Why do you,Evil Peter and co.insist on passing off your personal opinion as "Did You Know" Facts?Get a clue.
Year 2012.First quarter.
Merchandise,other sales(licensed) accounted for 29%
of WWE's revenue.YOUTUBE and other digital media
accounted for a mere 6% .Yes, ONLY 6%
.TV and PPV events however hog 61%
of their total revenue.What does it infer?
PPV/TV Ads,Sponsors,Investors are majorly responsible for keeping the WWE brand afloat and NOT the IWC hipsters who watch Punk,Bryan's videos on Youtube - each day,every hour
. WWE is heavily dependent on TV,PPV but you just stated the contrary.
Bork Laser main evented SummerSlam. Result = Best Summerslam buy since 2008
The Great One main evented Wrestlemania 28 . Result = Creates History.
Despite the availability of secondary means such as live streams,Youtube for viewing TV,PPVs events,people are willing to spend money to watch Bork,Guan Sena,HHH,Big Shoe,The Rock Live on PPV .Ratings increase when the said stars make their presence on TV.
On the other hand people would rather see guys like Doll Jiggler,Punk,Bryan on Youtube than on TV.That's probably
why people switch off their TV or change channels when their segments are shown.
Youtube = 6% revenue .
Guys like Punk,Jiggler,Bryan compete for the 61% revenue pie every week .Sadly the net total revenue
is dwindling each year.No profit .Low rating implies less revenue from Ads,sponsers .WCW eventually shut down its business 'cause ultimately they couldnt sustain themselves.
Again ,from the bigger
picture i.e from a business(revenue) standpoint, TV rating means everything for WWE (and wrestlers), contrary to what you've stated .
High ratings = More people are watching = Entertainment = Good revenue
Phil and his sloppy whinny ass = Low ratings
If i could explain in PG terms this is how it goes.
RAW these days is like a plain Plumcake(for good reasons).Cena/Show represent the choco toppings over it - main attraction for viewers .Punk represents other goodies in plumcakes.Every Monday Night Raw people check-in searching for chocolates but alas they dont find it hence many people go away.Few people settle for goodies like punk and thus he gains comparatively higher ratings than rest of the roster.The moot point here is that each week the consumption of WWE's cake is getting less and punk is unable to convert himself into chocolate to attract many viewers .To make matters worse people are getting fed-up with just goodies and the absence of chocolate toppings in plumcake
What you're evidently failing to realize is that even when Punk wasn't in the spotlight and was taking a back seat to Cena, the ratings still weren't that great. Sorry, but considering I grew up watching in an era of 5s and 6s for ratings, a 3.1 with Cena on the show is NOT a good rating. Its just the 'WWE universe' accepting the Fed's bullshit as usual.
And speaking of the golden boy, let's assume for one second that Punk isn't the center of attention or the champion. Let's say Cena was both. What exactly do you think we're going to get? Punk isn't the champ and we're suddenly going to enter a new golden age? No, we'd be getting exactly the same bullshit we got with every other Cena title run. Crummy comedy and lame feuds. Who doesn't want to see Cena vs Big Show for the 50th time? He won't feud with the two other mega faces Orton and Sheamus. Oh maybe he can fight Miz again. No wait, R-Truth, there's a real money feud. Actually, Tensai is free these days, how about a 2-3 month extravaganza with them? ADR isn't challenging for the WHC anymore, let's try to recreate the magic from last fall. Maybe they can do like Vengeance last October (which Punk did NOT main event) and do the lowest PPV buyrate since December to Dismember in 2006.
Wrestling just isn't a hot product anymore. Its not because of Punk, even without him we'd still be getting the same type of shit, just a different color. The core of what the problem is is the focus on commercials and advertisement (which has shot up about 200% in the past few years), the focus on social media (I seriously don't care what Larry King thinks of Raw) and the worst booking and storylines in wrestling history. THAT is why people aren't tuning in. They aren't avoiding the product because "oh this Punk guy looks homeless, I don't like him", they're tuning out because "oh wow, Lesnar lost his first match to Cena and he looks like a loser...". Or "why is Cena pouring BBQ sauce on Michael Cole, who is almost nude?" Or "why does this AJ chick have 30 minutes of air time and mean more than the WWE title?" Or "holy Christ, this show is dragging, why is there so much filler with meaningless matches and segments like Sheamus and Big Show debating?" Or "why is Natalya farting all the time now?" Its stupid, illogical, pointless shit like this that makes the former casual fan say "wow, wrestling is REALLY uncool. Forget that, I'm gonna go watch UFC." This is why I scoffed when the Did You Know fact came up and said that Raw did better than Ultimate Fighter last week, basically saying "see, we're better than the UFC!" Meantime, UFC is better than the WWE in almost every single way and consistently crushes them in PPV buys monthly. Just typical Vince bullshit, getting his shots in, while his competition continues to ignore him and take his fans, then make money from them.
The Raw ratings do mean something. They act as a general indicator of whether or not the show is popular. The ratings suck now, and it clearly shows that Raw is not popular. THE SHOW. Not CM Punk. The entire product. I don't exactly see Santino Marella and Brodus Clay blazing the trail for ratings, or Cena and Sheamus picking up Punk's alleged slack. EVERYONE is doing poorly.
And my God, you can't even get your facts straight.
[quote]On the other hand people would rather see guys like Doll Jiggler,Punk,Bryan on Youtube than on TV.That's probably
why people switch off their TV or change channels when their segments are shown.[quote]
So why is it that Punk vs Foley last week gained almost a million viewers, if people are always switching off during their segments?
At the same time, on the April 23rd Raw, when Edge returned to tell Cena he had to beat Brock, that segment did one of the lowest quarter hours of the year, a 2.50. 2.50! That is fucking horrific. And who was involved? A WWE Hall of Famer and John Cena, the guy you said will increase ratings because he's a big star making his presence on TV. Well you're clearly wrong about that. At the same time, the CM Punk sobriety test that took place that same night gained 270,000 viewers and did a 3.63 quarter hour, which Meltzer was quoted as saying was one of the best ratings in a while at the time.
Here's the article
, take a gander.
Before the current era of the 2s, only a couple of Raws this year had dipped below 3.0. One was Memorial Day, and its to be expected that there would be a loss since its a holiday. The second was the week after Memorial Day, which did a 2.92, which we ALL thought was atrocious at the time. The main event? Cena vs Cole and the BBQ sauce. Its amazing you're trying to make the argument that Cena is a super draw today because he was one several years ago when the WWE was a lot more popular than it is now.
You're all about numbers and how important the ratings are, want to see the numbers for the Raws in March when Rock was on every week?
What's your defense of this? You have the ratings mega draw, the Rock, going against your alleged gigantic draw in Cena, and this is the best they can turn out? A 3.05 for the Wrestlemania 28 go home show? Vince's return in June outdrew some of these shows.
Now you're gonna say "oh well they drew in the past." The past doesn't matter, its the now. The Rock is a terrific draw but not even his presence can boost the TV ratings up enough. Wrestling is just not popular in 2012, and you trying to draw up false facts and ludicrous presumptions to spin Punk into this evil ratings drain when its clearly incorrect makes me think you're just another blind Punk hater.