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)

988K 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.
 
#3,482 ·
Just heard the Observer Radio. The Punk vs Bryan match with a full quarter at the top of the hour LOST viewers :lmao. I told you even with the Albert match in the overrun lose that together they're suicidal and here's another proof. The peak of the show was for the awesome Big Show promo.

Dave Meltzer: "To the average fan those two don't mean anything and they don't buy them as top guys", His words.

Spot on from Big Dave as usual about what the masses want to see and who is mid card material. He said that WWE were in a big panic mode from the horrendous rating and the ratings number was as big as the second biggest full time star Randy Orton's suspension for the second time so that should tell you something. Also said that WWE knew about Orton's case for a few days and maybe weeks and he's the biggest draw on the SD brand which is why Cena and HHH are going to work TVs now to keep the business above water until he comes back.
 
#3,504 · (Edited)
Spot on from Big Dave as usual about what the masses want to see and who is mid card material. He said that WWE were in a big panic mode from the horrendous rating and the ratings number was as big as the second biggest full time star Randy Orton's suspension for the second time so that should tell you something. Also said that WWE knew about Orton's case for a few days and maybe weeks and he's the biggest draw on the SD brand which is why Cena and HHH are going to work TVs now to keep the business above water until he comes back.

This clearly needs posting again - for you and anyone else who refuses to believe that Punk has leapfrogged Orton... read it a few times and it might finally start to sink in:
- There was some talk coming out of last night’s Raw Supershow about how the backstage influence of WWE Champion CM Punk is currently at an all-time high. All this stems from the fact that Punk put his foot down last year and basically told Vince McMahon he was either going to be a main event guy or was walking. I’m told Punk is now seen as second behind only John Cena in WWE, surpassing Randy Orton because the company feels he caters more to the 21-35-year-old demographic they desperately need. I’m told the idea behind Punk now is to just let him keep doing what he’s been doing.
Key words: SURPASSING RANDY ORTON
 
#3,483 ·
A CM Punk match losing viewers... nothing new here.

HOWEVER, was his segment with Laurinitis high? Of course some people will just contribute that to Laurinitis, but if that was high and then Punk/Bryan lost viewers but was still one of the highest of the night, it's all good.

Of course, I'll believe everything when I see it (which I guess won't be for another week).
 
#3,484 ·
Unfortunately I think Meltzer might be right about DB/Punk not catching on with the casuals. With the way they hyped it throughout the first hour and gave it the lead-in with Laurinaitis they've got to be pretty damn disappointed with losing viewers in that time-slot. Very bad news.
 
#3,486 ·
Does it really matter that they lost ratings if Obis is right and they still had one of the highest segments of the night?
 
#3,487 · (Edited)
Yup he did say that, Just downloaded from Wrestlezone board and listened to the show. It looks like Del Rio-Santino lost over 700,000 viewers and its the second lowest rated quarter-hour on a non-July 4th RAW since 1997. Punk-Bryan match at 10 PM totally lost viewers. Those two were the real bombs. Brodus-Show gained 400,000 which is a low gain for the overrun.

Metlzer says people are not buying Punk and bryan as Top guys/Main Eventers. They dont mean anything to the casuals.


And Cena,HHH are advertised for more upcoming smackdowns to cover up for Orton but mostly dark matches.
 
#3,488 ·
I don't get why people still put Bryan and Punk in the same category, they're nothing alike. Bryan drew ratings that were rivaling Henry, he was actually the main focus of the show and even now still has a storyline and character development with AJ. Punk has been champion, yes, but he hasn't drawn in a long time nor does he have much focus or character development, he's basically an upper midcarder that happens to hold the title because Cenas not in mood for it right now, which is only beeing accentuated even more by Cena still beeing in the ME at every PPV.
 
#3,489 ·
theres only one thing to do,

time to turn cena heel to freshing it up

i have said time and time again in the past it wont happen,

but ive just got this gut feeling its going to happen on the 1000th episode

then summerslams up next and he takes the title off punk

its the only way they need huge changes for 3 hours or there going to have more and more switching off.



another thing is people that moan about tuning in stop watching through streams and view the product then?
streaming is not supporting the company in the slightest
 
#3,490 ·
another thing is people that moan about tuning in stop watching through streams and view the product then?
streaming is not supporting the company in the slightest
Streams existed when Raw was averaging about a 4.0 for several weeks straight not too long ago. That's not an excuse
 
#3,493 ·
^^^ A-C-P is absolutely right!!

People need to realize that there is no upper card in the WWE. The upper card is Cena and whoever he is feuding with. He wins at the PPV and moves on to next person he's beaten before or he loses b/c of shenanigans and the feud continues. Everyone else, Punk and Bryan included, are basically upper mid-card. Cena >>> WWE title.

