|
Post by angryfan on Dec 4, 2013 14:40:11 GMT -5
Ratings don't matter when some guys don't do so good. They do matter with theirs. If a guy I like get good numbers then ratings matter. If a guy I like doesn't get good rating then they don't matter If a guy I like gets bad ratings see #2 If a guy I don't like gets bad ratings see #1 Serious question then. If ratings, and things like them, are truly meaningless, crowd reactions aren't reliable in big cities, then what is the gage? What does matter? I know the real answer is "What Vince wants", but is there anything tangible to show whether someone is "really" over or "really" not?
|
|
hassanchop
Grimlock
Who are you to doubt Belldandy?
Posts: 14,910
|
Post by hassanchop on Dec 4, 2013 14:56:50 GMT -5
This is what they get for firing everybody.
|
|
|
Post by sportatorium on Dec 4, 2013 15:00:26 GMT -5
Considering that the game was a blowout, they should have seen pretty much the entire country outside of Seattle tuning in & as someone who lives in Seattle, we get it starting at 8 Pacific Time, so I was able to see most of it after the game.
Football isn't the only reason. People aren't watching the show. Orton, Cena, Big Show & HHH aren't going to bring viewers in. Get Punk in a blood feud w/The Shield that doesn't involve the Authority, get some mainstream publicity & build the show around it. Pay Brock for more appearances & use him to build some people up.
|
|
wisdomwizard
King Koopa
Too Salty
Watching you.
Posts: 11,087
|
Post by wisdomwizard on Dec 4, 2013 15:05:46 GMT -5
|
|
Juice
El Dandy
Wrong? Oh he can tell ya about being wrong.
I'm the one who raised you from perdition.
Posts: 8,172
|
Post by Juice on Dec 4, 2013 15:06:50 GMT -5
Its been on the dvr, still haven't brought myself to watch it.
|
|
Y2M
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,757
|
Post by Y2M on Dec 4, 2013 15:08:53 GMT -5
Bad News Barrett is going to have some new material.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on Dec 4, 2013 15:16:23 GMT -5
That's not a panic button, that's just steadying the course. There's your panic button. ...
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Dec 4, 2013 15:19:00 GMT -5
"Damn that Punk and Bryan, taking viewers away from our highly hyped Cena/Orton segment!" f***ing glory hounds!
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Dec 4, 2013 15:41:53 GMT -5
Looking at PWInsider's ratings chart, I find something interesting. We have seen the third hour have issues for a while now, but in terms of every hour is lower than the one before it, that trend (and it's been every week since) began 10/21/213. That was the week before Hell in a Cell when Daniel Bryan was completely removed from the title picture. So Orton/Show/Triple H as the main event was the constant. Then throw Cena in there and it's Orton/Cena/Triple H and the trend STILL continues. We've shown that Cena not being there doesn't negatively effect ratings, which means that, the sole constants for the trend have been Orton/Triphanie. Here's the link to the ratings breakdowns. pwinsider.com/article/81987/wwe-raw-audience-drops-to-lowest-of-2013-.html?p=1
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Dec 4, 2013 15:49:21 GMT -5
If a guy I like get good numbers then ratings matter. If a guy I like doesn't get good rating then they don't matter If a guy I like gets bad ratings see #2 If a guy I don't like gets bad ratings see #1 Serious question then. If ratings, and things like them, are truly meaningless, crowd reactions aren't reliable in big cities, then what is the gage? What does matter? I know the real answer is "What Vince wants", but is there anything tangible to show whether someone is "really" over or "really" not? PPV buyrates, house show attendance, merchandise and live reactions should be the only barometer for determining who is over. TV ratings are fine for network negotiations, but they are insignificant in gauging appeal because only 6% of that viewing audience even PAYS MONEY on the product, regardless of what segments they watch or prefer.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Dec 4, 2013 16:03:53 GMT -5
Serious question then. If ratings, and things like them, are truly meaningless, crowd reactions aren't reliable in big cities, then what is the gage? What does matter? I know the real answer is "What Vince wants", but is there anything tangible to show whether someone is "really" over or "really" not? PPV buyrates, house show attendance, merchandise and live reactions should be the only barometer for determining who is over. TV ratings are fine for network negotiations, but they are insignificant in gauging appeal because only 6% of that viewing audience even PAYS MONEY on the product, regardless of what segments they watch or prefer. Point taken. However, consider this. Merch sales, you're correct, but if a company has 5 pieces of merchandise for one performer, 3 for another, and 2 for another, with each of them selling well, who will be the "top draw" in terms of merchandise? All things being equal, a larger number of products will generally equate to "more units sold". If Performer A sells 5 shirts, 5 hats, 5 foam fingers, and 5 replica belts, while performer B sells 7 shirts and 9 hats, but those are the only items that exist for him, then performer A is "more valuable" because he's sold more total units. It's a manipulatable statistic. Live audience reaction, I agree with you, but when the announcers (and Vince, who feeds them the lines) discount arenas as being "bizzarroworld",doesn't it change the weight? Attendence is static. If a show sells 9K tickets, that's the number, no fudging it. However, who is credited for the "draw" is tough> We can say "Oh, it's the top guy", but if the next show with the same card draws half as many people, what does that say? I'm not saying I don't agree with you that these things are indicators of who is really over, but knowing Vince's occasionally delusional mindset, each of these things can easily be manipulated to "what Vince wants".
