Treklubj
AC Slater
Posts: 207
Member is Online
|
Post by Treklubj on Jul 4, 2023 8:33:38 GMT -5
With the best will in the world, one of the primary reasons 'good' ratings threads are quieter than the 'bad' ones, is that you don't post 40 times replying to everyone. Not trying to have a dig, but there's a bit of 'we're trying to find the guy who did this' energy to this post. But it's true and not unsuprising that it's more noteworthy when a show does an especially bad number. Smackdown had 2.5m viewers last week and there's no thread at all about it. If it did less than 2m there would be. It's not an AEW thing. That's a good number for Rampage, I'm sure if they can stick around that mark they'll be very happy with that for their C show. Given you're not trying to dig and not trying to turn this into an argument allow me to civilly rebut here. I feel like I'm not "The guy who did this", given how I wasn't the multiple other people who expressed annoyance at these threads when a number dips or even requested they be banned because that happened and I outwardly disagreed with it. I get annoyed when I'm singled out when these threads have been pretty divisive as a whole lately. And I dont think that should be handwaved away because I commented in that thread a lot, it's why I think my point has some merit to it. Even if I never posted in those threads, the pages double or triple what good ratings threads get, that was my point. I'll just leave it at that and see if that trend continues. On the point of Smackdown though, Smackdown has gotten the same number for like two years with spikes like last week, there's no commentary for those threads because the show is on FOX and outside of FS1 weeks, it never ever wavers, it does well because it's in a spot where it can't really lose on cable imo. With AEW it is a pattern that lower ratings are examined way more than the high ratings or increases, this isn't me trying to poke at anyone here specifically either, it just kinda is the vibe anymore. That's not an insult to Smackdown either, shows just in a good spot. I really hope Rampage can sustain these numbers, it's really not bad and they've been having better cards lately. Shida and Taya main eventing was also nice. For clarification, Smackdown's viewership is due to it being in a can't-miss situation and timeslot where it simply can't fail? I've seen Friday at 10 be referred to as a death-slot since Rampage debuted but are it looks like you're saying Friday at 8 is the complete opposite. Does the death slot thing only apply to cable?
|
|
Treklubj
AC Slater
Posts: 207
Member is Online
|
Post by Treklubj on Jul 4, 2023 8:38:20 GMT -5
Can we point to this thread the next time explanations for a bad rating are called "excuses"? I'm delighted by seeing the same kind of thought process applied to an unexpectedly good rating. To be fair, two people exchanged three posts about whether a high-quality, well-watched episode of Smackdown helped Rampage. The other posts were more of the good-natured, jokey "The Bunny's ready, brother" posts. This thread is not close to what we get when Dynamite draws 750.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Jul 4, 2023 10:02:40 GMT -5
For clarification, Smackdown's viewership is due to it being in a can't-miss situation and timeslot where it simply can't fail? I've seen Friday at 10 be referred to as a death-slot since Rampage debuted but are it looks like you're saying Friday at 8 is the complete opposite. Does the death slot thing only apply to cable? One of the reasons Fox wanted to experiment with putting Smackdown on Friday was to basically try to capture the younger audience WWE usually gets that don’t usually watch on Fridays since most of the shows competing against it, such as CBS’ Blue Bloods, mostly get the older demographic and usually win in viewership because old people don’t usually go out like young people do. So yeah, it’s a death slot either way (and it used to be that if a show was put on Sundays or Fridays, especially on Fox, that was it for them) but this gamble has somewhat paid off for Fox.
|
|
Treklubj
AC Slater
Posts: 207
Member is Online
|
Post by Treklubj on Jul 4, 2023 12:16:51 GMT -5
For clarification, Smackdown's viewership is due to it being in a can't-miss situation and timeslot where it simply can't fail? I've seen Friday at 10 be referred to as a death-slot since Rampage debuted but are it looks like you're saying Friday at 8 is the complete opposite. Does the death slot thing only apply to cable? One of the reasons Fox wanted to experiment with putting Smackdown on Friday was to basically try to capture the younger audience WWE usually gets that don’t usually watch on Fridays since most of the shows competing against it, such as CBS’ Blue Bloods, mostly get the older demographic and usually win in viewership because old people don’t usually go out like young people do. So yeah, it’s a death slot either way (and it used to be that if a show was put on Sundays or Fridays, especially on Fox, that was it for them) but this gamble has somewhat paid off for Fox. I'm aware of everything you wrote, but essentially you're saying Fox and WWE have proven that if you put something on a Friday in prime time that the younger demographic wants to watch, they'll watch it. To be fair, though, my previous post was pointing out the inconsistency in the idea that Smackdown is in a position where it can't fail due to its timeslot and Rampage is in a spot where it can't draw a large audience due to its timeslot, when both are prime time on a Friday night.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Jul 4, 2023 12:28:00 GMT -5
One of the reasons Fox wanted to experiment with putting Smackdown on Friday was to basically try to capture the younger audience WWE usually gets that don’t usually watch on Fridays since most of the shows competing against it, such as CBS’ Blue Bloods, mostly get the older demographic and usually win in viewership because old people don’t usually go out like young people do. So yeah, it’s a death slot either way (and it used to be that if a show was put on Sundays or Fridays, especially on Fox, that was it for them) but this gamble has somewhat paid off for Fox. I'm aware of everything you wrote, but essentially you're saying Fox and WWE have proven that if you put something on a Friday in prime time that the younger demographic wants to watch, they'll watch it. To be fair, though, my previous post was pointing out the inconsistency in the idea that Smackdown is in a position where it can't fail due to its timeslot and Rampage is in a spot where it can't draw a large audience due to its timeslot, when both are prime time on a Friday night. Well, the point was more that a usual tradition of TV as a whole was that Friday’s where you put any random repeat or an older demo show or a show you wanted to kill quicker than expected and arguably both Smackdown and Rampage have done that in different ways. Especially in a time when cord cutting is a thing and networks are finding more ways of getting data about shows.
