Posted by TNA Wrestling News Staff on Mar 25, 2013
The Early TNA Lockdown Pay-Per-View Buyrate

The Early TNA Lockdown Pay-Per-View Buyrate

This month’s TNA LockDown pay-per-view drew approximately 17,000 pay-per-view buys. This is around the same as last year’s show – which isn’t a great sign, considering TNA’s new quarterly PPV format and the show featuring the big payoff of Bully Ray joining Aces & Eights.


Post a Comment

23 Responses to “The Early TNA Lockdown Pay-Per-View Buyrate”

  1. Cam says:

    Now, before marks start talking about this website being “TNA haters” and how would they know that. Buy rates aren’t hard to get, the cable company Verizon, Time Warner etc. Indemand service can give away those kind of stats, so they aren’t as secret as TNA would like to say and if they weren’t this low…..why would the company keep them private?

    • tnadude says:

      The website doesn't hate TNA. They just realize we click more on negative articles than positive ones. It's their business, hence the reason they take unnecessary shots at Hogan.

      That said – the buy rate was likely due to the pathetic build-up. It was too obvious that Bully was turning heel. Add to the fact that there was no "guarantee" anything cool would happen (what if the Bully build-up was just a swerve?), and people declined to purchase it altogether.

      So I'm not the least bit surprised the buy was awful. Shame on TNA for lousy promotion. Shame on them.

  2. TwIsTeD_EnEmY says:

    Thats not good…
    I really want TNA to focus on long term storylines/ feuds, but if the new system doesn't work, then we will be seeing 12 ppv's a year once again..

    • jbcissom says:

      The 4 PPVs is a money saving effort, not necessarily an effort to put more emphasis on those 4 PPVs… at least that is not the main intention. It's just a nice product of the direction taken by TNA.

      • TwIsTeD_EnEmY says:

        Actually, from the reports from this website, it was claimed that it was to garner more interest in the TNA product

        • Philly_Cheese says:

          Well it was more to save money, as far as production costs and wrestler costs, it's more expensive. Also with them being on the road, they have the ability to make money from shows unlike when they were in the impact zone (which was free). Before leaving the impact zone PPVs was how the company made most of their money, now it's from both ticket sales and PPV buys. Also tickets are significantly more expensive than the PPV buys, and within one month they could probably accumulate more individual ticket sales than PPV buys.

  3. jbcissom says:

    Not a good sign????

    I just read a report yesterday that WWE is basically phasing PPVs out with their new network, because their PPV buyrates aren't meeting projections (other than their big 4 PPVs, the remaining all had decreases in buys compared to years past).

    If this is indeed the case, status quo is a good thing.

    • Bigmike885 says:

      you cant compare the two..even the lowest WWE ppv's are still getting 100-150k buys…less then in the past, but still MUCH higher then TNA…also..they're plan for only charging for 4 ppvs a year is briliant. Ive read that they're charged 12.99-14.99 per month for the network…they're expecting double or tripple the buys monthly for the network then they do for PPVS (i dont think its going to happen, but if it does thats a boatload of money). Also, Lockdown is one of TNAs "big" four…and it didnt get them anything new..that means eitehr they're not getting ANY new veiwers or not interesting them enough to buy the PPV…which is NOT A GOOD SIGN…

      • jbcissom says:

        You're missing the point dude. Everyone, across the board: boxing, mma, and wrestling; just about every single one of their ppv numbers is down as a total. The only reason that the bottom line has not been affected in a negative manner is because the price has gone up.

        So if there is a trend of decline, status quo is actually considered a good thing.

        • Bigmike885 says:

          no..its a bad sign,b ecause they need to be growing..no sure..they're not shrinking, but it pretty much says the same people who bought it last year bought it this year..this company needs growth..not stangnant..

          • jbcissom says:

            I'm not disagreeing with in the sense that TNA needs to grow, but you've to consider the parameters and environment in which said growth is attempting to occur. If a company that is well over 50 years old, has been established for almost 20+ years with national television programming is on the decline; a sport that has existed for 100+ years and thrived off of ppvs for 20+; and finally a sport than has instantly replaced the previous two as the top ppv revenue earner for the last 5-10 years… when those three companies/sports are not growing (some on the decline) status quo is considered a good thing.

            Also, TNA has never been a decent ppv earner. Their income has mainly been tv revenue from Spike and investors.

  4. DJBIGCG says:

    I think that a reason tna and wwe aren't getting higher ratings and more ppv buys is because people watch on streams and dvrs unlike back in the 90s and early 2000s

  5. tsoutheast says:

    Until TNA does 50k a PPV. They will never be called a success in my book.

  6. Treck says:

    Indeed so. Streams. Maybe if TNA lowered pay per view prices that would be cool. But as for wrestling as a whole its not as popular as it was. Wwe lies and mentions how big they are but its not the case. The number two company in popularity TNA suffers from this as well. But they know Rome was not built in a day. It will be years for TNA to get away with having bad product years like the wwe and still get decent numbers. If only these jerks who stopped watching TNA because of Hogan realize what they are doing to the rest of the talent who bust their butts.

  7. powerbomb says:

    people are streaming the ppvs

  8. Treck says:

    Maybe people will buy it on pay per view rather than streaming if cheaper. They can have a better picture watching it on pay per view.

  9. The Truth says:

    OT LMFAO RIP X-pac asshole! Hahaha hear about he ripped his rink doing a bronco buster! In a match for Jerry Lynn farewell. I guess it was a bromance match!

  10. DirkB says:

    The build to Lockdown was awful, half the card wasn't even set a week before the PPV.
    There was only 3 matches that actually belonged at Lockdown too, Robbie E vs Robbie T should have been in a cage, TNA vs A&8s and Angle vs Brisco also were worthy of being in a cage. The rest was throwaway, TNA need to make the PPVs matter, just having a big turn in a storyline isn't enough, 90% of the matches should matter.

    I'm watching bits of WWE right now, mainly for The Shield, and they're quietly building all their matches, they all matter, it's not just a couple of big names.

  11. dericklovesTNA says:

    Put ALL of the matches in a SIX sided cage and see the interest go back up. Bully Ray is not a headliner and the move to Aces & 8's was obvious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


More TNA Wrestling Headlines