# All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's quite fitting that a new thread is opened because this year starts a new chapter in ratings, namely the "Pray to god our hardcores don't tune out" era.

The Raw pre- and post-Wrestlemania clearly, without a shadow of a doubt, cement the fact that aside from WWE fans, nobody's watching this shit anymore. Wrestlemania can't even draw those FANS back in that tuned out.

And if they keep feeding us shit like RomanTHEguyWinsLOL, they'll be in 1.X territory faster than they can say "Please retire Vince".


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:clap :clap:clap









The fam's here, the drinks here, the marks are here. Well f*ck let's get it!


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Top 3 Youtube draws from this week's RAW (One of the most relevant global parameters): 

* #1 *










* #2*










*#3*










Reigns has consistently proven over the course of last year to be commanding huge global interest. Studying this parameter for the next few years or so would be interesting as WWE is more global than ever before with the emergence of the network.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Makes sense to make a new thread. The rating from the night after Mania was just too embarrassing for that thread to bare.

:mj4


----------



## xDD

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

>Reigns.
>huge global interest.

Pick one.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Should've just made this the YouTube views thread Brock. Ratings don't matter anymore. A lot have vanished when what they were saying was proved wrong. New champ even worse ratings :toomanykobes


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

fuck me it looks like this thread is going to be youtube views thread again.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope the Reigns "heel" video" crosses 2 million this week.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> fuck me it looks like this thread is going to be youtube views thread again.


When YouTube views fail we'll get Facebook and Twitter followers :jericho3


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I wish we could have a television ratings thread and a separate YouTube and social media views count thread.


----------



## Marrakesh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Congratulations to Kevin Owens, Chris Jericho and Sami Zayn on such a fantastic number on Youtube. :clap 

:lol


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Can't understand what's the big deal about Youtube is here. The thread specifically states that any drawing argument can be put forth, including Youtube. People are being a bit irrational asking for ratings to have a monopoly over this thread.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Marrakesh said:


> Congratulations to Kevin Owens, Chris Jericho and Sami Zayn on such a fantastic number on Youtube. :clap
> 
> :lol


No love for Cesaro? :lol ( Sorry for quoting btw, I know it offends you a bit. > )


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Don't really see youtube ratings as indicator of anything.
A video with a dog licking his balls can get bigger youtube ratings sometimes, it means nothing.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> Don't really see youtube ratings as indicator of anything.
> A video with a dog licking his balls can get bigger youtube ratings sometimes, it means nothing.


Yes but we're not comparing a video of a dog licking it's balls with a pro wrestling video. We're comparing pro wrestling videos with pro wrestling videos. You have a better tangible global indicator? Kindly bring it to our notice.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> When YouTube views fail we'll get Facebook and Twitter followers :jericho3


Well what I can get from twitter is Ryder is a bigger draw than Roman :draper2


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



dougfisher_05 said:


> I wish we could have a television ratings thread and a separate YouTube and social media views count thread.


Why? There's the word "draw" in the thread -- that encompasses different stats from different forms of media which give weight to the drawability factor discussions. Weekly Nelson ratings are only one metric of many


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> Yes but we're not comparing a video of a dog licking it's balls with a pro wrestling video. We're comparing pro wrestling videos with pro wrestling videos. You have a better tangible global indicator? Kindly bring it to our notice.


Sorry pal I just don't buy into social media ratings as a reliable indicator
To me TV ratings are still the most reliable measure, its the best way to measure the popularity of the product as is now in comparison to past months/years.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Guys, when are we goona start using Instagram to see who draws.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> Sorry pal I just don't buy into social media ratings as a reliable indicator
> To me TV ratings are still the most reliable measure, its the best way to measure the popularity of the product as is now in comparison to past months/years.


Plus the ratings will indicate just how much money WWE gets from USA Network, which right now is a couple hundred million dollars. That's alot of money. That's why their used as a huge indicator and more than anyother.


----------



## Werdum

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE earned $2.3 million from ad revenue from YouTube videos in 2014. Even if they doubled that amount, that's just under $5 million, which is 0.7% of their entire revenue in 2015. Less than 1%! If they tripled it, it's about 7 million, which is about 1% of their revenue in 2015. Now consider that even if Reigns gets the most views, he still isn't responsible for anywhere near 100% of that very small ad revenue number.

Terrible argument to make in favor of Reigns. The guy can't draw on TV, he doesn't sell anywhere near enough merch given his level of push, and the revenue from YT videos is minuscule.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A bit of information on the WWE Youtube channel: Major parameters, the growth trend and it's standing in the global ladder.































Source: socialblade.com


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717568719359049729


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Werdum said:


> WWE earned $2.3 million from ad revenue from YouTube videos in 2014. Even if they doubled that amount, that's just under $5 million, which is 0.7% of their entire revenue in 2015. Less than 1%! If they tripled it, it's about 7 million, which is about 1% of their revenue in 2015. Now consider that even if Reigns gets the most views, he still isn't responsible for anywhere near 100% of that very small ad revenue number.
> 
> Terrible argument to make in favor of Reigns. The guy can't draw on TV, he doesn't sell anywhere near enough merch given his level of push, and the revenue from YT videos is minuscule.


Great info. Now compare that to USA who pays them a couple hundred million dollars. We need not say anymore.

@SnapOrTap tweet he just linked to:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717568719359049729
Post Mania last year compared to Post Mania this year :lmao


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE Ratings have been falling for 10+ years and yet they've been signing path breaking deals every time despite the fact that WWE "T.V" viewership is down 66 % from 2000. Ratings are a factor of the times and their standard keeps on changing with the times.

On the other hand, Youtube is not just about money, it's one of the most relevant global parameters to gauge popularity of each and every performers amongst a very vast domain. Secondly T.V is on it's way down, the change is irreversible.. Internet on the other hand is well on it's way to ascendency. The growth chart of the WWE Youtube channel a post back illustrates that which makes these figures even more significant and TV Ratings more and more redundant by the day.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> WWE Ratings have been falling for 10+ years and yet they've been signing path breaking deals every time despite the fact that WWE "T.V" viewership is down 66 % from 2000. Ratings are a factor of the times and their standard keeps on changing with the times.
> 
> On the other hand, Youtube is not just about money, it's one of the most relevant global parameters to gauge popularity of each and every performers amongst a very vast domain. Secondly T.V is on it's way down, the change is irreversible.. Internet on the other hand is well on it's way to ascendency. The growth chart of the WWE Youtube channel a post back illustrates that which makes these figures even more significant and TV Ratings more and more redundant by the day.


There's almost no point in arguing this. Only on this board does social media not matter in 2016.


----------



## Werdum

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> There's almost no point in arguing this. Only on this board does social media not matter in 2016.



No one ever stated that. Let's look at some facts though:

NFL Facebook likes: 13,552,599
WWE Facebook likes: 31,037,477

NFL YouYube: 949,492 subscribers and 453,630,860 views
WWE YouTube: 10,729,518 subscribers and 8,465,994,576 views 

NFL revenue in 2015: $12 billion
WWE revenue in 2015: $658 million

WWE dominates in social media metrics, but its revenue in comparison is laughable. Either the WWE has a large % of fake social media followers, or they are terrible at monetizing their social media following.

It's probably a mix of both. On TV for example, advertising rates for pro wrestling are exceptionally low.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Werdum said:


> No one ever stated that. Let's look at some facts though:
> 
> NFL Facebook likes: 13,552,599
> WWE Facebook likes: 31,037,477
> 
> NFL YouYube: 949,492 subscribers and 453,630,860 views
> WWE YouTube: 10,729,518 subscribers and 8,465,994,576 views
> 
> NFL revenue in 2015: $12 billion
> WWE revenue in 2015: $658 million
> 
> WWE dominates in social media metrics, but its revenue in comparison is laughable. Either the WWE has a large % of fake social media followers, or they are terrible at monetizing their social media following.
> 
> It's probably a mix of both. On TV for example, advertising rates for pro wrestling are exceptionally low.


Social media was outright dismissed in the last thread to the point I felt some were trolling and now some in this new thread are questioning why it's being brought up. It may not be the end all, be all, but it is a metric. I do agree that the WWE should monetize their social media following better. It's similar to an artist having 10 million Twitter followers but failing to have that audience buy their album.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What are your thoughts on the ratings @Empress. Are they good or bad compared to the last few post Mania Raws? Also thoughts on it being the lowest in viewership and ratings in the last 19 years. 

I know your opinion on the social media aspect.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Great info. Now compare that to USA who pays them a couple hundred million dollars. We need not say anymore.
> 
> @SnapOrTap tweet he just linked to:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717568719359049729
> Post Mania last year compared to Post Mania this year :lmao


Thanks for posting the tweet.

I have no idea how to embed and kept failing lmao. 

Appreciated.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> What are your thoughts on the ratings @Empress. Are they good or bad compared to the last few post Mania Raws? Also thoughts on it being the lowest in viewership and ratings in the last 19 years.
> 
> I know your opinion on the social media aspect.


I thought this week's RAW would get 4 million ratings for each hour and didn't. So, it underperformed. Overall, the ratings have been very stagnant. Outside of Shane's return and Roman winning the belt, not much has changed. At least, the TV ratings aren't in a free fall (from week to week). They stay in the 3-3.5 million range.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I thought this week's RAW would get 4 million ratings for each hour and didn't. So, it underperformed. Overall, the ratings have been very stagnant. Outside of Shane's return and Roman winning the belt, not much has changed. At least, the TV ratings aren't in a free fall (from week to week). They stay in the 3-3.5 million range.


You think WWE and Vince are worried that was the worst rating in over a decade? I just assumed a post mania Raw would be in the 3s but was surprised it was that low. If that's what they get for a post mania Raw do you think it'll get much worse now that Baseball is back, NBA playoffs soon. Also the NFL which I think is a threat despite WWE leading them in Facebook followers.


----------



## OwenSES

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The drop from last years Mania to this years Mania is crazy.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> You think WWE and Vince are worried that was the worst rating in over a decade? I just assumed a post mania Raw would be in the 3s but was surprised it was that low. If that's what they get for a post mania Raw do you think it'll get much worse now that Baseball is back, NBA playoffs soon. Also the NFL which I think is a threat despite WWE leading them in Facebook followers.


I don't think the WWE is a threat to the NFL in any real way. Social media is great, but that's always been one component. 

As for the ratings, Vince could goose them and highlight the live plus-3 number. Either way, the post Mania RAW should've done better on the live airing.


----------



## Saved_masses

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wrestlemania YouTube views:

Shane vs Taker 3.99m
The Rock and Cena 2.52m
Reigns vs HHH 2.01m

nearly double for Shane-o and taker over the main event, very surprising. Just incase these numbers have not been posted.


----------



## Werdum

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Saved_masses said:


> Wrestlemania YouTube views:
> 
> Shane vs Taker 3.99m
> The Rock and Cena 2.52m
> Reigns vs HHH 2.01m
> 
> nearly double for Shane-o and taker over the main event, very surprising. Just incase these numbers have not been posted.


This clearly means that Shane is a bigger draw than The Rock and Cena combined.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE Total Divas Viewership This Week?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

This week's WWE Total Divas episode on the E! network drew 649,000 viewers and ranked #28 for the night on cable.

This is up 15% from last week's episode, which drew 563,000 viewers and ranked #34 for the night on cable. The week before that drew 663,000 viewers and the week before that drew 650,000.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ase-for-this-week-wwe-total-divas-viewership/


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No. 3 Merch Seller Maineventing back to back Wrestlemanias? Yup.

Ratings falling a million from last year's Raw? Yup.

I see a pattern here fellas. 

:reigns2


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Shit is shit and the fans have finally realized that. Mania, in many ways for many people, was a fuck you from WWE for all the hijacking nonsense fans pulled for two straight Manias back in 2014. Favorites like New Day, Styles, Sasha, Becky, Ambrose, Shane all lost at Mania with one of the most hated babyfaces of the modern era in Roman Reigns standing tall as the new WWE World champion for a THIRD TIME.

They deserve this. All of this. That's what you get for thinking putting bandaids (Cesaro, Enzo/Cass, AJ's win) over bullet holes would make everything good again. You couldn't even break a 3.0 for a post-Mania RAW. Absolutely pathetic and inexcusable.

2016 may end up being even worse than 2015, if you could even imagine that. I also predict RAW will get a 1.9 or lower rating this year. It's long overdue, honestly. Especially when August/September comes crashing down with football. WWE is about to have a rude awakening and I have no sympathy for them. At all.


----------



## Russoite

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Social media was outright dismissed in the last thread to the point I felt some were trolling and now some in this new thread are questioning why it's being brought up. It may not be the end all, be all, but it is a metric. I do agree that the WWE should monetize their social media following better. It's similar to an artist having 10 million Twitter followers but failing to have that audience buy their album.


Social media aint worth shit. YouTube has nowhere near the amount of ads as TV and even if it did there is ad block.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Russoite said:


> Social media aint worth shit. YouTube has nowhere near the amount of ads as TV and even if it did there is ad block.


I'm not debating this point further with anyone in this thread. I know what I'm talking about and frankly, that's all that matters to me. Do you.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lol I entered the thread and saw Reigns fans discussing twitter and YouTube so I already know the way the post RAW episode went ratings wise without even having to see it. :mj5 Reigns has never been the casual savant they pretend he is, and it doesn't help they delivered what many feel was a subpar WM.Cena fans haven't defaulted to him and he's never been as charismatic as his predecessors. Rock, Sting, Austin, Hogan, Flair, ect, Would have lapped Cena ten times over in popularity and merchandise sales after this two year, monster push he's received. Smoke and mirrors will only get you so far now that he _actually_ has the belt.


It's obvious when a guy has "it" and when he doesn't. The McMahon's are going to learn the hard way that it takes more than putting a guy you find handsome in the top slot for him to actually be conductive to success in that role. Him being attractive doesn't make him a draw. A WWE champ with no personality and a poorly booked product. As I said before, unless they get the belt off of Roman and/or shake the *entire* product up, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better, and that goes for ratings *and* attendance. Wait until we're in the thick of football season.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

From now on, every dipshit taking YouTube hits as proof for how over Reigns is, will be put instantly on ignore.
I can't take that asinine bullshit anymore.

Once Raw will be cancelled for good, the last few shows will be a guaranteed YouTube hit. And I bet some idiots will take it as proof for how popular WWE was until the curtain fell.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> No. 3 Merch Seller Maineventing back to back Wrestlemanias? Yup.
> 
> Ratings falling a million from last year's Raw? Yup.
> 
> I see a pattern here fellas.
> 
> :reigns2



To be fair, I thought Roman was #2 , (albeit closer to #3 than he was to #1 )


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The most worrying stat for wwe is the the fall in the number of paying subs from the last wm.

Let's forget reigns for a minute because his push is just a symptom of the problem at the moment, the booking, the storytelling, the pushes, the turns, everything at raw level is failing. The crowd is going into business for itself and the product however you spin it, long term is dying.

They need to do something quickly to stop this long slow death.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How about a short, quick death?

Bang Bang!

:heston


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Lothario said:


> Lol I entered the thread and saw Reigns fans discussing twitter and YouTube so I already know the way the post RAW episode went ratings wise without even having to see it. :mj5 Reigns has never been the casual savant they pretend he is, and it doesn't help they delivered what many feel was a subpar WM.Cena fans haven't defaulted to him and he's never been as charismatic as his predecessors. Rock, Sting, Austin, Hogan, Flair, ect, Would have lapped Cena ten times over in popularity and merchandise sales after this two year, monster push he's received. Smoke and mirrors will only get you so far now that he _actually_ has the belt.
> 
> 
> It's obvious when a guy has "it" and when he doesn't. The McMahon's are going to learn the hard way that it takes more than putting a guy you find handsome in the top slot for him to actually be conductive to success in that role. Him being attractive doesn't make him a draw. A WWE champ with no personality and a poorly booked product. As I said before, unless they get the belt off of Roman and/or shake the *entire* product up, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better, and that goes for ratings *and* attendance. Wait until we're in the thick of football season.


B..b..but Summerslam sold out!

:lol


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



bullshitter said:


> The most worrying stat for wwe is the the fall in the number of paying subs from the last wm.
> 
> Let's forget reigns for a minute because his push is just a symptom of the problem at the moment, the booking, the storytelling, the pushes, the turns, everything at raw level is failing. The crowd is going into business for itself and the product however you spin it, long term is dying.
> 
> They need to do something quickly to stop this long slow death.


The paying subs didn't fall at all. They actually increased substantially while considering the entire global numbers. They fell a minuscule 1% domestically which would be more than compensated for by the large number of trial sign ups they received of which a significant portion would become paying customers considering the retention ratio we have witnessed in this service.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> They fell a minuscule 1% domestically


That is really bad considering the network is still fairly new even if it went up 1% it would still be bad.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> That is really bad considering the network is still fairly new even if it went up 1% it would still be bad.


Not that much. In the grand scheme of things, they have indeed added substantial numbers both domestically and internationally from the same time last year. Remember that once the first numbers were out, some people were putting across the point that 667,000 is close to WWE's ceiling.. and WWE almost doubled it domestically in a short space of time. The scope of growth still is immense.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Voice Lives next week vs Raw hosted by Dr. Phil.

Hmmm.

Hmmm.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I predict that within 3 years that all WWE content will be on the WWE Network. USA will cancel Raw after Raw falls below a 2.0. Vince could shop the show to other networks but he won't get any good deals at all. Wrestling is dead. Compare the amount of people that watched WCW/WWE from 17 years ago till today. The wrestling audience has went from what, 12+ mils nightly down to 3.5mils? You can't survive on that. You can't lose that many customers and still survive in the current format. There's an end game here.


----------



## heizenberg the G

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

hahahahaha Roman marks are so desperate they have nothing to say about the shit ratings so they showing us youtube views and Twitter like that suppose to mean something. They can push Reigns a million times and make him headline Wrestlemania every year he will never be the star they want him to be he dont have enough charisma and poor mic skills to be the guy. He look like he could be a good smug upper midcard heel but that's it nothing more.


----------



## Marrakesh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> I predict that within 3 years that all WWE content will be on the WWE Network. USA will cancel Raw after Raw falls below a 2.0. Vince could shop the show to other networks but he won't get any good deals at all. Wrestling is dead. Compare the amount of people that watched WCW/WWE from 17 years ago till today. The wrestling audience has went from what, 12+ mils nightly down to 3.5mils? You can't survive on that. You can't lose that many customers and still survive in the current format. There's an end game here.


Without national TV WWE would lose hundreds of millions of $ per year and probably lose most, if not all of their largest sponsors/partnerships. 

They would also have to flood the network with advertising because to replace the lost revenue from the TV deals via the network in it's current state would take a number just below 3 million subscribers paying year round. They averaged about 1.2m paid subscribers for 2015 I think. 

Raw moving to the network in the not too distant future is definitely possible but it won't be a smooth transition unless business improves dramatically these next few years.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Also you can bet that it won't be $9.99 anymore and would be relative to what you would pay for a premium cable package to cover those costs.

However, people doubting that it wouldn't get to that point are being naïve. The WWE Network is and always has been seen as a backup plan if their TV deal went awry. WWE knows their ratings and viewerships are in a downward spiral.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Enzo & Cass raking up some pretty impressive numbers on their debut, 4th highest viewed Youtube RAW segment atm:


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE announces more WM32 stats – Social Media interest, record merchandise sales, data usage, more*

WWE issued a press release Thursday morning announcing more stats and information from WrestleMania 32 at AT&T Stadium in Texas.


– WrestleMania 32 was the “most social event in WWE history,” generating 2.5 million mentions on Twitter during the day and 1.3 million mentions during the broadcast. WWE said this was an increase of 50 percent and 18 percent, respectively, compared to WM31 last year.

– WWE Network subscribers viewed 21.7 million hours of programming during WrestleMania Week, or 12 hours per subscriber.

– WrestleMania generated $4.55 million in WrestleMania merchandise revenue, blowing away $1.2 million at WM31 last year. The wide variety of merchandise and use of the iconic Texas state shape for “WrestleMania Texas” helped sales.

WWE could have made even more money at the Smackdown TV taping in Houston two nights later, but they did not have WM32 merchandise for sale at the Merchandise Truck outside of the Toyota Center.

– WrestleMania data usage at AT&T Stadium totaled 8.6 TB, setting a new stadium record. WWE compared it to the 2015 College Football Title Game at AT&T Stadium, with WM32 generating 36 percent more data traffic.

WWE benefited from a near-seven-hour show compared to a three-and-a-half hour football game.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04...interest-record-merchandise-sales-data-usage/


----------



## Russoite

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Dont understand why WWE dont just get their own Network . They could keep all the profit from the ads . Unless that is USA are overpaying WWE. If thats the case then they have all to fear.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter
> This year’s WWE Fastlane was the least purchased WWE PPV in history. While WWE is focused primarily on signing up WWE Network subscribers they do still make the shows available via PPV. Fastlane did 18,000 PPV buys in North America and 25,000 PPV buys outside of North America for a total of 43,000 PPV buys. Last year’s WWE Fastlane did a total of 56,000 PPV buys. This year’s WWE Fastlane was headlined by Dean Ambrose vs Roman Reigns vs Brock Lesnar in a match to determine Triple H’s opponent for WrestleMania 32.


Them 18,000 people that bought in NA better have good excuses for buying the ppv instead of the network it's 1/6 the price why would you waste your money.

PPV numbers don't matter much anymore but considering the network numbers have fallen domestically it's still not very favorable.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Fastlane least bought PPV in WWE history.

:lmao


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *WWE announces more WM32 stats – Social Media interest, record merchandise sales, data usage, more*
> 
> WWE issued a press release Thursday morning announcing more stats and information from WrestleMania 32 at AT&T Stadium in Texas.
> 
> 
> – WrestleMania 32 was the “most social event in WWE history,” generating 2.5 million mentions on Twitter during the day and 1.3 million mentions during the broadcast. WWE said this was an increase of 50 percent and 18 percent, respectively, compared to WM31 last year.
> 
> – WWE Network subscribers viewed 21.7 million hours of programming during WrestleMania Week, or 12 hours per subscriber.
> 
> – WrestleMania generated $4.55 million in WrestleMania merchandise revenue, blowing away $1.2 million at WM31 last year. The wide variety of merchandise and use of the iconic Texas state shape for “WrestleMania Texas” helped sales.
> 
> WWE could have made even more money at the Smackdown TV taping in Houston two nights later, but they did not have WM32 merchandise for sale at the Merchandise Truck outside of the Toyota Center.
> 
> – WrestleMania data usage at AT&T Stadium totaled 8.6 TB, setting a new stadium record. WWE compared it to the 2015 College Football Title Game at AT&T Stadium, with WM32 generating 36 percent more data traffic.
> 
> WWE benefited from a near-seven-hour show compared to a three-and-a-half hour football game.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04...interest-record-merchandise-sales-data-usage/



*Oh look at that, more records broken. Watch Roman Reigns single handedly bankrupt Vince into billionaire territory :lel. You know you're desperate when you use PPV buys as a negative metric, two years after the Network launched for 1/6th of the price.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why does anyone buy WWE PPV's? The Network is $9.99 and a decent stream isn't hard to find. I'll be damned if I ever pay $50 for another PPV.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Why does anyone buy WWE PPV's? The Network is $9.99 and a decent stream isn't hard to find. I'll be damned if I ever pay $50 for another PPV.


I can only think off having horrible internet and being old as fuck along with for other countries the network not being available.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> I can only think off having horrible internet and being old as fuck along with for other countries the network not being available.


Your sig is hilarious. :lol Where did that Brock go? 

Those are solid reasons as to why some would pay $50 for a WWE PPV. Before the Network, I had stopped purchasing the PPV's. It just wasn't worth it. But they can have my $9.99 each month.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Obviously PPV doesn't mean as much as it once did. Didn't the main event of Fastlane determine who was going to be one of the WM main event participants? WWE will never go out of business with the setup they have in the US right now. Just like we were told so many of the past Champions were going to run WWE out of business in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015. 

:mj4

What a great week. (Y)


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Obviously PPV doesn't mean as much as it once did. Didn't the main event of Fastlane determine who was going to be one of the WM main event participants?


Well like a lot of things involving Roman we know he is winning he is the only guy immune to 50/50 booking



ShowStopper said:


> Just like we were told so many of the past Champions were going to run WWE out of business in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015.


I wonder if they will say the same thing about Roman or if they will just bring up that he got couple hundred thousand more views on youtube than some midcard geek.

Though I don't think it's Roman's fault more to do with creative as they should be able to make anyone a draw Goldberg proves this he had no wrestling or mic skills.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm still surprised at how much they made when they were basically giving away Mania for free. 

In my eyes, giving away their biggest event of the year was not only a bad idea when it came to making money off the network subs and such, but I think it also devalues the brand. I know they want to bring in subscribers and all, but they should illustrate that their product is actually worth money to them.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Well like a lot of things involving Roman we know he is winning he is the only guy immune to 50/50 booking
> 
> 
> 
> *I wonder if they will say the same thing about Roman or if they will just bring up that he got couple hundred thousand more views on youtube than some midcard geek.*
> 
> Though I don't think it's Roman's fault more to do with creative as they should be able to make anyone a draw Goldberg proves this he had no wrestling or mic skills.


I can't speak for anyone else, but I will continue to bring up social media and everything that falls under that umbrella. It's nothing to be denigrated and with the latest figures the WWE released (which everyone but @Legit BOSS no sold because it didn't fit a sky is falling narrative), the WWE seems to be in good financial shape. Their bottom dollar remains better than ever even if they're not bringing in 10 million viewers as they used to in their prime.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dr. Middy said:


> I'm still surprised at how much they made when they were basically giving away Mania for free.
> 
> In my eyes, giving away their biggest event of the year was not only a bad idea when it came to making money off the network subs and such, but I think it also devalues the brand. I know they want to bring in subscribers and all, but they should illustrate that their product is actually worth money to them.


*It's actually a risky and brilliant business strategy. Like you said, it could have cost them a lot of money to give away Wrestlemania for free to new subscribers, but here are the benefits to the gamble:

1. Hundreds of thousands of free subs from Wrestlemania try the rest of the Network and get addicted.
2. Free subs turn to paid subs.
3. They get a boatload of new paid subs for the month of April, with a potentially disinterested minority deciding not to renew.

