Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2010 18:15:31 GMT -5
Last Thursday damaged it. They'll be going back to Thursdays soon enough. They drew a 1.1 on Thursday and a 1.0 on Monday, and that's going to convince Spike to pull the plug on Monday's? Come on. Disappointment and bad are two different things. The ratings are a disappointment given the hype, but coming close to what they usually do Thursday on a night when they were up against their direct competition is not bad. Raw's ratings dropped from 3.7 to 3.4 and no one cares, but TNA's almost matches what they did 3 nights ago (unopposed) and Spike is going to panic? Let's be serious here. If 3 months from now Impact is drawing 0.4 ratings, then yes, that's panic time.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 9, 2010 18:17:22 GMT -5
I think it would be more interesting to see the number watching (swore it reached 1/4 levels of activity here) and how the quarters were, if it was steady or high in the opening and dropped after.
Still, it's not as bad when they got a 0.6 when they went up with a taped RAW the first time.
|
|
|
Post by Slammy Award-Winning Cannibal on Mar 9, 2010 18:17:39 GMT -5
If they were getting below 1.0, then yes that would be a problem. Below a 1.0 and then it would be a problem?? Sorry guys... but believe it or not, Dixie and Co. WANTED people to tune in last night. They advertised the bejesus out of that show. They made a point to feature the in-ring returns of Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Sting, RVD, and Jeff Hardy. All within the span one two hour free broadcast. 1.0. Any way you slice it, this was an embarrassment for TNA.
|
|
comahan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by comahan on Mar 9, 2010 18:19:44 GMT -5
If they were getting below 1.0, then yes that would be a problem. Below a 1.0 and then it would be a problem?? Sorry guys... but believe it or not, Dixie and Co. WANTED people to tune in last night. They advertised the bejesus out of that show. They made a point to feature the in-ring returns of Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Sting, RVD, and Jeff Hardy. All within the span one two hour free broadcast. 1.0. Any way you slice it, this was an embarrassment for TNA. Even if its sliced in squares? Because I dont like it when things are sliced in squares.
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Mar 9, 2010 18:21:54 GMT -5
I think its a disapointment because TNA at least thought they were going to hurt Raw.
Oh they did give Raw some pain, but it was in their abdomen because they were laughing so hard.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 9, 2010 18:22:17 GMT -5
Well, if people think the rating suffered due to the last two shows, then the next week should improve since this one was considered a good show.
Also, I'm pretty sure if they can stabilize the ratings instead of dropping more, they should be fine.
|
|
|
Post by jobsquad on Mar 9, 2010 18:22:51 GMT -5
As long as it does better than whatever used to be in their time slot, it will be ok.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2010 18:23:09 GMT -5
If they were getting below 1.0, then yes that would be a problem. Below a 1.0 and then it would be a problem?? Sorry guys... but believe it or not, Dixie and Co. WANTED people to tune in last night. They advertised the bejesus out of that show. They made a point to feature the in-ring returns of Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Sting, RVD, and Jeff Hardy. All within the span one two hour free broadcast. 1.0. Any way you slice it, this was an embarrassment for TNA. When Raw brought back Bret Hart recently, their ratings were pretty much identical to what they had drawn the previous 7 years (give or take). TNA had their big moment on 1/4. You can't debut Hogan twice (his debut segment scored a 1.8 or something like that). Yes, a Hogan/Flair showdown should have drawn more (they didn't really hype up Hardy, RVD, or Sting). But pretty much maintaining their current fanbase despite being up against the wrestling monopoly is not bad. Sorry. Again, disappointing? Sure. I thought the show would do better too. But it's really not that bad. A 0.5 rating would have been bad. People are expecting way too much, way too soon for TNA. Dixie and Hulk are supposed to expect big things because they are running things. That's why the way they should think. Fans should be more realistic. It will take a while for TNA to build up a fanbase above their usual 1.0-1.3 on Monday's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2010 18:24:12 GMT -5
Big deal. Good ratings is not = quality show No but it does equal Long running show
|
|
ICBM
King Koopa
Didn't know we did status updates here now
Posts: 12,288
|
Post by ICBM on Mar 9, 2010 18:24:21 GMT -5
Hey uh just thinking about it and I could be wrong here but. Dosn't the 3-whatever for Raw and 1.1 mean more people watched wrestling monday than last week? And if memory serves that skews the way the ratings "share" IE 1.2=1.5 million viewers because the audience is larger overall on cable that night? So wouldn't 1.1 be more like 1.3 on Thursday?
