Wrestling Forum banner

81 - 100 of 1865 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,329 Posts
The reason why I am asking is because what is the metrics used for good ratings today. Let’s take music for example, back in 2000 if you sold 1m records u were seen as successful. In today’s digital age no one sells 1m records but there are a lot of successful artists out there.
I just think we have to take into account the damage digital media and social media has done to cable tv.
In 1998 when stone cold came on my tv it was must see tv and u wouldn’t dare miss it because I wasn’t sure if it would come on again. In today’s time if stone cold came on my tv and I was busy, I would simply skip raw and watch it 24 hours later on Hulu.
Also the rock is the goat but his show the titans only did 1.8 in ratings.

https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/tuesday-cable-ratings-july-2-2019/
Smackdown live is no 1.
Until I see raw and smackdown fall out of the top 10 I won’t worry. The big worry for wwe is the low attendance record at venues in my opinion.
If WWE can stop the fall and remain above 2MM for the next several years they will be fine. They won’t survive on Fox, but somebody will pick them up. The point you seem to be missing is that the conversation is not about where they are in the rankings, it’s the drastic YoY drop that if they don’t stop or severely curb they will not be on television anymore. There are other factors working against them like demos, ad rates, and just the stigma of pro wrestling in general. They need to be solidly in the top 10 in order for networks to want them. The only things they bring are they are live (usually) and they add to the raw viewership figures which keeps USA relevant. It’s a balancing act. Networks can hold their nose and put pro wrestling on their schedule if they are bringing in 2MM to 3MM viewers per hour. As they get closer to 1MM the stench starts to become too much. WWE knows this and Fox and NBCU know this and that’s why there is a scramble to throw things at the wall and see what sticks.

Man, going down after last week’s effort and a go home show. Plus the people that tuned in can’t have liked what they saw. They better make ER a newsworthy show.
 

·
Parks and Recreation Dept.
Joined
·
7,411 Posts
Damn, they just can't get that third hour up.

I still think even the most basic promotion is where WWE is lacking when it comes to Raw. Remember the Attitude Era when they announced what the main event was a week out? I'm not talking "it'll happen somewhere during the show", I mean the MAIN EVENT.

Give people at least some possible incentive to tune in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,329 Posts
Damn, they just can't get that third hour up.

I still think even the most basic promotion is where WWE is lacking when it comes to Raw. Remember the Attitude Era when they announced what the main event was a week out? I'm not talking "it'll happen somewhere during the show", I mean the MAIN EVENT.

Give people at least some possible incentive to tune in.
I agree with your premise, but I think they avoid announcing main events partly because they know they will be underwhelming. I get that a lot of it is because of the late rewrites, but if you said the main event is Roman and a JAG vs Shane & Drew that’s not going to help the third hour. If you have something like Batista returning it can help. But with this roster short of the title being on the line I don’t think there is much they can do.
 

·
Parks and Recreation Dept.
Joined
·
7,411 Posts
I agree with your premise, but I think they avoid announcing main events partly because they know they will be underwhelming. I get that a lot of it is because of the late rewrites, but if you said the main event is Roman and a JAG vs Shane & Drew that’s not going to help the third hour. If you have something like Batista returning it can help. But with this roster short of the title being on the line I don’t think there is much they can do.
I think it's more that these clowns don't even know what Raw looks like until an hour before the cameras start rolling, sometimes even less.
 

·
Ex Con With A Heart Of Gold
Joined
·
10,226 Posts
I think it's more that these clowns don't even know what Raw looks like until an hour before the cameras start rolling, sometimes even less.
Any decision is better than indecision. There are rumors going around that RAW is to a point where they don't know every match on the card not just on Monday morning, but as the show is happening and they are booking matches as the show is going. There are also grumblings that they are rewriting promos and segments and handing revised or even totally new scripts to people as the show is ongoing as well. Its just a steak wrap fiasco. We know who is principally to "thank"...

:vince3

But the networks and investors are finally riding them for these lousy numbers which makes it even more "scrambling eggs"

:cornette

Then as all this Keystone Kops malarkey is happening, they're booking all these weird stipulations and break ups to matches due to the no-wrestling-through-commercials edict, whoever that is from. That ain't helpin' matters.