So yes, they may have lost some money by giving away their biggest event for free, but you've got to spend money to make money, and it's beneficial in the long term to get as many people as possible to try the Network before they buy it, like a crack dealer.*


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *It's actually a risky and brilliant business strategy. Like you said, it could have cost them a lot of money to give away Wrestlemania for free to new subscribers, but here are the benefits to the gamble:
> 
> 1. Hundreds of thousands of free subs from Wrestlemania try the rest of the Network and get addicted.
> 2. Free subs turn to paid subs.
> 3. They get a boatload of new paid subs for the month of April, with a potentially disinterested minority deciding not to renew.
> 
> So yes, they may have lost some money by giving away their biggest event for free, but you've got to spend money to make money, and it's beneficial in the long term to get as many people as possible to try the Network before they buy it, like a crack dealer.*


They did luck out and it worked out to their advantage, but it's not something that I would do again, especially for their bigger events. But I do get why they did it and the implications behind the decision. I think they ended up with something like 1.8 million subs, which is a fantastic number.

If I were them, I would configure something to work around the whole email deal though. Anybody can just make a new email to utilize one of their free subscriber months, of which there are a huge amount of. Maybe something to recognize the use of a credit card number, and to only allow a number to be used for one account only.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dr. Middy said:


> They did luck out and it worked out to their advantage, but it's not something that I would do again, especially for their bigger events. But I do get why they did it and the implications behind the decision. I think they ended up with something like 1.8 million subs, which is a fantastic number.


*Exactly. Lets say 1.2 mil become paid subs and they never see those other 600,000 people again. They've still made $12 million for the month of May by converting the majority of first timers. In this scenario, they've given up $6 million to make $12 million. As long as they make more money than they lose, they're still winning.*



> If I were them, I would configure something to work around the whole email deal though. Anybody can just make a new email to utilize one of their free subscriber months, of which there are a huge amount of. Maybe something to recognize the use of a credit card number, and to only allow a number to be used for one account only.


*
Yeah, because some people figured out awhile ago that you can just cancel and sign up repeatedly without ever paying.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dr. Middy said:


> They did luck out and it worked out to their advantage, but it's not something that I would do again, especially for their bigger events. But I do get why they did it and the implications behind the decision. I think they ended up with something like 1.8 million subs, which is a fantastic number.
> 
> *If I were them, I would configure something to work around the whole email deal though. Anybody can just make a new email to utilize one of their free subscriber months, of which there are a huge amount of. Maybe something to recognize the use of a credit card number, and to only allow a number to be used for one account only.*


I think the WWE has caught onto that. But I gave my sister my email address and now she has full access to the Network.


----------



## Marrakesh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

^^^ They only got about 300-400k subscribers on the free trial. 

The 1.8m number is total subscriptions including paid. 

You seem to have implied that they got 1.8m new subscriptions for Wrestlemania and that they would capable of retaining 1.2m of those which is well wide of the mark. 

Unless I've misinterpreted your post, but that appears to be what you are saying.


----------



## The Bloodline

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I think the WWE has caught onto that. But I gave my sister my email address and now she has full access to the Network.


They havent fixed it yet, I can tell you that for sure . They really should though. I'd probably pay the 10 dollars if I have to.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@Dr. Middy


> WrestleMania reached 1.82 million global households on WWE Network alone, making it the most-watched WrestleMania in history, with pay-per-view data still forthcoming.


*1.82 mil is the number of people who watched Wrestlemania live, and by the end of 2015 they had 1.2 mil. Lets see how many they maintain through the month of May to assess their profit. *


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> @Dr. Middy
> 
> 
> *1.82 mil is the number of people who watched Wrestlemania live, and by the end of 2015 they had 1.2 mil. Lets see how many they maintain through the month of May to assess their profit. *


Yeah the 1.2 is a bad number they conveniently left it out and just kept talking about 1.8 subscribers they had but the amount of people who will forget to cancel will put it to a decent number.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *1.82 mil is the number of people who watched Wrestlemania live, and by the end of 2015 they had 1.2 mil. Lets see how many they maintain through the month of May to assess their profit. *


I'm just as curious about the number who will remain subscribers once this free month ends. I wonder if it'll be a steep drop or not.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Yeah the 1.2 is a bad number they conveniently left it out and just kept talking about 1.8 subscribers they had but the amount of people who will forget to cancel will put it to a decent number.


*
1.2 mil is not a bad number by any means. They significantly increased their profit and amount of subscribers from the previous year: * http://variety.com/2016/digital/news/wwe-network-1-2-million-subscribers-1201703281/



> WWE pinned 1.22 million paid subscribers for its over-the-top WWE Network as of the end of 2015, up 72% from the year-earlier period, as revenue for the segment rose 60%.





> WWE Network revenue for the fourth quarter of 2015 increased to $37.2 million from $23.3 million in the prior-year quarter.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> 1.2 mil is not a bad number by any means. They significantly increased their profit and amount of subscribers from the previous year: * http://variety.com/2016/digital/news/wwe-network-1-2-million-subscribers-1201703281/


Sure they got some profit but something like UFC 196 had 1.5 million and that was at 65 dollars compared to the 10 bucks that the network cost.

WWE's stock went down because of that number and they got a lot of ESPN hype for Wrestlemania and I am pretty sure WWE were predicting 1.5 paid subs from what I remember from Meltzer's show.

Their was a reason they give a fake number at the conference call.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> I predict that within 3 years that all WWE content will be on the WWE Network. * USA will cancel Raw after Raw falls below a 2.0.* Vince could shop the show to other networks but he won't get any good deals at all. Wrestling is dead. Compare the amount of people that watched WCW/WWE from 17 years ago till today. The wrestling audience has went from what, 12+ mils nightly down to 3.5mils? You can't survive on that. You can't lose that many customers and still survive in the current format. There's an end game here.





USA will not cancel Raw because Raw is their #1 show. The 2.0, 2.3, 3.5 numbers don't matter. If Raw is their number #1 draw, then USA is not going to drop them.


----------



## DanTheMan07

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



bigdog40 said:


> USA will not cancel Raw because Raw is their #1 show. The 2.0, 2.3, 3.5 numbers don't matter. If Raw is their number #1 draw, then USA is not going to drop them.


I don't believe USA Network will ever "drop" Raw, but it has to be noted they pay a hell of a lot more to air Raw than any other show on their network. We're talking about well over $100 million annually, probably more towards $150 million, and it's a number that is increasing yearly, at the same time when ratings are decreasing. Again, they won't drop them, but there is more to it than just saying "Raw is their highest rated show". Of course it is, there would be a huge problem if it was not. 

The problem for them with their decreasing ratings has less of an impact on their current standing with USA Network, and more of an impact on future TV deals.


----------



## Russoite

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What are USA's finances like?


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I think the WWE has caught onto that. But I gave my sister my email address and now she has full access to the Network.


Our bar pays for a Network sub so we can show the PPVs and NXT events at the bar, but we all also use that sub sign-in for our personal use to. So the bar and like 4 of us are all using one sub.


----------



## Sincere

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Average WWE Raw ratings by champion since 2005


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Bryan bringing in that biggest average since Cena 2011, second only to The Rock :ha


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Bryan that MEGA RATINGS draw :bryan


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I am guessing Miz got some good numbers because of Dwayne and WM season?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> Bryan that MEGA RATINGS draw :bryan


Daniel Bryan really had the ability to become the next mainstream star. I don't think he would've been the next Rock, but maybe catch up to John Cena. 

I'm always happy to see The Miz up there. I know that Rock/Cena were the draws, but he's so underrated in what he does. So, I'll give him some of the credit too. :smile2:


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The chart just goes on to show how the ratings have been gradually falling from as far as 10 years back.. discounting minuscule spikes here and there, yet their TV revenue has only gradually increased all this while. Another reason why not looking at ratings in context is an exercise in futility.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was This Week's WWE SmackDown Viewership With The WrestleMania 32 Fallout?
*
Source: Showbuzz Daily

Last night's WWE SmackDown, featuring the fallout from WrestleMania 32, drew 2.444 million viewers. This is up from last week's show with live shots from Axxess, which drew 2.328 million viewers.

SmackDown ranked #3 for the night in viewers, behind NBA on TBS and The O'Reilly Factor, and #3 in the 18-49 demographic with a 0.71, behind the NBA and 60 Days In.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...e-smackdown-viewership-with-the-wrestlemania/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> The chart just goes on to show how the ratings have been gradually falling from as far as 10 years back.. discounting minuscule spikes here and there, yet their TV revenue has only gradually increased all this while. Another reason why not looking at ratings in context is an exercise in futility.


Yet, them record low ratings with the Roman Reigns context continues to elude you.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> The chart just goes on to show how the ratings have been gradually falling from as far as 10 years back.. discounting minuscule spikes here and there, yet their TV revenue has only gradually increased all this while. Another reason why not looking at ratings in context is an exercise in futility.


Well the quality has been pretty bad for the last 10 years except for a few spikes like Y2J vs HBK,Punk vs Cena and Bryan vs Authority along with some other things.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Yet, them record low ratings with the Roman Reigns context continues to elude you.


There's no "Roman Reigns context". Here's my post in the 3rd quarter revenue thread when Reigns was not the champion and a pretty length title reign of another performer had covered the entirety of the previous two quarters.



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> No wonder they're not that worried about the ratings, which are increasingly becoming an obsolete parameter in the current dispensation anyway.


So, you would be well advised to not pull out that card with me, because unlike a few people I'm actually capable of retaining and defending my views irrespective of who is champion, unlike some of the supporters of the guy who held the title for most of last year, for whom a 3.6 million average RAW with that performer as champion was a "good enough number" but in another case with another champion, a 3.5 million number became dreadful and somehow an implication of how the company was going out of business.

Ratings for me have been irrelevant for quite a while now, and I've explained at length as to why it is so on multiple occasions.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Well the quality has been pretty bad for the last 10 years except for a few spikes like Y2J vs HBK,Punk vs Cena and Bryan vs Authority along with some other things.


Quality is subjective, the T.V revenue money flowing into the company is not.. which has always been gradually increasing for the past 10 years.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sincere said:


> Average WWE Raw ratings by champion since 2005


Rollins not at the absolute bottom like some used to say he was.

:drose


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*4/7 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – how did the post-WM32 edition fare vs. American Idol finale?*


The combination of the first Smackdown after WrestleMania and Thursday’s show going against the series finale of “American Idol” produced a one-tenth uptick in Smackdown TV ratings.


WWE Smackdown Ratings Tracking

April 7: Post-WM32 Smackdown scored a 1.75 rating on USA Network, up one-tenth from the “clip show” pre-WM32 episode last week.

Smackdown returned to the exact same rating as two weeks ago when Brock Lesnar made a special appearance on the March 24 episode.

– Smackdown drew 2.444 million viewers, up five percent from last week’s viewership.

Thursday’s show was slightly below the First Quarter 2016 average of 2.481 million viewers.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Despite the overall TV rating upticking one-tenth of a rating, the key demo ratings barely moved.

Adults 18-49 improved 0.02 of a rating, males 18-34 dipped 0.01, and males 18-49 dipped 0.01. It was essentially the same audience as last week in the key demos.

Smackdown First Quarter Summary

(January 7-March 31)

Avg. TV Rating: 1.77
Avg. Viewership: 2.481 million viewers
Avg. DVR Viewer add-on: 223,846
Avg. TOTAL VIEWERSHIP: 2.705 million viewers

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04...st-wm32-edition-fare-vs-american-idol-finale/


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sincere said:


> Average WWE Raw ratings by champion since 2005


ALL HAIL THE RATED R SUUUUUUUUU(HIGHPITCHED)UUUUUUUUUUUUPERSTAR! THE KING OF THE RATINGS!

Anyway, SD did poorly yet again. At least it didn't go down from last week's half-SD.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People liked to shit on Punk with how the ratings were going when he was champion(even though he was hardly booked in main event matches) yet look at where they are now with the "Make Roman Look Strong" push of the last two years+. Jeez.


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince McMahon would rather draw a 3 rating and be sponsored by Coke than draw a 6 and be sponsored by Stacker 2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The way things are going, I think the whole Stamford tower is sponsored by Coke.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was Viewership For The 2016 WWE Hall Of Fame Special On The USA Network?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

The 2016 WWE Hall of Fame special that aired on the USA Network after SmackDown on Thursday night drew 1.677 million viewers, according to Showbuzz Daily.

The one-hour special ranked #9 for the night in viewership and #9 for the night in the 18-49 demographic.

As noted, the lead-in episode of SmackDown drew 2.444 million viewers, up from last week's 2.328 million viewers. SmackDown ranked #3 for the night in viewers and #3 in the 18-49 demographic.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...for-the-2016-wwe-hall-of-fame-special-on-the/

*EDIT*

- As noted, this week's post-WrestleMania 32 WWE SmackDown drew 2.444 million viewers, up from last week's 2.328 million viewers. The final rating for the show was a 1.75, up from last week's 1.66 rating.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0409/609586/roman-reigns-tops-wwe-rankings/


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Sheesh. Some mediocre to bad ratings this week. :mj4


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










I don't really get this whole youtube thing but it looks like WWE are the 5th most viewed youtube channel but they do pump out a lot more videos than everything else and they have some weird competition some Swedish guy screaming into his mic and some person unboxing playdoh, are first and second.

Source:http://vidstatsx.com/youtube-top-50-most-viewed


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well, hooray?


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sincere said:


> Average WWE Raw ratings by champion since 2005


This actually doesn't show that much other than the ratings as a whole have been on a steady decline for awhile now, and that on occasion some guys as champion will cause a very small uptick.


----------



## NinjaCPU09

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> The chart just goes on to show how the ratings have been gradually falling from as far as 10 years back.. discounting minuscule spikes here and there, yet their TV revenue has only gradually increased all this while. Another reason why not looking at ratings in context is an exercise in futility.


Ehh, yeah and no. I would agree in the sense that their TV revenue is increased because of the quality of sponsor and the USA multi-year contract. However, I doubt USA and WWE were to expect the significant decline that has happened these past two years. Are you really expect USA to give them same contract they gave them last time? These aren't small declines like before, these are 10 - 20% differences. It's like giving someone a long-term contract and after having sub-par numbers to expect the same numbers. It isn't going to happen and for WWE to expect the same next time this comes up will be laughable. 

Honestly, if I were them. I'd either invest in whatever they have now to at least try to keep this decline from getting any worst than it is or whenever the next USA contract could be HALF.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> I don't really get this whole youtube thing but it looks like WWE are the 5th most viewed youtube channel but they do pump out a lot more videos than everything else and they have some weird competition some Swedish guy screaming into his mic and some person unboxing playdoh, are first and second.
> 
> Source:http://vidstatsx.com/youtube-top-50-most-viewed


It has to be something good for WWE. I mean companies are profitable just from making videos that they either post on youtube or on their own website at no cost to the viewer. I watch some various RoosterTeeth videos from time to time and I know they are an expanding and profitable company based off almost entirely free online content that they produce. 

WWE has to be making some money from this stuff.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



NinjaCPU09 said:


> Ehh, yeah and no. I would agree in the sense that their TV revenue is increased because of the quality of sponsor and the USA multi-year contract. However, I doubt USA and WWE were to expect the significant decline that has happened these past two years. Are you really expect USA to give them same contract they gave them last time? These aren't small declines like before, these are 10 - 20% differences. It's like giving someone a long-term contract and after having sub-par numbers to expect the same numbers. It isn't going to happen and for WWE to expect the same next time this comes up will be laughable.
> 
> Honestly, if I were them. I'd either invest in whatever they have now to at least try to keep this decline from getting any worst than it is or whenever the next USA contract could be HALF.


Absolutely, I expect them to get an even higher deal simply because of the fact that T.V as a medium itself has been fading for years now, the "rate" of decline as you mention never follows a linear path, there are always points where a comparatively more drastic changes take place. The Internet is to TV but TV was to radio. You'd never see a resurgence of the radio, no matter what.. the change was strictly one sided. Same with the case of the TV and Internet.

It's not something the WWE has to be worried about, it's the USA network and the entire TV clan who have to ascertain at what pace this unilateral change is taking towards Internet and formulate their plans accordingly. WWE has already self sufficed itself with the Network and has it's framework set for the next decades and decades. It' would be wrong to think they are at the "mercy" of the TV networks, far from it. WWE signed a record TV deal in 2014 despite all the hooplah which happened with ratings in 2012 and 13. The viewership was significantly down from the last time they signed the deal as well. Plus, it would not be very smart of the TV networks to play hard ball with an ever expanding global enterprise like the WWE which has more people watching it worldwide now than ever in it's history.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> Absolutely, I expect them to get an even higher deal simply because of the fact that T.V as a medium itself has been fading for years now, the "rate" of decline as you mention never follows a linear path, there are always points where a comparatively more drastic changes take place. The Internet is to TV but TV was to radio. You'd never see a resurgence of the radio, no matter what.. the change was strictly one sided. Same with the case of the TV and Internet.
> 
> It's not something the WWE has to be worried about, it's the USA network and the entire TV clan who have to ascertain at what pace this unilateral change is taking towards Internet and formulate their plans accordingly. WWE has already self sufficed itself with the Network and has it's framework set for the next decades and decades. It' would be wrong to think they are at the "mercy" of the TV networks, far from it. WWE signed a record TV deal in 2014 despite all the hooplah which happened with ratings in 2012 and 13. The viewership was significantly down from the last time they signed the deal as well. Plus, it would not be very smart of the TV networks to play hard ball with an ever expanding global enterprise like the WWE which has more people watching it worldwide now than ever in it's history.


At this time I think WWE still needs a TV deal to survive. In 10 years that could change. We're at what 1.8 million network subscribers? If they can keep growing that number in time they might be able to get away with airing all of their shows on their Network. So they get their subscribers to pay $10 a month and they still sell advertising for Raw and Smackdown. I think entertainment will be eventually be people just paying for the things that they want over the internet and watching that way.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



FITZ said:


> At this time I think WWE still needs a TV deal to survive. In 10 years that could change. We're at what 1.8 million network subscribers? If they can keep growing that number in time they might be able to get away with airing all of their shows on their Network. So they get their subscribers to pay $10 a month and they still sell advertising for Raw and Smackdown. I think entertainment will be eventually be people just paying for the things that they want over the internet and watching that way.


The thing that quite a few people fail to understand is that, with the network.. WWE has changed the game drastically. Even during the ratings peak of the company during the Attitude Era, many countries used to get programming at large delays and many of them didn't even get complete programming.

Now, with the Network, most of these countries have the option of getting up to date consistent WWE programming which finally after these years puts them on the same pedestal as the traditional centre demographic, which is already evidenced by the drastic flow of International subs. already.. and this is just the tip of the iceberg. With every passing day, when more and more people are being added to the middle class in various fast developing countries like South Asia/China etc. it's like an unending gold mine waiting to be tapped into because WWE has had a solid foot hold in these places for absolute years! It's just now that they've carved a path to mint major money off all these centres which wasn't possible a while back.

And again, it wouldn't be wise to ever think that WWE is the concerned party in this relationship with the USA Network here, it's the network. It would be foolish of the network to let go of an entity that is expanding globally at the pace which the WWE is. It should rather be more concerned about at what rate is the TV becoming obsolete year by year, month by month, day by day.


----------



## Russoite

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sincere said:


> Average WWE Raw ratings by champion since 2005


That table is a bit miseading because some were on Smackdown.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> The thing that quite a few people fail to understand is that, with the network.. WWE has changed the game drastically. Even during the ratings peak of the company during the Attitude Era, many countries used to get programming at large delays and many of them didn't even get complete programming.
> 
> Now, with the Network, most of these countries have the option of getting up to date consistent WWE programming which finally after these years puts them on the same pedestal as the traditional centre demographic, which is already evidenced by the drastic flow of International subs. already.. and this is just the tip of the iceberg. With every passing day, when more and more people are being added to the middle class in various fast developing countries like South Asia/China etc. it's like an unending gold mine waiting to be tapped into because WWE has had a solid foot hold in these places for absolute years! It's just now that they've carved a path to mint major money off all these centres which wasn't possible a while back.
> 
> And again, it wouldn't be wise to ever think that WWE is the concerned party in this relationship with the USA Network here, it's the network. It would be foolish of the network to let go of an entity that is expanding globally at the pace which the WWE is. It should rather be more concerned about at what rate is the TV becoming obsolete year by year, month by month, day by day.


Jesus, can you be any more delusional and behave like an a-hat? 
First of all, 1.8 is the number with freebies. WWE themselves expect a number around 1.5. With the Network available practically everywhere, 1.5 worldwide is p-i-s-s p-o-o-r.
"Drastic flow of international subs" fpalm

The Network makes nothing obsolete, nothing. Raw is on there with a ridiculous delay, and as of today, I get the newest Raw 20 days faster on German free TV than on the Network where I'd have to pay for it. You don't know shit about WWE TV situation in other countries. In Germany, we were treated a hell of a lot more like the American audience two years ago than we are today. We got Raw live, Smackdown with a day delay, NXT, Main Event, and PPVs on order. 

Of course the first thing people will want in Asia, once they get out of the gutter into some money is not food, better shelter, better clothes, healthcare, no ... the first thing they want is Dr. Phil hosting Raw fpalm fpalm fpalm fpalm :deanfpalm

WWE will never, ever put their shows only on the Network as long as they get 200+ million for it from USA. You know, 200 million, also known as 1/4 of their annual revenue?
And even if every country on earth got Raw live on the Network, you think they'll watch everything just because it's WWE? Their product is stale as ass. Or do you, with your apparent clueless mindset, assume Germans, French, Italians, Ukrainians, Chinese will all flock around the WWE Network like 15th century Aztecs around the assumed god-like Cortez?


----------



## NinjaCPU09

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> The Internet is to TV but TV was to radio.


That's where I would disagree. Honestly, it's sort of like TV is to Movies. Movies, you have to drive somewhere, paid them a fee to sit down on for a 90 to 150 minute show which drastically high prices for food and the movie itself compared to television where it could free or monthly to pay off. I'm sure there was a massive decline when television started becoming easier to purchase. However, look at movies now. Are you saying that it's impossible for television and internet to live symbiotic as movie and television are today?

Internet is still a growing media and doesn't have the same money, even with the numbers. If the same number of viewers were watching the swedish guy on television instead of YouTube, you know how much he'd be able to get? Significantly more than he is now. That's also one of the reason why YouTube isn't really much of a factor nor is Twitter compared to TV(WWE). They sure have the manpower for it, but that doesn't mean squat if there isn't any significant revenue from it. 

Honestly, all it really takes is a simple tweaks from the cable companies to really stop this massive decline. Netflix is around $10 a month. How hard would it be to stop massive bundling or to make single channels purchasable? Of course you're going to get massive decline from cable if you have to pay 40 - 80 dollars a month when you're only watching maybe 10 - 20 channels compared to getting something that's only $10 with easy access but not new content from movies or TV shows before they come out.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



NinjaCPU09 said:


> That's where I would disagree. Honestly, it's sort of like TV is to Movies. Movies, you have to drive somewhere, paid them a fee to sit down on for a 90 to 150 minute show which drastically high prices for food and the movie itself compared to television where it could free or monthly to pay off. I'm sure there was a massive decline when television started becoming easier to purchase. However, look at movies now. Are you saying that it's impossible for television and internet to live symbiotic as movie and television are today?
> 
> Internet is still a growing media and doesn't have the same money, even with the numbers. If the same number of viewers were watching the swedish guy on television instead of YouTube, you know how much he'd be able to get? Significantly more than he is now. That's also one of the reason why YouTube isn't really much of a factor nor is Twitter compared to TV(WWE). They sure have the manpower for it, but that doesn't mean squat if there isn't any significant revenue from it.
> 
> Honestly, all it really takes is a simple tweaks from the cable companies to really stop this massive decline. Netflix is around $10 a month. How hard would it be to stop massive bundling or to make single channels purchasable? Of course you're going to get massive decline from cable if you have to pay 40 - 80 dollars a month when you're only watching maybe 10 - 20 channels compared to getting something that's only $10 with easy access but not new content from movies or TV shows before they come out.


What people constantly dismiss is the fact that TV is perceived as more prestigious than Internet/Youtube. People have an inner conviction that whatever costs more, or whichever is more expensive, is the better product, and it's more desirable and prestigious to have the one, rather than the other.
So, in that sense, the movie/TV comparison is spot on. Theatrical films are more expensive to produce than TV movies, and cinematic releases are still regarded as the best films, even if they may not be that. 
It's easier to produce a show for YouTube, than to produce a TV show. Ergo, people don't regard Youtube as a replacement for TV. Youtube clips are a recap, a quick fix, TV is the actual event that is perceived as important.
It's Wendy's vs Restaurant. 

In fact, that is the main thing I heard complains about from fellow German wrestling fans. Back in 2014, when WWE was scrapped from television altogether, except a 90 minutes Raw edit, and moved to the online television Maxxdome, people complained that wrestling was now only available on "shitty online services" instead of "actual television". 

It makes WWE look cheap.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Jesus, can you be any more delusional and behave like an a-hat?
> First of all, 1.8 is the number with freebies. WWE themselves expect a number around 1.5. With the Network available practically everywhere, 1.5 worldwide is p-i-s-s p-o-o-r.
> "Drastic flow of international subs" fpalm


1.5 million subs when the network is still in it's global infancy is low?

It's already worth 1.5 x 9.99 x 12 = 179.82 million dollars / year. Really low, yeah. It's also naive to think that this is anywhere near the ceiling. You must be one of the people who thought that the network had hit it's ceiling at 667,000 when the first numbers were announced, they have almost doubled their domestic subscribers since. The significant international increase which was announced in the latest reports is for you to see, the successive % increases there have been are there for you to see.. there's no scope for bias here, just pure hard facts. Try them.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> The Network makes nothing obsolete, nothing. Raw is on there with a ridiculous delay, and as of today, I get the newest Raw 20 days faster on German free TV than on the Network where I'd have to pay for it. You don't know shit about WWE TV situation in other countries. In Germany, we were treated a hell of a lot more like the American audience two years ago than we are today. We got Raw live, Smackdown with a day delay, NXT, Main Event, and PPVs on order.


First of all, I find it funny that you assume that I don't belong to the "other countries" even without asking me. Regardless, I'm not here to give you a first person perspective, I can very well back my arguments on the basis of methodological data.

Secondly, the comparison was never between with what delay does RAW comes on the network as opposed to cable television. WWE network is not making the TV obsolete, the Internet is making TV obsolete, and the fall in cable TV figures throughout the developed countries prove it. It's the most transparent change that there is in the entertainment world today and you shut your eyes to it. The fact that WWE is bringing in record amounts of revenue and packing 100,000 stadiums should have at least given you a clue but it hasn't, sadly.

Thirdly, it's not just about weekly TV programming like RAW & Smackdown. What makes you think that the non traditional centre audience would not want to come on the same pedestal with US with regards to having access to data like classic programming and other contemporary programming the WWE offers on the network? The fact remains that many of these centres could have never thought of it 10 years back, now they are getting the opportunity to do so, if they can afford, why wouldn't they?