|
|
|
Post by forgottensinpwf on Mar 9, 2010 18:27:54 GMT -5
Well, if people think the rating suffered due to the last two shows, then the next week should improve since this one was considered a good show. Also, I'm pretty sure if they can stabilize the ratings instead of dropping more, they should be fine. Exactly. If you're not giving them anything to enjoy before the big move, why would people tune in? Especially with the trainwreck January show, and the steady decline in quality as the weeks rolled on.
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,563
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Mar 9, 2010 18:28:08 GMT -5
They advertised the crap out of Hogan/Flair returning to the ring.
A 1.0 has to be a big disappointment.
|
|
|
Post by FailedGimmick on Mar 9, 2010 18:29:03 GMT -5
Dave Meltzer says Impact did a 0.98, so it was rounded UP to 1.0 - failure. Do you have a link for this?
|
|
|
Post by Clarence "Showstealer" Mason on Mar 9, 2010 18:30:22 GMT -5
So let me get this straight. You pull out all the stops, put on all this extra expense in going live, bring in another big name signing to a roster beginning to sag with talent, prepared the show for 2 months and you STILL ONLY DRAW A 0.98?
I'm sure some will disagree but my opinion is there are only two words that can come to mind.
EPIC........FAIL
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 9, 2010 18:30:34 GMT -5
Well, if people think the rating suffered due to the last two shows, then the next week should improve since this one was considered a good show. Also, I'm pretty sure if they can stabilize the ratings instead of dropping more, they should be fine. Exactly. If you're not giving them anything to enjoy before the big move, why would people tune in? Especially with the trainwreck January show, and the steady decline in quality as the weeks rolled on. it was just the last two weeks. Everything else was considered working.
|
|
|
Post by Seth Drakin of Monster Crap on Mar 9, 2010 18:33:32 GMT -5
Im just laughing at people trying to find EXCUSES for anything that doesnt say TNA is going to as Tazz said, "dominate Monday Nights"
|
|
|
Post by jobsquad on Mar 9, 2010 18:34:33 GMT -5
Jim Ross said it best:
RAW vs. iMPACT!: I am not going to analyze the Monday night wrestling sagas of last night for many reasons. One, I'm not unbiased and two, there is PLENTY of analyzing going on from wrestling websites that do that sort of thing for a living. It can be said, however, that those fans who are yearning for longer matches and more matches in general on TV are likely still yearning. Plus, and finally, some people forget apparently that they are producing 'episodic' television.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Mar 9, 2010 18:34:39 GMT -5
Im just laughing at people trying to find EXCUSES for anything that doesnt say TNA is going to as Tazz said, "dominate Monday Nights" No, it's trying to stop people from calling the death of TNA for a point drop in the rating.
|
|
|
Post by rawthentic on Mar 9, 2010 18:34:53 GMT -5
Well, it's probably not what they wanted but it appears going head to head with WWE is not going to hurt them as they drew around the same as they would on Thursday. I for one, don't think they promoted the show that well. Not nearly as much as they did Jan. 4th....but whatever, what is of real importance to me is that last night TNA put on a significantly better show than WWE did.
|
|
|
Post by Ryushinku on Mar 9, 2010 18:35:22 GMT -5
Well, if people think the rating suffered due to the last two shows, then the next week should improve since this one was considered a good show. Also, I'm pretty sure if they can stabilize the ratings instead of dropping more, they should be fine. Makes it even more of a shame that next Monday won't be a live show for them. If they were, I'm sure they'd improve over this 1.0. Even if some goodwill interest carries over, the stacked-looking card for Raw and the fact Impact is taped...you'd have to think that'll be a detriment. I wonder if that'll be the next thing Hogan & Bisch really push for - live every week. They'll certainly hope, like you say, that the ratings stayed pretty stable through the show. Or better yet, built up.
|
|