Wade is clearly in over his head regarding anything but current WWE. When he was trying to explain why Shinsuke Nakamura was a big singing by WWE he couldn't articulate why. When his guests talk about anything but current WWE he responds with "Yeah...yeah...absolutely...so back to Shane McMahon on 'Raw.'"

 

Wade is good at some things but has to realize his audience wants more than just recaps of what happened Monday night.

Agreed. Does Wade watch much else apart from WWE?

 

I get the impression he/The Torch was big into RoH in the mid-00's but don't see/hear much beyond WWE these days.

Wade has his other columnists cover ROH and NJPW but it's rare. Almost everything on the site, in the newsletter, and in the audio is dissecting Raw every week. He pays much more attention to TNA lately than any other non-WWE product.

I have been a member of the Torch for 10 years (I also subscribe to the Observer). In general, it's a good product (especially since I'm "grandfathered in" at $7.50 a month as opposed to $10 like it is for newer subscribers). I enjoy the Fix with Todd Martin, even though it's way too cute at times for me. I like the Bruce Mitchell audio show. I also credit Keller for all of the consecutive days of the hotline (I think he said it is over 2,000 now). He also talks about things (like Kayfabe compromising segments or even shows) that Meltzer hardly addresses. To that end Keller also has strong opinions....

 

Which leads to the problem. In a lot of ways Keller is the worst part of the site. I am the first to say that it takes all kinds of people to make the world work. Moreover, I really believe in subjectivity in many things in the world, especially entertainment and I have a tendency to harp on things as well but the Shane McMahon stuff got to be unbearable for. He used the exact wording "46 year old executive wrestling in tennis shoes" about 8-10 times in one Mitchell audio show, not to mention using that exact phrase in his other hotlines as well. He also said that Goldberg wasn't a draw (l know he wasn't one long-term, but he did burn hot for a while if I'm not mistaken) and is much harder on him than he deserves.

 

The biggest problem with Keller (from my point of view) is not his obsessions, but it's the fact that I'm not sure there is any major wrestling media figure who watches less wresting than Keller. He does delegate to make sure the shows are covered, but it is hard to take him seriously as a "student of the game" which he calls himself when he only watches Raw consistently, he has a bad memory and he is not a historian.

I've loved the site for the last few weeks since I've joined. I don't care that he doesn't follow international stuff, because it's not like Metlzer covers lucha and his NJPW coverage is the worst.

 

The Shane stuff is too much though, he did say on the update this morning he wouldn't mention his name, because of the complaints.

Is he still complaining about kayfabe breaking for minutes on end on every single show?

Is he still complaining about kayfabe breaking for minutes on end on every single show?

 

Yep. Every single show he finds something to complain about "destroying the internal narrative".

I wonder what Wade would've thought about Deadpool. When the most currently successful movie in the country leans SO heavily on the entire "we know that you're watching a movie, and the characters in the movie will frequently remind you of that fact and make a bunch of jokes about their fictional nonexistence" then maybe people should stop whining so damn much about how breaking kayfabe is gonna drive away the audience.

I think that's a silly point. I agree with Wade on the substance of the argument, but it gets incredibly tedious hearing about it so much.

Wade thinks wrestlers should stay in character in every media interview and only use social media to further storylines. This I completely disagree with. I will, however, agree that wrestlers shouldn't break character during the show itself (i.e., heels being featured in charity segments minutes after doing something dastardly).

Does Wade offer anything anymore besides wild, speculative fantasy booking disguised as analysis? He clearly has zero sources outside of one or two in TNA.

The lack of sources can be a good thing sometimes. Having followed how everyone is covering the TNA "sale" story, his newsletter coverage on the matter seems a lot closer to the truth than others who have broken aspects of the story, but haven't put the pieces of the puzzle together, perhaps because they're being worked something fierce by their sources.

The lack of sources can be a good thing sometimes. Having followed how everyone is covering the TNA "sale" story, his newsletter coverage on the matter seems a lot closer to the truth than others who have broken aspects of the story, but haven't put the pieces of the puzzle together, perhaps because they're being worked something fierce by their sources.

 

What is Wade saying differently from Dave? What IS the truth in this giant clusterfuck of a situation?

One thing Keller has reported is exact monetary figures of the ad-revenue TNA is generating for PopTV:

 

The March 29 TNA Impact generated $18,414 in ad revenue, which was less than half of its “Days of Our Lives” lead-in. Impact also generated less money for a 30-second ad than an acquired movie. TNA Impact First-Run Airing Revenue: $18,414. Avg. unit cost for a 30-second ad: $335.

 

This demonstrates why TNA is in the financial peril they are currently in, as they promised much higher viewership on PopTV than they are currently drawing and obviously budgeted for making much more money from their ad-revenue sharing deal with the station.