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Of course the first thing people will want in Asia, once they get out of the gutter into some money is not food, better shelter, better clothes, healthcare, no ... the first thing they want is Dr. Phil hosting Raw fpalm fpalm fpalm fpalm :deanfpalm


Seems like the concept of what a "middle class" is a bit lost on you. Whatever you mentioned here are "necessities". The WWE network is not a necessity, a middle class family can afford to spend money for recreational purposes, you know? It's hilarious that you act like - 

i) The entire population of developing countries is in the gutter or it's vicinity.

ii) The economic status of people in those countries can never improve, but since you live in a developed country and have probably not even studied the economic scenario of developing countries, let alone experiencing them.. I can't fault you.




Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> WWE will never, ever put their shows only on the Network as long as they get 200+ million for it from USA. You know, 200 million, also known as 1/4 of their annual revenue?
> And even if every country on earth got Raw live on the Network, you think they'll watch everything just because it's WWE? Their product is stale as ass. Or do you, with your apparent clueless mindset, assume Germans, French, Italians, Ukrainians, Chinese will all flock around the WWE Network like 15th century Aztecs around the assumed god-like Cortez?


And what makes you think that the USA network is holding a gun to WWE's head with regards to ratings? I've made this point a million times without a concrete reply and I'll make it again. * The standard of viewership is a function of the times you're living in. The WWE TV audience is DOWN 66% since 2000, still WWE has been signing in record deals every successive time they sit down with the networks. They got a near 50% increase on their deal last time despite the fact that the viewership was substantially down from the last time they signed it"*

Plus, quality of the product is SUBJECTIVE. The product might be stale for you, but still there are millions of people with fat wallets marking out over Roman Reigns overcoming the authority and ready to spend money. It's funny that you bring up this point in the midst of a phase when WWE has broken historical records and is financially at their healthiest phase ever.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



NinjaCPU09 said:


> That's where I would disagree. Honestly, it's sort of like TV is to Movies. Movies, you have to drive somewhere, paid them a fee to sit down on for a 90 to 150 minute show which drastically high prices for food and the movie itself compared to television where it could free or monthly to pay off. I'm sure there was a massive decline when television started becoming easier to purchase. However, look at movies now. Are you saying that it's impossible for television and internet to live symbiotic as movie and television are today?


Absolutely, because there's nothing which the TV offers which the Internet can't. It's a matter of time, not reason. You wouldn't find a single year from this one in which the TV cable viewership would actually increase year on year, hell it's actually the case for a few years now.



NinjaCPU09 said:


> Internet is still a growing media and doesn't have the same money, even with the numbers. If the same number of viewers were watching the swedish guy on television instead of YouTube, you know how much he'd be able to get? Significantly more than he is now. That's also one of the reason why YouTube isn't really much of a factor nor is Twitter compared to TV(WWE). They sure have the manpower for it, but that doesn't mean squat if there isn't any significant revenue from it.


Nobody is comparing the standing of TV to Internet as of today. What we're following are the "trends" and the far reaching consequences of them in the near/intermediate future. There was a time when even Orkut was much above Facebook as a social media network. But Facebook's rate of increase increased drastically and it overtook Orkut eventually. It would have been absurd to neglect the drastic first degree derivative changes taking place everyday and look at just the absolutes. That's not how you conduct a trend analysis. That's a layman view.




NinjaCPU09 said:


> Honestly, all it really takes is a simple tweaks from the cable companies to really stop this massive decline. Netflix is around $10 a month. How hard would it be to stop massive bundling or to make single channels purchasable? Of course you're going to get massive decline from cable if you have to pay 40 - 80 dollars a month when you're only watching maybe 10 - 20 channels compared to getting something that's only $10 with easy access but not new content from movies or TV shows before they come out.


It's because Internet > TV, straight up. TV is a one purpose machine, a computer device with Internet offers hundreds of functions that you can fulfil including TV. I'll give you an analogy.. Why would you buy a singular printer when you can get a printer, scanner, photocopier multidevice at a cheaper price? Sounds like a no brainer to me. Internet gives you tons of more options than cable TV. to watch multiple programmings on your own accord and with much more comparative ease. You do realize that if TV could, they would have already stemmed this flow out of users from cable TV which has been consistently happening for years now. When was the last time cable TV actually gained viewers on the whole from the previous year? What are the latest trends? Enough said.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Arguing with you is like banging heads against a wooden plank.
Like you know a thing about what reality looks like in Asia.

I need my strength dealing with morons for reading about tonight's Raw.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Arguing with you is like banging heads against a wooden plank.
> Like you know a thing about what reality looks like in Asia.
> 
> I need my strength dealing with morons for reading about tonight's Raw.


Then why do you even bother to start an argument? Take whatever cheap shots you want without wasting one of my notifications. Or you can ask me to never quote you in any argument, there have been a few people who have asked me to refrain from quoting them and I'm happy to oblige. 

Knowing or not knowing the reality is not the issue. My country or your country has nothing to do with the argument. You're pushing a first person perspective in an objective argument, that's not reinforcing it. That's called arguing in a bubble. You can easily get the data about how many countries got up to date programming at the time of the Attitude Era as compared to now.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Post-SummerSlam WWE RAW Update
*
- We noted before that the 2016 WWE SummerSlam pay-per-view from Brooklyn quickly sold out last week. The post-SummerSlam RAW, which is also held in Brooklyn, sold out fairly quick as well.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0411/609625/john-cena-talks-wrestlemania-video/


*WWE Money In The Bank And Battleground Tickets News*
- Tickets for the June 19th WWE Money In the Bank pay-per-view from the T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas went on sale this weekend and it looks like 4 levels of the cheapest seats are sold out - $25, $35, $55 and $75. The $350 tickets are also sold out but some $475 floor seats remain. There are also seats left at the $175 and $150 levels.

- Tickets for the WWE Battleground pay-per-view on July 24th from the Verizon Center in Washington, DC also went on sale but aren't moving as fast. The $500 floor seats have sold out but there are still tickets left at $25, $45, $75, $95, $200 and $400.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0409/609595/roman-reigns-mattel-exclusive-set/


*WWE NXT Takeover And HOF Attendance, WWE Programming Expanding In Russia?*
- The WWE NXT "Takeover: Dallas" event on April 1st from the Kay Bailey Hutchison Center in Dallas was sold out with 9,000 in attendance. The 2016 WWE Hall of Fame ceremony the next night from the American Airlines Center was also sold out with 11,000 fans in attendance.

- - WWE officials met with the chief editor of Match TV, Russia's only major sports channel, at WrestleMania 32 in Dallas. No deals have been signed but it appears the two sides are negotiating. WWE premiering on Match TV would be huge for them in Russia as they currently air one-hour versions of RAW and SmackDown each week on the 2x2 channel, which just 2% of the country has access to, compared to the 50% that have access to Match TV.
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0409/609593/wwe-nxt-takeover-and-hall-of-fame-attendance/


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CycLoNe_AttAcK_ said:


> *The thing that quite a few people fail to understand is that, with the network.. WWE has changed the game drastically.* Even during the ratings peak of the company during the Attitude Era, many countries used to get programming at large delays and many of them didn't even get complete programming.
> 
> Now, with the Network, most of these countries have the option of getting up to date consistent WWE programming which finally after these years puts them on the same pedestal as the traditional centre demographic, which is already evidenced by the drastic flow of International subs. already.. and this is just the tip of the iceberg. With every passing day, when more and more people are being added to the middle class in various fast developing countries like South Asia/China etc. it's like an unending gold mine waiting to be tapped into because WWE has had a solid foot hold in these places for absolute years! It's just now that they've carved a path to mint major money off all these centres which wasn't possible a while back.
> 
> And again, it wouldn't be wise to ever think that WWE is the concerned party in this relationship with the USA Network here, it's the network. It would be foolish of the network to let go of an entity that is expanding globally at the pace which the WWE is. It should rather be more concerned about at what rate is the TV becoming obsolete year by year, month by month, day by day.


I was just on WrestlingInc and they linked to a New York Times Article about the NFL "looking at WWE's business model for the Network for its own online streaming. It also wonders if the NFL will create its own subscription only app to stream games, similar to HBO."

It also touches upon if the WWE will remain committed "to a cable network whose profits are dependent on an eroding business model" in regards to the TV ratings. 

Here it is for those who are interested. It's worth a read IMO. 

*The N.F.L. Has Seen the Future, and It Is WWE Wrestling*
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/09/s...seen-the-future-and-it-is-wrestling.html?_r=2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Network will only, ONLY, then be viable for WWE, if they have as many subscribers as Raw viewers. And that's utopian. They will only reach that many if they put Raw exclusively on the Network. And that would be an enormous risk because as shitty as their product is, they would lose a good slice of their audience that simply does not want to pay for a shitty show they could watch for free. And because they simply can't just put almost a third of their annual revenue at risk in television deals. 
They would have to negotiate a contract with USA, allowing them to air Raw on the Network, as a transitional period. 
A sudden move from USA to Network could, and would, seriously damage the company. And Vince wouldn't survive that.

Comparing WWE to NFL is ridiculous. NFL is a legitimate sport with legitimate surprise factors and competition. They will always have their fan base. WWE is an entirely different beast, they have to please fans in order to stay viable because the legitimate sports factor is nonexistent.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I was just on WrestlingInc and they linked to a New York Times Article about the NFL "looking at WWE's business model for the Network for its own online streaming. It also wonders if the NFL will create its own subscription only app to stream games, similar to HBO."
> 
> It also touches upon if the WWE will remain committed "to a cable network whose profits are dependent on an eroding business model" in regards to the TV ratings.
> 
> Here it is for those who are interested. It's worth a read IMO.
> 
> *The N.F.L. Has Seen the Future, and It Is WWE Wrestling*
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/09/s...seen-the-future-and-it-is-wrestling.html?_r=2


Great read, thanks for sharing. Also just reinforces the fact as to how far behind this place is at coming to terms with the contemporary global auditing/trend analysing standards. Copious amounts of Ostrich-head-sand mentality on display on this forum from the ratings/T.V clan.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Coming here expecting ratings that again defines a new low for post-Wrestlemania shows, instead finding yet another post how these numbers don't matter at all.

In case basic math eludes you:
Stagnating Network numbers + falling ratings = dwindling fan interest.


----------



## CycLoNe_AttAcK_

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

There we have it again folks. The most talked about question once again has a conclusive answer. Let's have a look:

* Pro. Wrestling:*











Vs.

.

.

.

.

.

* SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT! : *



















Hell, even the match consisting of proper sports entertainers draws much more: 












So, apparently.. the technical wrestling masterpiece which was being billed as the "PPV main event level" match taking place on RAW actually got out drawn easily by conventional sports entertainment.

* Meanwhile - The collective reaction of the technical wrestling enthusiast smarks to these latest developments:*

.

.

.

.

.

.











''WHY THE HELL DINN VINCE BUY 1000000 VIEWS FOR MAA WRESTLING GAWDS!!!!!!!" 


Images not intended to hurt the feelings of any individual or group, except technical wrestling elitist smarks.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*4/11 Raw Twitter TV Ratings – big drop post-WM32, but still #1 *

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

March 11: The second episode after WrestleMania fell about 40 percent in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings metrics.

However, Raw retained the #1 ranking among series & specials for the third consecutive week.

– Total tweets about Raw were 187,000, down 41 percent from last week and fewer than the pre-WM32 two weeks ago.

– Total unique authors were 35,000, down 38 percent from last week. The total was in-line with Raw two weeks before WrestleMania when Philly Raw on March 21 totaled 34,000 unique authors.

– Raw ranked #1 ahead of “Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta” in series and specials. Raw also would have ranked #1 in the sports category on a quiet sports night.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/12/411-raw-twitter-tv-ratings-big-drop-post-wm32-still-1/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I love how the only parts of Raw being praised last night are that of the hard work and effort put in by the Indy Gawds.

:banderas

No surprise Raw finally had one decent episode when they were pushed to the forefront.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.474M
H2-3.687M
H3-3.427M
3H-3.529M*










*H2 Vs H1 (+6.13%/+0.213M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.05%/-0.260M)
H3 Vs H1 (-1.35%/-0.047M)

4/11/16 Vs 4/4/16 (-6.39%/-0.241M)
4/11/16 Vs 4/6/15 (-10.95%/-0.434M*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Thanks @JonnyAceLaryngitis

Was Styles/Sami in Hour 2? Either way, it was the strongest. I'll have to go back and to see what went down here.

In any event, RAW was mostly good from start to finish.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Sami Styles in the 2nd hour - highest drawing.

Roman RATINGS Reigns in the 3rd hour - lowest drawing. 

What else is new?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Comparison to last year's Raw the week after WM (this is the Raw that went up against last year's NCAA Men's Basketball Championship, too):

4/6/15:

Hour one: 4.30 million 
Hour two: 4.04 million
Hour three: 3.55 million

This year:

Hour 1: 3.474M
Hour 2: 3.687M
Hour 3: 3.427M

Damn. Even up against the NCAA Championship; last year's Raw blew away this one. Last year's Hour 1 drew almost a million more viewers than this year's Hour 1.

Also, that is a massive fall from last week's viewership. Gigantic fall in literally just one week.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Thanks @JonnyAceLaryngitis
> 
> Was Styles/Sami in Hour 2? Either way, it was the strongest. I'll have to go back and to see what went down here.


Welcome anytime Empress. :smile2: I guess so.

*H2 Vs H1 (+6.13%/+0.213M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.05%/-0.260M)
H3 Vs H1 (-1.35%/-0.047M)

4/11/16 Vs 4/4/16 (-6.39%/-0.241M)
4/11/16 Vs 4/6/15 (-10.95%/-0.434M)*


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Roman Reigns: *"I'M NOT A GOOD GUY, I'M NOT A BAD GUY, I'M THE GUY PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO SEE"
*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Welcome anytime Empress. :smile2: I guess so.
> 
> *H2 Vs H1 (+6.13%/+0.213M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-7.05%/-0.260M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-1.35%/-0.047M)
> 
> 4/11/16 Vs 4/4/16 (-6.39%/-0.241M)
> 4/11/16 Vs 4/6/15 (-10.95%/-0.434M)*


You should get a special title or something. I always know that you'll come through with the ratings.

I expected RAW to fall in the ratings but it doesn't seem that severe on first glance. The show was solid last night. It's baby steps.

As for Hour 2, I think it was Reigns/LON/Wyatt family, Charlotte, Styles/Sami towards the end. I think the Usos/Bullet Club may have been here too.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE RAW Viewership With Shane McMahon Back In Control Of The Show?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Shane McMahon in charge for the second week in a row and a main event of Bray Wyatt and WWE World Heavyweight Champion Roman Reigns vs. Sheamus and Alberto Del Rio, drew 3.529 million viewers. This is down from last week's 4.094 million viewers for the post-WrestleMania 32 episode.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.474 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.687 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.427 million viewers.

RAW was #1 on cable for the night in viewership. They were #2 in the 18-49 demographic, behind Love & Hip-Hop.

The post-WrestleMania RAW is always up but compared to the last two normal episodes of RAW, the March 22nd episode drew 3.399 million viewers and the WrestleMania go-home episode drew 3.764 million viewers.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ership-with-shane-mcmahon-back-in-control-of/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last week:

8 p.m. 4.29 million viewers
9 p.m. 4.18 million viewers
10 p.m. 3.82 million viewers

This Week:

Hour 1: 3.474M
Hour 2: 3.687M
Hour 3: 3.427M

Hour 1 had over 700,000 less viewers than last weeks Hour 1.

Hour 2 had around 500,000 less viewers than last week's Hour 2

Hour 3 had 400,000 less viewers than last week's Hour 3.

Those are all huge declines in each hour of the show.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Last week:
> 
> 8 p.m. 4.29 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 4.18 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 3.82 million viewers
> 
> This Week:
> 
> Hour 1: 3.474M
> Hour 2: 3.687M
> Hour 3: 3.427M
> 
> Hour 1 had over 700,000 less viewers than last weeks Hour 1.
> 
> Hour 2 had around 500,000 less viewers than last week's Hour 2
> 
> Hour 3 had 400,000 less viewers than last week's Hour 3.
> 
> Those are all huge declines in each hour of the show.


Are you genuinely surprised that a post Mania show fell in viewers?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Are you genuinely surprised that a post Mania show fell in viewers?


To this degree? Yes. It's not like it's a couple hundred thousand viewers. The smallest fall was 400,000. That's nutty. Even crazier is that last year's Raw the week after 'Mania that went up against the NCAA Title game got over 4 million viewers in the first two hours of the show. That almost seems impossible now for any show that isn't the night after 'Mania or one that has a Rock appearance.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Damn. Even up against the NCAA Championship; last year's Raw blew away this one. Last year's Hour 1 drew almost a million more viewers than this year's Hour 1.


ShowStopper mentioned a vital comparison parameter guys, which I seem to have omitted. That is a very crucial yardstick. Even with no NCAA this year, the viewership is down by 0.434M and 10.95%



Empress said:


> You should get a special title or something. I always know that you'll come through with the ratings.
> 
> I expected RAW to fall in the ratings but it doesn't seem that severe on first glance. The show was solid last night. It's baby steps.
> 
> As for Hour 2, I think it was Reigns/LON/Wyatt family, Charlotte, Styles/Sami towards the end. I think the Usos/Bullet Club may have been here too.


Haha let me know if you come up with any title. :wink2: On a more serious note however, does a Bray Wyatt face turn herald the kind of baby steps that can save these large weekly falls? Last night's reactions to it may just signify that. Nonetheless this RAW seems to be heading around the neighborhood of a 2.5R this week against no NCAA game which is worrying.

Could Bray Wyatt herald a new era wherein he reminds us of Foley's success that made fans vote for him en masse in a 1999 online poll for TIME Magazine's Person Of The Year?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hope RAW picks up some time shifted viewership. These are not the numbers of a hot, MUST SEE product.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> To this degree? Yes. It's not like it's a couple hundred thousand viewers. The smallest fall was 400,000. That's nutty. Even crazier is that last year's Raw the week after 'Mania that went up against the NCAA Title game got over 4 million viewers in the first two hours of the show. That almost seems impossible now for any show that isn't the night after 'Mania or one that has a Rock appearance.



It seems as the show went on, the bleeding of viewers stopped. 

I'm curious as to why Hour 2 had a spike. I think my memory of what happened is correct but I'm not 100% sure. 

But as I said, I did enjoy the show. I hope the WWE shakes off this rating and continues with their (new?) creative direction. I read in one of these threads that a writer from NXT was called up.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Then you can compare 15s post-Mania RAW and the week after as well.


3/30/15:

Hour one: 5.22 million
Hour two: 5.59 million
Hour three: 5.26 million

4/6/15:

Hour one: 4.30 million
Hour two: 4.04 million
Hour three: 3.55 million,

Hour 1 had early 900k viewers less than the week before.
Hour 2 had over 1.5 million viewers less than the week before.
Hour 3 had about 1.7 million viewers less than the week before.

You have to keep into account that there was a sports game here, but the amount of viewers lost is still massive. In 2014, they lost 300k-500k viewers as well.

Comparing it with last year (as you did at the start of this page) makes much more sense.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It seems people stayed to see if Reigns would turn heel or lose the title last week, and when none of that happened, uh oh spaghettio.

It will be interesting to see what happens to ratings after Payback if Reigns defeats Styles to resounding boos and remains a babyface.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> It seems as the show went on, the bleeding of viewers stopped.
> 
> I'm curious as to why Hour 2 had a spike. I think my memory of what happened is correct but I'm not 100% sure.
> 
> But as I said, I did enjoy the show. I hope the WWE shakes off this rating and continues with their (new?) creative direction. I read in one of these threads that a writer from NXT was called up.


From Hour 2 to Hour 3 they lost 260,000 viewers. I'd say that's still bleeding a good amount of viewers.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> ShowStopper mentioned a vital comparison parameter guys, which I seem to have omitted. That is a very crucial yardstick. Even with no NCAA this year, the viewership is down by 0.434M and 10.95%
> 
> 
> 
> Haha let me know if you come up with any title. :wink2: On a more serious note however, does a Bray Wyatt face turn herald the kind of baby steps that can save these large weekly falls? Last night's reactions to it may just signify that. Nonetheless this RAW seems to be heading around the neighborhood of a 2.5R this week against no NCAA game which is worrying.
> 
> Could Bray Wyatt herald a new era wherein he reminds us of Foley's success that made fans vote for him en masse in a 1999 online poll for TIME Magazine's Person Of The Year?


I like Bray. I've always felt he could make a great face.

But the baby steps I was referring to was RAW being a good body of work last night. It didn't feel like a chore to watch. If the WWE keeps putting on solid shows every week, the ratings could start to increase.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



DoubtGin said:


> Then you can compare 15s post-Mania RAW and the week after as well.
> 
> 
> 3/30/15:
> 
> Hour one: 5.22 million
> Hour two: 5.59 million
> Hour three: 5.26 million
> 
> 4/6/15:
> 
> Hour one: 4.30 million
> Hour two: 4.04 million
> Hour three: 3.55 million,
> 
> Hour 1 had early 900k viewers less than the week before.
> Hour 2 had over 1.5 million viewers less than the week before.
> Hour 3 had about 1.7 million viewers less than the week before.
> 
> You have to keep into account that there was a sports game here, but the amount of viewers lost is still massive. In 2014, they lost 300k-500k viewers as well.
> 
> Comparing it with last year (as you did at the start of this page) makes much more sense.


The difference is the week after still had 2 hours well over 4 million viewers, though. Still damn good and DESTROYS this year's show.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> From Hour 2 to Hour 3 they lost 260,000 viewers. I'd say that's still bleeding a good amount of viewers.


It's not 700K but I get your point.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So I take it Shane was on this show. It would appear that they have already sucked out most of his ratings potency. Who can *rebuild* the ratings? Sounds like a job for an architect. :Cocky


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> It's not 700K but I get your point.


I would hope it wouldn't be 700K. Can't be losing that amount too often.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> So I take it Shane was on this show. It would appear that they have already sucked out most of his ratings potency. Who can *rebuild* the ratings? Sounds like a job for an architect. :Cocky


I don't want to see Seth used as a punching bag again in this thread if he can't bring in a 3.0. Reigns is already the current scapegoat. If Shane McMahon has already lost his potency (and he was advertised) honestly, what is Rollins going to do? I still think a solid show from top to bottom will get a more consistent rating, not one superstar.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> So I take it Shane was on this show. It would appear that they have already sucked out most of his ratings potency. Who can *rebuild* the ratings? Sounds like a job for an architect. :Cocky


I know you're just messing around; but WWE is screwed re: ratings. Rollins ain't bringing it back and neither is anyone else.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I like Bray. I've always felt he could make a great face.
> 
> But the baby steps I was referring to was RAW being a good body of work last night. It didn't feel like a chore to watch. If the WWE keeps putting on solid shows every week, the ratings could start to increase.


There was one entrance of his where the crowd was clapping to his theme and waving their phones alongside. It looked unreal. If anyone watched that entrance of Bray, oblivious of his win/loss record, they would have assumed he is a super over main event heel or tweener. And that was a full blown heel Bray during Extreme Rules 2014 I guess which I think had an ending that didnt quite do justice to his whole involvement in the feud with Cena.

Yes I agree. The way the main event ended helped a lot in RAW not ending on a low. WWE seems to have delayed the Bullet Club's debut and the Wyatts's slow burn face turn by a week by spreading it over 2 episodes instead of cramming both developments into one post WM episode.

With the returns of Rollins and Cena on the horizon, the transition to summer or the post summer period will hopefully be smooth and not a snooze.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> To this degree? Yes. It's not like it's a couple hundred thousand viewers. The smallest fall was 400,000. That's nutty. Even crazier is that last year's Raw the week after 'Mania that went up against the NCAA Title game got over 4 million viewers in the first two hours of the show. That almost seems impossible now for any show that isn't the night after 'Mania or one that has a Rock appearance.


You know what is the funniest part? The Wrestlemania Fallout show drew the lowest post-Mania number in forever, and they still managed to generate such a gigantic drop off just a week later.

Just wait until Reigns is in full-on stale mode, until they inevitably botched AJ, and possibly Sasha, too.

They will scrape the 3.0 million soon. Again.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> You know what is the funniest part? The Wrestlemania Fallout show drew the lowest post-Mania number in forever, and they still managed to generate such a gigantic drop off just a week later.


That is a real possibility. If they go near a 2.4R this will officially be the lowest rated episode within weeks of a WM ending. And I can't find ratings for such episodes before 1996. Most sites only have ratings from the start of the Monday Night Wars/Labor Day week of 1995. So such a rating unseen for 20+ years is really telling.

http://www.angelfire.com/pa2/RAWisWAR/WWFRawRatings.html

Looks like we have to use 1995 and 1996 as yardsticks for comparison this time. Which might not be accurate considering the change in TV viewership and ancillary forms of consumption. But no other year seems to be comparable as far as ratings are concerned.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> That is a real possibility. If they go near a 2.4R this will officially be the lowest rated episode within weeks of a WM ending. And I can't find ratings for such episodes before 1996. Most sites only have ratings from the start of the Monday Night Wars/Labor Day week of 1995. So such a rating unseen for 20+ years is really telling.
> 
> http://www.angelfire.com/pa2/RAWisWAR/WWFRawRatings.html
> 
> Looks like we have to use 1995 and 1996 as yardsticks for comparison this time. Which might not be accurate considering the change in TV viewership and ancillary forms of consumption. But no other year seems to be comparable as far as ratings are concerned.


And at least in the mid 90s, they had the excuse of head to head competition with Nitro; another wrestling show. Especially when the nWo came about and they had some REAL competition. Today's Raw doesn't have that direct competition from a wrestling show.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> There was one entrance of his where the crowd was clapping to his theme and waving their phones alongside. It looked unreal. If anyone watched that entrance of Bray, oblivious of his win/loss record, they would have assumed he is a super over main event heel or tweener. And that was a full blown heel Bray during Extreme Rules 2014 I guess which I think had an ending that didnt quite do justice to his whole involvement in the feud with Cena.
> 
> *Yes I agree. The way the main event ended helped a lot in RAW not ending on a low. WWE seems to have delayed the Bullet Club's debut and the Wyatts's slow burn face turn by a week by spreading it over 2 episodes instead of cramming both developments into one post WM episode.*
> 
> With the returns of Rollins and Cena on the horizon, the transition to summer or the post summer period will hopefully be smooth and not a snooze.


I am surprised that the WWE managed to spread out the debut and Bray's face turn. The Bullet Club would've probably gotten lost in the shuffle last week.

