**The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here) - Page 911 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums
View Poll Results: Do Wrestlers Draw, Or Does the WWE Brand Draw?
Wrestlers Draw 251 39.53%
WWE Brand draws 384 60.47%
Voters: 635. You may not vote on this poll

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #9101 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 11:28 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 831
Points: 29
   
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

and another week of losing viewers in the third hour

wouldn't it make more sense for usa to buy a program for half the price or even a 1/3 the price of raw, run some "big bang theory" repeat shows like other networks do, and do a 1.0-1.8

its less risk and less money and can still draw a descent rating
chucky101 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #9102 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 12:16 PM
The Face Of The Company
 
dxbender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,825
Points: 311
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Don't get why people care about the exact number of viewers or tv rating.

What they should be caring about, is amount of viewers Raw has over all the other cable tv shows that air in the same timeslot.

Raw is a top show on cable tv on monday nights in primetime, so don't get why people even care about all these other factors.

Are you working for WWE? Does your job depend on the rating of the show? So why do people care about all this stuff.

dxbender is offline  
post #9103 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 12:41 PM
Little Poppa Pump
 
roadkill_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The WWE Universe
Posts: 2,351
Points: 79
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Because it affects the decisions management takes. And some serious decisions need to be taken.
roadkill_ is offline  
post #9104 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 01:26 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Evil Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 993
Points: 6
         
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadkill_ View Post
Because it affects the decisions management takes. And some serious decisions need to be taken.
I don't know if it means that though. Raw being three hours is something that lowers the ratings but it also increases the profit for WWE. Punk gets criticism for not increasing the ratings as a champ but WWE has obviously seen enough value in him to have him champ for over 400 days. That only makes sense if you think that WWE gives out long title reigns just because they are nice. The ratings have constantly been going down for several years and they still aren't making any changes to their biggest star, Cena, either. On the contrary there were reports from Meltzer that Cena and Punk were the only two guys WWE had full confidence in, despite that they aren't changing the downward trend.

So I don't see anything drastic WWE is doing due to the ratings. Bringing in guys like The Rock would have been done anyway. It just looks like WWE is doing their thing without any significant changes, which makes it look like the fans are more panicked about ratings than they are.
Evil Peter is offline  
post #9105 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 02:06 PM
Asking SCOTT STEINER for Wrestling Advice
 
SerapisLiber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Abydos, Egypt
Posts: 369
Points: 24
           
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Yeah, they value dollar signs over ratings. Sure, they'd love it if ratings were higher, but as long as profits are around the same or even higher, they see no need to change.
SerapisLiber is offline  
post #9106 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 02:48 PM
Acknowledged by SCOTT STEINER
 
Defei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,471
Points: 0
         
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Peter View Post
I don't know if it means that though. Raw being three hours is something that lowers the ratings but it also increases the profit for WWE. Punk gets criticism for not increasing the ratings as a champ but WWE has obviously seen enough value in him to have him champ for over 400 days. That only makes sense if you think that WWE gives out long title reigns just because they are nice. The ratings have constantly been going down for several years and they still aren't making any changes to their biggest star, Cena, either. On the contrary there were reports from Meltzer that Cena and Punk were the only two guys WWE had full confidence in, despite that they aren't changing the downward trend.

So I don't see anything drastic WWE is doing due to the ratings. Bringing in guys like The Rock would have been done anyway. It just looks like WWE is doing their thing without any significant changes, which makes it look like the fans are more panicked about ratings than they are.
I thought the only reason Punk is the WWE champion is because the Rock wants the title? Thats what the report said last month.


Defei is offline  
post #9107 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 03:26 PM
Cutting a shoot promo to get over
 
bigdog40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 7,245
Points: 996
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SerapisLiber View Post
Yeah, they value dollar signs over ratings. Sure, they'd love it if ratings were higher, but as long as profits are around the same or even higher, they see no need to change.



The WWE makes far too much money and their product has more than enough distrubition that it doesn't really that much about the ratings as they did back during the monday night war. Before the monday night war, nobody cared what the ratings were and what they met.

Quote:
Originally Posted by new_guy View Post
People complain about newer talent not getting over, but what they mean is that their favourite isn't getting over, everyone else can go to hell. I'm for as many people getting over as possible, it would improve the show and the more over people there are, the more avenues there are to push new talent, yes, your favourites are more likely to get pushed if there are more over people to feud with.
bigdog40 is offline  
post #9108 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 05:25 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Evil Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 993
Points: 6
         
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Defei View Post
I thought the only reason Punk is the WWE champion is because the Rock wants the title? Thats what the report said last month.
I can't pretend to know what's going on backstage but Punk doesn't have to be the champ in order for Rock to become champ, Rocky can beat anyone if WWE wanted someone else as champ. From what I've read The Rock wants to wrestle Punk though, and he's set up to face the champ at RR, so that is obviously a factor in that Punk will go into RR as the champ. They could have taken it off him previously during the year and have him gotten it back though, but they chose to give him a record breaking run. I don't think you do that with someone you don't have confidence in, regardless of opponent at RR.
Evil Peter is offline  
post #9109 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-04-2013, 09:44 PM
Acknowledged by SCOTT STEINER
 
Defei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,471
Points: 0
         
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Peter View Post
I can't pretend to know what's going on backstage but Punk doesn't have to be the champ in order for Rock to become champ, Rocky can beat anyone if WWE wanted someone else as champ. From what I've read The Rock wants to wrestle Punk though, and he's set up to face the champ at RR, so that is obviously a factor in that Punk will go into RR as the champ. They could have taken it off him previously during the year and have him gotten it back though, but they chose to give him a record breaking run. I don't think you do that with someone you don't have confidence in, regardless of opponent at RR.
That would weaken the title match. They probably considered taking it off several times but since the Rock wanted the title, and considering the plan for Mania seems to be Rock vs Cena II they let him hold it through till Rumble.


Defei is offline  
post #9110 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-05-2013, 05:47 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Evil Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 993
Points: 6
         
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Defei View Post
That would weaken the title match. They probably considered taking it off several times but since the Rock wanted the title, and considering the plan for Mania seems to be Rock vs Cena II they let him hold it through till Rumble.
It's The Rock coming back, it doesn't really need everything to be perfect in order to attract a ton of attention. We can't know but I don't really buy that wouldn't have taken the title off Punk if they were unhappy with him in that position.
Evil Peter is offline  
Closed Thread

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome