Wrestling Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

RAW TV Ratings Thread

425K views 6K replies 433 participants last post by  Chelsea 
#1 ·
All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Attendance, Draw Talk Here - THE RATINGS STUFF PART VII - NUMBERZ

**All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here**

Previous thread HERE : https://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/...talk-here-ratings-war-part-vi-lolratings.html

NEW THREAD PEEPS!!!

It's the ratings thread, that thing that WWE apparently doesn't give a shit about, yeah (right)?

The next chapter in the ongoing saga that is the numbers game. Where numbers and decimal points gets analysed to the tenth degree and the dreaded 'Draw' phrase gets bought up and people get their handbags out and have a 'discussion' over a bunch of numbers about their favourites and how they draw and when they don't draw it's because nobody is a draw.

Even people who don't watch are enamored by dem numbers. It's all about the bloody numberz.

NUMBERZ. NUMBERZ. NUMBERZ.

THE RATINGS WAR PART VII

 
See less See more
1
#8 ·
Why blame Rollins? No one is helping WWE get ratings. WWE itself is the problem, Rollins and co. are just along for the ride.

The Rock could ditch Hollywood to come back full time for wrestling and it wouldn't do shit for ratings because of how WWE fucks shit up now.
 
#9 ·
No one denies that WWE's booking sucks.

But it doesn't help that their current FOTC is not fit for the role. The idea that The Rock and Seth Rollins are equal in value is insane.

Of course The Rock could take the material that Rollins has been given and produce better performances/ratings. He's a vastly superior performer to Rollins.
 
#11 ·
:Cocky THE BESTEST IN THE WORLD. THE DRAWEST DRAW IN ALL THE WORLD

Don't forget the golden rule, folks. If your favourite is the most "over" guy on the show, and the FOTC they aren't in any way responsible for the bad ratings and awful attendance. That shit is ALL Brock and Roman's fault. Maybe :asuka and :rusev are to blame as well.

Either way it isn't :Rollins
 
#18 ·
In terms of what's coming (NFL and AEW), this may end up being the most entertaining and interesting ratings thread this forum has had in forever. It's going to be a ride for sure.

Also, can we stop with the blindness here? I have said that not one single individual other than Vince deserve full blame for the current decay this company finds itself in. Having said that, I have also been clear to state that some stars are better suited for top roles in the company than others. You can say it as much as you want but the Rock would stop the bleeding at a huge rate and at the very least stabilize it more so than a Seff, a Becky, or a Kofi ever could. That's just the reality of the situation. You have the wrong group of top players here. The experiment failed. It didn't work. They were great to pander to your dwindling fanbase at Wrestlemania but going forward for this long has saved anything but shown continuous record low ratings and attendance, the Network has stagnated, the PPVs aren't drawing as powerful anymore, and the star power is almost non-existent.

Trust me, Baron Corbin and Lacey Evans isn't the answer, either. They're just as bad, if not worse, than the current crop of World champions. The fact is, it's time to try something else. Get stars the crowd can really gravitate to at a consistent rate and build off of it while not cutting their legs from underneath. You had it for a while with Becky Lynch but now it's clear her "jets have been cooled".

Meltzer said it this week, and someone repeated it here, but the record low attendances this company has had this week in three back to back to back events (Stomping Grounds, RAW, Smackdown) is alarming and this could very well be where they draw under 2 million viewers. They are already at peak TNA numbers.

This is the New Generation 2.0 era, with far more money and far less star power. It cannot be denied anymore. The scary thing is, the worse may be to come.
 
#27 ·
the only way i'm watching a full raw is if they put the important wrestling & promos with the big stars in the first 2 hours then make the 3rd hour a big moment of bliss episode.
 
#31 · (Edited)
H1- 2.468M
H2- 2.676M
H3- 2.345M
3H- 2.496M




Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 8.43% / + 0.208M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.37% / - 0.331M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.98% / - 0.123M )
7/1/19 Vs 6/24/19 ( + 9.67% / + 0.220M )

Demo (7/1/19 Vs 6/24/19):
H1- 0.760D Vs 0.750D
H2- 0.820D Vs 0.740D
H3- 0.780D Vs 0.700D
3H- 0.787D Vs 0.730D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership.




Viewership (7/1/19 Vs 7/2/18):
H1- 2.468M Vs 2.641M
H2- 2.676M Vs 2.822M
H3- 2.345M Vs 2.658M
3H- 2.496M Vs 2.707M ( - 7.79% / - 0.211M )

Demo (7/1/19 Vs 7/2/18):
H1- 0.760D Vs 0.850D
H2- 0.820D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.780D Vs 0.900D
3H- 0.787D Vs 0.883D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 3rd & 2nd by hourly demo & 5th, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.
 
#33 ·
Got to think that the Strowman/Lashley stuff generated some buzz that it really seems like Heyman is in charge and that's why hour two got that big jump in viewers
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ace
#43 · (Edited)
That's the highest third hour in a long time and is a slight drop from the first hr. AJ-Ricochet was also announced late in the show. Idk how you got that no one cares, when they did that number along with held strong last week. The second hr increase was probably due to Taker. I'm surprised it drew that well.
 
#38 ·
I think if that were the case I’d have expected a higher H1 rating. That H1 doesn’t seem that far off from other recent H1s. The difference is instead of slipping to 2.3 or 2.2 million in H2 they actually went up by a few hundred thousand. That tells me the buzz around the opening segment worked in their favor. They just didn’t do a good job of giving those people that checked in a reason to stay through H3. AJ v Rico and the Seth & Becky love story ain’t gonna get the job done.
 
#40 ·
I'd figure the Undertaker return is what popped them this week after Taker came out of nowhere last week. Taker still holds interest from fans, even if he has overstayed his welcome. Probably the interest of a Heyman-booked RAW was there, too. In terms of the ratings they were getting, this was good but long term, this will amount to nothing if they can not consistently keep the rating afloat.
 
#50 ·
Taker in his full getup still looks exactly the same as he did in 2007. The intrigue in seeing the Undertaker live is still a factor. It's only when he gets in the ring to wrestle that the magic wears off. Hulk Hogan was supremely past his prime in 2006, but he was still the selling point for me to go to the last Raw I ever attended. I don't believe Hogan ever came back to Cleveland, so I got to see him for the last time in my hometown.

It's like seeing The Rolling Stones, Metallica, Fleetwood Mac, Bruce Springsteen, Paul McCartney, etc... People will still pay to see their favorite acts from when they were younger
 
#41 ·
They're still down from last year, but at least it isn't a total dive. And before people pooh-pooh the 2.3 million viewers for hour 3, hour 3 is a total death hour now with some hours this year hitting 2 million flat, I think one was even below 2 million or damn close to it. 2.3 million is nothing to sneeze at.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top