In a recent blog, Eric Bischoff had the following to say about WWE's recent movement to develop young stars:
On the heels of the big "youth push" in WWE during the past several weeks, here are some facts from this week in the business:
"Raw's demographic ratings among males 18-34 and 18-49 were the lowest in seven weeks."
"Raw scored a 1.86 rating among males 18-34, which was down from a 2.03 rating last week."
And during this months conference call to investors Vince McMahon admitted that:
"Basically, we had a lousy quarter," and then when on to pin the loss of Shawn Michaels, Batista, Triple H, and Undertaker (all 40 + years old) as the reason for the hit to PPV and live event revenue.
Now one could suggest that McMahon is insane enough to be intentionally misleading Wall Street with excuses that are not substantiated by financials that wouldn't hold up under either SEC or Sarbanes Oxley Act 404 scrutiny, or maybe that he has no idea what he's talking about despite the massive success of his business model.
Or one could recognize the direct connect between what TV ratings, PPV buy rates, and ticket sales have proven time and time again, as well as what legitimate focus groups conducted by credible media companies in the business of such have clearly identified: the TV audience (including 18-34 males) rate with ESTABLISHED (and yes older) stars!
Admittedly, these facts are kind of dry compared to the subjective opinion of those with their own agenda or the inflamed rhetoric that appeals to those perpetually pre-pubescent, parasitic internet "experts" who neither have any legitimate experience or success as executives in the television or wrestling industry, and the rants of the terminally irrelevant trying desperately to hold on to their last 200 fans.
But they are facts non-the-less.
In my opinion Vince Russo, Dixie Carter and the team at TNA have done a great job of utilizing veteran stars to help elevate some of the young emerging talent in TNA and at the same time gaining awareness and credibility within the media industry.
That's just my opinion. And my opinion is backed up by facts.
Well Mr. Bischoff, sticking to the facts as you call them:
1) When you arrived at TNA and took it to Monday nights you failed in an epic manner despite your belief that TNA could challenge Raw
2) When you conceded defeat and moved back to Thursday nights you got nowhere near the ratings you used to get averaging around 0.8-0.9. Only recently, by bringing back a bunch of pensioners have you been able to get your ratings more or less to where they were before you arrived.
3) Just taking a quote from your blog
'In my opinion Vince Russo, Dixie Carter and the team at TNA have done a great job of utilizing veteran stars to help elevate some of the young emerging talent in TNA'
Does that include or not include having Kurt Angle beat all your young talent in the top ten making them look exceptionally weak? Not to mention making AJ Styles a relative jobber compared to his status in the company before you arrived. Oh yeah, and suspending Samoa Joe who was one of the most popular talents in your company for merely telling the truth about the abysmal production of your shows.
4) WWE Raw still gets on average 3 times the rating TNA Impact! gets.
5) WWE fits on average 15000 people into an audience for an average show whereas the 'Impact! Zone' manages 1350.
The Honky Tonk Man had the following response to Bischoff's blog:
Eric Bischoff calls the WWE youth movement a flop!? My what a short memory you have Eric. In 2000 you and Vince Russo called anyone over 35 (with the exception of Hogan) a non draw as you killed WCW. Ouch!
My reply is simple, if no one is watching WWE, how in the hell do they draw 75,000 people to Mania and demolish TNA in the ratings each week. WWE must be doing something right!
You bash the internet wrestling community yet post comments directly aimed at them and the sites you obviously visit. Don't be a mark for yourself Eric!
If wrestling fans, reporters or anyone else want to talk TNA, WWE, ROH or any other wrestling show, it's their right to do so. It's called free speech.