|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Aug 17, 2007 0:06:39 GMT -5
While I'll admit, a 20% fluctuation in your ratings is a sizable chunk, (between 1.0 and 1.2) does it speak well for their philosophy that they have trouble sustaining those viewers from week to week? Yes, recently they scored their highest rating ever, which was 0.1 higher than their previous record (or approximately 166,300 viewers). Problem there is, what happened the next week? They dropped back down to their norm. We can crow all we want about the ifs. IF they get a second hour, IF they get a better network deal, IF they sign the big name that will garauntee people tune in and keep tuning in, rather than spike a rating one week. The fact is, I see Bentley's complaints, and I see bigger problems than booking. I see a hiring philosophy that says "we trust no one we have here to draw, so we will bring in anyone that doesn't pan out for Vince, or who leaves and is willing to come here and trash them on television". Once they decided to put Joe on the back burner, it seems that no one that hasn't worked for WWE (or in Sting's case was a major player in WCW) can get even a sniff of a sustained main event title push. Does it strike anyone else as sad that Tomko has approximately the same number of title matches as Samoa Joe? Tomko for God's sake. Whoa Whoa Whoa Whoa Whoa.......When the hell was Tomko in a World title match? I may not have bought every PPV, but I would damn sure remember when Tomko challenged for the World title. |
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Aug 17, 2007 0:11:16 GMT -5
While I'll admit, a 20% fluctuation in your ratings is a sizable chunk, (between 1.0 and 1.2) does it speak well for their philosophy that they have trouble sustaining those viewers from week to week? Yes, recently they scored their highest rating ever, which was 0.1 higher than their previous record (or approximately 166,300 viewers). Problem there is, what happened the next week? They dropped back down to their norm. We can crow all we want about the ifs. IF they get a second hour, IF they get a better network deal, IF they sign the big name that will garauntee people tune in and keep tuning in, rather than spike a rating one week. The fact is, I see Bentley's complaints, and I see bigger problems than booking. I see a hiring philosophy that says "we trust no one we have here to draw, so we will bring in anyone that doesn't pan out for Vince, or who leaves and is willing to come here and trash them on television". Once they decided to put Joe on the back burner, it seems that no one that hasn't worked for WWE (or in Sting's case was a major player in WCW) can get even a sniff of a sustained main event title push. Does it strike anyone else as sad that Tomko has approximately the same number of title matches as Samoa Joe? Tomko for God's sake. Whoa Whoa Whoa Whoa Whoa.......When the hell was Tomko in a World title match? I may not have bought every PPV, but I would damn sure remember when Tomko challenged for the World title. My mistake, t'was a non-title match. My memory, she is failing me in my old age. |
|
|
|
Post by mrjerkybigbucks on Aug 17, 2007 2:40:38 GMT -5
Who knows? More people are watching now, than were watching last year. I think everyone thinks that ratings have to reach really high over night and the truth is they dont. Not really. www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/nwa/impactrat.htmImpact ratings have hovered in the 1.0 range quite often. Summer last year, they were hitting 1.1's as well. Now? They're in that exact same range, with a plus or minus of .1 or so ratings points on any given week. Average ratings last year was a .9 with the average rating this year up to what they have recorded (which is May) as a .95. That doesn't spell leaps and bounds, that spells consistency. As of may? You do know that comparing 5 months to 12 is not a sound way to prove a point. Any person can look at both sets of numbers and tell the viewership is incressing slowly, just by compairing the 1.+ shows to the 0.+ shows. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2007 3:23:40 GMT -5
Bentley is right. TNA shouldn't push former WWE guys.
They should push those that completely ripoff current WWE guys.
|
|
Kae
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 3,610
|
Post by Kae on Aug 17, 2007 5:10:16 GMT -5
Serotonin had such potential. They had a great gimmick and Raven backing them. It makes me angry that Mantell couldn't be bothered to think up anything for them on a serious, long-term basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by Viking Snad on Aug 17, 2007 6:15:46 GMT -5
London/Kendrick/Shane (w/ HBK) vs Teddy/Harry/TJ (w/ Nattie)~!?~!
Too perfect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Aug 17, 2007 8:00:42 GMT -5
As of may? You do know that comparing 5 months to 12 is not a sound way to prove a point. Any person can look at both sets of numbers and tell the viewership is incressing slowly, just by compairing the 1.+ shows to the 0.+ shows. If you want to believe that TNA's core audience is any bigger, that's your thing. TNA has hit exact same ratings they're hitting now in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Aug 17, 2007 10:33:00 GMT -5
As of may? You do know that comparing 5 months to 12 is not a sound way to prove a point. Any person can look at both sets of numbers and tell the viewership is incressing slowly, just by compairing the 1.+ shows to the 0.+ shows. If you want to believe that TNA's core audience is any bigger, that's your thing. TNA has hit exact same ratings they're hitting now in the past. How far along? Before the change to primetime, iMPACT was getting ratings in the 0.7 range. Even after the change, iMPACT was not doing the same ratings, usually hovering under 1.0, and it only started doing those steady ratings around the time a bit later than that. |
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Aug 17, 2007 10:42:28 GMT -5
If you want to believe that TNA's core audience is any bigger, that's your thing. TNA has hit exact same ratings they're hitting now in the past. How far along? Before the change to primetime, iMPACT was getting ratings in the 0.7 range. Even after the change, iMPACT was not doing the same ratings, usually hovering under 1.0, and it only started doing those steady ratings around the time a bit later than that. I'd like to point out that TNA's core audience is actually SMALLER than the 1.0 ratings they get. Given that they only got a .6 going head to head with WWE Raw that one time, that means that really only 60% of their regular audience are die-hard TNA watchers. That's their core audience, right there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2007 14:13:25 GMT -5
Can we please not get into the junk science of Neilson ratings.
