Wrestling Forum banner

Do Wrestlers Draw, Or Does the WWE Brand Draw?

  • Wrestlers Draw

    Votes: 251 39.5%
  • WWE Brand draws

    Votes: 384 60.5%
Status
Not open for further replies.

**The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

987K views 9K replies 852 participants last post by  Starbuck 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
For a list of the weekly rating dating back to January, please click here:

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/

RATINGS BREAKDOWN FOR THIS WEEKS RAW 4/9

Raw on 4/9 did a 3.10 rating and 4.29 million viewers. The show was third for the night on cable. The show did a 2.4 in Males 12-17, 2.7 in Males 18-49, 1.0 in Girls 12-17 and 1.1 in Women 18-49 with a 69.3% male skew. It was down 21% from the 5.46 million viewers of the week after Mania show last year, and last year there was no bombshell along the lines of the Brock Lesnar return on the night after Mania show.

In the segment-by-segment, Brodus Clay & Santino Marella vs. Dolph Ziggler & Jack Swagger lost 99,000 viewers.

Backstage with Laurinaitis with Miz an Cena, Marella looking for the Three Stooges and R-Truth vs. Cody Rhodes gained 255,000 viewers.

Lord Tensai vs. Yoshi Tatsu lost 415,000 viewers.

The mic work between C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho in the top of the hour segment gained 379,000 viewers to a 3.19.

Punk vs. Henry and the post-match with Jericho pouring beer all over Punk, as well as the quick Del Rio vs. Ryder match lost 169,000 viewers.

The Three Stooges in-ring segment lost 240,000 viewers and was the low point of the show at 2.90.

The Brock Lesnar interview gained 423,000 viewers.

And the Cena vs. Otunga match with Lesnar run-in gained 301,000 viewers, which is a very weak overrun number, finishing at 3.42.
 
#1,360 ·
yeah, when he said are clueless about ratings and that there only there to please sponsers? which is true.

WWE is not just a T.V show. There are so many things like buyrates, Merchandise sales, DVD and media, ticket sales etc. Even Vince has stated that ratings arent a big deal to begin with, and he said that in fucking 1997 when WWE was not a puplic traded company.
 
#1,368 · (Edited)
Exactly this, nobody is saying the ratings don't matter at all (ok maybe some people have said that but any half-way intelligent person wouldn't say ratings don't matter at all)

And Punk didn't say ratings don't matter at all he said people put WAY to much emphasis on them.Just like this forum; the importance some people in this thread put on them is borderline ridiculous.

Plus that USA netowrk prime time average has also probably dropped as well over the last year b/c television as a whole is a declining media with the internet becoming more and more prevalent year after year. But sorry I really don't want to take away from the EPIC AWFULNESS this thread creates so please continue.

Now I don't want my post misunderstood this is directed more at the people who are trying to claim the WWE is going out of business b/c of the ratings. IF you want to discuss ratings from last year vs ratings from this year (or whatever somparison) I don't ahve an issue with that at all, thats what this thread is for.
 
#1,370 ·
Its really about what the USA Network is paying the WWE for each Raw show, and compare that to what kind of ad revenue the show brings into the USA Network.
For the network its always "Is the show worth the price they are paying?".

Only USA Network knows that.

I dont think they would ever dump WWE Raw altogether but I could see them paying less for each show.
 
#1,371 ·
Comparing Raw ratings to the network average is kinda pointless, nobody is saying USA is gonna drop them but it is fair and meaningful to compare them to previous Raw ratings. For some people anyway, if ratings aren't important to you then nobody is forced to discuss them. It's pretty easy to avoid now seeing as there is one sticky thread for it
 
#1,376 · (Edited)
Without the TV deal, you can't promote anything, there would be no merchandise, no PPVs and no house show because nobody can see them. The business is based on the TV shows. USA are a big reason that is still with the head above water, they will never do close on a network like Spike or something. That's proven from the 2000 move and the jump in 2006.

To say that it's only sponsors is just plain wrong, and he obviously clueless and doesn't understand how this works in the company. WWE are booking the show from week to week based on ratings, everything they're doing in the show from the concept to the timeslots. Vince was in a panic mode for a month in October and gave the title to Cena because Del Rio did 2.7.

Ratings are everything, that's a fact. LOL@Meltzer out of touch, butthurt because he tells you the truth?
 
#1,383 ·
Without the TV deal, you can't promote anything, there would be no merchandise, no PPVs and no house show because nobody can see them. The business is based on the TV shows. USA are a big reason that is still with the head above water, they will never do close on a network like Spike or something. That's proven from the 2000 move and the jump in 2006.

To say that it's only sponsors is just plain wrong, and he obviously clueless and doesn't understand how this works in the company. WWE are booking the show from week to week based on ratings, everything they're doing in the show from the concept to the timeslots. Vince was in a panic mode for a month in October and gave the title to Cena because Del Rio did 2.7.