Last night, all the talents felt like superstars and not glorified geeks. Each performer felt important and the angles had purpose. I just hope this kind of booking is here to stay and won't be a casualty of the post Mania rating.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> You should get a special title or something. I always know that you'll come through with the ratings.
> 
> I expected RAW to fall in the ratings but it doesn't seem that severe on first glance. The show was solid last night. *It's baby steps*.
> 
> As for Hour 2, I think it was Reigns/LON/Wyatt family, Charlotte, Styles/Sami towards the end. I think the Usos/Bullet Club may have been here too.


Right, especially considering how long ratings have been falling. They're not going to jump on one show, especially when that one show is the first really good one after a couple of years of really bad ones. Last week's was a little better than previous weeks, but nothing close to last night. It's going to take a few weeks of shows like this week's, and time for word to get around that this stuff is actually watchable again before there's any kind of a measurable upward trend.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If WWE decides to turn Rollins face on his return and turn Reigns full heel sometime down the line with Bray already a face, it will be their strategy of just flipping the personas of their 3 most important stars (by booking precedence) from the past 3 years.

As for Cena and Ambrose, it's up in the air what sort of major storyline plans they are heading to.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> If WWE decides to turn Rollins face on his return and turn Reigns full heel sometime down the line with Bray already a face, it will be their strategy of just flipping the personas of their 3 most important stars (by booking precedence) from the past 3 years.
> 
> *As for Cena and Ambrose, it's up in the air what sort of major storyline plans they are heading to*.


John Cena will always be a major player. I think Dean will be in his current position or upper mid card by the summer.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*4/11 Raw TV Ratings – Post-WM32 Lull Period already here?*

Monday’s WWE Raw fell hard the week after WrestleMania, falling into the same range as the middle of March when Raw was struggling on the Road to WrestleMania.

WWE RAW TV RATINGS TRACKING

April 11: Monday’s Raw scored a 2.50 rating, down 15 percent from a season-high 2.93 rating last week the night after WrestleMania.

Raw was also down from a 2.66 rating the week before WrestleMania.

– The demographic ratings nosedived for the second show after WrestleMania, erasing last week’s gains by falling below the pre-WM32 show.

Adults 18-49 fell from a 1.55 to 1.24 (20% decline)
Males 18-34 fell from a 1.99 to 1.40 (30% decline)
Males 18-49 fell from a 2.05 to 1.62 (21% decline)

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.529 million viewers, down 14 percent (about 565,000 viewers) from last week’s show.

As usual, the third hour fell off from the second hour, which was the peak hour of the show. The most concerning hour, though, was the first hour…

First Hour: 3.474 million viewers (down about 800,000 viewers from last week’s 1H)
Second Hour: 3.687 million viewers (down about 490,000 viewers from last week’s 2H)
Third Hour: 3.427 million viewers (down about 390,000 viewers from last week’s 3H)

Caldwell’s Analysis: It looks like the key male demo came back last week, evaluated post-Mania happenings, and decided to go back into hiding this week. That’s not a good sign for advertisers and USA Network. There has been so much long-term damage done to the Raw product in the Three-Hour Raw environment that it’s going to take time for viewers to come back. But, two key factors that have to be addressed is the rejection of Roman Reigns as top champion and the “interim tag” on Shane McMahon making it unclear if he’s going to stick around to keep Raw fresh. WrestleMania 32 was a business success, but there is no evidence of that translating to Raw (or Smackdown).

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/12/april11rawratings/


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I like Bray. I've always felt he could make a great face.
> 
> But the baby steps I was referring to was RAW being a good body of work last night. It didn't feel like a chore to watch. *If the WWE keeps putting on solid shows every week, the ratings could start to increase.*


Good point, 1 or 2 good shows isn't going to bring a bunch of people back. They need to put on consistently good shows for a number of months before we start seeing a ratings increase. They need to rebuild that trust with the audience.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

We're the ratings good this week? Don't think there was any competition like there was last week.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

An hour 2 increase is really rare, no? Last time it happened was when Rock returned, right? Curious as to what triggered the spike in interest.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> And at least in the mid 90s, they had the excuse of head to head competition with Nitro; another wrestling show. Especially when the nWo came about and they had some REAL competition. Today's Raw doesn't have that direct competition from a wrestling show.


Well, if you want to present wrestling in the year 2016, WWE would pretty much be without competition.
But since they don't want that, deny wrestling, and compare themselves to Walt Disney, and Entertainment, they put themselves in direct competition to entertainment that they frankly have no chance of touching.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> We're the ratings good this week? Don't think there was any competition like there was last week.




H1 3.474 million viewers
H2 3.687 million viewers 
H3 3.427 million viewers

AVG: 3.529 million viewers

I'll get you the Youtube numbers later. I know you like those.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> H1 3.474 million viewers
> H2 3.687 million viewers
> H3 3.427 million viewers
> 
> AVG: 3.529 million viewers
> 
> I'll get you the Youtube numbers later. I know you like those.


Thank you. I'll just ask for your opinion on the ratings though. Hopefully I don't have to ask 3 or 4 times to get an answer :kobe3


----------



## FROSTY

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Great info. Now compare that to USA who pays them a couple hundred million dollars. We need not say anymore.
> 
> @SnapOrTap tweet he just linked to:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717568719359049729
> Post Mania last year compared to Post Mania this year :lmao


*Last years post Rumble studio show blew this years post Mania show away :bryanlol*


----------



## Wildcat410

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I know you're just messing around; but WWE is screwed re: ratings. Rollins ain't bringing it back and neither is anyone else.


Agreed

I think they have gone down a rabbit hole from which the numbers may never rebound. At best, the bleeding might stop sometime. 

But that is a best case scenario for years to come. If not for good.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

In about a year or 2 today's ratings will look great in hindsight. ac

Good thing they've got the Network and attendance is still fairly decent or they'd really be in some trouble.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*DVR Tracking Table – 4/12 Update for Raw & Smackdown post-WM32 audiences*

WWE Raw (including First Quarter Average)
WWE Smackdown (including Q1 Average)

RAW Q1 NOTES: The First Quarter hourly average indicates a downward trend from the first hour to second hour to third hour, including DVR viewing. The first hour averaged 4.125 million total viewers, the second hour averaged 4.004 million total viewers, and the third hour averaged 3.808 million total viewers. As a result, the total average during the First Quarter was below 4.0 million viewers – 3.979 million viewers.

RAW 4/4 NOTES: The post-WrestleMania Raw episode delivered the largest overall audience of the year, but did not have the big separation from the rest of the year like a typical post-Mania Raw. The individual hours and overall audience were right below or right above the post-Royal Rumble and post-Fast Lane episodes. A boost in third hour DVR viewership helped the overall total surpass post-Royal Rumble Raw for #1 this year.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/12/dvrtrackingtables/

*(The RAW/Smackdown charts are at the link)*


----------



## FROSTY

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Social media was outright dismissed in the last thread to the point I felt some were trolling and now some in this new thread are questioning why it's being brought up. It may not be the end all, be all, but it is a metric. I do agree that the WWE should monetize their social media following better. It's similar to an artist having 10 million Twitter followers but failing to have that audience buy their album.


*I'me not even joking that move Cesaro is doing in your sig should be his finisher! That is fucking dope, puts The Neutralizer to shame, hell puts The Phenomenal Forearm to shame imo. *


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



YOUR OLYMPIC HERO said:


> *I'me not even joking that move Cesaro is doing in your sig should be his finisher! That is fucking dope, puts The Neutralizer to shame, hell puts The Phenomenal Forearm to shame imo. *


It was a badass move. It's even more impressive since he appeared to be hurt. 

Go to 1:43


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Despite the ratings getting lower, however, I am starting to like what I saw from last night. Everything about the show felt fresh and new. Matches, feuds, storyline progression. The real question is can WWE keep this going consistently? They're going to have build on from last night. So I am looking forward to next week.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I just came here to laugh at WWE's ratings but if they keep doing consistently pretty good shows then in the distant future their ratings will properly go up though having 3 hours really hurts the casual appeal.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@Empress

Can't find the quote, but when you said:

"Social media was outright dismissed in the last thread to the point I felt some were trolling and now some in this new thread are questioning why it's being brought up. It may not be the end all, be all, but it is a metric. I do agree that the WWE should monetize their social media following better. It's similar to an artist having 10 million Twitter followers but failing to have that audience buy their album."

I'm sorry, but its a bad metric. People should be dismissing social media. First off, does having umpteen million twitter followers translate into any dollars brought in by WWE? No. It measures how many people are talking about a topic. And apparently, a lot more people are talking about WWE than are watching it. You say its like an artist having 10 million twitter followers and not having that audience buy their album...that's a total failure. And in WWE's case, it should be considered that, too. They have 6 million twitter followers, and more for their stars, and yet can only get 3.5 million people per week to watch their flagship show? Worse yet, they can only yet 1.8 (inflated because of Mania) million to buy their network? That's such a colossal failure its actually amusing. 

Gauging interest should directly correlate to how much money they make from it. Ratings equates to how much ad money they make and USA's willingness to give them a big TV contract. That makes sense. Twitter followers and tweets have a whopping income of zero total dollars. So why should anyone care? People are talking and yet they're not making money from this talk. At least YouTube views means more ad traffic and thus, some profit. But I don't consider YouTube social media.

I mean, what does Twitter activity measure, exactly? Again, people talking about a topic. Hence, why it trends. When more people are talking about a topic than are willing to give you money and keep you in business to watch a show, that's embarrassing. I don't understand this emphasis anyone places on it.


----------



## FROSTY

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *It's actually a risky and brilliant business strategy. Like you said, it could have cost them a lot of money to give away Wrestlemania for free to new subscribers, but here are the benefits to the gamble:
> 
> 1. Hundreds of thousands of free subs from Wrestlemania try the rest of the Network and get addicted.
> 2. Free subs turn to paid subs.
> 3. They get a boatload of new paid subs for the month of April, with a potentially disinterested minority deciding not to renew.
> 
> So yes, they may have lost some money by giving away their biggest event for free, but you've got to spend money to make money, and it's beneficial in the long term to get as many people as possible to try the Network before they buy it, like a crack dealer.*





Dr. Middy said:


> They did luck out and it worked out to their advantage, but it's not something that I would do again, especially for their bigger events. But I do get why they did it and the implications behind the decision. I think they ended up with something like 1.8 million subs, which is a fantastic number.
> 
> If I were them, I would configure something to work around the whole email deal though. Anybody can just make a new email to utilize one of their free subscriber months, of which there are a huge amount of. Maybe something to recognize the use of a credit card number, and to only allow a number to be used for one account only.


*Just giving credit where credits due, B2B two of the better more informative posts I have read in awhile. Where if both were added together would be like reading a interesting newspaper article about the Network. Top notch posts too you both :clap :clap :clap*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@KO Bossy,

I decided weeks ago not to continually debate the fundamentals of social media. Most of the responses were born out of people not knowing and flat out trolling. There's no point arguing what I know is true but I respect your opinion and POV. I'm currently not able to go into an in depth answer at the moment but will respond to you accordingly. On a cursory glance of your post, I think you said there's no money in Twitter. That's far from the truth. If I've misrepresented your post, my apologies. But I'm not someone who is just throwing bait out there for my own amusement. I can back up my assertions. 

I'll answer once I'm back in the house.


----------



## FROSTY

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Exactly. Lets say 1.2 mil become paid subs and they never see those other 600,000 people again. They've still made $12 million for the month of May by converting the majority of first timers. In this scenario, they've given up $6 million to make $12 million. As long as they make more money than they lose, they're still winning.*
> 
> 
> *
> Yeah, because some people figured out awhile ago that you can just cancel and sign up repeatedly without ever paying.*


*If they would upgrade the search function to be more refined, for that alone I believe they could raise the subscription price up to 13 to 14.99 monthly. I know I'd pay it and be thrilled to be able to search Kurt Angle, and get a list of all his matches and segments/promos in chronological order. For that type of function they could pretty well call their shot on the monthly fee and I'd pay it, as long as it was still within reason.*


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



YOUR OLYMPIC HERO said:


> *If they would upgrade the search function to be more refined, for that alone I believe they could raise the subscription price up to 13 to 14.99 monthly. I know I'd pay it and be thrilled to be able to search Kurt Angle, and get a list of all his matches and segments/promos in chronological order. For that type of function they could pretty well call their shot on the monthly fee and I'd pay it, as long as it was still within reason.*


That actually is a pretty neat idea, but I wonder if they could pull off doing that with the current system they have for the network. Perhaps they could create a site with the similarities that Profightdb has, and have links from there to the respective shows where any match would be.


----------



## FROSTY

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> It seems as the show went on, the bleeding of viewers stopped.
> 
> *I'm curious as to why Hour 2 had a spike.* I think my memory of what happened is correct but I'm not 100% sure.
> 
> But as I said, I did enjoy the show. I hope the WWE shakes off this rating and continues with their (new?) creative direction. I read in one of these threads that a writer from NXT was called up.


*Word of mouth about the Zayn vs Styles #1 contender/possible Triple Threat WHC match? :shrug With Shane's announcements at the top of the show, I'm sure Twitter played a factor in peaking the interest in those interested in exciting fast-paced professional wrestling matches. There was also a rumor making the dirt sheet rounds that Bulletproof was attacking the Usos last night, my guess is take your pick between those two segments.

Also :cesaro is back :mark:*


----------



## FROSTY

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I know you're just messing around; but WWE is screwed re: ratings. Rollins ain't bringing it back and neither is anyone else.


*Maybe if Shane is going away soon (as I suspect is the case) then he can in his last act as "showrunner" re-appoint (face) Stone Cold Steve Austin as Raw President/commissioner :mark: 

But seriously I agree with @Empress in that if they can keep producing quality content like they did this week on a consistent basis, that would go a long way to bringing back some of the newly lost TV audience.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



YOUR OLYMPIC HERO said:


> *Maybe if Shane is going away soon (as I suspect is the case) then he can in his last act as "showrunner" re-appoint (face) Stone Cold Steve Austin as Raw President/commissioner :mark:
> 
> But seriously I agree with @Empress in that if they can keep producing quality content like they did this week on a consistent basis, that would go a long way to bringing back some of the newly lost TV audience.*


That's always been the case. But it's going to take more than just some good wrestling matches. I love good matches as much as the next guy, but good matches on their own don't draw. I feel like if you take out the two good matches from last night alot of the praise wouldn't have happened. So, they need to write good TV consistently for months and months to get back on track, if not a year. That's how long it took them in the AE. Everytime we get a good Raw or two people go nuts and it goes back to shit shortly thereafter. We'll see what happens but it's way too early to think they will do it. Showcasing the right talent last night (AJ, Zayn, Cesaro) was a good start.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KO Bossy said:


> I'm sorry, but its a bad metric. People should be dismissing social media.


People make their livelihoods based on social media; brands hire personnel to manage their online accounts. If an entity is not taking advantage of the platform, through all means, they're doing it wrong. We live in a digital world and smartphones. 

Furthermore, Neilsen introduced the Twitter TV ratings in 2013 to gauge it as a metric. That renders it important enough to be considered an established metric just like any other. 



KO Bossy said:


> First off, does having umpteen million twitter followers translate into any dollars brought in by WWE? No. It measures how many people are talking about a topic. And apparently, a lot more people are talking about WWE than are watching it.


I'd like to unpack your comment in two ways.

Many brands/celebrities are paid to push X,Y and Z on Twitter. I don't know if WWE is engaged in similar activities. 

And yes, it does measure how many people are talking about the WWE. Word of mouth is free publicity and bypasses $$$ spent on adverts. It draws interest and traffic. 

For instance, Beyonce dropped her song Formation in February and included a line about Red Lobster. The chain saw a 33% increase in their sales. They bungled the social media response to the song. Hence, the reason why brands have social media managers to take advantage of what's trending and get themselves over. 




KO Bossy said:


> You say its like an artist having 10 million twitter followers and not having that audience buy their album...that's a total failure. And in WWE's case, it should be considered that, too. They have 6 million twitter followers, and more for their stars, and yet can only get 3.5 million people per week to watch their flagship show? Worse yet, they can only yet 1.8 (inflated because of Mania) million to buy their network? That's such a colossal failure its actually amusing.


Ratings have fallen overall on the USA Network but yet RAW remains their top rated show, I believe. Wrestlemania 32 was just their highest grossing and the Network has shown growth. It may not be gangbusters, but the WWE is not about to be run out of business.

Moreover, they experienced a surge in this year's social activity compared to last. 

As with all things, you can only lead a horse to water. Social media can only go but so far. The WWE has to put on a hot product in order to engage all of its follower. Tweeting and sharing videos is free on my part. What the WWE gets in return is traffic, impression and an audience that isn't always committed. 



KO Bossy said:


> Gauging interest should directly correlate to how much money they make from it. Ratings equates to how much ad money they make and USA's willingness to give them a big TV contract. That makes sense. Twitter followers and tweets have a whopping income of zero total dollars. So why should anyone care? People are talking and yet they're not making money from this talk. At least YouTube views means more ad traffic and thus, some profit. But I don't consider YouTube social media.


All things can be monetized, including Twitter. For instance, advertisers use the analytics on their budget. However, to revert it back to the discussion of how Twitter can impact ratings, there's word of mouth. Now, Twitter/Facebook will officially be bundled with the TV ratings. 


_The new ratings will measure programs on both traditional television and streaming services during the time period when the show is televised. It will also monitor conversations about television programs round the clock._



KO Bossy said:


> I mean, what does Twitter activity measure, exactly? Again, people talking about a topic. Hence, why it trends. When more people are talking about a topic than are willing to give you money and keep you in business to watch a show, that's embarrassing. I don't understand this emphasis anyone places on it.


Advertisers/Brands care and for professional reasons, I have to stay on top of social media. It's all about converting free media (social) into dollars and engagement on the part of the user; more viewers and word of mouth would and should be WWE's goal. 

I hope I covered everything to the best of my abilities. Social media hasn't overtaken TV ratings but it's not just something to be casually dismissed as some do. I can't make anyone believe that social media is important. I simply can't afford to act like it's not.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> People make their livelihoods based on social media; brands hire personnel to manage their online accounts. If an entity is not taking advantage of the platform, through all means, they're doing it wrong. We live in a digital world and smartphones.
> 
> Furthermore, Neilsen introduced the Twitter TV ratings in 2013 to gauge it as a metric. That renders it important enough to be considered an established metric just like any other.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to unpack your comment in two ways.
> 
> Many brands/celebrities are paid to push X,Y and Z on Twitter. I don't know if WWE is engaged in similar activities.
> 
> And yes, it does measure how many people are talking about the WWE. Word of mouth is free publicity and bypasses $$$ spent on adverts. It draws interest and traffic.
> 
> For instance, Beyonce dropped her song Formation in February and included a line about Red Lobster. The chain saw a 33% increase in their sales. They bungled the social media response to the song. Hence, the reason why brands have social media managers to take advantage of what's trending and get themselves over.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ratings have fallen overall on the USA Network but yet RAW remains their top rated show, I believe. Wrestlemania 32 was just their highest grossing and the Network has shown growth. It may not be gangbusters, but the WWE is not about to be run out of business.
> 
> Moreover, they experienced a surge in this year's social activity compared to last.
> 
> As with all things, you can only lead a horse to water. Social media can only go but so far. The WWE has to put on a hot product in order to engage all of its follower. Tweeting and sharing videos is free on my part. What the WWE gets in return is traffic, impression and an audience that isn't always committed.
> 
> 
> 
> All things can be monetized, including Twitter. For instance, advertisers use the analytics on their budget. However, to revert it back to the discussion of how Twitter can impact ratings, there's word of mouth. Now, Twitter/Facebook will officially be bundled with the TV ratings.
> 
> 
> _The new ratings will measure programs on both traditional television and streaming services during the time period when the show is televised. It will also monitor conversations about television programs round the clock._
> 
> 
> 
> Advertisers/Brands care and for professional reasons, I have to stay on top of social media. It's all about converting free media (social) into dollars and engagement on the part of the user; more viewers and word of mouth would and should be WWE's goal.
> 
> I hope I covered everything to the best of my abilities. Social media hasn't overtaken TV ratings but it's not just something to be casually dismissed as some do. I can't make anyone believe that social media is important. I simply can't afford to act like it's not.


Appreciate the breakdown.

Still, from everything I've read, both from you and my own research in these past couple hours, I still have to stand by my beliefs. People following you on twitter and talking about you doesn't make money. What twitter does is give you exposure. Or in a word, a platform. Yes, celebrities get paid to name drop something, no different than if they went on television and did it. Yes, having a social media manager (god, I seriously can't believe such a thing exists) can allow for proper promotion via twitter. But at the end of the day, it is a media platform, no different than television or radio are/used to be. Except with those, shows get advertising money and contracts. With YouTube, guys like Markiplier get big bucks because they have so many subscribers and video views, which again, get them cheques from YouTube for being able to advertise in high traffic channels. You get 10 million twitter followers, and that means no income. It can potentially mean SOME income, but there is really no direct link I see. 

Let me put it another way. People tweeting about Raw...does WWE make a single penny off of any of those tweets? Like remember when you could spend 50 cents and text something to win a prize back in the day? No. WWE has 6 million followers...do they get a penny per follower? No. Every time a person uses a hashtag in relation to something WWE, does WWE make even one red cent? No.

That's because simply talking about something doesn't equate to them being willing to spend money on it, or do something to increase their revenue. Tuning into Raw? That increases revenue. Attending shows, buying merch, subbing the network? All increase revenue. Talking about something in an online conversation? You can't bill something like that. 

From what I see, using twitter as a metric is a way to analyze patterns. And the analysis is so far reaching that giant leaps of assumption are made. Oh this person is talking about Wrestlemania! That's great, are they ordering the show on PPV? Are they attending live? Perhaps buying the network to get it for 10 bucks? No, turns out they're just talking about it. So who cares? Why does that need to be measured? We're talking about WWE in this conversation right now, why does nobody feel the need to measure us and use WF as a metric? They could put ads on this site for WWE and they could get a cut. Why not?

Twitter is simply free publicity. Should they be using it? I guess it couldn't hurt, and sure, its promotion and advertising that doesn't cost them anything. Well, it COULD cost them something, if they pay a celebrity to name drop them or something. And social media managers aren't free. Or people who manage these accounts. But hey, maybe someone will see WWE on twitter, and sub the network, and that's another 10 bucks. I guess my problem is that while I understand how it works, I think there's WAY too much of an emphasis being placed on it. Their biggest media platform is still TV. So instead of worrying about social media, maybe they should invest more of that time and money into putting on a show that doesn't suck shit. Its been 2 solid weeks, from what I hear. Prior to that? 2 solid years of wretched television. Fix that, and you'll be rolling in the green. Twitter can contribute a little bit *potentially*, but it shouldn't be your priority, and it seems that many people seem to be blowing the "importance" of twitter greatly out of proportion. I'm of the opinion that a separate social media metric is really a waste of time, especially considering what you *do* have to put in and what you *potentially* get out of it. That "potentially" can be zero. And if you aren't getting anything out of it, what good is the metric?

I have to say I feel kinda bad that you are forced to monitor social media. I detest twitter, vine and all that crap. Its like the yelp shit all over again, it gives people an unwarranted and unneeded feeling and level of self importance and a platform to act like morons. Not to mention its completely unnecessary. I don't care for Facebook, but I can at least see the use. What good are 6 second looping videos? 6 seconds is pointlessly short, and YouTube exists for videos. Why does Vine need to be in business? 140 characters or less for a message? Just use a telephone. Not to mention, why should anyone care what a person's thoughts on a subject are? If I wanted to know what CM Punk thinks about Mexican food, I'd have found out long ago via an e-mail or stood in line and asked him. But I don't care, so why do I need to follow him to know every fucking thought that goes through his head that he deems important enough to put out there? Or is shit like this...












really THAT important to measure?


Forgive me being an old curmudgeon, I'm rather old school in my beliefs. I'm not even old, age wise...just practical.


----------



## Russoite

Empress said:


> I was just on WrestlingInc and they linked to a New York Times Article about the NFL "looking at WWE's business model for the Network for its own online streaming. It also wonders if the NFL will create its own subscription only app to stream games, similar to HBO."
> 
> It also touches upon if the WWE will remain committed "to a cable network whose profits are dependent on an eroding business model" in regards to the TV ratings.
> 
> Here it is for those who are interested. It's worth a read IMO.
> 
> *The N.F.L. Has Seen the Future, and It Is WWE Wrestling*
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/09/s...seen-the-future-and-it-is-wrestling.html?_r=2


That article is dumb. WWE still relies on ratings to watch RAW and they have a profit 25m less than in 2010.


----------



## Kinjx11

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

i wonder if AE ratings were that low/high !!!


----------



## Dark_Raiden

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Need more Roman Reigns. I had to wait forever just to see him and was bored with the rest of the night. IMO they need to build up a Reigns segment once per hour. The start, the top of hour 2, and finish with the ME at hour 3. He's the champion and 'the guy', treat him that way.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dark_Raiden said:


> Need more Roman Reigns. I had to wait forever just to see him and was bored with the rest of the night. IMO they need to build up a Reigns segment once per hour. The start, the top of hour 2, and finish with the ME at hour 3. He's the champion and 'the guy', treat him that way.


Do you want to kill Raw for good?
The man can't carry one segment, let alone three on the same show.

Whoever they make champion, you don't make him special by making the viewer sick of him, by putting him on the show for 30 minutes. You make him special by making people wait for him.
Champs used to defend their belt every few MONTHS.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*PWTorch Report – How much has WWE spent on Network TV ads, and is it effective?*

WWE has undertaken an interesting advertising strategy trying to convert regular TV viewers into WWE Network subscribers to begin the year.


According to ad sales information obtained by PWTorch, WWE bought ad time across multiple cable TV networks valued at $2.6 million for the period of January 1 to April 12.

Most of the spots ran during WWE’s Raw and Smackdown shows on USA Network. Within those broadcasts, Network ads make up approximately two minutes of sales time during every Raw and Smackdown episode, or four 30-second spots per show.

Overall for 2016, WWE has run nearly 500 spots for WWE Network across USA and other NBCU channels such as Bravo, NBC, MSNBC, E!, Syfy, and NBC Sports. Plus, non-NBCU channels Spike TV, truTV, TNT, Fox News, Nickelodeon, VH1, BET, and Travel Channel.

The ads run during Raw and Smackdown are obviously targeting WWE fans who are potentially interested in adding to their WWE consumption by subscribing to the Network. This made up about two-thirds of ad-buys during the January to April period.

The Network ads during non-WWE programming is interesting because of the timeslot choices. The only prime time ad-buys not during Raw or Smackdown on USA Network were inside some programming on E!, NBC Sports, and CNBC. Since WWE has a presence on E! with “Total Divas,” WWE could be looking to attract viewers with some familiarity with WWE. The prime-time ad-buys on NBC Sports point to going after general sports viewers.

