PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE



By Dave Scherer on 2013-10-29 09:59:00

You can send us questions for the Q&A by clicking here.

My question is,with the decline that TNA is facing with recent budget cuts and looking like it may go under, could you see WWF....,yeah I said WWF, possibly buying TNA and using the “Valuable” wrestlers on the roster in another invasion angle?

Well obviously The World Wildlife Fund has no use for TNA footage. If you meant WWE, I could see them buying the footage but an invasion angle? I don't see it. They don't see TNA as being their equal. I think having a group of TNA guys come in could be interesting but historically all WWE has ever shown us when they do those angles is that they are done to kill the new group and make WWE look stronger.

What did you think of the Magnus interview????? Do you think he would prefer that people stopped watching all together instead of complaining? I mean I turned off of TNA 2-3 years ago but at least the others care enough to sit through it!!!

I think he was just defending his company. If he worked for you, that is what you would want him to say.

I saw the post about Stephanie getting here rear beat. I would do a woman legend contract & have Amy (Lita) or Lisa (Victoria) do it for 2 reasons. They know what their doing and no one is gonna believe that these girls in the WWE are capable of beating down Stephanie. It would be a great buy rate to do it @ Survivor Series, Royal Rumble, or Wrestelmania even. What do you think?

I don't know that a Stephanie match would be a PPV draw. I would do it on Raw and get a rating. It's kind of sad that you look at the roster of Divas and don't see anyone credible enough to wrestle Steph. It says a lot about how they have booked the division. Lita or Trish would be great people to have do the match but I don't see Steph wrestling.

With the ups and downs of the viewership of RAW, how low do you think it will have to go before the higher ups (Vince) take notice and make changes?

I think they would have to consistently fall under three million viewers a week before there would be any serious repercussions.

How do RAW ratings now in 2013 stack up against Nitro's dying years? I've noticed RAW has been doing high 2.0s and if you look at Nitro ratings from 2001, they seemed to be pulling very similar numbers. In 2010 RAW was pulling in mid 3.0s. Since when is pulling in 2.7, 2.8s and 2.9s acceptable for WWE? Maybe I'm not reading the ratings correctly? It seems like as the years go by less and less people are watching RAW and it's a steady constant trend. If the trend continues in a few years WWE will be pulling low/mid 2.0s. Am I off on this?

WWE is doing more viewers than WCW was at the end. They were in the two million range back then. But there were a lot less options back then so a show that does two million viewers today is much better received than one that did one then.

You can send us questions for the Q&A by clicking here.

If you enjoy you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more, right now for THREE DAYS free by clicking here!