Hypothetically, Cena can feud with Hornswoggle and that feud will get the most TV time. WWE has become all about filler and as ACP said: mini-feuds. Unless WWE gives us a reason to care about characters and/or matches, ratings will tumble, slowly but surely.

Personally, I stopped watching WWE when Cena beat Lesnar. I was finally fed up. It was an incredible and amazing match that was ruined (at least for me) when Cena won "miraculously" as he always does.\

The best way to demand change is not by cheering/booing WWE/Cena, but to stop watching WWE programming altogether. When ratings tumble some more, VKM will feel forced to do something compelling. I'll be boycotting WWE until they stop feeding us the same stupid crap. I really WANT to love WWE and the product, but I cannot get myself to do so under the current state of their programming.
 
#3,494 ·
See above.

Only 25, 000 American homes are actually measured on their television habits. If you don't have a Nielsen meter in your home, then what you watch doesn't affect the ratings.
 
#3,497 ·
Except their product wasn't shit when they went 3 hours, and even during the 3-hour run for 2 years the product was still better than WWE's today and their roster was FAR more talented.
 
#3,505 ·
^ I'd agree he surpassed Orton. He did it a long time ago.

But regardless of the level of truthness to it, you're wasting your time telling Rock316AE it.

And this thread as usual has gotten ridiculously hilarious off the heels of a low rating ON MEMORIAL DAY, and now a Punk match losing viewers. Haters gonna hate.
 
#3,511 ·
^People have complained about the rating since ratings were first made public.

I'm sure if ratings were(dont know if they were or not) available during attitude era, you could look on an attitude era archived forum and see people complaining about the rating. Especially since ratings went up and down by like .5 or something each week.

If people DURING attitude era complained so much about the rock, they'd complain about ratings too for sure
 
#3,516 ·
Citizen Kane bombed at the box office. Did that (or does that) have any impact on the quality of the film?

In an ideal world, talent like Shawn Michaels and CM Punk would be huge draws, but that's not always the case. It takes time, money, effort and good storytelling to develop a top draw. Punk has had some time, but there's been very little effort put into his elevation and the storytelling certainly isn't there. It's possible that he'll never reach the masses, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he's more talented and more entertaining than 95% of the current roster.

At the moment Punk is in a very similar position to that of Orton; he's incredibly popular amongst live crowds, he's selling merch like a motherfucker, but he doesn't draw in new viewers on name alone.

Besides; People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.
 
#3,530 ·
Of course he isn't just as he isn't responsible when some nerd buys his shirt.

The overal picture is the problem, not just one guy.

BUT

If people keep turning off in their droves when the champion is on then it shows that they are not as popular as some would love you to believe. If WWE keep that champion for a longtime and it keeps turning people off then that will naturally have some impact on their finances i.e buyrates down for ppv's.
 
#3,535 ·
Dude, investors are not buying, selling, or shorting WWE stock based on who the champion is. I mean you can make the argument that Punk as champ has been bad for business - I wouldn't make that argument, but it can be made - but pulling up WWEs stock price ain't gonna do it. That's not how it works.
 
#3,536 ·
To be honest while I agree with what you say (again have to remember my post was light hearted, notice the smiley?) I think that if say for example The Rock was champion right now it would be different. Shares are all about mommentum and how popular something is likely to be in the future. If WWE had some good things going on right now it would help to get rid of the whole doom and gloom about the company right now, it would make people think there was a bright future ahead. Where as right now I think everyone can agree the future is unknown. If things stay as they are then I think you would have to fear for them.

The champion is sort of the face of the company, they will be on a lot of various products such as the new wwe game. This creates further awareness of the product. But as I mentioned before if say someone like Rock was champion it would create more of a buzz, more people would be interested. More people interested means more potential buyers at ppvs. More buyers at ppvs means WWE makes more money, WWE making more money means investors want a piece of the action, if investors want a piece of the action share prices increase etc etc.

If something is doing well shares increase, if it is doing bad they drop. That is how it is. There will always be a connection with the champion to how the company does financially, after all why do you think they kept giving Cena the belt?
 
#3,539 · (Edited)
fuck! Without cena RAW ratings 2.72? and can't blame Punk unable to draw but blame on poor booking. last 3 weeks also i feel really bored watching RAW and on chat room i'm with they pretty fucking quite.

WWE really losing it and drop the fucking ball lose all the momentum after WM...seriously what you looking forward to or want to watch RAW this Monday? for me simply nothing and there's nothing to talk about out of raw.

there's always reason for bad booking/poor writing...No Cena-Holiday-NBA games..excuses
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top