Edit: The most troubling thing to me is the flattening of the numbers. If all numbers do 2.whatever with no big difference, eh. That shows that the people that are left are the full-show viewers and there is no interest spikes and very few sort of pop-in viewers and stuff like that going on. The convergence of viewers for all the hours for RAW could be really bad for them if the overall total viewership number goes down. Imagine them going down from these numbers somehow by about 300,000 during MNF. We're looking at a whole show being 2 flat or below.

:mj2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
939 Posts
Those are great numbers, most of the top shows on cable do 500k-1m viewers

The reason why I am asking is because what is the metrics used for good ratings today. Let’s take music for example, back in 2000 if you sold 1m records u were seen as successful. In today’s digital age no one sells 1m records but there are a lot of successful artists out there.
I just think we have to take into account the damage digital media and social media has done to cable tv.
In 1998 when stone cold came on my tv it was must see tv and u wouldn’t dare miss it because I wasn’t sure if it would come on again. In today’s time if stone cold came on my tv and I was busy, I would simply skip raw and watch it 24 hours later on Hulu.
Also the rock is the goat but his show the titans only did 1.8 in ratings.

https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/tuesday-cable-ratings-july-2-2019/
Smackdown live is no 1.
Until I see raw and smackdown fall out of the top 10 I won’t worry. The big worry for wwe is the low attendance record at venues in my opinion.
It's not about where their show ranks. It's about how much that show costs a TV network to carry vs how many viewers that show brings in. TV Networks want to make money. You can't make money by spending a ton of money on a show that doesn't bring in alot of viewers.

WWE needs to have ratings far above it's competition to justify what TV networks pay them for the show. Otherwise, what is the incentive for a TV network to keep them? USA could make more money putting reruns of The Office on during their monday night time slot. They aren't going to bring iin the same ratings as Raw, but they'll cost far less.

TV shows get cancelled all the time when the cost of the show far outweights the benefits of additional viewers. When a TV show becomes to costly to produce, it's generally cancelled. I see the same thing happening to WWE.

Nobody is going to pay them $1 billion dollars for similar ratings that got WCW and TNA cancelled.

And you make an interesting point about Musicians. Yes, fewer records are being sold now than in 2000. Therefore, you see far fewer record stores now, than in 2000. Many record stores went out of business. Same thing will happen to wrestling on cable tv. Since there are few fewer consumers of wrestling on cable TV, inevitably there will be less wrestling on cable TV. Now, perhaps it will be consumed in different medias (like WWE Network). But in your example, the record store is like Cable TV. It is delivering the product. If the product is no longer selling, the store goes out of business or changes what it sells. For Cable TV, I don't think USA will go out of business, but I do think they will have to change what they air on their channel
 

·
HOES MAD
Joined
·
22,982 Posts
:maury The go-home show that sucked decreased from last week. Imagine that.

Look at the downward spiral the viewership and ratings took after the post-WM RAW. Holy shit, how drastic. RAW hasn't even touched at or above 3 million viewers all year. This is very troubling and will only prove to be difficult once the fall hits.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,533 Posts
Wow after last week, and on the go home show and they opened so low. They gotta hit another panic button soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Ex Con With A Heart Of Gold
Joined
·
10,226 Posts
:maury The go-home show that sucked decreased from last week. Imagine that.

Look at the downward spiral the viewership and ratings took after the post-WM RAW. Holy shit, how drastic. RAW hasn't even touched at or above 3 million viewers all year. This is very troubling and will only prove to be difficult once the fall hits.
3 million viewers? They're dreaming of that for an overall show these days, After Superstar Shakeup/Draft Night, they only broke 2.5 million overall viewers once, the first show back after Money in the Bank.

:brock2

Save_US Bork LAZER

:brock
 

·
HOES MAD
Joined
·
22,982 Posts
As I predicted, the Heyman bump from last week was out of sheer intrigue. This week, it was back to the same garbage RAW has been in for most of the year. People will say Vince took the book back, and you can smell some of his stench from Monday, but if Heyman is already or has already taken charge since a couple months ago, he deserves some of the blame too. It was reported that the Maria/Mike angle, the Ricochet push, and the advancement of Seff/Becky is his doing and if that is the case, then he's just as out of touch as Vince is.

Heyman may very well be :washed as a creative mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
897 Posts
Damn Randy u nailed it, I totally forgot that the networks pay wwe far more than they would pay other shows. Great points.
 

