guest) on July 03, 2010 at 07:42 PM
One of the main reasons that both of the Big US promotion's suck. TNA means Tit's and Ass, WWE is a misspelling wee.
Wrestling would be great if both companies would fuck off and die.
Posted By: Vince McArsehole (Guest) on July 04, 2010 at 10:28 AM
Every time a holiday rolls around, like the 4th of July, Nielsen ratings for shows like "Raw" end up being released two days after instead of one.
Yet the Nielsens seem to have no problem releasing ratings the day after for other primetime shows, holiday or not.
Despite cable being almost on a par with the "original 3+1" networks [ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox], are the Nielsens still treating cable differently in terms of when primetime ratings get released?
Posted By: Guest#8286 (Guest) on July 07, 2010 at 08:19 AM
Copyright (c) 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.
