Ratings in.... 3.2

Slight ratings spike coming off MITB up from 2.9 last week.

Still however below 2011 average of 3.3 & below last years show of 3.38 when the Cena Nexus angle was unfolding...

Very surprising it was below the 2011 average. No idea why! Maybe there was something big on a rival channel but don't believe so.

I agree... One thing I would say is ratings don't change over night. Raw was better in 97 than WCW but it didn't show up in the ratings until 98

Ratings mean jack now, more people watch online than ever before be it on Justin TV or YouTube, still its up from 2.4 a 2 weeks ago and 2.9 last week, the yearly average is a bit tricky to gauge though to be fair, Ratings are always up higher than ever during Mania season so it throws off the other 47/48 weeks of the year

the-gaffer wrote:Ratings mean jack now, more people watch online than ever before be it on Justin TV or YouTube, still its up from 2.4 a 2 weeks ago and 2.9 last week, the yearly average is a bit tricky to gauge though to be fair, Ratings are always up higher than ever during Mania season so it throws off the other 47/48 weeks of the year

Cant agree with that.

Vince doesnt give one stuff about the people who watch on justinTV etc

The reason - corporate sponsors - thats where they make their money, and from the little kiddies who buy the merchandise. People who stream it, are not the demographic vince cares about - they dont buy the shirts, go to the arenas or help him sell ad space.

Ratings are still king in WWE land.

You misunderstand me mate, I mean ratings aren't a true reflection on the amount of people who actually watch their product

I think WWE will continue to see ratings slide as more people use the net. In a way it's good exposure for them -- they can reach anyone, but PPV buy rates will be lower and the ratings have to be high to draw advertising as Hobo says.

I expect a gentle climb shortly though, as more and more people hear about CM Punk and the Vince/HHH story. Plus the pre-WM boost of the Rock being around.

I can see why WWE are diversifying though. Films, TV channels and other entertainment ventures make them a bigger force than if they were simply a wrestling company relying on TV ratings and advertising for revenue.

Maybe it's a sign that the wider audience just isn't interested in worked shoot storylines, however well executed?

I disagree that ratings are in any way unimportant. I'd suggest that the vast majority of WWE's audience (90% plus) watches their shows on TV, just like most TV programmes. It is still only a small proportion of TV viewers who watch online. A ratings increase/decrease is as valid as it ever was. Unless you think that during the period before Wrestlemania a large portion of the audience switches from their laptops to their TV sets, and then goes back to watching online afterwards?!

I wouldn't be willing to bet that 90%+ WWE fans in the United States have access to the USA Network so they would need to find other means to watch, as for Mania season, more casual fans watch in the run up to WrestleMania than any other time in the year, when I said ratings don't mean jack I meant as a marker to how many people watch the product

I think it does mean jack. If the TV viewership goes up, that almost certainly means more people watched Raw.

FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT.

My money is on Crips.

Coming down the aisle, hailing from the South West of England, its Crippled 'Holier Than Thou' Tart. And his opponent, from the heroin capital of the world, its Mr Personality himself, The Gaffer.

What a match we have in store here Clarkey, will Gaffer be able to hit his pattended 'Charisma Bomb' on crips, or will The Tart bore Gaffer into submission with an 84 page evaluation of human rights?

Ring the bell folks....

How do you know I'm from the South West?!

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:How do you know I'm from the South West?!

How do you know he doesn't know your not from the South West?

Clarke James wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:How do you know I'm from the South West?!

How do you know he doesn't know your not from the South West?

Oh yeah, I hadn't thought of that.

I thought you were from America for some reason...

Electric Demon wrote:I thought you were from America for some reason...

How do you know that Mr H wasn't referring to the American South West?

Mr H wrote:Coming down the aisle, hailing from the South West of England,

Because he kindly specifies the country he was referring to, immediately after specifying the region.

Electric Demon wrote:

Mr H wrote:Coming down the aisle, hailing from the South West of England,

Because he kindly specifies the country he was referring to, immediately after specifying the region.

Congratulations. You passed the test.

Ha!

My location was originally Badstreet, USA (the Freebirds' hometown) but then I thought people might assume I was actually American so I changed it because of their human rights record.

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:Ha!

My location was originally Badstreet, USA (the Freebirds' hometown) but then I thought people might assume I was actually American so I changed it because of their human rights record.

I like you more now Crips

Electric Demon wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:Ha!

My location was originally Badstreet, USA (the Freebirds' hometown) but then I thought people might assume I was actually American so I changed it because of their human rights record.

I like you more now Crips

I like you more now because you like me Demon

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:

Electric Demon wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:Ha!

My location was originally Badstreet, USA (the Freebirds' hometown) but then I thought people might assume I was actually American so I changed it because of their human rights record.

I like you more now Crips

I like you more now because you like me Demon

I feel like breaking into U2's "Beautiful Day"

Electric Demon wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:

Electric Demon wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:Ha!

My location was originally Badstreet, USA (the Freebirds' hometown) but then I thought people might assume I was actually American so I changed it because of their human rights record.

I like you more now Crips

I like you more now because you like me Demon

I feel like breaking into U2's "Beautiful Day"

I feel like being sick.

Just ring the dammed bell and start the dammed match.....!

Electric Demon wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:

Electric Demon wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:Ha!

My location was originally Badstreet, USA (the Freebirds' hometown) but then I thought people might assume I was actually American so I changed it because of their human rights record.

I like you more now Crips

I like you more now because you like me Demon

I feel like breaking into U2's "Beautiful Day"

This reminds me of how lionbloodeverywhere and Holymiky would talk to eachother on the old 606.

