This week's Impact rating

[#Classic Hi-Definition X]

Impact scored a 1.1 cable rating last night. The episode did a .73 in M18-49, a .52 in P18-49, a .58 in M18-34, and an average audience of 1.4 million viewers.

-Gerweck.net

In other words, same ol' stuff.

[lildude8218]

Cornette's gonna be a rich bastard with all these bonus checks

[erisi236]

They need to start posting Impact Ratings with another decimal point and few more numbers after it so it'll look a bit different from week to week.

Last week: 1.1.05.008

This week: 1.1.05.010

ZMOG improvement!

[KLRA]

I'm keeping up my opinion that TNA should just do some hardcore porn for their two hours just to see if the ratings spike.

[-Lithium-]

"Atleast there consistent!"

"Same old s***"

[angryfan]

So, serious question here. Does this mean that they're "showing consistancy in the ratings" or does it mean that they're proving that, regardless of what they do, they're not attracting and/or keeping new viewers? Not trying to come off as a hater, and I know I ask this question every week, but I honestly want to know. Big names don't keep new viewers, nor do gimmick matches, gauntlets, poles, cages, six sides of watcahmahoochie, or anything else.

What will it take for TNA to get mroe people to tune in and stay tuned in for more than one week?

[Ace Diamond]

angryfan said:

So, serious question here. Does this mean that they're "showing consistancy in the ratings" or does it mean that they're proving that, regardless of what they do, they're not attracting and/or keeping new viewers? Not trying to come off as a hater, and I know I ask this question every week, but I honestly want to know. Big names don't keep new viewers, nor do gimmick matches, gauntlets, poles, cages, six sides of watcahmahoochie, or anything else.

What will it take for TNA to get mroe people to tune in and stay tuned in for more than one week?

At this point, I'd honestly say they should worry less about TV Ratings and more about the buyrates (or lack thereof)

[angryfan]

aodpilot said:

angryfan said:

So, serious question here. Does this mean that they're "showing consistancy in the ratings" or does it mean that they're proving that, regardless of what they do, they're not attracting and/or keeping new viewers? Not trying to come off as a hater, and I know I ask this question every week, but I honestly want to know. Big names don't keep new viewers, nor do gimmick matches, gauntlets, poles, cages, six sides of watcahmahoochie, or anything else.

What will it take for TNA to get mroe people to tune in and stay tuned in for more than one week?

At this point, I'd honestly say they should worry less about TV Ratings and more about the buyrates (or lack thereof)

Agreed, although, aside from a few anomalies, they've remained somewhat consistant. Sadly, some of those, shall we say, low points have happened in recent months. So...yeah.

[comahan]

Hey! it only took 6 posts this go around for someone to bring up buyrates.

Good job!

[Deleted]

A 1.1 isn't terrible, it just isn't great.

If you're pulling a 1.1 you're probably in the top 100 or so and that's in the cable market for a show that's been on the air for 3 years.

I dunno, I guess its around par for the course. When RAW first started it was pulling like a 2.5 average rating. 3 years later they were only slightly higher by like .4 or so (though they did peak at 4.1) and they had a much larger fan base when they started. In the past few years they've been doing high 3's/low 4's for the most part which is great for a show, especially on cable.

There's some perspective for you. Draw your own conclusions.

[Ace Diamond]

comahan said:

Hey! it only took 6 posts this go around for someone to bring up buyrates.

Good job!

Hey. I was saying at least the consistency is good. they could be going down. a 1.1 isn't great by any means but it could be worse, but again, they are not selling PPVs the way they're doing things now.

[krazysane]

Hell I watched Impact, but I felt like changing the channel cause they kept on mentioning murder and suicide and things like that. They bleep out ass and basturd but kept prick and scumbag. Tna is confusing!

[Deleted]

Sharkboy needs more ass kickings to boost the ratings I tell ya!

[lildude8218]

angryfan said:

So, serious question here. Does this mean that they're "showing consistancy in the ratings" or does it mean that they're proving that, regardless of what they do, they're not attracting and/or keeping new viewers? Not trying to come off as a hater, and I know I ask this question every week, but I honestly want to know. Big names don't keep new viewers, nor do gimmick matches, gauntlets, poles, cages, six sides of watcahmahoochie, or anything else.

What will it take for TNA to get mroe people to tune in and stay tuned in for more than one week?

They have a hard enough problem getting people to tune in and stay tuned in THAT week. Whenever you see the quarter hour breakdowns, there always seems to be a pattern where they start out strong and then drive away a portion of their audience within 1 or 2 quarters but they wind up coming back for the main event usually.

[Deleted]

Honestly, 1.1 isn't a bad rating. TNA are nowhere near as established as WWE are and with wrestling not being that popular these days, it's even harder to get a consistently strong audience.

The only problem is that TNA are not gaining viewers, which is their number one goal. But, with that said, they aren't losing any either.

[lucaspunkari]

I'm interested to see the quarter-by-quarter raiting, mainly to see how many ended up seeing the Kong vs. Kim match.

[greate]

1.1 is okay, not expecting better. That global impact stuff is genious, NJPW(or whatever company it is) pulls in the audience and TNA gets a share. MONEY is what you need and ratings wont do it.