This is my point - WWE pulled 3.5m viewers while TNA consistently pulls 1.4-1.8m. RAW used to have triple the audience and now they struggle to have double. This isn't a decline in WWE or stagnation from TNA. It is the change in TV audiences. TNA has maintained their ratings since about 2008 while WWE has fallen off a cliff, 5.5m viewers per episode down to 3.5m. Network TV shows get renewed at 2.0 or above while in 2008 anything less than 3.0 was considered a joke. That is a 33% decline.
That 33% is pretty accurate for WWEs' decline since 2008 while with TNAs' stagnation it could be argued TNA has instead grown 33%. That is how I look at it, it makes more sense as 2008 to 2012 is like comparing an Apple to a Lobster, you can't do it.
So - Hogan, Hardy and good booking have led to a rise of 33%. That seems about right.
Currently marking out for:
WWE- Brock Lesnar, Dolph Ziggler, Daniel Bryan, Chris Jericho, CM Punk.
Austin Aries, AJ Styles, Bully Ray, Bobby Roode, Jeff Hardy, James Storm, Kurt Angle.
You compared Raw's current rating with their best ever rating. Impact's best viewership was 3 million for the opening hour of the January 4, 2010 show, so that makes their current viewership less than ½ of their best viewership.
Even if we're not comparing it to their best viewership, TNA used to do 1.6-1.8 million in 2011, and now they're doing 1.1-1.4 million, so it's a big drop. TNA's ratings are not growing.
Last edited by TNAmarkFromIndia : 10-03-2012 at 08:17 PM.
Do TNA have bad ratings in the US because wrestling isnt the same as it was 10-15 years ago or??
The rating systems isn't the same as it was 15 years ago either, popularity in wrestling is way down it's a know fact wrestling shows aren't pulling in the live crowds as much as they did in the 90's. Ratings are also bad but you cant really compare them that much to the ratings in the 90's since now people watch the show online, watch it on dvr or downloaded the show, theres more ways to get the weekly shows now then in the 90's, In 90's you pretty much had to watch it live on tv or you wouldn't see it.
If things like watching shows online and dvrs where around in the 90's the ratings wouldn't have been as high as they where, They still would have been a lot higher then now but i really don't thing they would have pulled in the monster ratings they used to pull in back then.
I think pro wrestling is definitely in a down slope. So naturally, the second largest company is going to fall behind WWE. Its comparing apples and oranges.
I think TNA may need to utilize a couple big names. Look at January 2010. They drew 3 million. Why? because some of the old faces were coming back. I'm not saying hire Nasty Boys or X Pac... but there is a market for a guy like Kevin Nash, Scott Steiner and Matt Hardy.
Statistically, they are growing and what wrestling fans don't seem to understand is what TNA is drawing is considered good ratings. What WWE draws are elite ratings that rank up there with the NBA, NHL, MLB programming.
1.8 million viewers per week is better than 45% of Cable TV shows. 90% of Spike TV's shows for example draw a maximum of 900,000 viewers. MMA Uncensored draws 400,000 viewers, their highest peak was near 700,000 when Batista appeared. Yet, Spike was thrilled with those numbers.
If you are not FOX, ABC, USA, MTV, TNT or any of the elite channels on television, your product will not sustain 3-4 million viewers.
The issue that people should examine with TNA is why do they peak with viewership at 2.0 million or so but dip all the way down to 1.4 million. Why are these casual fans not buying into the product while the company continues to draw 1.4 million faithful viewers. What are the casuals seeing that the hardcore faithfuls do not?