606v2 = WWE - promises much after a big build up, then let's us down!

What's with the love-in?

Miz NG wrote:606v2 = WWE - promises much after a big build up, then let's us down!

What's with the love-in?

Whatever do you mean?

The wrestling section is dead now, i think Gaffer and Crips have alienated everyone.

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:I think it does mean jack. If the TV viewership goes up, that almost certainly means more people watched Raw.

Officially you'd be spot on, The WWE though say they have 20m viewers a week in the US alone, they get between 9m and 10.5m on SD and RAW and their respective repeats, if their figures are anywhere near acurate then thats an admission that they are aware that a large number of their potential audiance watch online.

the-gaffer wrote:

Davieswasacrippledtart wrote:I think it does mean jack. If the TV viewership goes up, that almost certainly means more people watched Raw.

Officially you'd be spot on, The WWE though say they have 20m viewers a week in the US alone, they get between 9m and 10.5m on SD and RAW and their respective repeats, if their figures are anywhere near acurate then thats an admission that they are aware that a large number of their potential audiance watch online.

Gaffer, since the advent of time/wrestling, promotions have always exagerrated numbers.

I really don't think they are acknowledging online viewership. I expect the 20m figure comes from counting all visitors to wwe.com or something like that (what with NXT being on the website). They are manipulating numbers, as wrestling promotions have always done!

In other news, there weren't really 93,000 people at Wrestlemania 3...

I've no doubt they are talking numbers up, however I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it either, even if the figure is nearer to 15m it would still be far greater than official numbers, if you have add time in the US during RAW you know more people are likely to see it Worldwide via the internet than catch it on TV, thats why ratings don't mean as much to a sponsor now than it did 10 years ago, which was basically my initial point

There are a multitude of reasons why ratings may be lower now than they were 10 or 20 years ago, but TV ratings still count as much as ever. If they go up, that is good, and if they go down, that is bad.

The fact is, Raw was getting 3.8 and 3.9 ratings when The Rock came back in the build up to WM27. Does that mean more people were Raw every week? Yes! It was a massive deal when the ratings shot up that much, both to WWE and to USA Network. You are suggesting that TV ratings don't truly indicate the popularity of a programme, whereas I'm saying they do. I think it's very fair to assume that WWE Raw was more popular when it was getting 3.8 and 3.9 ratings than it is now.

Plus, it is the only viewing information available, therefore it is the official record. If Band A sells twice as many albums as Band B, it's equally reasonable to assume that A's album is more popular. Maybe lots more people burned a copy of B's album for their mate, and more people have viewed them on Youtube, and so on, but Band A is more marketable and more successful because they sold the most albums.

Furthermore, WWE is still competing with other programmes and channels for ratings, and they are all competing for the same eyeballs. Even if there are half as many eyeballs as there once were, all TV programmes are in the same boat.

Ratings are a huge part of sponsorship deals: If WWE can guarantee a sponsor that their ratings are above 3.0, they will get more money than if those ratings are below 3.0!

In addition, WWE's last quarterly earnings showed that TV licensing fees have increased to the point that they now match PPV revenue. This is a huge jump from only a few years ago when PPV revenue dwarfed TV revenue. When negotiating licensing fees, the ratings are surely the most crucial factor of all?

I do understand your point, but I think that you both exagerrate the number of online viewers and underestimate the importance of TV ratings.

Sorry, it's a while since I wrote a long essay like that. School holidays...

Crips 1 - 0 Gaffer

Ratings always go up in Mania season though, thats the time of year casuals are more likely to tune in, while I get what you're saying about TV revenue matching a PPV revenue but thats due to PPV Sales being extremely low from 5 years ago, I don't genuinely believe TV ratings give an accurate account of people who watch Wrestling in North America

the-gaffer wrote:Ratings always go up in Mania season though, thats the time of year casuals are more likely to tune in, while I get what you're saying about TV revenue matching a PPV revenue but thats due to PPV Sales being extremely low from 5 years ago, I don't genuinely believe TV ratings give an accurate account of people who watch Wrestling in North America

So surely in the buil up to Mania more people watch wrestling as a whole then? The increase in interest that leads to the spike in ratings would be matched by people streaming/downloading WWE shows.

I'm not denying that, more people watch Wrestling in Feb/March than any other month

People fast forward through ads online and tevo/Sky+ - ratings are all that matters to advertisers I would say.

Thats a fair point mate but you can't fast forward a live show

'Thats a fair point mate but you can't fast forward a live show.'

Very true, I'm not aware how viable live streams are for RAW - I presumed a large % of internet viewers watch delayed on the likes of wweo etc.

Also the USA network is available on basic cable, I suspect (entirely opinion) that you are unlikely to have solid broadband good enough to stream live TV without basic cable. A cohort I can think of are people at UNI/college which could be a decent amount of viewers.

In summary unless they can count the viewers watching advertisements online (maybe live via wwe.com) then the ratings will continue to be the main guage of penetration.

How many homes do Nelson cover? Is it not something like 18% of homes in North America

According to Wiki 58% of homes have basic cable and 22% of people have broadband.

So they cover 58% of homes in North America?

I'm no expert on American television but basic cable is estimated to be in 58% of N American homes (according to a couple of websites) and USAs website and Wiki state is is available on basic cable packages, it is only their HD service that is on fancier satellite etc.

So I'd say yes but happy to be corrected if someone knows better.

I thought it was lower but thats only second hand info