All other non-USA ad-buys aired in daytime, overnight, or weekend afternoons when rates are cheaper and a different type of viewer is watching TV. Specifically, the type of viewers with atypical work schedules who might be flipping channels in the middle of the day or late at night who might be interested in WWE programming.

The question is whether this is an effective ad strategy targeting WWE fans watching Raw or Smackdown who might already be Network subscribers or trying to reach lapsed/casual/intrigued viewers watching other programming. For the second group of casual viewers, the call to action might not be specific enough, especially if they’re watching NBC Sports on a Wednesday night and cannot “change the channel” to WWE Network since it’s an over-the-top delivery service not available through a cable/satellite provider.

At this stage in the game, though, the strategy seems to be flooding WWE programming with Network ads to make sure irregular/casual viewers are aware of the Network and might tell a friend about it. And, try to spread the Network net across multiple cable TV properties, both NBCU and non-NBCU, to catch a few fish who might remember when they used to watch wrestling and be intrigued to re-live old times, while also potentially watching regularly again.

The answer to whether this is effective helping domestic Network subscriptions might not be known until after WrestleMania Season when the planted seeds either produce subs or wither away.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/13/pwtorch-report-much-wwe-spent-network-advertising-year/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't get it.
If you really want to capture a target audience between 18 and 40, invest some money and buy ad time during time slots that actually draw that audience in high numbers. In fact, why buy ad time during WWE programming? They may or may not realize it, but their casual audience is gone, and Cole shoving "9.99" down our throats is more than enough. Scrap those ads, and invest some real money in proper time slots.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

As many have already stated, the only sure fire way to produce better numbers on a week to week basis is to consistently book quality shows. You have to look no further than this thread to see the hesitancy folks have in accepting that a good episode will be followed by another. There is a serious trust issue between the WWE and their core viewing audience. One that will take months, if not years, to mend. Its not impossible, and shows like this past Monday prove that. Deliver like that on a weekly basis, and numbers will tick back up in a slow and steady manner.


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE always does this. They'll have 3 good shows. Then have 12 weeks of crap. Then 2 good Raws, A bad PPV. A good Raw after the PPV and 7 weeks of crap. WWE needs to put on good shows for weeks. 1 good show doesn't solve anything.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was Viewership For Part One Of The WWE Total Divas Season Finale?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

This week's WWE Total Divas episode on the E! network, which was part 1 of the season finale, drew 632,000 viewers and ranked #28 for the night on cable.

This is down from last week's episode, which drew 649,000 viewers and ranked #28 for the night on cable. The week before that drew 563,000 viewers and the week before that drew 663,000.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...p-for-part-one-of-the-wwe-total-divas-season/


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Social media isn't getting a fair shout in here. Anybody with any sense would realize the ever growing importance and significance of social in the modern world. I fully understand the points raised about monetizing your social efforts but that's something nobody in this thread is even capable of discussing with any credibility. Social media...or rather, making money from social media is such a misunderstood concept. A lot of company higher ups actually look down on social and think that they can just stick somebody who knows how to work twitter and facebook in the role of social media manager and that'll do it. In actual fact, it's an analytical job that when leveraged correctly can bring ridiculous return on investment. Social media is all about content and content creation, something that WWE is just about second to none in providing for its fanbase. 

All these stupid arguments about ratings vs. youtube etc are so pointless. Of course WWE isn't making more money from youtube than it does ratings. While on the decline, TV is still a way more valuable commodity than just about everything else. But that is changing every day. That's why WWE has so rightly invested in its digital space and social offerings. The only form of television that is moving forward rather than backwards is live NFL football. Why continue to put effort into a declining business model? 10 years from now it's practically a guarantee that almost everybody will be watching TV through a digital network or streaming service. There are kids today who don't know anything other than Netflix. That's what a lot of you are failing to grasp when you so foolishly put down social as being insignificant. Can WWE increase its ratings by putting on a product that doesn't insult the intelligence of its viewers? Yes it can. But is it going to monumentally change the trend in the overall TV industry? Absolutely not. There's only so high you can go in an industry on the decline. That's why such a heavy investment in social media now is probably going to be what keeps WWE afloat in the future. Because if this downward trend of the past few years continues, soon ratings ARE going to be below 2.0. I don't know why so many of you continue to act surprised that ratings are falling when they've been falling for the past decade. It's just that in the last few years, actually I'd argue that since Daniel Bryan left and the television product has gone to absolute shit, there's been a bit of a free fall and that decline has been accelerated. 

In the grand scheme of things I wouldn't be surprised at all if WWE's main goal in creating a better product is to convert those new or returning fans into network subscribers over people who watch Raw. No business wants to be reliant on one huge source of income because if it fails, everything goes to shit. WWE doesn't want USA to have bargaining power. WWE wants to have bargaining power and the only way WWE gets it is by becoming self reliant. The WWE Network allows for that to happen and social media is a huge part of making their digital efforts a success. 

Don't get me wrong, the ratings problem is a serious issue for WWE because if they don't manage to reach the subscription level they need and they don't continue to grow revenue from social, then they will have to rely on USA network for their biggest chunk of change and when that contract comes up for renewal, they're going to be in trouble. But to outright dismiss the value of social media like too many of you are doing in this thread is so damn naive. Bigger picture here folks. Open your eyes, if it's at all possible.


----------



## Dark_Raiden

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Do you want to kill Raw for good?
> The man can't carry one segment, let alone three on the same show.
> 
> Whoever they make champion, you don't make him special by making the viewer sick of him, by putting him on the show for 30 minutes. You make him special by making people wait for him.
> Champs used to defend their belt every few MONTHS.


I didn't say defend his title, but he's the one I want to see most. Thus I want him in 3 segments, beginning and end (because those are the best segments usually) and the middle (to keep me watching). Plus Roman Ratings will probably pick up business for them if they do this. 

I'm not personally entertained much by anyone else on the roster (besides Wyatt), so I want him to show up as much as possible.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dark_Raiden said:


> I didn't say defend his title, but he's the one I want to see most. Thus I want him in 3 segments, beginning and end (because those are the best segments usually) and the middle (to keep me watching). Plus Roman Ratings will probably pick up business for them if they do this.
> 
> I'm not personally entertained much by anyone else on the roster (besides Wyatt), so I want him to show up as much as possible.


No, they would burn out both the audience and Reigns within months if they did this stupid move. Reigns didn't pick up business in two years, putting him in three segments on each show makes things far, far worse. People tune in when they anticipate something. People get sick of someone who's on the show three times each week, just like women get sick of men who constantly want to be around them, begging for approval.

Seth Rollins was far more liked than Reigns, and he turned Raw into the Seth Rollins show, being on two or three times. It didn't do a rat's ass worth of good. 

People saying WWE needs to put on weeks of good TV for a ratings increase are too optimistic. It takes months of consistently great (not good, great) TV to turn things upwards, if it's not too late already, and they have to wait until the bottom is reached.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Its interesting advertisers spend as much money during sd as they do for live raw (usa pays the same hourly fee for both too). WWE and fans get all hung up on raw and its numbers while the network and advertisers view the show on same level as sd and less valuable than total divas



> Ad sales information obtained by PWTorch indicates that USA receives close to $1.0 million in ad sales revenue for a three-hour Raw episode.
> 
> The post-WrestleMania Raw on April 4 generated about $940,000 in ad revenue, while this week’s Raw from April 11 was around $1.0 million in revenue.
> 
> Then, there’s two-hour Smackdown, which generated about $785,000 in ad sales revenue on March 31 leading into WrestleMania.
> 
> Both shows command about $12,000-13,000 for a 30-second ad spot.
> 
> Comparatively, the average unit cost for a 30-second spot on “Chrisley Knows Best” is $9,000-12,000 and $8,000-9,000 for “Motive.”
> 
> WWE draws higher TV ratings on a weekly basis, which would typically allow USA to command higher rates than other programming. But, it’s pro wrestling, so the market takes on different form when there is less demand for ad slots.


How tna compare



> PWTorch obtained the following ad sales information capturing Pop’s business position.
> 
> The March 29 TNA Impact generated $18,414 in ad revenue, which was less than half of its “Days of Our Lives” lead-in. Impact also generated less money for a 30-second ad than an acquired movie.
> 
> TNA Impact First-Run Airing Revenue: $18,414
> Avg. unit cost for a 30-second ad: $335
> Days of Our Lives lead-in Revenue: $44,135
> Avg. unit cost for 30-second ad: $1,100-1,250
> “You’ve Got Mail” acquired movie 30-second ad: $406





The Renegade said:


> As many have already stated, the only sure fire way to produce better numbers on a week to week basis is to consistently book quality shows.


It's a star power based business not a quality one to be fair. You could put on best shows ever but unless the fans view the wrestlers/people on tv as stars viewership won't rise..look at 2009 e.g. Most consider raw awful that year yet it averaged the highest viewership since 2001. Spring/early summer 2013 raw was mostly terrific but viewership was lower than same period the year before when the show was mediocre.

You also have the issue now where nearly everything on tv is down so growing audience would be completely against grain.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> You also have the issue now where nearly everything on tv is down so growing audience would be completely against grain.


I don't disagree, but the way to present those individuals as stars is through good booking. Right now, I think the argument could be made that the inconsistent booking is actually more of a factor in the lack of star power than the performers themselves. Case and point: Bray Wyatt. He has everything necessary to be money for the company, but they seem to only build him to be fed to established stars. That has to change.


----------



## Dark_Raiden

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> No, they would burn out both the audience and Reigns within months if they did this stupid move. Reigns didn't pick up business in two years, putting him in three segments on each show makes things far, far worse. People tune in when they anticipate something. People get sick of someone who's on the show three times each week, just like women get sick of men who constantly want to be around them, begging for approval.
> 
> Seth Rollins was far more liked than Reigns, and he turned Raw into the Seth Rollins show, being on two or three times. It didn't do a rat's ass worth of good.
> 
> People saying WWE needs to put on weeks of good TV for a ratings increase are too optimistic. It takes months of consistently great (not good, great) TV to turn things upwards, if it's not too late already, and they have to wait until the bottom is reached.


See I disagree that Seth Rollins is more popular than Reigns. I heavily disagree. The more popular you are, the more you can be seen. No matter how much HHH and Rock and Austin showed up, the fans loved them everytime they showed up and ratings were high. I feel the same way about Reigns and think that'll help ratings out tbh.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dark_Raiden said:


> See I disagree that Seth Rollins is more popular than Reigns. I heavily disagree. The more popular you are, the more you can be seen. No matter how much HHH and Rock and Austin showed up, the fans loved them everytime they showed up and ratings were high. I feel the same way about Reigns and think that'll help ratings out tbh.


Not speaking on who's more popular between the two (that's for someone else to decide, not me) but HHH, Rock and Austin weren't doing 5 hours of television a week in the broadband era. Its a lot more difficult to feel fresh in this day and age.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Comparing Austin and Rock popularity to Reigns is ridiculous, it's not even worth commenting on it further.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> Not speaking on who's more popular between the two (that's for someone else to decide, not me) but HHH, Rock and Austin weren't doing 5 hours of television a week in the broadband era. Its a lot more difficult to feel fresh in this day and age.


I love Seth Rollins as a talent but I got so sick of him once RAW became the Seth Rollins Show. There's no one on the roster that needs more than 40 minutes of screen time each week. 

I like the way Reigns is used now. He cuts his promo and then returns for the main event. If and when he catches fire, I think his segments will take on an even greater importance. I feel it's more about quality, not quantity when it comes to screen sometimes.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I love Seth Rollins as a talent but I got so sick of him once RAW became the Seth Rollins Show. There's no one on the roster that needs more than 40 minutes of screen time each week.
> 
> I like the way Reigns is used now. He cuts his promo and then returns for the main event. If and when he catches fire, I think his segments will take on an even greater importance. I feel it's more about quality, not quantity when it comes to screen sometimes.


You're absolutely right. The amount of time Seth was out there on a weekly basis was ridiculous. Especially when you consider the small amount of screen time other stars weren't getting. There needs to be a balance. 

I feel like they are finally nailing the presentation of Roman now. He doesn't need to be out there cutting huge promos every week. Its actually a nice change of pace to have a champ who doesn't talk quite as much. Not sure how that became the standard, because it really isn't necessary all the time.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*John Cena’s “American Grit” TV viewership – Series Premiere off to very slow start*

The series premiere of “American Grit” hosted by John Cena got off to a very slow start Thursday night on Fox.


Grit drew a small broadcast TV audience of 2.43 million viewers, scoring a 0.8 adults 18-49 TV rating, reports TVBytheNumbers. By comparison, last week’s Smackdown drew 2.44 million viewers on cable TV’s USA Network.

Cena’s new show trailed its lead-in, “Bones,” by nearly two million viewers. Bones drew 4.36 million viewers and registered a 0.9 a18-49 rating.

The show was a distant fourth among the four major broadcasters in the 9:00 p.m. EST window on a crowded TV night. “Grey’s Anatomy” drew a total of 8.0 million viewers over a two-hour block, CBS’s half-hour programming averaged 7.4 million viewers, and “The Blacklist” on NBC drew 6.6 million viewers.

Cena’s show benefited from a lot of in-show advertising during last Thursday’s series finale of “American Idol” and Cena doing a lot of promotion trying to get the word out.

However, Cena has been off WWE TV with an injury and WWE did the minimum to promote Cena’s show since it was going to head-to-head with Smackdown. The lack of exposure to WWE viewers, especially Cena’s fanbase, appears to have impacted the slow start.

Caldwell’s Analysis: The main issue seems to be the show’s format. Cena is the designated star as the host. However, he’s a “fish out of water” as a pro wrestler trying to turn into an actor hosting a show with no other real stars despite the nice message about honoring the military. Viewers simply do not know who the military personnel are or why they should care about the contestants. The show’s concept is similar to other shows, creating a situation where the stars have to be the draw. The only star is Cena, whose mainstream appeal is minimal to adults who left wrestling after the Attitude Era. And, kids likely would not be drawn to the show since Cena is in unfamiliar territory not playing a “super-hero” wrestler wearing bright-colored t-shirts.

Cena is trying to branch out on his own as a leading man outside of WWE, but he seems more suited for the supporting role in a comedy movie like “Trainwreck” that generated buzz because he exceeded expectations of a pro wrestler by showing range as an actor. But, playing a serious host of a competition show that does not separate itself from the pack will make for a challenging season, especially being in the “comedown match” spot after the American Idol finale.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04...tv-viewership-series-premiere-off-slow-start/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I love Seth Rollins as a talent but I got so sick of him once RAW became the Seth Rollins Show. There's no one on the roster that needs more than 40 minutes of screen time each week.
> 
> I like the way Reigns is used now. He cuts his promo and then returns for the main event. If and when he catches fire, I think his segments will take on an even greater importance. I feel it's more about quality, not quantity when it comes to screen sometimes.


Rollins was able to convey histrionics animatedly and even believably. Even those minute expressions of recollection when Cena called him out over his betrayal of the Shield or his shocked expression at Lesnar's return ahead of schedule the RAW after MITB can attest to that. He has this slimy heel aura all over him and in that promo with The New Day, he displayed chemistry in promos besides his obviously adept in ring chemistry with good workers. But it's another thing hearing his high pitched voice open promos and harp repetitively in an obviously scripted manner about the developments in his storyline (as if the barrage of mid show recaps weren't enough to keep us in the loop)

Reigns seems to be in the spot where Rocky(or Rocky Maivia) was in 97, except he is obviously getting a far greater push. Comparisons about charisma and mic work are apples to oranges due to the limitations of the current product and Rock being able to effuse more talkativeness naturally in his gimmick.

A heel Reigns however can be gold, especially against a babyface that is really over. However from what has happened to entrants from outside like Booker T, Sting and RVD, am not sure if AJ Styles is just a filler feud to build up something else or is actually something more than presented.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@JonnyAceLaryngitis

I agree that Seth Rollins played a great heel and was a master at facial expressions. I just got sick of him. I think @THANOS put it best. You can love ice cream but get sick of it. His title reign undoing, for me at least, was overexposure and a chickenshit run. 

A full blown heel Reigns, face Rollins, tweener Ambrose, face Styles and making the other characters feel important again could lead to a gradual increase in TV ratings and create a social media buzz. Let's hope for a hot summer!


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> @JonnyAceLaryngitis
> 
> I agree that Seth Rollins played a great heel and was a master at facial expressions. I just got sick of him. I think @THANOS put it best. You can love ice cream but get sick of it. His title reign undoing, for me at least, was overexposure and a chickenshit run.
> 
> A full blown heel Reigns, face Rollins, tweener Ambrose, face Styles and making the other characters feel important again could lead to a gradual increase in TV ratings and create a social media buzz. Let's hope for a hot summer!


Adding to those predictably whiny promos, Rollins was also saddled with a win loss record as bad as a lower mid carder's at one time whilst holding the biggest title in WWE. They really made him nothing more than a punch clock bag man for The Authority at times. That diminished his own heelish attributes.

Am skeptical of WWE turning Reigns full blown heel very soon unless its a major hook out of nowhere or a bigger feud than now. They did make even CM Punk do so albeit in a slow burn manner but the circumstances ensured they got the most eyeballs for it as the starpower during that segment was off the charts.

Ambrose is a natural tweener/heel but his booking is rivalling Wyatt's geek booking not too long ago. AJ Styles's hot run at the moment may stem from his merch sales and crossover audience potential from his other promotions.

On a side note am wondering why they didn't change Cesaro's theme. He needs one that the crowd can partake in like Zayn's. Not this factory alarm which looks totally unrelated to his current run.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> On a side note am wondering why they didn't change Cesaro's theme. He needs one that the crowd can partake in like Zayn's. Not this factory alarm which looks totally unrelated to his current run.


The WWE seems quite cheap when it comes to theme songs. Most superstars get generic tunes now. Personally, I found Brie's theme to be an assault on my ears. I'm so happy I never have to hear it again. :grin2:


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> On a side note am wondering why they didn't change Cesaro's theme. He needs one that the crowd can partake in like Zayn's. Not this factory alarm which looks totally unrelated to his current run.


He needs a new finisher as well he does all this cool shit in the ring and then he plants them on their belly for his finisher it looks like it doesn't hurt the Sharpshooter and the move that was on @Empress sig should be his 2 finishers.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> The WWE seems quite cheap when it comes to theme songs. Most superstars get generic tunes now. Personally, I found Brie's theme to be an assault on my ears. I'm so happy I never have to hear it again. :grin2:


When the crowd sang along to his Real American theme the RAW after WM29, it was epic. I don't think they are cheap. They let those with leeway choose their own themes. It's just that I think they just don't care.

And as for that Brie theme, I hope am not reminded of it again.



TheGeneticFreak said:


> He needs a new finisher as well he does all this cool shit in the ring and then he plants them on their belly for his finisher it looks like it doesn't hurt the Sharpshooter and the move that was on @Empress sig should be his 2 finishers.


I think he has to go through way too much backstage politicking to change his moveset even a bit.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown - Twitter
*

- Last night's WWE SmackDown ranked #5 among series & specials for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings, behind 30 For 30, the Ted Cruz Town Hall, Grey's Anatomy and the CNN Democratic Debate. As noted, Nielsen recently confirmed to us that they have changed the way Twitter ratings are being released as Unique Audience will no longer be included. The weekly lists will now include and be ranked by tweet volume. SmackDown had 37,000 tweets with 12,000 unique authors. In comparison, Monday's RAW had 187,000 tweets with 35,000 unique authors.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0415/609765/new-seth-rollins-tapout-video/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The main event scene absolutely needs a new breathe of fresh air added to it, especially when AJ goes directly back to the midcard after losing to Reigns. It's too bad Seth, Cena, and Orton are still a few months away and he can't come back in May or June. August will do, though. They will add a nice breathe of fresh air to a main event scene that is lacking severely at the moment.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The main event scene absolutely needs a new breathe of fresh air added to it, especially when AJ goes directly back to the midcard after losing to Reigns.


If that occurs and it very well may, it's sad that WWE has reached such a point of predictability.



ShowStopper said:


> It's too bad Seth is still a few months away and he can't come back in May or June. August will do, though. He will add a nice breathe of fresh air to a main event scene that is lacking severely at the moment.


Provided they don't put him in a customary 'get over HHH first' feud as soon as he returns.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> If that occurs and it very well may, it's sad that WWE has reached such a point of predictability.
> 
> 
> 
> Provided they don't put him in a customary 'get over HHH first' feud as soon as he returns.


I'd be okay with that. Going over HHH, if he does, would be a huge win for him and would be miles better than the awful HHH/Reigns feud we just got.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Now, if only Seth didn't sound like a eunuch ....


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The main event scene absolutely needs a new breathe of fresh air added to it, especially when AJ goes directly back to the midcard after losing to Reigns. It's too bad Seth, Cena, and Orton are still a few months away and he can't come back in May or June. August will do, though. They will add a nice breathe of fresh air to a main event scene that is lacking severely at the moment.


I dunno about the AJ thing. They've given him plenty of exposure right from the get-go and he's getting big reactions at every show they do, house show or television. 

He might stay near or right at the main event even after the match with Reigns. Considering the mileage on him, it would make sense to use the next few years of his wisely before he starts breaking down.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dr. Middy said:


> I dunno about the AJ thing. They've given him plenty of exposure right from the get-go and he's getting big reactions at every show they do, house show or television.
> 
> He might stay near or right at the main event even after the match with Reigns. Considering the mileage on him, it would make sense to use the next few years of his wisely before he starts breaking down.


I hope so, but I doubt it. I think it's lights-out (as far as main event goes for awhile) once Cena, Orton, and Rollins come back. But we shall see. I doubt it, though.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I hope so, but I doubt it. I think it's lights-out (as far as main event goes for awhile) once Cena, Orton, and Rollins come back. But we shall see. I doubt it, though.


I assume Rollins will be thrust back into a feud with HHH for Summerslam if he's back in time for it. 

Cena I don't know, but I can see him remaining in a role where he feuds with midcarders and isn't at the top of the card, because really he doesn't need to be the main event anymore. 

Orton I think is the most questionable. I could see him very soon becoming a part-time act similar to Jericho where he comes back only to work with certain wrestlers. I could also see him take Shawn Michaels' shedule of doing only tv appearances and PPVs, but completely staying off house shows, which means they'll need somebody to fill that role on house shows.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dr. Middy said:


> I assume Rollins will be thrust back into a feud with HHH for Summerslam if he's back in time for it.
> 
> Cena I don't know, but I can see him remaining in a role where he feuds with midcarders and isn't at the top of the card, because really he doesn't need to be the main event anymore.
> 
> Orton I think is the most questionable. I could see him very soon becoming a part-time act similar to Jericho where he comes back only to work with certain wrestlers. I could also see him take Shawn Michaels' shedule of doing only tv appearances and PPVs, but completely staying off house shows, which means they'll need somebody to fill that role on house shows.


I think Cena is going back to the main event VERY soon. He served as a mid-carder for all of 2015. I think he's going right back to the main event when he comes back and Vince won't have it any other way especially with ratings continuing to decline.

Rollins, not sure if he feuds with H right away or not, but he will be somewhere in the main event scene, as well. Thus, crowding it up even more.

Orton, I'm not sure. But he's been gone for awhile now, too. I think Vince likes to have his big names who have been gone for awhile, with ratings continuing to decline, go right into a high profile/main event feud right away. I think all 3 make a huge impact in high profile feuds upon arrival. By this time the AJ/Reigns feud will be over, too. I think AJ stays in the upper-midcard, though. At least I hope.


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*4/14 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – Thursday’s show dips, how did it compare to Cena’s new show?*

This week’s WWE Smackdown drew almost exactly the same number of viewers as John Cena’s new “American Grit” show on Fox…


WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

April 14: Thursday’s Smackdown scored a 1.70 rating, down from a 1.75 rating last week.

Smackdown drew 2.355 million viewers, down four percent from 2.444 million viewers last week for the post-WrestleMania episode.

Smackdown’s cable TV audience was nearly identical to the season premiere of Fox’s “American Grit” hosted by John Cena, which drew a final audience of 2.35 million viewers on broadcast TV.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Smackdown’s demo ratings were up and down compared to last week. Adults 18-49 was identical, males 18-34 was slightly down, and males 18-49 was slightly up to a four-week high.

– Overall, Smackdown continues to underperform compared to last year on Syfy, two years ago on Friday nights on Syfy, and the First Quarter of this year.

During the first quarter, Smackdown averaged a 1.77 rating and 2.481 million viewers, mainly on the strength of January episodes. Smackdown has not topped a 1.77 rating since February 4.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04...s-thursdays-show-dips-compare-cenas-new-show/


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *John Cena’s “American Grit” TV viewership – Series Premiere off to very slow start*
> 
> The series premiere of “American Grit” hosted by John Cena got off to a very slow start Thursday night on Fox.


Well tbf to Cena no one really gives many fucks about these kinda shows anymore.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *John Cena’s “American Grit” TV viewership – Series Premiere off to very slow start*
> 
> The series premiere of “American Grit” hosted by John Cena got off to a very slow start Thursday night on Fox.
> 
> 
> Grit drew a small broadcast TV audience of 2.43 million viewers, scoring a 0.8 adults 18-49 TV rating, reports TVBytheNumbers. By comparison, last week’s Smackdown drew 2.44 million viewers on cable TV’s USA Network.
> 
> Cena’s new show trailed its lead-in, “Bones,” by nearly two million viewers. Bones drew 4.36 million viewers and registered a 0.9 a18-49 rating.
> 
> The show was a distant fourth among the four major broadcasters in the 9:00 p.m. EST window on a crowded TV night. “Grey’s Anatomy” drew a total of 8.0 million viewers over a two-hour block, CBS’s half-hour programming averaged 7.4 million viewers, and “The Blacklist” on NBC drew 6.6 million viewers.
> 
> Cena’s show benefited from a lot of in-show advertising during last Thursday’s series finale of “American Idol” and Cena doing a lot of promotion trying to get the word out.
> 
> However, Cena has been off WWE TV with an injury and WWE did the minimum to promote Cena’s show since it was going to head-to-head with Smackdown. The lack of exposure to WWE viewers, especially Cena’s fanbase, appears to have impacted the slow start.
> 
> Caldwell’s Analysis: The main issue seems to be the show’s format. Cena is the designated star as the host. However, he’s a “fish out of water” as a pro wrestler trying to turn into an actor hosting a show with no other real stars despite the nice message about honoring the military. Viewers simply do not know who the military personnel are or why they should care about the contestants. The show’s concept is similar to other shows, creating a situation where the stars have to be the draw. The only star is Cena, whose mainstream appeal is minimal to adults who left wrestling after the Attitude Era. And, kids likely would not be drawn to the show since Cena is in unfamiliar territory not playing a “super-hero” wrestler wearing bright-colored t-shirts.
> 
> Cena is trying to branch out on his own as a leading man outside of WWE, but he seems more suited for the supporting role in a comedy movie like “Trainwreck” that generated buzz because he exceeded expectations of a pro wrestler by showing range as an actor. But, playing a serious host of a competition show that does not separate itself from the pack will make for a challenging season, especially being in the “comedown match” spot after the American Idol finale.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04...tv-viewership-series-premiere-off-slow-start/


Somebody needs to slap whoever decided to air that show at the same time as Smackdown. People know Cena, he's pretty popular. Those people are wrestling fans. They watch WWE wrestling. So naturally air the show at the same time as Smackdown... 