 

The main difference is one of tone, as Wade isn't falling for the investor hype like other reporters are as much. He wrote an editorial for the Torch entitled "TNA: What’s the point?" which bluntly spelt out how little value TNA has left as a brand. He doesn't rule out the possibility of a deep pocketed investor for some reason buying the company, but clearly doesn't put much stock that that will actually happen.

 

What is the truth in this giant clusterfuck? Who knows for sure? How I personally read the situation is that the likely end result is that TNA files for bankruptcy, it's just a matter of how long they can hang on for. I think they will keep managing to scrape enough money together to keep taping television until they get cancelled by PopTV, at which point TNA's goose is well and truly cooked.

 

I think there's a lot of pressure internally for Dixie Carter to take a bad deal as they've realised that they've milked the money mark until it's almost dry and there is hope they can sweet talk whomever takes over to throw good money after bad. The only interested party named so far is either a creditor (Aroluxe) or what seems like an asset flipping company linked to Aroluxe (Summit Strategic Investments). I'm suspicious that any talk of other suitors is just bluster to try and leverage a more favourable deal from SSI. Plus, due diligence might scare off anyone who is seriously interested.

One thing Keller has reported is exact monetary figures of the ad-revenue TNA is generating for PopTV:

 

The March 29 TNA Impact generated $18,414 in ad revenue, which was less than half of its “Days of Our Lives” lead-in. Impact also generated less money for a 30-second ad than an acquired movie. TNA Impact First-Run Airing Revenue: $18,414. Avg. unit cost for a 30-second ad: $335.

 

 

And then Pop's response was to promptly drop Days of our Lives a few weeks later!

Keller might lack sources but Dave seems to have as many wrong scoops as right these days... probably more in fact.

So I subbed to the Torch for a month in September first time I had subbed to it. I have heard bits and pieces of Torch Audio over the years and despite many of the criticisms people have with Wade Keller and the Torch in general I don't mind his product. Personally I have always prefered Meltzer and the Observer and just F4WOnline in general. But I do like listening to Keller's audio and generally like his take on things. Plus the Torch archive has a bunch of good Mitchell shows talking about historical topics and I like when Wade and Bruce review WWE DVD's (something I wish Dave and Bryan did more on F4W)

Funny enough I was listening to his recent interview with Al Snow earlier today. Wade has his good and bad points, and they stand out particularly in comparison to Meltzer. I find him much more articulate and consistent in his views, but with a much narrower range of interests than Dave (exclusively US wrestling from 1980s to now, basically). I think he's a far better interviewer, and seems much more prepared and able to steer conversation. Where he can fail is in trying to shoehorn in his own particular talking points though.

His interviews were always his strong suit when I subscribed. I just didn't care for his takes. I don't need to pay someone to tell me that Roman Reigns sucks when I can go literally almost anywhere online and get the same opinion and not agree with it.

Funny enough I was listening to his recent interview with Al Snow earlier today. Wade has his good and bad points, and they stand out particularly in comparison to Meltzer. I find him much more articulate and consistent in his views, but with a much narrower range of interests than Dave (exclusively US wrestling from 1980s to now, basically). I think he's a far better interviewer, and seems much more prepared and able to steer conversation. Where he can fail is in trying to shoehorn in his own particular talking points though.

I have listened to old Torch Talks and his old radio show from the early 90s and yes he is a very good interviewer. I generally don't listen to the Livecast since the callers are just outright bad and have put me off listening to the Livecast for years. With Dave he is a stronger interviewer when its someone he has known for decades like a Bruno or Cornette where it doesn't feel like he is interviewing the guy but just having a conversation with them that just happens to be recorded. The weakness of his interview skills outside of that was pretty evident on the old Observer Live show on eYada and Sports Byline when he hosted.

 

His interviews were always his strong suit when I subscribed. I just didn't care for his takes. I don't need to pay someone to tell me that Roman Reigns sucks when I can go literally almost anywhere online and get the same opinion and not agree with it.

Keller and his takes are probably only for people who only follow the US promotions like WWE,TNA or ROH and only have interest in that stuff. He probably realized that is were the biggest market was and thus why there is so much emphasis on that stuff on the Torch site.

Keller is on podcastone 4 times a week now.

 

I'll listen to his Thursday shows with Mitchell, but can't imagine anything fascinating coming from the Raw and SDL recaps earlier in the week.

Heard him plugging it on Austin's show. I may check it out on Fridays to see who he gets for the first few interviews.

Back when the free Torch site was really good and it had a lot of old content. I saw Wade's post Survivor Series 97 coverage and he was PISSED that Bret punched Vince.

If I did not know better I would swear he was on the WWF pay roll.

I remember Dave saying once that the WON is the New York Times and the Torch is USA Today. That's an interesting way to look at it if nothing else.

The Torch Talks really are great. Wade knew how to ask the right questions to get the most informed answers. I use to do an interview show and it was difficult even with a friendly guest.