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Dec 4, 2013 16:10:04 GMT -5
PPV buyrates, house show attendance, merchandise and live reactions should be the only barometer for determining who is over. TV ratings are fine for network negotiations, but they are insignificant in gauging appeal because only 6% of that viewing audience even PAYS MONEY on the product, regardless of what segments they watch or prefer. Point taken. However, consider this. Merch sales, you're correct, but if a company has 5 pieces of merchandise for one performer, 3 for another, and 2 for another, with each of them selling well, who will be the "top draw" in terms of merchandise? All things being equal, a larger number of products will generally equate to "more units sold". If Performer A sells 5 shirts, 5 hats, 5 foam fingers, and 5 replica belts, while performer B sells 7 shirts and 9 hats, but those are the only items that exist for him, then performer A is "more valuable" because he's sold more total units. It's a manipulatable statistic. Live audience reaction, I agree with you, but when the announcers (and Vince, who feeds them the lines) discount arenas as being "bizzarroworld",doesn't it change the weight? Attendence is static. If a show sells 9K tickets, that's the number, no fudging it. However, who is credited for the "draw" is tough> We can say "Oh, it's the top guy", but if the next show with the same card draws half as many people, what does that say? I'm not saying I don't agree with you that these things are indicators of who is really over, but knowing Vince's occasionally delusional mindset, each of these things can easily be manipulated to "what Vince wants". I agree with all of this, and the company biases that lie therein. It's hard to quantify what's what to a precise degree, but it at least is somewhat tangible monetarily. To me, though, I despise the fact that TV ratings determine or curtail pushes. I don't think people who "take free samples" but then never buy the product being sold should be counted. They're freeloaders, not customers.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Dec 4, 2013 16:10:55 GMT -5
Eh, it's only one show, but the problem is that WWE will never accept responsibility no matter how far it dips. They'll always find a reason as to why their viewers aren't watching their "excellent" product. The problem though is that when it comes down to it- between how cable TV is ubiquitous now, the game has changed for Nielsen ratings. Due to this change in ratings, WWE's ratings are perfectly fine [they always have great DVR-adjusted ratings and are high on the cable list.) The bigger problem WWE has is that in the current era, it's not about viewers, but about being part of the ZEITGEIST. At the moment in cable- the thing to make a show a BIG HIT is the media TELLING YOU it's a big hit, not the ratings of the show proving it's a big hit. Right now, Duck Dynasty is considered a "huge hit everyone watches". It gets about 4 million viewers, only slightly higher than WWE does now at their worst.. Pawn Stars is considered a huge hit, and it gets the same ratings WWE gets at their worst. Even shows with absolutely miniscule ratings like "Girls" (a .35 in the ratings) are considered huge hits, solely because the media decided to tell people they're huge hits. That's the bigger problem for WWE than their actual ratings- and even if they plummet, they still would be hits on cable TV.
|
|
Sparkybob
King Koopa
I have a status?
Posts: 11,003
|
Post by Sparkybob on Dec 4, 2013 16:11:19 GMT -5
PPV buyrates, house show attendance, merchandise and live reactions should be the only barometer for determining who is over. TV ratings are fine for network negotiations, but they are insignificant in gauging appeal because only 6% of that viewing audience even PAYS MONEY on the product, regardless of what segments they watch or prefer. Point taken. However, consider this. Merch sales, you're correct, but if a company has 5 pieces of merchandise for one performer, 3 for another, and 2 for another, with each of them selling well, who will be the "top draw" in terms of merchandise? All things being equal, a larger number of products will generally equate to "more units sold". If Performer A sells 5 shirts, 5 hats, 5 foam fingers, and 5 replica belts, while performer B sells 7 shirts and 9 hats, but those are the only items that exist for him, then performer A is "more valuable" because he's sold more total units. But the reason the WWE only makes new merch for wrestler who actually sell it. AJ Lee has like 40 different items on WWE shop and the reason the WWE keeps making more is because people are buying a sh** ton of her stuff. It's basic supply and demand. If Del Rio shirts aren't selling for instance, the WWE ism't going to pump out 6 new items for him.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Dec 4, 2013 16:14:03 GMT -5
Fire Russo
|
|
|
Post by Loser troll. Please ban me on Dec 4, 2013 16:38:53 GMT -5
It was: The weather The [x] Season [x] was on tv too WWE always does these numbers this time of year I think that covers the bulk of the excuses.
|
|
|
Post by Kayfabe FAN don't want none on Dec 4, 2013 16:47:16 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 16:47:23 GMT -5
There are a lot of guys that I like and the tag division is really good but Raw just isn't that much fun these days.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Dec 4, 2013 16:53:50 GMT -5
Just saw, and yeah it's sescoops.com so take that with a grain of salt, 2.65 was the rating. Found a 2.6 rating 9/15/08, 12/31/07, Christmas 2006 was as well.
Ratings might not matter like they once did, but if, essentially, a go home show before a PPV that featured all your "big names" with the exception of Undertaker draws what a Christmas or New Years Eve broadcast, that's not good.
|
|
JTH
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 3MB
Posts: 4,467
|
Post by JTH on Dec 4, 2013 17:27:56 GMT -5
Remember when Hunter was bragging about the ratings for RAW a week into Randy's title reign?
Yeah, neither do I...
|
|