Also WWE probably would have promoted the shit out of the show if they didn't air it at the same time.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah, the WWE would'e promoted John Cena's hosting gig if it didn't air opposite Smackdown. That was a strategic flop by FOX rather than synergy. 

I always find it a bit odd that Cena waited this long to get into Hollywood. He should've made the jump 5 years ago and been a part timer.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Aaaand the Smackdown rating continues to fade into complete irrelevancy..

:ti


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last nights live ufc on fox averaged 2.137 million viewers

Just interesting to compare what other stuff is doing on tv right now. Fox is in over 20 million more homes than cable


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

UFC also did the same number of buys for their 60 bucks PPVs this year that WWE has US subscibers for their crappy 9,99 bucks network.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Big difference between a Saturday night and a Thursday night. Why do you think NFL has games on Monday nights, Thursday nights, and Sunday nights, but none on Saturday night.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Big difference between a Saturday night and a Thursday night. Why do you think NFL has games on Monday nights, Thursday nights, and Sunday nights, but none on Saturday night.


All ufc ppvs are on Saturday night so its a traditional night for them and half the nfl playoffs take place on saturday. Basketball final four also takes place on saturday

Not sure why regular season games are not on Saturday as they would beat Thursday night numbers. Remember viewership for Thursday night football fell 5% last year..same as SD


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> All ufc ppvs are on Saturday night so its a traditional night for them and half the nfl playoffs take place on saturday. Basketball final four also takes place on saturday
> 
> Not sure why regular season games are not on Saturday as they would beat Thursday night numbers. Remember viewership for Thursday night football fell 5% last year..same as SD


The NFL playoff games are on Saturday afternoon, as well. One game in the afternoon and one at night. Besides, NFL playoffs draw no matter what day or time they are on. They are the NFL playoffs. There is nothing bigger in America.

Regular season games are not on Saturday night because people go out on Saturday nights. Thursday night most people are home since they have work and school the next day. There was an article a year or two ago about this explaining why the NFL made their schedule like this. But when it comes to the playoffs, all the rules go out the window. People will make it a point to be in front of a TV for an NFL playoff game on a Saturday night. They are a much bigger deal than a regular season game. As big as the regular season games draw, the playoff games draw even more, as scary as that it (in a good way for the NFL).


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Big difference between a Saturday night and a Thursday night. Why do you think NFL has games on Monday nights, Thursday nights, and Sunday nights, but none on Saturday night.





ShowStopper said:


> The NFL playoff games are on Saturday afternoon, as well. One game in the afternoon and one at night. Besides, NFL playoffs draw no matter what day or time they are on. They are the NFL playoffs. There is nothing bigger in America.
> 
> Regular season games are not on Saturday night because people go out on Saturday nights. Thursday night most people are home since they have work and school the next day. There was an article a year or two ago about this explaining why the NFL made their schedule like this. But when it comes to the playoffs, all the rules go out the window. People will make it a point to be in front of a TV for an NFL playoff game on a Saturday night. They are a much bigger deal than a regular season game. As big as the regular season games draw, the playoff games draw even more, as scary as that it (in a good way for the NFL).


The NFL doesn't have games on Saturday because College Football has games on Saturday and millions of people watch that. The NFL wants people to watch college football because it creates stars for them by having new guys in the league already be well known.

When the NFL Playoffs start college football is done with. 

On Saturday, November 28 there were 7 games that had over 4 million viewers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



FITZ said:


> The NFL doesn't have games on Saturday because College Football has games on Saturday and millions of people watch that. The NFL wants people to watch college football because it creates stars for them by having new guys in the league already be well known.
> 
> When the NFL Playoffs start college football is done with.
> 
> On Saturday, November 28 there were 7 games that had over 4 million viewers.


Great point. Completely forgot about College Football. The other poster asked me about Saturday nights and why the NFL has games on Monday, Thursday, and Sunday nights, but not Saturday nights. Completely forgot that there are college games on Saturday night. Another big reason why the NFL skipped Saturday night.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.486M
H2-3.541M
H3-2.980M
3H-3.336M*










*H2 Vs H1 (+1.6%/+0.055M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-15.84%/-0.561M)
H3 Vs H1 (-14.52%/-0.506M)
4/18/16 Vs 4/11/16 (-5.47%/-0.193M)
Note: Taped London RAW.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They went under 3 million in the third hour.

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Sub 3 million for an hour without major competition. Houston we have a problem.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> They went under 3 million in the third hour.
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao





THE SHIV said:


> Sub 3 million for an hour without major competition. Houston we have a problem.


Consistently rivaling the April ratings from 97. But this one was taped though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Consistently rivaling the April ratings from 97. But this one was taped though.


Wow, that is pretty bad. All England Raws have been taped, including last years.

Last year's England Raw rating: (4/13/15):

Hour one: 3.69 million
Hour two: 3.79 million
Hour three: 3.53 million

Also taped.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It was a taped raw from what I heard so makes sense that the viewership was that low......or does it :hmm:. The "iwc" would know it's taped but it's supposedly a really small part of the WWE's audience, the "casuals" wouldn't know so would've just tuned in taped or not taped.

:rollins4


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Wow, that is pretty bad. All England Raws have been taped, including last years.
> 
> Last year's England Raw rating: (4/13/15):
> 
> Hour one: 3.69 million
> Hour two: 3.79 million
> Hour three: 3.53 million
> 
> Also taped.


WWE didnt have any UK tour in April 97, which was the time period am comparing the current ratings to. But their 4/14/97 RAW was in Johannesburg, South Africa. So yeah that is less likely to be an apples to oranges comparison.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Awful :mj5


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> It was a taped raw from what I heard so makes sense that the viewership was that low......or does it :hmm:. The "iwc" would know it's taped but it's supposedly a really small part of the WWE's audience, the "casuals" wouldn't know so would've just tuned in taped or not taped.
> 
> :rollins4


Last year's England Raw was also taped, and they didn't come close to going under 3 million. :shrug


----------



## Kabraxal

More... Give me more. Let it crash harder. Let "Rome" burn!

So fucking glad this trash is finally reaching what should be "absolute panic" levels. Something will have to change you'd think.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> WWE didnt have any UK tour in April 97, which was the time period am comparing the current ratings to. But their 4/14/97 RAW was in Johannesburg, South Africa. So yeah that is less likely to be an apples to oranges comparison.


Forget about 1997. Just compare it to last year's England Raw, which was also taped. Much higher numbers than this year. :shrug


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They ae coming perilously close to having a sub 1.0 demo for an hour. There are some lines that should not be crossed.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I expected a ratings drop with the show being taped and the NBA playoffs being on, but an hour averaging less than 3 million viewers is pathetic.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It was taped so the drop is not all too surprising. Also, the second half of the show was a bore overall, I'd say.

Awful numbers in the grand scheme of things though.


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Who the fuck wanted to see Ambrose v Owens again? We've seen that match a million times already.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why did the 3rd hour crash so hard? I honestly would have never guessed that number.

The taped stuff is irrelevant because that's assuming every fan knows it's taped.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Roman's confirmed new gimmick as a modern TL Hopper plumbing new ratings depths.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Forget about 1997. Just compare it to last year's England Raw, which was also taped. Much higher numbers than this year. :shrug


Which makes me wonder, how low is the ceiling for the hardcore fanbase. If these yearly drops continue then is 2 to 3 million the hardcore fanbase? By 2017?


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hour 3 :ti


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm obviously mixing up hours because I swear the selling point was Owens vs Dean for the 3rd hour..


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No one on the roster is keeping the fans tuned in. The highest hour was 3.5 million just a couple weeks removed from the biggest show of the year.

:lmao


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The numbers indicate that fans aren't willing to hang around for that third hour. They desperately need a format change. Bad.


----------



## Kabraxal

The Last Marauder said:


> I'm obviously mixing up hours because I swear the selling point was Owens vs Dean for the 3rd hour..


There is no selling point anymore. The main roster has made every must see act a "this shit is boring" channel changer. There is no hear to any feud or angle except for Vince v the fans and creative v intelligence. They could bring Punk back and it wouldn't move the needle.

The WWE has conditioned fans to expect only disappointment and they always deliver on that expectation. So people stop caring.


----------



## Robbyfude

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The hour 3 drop makes sense, who wants to see Owens vs Ambrose again? That's like adding Cena vs Orton again.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Kabraxal said:


> There is no selling point anymore. The main roster has made every must see act a "this shit is boring" channel changer. There is no hear to any feud or angle except for Vince v the fans and creative v intelligence. They could bring Punk back and it wouldn't move the needle.
> 
> The WWE has conditioned fans to expect only disappointment and they always deliver on that expectation. So people stop caring.


Funny because I see all this hype how "Shane's" Raws have been so good and different. It's definitely not translating ratings wise. It will take way. more than 3 weeks of good booking to reverse such colossal damage done over the years. Ratings have been steadily declining and fans are leaving in droves. 

Vince must be so confused. He probably expected Shane to bring many back in.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hour 3.. lol. Main event was a pre-taped match of two guys we've seen wrestle a million times in the last few months with no consequence of who wins/loses... not to mention Better Call Saul season finale was on during it (not sure how that did, though).


----------



## Kabraxal

The Last Marauder said:


> Kabraxal said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no selling point anymore. The main roster has made every must see act a "this shit is boring" channel changer. There is no hear to any feud or angle except for Vince v the fans and creative v intelligence. They could bring Punk back and it wouldn't move the needle.
> 
> The WWE has conditioned fans to expect only disappointment and they always deliver on that expectation. So people stop caring.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny because I see all this hype how "Shane's" Raws have been so good and different. It's definitely not translating ratings wise. It will take way. more than 3 weeks of good booking to reverse such colossal damage done over the years. Ratings have been steadily declining and fans are leaving in droves.
> 
> Vince must be so confused. He probably expected Shane to bring many back in.
Click to expand...

The results I've read have been no different from previous Raws though. It's all slapped together feuds where the matches mean nothing and there is very little build up to those matches. 

There is just no thought put into the show at all anymore.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



#BadNewsSanta said:


> Hour 3.. lol. Main event was a pre-taped match of two guys we've seen wrestle a million times in the last few months with no consequence of who wins/loses... not to mention Better Call Saul season finale was on during it (not sure how that did, though).


That one did 2.263M with a 0.85 demo compared to RAW's 3.336M and a 1.19 avg demo for all 3 hours combined.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah, the Ambrose/Owens matches have been done to death, and Ambrose so far has won them all IIRC. Which would be fine if they're trying to give Ambrose a legit push, but we know he's just gonna job to the stars like Lesnar and Reigns. So Owens is basically just the bitch of a bitch, and it's a sad thing to see.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Ambrose/Owens matches are still very good, but yeah they've been done too many times now, and you can tell even the crowd wasn't terribly interested in the majority of their match. Also, strange to even put them together since both guys didn't need another loss. And this was the best the third hour had to offer, so I wouldn't be surprised with a huge drop off. 

Also, they made very clear that Owens/Zayn is a full step below Ambrose/Jericho on the amount they care about it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Pretty obvious the decisions they made at WM aren't what the fans wanted to see.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> Raw last night broke a new record for the least watched episode on its regular night outside of football season with 3.32 million viewers.
> 
> The show fell victim to a big third hour drop which led to it falling below the previous low mark set on 2/1 at 3.37 million viewers.
> 
> http://www.f4wonline.com/news/wwe-r...-211331?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Roman's confirmed new gimmick as a modern TL Hopper plumbing new ratings depths.


I love that gif. I'm so glad you came up with the whole Roman 2:16 thing, it's quite amusing.

The hell was in the third hour to cause such a crash?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A NEW low record for Raw. Even lower than the 2/1/16 Raw.

:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

We are setting new records every week :vince2


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope Vince doesn't panic and bring back the Authority they are WOAT, it just got desperate near the end with how much they tried to make us cheer Roman.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Remember, you can't spell *R**E*CORD low RAT*I**N**G**S* without *REIGNS*.


----------



## Wildcat410

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Pretty obvious the decisions they made at WM aren't what the fans wanted to see.


There has been an ever increasing sense of unimportantance about tuning into Raw. As well as malaise about the product in general. People are also perpetually waiting for backstage to drop the ball again. Even when something good does show up.

Hell even their top feud does not feel like a main event worthy one. Styles and Reigns should be paired with performers who can carry the entertainment parts. Not with each other.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wait, so the low ratings, and nosedive there for the last hour was the result of someone that was barely even featured and wasn't in the main event? :lol :lol :lol

The blind hate for Reigns is just comical at this point. If he is in the ME and the third hour sees a drop, it's his fault, if he's not in the ME and the third hour sees a massive plunge, it's his fault... And people wonder why WWE/people IN the business don't take the IWC seriously.


Edit: As the DB marks always said... SHOW ME DA BREAKDOWNN!!!!111


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> Wait, so the low ratings, and nosedive there for the last hour was the result of someone that was barely even featured and wasn't in the main event? :lol :lol :lol
> 
> The blind hate for Reigns is just comical at this point. If he is in the ME and the third hour sees a drop, it's his fault, if he's not in the ME and the third hour sees a massive plunge, it's his fault... And people wonder why WWE/people IN the business don't take the IWC seriously.


Except for the fact that we were told once he was Champion ratings would increase... :lol

Not only have they not increased; they have actually decreased.

You were saying?


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Except for the fact that we were told once he was Champion ratings would increase... :lol
> 
> Not only have they not increased; they have actually decreased.
> 
> You were saying?


Not to mention that this was after "the biggest WM" of all time with their "record breaking" attendance.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A record low and it's only April. :lol

Can't wait to see what the ratings look like come football season. :banderas


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Except for the fact that we were told once he was Champion ratings would increase... :lol
> 
> Not only have they not increased; they have actually decreased.
> 
> You were saying?


"You were saying" :lol :lol, wow, you really got me there. Case closed.



I never remember anyone telling me that. Regardless, the reasoning on here is absurd. When DB was champion and ratings declined, it was everyone else's fault... When Roman is champion and ratings decline, it's his fault. If Reigns were in the ME last night and you tell me that you wouldn't have said the decline was 100% his fault, then you're a liar.

When a show is heavy on Roman or Cena, and it doesn't draw, it's because everyone tunes out not wanting to see them. When a show is heavy on the NXT/Indy guys and people tune out, it's because some guy is champion that they don't want to be champion, so despite him not being featured much, and not in the main event, it's still his fault.

Also, what kind of terrible reasoning would someone have to say, "well, they've decided to start featuring all these indy guys that I like love and have been wanting to get called up for the past year.... But I don't like the guy that they put the WHC belt on, so I'm just going to not watch at all."

Somehow, there's ALWAYS an excuse on this forum to blame the 1-2 people that are disliked, while never making it the fault of anyone else. But to be completely honest, it's not that important to me because I fast-forward through Raw anyway... But I do love to come in this thread to troll everyone ever since the time my brain melted and bled out of my ears after seeing the hoops that people jump through around here to blame someone they don't like (usually Cena or Reigns), while deflecting blame from someone they do like (DB, or whomever else).


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> "You were saying" :lol :lol, wow, you really got me there. Case closed.
> 
> 
> 
> I never remember anyone telling me that. Regardless, the reasoning on here is absurd. When DB was champion and ratings declined, it was everyone else's fault... When Roman is champion and ratings decline, it's his fault. If Reigns were in the ME last night and you tell me that you wouldn't have said the decline was 100% his fault, then you're a liar.
> 
> When a show is heavy on Roman or Cena, and it doesn't draw, it's because everyone tunes out not wanting to see them. When a show is heavy on the NXT/Indy guys and people tune out, it's because some guy is champion that they don't want to be champion, so despite him not being featured much, and not in the main event, it's still his fault.
> 
> Also, what kind of terrible reasoning would someone have to say, "well, they've decided to start featuring all these indy guys that I like love and have been wanting to get called up for the past year.... But I don't like the guy that they put the WHC belt on, so I'm just going to not watch at all."
> 
> Somehow, there's ALWAYS an excuse on this forum to blame the 1-2 people that are disliked, while never making it the fault of anyone else. But to be completely honest, it's not that important to me because I fast-forward through Raw anyway... But I do love to come in this thread to troll everyone ever since the time my brain melted and bled out of my ears after seeing the hoops that people jump through around here to blame someone they don't like (usually Cena or Reigns), while deflecting blame from someone they do like (DB, or whomever else).


"No one told me that." Well, no one had to tell you that. It was said in this thread and in some other threads for awhile now. 

People have had the idea to blame the ratings on whoever the World Champion is for YEARS now. This is nothing new, seriously. Don't know how anyone can even hint at the idea of that being some new idea. Punk got blame. Cena got blame. Lesnar got blame. Bryan got blame. Rollins got blame. All of the recent World Champions have gotten blame. The current one is no different.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings from last year's London show:

Hour one: 3.69 million
Hour two: 3.79 million
Hour three: 3.53 million

I knew it. I knew that catering to these hardcore fans would start doing damage and it is. I'll enjoy the flames haha.


----------



## T0M

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Fucking lol. 

I thought going sub-three million in November was bad but three weeks removed from Mania? Holy shit. We could be sub-two million after Summerslam at this rate.

Nobody with a working brain should be surprised considering how crap the product is these days.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



nWoWolfpac98 said:


> Ratings from last year's London show:
> 
> Hour one: 3.69 million
> Hour two: 3.79 million
> Hour three: 3.53 million
> 
> I knew it. I knew that catering to these hardcore fans would start doing damage and it is. I'll enjoy the flames haha.


Yes because the expensive house show that was Mania and making Roman champ is clearly catering to hardcore fans.


----------



## T0M

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Oh and to all the people who continuously repeat "people consume TV in different ways, it's a different era!", the post mania Raw rating was over four million and now we're below three.

The point is if there is interest in the product people will watch that shit. When it's crap people switch off - as we are now seeing week after week.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Yes because the expensive house show that was Mania and making Roman champ is clearly catering to hardcore fans.


No, bro. Lack of story. Lack of characters. Just long, meaningless wrestling. No one has a dynamic presence to them. They barely let AJ speak, because they know he can't. Bringing in all of these guys from Japan and the indies and just expecting their audience to give a shit about them. 

I watch Japanese wrestling. A majority of their fans don't. They shouldn't have to go out and search for who these people are. This isn't the 90s when millions upon millions of people were watching wrestling and got excited when WWF Midcarders showed up on Nitro.

People remember the greatest wresting moments for the story. If you got to a WWE event and ask kids and their parents what their favorite aspect of wrestling is I doubt they'll tell you "technical ability!" The biggest era in wrestling history was story based with little wrestling on the actual shows. 

The great wrestling matches provided was always just the added bonus.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



T0M said:


> The point is if there is interest in the product people will watch that shit. When it's crap people switch off - as we are now seeing week after week.


What is so crap about WWE right now? RAW has been entertaining. Only downside is 3 hours.


----------



## Kabraxal

nWoWolfpac98 said:


> Ratings from last year's London show:
> 
> Hour one: 3.69 million
> Hour two: 3.79 million
> Hour three: 3.53 million
> 
> I knew it. I knew that catering to these hardcore fans would start doing damage and it is. I'll enjoy the flames haha.


You call thiscatering to hardcore fans? What reality do you live in?


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Kabraxal said:


> You call thiscatering to hardcore fans? What reality do you live in?


Already explained it in my last post. And yes, they are catering way more to the hardcore fans than they have in the past.

Ratings are going down and they're gonna keep going down if they continue doing what they're doing.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> "No one told me that." Well, no one had to tell you that. It was said in this thread and in some other threads for awhile now.
> 
> People have had the idea to blame the ratings on whoever the World Champion is for YEARS now. This is nothing new, seriously. Don't know how anyone can even hint at the idea of that being some new idea. Punk got blame. Cena got blame. Lesnar got blame. Bryan got blame. Rollins got blame. All of the recent World Champions have gotten blame. The current one is no different.


I meant "no one told me that" as in, no one of any importance/anyone within WWE. It wasn't something Vince said, to my knowledge, so a bunch of random people on the internet saying it is meaningless.

And yes, you're completely right in your point. I have no problem with it being that way. My entire post was to point out the hypocrisy among so many fans. I saw far more people blaming everyone OTHER than DB than him. That's why I made the whole "show me the breakdown" joke... That was all I heard when he was champ... That it wasn't HIS fault that ratings had declined after he won, rather, "the breakdown shows his segments are always rated high, so people tuning out isn't because of him." In this case, Reigns was barely featured and the viewership was awful. That's why I jokingly said "show me the breakdown" of the Reigns segment to compare with the ME. DB fans always said it wasn't his fault if the ME doesn't draw, it's the ME guys' fault (Cena, whoever else). Here, shouldn't those people say it's Ambrose and Owens' fault? I mean, just to be consistent?

Like I said, it doesn't matter to me one way or another, I just find it funny the lengths people go to to absolve their favorites of guilt regarding ratings while doing an about-face when it's a guy they don't like. But like you said, Reigns is the champ, so he deserves to carry the load for the ratings... But I said the same about guys like Rollins (who is probably the most talented guy we've seen in YEARS) and DB, but far fewer people agreed back then. Apparently it was still Reigns fault when Rollins was champ because "everyone knew Reigns was up next".



Though I don't necessarily have a problem blaming whoever is champion, booking does far more to destroy ratings than anyone on the roster.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> I meant "no one told me that" as in, no one of any importance/anyone within WWE. It wasn't something Vince said, to my knowledge, so a bunch of random people on the internet saying it is meaningless.
> 
> And yes, you're completely right in your point. I have no problem with it being that way. My entire post was to point out the hypocrisy among so many fans. I saw far more people blaming everyone OTHER than DB than him. That's why I made the whole "show me the breakdown" joke... That was all I heard when he was champ... That it wasn't HIS fault that ratings had declined after he won, rather, "the breakdown shows his segments are always rated high, so people tuning out isn't because of him." In this case, Reigns was barely featured and the viewership was awful. That's why I jokingly said "show me the breakdown" of the Reigns segment to compare with the ME. DB fans always said it wasn't his fault if the ME doesn't draw, it's the ME guys' fault (Cena, whoever else). Here, shouldn't those people say it's Ambrose and Owens' fault? I mean, just to be consistent?
> 
> Like I said, it doesn't matter to me one way or another, I just find it funny the lengths people go to to absolve their favorites of guilt regarding ratings while doing an about-face when it's a guy they don't like. But like you said, Reigns is the champ, so he deserves to carry the load for the ratings... But I said the same about guys like Rollins (who is probably the most talented guy we've seen in YEARS) and DB, but far fewer people agreed back then. Apparently it was still Reigns fault when Rollins was champ because "everyone knew Reigns was up next".
> 
> 
> 
> Though I don't necessarily have a problem blaming whoever is champion, booking does far more to destroy ratings than anyone on the roster.


Gotcha. (Y) I've said in the past that I think it's alittle much that just one guy (the Champion) gets all of the blame for the ratings. But everytime I said that, so many people didn't agree with me. So, fine. I'll use their logic then. They can have it their way. :shrug


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

As PWMania.com reported, Monday’s taped WWE RAW from London drew *3.335 million* viewers, down from last week’s *3.529 million* viewers. The final rating for the show was a *2.32*, down from last week’s *2.50* rating. This is the lowest rating of the year. The previous low came on *January 11th*, a *2.36* rating for an episode that went up against the college football championship game. The *3.32 million* viewers makes Monday night’s show the least-watched RAW episode on its regular night outside of football season, according to F4Wonline.com. The previous record was set on *February 1st* with *3.37 million* viewers.

http://www.pwmania.com/wwe-raw-rating-down-this-weeks-taped-episode-sets-new-record-for-low-viewership


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> Raw took a downward tick in the ratings, while viewership slipped to the lowest number since January. Last night’s episode brought in 3.336 million viewers and a 1.19 rating in the 18 – 49 demographic, down 5% each from last week’s 3.529 million viewers and 1.25 demo rating. The viewership was the lowest since the January 11th episode brought in 3.323 million viewers, while the demo rating matched the 1.19 from March 21st.
> 
> One thing to note is the hourly numbers, which saw the third hour slide under three million viewers for the first time in quite a while. Raw ranked #5 for the night among cable originals behind the two NBA playoff games on TNT (ranking #1 and #3 at 2.04 demo rating/4.416 million viewers and 1.41 rating/3.02 million), Love & Hip-Hop on VH-1 (1.47 demo rating, 2.825 million viewers) and Blank Ink Crew on VH-1 (1.29 rating, 2.415 million viewers). The hourly numbers are below:
> 
> 8 PM: 1.24 demo rating (3.486 million viewers)
> 9 PM: 1.25 demo rating (3.541 million viewers)
> 10 PM: 1.08 demo rating (2.980 million viewers)


Jesus, they went UNDER 3 million in the third hour. Not good at all.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Love it. :lol The spinning by most of Romans fans after they absolutely destroyed Punk, Bryan and Seth, poking their fingers at them and laughing is beautiful. This marketable, casual juggernaut was crowned king at WM but unfortunately, all of his peasants have defected from his empire and he's losing the one thing a king must have in order for his rule to actually mean anything, which is actual subjects. If there is a God, he has a dark sense of humor. Vince thought he was sticking it the fans at WM and while I can't fathom a McMahon ever being humbled, he'll ultimately regret what he pulled in Dallas (and not just the booking of the main event.) 


Reigns himself is uninteresting and has never proven to be the casual draw he's heralded as. I saw a toddler decked from head to toe in Cena gear visibly nauseous by his appearance last night. Why would Johns fans settle for the less charismatic version of him? Because he has a head full of hair, pouty lips and the guy from the attitude Era that was an actual *draw* outside the confines of Youtube and is currently the biggest action star in Hollywood, was nice enough to claim him as family? They're moving away from it now gradually, but the damage is done. You combine a subpar product with the fact you molested your fans with a guy they didn't want because you were infatuated by how he looked, and yeah. This is deserved and it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. You can have an subpar product and a (stale) albeit, charismatic face. You can't have a subpar product and a stale, subpar face and expect fans will stick around.