Ratings are everything, that's a fact. LOL@Meltzer out of touch, butthurt because he tells you the truth?
Yes, and Raw, like you ignored, consistently gets good ratings for a weekly broadcast for todays state of the T.V industry. Why do you think the USA network wants so many three hour Raws? And the almighty Melzter says Vince took the belt of Del Rio becuase of ratings? even though Del Rio was involved in the most watched segment of the night? Melzter knows a little more then you and I do, but you wont accept that as you piss away your money subscribing to his site.

whatever just saying shit that interfered with viewership has been around way before the internet.
You cant just whatever that huge handicap on the T.V industry. Nothing has come close to interfering with viewership as the internet has.
 
#1,378 ·
Ratings and television are 1 piece of the puzzle. They aren't the be all end all but they sure as fuck do matter. Everything stems from the actual television show Raw because without it they can't promote the stars to sell the tickets to the live shows, the feuds to sell the PPV's and the characters to sell the merchandise. Anybody claiming otherwise is just being stupid. The fact is, while the current system being used may not be truly reflective of authentic viewing patterns, it's still the system being used where billions of dollars are changing hands every day. It is what it is and it's the system every show is measured by. Until the system changes, that's just the way it is. Besides, were things actually going well you can bet your ass everybody would be marking and giving so and so all the credit. WWE themselves would be putting it in their Did You Know's every week too. But they aren't so people get critical and start placing blame. That's where all the trolling begins and the retarded conversations start. But to say they don't matter is flat out wrong.
 
#1,385 · (Edited)
^ And then a hole is thrown in your whole argument about ratings numbers being so horrible for RAW with that story b/c it says they are not doing a 2nd season of TE b/c of the ratings and plan to replace it with a 3rd hour of live WWE programming, which at best is only going to get ratings on par with Raw's if not lower than the 9 and 10 hrs or Raw. Why would USA want to put a 3rd hour of WWE programming on Monday nights if they were unhappy with Raw's current ratings? Nevermind I will just go ask Meltzer I usually find it better to just get the answer straight from the horses mouth.
 
#1,389 ·
The DVR ratings are irrelevant anyway. Sponsors and advertisers dont care about DVR ratings because people watching on DVRs usually skip advertisements or fast forward through them.

TV ratings presented are all that matters.
When it comes to WWE, its not all that matters, and if it was WWE would be just fine as Raw is doing a solid job in the ratings department. Anyway I'm done explaining.
 
#1,390 ·
A typical Meltzer, the hh-ratings are meaningless today.
USA looks at the viewership (total and demos) and not at the household numbers.
-----
And after a season, they look at the Live+7 and C3 numbers from the shows and make then a decision if the show will get another season or will cancelled.
 
#1,394 ·
I think the internet streaming thing is so overblown in respect to U.S. tv ratings. It impacts PPVs certainly, but I doubt it impacts tv ratings much at all. There are 100 million homes in the US that get the USA network. This is more than ever before. Why would these people be streaming it if they got it on tv?

I'd bet that most people that stream Raw are outside of the U.S. because Raw is either on pay tv (U.K.), or because Raw may not be available in the country they live in. Ratings don't include non-U.S. residents.

So, basically, most people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. They have no impact on the ratings because if they didnt stream it, they still couldn't watch it.
 
#1,396 ·
Rock Cena will not draw in big numbers on it's own. Survivor Series should tell you this feud has lost it's spark. WWE needs to get this Shaq storyline rolling, because he's the guy that will actually bring in the spark.

WWE has to pull out all of the stops too, because interest in the product is fading at an alarming level. It's not a CM Punk or a Daniel Bryan or a kid friendly John Cena thing the industry is just be taking out by MMA and increased competition on a cable level.

If I was the WWE I'd try to be as creative as possible with the Rock and Shaq. Don't put at your eggs into the Wrestlemania basket.

Rock v Miz is a match that can easily be made in the run up to Mania.
 
#1,408 ·
I was refering to people that stream raw on the internet because they couldn't watch it otherwise. The people that do that have NO impact.

I also said "So, basically, most people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise". I never said that everyone that streams raw does so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. I realize that some do so because they might prefer it. I guess you are one of those that would rather stream it.
 
#1,409 ·
Well i watch it on DVR so I would technically be counted in the ratings # if I had a neilsen box, but no need to continue this argument b/c I am the one you misunderstood ytour OP on the subject and we are basically arguing semantics on the same point.
 
#1,411 ·
I just find it funny that everyone acts like they know exactly how the WWE works inside and out.

And there's rarely ever a suggestion on how to improve it. Shit on it all you want, but at least try to come up with something. The ratings aren't the only thing that fucking matter.

Anyone here got a degree in business management or something? Because I'm pretty sure the people there have a good idea of what they're doing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top