|
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Aug 18, 2007 6:55:39 GMT -5
Can we please not get into the junk science of Neilson ratings. Nah I'm on a roll. See audiences can be divided up into inner cores, outer cores, and mantles, much like layers of the earth's interior. After the .6 inner core you have .4 of an outer core of people who just like wrestling. Then you have the .1 to .2 of people in the mantle who'll occasionally spike ratings but that's about it. |
|
|
|
Post by "Nature Boy" Ric Moranis on Aug 18, 2007 6:58:53 GMT -5
I'd like to point out that TNA's core audience is actually SMALLER than the 1.0 ratings they get. Given that they only got a .6 going head to head with WWE Raw that one time, that means that really only 60% of their regular audience are die-hard TNA watchers. That's their core audience, right there. ...Then I'd like to point out when TNA went head to head with WWE, they re-ran matches that their core audience had already seen. Monumental mistake by TNA, but you can't bring that night up without taking that into account. |
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Aug 18, 2007 7:00:01 GMT -5
I'd like to point out that TNA's core audience is actually SMALLER than the 1.0 ratings they get. Given that they only got a .6 going head to head with WWE Raw that one time, that means that really only 60% of their regular audience are die-hard TNA watchers. That's their core audience, right there. ...Then I'd like to point out when TNA went head to head with WWE, they re-ran matches that their core audience had already seen. Monumental mistake by TNA, but you can't bring that night up without taking that into account. Point taken. |
|
|
|
Post by mysterydriver on Aug 18, 2007 9:44:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Aug 18, 2007 10:19:14 GMT -5
Hopefully, a lot more people speak out about Dutch Mantell.
From all accounts, he's killing them.
|
|
greate
Mephisto
Swearenger is the man
Posts: 698
|
Post by greate on Aug 18, 2007 12:08:37 GMT -5
The thing is, the television ratings aren't going anywhere, and they have never gone anywhere. It's always around the same number, which is 1.0 or so. From a business expansion standpoint, this is simply not very good.
I know there has been talk about this already but...bring me the ratings from 2003 or so when they were on Fox and tell me they haven't gone anywhere. Also, what kind of ratings are you expecting? It's wrestling, wrestling is not "pop" anymore, it has a bad BAD public image not a lot of ppl start tuning in except kids cus "it's fake". Wrestling simply is not the best business to be in right now and TNA is not even on the top of the food chain. So to have a 0.8 rating increase in 3 years is quite a feat for a SMALL WRESTLING company. Also for the guy who said "they cant keep the viewers" yes but its the same with WWE, it's not like RAW has a regular number they hop around quite a bit.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,585
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Aug 18, 2007 13:55:03 GMT -5
Damn, things must really be sucking in TNA. I actually hope to see him In WWE soon. He could form a group with Londrick as HBK's understudties, and have him play the prick/slacker/Teddy Hart of the group saying that he is better than the other two since he is actually related to shawn and then Turn him heel. I could honestly see this working very well. |
|
|
|
Post by Gillberg: 0-175 on Aug 18, 2007 13:57:06 GMT -5
Can we please not get into the junk science of Neilson ratings. Nah I'm on a roll. See audiences can be divided up into inner cores, outer cores, and mantles, much like layers of the earth's interior. After the .6 inner core you have .4 of an outer core of people who just like wrestling. Then you have the .1 to .2 of people in the mantle who'll occasionally spike ratings but that's about it. Ok. But where do the people without Neilsen boxes fall into. Or did you think that just because you turn on your TV Mr. Neilsen knows what you're watching. Although I think Digitial TV Boxes have them built in now, or at least they should. |
|
|
|
Post by mrjerkybigbucks on Aug 18, 2007 15:26:28 GMT -5
Nah I'm on a roll. See audiences can be divided up into inner cores, outer cores, and mantles, much like layers of the earth's interior. After the .6 inner core you have .4 of an outer core of people who just like wrestling. Then you have the .1 to .2 of people in the mantle who'll occasionally spike ratings but that's about it. Ok. But where do the people without Neilsen boxes fall into. Or did you think that just because you turn on your TV Mr. Neilsen knows what you're watching. Although I think Digitial TV Boxes have them built in now, or at least they should. You do know that we still live in a free country where no organization can spy on your habbits unless they have a just cause or you let them? Just buying a new tv does not give anyone the right to spy on your viewing habbits. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great El' PANDA King on Aug 18, 2007 15:28:54 GMT -5
Heh, it doesn't look like anything new really.
Isn't everyone who rips on TNA say how much everyone hates Angle and the WWE guys, and how 'it's not fun anymore' and all that jazz?
|
|