The best course of action is to concede failure (they're getting to that point with potentially turning him heel soon) and restructure the product from top to bottom. The reset button must be hit, from the booking and all the way down to production. They burned a lot of good will after the latest WM. They won't get that back over night but they can do the right thing and begin making an effort to right the ship sooner than later, because as is, this baby may as well be the Titanic, because they are sinking -- and fast. It's not even the thick of football season, Jack. Your move though, Vince. Besides....ratings don't matter anyway.


Right?


:mj5


----------



## Kabraxal

nWoWolfpac98 said:


> Kabraxal said:
> 
> 
> 
> You call thiscatering to hardcore fans? What reality do you live in?
> 
> 
> 
> Already explained it in my last post. And yes, they are catering way more to the hardcore fans than they have in the past.
> 
> Ratings are going down and they're gonna keep going down if they continue doing what they're doing.
Click to expand...

No... This isn't targetted at hardcore fans on the main roster. In fact, they are mostly doing the exact opposite of what actual wrestling fans want. 

NXT gets it right... But trying to argue the main roster is geared more towards hardcore fans is laughable. It's geared towards kids that don't care if this shit is nonsense.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Unless it's Rock it doesn't matter who's champ. When you have a roster full of nobodies/people the casual fan(not the smarks) don't care about, on TOP of a poorly written watered down 3-hour "family" show, what do you expect the numbers to be? Roman's face run failed but if you're gonna blame him why not blame Meth Rollins' boring indy ass for last year's terrible numbers?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I actually wanted to predict a 2.3 max for this show. Brilliant.
They managed to kill more viewers with this abysmal Wrestlemania.

This is non-football rating, right? Subtract a few hundred thousand for football season, and this year will finally see a 1.x.

To speak with "hardcores", YOU DESERVE IT!

What a ratings juggernaut!

:vince

:HHH2


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I remember Meltzer saying that there has been a shown drop-off for taped episodes.

Watch Steph and HHH return next week so that they can take credit if there's a bump. :lol

It would make the most sense for them to wait 'til after Payback storyline-wise, though, so maybe that's what they'll do.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Y'all know what's going to happen here, right? Vince & Company are going to see the plunging ratings and correlate them to no Authority on TV. And before you know it they're going to be back and in your face like herpes, only worse, because even herpes doesn't make me go running screaming into the night like a Stephanie promo. It's coming. Mark my words. It's coming.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

On the road to CANCELLATION....first sub 3mil hour of the year. Won't be the last. WWE Raw is done on USA. This has been a long sustained drop in ratings that has not stopped. You can't lose 15-20+% viewers every single year and stay on live cable TV.


http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0419/609902/wwe-raw-rating-down/

_As noted, Monday's taped WWE RAW from London drew 3.335 million viewers, down from last week's 3.529 million viewers.

The final rating for the show was a 2.32, down from last week's 2.50 rating. This is the lowest rating of the year. The previous low came on January 11th, a 2.36 rating for an episode that went up against the college football championship game._


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Kabraxal said:


> No... This isn't targetted at hardcore fans on the main roster. In fact, they are mostly doing the exact opposite of what actual wrestling fans want.
> 
> NXT gets it right... But trying to argue the main roster is geared more towards hardcore fans is laughable. It's geared towards kids that don't care if this shit is nonsense.


If you say so, brother.


----------



## T0M

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WesternFilmGuy said:


> What is so crap about WWE right now? RAW has been entertaining. Only downside is 3 hours.


I politely disagree. As do the several hundred thousand other people that have stopped watching in the last few weeks.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



T0M said:


> I politely disagree. As do the several hundred thousand other people that have stopped watching in the last few weeks.


Yes. I have a different viewing appetite than some of the WWE faithful. WWE was built on other things and they are going in a completely different direction right now. I enjoy that direction. But with these ratings, that new direction will be short-lived.


----------



## Frost99

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I wonder what legit stock holders will have to say about these ratings on the next call? Honestly WITHOUT MNF, the NCAA or even the World Series to stand it it's way were down to 2.53 only 3 weeks removed from "crowning" the Roman Empire & such. So Vince let me ask the question how are things going with your "new" direction?

#RomanisaBUST #WWELogic #SELLSELLSELL 







:haa "_The wheel represents future TV deals_"


----------



## Wrestlefire

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince, you realize how bad you fucked up yet?

It took you three weeks in April after Mania to get a sub-3.0 third hour.

Can't wait to see what September is going to bring...


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They're not really targeting the "hardcores." They're working with what they've got with all the injuries. They have to elevate some people to the top of the card, and the people they're left with are the people they jobbed to Brock Lesnar, Chris Jericho, Triple H, and the League of Nations.

If they're serious about catering to the "hardcores" (and really, the "hardcores" make up more of their audience than the "casuals," and they're leaving at a steady rate ratings-wise), then they would have actually put Dean over, they would have actually put Styles over at the one event he should have beaten Jericho at, they would have used whatever momentum Dolph had after Survivor Series '14 and sustained it. 

They cut the legs out from so many of the guys that they have to rely on all year and it's been a universally stupid business practice for the last few years they've done it. Look, I like Brock, too, but they're doing WWE no favors by just having him come in and destroy the guys who are left holding the bag when he isn't there. Oh, they "don't draw." Wonder why...


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

"I'm not a bad guy. I'm not a good guy. I'm the guy who has shit ratings!"


----------



## Wrestlefire

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I am really getting the impression that, should USA ever want out, WWE would just put RAW and Smackdown on the Network and use that as the draw to force Network subs through the roof...


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Wrestlefire said:


> I am really getting the impression that, should USA ever want out, WWE would just put RAW and Smackdown on the Network and use that as the draw to force Network subs through the roof...


Except nobody wants to pay 2 bucks per show.


----------



## Dark_Raiden

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well of course there's low ratings. Roman was only in like...one or two short scenes and it was at the highest rated hour too. More Roman = More Ratings. Seems like people did what I would do if I didn't know the spoilers, tune in, wait for Roman, see the abysmal ME set up, tune out.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Pretty obvious the decisions they made at WM aren't what the fans wanted to see.


It's worse than that.
They not only didn't give them what they wanted, they then made the outcome the same without the payout (Reigns new attitude without the turn and Shame being in charge without the big win). It's like they gave them the bird at WM then rubbed their noses in it afterward.

Edit. Sorry for the mixed metaphors.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



nWoWolfpac98 said:


> If you say so, brother.


At WM. Shane lost, Reigns won, Charlotte won,KO lost.
Now on RAW Shane is just given RAW as if it didn't matter anyway, reigns new persona is him laughing at the boo's, Becky and Sasha are spinning their wheels whilst Charlotte is in a feud with Natty, KO is in a program with SZ that should have had a belt involved and has lost week after week. 
Yeah that is EXACTLY what the hardcores wanted:draper2


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> Wait, so the low ratings, and nosedive there for the last hour was the result of someone that was barely even featured and wasn't in the main event? :lol :lol :lol
> 
> The blind hate for Reigns is just comical at this point. If he is in the ME and the third hour sees a drop, it's his fault, if he's not in the ME and the third hour sees a massive plunge, it's his fault... And people wonder why WWE/people IN the business don't take the IWC seriously.
> 
> 
> Edit: As the DB marks always said... SHOW ME DA BREAKDOWNN!!!!111


I'm just catching up on this thread and I don't get why Reigns is being blamed either. Aside from the usual reflexes and blind hate by some. I didn't watch all of RAW but I don't think he was in that below 3 million third hour. Unless I'm wrong, Owens and Ambrose were in the main event. Since it was taped, fans knew what they wanted to watch. And they didn't. 

At this point, if Roman is solely to blame for the ratings, he should get sole credit for the WWE's profits.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I'm just catching up on this thread and I don't get why Reigns is being blamed either. Aside from the usual reflexes and blind hate by some. I didn't watch all of RAW but I don't think he was in that below 3 million third hour.


The same exact reason why every other past World Champion has been blamed the past 10 years since the ratings have been declining, including Cena and Brock and every other Champion in between and because we were told ratings would increase when Reigns became Champ, too.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The same exact reason why every other past World Champion has been blamed the past 10 years since the ratings have been declining, including Cena and Brock and every other Champion in between and because we were told ratings would increase when Reigns became Champ, too.


TV ratings will increase once the show gets better overall. I didn't watch all of RAW, but from what I hear, it was a solid show. I did see the main event. I wasn't that engrossed by it but whatever. Maybe others liked it.

I usually keep up on the ratings, but had other pressing matters yesterday. I'm not sure I want to pay due diligence a day later, but I was just surprised to read post after post blaming Roman Reigns. If Reigns can't bring new eyeballs to the product, I don't see how the "Anyone But Roman" crowd is faring any better. Owens and Ambrose are well liked and their main event tanked. I haven't read the lat few pages in their entirety and could be wrong, but I don't see those parties being held responsible for the USA Network potentially dumping RAW which isn't likely to happen. Rollins had shit ratings. Cena didn't bring in 10 million viewers and every other champ from the past 5 years. But RAW still comes on at 8 p.m. each week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> TV ratings will increase once the show gets better overall. I didn't watch all of RAW, but from what I hear, it was a solid show. I did see the main event. I wasn't that engrossed by it but whatever. Maybe others liked it.
> 
> I usually keep up on the ratings, but had other pressing matters yesterday. I'm not sure I want to pay due diligence a day later, but I was just surprised to read post after post blaming Roman Reigns. If Reigns can't bring new eyeballs to the product, I don't see how the "Anyone But Roman" crowd is faring any better. Owens and Ambrose are well liked and their main event tanked. I haven't read the lat few pages in their entirety and could be wrong, but I don't see those parties being held responsible for the USA Network potentially dumping RAW which isn't likely to happen. Rollins had shit ratings. Cena didn't bring in 10 million viewers and every other champ from the past 5 years. But RAW still comes on at 8 p.m. each week.


It was a blah show. Not horrible, not great. The usual.

The Champion has been blamed in these rating threads ever since I joined here in late 2012. Doesn't matter if it's an 'indy darling' or non-indy darling; they've all been shit on. Guess that's why I was surprised to see someone say they are surprised the Champion is getting dumped on like it has never happened before. That is the norm in these threads. I don't agree with it and said so in the past, but was patently ignored and told repeatedly that 'it's all on the Champion." So, I'm just using everyone else's logic. If that's how people want to do it, then that's how it'll be done, I suppose..

Also, there is something to be said for when you are repeatedly told the ratings will increase when someone in particular gets the ball, and not only do they not increase, but they've actually decreased last year from "Rollins' shit ratings."


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> It was a blah show. Not horrible, not great. The usual.
> 
> The Champion has been blamed in these rating threads ever since I joined here in late 2012. Doesn't matter if it's an 'indy darling' or non-indy darling; they've all been shit on. Guess that's why I was surprised to see someone say they are surprised the Champion is getting dumped on like it has never happened before. That is the norm in these threads. I don't agree with it and said so in the past, but was patently ignored and told repeatedly that 'it's all on the Champion." So, I'm just using everyone else's logic. If that's how people want to do it, then that's how it'll be done, I suppose..
> 
> *Also, there is something to be said for when you are repeatedly told the ratings will increase when someone in particular gets the ball, and not only do they not increase, but they've actually decreased last year from "Rollins' shit ratings."*


I think a monster heel Roman Reigns can draw more interest to the product, face Rollins, etc and everything firing from all cylinders. If they're booked right, a draw can be made. Rock, Austin and Bryan needed something of substance to stand on too. 

But my original point was about the third hour falling below 3 million. I remember Reigns being bashed because he had a 16% drop or something like that a few months ago during his main event. But Dean and Owens tanked this week and it's crickets, much like their main event. As I said, I only read a few pages while trying to catch up. Most were only blaming Reigns. 

I'm all for calling a spade a spade; just not selectively.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I think a monster heel Roman Reigns can draw more interest to the product, face Rollins, etc and everything firing from all cylinders. If they're booked right, a draw can be made. Rock, Austin and Bryan needed something of substance to stand on too.
> 
> But my original point was about the third hour falling below 3 million. I remember Reigns being based because he had a 16% drop or something like that a few months ago during his main event. But Dean and Owens tanked this week and it's crickets, much like their main event. As I said, I only read a few pages while trying to catch up. Most were only blaming Reigns.
> 
> I'm all for calling a spade a spade; just not selectively.


Owens and Ambrose can eat the blame, too. No problem with that. I just remember being told a million times how the ratings will increase once "someone credible" has the title; and that has not happened in the least. They've actually decreased. This past Raw was another record low; lowest of all time with no NFL on. Also, some fans said to wait until Reigns has the title, so..

There has been a TON of selectivity, too. People were complaining about the 2015 ratings so much and they are worse now. Yet, some of those people aren't complaining anymore. There's selectivity...


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Owens and Ambrose can eat the blame, too. No problem with that. I just remember being told a million times how the ratings will increase once "someone credible" has the title; and that has not happened in the least. They've actually decreased. This past Raw was another record low; lowest of all time with no NFL on. Also, some fans said to wait until Reigns has the title, so..
> 
> There has been a TON of selectivity, too. People were complaining about the 2015 ratings so much and they are worse now. Yet, some of those people aren't complaining anymore. There's selectivity...


The WWE needs to shit or get off the pot with Reigns, to excuse my French. I'm just waiting on a monster heel run. If not ratings, you could at least draw some interest. I like this tweener stuff but I need more.

I didn't realize the rating fell to another record low. It looks like their social media activity bottomed out too. 

Anyway, I don't want to anchor Ambrose or Owens to the overall bad ratings. I just thought it was cherry picking by some to exclusively bash Reigns, but ignore that the third hour fell below 3 million viewers.

Also, this has nothing to do with the ratings but I like the red highlight in your username.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> The WWE needs to shit or get off the pot with Reigns, to excuse my French. I'm just waiting on a monster heel run. If not ratings, you could at least draw some interest. I like this tweener stuff but I need more.
> 
> I didn't realize the rating fell to another record low. It looks like their social media activity bottomed out too.
> 
> Anyway, I don't want to anchor Ambrose or Owens to the overall bad ratings. I just thought it was cherry picking by some to exclusively bash Reigns, but ignore that the third hour fell below 3 million viewers.
> 
> Also, this has nothing to do with the ratings but I like the red highlight in your username.


You're preaching to the choir, to a certain degree. I've said many times in the past I think it's somewhat ridiculous that the Champion get 100% of the blame for bad ratings. But everytime I said that, I was either ignored or told I was wrong and that it is always on the Champion. So, I just decided, 'alright, then that's how it'll be." If one Champion deserves the blame for shit ratings even when they're not in the lowest hour, then they all do. Also, even the highest hour is bad. I mean, these are ratings they were getting when they were going up against the NFL last year. They never slipped under 3 million in September or October of last year when Rollins was Champ and the NFL was on. You can't slip under 3 million just 2 weeks removed from WM and no NFL on. Yikes.

Thanks about the new color! Red and Black is a great color combo, IMO. I feel they are the two colors most associated with HBK, minus the DX years.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah I don't blame Reigns for the ratings it's all due to the booking nearly anyone can be made a big deal and WWE have lost it's trust of it's audience even when it's a good show most people aren't optimistic that next week will be good, and WWE are trying to hard to create 1 star in Reigns when it should be multiple stars.

This raw was pretty meh nothing happened and Ambrose vs Owens was a shite match.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheLooseCanon said:


> "I'm not a bad guy. I'm not a good guy. I'm the guy who has shit ratings!"


Lol his segment was in the highest hour.:drake 'Tank Owens Tank!' and Lunatic Cringe get this one.:maisie3


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Lol his segment was in the highest hour.:drake 'Tank Owens Tank!' and Lunatic Cringe get this one.:maisie3


The 3rd hour basically always is the worst hour no matter who is on, plus gotta watch that Better Call Saul better than Raw anyway which is on at the third hour.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Owens and Ambrose can eat the blame, too. No problem with that. *I just remember being told a million times how the ratings will increase once "someone credible" has the title;* and that has not happened in the least. They've actually decreased. This past Raw was another record low; lowest of all time with no NFL on. Also, some fans said to wait until Reigns has the title, so..
> 
> There has been a TON of selectivity, too. People were complaining about the 2015 ratings so much and they are worse now. Yet, some of those people aren't complaining anymore. There's selectivity...


Do they still post in here, the ones that were telling you this? Don't post much in here because its shit but it seems light, like many have vanished.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The same exact reason why every other past World Champion has been blamed the past 10 years since the ratings have been declining, including Cena and Brock and every other Champion in between and because we were told ratings would increase when Reigns became Champ, too.


Yeah, but Reigns is different from all of them because they make it a point shoving him down our throats.
Cena had a fan base before he went Booooooooooooo. Reigns has nothing. At most, he has the Shield fan base, and only those fans who aren't pissed he's the guy from the group getting the office pops. And some male virgins. That's it.

Vince would have pulled the plug on any other guy a long time ago.

Responsible for the biggest social media protests in WWE history.
Draws lowest Raw rating in football season.
Draws lowest Raw rating in non football season.
#3 merch seller behind a semi-retired wrestler.
Draws the biggest legit boo concert in Wrestlemania history.
Is publically ridiculed for his lack of talking.
Has to be hidden from the crowd.
Has to be protected from getting gassed.

It's a freaking disaster. Measured by the lengths they go to, Hulk freaking Hogan wasn't as protected in the 80s.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Do they still post in here, the ones that were telling you this? Don't post much in here because its shit but it seems light, like many have vanished.


Some post once every blue moon, but alot have completely disappeared, it seems, despite the ratings being even worse.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Lol his segment was in the highest hour.:drake 'Tank Owens Tank!' and Lunatic Cringe get this one.:maisie3


Who cares? They are all jobbers and your boy leads the booking.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Slightly old, but deserves to be posted to understand that this decline in viewership isn't occurring in a vacuum: http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/2015-cable-ratings-amc-discovery-cartoon-network-1201666316/

There are a few companies and shows going against the grain, but overall television viewership is going down the drain at a pretty astonishing clip. We're beyond the point of looking at any individual talent to be a ratings savior, but we also need to take into consideration that even a great show may not be enough to stem that tide that's occurring all over the place.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Some post once every blue moon, but alot have completely disappeared, it seems, despite the ratings being even worse.


Even though we disagree a lot in this thread, at least we show up week to week. If the numbers or good or bad, we're here. I know you take some shots at Reigns but at least you don't solely post to blame him and then disappear. Some will post to crap on Reigns and then insist he has no part in the success of the company.

@The Renegade

TV ratings are on a decline overall. But I think the WWE should worry if their social media activity also starts to see significant drops. That's a troubling sign in today's digital age. 

Sometimes, I doubt Vince cares all that much. The WWE is still turning a healthy profit.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Gotcha. (Y) I've said in the past that I think it's alittle much that just one guy (the Champion) gets all of the blame for the ratings. But everytime I said that, so many people didn't agree with me. So, fine. I'll use their logic then. They can have it their way. :shrug


I know what you mean. Especially in this 3-hour era. People are burned out after 2-hours of mind-numbing nonsense, which I think is the reason we always see this drop in 3rd hour.

Like you said, people just need to be consistent. I see way too many people blame a certain guy (it used to be Cena, now it's Reigns) for poor ratings REGARDLESS of whether they are champion. Regardless of who it is, to blame poor ratings on any one guy is absurd. It's the same argument people used to use to say HBK wasn't good... Maybe people didn't like him as champion, or MAYBE the product as a whole just wasn't good.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> The 3rd hour basically always is the worst hour no matter who is on, plus gotta watch that Better Call Saul better than Raw anyway which is on at the third hour.


Exactly. But then all arguments need to be free of hypocrisy. When Roman was main eventing Raws while Seth was champion, everyone who didn't want Seth blamed for low ratings blamed it on Roman specifically because he was main eventing. Fast forward to 2016, Roman is champ, but since he's not doing much main eventing, suddenly the blame is back on the champ, and not the main eventers. 

The fact of the matter is, ratings are besides who's in what position. When Austin, Michaels, and Flair came back last year, the ratings were still in the gutter. Television ratings as a whole are dropping, and many people see professional wrestling lame as a whole now, so finding 1 talent to blame for low ratings is just ridiculous.

It's like saying, "CNN ratings are down. That darn Anderson Cooper!"
:will2



The Renegade said:


> Slightly old, but deserves to be posted to understand that this decline in viewership isn't occurring in a vacuum: http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/2015-cable-ratings-amc-discovery-cartoon-network-1201666316/
> 
> There are a few companies and shows going against the grain, but overall television viewership is going down the drain at a pretty astonishing clip. We're beyond the point of looking at any individual talent to be a ratings savior, but we also need to take into consideration that even a great show may not be enough to stem that tide that's occurring all over the place.


Thanks for posting. This is something everyone needs to understand.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

ShowStopper joined the dark side after Rollins got blamed for (even more now in hindsight) really good numbers.

I miss the quarterly ratings that proved that Daniel Bryan was the GOAT.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> Slightly old, but deserves to be posted to understand that this decline in viewership isn't occurring in a vacuum: http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/2015-cable-ratings-amc-discovery-cartoon-network-1201666316/
> 
> There are a few companies and shows going against the grain, but overall television viewership is going down the drain at a pretty astonishing clip. We're beyond the point of looking at any individual talent to be a ratings savior, but we also need to take into consideration that even a great show may not be enough to stem that tide that's occurring all over the place.


TV ratings are down overall, been that way for a couple years now. But, WWE still has to look and examine this. For last year's England Raw tapings (also not live) the ratings were head and shoulders above what they were for this year's England Raw tapings:

Last year's England taped Raw:

Hour one: 3.69 million
Hour two: 3.79 million
Hour three: 3.53 million

This year's England taped Raw:

Hour one: 3.49 million
Hour two: 3.54 million
Hour three: 2.98 million

Huge differece, and huge decline in literally just 12 months. Not every show is hitting declines that huge from 1 year to the next. There is something they have to look at there. It's not just TV ratings as awhole being down. There is more to it in WWE's case. And it is important if WWE wants to get a good or even better TV deal when their current one is up in 2 or so years..


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Meltzer should report the breakdowns. He only does it for Bryan. Wonder why that is.

I never realized HBK was regarded as a "flop" champ until I started posting on these boards. He held the belt during a creative lull in the WWE. I realize I'm crying over spoiled milk 20 years later, but there'so only so much one talent can do.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Meltzer should report the breakdowns. He only does it for Bryan. Wonder why that is.
> 
> I never realized HBK was regarded as a "flop" champ until I started posting on these boards. He held the belt during a creative lull in the WWE. I realize I'm crying over spoiled milk 20 years later, but there'so only so much one talent can do.


One talent can't carry the company on his/her own, but if everyone worked together they could. I know the roster is overworked and most likely underpaid, but it would be nice if they took it upon themselves to be as entertaining as possible despite the shortcomings of the company. Just feel some responsibility or something, even though the product quality isn't their fault, they could still do better, and I'm certain because I've seen all of them do better.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> One talent can't carry the company on his/her own, but if everyone worked together they could. I know the roster is overworked and most likely underpaid, but it would be nice if they took it upon themselves to be as entertaining as possible despite the shortcomings of the company. Just feel some responsibility or something, even though the product quality isn't their fault, they could still do better, and I'm certain because I've seen all of them do better.


New Day has set a good example for others to follow. But it could be argued that Vince gave them more creative freedom at first because they weren't a priority. I still like New day but they've obviously caught Vince's attention now. 

Also, it often doesn't matter how hard a talent tries. Sandow and Ryder got over and it led to nothing.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> TV ratings are down overall, been that way for a couple years now. But, WWE still has to look and examine this. For last year's England Raw tapings (also not live) the ratings were head and shoulders above what they were for this year's England Raw tapings:
> 
> Last year's England taped Raw:
> 
> Hour one: 3.69 million
> Hour two: 3.79 million
> Hour three: 3.53 million
> 
> This year's England taped Raw:
> 
> Hour one: 3.49 million
> Hour two: 3.54 million
> Hour three: 2.98 million
> 
> Huge differece, and huge decline in literally just 12 months. Not every show is hitting declines that huge from 1 year to the next. There is something they have to look at there. It's not just TV ratings as awhole being down. There is more to it in WWE's case. And it is important if WWE wants to get a good or even better TV deal when their current one is up in 2 or so years..


Thats only a 5% decrease in the first hour though. Seems about in line with 4% decrease in the Oscars' ratings (http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/oscars-ratings-down-2016-chris-rock-1201717431/), and much less than the 16% drop for the Academy Awards. (http://fortune.com/2016/02/16/grammy-2016-ratings/)



Empress said:


> @The Renegade
> 
> TV ratings are on a decline overall. But I think the WWE should worry if their social media activity also starts to see significant drops. That's a troubling sign in today's digital age.
> 
> Sometimes, I doubt Vince cares all that much. The WWE is still turning a healthy profit.


I agree, but only to an extent. I think the lesson here is that unless you're a must watch show like GOT or Walking Dead where people are left out of the conversation if they miss your first run, folks will simply find other ways/times to watch your show. If you're watching Raw on Tuesday, you won't be tweeting during the live action. Doesn't necessarily reflect a loss in engagement.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> Thats only a 5% decrease in the first hour though. Seems about in line with 4% decrease in the Oscars' ratings (http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/oscars-ratings-down-2016-chris-rock-1201717431/), and much less than the 16% drop for the Academy Awards. (http://fortune.com/2016/02/16/grammy-2016-ratings/)
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but only to an extent. I think the lesson here is that unless you're a must watch show like GOT or Walking Dead where people are left out of the conversation if they miss your first run, folks will simply find other ways/times to watch your show. If you're watching Raw on Tuesday, you won't be tweeting during the live action. Doesn't necessarily reflect a loss in engagement.


It's a consistent drop throughout the entire 3 hours of the show. There are other examples too that have been covered in these threads. They keep going down each year and pretty soon that USA deal is going to be a nightmare of a disappointment for them. No one is expecting AE ratings or anything like that. But they can't keep dropping year after year. Eventually it will catch up to them. It already is..(lowest rated Raw of all time without NFL on).


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> Thats only a 5% decrease in the first hour though.