|
|
|
Post by "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik on Jul 4, 2023 12:36:32 GMT -5
I mean if you broke down the differences w/ Rampage & SmackDown, there are a few:
- 10 PM vs. 8 PM (there's a reason Rampage does the most DVR viewership of any major wrestling show) - Cable vs. Broadcast - A Show vs. B Show (and now C Show) - 2 Hours vs. 1 Hour (I don't think this is mentioned much but a one hour show makes it both easier to DVR and get through quickly and wrestling fans are trained to think that major shows are at least two hours)
|
|
|
Post by stoptheclocks on Jul 4, 2023 12:45:41 GMT -5
I mean if you broke down the differences w/ Rampage & SmackDown, there are a few: - 10 PM vs. 8 PM ( there's a reason Rampage does the most DVR viewership of any major wrestling show) - Cable vs. Broadcast - A Show vs. B Show (and now C Show) - 2 Hours vs. 1 Hour (I don't think this is mentioned much but a one hour show makes it both easier to DVR and get through quickly and wrestling fans are trained to think that major shows are at least two hours) Is there a source for this? Maybe as a % of overall viewership, but it'd be a bit of a shock if it was doing outright bigger DVR numbers than shows with 5x as many people watching live.
|
|
|
Post by "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik on Jul 4, 2023 12:49:14 GMT -5
I mean if you broke down the differences w/ Rampage & SmackDown, there are a few: - 10 PM vs. 8 PM ( there's a reason Rampage does the most DVR viewership of any major wrestling show) - Cable vs. Broadcast - A Show vs. B Show (and now C Show) - 2 Hours vs. 1 Hour (I don't think this is mentioned much but a one hour show makes it both easier to DVR and get through quickly and wrestling fans are trained to think that major shows are at least two hours) Is there a source for this? Maybe as a % of overall viewership, but it'd be a bit of a shock if it was doing outright bigger DVR numbers than shows with 5x as many people watching live. I meant that it increased its viewership at a higher rate than any other wrestling show. Meaning RAW for example adds 20% of its viewership via DVR (so if they do 1.5 million, they do 1.8 million w/ DVR viewership). Whereas Rampage adds 50% via DVR (so if they do 500K, they do 750K w/ DVR viewership). And that has been in the Observer.
|
|
Treklubj
AC Slater
Posts: 207
Member is Online
|
Post by Treklubj on Jul 4, 2023 14:48:41 GMT -5
Is there a source for this? Maybe as a % of overall viewership, but it'd be a bit of a shock if it was doing outright bigger DVR numbers than shows with 5x as many people watching live. I meant that it increased its viewership at a higher rate than any other wrestling show. Meaning RAW for example adds 20% of its viewership via DVR (so if they do 1.5 million, they do 1.8 million w/ DVR viewership). Whereas Rampage adds 50% via DVR (so if they do 500K, they do 750K w/ DVR viewership). And that has been in the Observer. Did Meltzer reveal the source for reporting that 50 percent of Rampage's live audience watches it the next day (or within three days) on DVR or VOD?
|
|
|
Post by "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik on Jul 4, 2023 14:55:50 GMT -5
I meant that it increased its viewership at a higher rate than any other wrestling show. Meaning RAW for example adds 20% of its viewership via DVR (so if they do 1.5 million, they do 1.8 million w/ DVR viewership). Whereas Rampage adds 50% via DVR (so if they do 500K, they do 750K w/ DVR viewership). And that has been in the Observer. Did Meltzer reveal the source for reporting that 50 percent of Rampage's live audience watches it the next day (or within three days) on DVR or VOD? Not explicitly but I assume it's the same sources he uses for all of his other reports on ratings/business. This is what the Observer said: An update on DVR numbers. Generally speaking Dynamite is up 15-21 percent if you include 18-49 viewership over the next week. Rampage is up 48-55 percent. Raw is up about 15 percent and Smackdown is up about 16 percent, so DVR usage is very slightly lower by percentage than it was the last time we got numbers.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Jul 4, 2023 15:36:06 GMT -5
I'm curious about the DVR numbers for Collision in its short lifespan.
|
|
Treklubj
AC Slater
Posts: 207
Member is Online
|
Post by Treklubj on Jul 4, 2023 16:53:21 GMT -5
Did Meltzer reveal the source for reporting that 50 percent of Rampage's live audience watches it the next day (or within three days) on DVR or VOD? Not explicitly but I assume it's the same sources he uses for all of his other reports on ratings/business. This is what the Observer said: An update on DVR numbers. Generally speaking Dynamite is up 15-21 percent if you include 18-49 viewership over the next week. Rampage is up 48-55 percent. Raw is up about 15 percent and Smackdown is up about 16 percent, so DVR usage is very slightly lower by percentage than it was the last time we got numbers. Thanks for sharing. I have tried to find this information (not for wrestling but more just general interest) but I haven't had much luck other than random articles about particular shows.
|
|