·
Ex Con With A Heart Of Gold
Joined
·
10,226 Posts
Damn Randy u nailed it, I totally forgot that the networks pay wwe far more than they would pay other shows. Great points.
Does USA pay something like 300 million a year on their contract with WWE? Even though its 3 hours of live programming, that's still nearly 2 million and hour and it runs every Monday, too. I wonder what they pay per hour for their other shows? I can't imagine its close to 2 million an hour.
 

·
Ex Con With A Heart Of Gold
Joined
·
10,226 Posts
2.4 for raw lolololol pls go under 2.0 soon
Historically, MNF leads to a double digit viewer drop.

Here was last year's pre-MNF RAW against the MNF next week...


Hour 1: 2.945 million viewers, .95 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 2: 2.933 million viewers, 1.00 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 3: 2.740 million viewers, .97 rating in 18-49 demographic


Hour 1: 2.818 million viewers, .88 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 2: 2.801 million viewers, .91 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 3: 2.601 million viewers, .89 rating in 18-49 demographic

I think its pretty reasonable to expect at least another 100,000 viewers to leave when college football, MNF and playoff baseball happen this September and October.
 

·
Spanish God
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
Does USA pay something like 300 million a year on their contract with WWE? Even though its 3 hours of live programming, that's still nearly 2 million and hour and it runs every Monday, too. I wonder what they pay per hour for their other shows? I can't imagine its close to 2 million an hour.
they will be paying $5 million per show come this fall, they pay like 1.5 million now if you divide equally between RAW and SDL. So about $1.6 million per hour which is pretty cheap actually for a series that is top 5 of the ratings all year long and is also live. These are 2017 numbers, so they would be higher now but gives an idea on why the networks were willing to pay them this much, especially FOX which sold off its studios, which would make original programming much more expensive for them then it used to be:
"The estimates on the cost of content that emerged from these interviews peg the typical range of the production budget for high-end cable and streaming dramas at $5 million-$7 million an hour, while single-camera half hours on broadcast and cable run from $1.5 million to more than $3 million."
So USA will be paying WWE for RAW what it would cost just to make one 1 hour drama series, and FOX would be paying around $4 million for 2 hours of live TV when they would pay close to that for just one half hour show. So WWE is actually a bargain when you consider its live, and they run all year long.
Everyone saying they won't get a new contract is smoking something strong, they will get something, maybe not as much as the new contracts that kick in later this fall if ratings don't bounce back, but they wont get anything lower than what they get now.
 

·
Spanish God
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
Quick question why do u guys use past ratings to judge current ratings? Since we all agree that cable tv today is not the same as it was 5 or 10 years ago due to live streams, Hulu, etc why can’t we use current tv shows as a metric. While I understand that ratings are not what it was, the fact that raw and smackdown live are the top rated shows on tv tells me that they are doing just fine in today’s ratings climate.
the issue with the drops is that it is falling faster than the other shows, and out of sync with what you would expect from cord cutters. The demo used to be around 1.0 when the contracts were negotiated and now they regularly do .6-.8, even falling to .5 at times. That's not good for the networks since even though the demo is the most important part of ad rates, another factor is the income of the viewers and wrestling fans are perceived as being lower income and so the networks don't get as much as other sports and shows. So its not ok for them to be just as good as other shows on cable, they need to do better as they used to do before the big drops that started last year. As I posted above in another post, they still bring in good ratings all year long and cost less per hour than what the networks could put on that may; but more likely would not; do better ratings so they will be fine for now. the biggest plus is they are all year long and get somewhat consistent numbers for the year, which helps USA for instance say they are number one network in cable, which is big from a branding standpoint and worth a lot in and of itself.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,533 Posts
Historically, MNF leads to a double digit viewer drop.

Here was last year's pre-MNF RAW against the MNF next week...


Hour 1: 2.945 million viewers, .95 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 2: 2.933 million viewers, 1.00 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 3: 2.740 million viewers, .97 rating in 18-49 demographic


Hour 1: 2.818 million viewers, .88 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 2: 2.801 million viewers, .91 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 3: 2.601 million viewers, .89 rating in 18-49 demographic

I think its pretty reasonable to expect at least another 100,000 viewers to leave when college football, MNF and playoff baseball happen this September and October.
Very reasonable to expect sub 2 million by MNF.
 
81 - 100 of 1865 Posts
Top