|
Post by donners on Dec 18, 2009 23:23:09 GMT -5
1.0.
Bit of a worry that none of the advertising seems to have had any effect.
|
|
|
Post by The Genesis of KoOS on Dec 18, 2009 23:25:11 GMT -5
|
|
Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Dec 18, 2009 23:36:27 GMT -5
A thought: Have ratings gone done since BFG when Sting stopped appearing on TV? They were doing between 1.1 and 1.3 for most the of year until the last few weeks/months.
|
|
|
Post by BitterAF on Dec 18, 2009 23:43:19 GMT -5
A thought: Have ratings gone done since BFG when Sting stopped appearing on TV? They were doing between 1.1 and 1.3 for most the of year until the last few weeks/months. I believe so. I wouldn't ask questions though until after the new year. From mid-November till the end of December is a pretty crazy time for some people. I just finished college and was super busy these past 6 weeks and didn't always get to watch something when I wanted. I don't have DVD and don't know that many college students who have it either (when living on their own).
|
|
|
Post by Hulkshi Tanahashi on Dec 18, 2009 23:52:36 GMT -5
It would be funny if TNA's ratings stayed under 1.5 after Hogan showed up. For like the entire time he was there.
|
|
|
Post by GaTechGrad on Dec 19, 2009 2:08:13 GMT -5
Losing Sting, Booker, and Angelina didn't help matters. However, I was expecting a small bump up in the ratings for Jarrett's return. I think the continual bait-and-switches (such as Sting's interview) probably turned some people off as well.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,125
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 19, 2009 5:57:38 GMT -5
It would be funny if TNA's ratings stayed under 1.5 after Hogan showed up. For like the entire time he was there. That, or all his ideas end up being bizarre ploys for attention like making Sam Puckett and Carly Shay the Knockout tag champs. Not the actresses, the characters.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,125
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 19, 2009 7:15:32 GMT -5
Might as well, TNA would kill to have iCarly's ratings. Hell, a lot of people would. No way they could afford to pay Nick to let them do that, though.
|
|
|
Post by Ryushinku on Dec 19, 2009 7:40:17 GMT -5
Some people maintain that TNA is rarely able to build up their PPVs and make them seem special, more special than Impact. At the moment it looks like they're having a problem doing the same for their own Impact main events.
I attach no blame to guys like AJ for this, the hype and video segments/"To the back!" seem directed elsewhere all the time, like the Jarrett melodrama.
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Dec 19, 2009 8:13:07 GMT -5
What's frustrating is that Impact has been really good for the last few months, yet the ratings continue to fall.
|
|
|
Post by Djm Doesn't Find You Funny on Dec 19, 2009 9:06:07 GMT -5
TNA has the audience they're going to get. They should dedicate themselves to maintaining the audience they have, because no one is ever crossing over.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 19, 2009 9:47:46 GMT -5
TNA has the audience they're going to get. They should dedicate themselves to maintaining the audience they have, because no one is ever crossing over. If "by the audience they're going to get" you mean the small amount of residual Attitude-era fans that actually still care about Hogan and hate the WWE's kid-oriented direction, I agree. I think most fans from that era have moved on already. That said, the endless hyping of Hogan showing up has become the most obnoxious waiting game I've ever seen.
|
|
pacino
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,504
|
Post by pacino on Dec 19, 2009 13:45:53 GMT -5
who gives a crap about ratings, as a fan? just enjoy the product
|
|
|
Post by BitterAF on Dec 19, 2009 14:00:49 GMT -5
who gives a crap about ratings, as a fan? just enjoy the product I would imagine if they got low enough consistently, TNA would have to look for a new network.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 19, 2009 14:19:15 GMT -5
who gives a crap about ratings, as a fan? just enjoy the product I would imagine if they got low enough consistently, TNA would have to look for a new network. There's really not much difference between a 1.0 and a 1.1.
|
|
pacino
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,504
|
Post by pacino on Dec 19, 2009 14:35:09 GMT -5
Does anyone here know how ratings work? It's a joke, just enjoy the product. A .00000004 difference between segments or weeks means NOTHING in the grand scheme of anything.
|
|
|
Post by donners on Dec 19, 2009 16:38:46 GMT -5
who gives a crap about ratings, as a fan? just enjoy the product If ratings are consistently low and show no sign of improvement, there may not be a product to enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Dec 19, 2009 16:45:06 GMT -5
It would be funny if TNA's ratings stayed under 1.5 after Hogan showed up. For like the entire time he was there. That, or all his ideas end up being bizarre ploys for attention like making Sam Puckett and Carly Shay the Knockout tag champs. Not the actresses, the characters. If that meant Spencer doing commentary, bring it on.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 19, 2009 16:51:28 GMT -5
These are the kind of numbers that make me wonder why TNA invests in expensive "star" contracts in the first place. When was the last time they had a permanent jump up in the ratings? The Angle/Joe feud? TNA is not some dirt-poor indie that's bereft of known talent, it has (or had until recently): Nash Steiner STING Kurt Angle (signed fresh out of WWE as possible!) Booker T Mick Foley Jeff Jarrett The New Age Outlaws The Dudleys/Team 3D
If the only permabump they got from all those signings was during Angel/Joe, they seriously need to consider how useful their "stars" are. I guarantee Booker was utterly worthless in the ratings and I doubt Mick Foley has contributed very much, despite having a starring role and the most watched wrestling segment of all time.
If TNA has made as small a bump as this in its ratings after hiring so much pricey talent, one has to wonder whether they will ever be a threat to WWE, no matter how many times they "fire the first shot" or blow their resources on expensive schemes that go nowhere (Pacman Jones).
|
|
|
Post by donners on Dec 19, 2009 19:44:09 GMT -5
I would imagine if they got low enough consistently, TNA would have to look for a new network. There's really not much difference between a 1.0 and a 1.1. There are several concerns: - They've had around 1.0 ratings for several years, and are at best stagnant. If Panda and Spike don't see room for improvement in TNA, then they are unlikely to continue pouring the money in - especially if Hogan does not bring a substantial increase - They've actually gone down substantially from 1.3 earlier in the year - Hogan will not come cheap, and they will need to make up his cost somehow.
|
|