TNA as competition.That's entirely misleading. Previous TV deals were worth less because WWE had competition, first from the WCW and then from TNA. WWE wasn't seen as must-have content because there were plenty of shows that brought an audience and for cheap without having to deal with the logistics of live TV and of stars getting injured/sick.
Now with television viewership dwindling, WWE is seen as a must-have because it comes with an audience that will always tune in. They can always expect to get a 1.5 rating, maybe a 2.0 on a good day, and with it moving to network TV that will be regular occurrence. The live TV format also now works towards its favor because it forces people to tune in.
There is nothing to suggest WWE's previous audience was just hicks and people who don't buy stuff.
![mjlol :mjlol: :mjlol:](https://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/mjlol.png)
You obviously don’t follow this closely because WWE absolutely underperformed relative to expectations and what non-wrestling programming with their weekly live viewership would have received with both the move back to USA and the first renewal after — well after they bought out their actual competition in WCW.
How little a wrestling viewer used to be worth compared to the worth of a viewer of other programming is straight up fact. You can argue networks/advertisers/sponsors had it all wrong, that they shouldn’t have looked at it that way, but the numbers showed it over and over again to be true. WWE accepted what they needed to do to fix it, even if it was going to take them some time, and they did it. The results were showing up even before the recent TV billions came through, with the deals they were cutting and who was willing to touch them.