Yeah but as @ShowStopper said they are more example of things like this with things like post WM raw

2014 Raw after WM 30: (College football or some other American shit)

Hour One: 5.31 million viewers
Hour Two: 5.09 million viewers
Hour Three: 5.03 million viewers
Average: 5,145,000

2015 Raw after WM 31: (No College American shit)


Hour 1: 5,227,000
Hour 2: 5,597,000
Hour 3: 5,267,000
Average: 5,364,000

This year: (College football or some other American shit)

Hour 1: 4.2
Hour 2: 4.1
Hour 3: 3.8
Average: 4,094,000


----------



## THANOS

Empress said:


> *Meltzer should report the breakdowns. He only does it for Bryan. Wonder why that is.*
> 
> I never realized HBK was regarded as a "flop" champ until I started posting on these boards. He held the belt during a creative lull in the WWE. I realize I'm crying over spoiled milk 20 years later, but there'so only so much one talent can do.


Maybe, he did it to dispel all those "vanilla midgets don't draw" criticisms he likely got on his twitter feed?

:draper2


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> New Day has set a good example for others to follow. But it could be argued that Vince gave them more creative freedom at first because they weren't a priority. I still like New day but they've obviously caught Vince's attention now.
> 
> Also, it often doesn't matter how hard a talent tries. Sandow and Ryder got over and it led to nothing.


Yes, but guys like Sandow and Ryder can get over all they want, but the quality of the show overall can only rise if the more popular guys turn trash into treasure (if creative won't stop sucking). Paige, Dean, Roman, Sasha, Dolph, Sheamus, Charlotte, etc. All these guys can and have done better than what they're doing now. Naomi, Bray, and Ryback talk about being misused or held back, but not many do, and I know it's not their fault, but they really should take a page out of New Day's book and get themselves over regardless of what the company does. They have to stop letting the company cut their balls off so to speak. For the lower card guys, they can probably find another gig in a different promotion making the same amount of money, so they really should just go all out. If everyone does it together, it would work. Wishful thinking. I know...


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Yes, but guys like Sandow and Ryder can get over all they want, *but the quality of the show overall can only rise if the more popular guys turn trash into treasure (if creative won't stop sucking).* Paige, Dean, Roman, Sasha, Dolph, Sheamus, Charlotte, etc. All these guys can and have done better than what they're doing now. Naomi, Bray, and Ryback talk about being misused or held back, but not many do, and I know it's not their fault, but they really should take a page out of New Day's book and get themselves over regardless of what the company does. They have to stop letting the company cut their balls off so to speak. For the lower card guys, they can probably find another gig in a different promotion making the same amount of money, so they really should just go all out. If everyone does it together, it would work. Wishful thinking. I know...


You're right about that. I don't think many of the performers know how to stray too far from their leash. That's not meant to demean anyone but when all you know is how to do is follow a script and "good enough" gets a pat on the head, it's not much of an incentive to get better. It takes a certain caliber of HBK's, Macho Man's, Austin's and Rock's to polish crap. 

@THANOS

That's a good point. But the breakdowns could end all the arguments once and for all. Although, I wasn't posting here when Bryan was champ in 2013. I don't know how his ratings reign was treated.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> New Day has set a good example for others to follow. But it could be argued that Vince gave them more creative freedom at first because they weren't a priority. I still like New day but they've obviously caught Vince's attention now.
> 
> *Also, it often doesn't matter how hard a talent tries. Sandow and Ryder got over and it led to nothing.*


Was going to post exactly this. Look what happened to Ryder and Sandow when they did this. When there are examples out there like that it does not surprise me that most of the guys just go out there and do what they are told, and just hope they get a push or, for some, just maintain their level.

The WWE created the current "creatively bankrupt environment" themselves and it is 100% on the people in charge, and very little on the actual talent. Yeh its all well and good to say "Oh the talents should all just start doing their own thing and say screw the script to be more entertaining" but the risk for most of the roster is greater than any possible benefits to do that.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> It's a consistent drop throughout the entire 3 hours of the show. There are other examples too that have been covered in these threads. They keep going down each year and pretty soon that USA deal is going to be a nightmare of a disappointment for them. No one is expecting AE ratings or anything like that. But they can't keep dropping year after year. Eventually it will catch up to them. It already is..(lowest rated Raw of all time without NFL on).





TheGeneticFreak said:


> Yeah but as @ShowStopper said they are more example of things like this with things like post WM raw
> 
> 2014 Raw after WM 30: (College football or some other American shit)
> 
> Hour One: 5.31 million viewers
> Hour Two: 5.09 million viewers
> Hour Three: 5.03 million viewers
> Average: 5,145,000
> 
> 2015 Raw after WM 31: (No College American shit)
> 
> 
> Hour 1: 5,227,000
> Hour 2: 5,597,000
> Hour 3: 5,267,000
> Average: 5,364,000
> 
> This year: (College football or some other American shit)
> 
> Hour 1: 4.2
> Hour 2: 4.1
> Hour 3: 3.8
> Average: 4,094,000


I'm not discounting any of these facts for the record. The numbers aren't good by any stretch of the imagination. My point rather is if overall numbers are going down as well, that will play a big factor into how USA determines whether or not WWE is still worth the big bucks. 

I personally wouldn't expect Raw's numbers to level out until overall TV ratings do, and for all we know, that may never happen. The most important point is how Raw performs relative to its other competition. As long as its top 5 cable programming, I don't "think" they'll take too big of a hit. I have no way of knowing for certain though.


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Repercussions must be taken into account. If a graphics director or video producer aren't happy with their time in wwe they can get a stable well paying job else where. 

Wrestlers can't. 


Think about this for a second. Wrestlers may have the least leverage in this entire company.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think we are all missing the big point here, AJ Styles in the highest viewed hour

Damn what a draw AJ Styles is proving to be already:


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I know it was taped but lol at that drop for the third hour.

Ambrose fucking sucks.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> It's a freaking disaster. Measured by the lengths they go to, Hulk freaking Hogan wasn't as protected in the 80s.


Brother, I don't know what I did to be mentioned in a paragraph with Roman Reigns. I revolutionized wrestling and paved the way for the Rocks, Austins, Cenas and Reigns. There wouldn't be a WWE without Hulk Hogan, brother. The star of my stature doesn't come around very often and that's why, just for the Hulkamaniacs, I had creative control over my character so no one could tell Hulk Hogan what to do. I protected myself, brother. When I picked up Andre the Giant in front of all those Hulkamaniacs, I knew what a huge superstar I would become. 

Much love - HH


----------



## THANOS

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> You're right about that. I don't think many of the performers know how to stray too far from their leash. That's not meant to demean anyone but when all you know is how to do is follow a script and "good enough" gets a pat on the head, it's not much of an incentive to get better. It takes a certain caliber of HBK's, Macho Man's, Austin's and Rock's to polish crap.
> 
> @THANOS
> 
> That's a good point. But the breakdowns could end all the arguments once and for all. Although, I wasn't posting here when Bryan was champ in 2013. I don't know how his ratings reign was treated.


Bryan's big run made the ratings thread fun, because we'd get the usual suspects calling for his head any time ratings sunk and giving the credit to everyone else when it went up; only for them to be completely silent every week when the breakdown would come out and it would show that Bryan drew, by far, the most on the show regardless of where he was on the card.

Of course, this would only last as long as one week, when the vitriol and insults would rear their ugly heads only to be silenced by the breakdowns once again, like clock-work.

You're right though, breakdowns truly would be helpful, especially now. All I've heard is about AJ Styles having the highest rated segments after the Rock in the few weeks following the Rumble.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THANOS said:


> Bryan's big run made the ratings thread fun, because we'd get the usual suspects calling for his head any time ratings sunk and giving the credit to everyone else when it went up; only for them to be completely silent every week when the breakdown would come out and it would show that Bryan drew, by far, the most on the show regardless of where he was on the card.
> 
> *Of course, this would only last as long as one week, when the vitriol and insults would rear their ugly heads once before only to be silenced by the breakdowns once again, like clock-work.*
> 
> You're right though, breakdowns truly would be helpful, especially now. All I've heard is about AJ Styles having the highest rated segments after the Rock in the few weeks following the Rumble.


So pretty much how it is now lol :lol

Daniel Bryan has proven he's a draw. He's not The Rock but most of his segments have been highly viewed. I think his retirement speech was one of the few instances that began to bleed viewers. 

The Hulkster's got a point. @Hulk Hogan did have some control over his character and was a good politician. I don't agree with talents being terrors backstage but there's no harm in looking out for yourself. 

Since Ambrose was mentioned, I resisted jumping on the heel bandwaggon, but I don't like the endless goofiness that comes with his character. It's like he's a loser or a comedy act. Faces can be serious without being bland, underdogs or used only for laughs.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> One talent can't carry the company on his/her own, but if everyone worked together they could. I know the roster is overworked and most likely underpaid, but it would be nice if they took it upon themselves to be as entertaining as possible despite the shortcomings of the company. Just feel some responsibility or something, even though the product quality isn't their fault, they could still do better, and I'm certain because I've seen all of them do better.


Sorry, but one talent can carry the whole company. If your top talent and top feud is hot, it's irrelevant what clusterfucks are presented in the undercard. Austin proved it, Hogan did, Flair did, Goldberg did, The Rock did, even Cena did to an extent.

It's possible. They just choose the wrong talent. Reigns is no guy, nor was he ever material to be the guy.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *So pretty much how it is now lol :lol*
> 
> Daniel Bryan has proven he's a draw. He's not The Rock but most of his segments have been highly viewed. I think his retirement speech was one of the few instances that began to bleed viewers.
> 
> The Hulkster's got a point. @Hulk Hogan did have some control over his character and was a good politician. I don't agree with talents being terrors backstage but there's no harm in looking out for yourself.
> 
> Since Ambrose was mentioned, I resisted jumping on the heel bandwaggon, but I don't like the endless goofiness that comes with his character. It's like he's a loser or a comedy act. Faces can be serious without being bland, underdogs or used only for laughs.


Pretty much lol. I'm curious to see if/when they pull the trigger and align Reigns with the Bullet Club WWE, will the rating jump significantly, decline, or remain stagnant?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THANOS said:


> Pretty much lol. I'm curious to see if/when they pull the trigger and align Reigns with the Bullet Club WWE, will the rating jump significantly, decline, or remain stagnant?


At this point, I'll take heel Reigns any way I can. Something major just needs to happen. I hope that Styles isn't flipped heel. He's the best positioned to be the top babyface. Seth Rollins can have that honor on his return, depending on how he's booked. 

I just have to shake my have at the assertion that one talent alone can bring back blockbuster ratings in this era. Aside from the fact that there's been a decrease over the years, it's a all hands on deck approach. Austin, Rock and Hogan did not exist in a vacuum. There was a deep bench of strong characters and angles. You could put the belt on Rusev, Ambrose, Bray, Rollins, etc and I doubt the TV rating would return to 3.0. or higher.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> You're right about that. I don't think many of the performers know how to stray too far from their leash. That's not meant to demean anyone but when all you know is how to do is follow a script and "good enough" gets a pat on the head, it's not much of an incentive to get better. It takes a certain caliber of HBK's, Macho Man's, Austin's and Rock's to polish crap.


Except these wrestlers have social media accounts literally telling them directly what they would like to see or how they feel about things, and they still don't listen.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Sorry, but one talent can carry the whole company. If your top talent and top feud is hot, it's irrelevant what clusterfucks are presented in the undercard. Austin proved it, Hogan did, Flair did, Goldberg did, The Rock did, even Cena did to an extent.
> 
> It's possible. They just choose the wrong talent. Reigns is no guy, nor was he ever material to be the guy.


Oh please. Hogan, Austin, Rock, all those guys couldn't have done crap without the undercard.

Roddy Piper
Ultimate Warrior
Ric Flair 
Bret Hart
Shawn Michaels
Steamboat
Vader
Rick Rude
Randy Savage
Dusty Rhodes
Jake Roberts
Jimmy Snuka
Yokozuna 
Ted Dibiase
Brutus Beefcake
Tatanka
Diesel
Val Venis
Savio Vega
Jannetty
JBL
Owen Hart
Ken Shamrock 
Kane 
Rikishi
Eddie Guerrero
CM Punk
Randy Orton
Chris Benoit
Rey Mysterio
Jeff Hardy 
Booker T
Undertaker
Big Show
Rob Van Dam

WWE wouldn't have the great reputation they do if it weren't for all those guys, and I'm not even listing the lowercard and jobbers. Reigns isn't at the level of the other FOTC's yet, but his team has nowhere near the personality of the former rosters.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Except these wrestlers have social media accounts literally telling them directly what they would like to see or how they feel about things, and they still don't listen.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please. Hogan, Austin, Rock, all those guys couldn't have done crap without the undercard.
> 
> Roddy Piper
> Ultimate Warrior
> Ric Flair
> Bret Hart
> Shawn Michaels
> Steamboat
> Vader
> Rick Rude
> Randy Savage
> Dusty Rhodes
> Jake Roberts
> Jimmy Snuka
> Yokozuna
> Ted Dibiase
> Brutus Beefcake
> Tatanka
> Diesel
> Val Venis
> Savio Vega
> Jannetty
> JBL
> Owen Hart
> Ken Shamrock
> Kane
> Rikishi
> Eddie Guerrero
> CM Punk
> Randy Orton
> Chris Benoit
> Rey Mysterio
> Jeff Hardy
> Booker T
> Undertaker
> Big Show
> Rob Van Dam
> 
> WWE wouldn't have the great reputation they do if it weren't for all those guys, and I'm not even listing the lowercard and jobbers. Reigns isn't at the level of the other FOTC's yet, but his team has nowhere near the personality of the former rosters.


The new FOTC is further away from former FOTC's than the undercarders are from former undercarders. Or, they're at least the same, which is both are very far off. No one on this roster (including the supposed new FOTC) has a tenth of the charisma of guys like Austin, Hogan, Rock, HBK, Savage, Taker, etc.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE Total Divas Viewership For Part Two Of The Season Five Finale*


Source: Showbuzz Daily

This week's WWE Total Divas episode on the E! network, which was part 2 of the season finale, drew 625,000 viewers and ranked #31 for the night on cable.

This is down from last week's episode, which drew 632,000 viewers and ranked #28 for the night on cable. The week before that drew 649,000 viewers and the week before that drew 563,000.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...rship-for-part-two-of-the-season-five-finale/


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

total divas is dead idk how its even getting a new season.

WWE will be fine as long as every other networks shows fall just as much or more. WWE will still be ahead of them.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CenaBoy4Life said:


> total divas is dead idk how its even getting a new season.
> 
> WWE will be fine as long as every other networks shows fall just as much or more. WWE will still be ahead of them.


Because WWE have lost the ability to see when something isn't working and/or its long past its sell by date.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Total Divas is probably getting cancelled next year now that the Bella's have their own show.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Except these wrestlers have social media accounts literally telling them directly what they would like to see or how they feel about things, and they still don't listen.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please. Hogan, Austin, Rock, all those guys couldn't have done crap without the undercard.
> 
> Roddy Piper
> Ultimate Warrior
> Ric Flair
> Bret Hart
> Shawn Michaels
> Steamboat
> Vader
> Rick Rude
> Randy Savage
> Dusty Rhodes
> Jake Roberts
> Jimmy Snuka
> Yokozuna
> Ted Dibiase
> Brutus Beefcake
> Tatanka
> Diesel
> Val Venis
> Savio Vega
> Jannetty
> JBL
> Owen Hart
> Ken Shamrock
> Kane
> Rikishi
> Eddie Guerrero
> CM Punk
> Randy Orton
> Chris Benoit
> Rey Mysterio
> Jeff Hardy
> Booker T
> Undertaker
> Big Show
> Rob Van Dam
> 
> WWE wouldn't have the great reputation they do if it weren't for all those guys, and I'm not even listing the lowercard and jobbers. Reigns isn't at the level of the other FOTC's yet, but his team has nowhere near the personality of the former rosters.


No, my friend, the other way around. The jobbers and midcarders of the past generations wouldn't have earned half as much if it wasn't for the Hogans and Austins carrying ratings and buys with their natural charisma. Austin didn't get over because of the other jobbers.
WWE has great reputation? Since when? They have a reputation of burning talent by the dozen and going by anything but talent.
With all due respect, 

Benoit
Guerrero
Big Show
Booker T
Dusty Rhodes
Vader
Rey Mysterio jr.
Ric Flair
Rob Van Dam

where pretty known before they came to Vince, you know. Big Show was better before Vince in fact, and Vince ruined Vader, and a good number of those on the list. Fucking Savio Vega, what the fuck?
Not sure how it's meant exactly, but if you add Hart, Undertaker, Owen, Michaels etc to the undercard, then that's insulting.
And if you mean that those guys on the list were all "made" by Vince, then you're downright demented.
How did Vince make Nash? He came in as a bodyguard, was given the belt because of steroid scandal, then Vince saw he didn't draw shit, and degraded him until he jumped ship to WCW, where BISCHOFF made him into what he's remembered as today. It wasn't until WCW that he could show his natural charisma and verbal skills.
Even in later years, when Nash returned to Vince, he was there as Kevin Nash, not as Diesel, except for that one Rumble. Even Vince, who dies for trademarking, realized he didn't make Nash into what he is now.

Are we blaming the ENTIRE roster now for Reigns' inabilities and the damn writers? That's not correct, nor is it acceptable. It's dumb. Pure, unbridled stupidity.


----------



## Wrestlefire

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Facts are facts. The WWE needs a "Black (whatever day of the week after Payback)" to cut about 15 talents. And most of the writers on top of it.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Except nobody wants to pay 2 bucks per show.


What do you think many people are doing with NXT now?

I do really begin to wonder if this is the endgame for WWE, that they would be perfectly content to drop the USA/etc. real TV and take the entire thing to the Network.

Much like Wrestlemania 32, Vince telling people "Where else you gonna go?"


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Wrestlefire said:


> Facts are facts. The WWE needs a "Black (whatever day of the week after Payback)" to cut about 15 talents. And most of the writers on top of it.
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think many people are doing with NXT now?
> 
> I do really begin to wonder if this is the endgame for WWE, that they would be perfectly content to drop the USA/etc. real TV and take the entire thing to the Network.
> 
> Much like Wrestlemania 32, Vince telling people "Where else you gonna go?"


The current group of superstars are overworked as it stands now and you want them to release more of them so the few left have to work even harder schedules?

And I am sure the WWE's business plan to give up a $200+ million revenue stream...


----------



## Wrestlefire

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> The current group of superstars are overworked as it stands now and you want them to release more of them so the few left have to work even harder schedules?
> 
> And I am sure the WWE's business plan to give up a $200+ million revenue stream...


DOWNSIZE THE WWE -- that means reducing the number of house shows too!

There are so many people who are working, but really aren't working, that all the pressure has gone to the top guys, who are overworked.

Cut the number of house shows and make the WWE experience meaningful more than about six days out of the year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> The current group of superstars are overworked as it stands now and you want them to release more of them so the few left have to work even harder schedules?
> 
> And I am sure the WWE's business plan to give up a $200+ million revenue stream...


Eh, not sure.
Vince is that delusional.
XFL?

Remember, he thinks he's competing with Disney, and there are 60 million wrestling fans in the US. Survey says so.

:HA


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Eh, not sure.
> Vince is that delusional.
> XFL?


Good Point :sundin2


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> The current group of superstars are overworked as it stands now and you want them to release more of them so the few left have to work even harder schedules?
> 
> And I am sure the WWE's business plan to give up a $200+ million revenue stream...


I think the long term goal is for the WWE to be as autonomous as possible; cut out as many middle men. 

The Network is actually a genius idea, all things considered. They may be laying the groundwork for more than just its current use. A lot of shows have left TV and operate online. They're starting to get legitimacy by getting Emmy nominations, etc.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I think the long term goal is for the WWE to be as autonomous as possible; cut out as many middle men.
> 
> The Network is actually a genius idea, all things considered. They may be laying the groundwork for more than just its current use. A lot of shows have left TV and operate online. They're starting to get legitimacy by getting Emmy nominations, etc.


The network is a genius idea, if they handle it right going forward. But I still think they are a long ways off from the Network alone being a viable revenue stream to replace the TV Deal revenue. If they moved Raw and SD to Network only, I do not see Network Revenue increasing by $200 million.

Hopefully they can keep moving things in the right direction with the network in regards to the original programming on it. But the the even bigger thing for the Network is that they need to be able to start selling it on the quality of the current main roster product at some point if they ever want it to be a viable replacement for a TV deal. Right now they are selling the Network more on past content and their "developmental" brand being exclusive to it. Which are both great selling points, don't get me wrong, but those 2 things as your main selling point comes with a ceiling.


----------



## Wrestlefire

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> The network is a genius idea, if they handle it right going forward. But I still think they are a long ways off from the Network alone being a viable revenue stream to replace the TV Deal revenue. If they moved Raw and SD to Network only, I do not see Network Revenue increasing by $200 million.
> 
> Hopefully they can keep moving things in the right direction with the network in regards to the original programming on it. But the the even bigger thing for the Network is that they need to be able to start selling it on the quality of the current main roster product at some point if they ever want it to be a viable replacement for a TV deal. Right now they are selling the Network more on past content and their "developmental" brand being exclusive to it. Which are both great selling points, don't get me wrong, but those 2 things as your main selling point comes with a ceiling.


At some point, they're going to need a "hook" to force people onto the Network, because (at least US) they've gone about as far as they can with the Network on a baseline level.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The new FOTC is further away from former FOTC's than the undercarders are from former undercarders. Or, they're at least the same, which is both are very far off. No one on this roster (including the supposed new FOTC) has a tenth of the charisma of guys like Austin, Hogan, Rock, HBK, Savage, Taker, etc.


No one has the creative control, confidence, or platform to be what the guys of old were since everyone is scripted to hell, constantly critiqued and berated by former stars and fans alike through social media, and part of a now niche form of entertainment. If the current roster had the environment and circumstances that wrestlers in the past had, the show quality would be infinitely better.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> No, my friend, the other way around. The jobbers and midcarders of the past generations wouldn't have earned half as much if it wasn't for the Hogans and Austins carrying ratings and buys with their natural charisma. Austin didn't get over because of the other jobbers.
> WWE has great reputation? Since when? They have a reputation of burning talent by the dozen and going by anything but talent.
> With all due respect,
> 
> Benoit
> Guerrero
> Big Show
> Booker T
> Dusty Rhodes
> Vader
> Rey Mysterio jr.
> Ric Flair
> Rob Van Dam
> 
> where pretty known before they came to Vince, you know. Big Show was better before Vince in fact, and Vince ruined Vader, and a good number of those on the list. Fucking Savio Vega, what the fuck?
> Not sure how it's meant exactly, but if you add Hart, Undertaker, Owen, Michaels etc to the undercard, then that's insulting.
> And if you mean that those guys on the list were all "made" by Vince, then you're downright demented.
> How did Vince make Nash? He came in as a bodyguard, was given the belt because of steroid scandal, then Vince saw he didn't draw shit, and degraded him until he jumped ship to WCW, where BISCHOFF made him into what he's remembered as today. It wasn't until WCW that he could show his natural charisma and verbal skills.
> Even in later years, when Nash returned to Vince, he was there as Kevin Nash, not as Diesel, except for that one Rumble. Even Vince, who dies for trademarking, realized he didn't make Nash into what he is now.
> 
> Are we blaming the ENTIRE roster now for Reigns' inabilities and the damn writers? That's not correct, nor is it acceptable. It's dumb. Pure, unbridled stupidity.


And without a strong midcard and lowercard, who the hell would Austin have gone up against? Everything exists for a reason. Those tier 2 guys played just as big of a role in making WWE great as Hogan, Austin, and Rock, and the only reason it's not great anymore is because the company can't write or book for shit. But you're so determined to make this all Reigns' fault that you can't even see the complete obvious. They've jacked everyone on the roster up and you're still singling Reigns out. Unbelievable!:kobefacepalm


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> No one has the creative control, confidence, or platform to be what the guys of old were since everyone is scripted to hell, constantly critiqued and berated by former stars and fans alike through social media, and part of a now niche form of entertainment. If the current roster had the environment and circumstances that wrestlers in the past had, the show quality would be infinitely better.


Agree with that. But even just from a charisma standpoint, the guys I mentioned are on their own planet.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not surprised at the sh^t rating in the third hour. The main event didn't look interesting at all and WWE gave us no reason to care about it throughout the entire show


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Agree with that. But even just from a charisma standpoint, the guys I mentioned are on their own planet.


That may be true, but I'd like to think that if the current roster were allowed to live in their own world, feel themselves, and have major confidence like former wrestlers, the charisma would be equal. Those 80's-90's guys were on so many roids, had a lighter schedule, didn't have to deal with a barrage of hate off of social media, were allowed to have fun and make magic when they went out. The current roster doesn't. They work 5-6 days a week over 300 days a year, little to no vacations, have to find a way to workout, sleep, eat, practice wrestling, be on time for their shows, and on Monday/Tuesday learn their scripts, where they're supposed to be, and what they're supposed to do, and by the time they do that plus their show, they're exhausted as hell. Plus, over half of have wives/husbands/children that they actually make an effort to be there for unlike the old rosters men.

The old guys were all pumped up with all kinds of drugs and steroids. This roster isn't allowed those, hence the injuries. They're so worn thin and worn out that I understand why they don't give it their all (guess that answers my earlier question). The amount of eyebags alone are proof.

So I guess my stance is still that if you took the current roster and dropped them in the 80's or 90's, they'd do just as well. But it's honestly a little hard to say for sure, but like I said earlier, I'd like to think that they would.:shrug


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> That may be true, but I'd like to think that if the current roster were allowed to live in their own world, feel themselves, and have major confidence like former wrestlers, the charisma would be equal. Those 80's-90's guys were on so many roids, had a lighter schedule, didn't have to deal with a barrage of hate off of social media, were allowed to have fun and make magic when they went out. The current roster doesn't. They work 5-6 days a week over 300 days a year, little to no vacations, have to find a way to workout, sleep, eat, practice wrestling, be on time for their shows, and on Monday/Tuesday learn their scripts, where they're supposed to be, and what they're supposed to do, and by the time they do that plus their show, they're exhausted as hell. Plus, over half of have wives/husbands/children that they actually make an effort to be there for unlike the old rosters men.
> 
> The old guys were all pumped up with all kinds of drugs and steroids. This roster isn't allowed those, hence the injuries. They're so worn thin and worn out that I understand why they don't give it their all (guess that answers my earlier question). The amount of eyebags alone are proof.
> 
> So I guess my stance is still that if you took the current roster and dropped them in the 80's or 90's, they'd do just as well. But it's honestly a little hard to say for sure, but like I said earlier, I'd like to think that they would.:shrug


Nah, man, the schedule back then was 100% worse. Ever heard of the 'WWF Killer Kalendar?" If not, read Bret Hart's book. These guys have it easy as fucked compared to the 80s and 90s.

Charisma is not mic skills. Two entirely different things. Charisma is presence/way they look/that extra little factor and none of today's guys are shit compared to the guys I mentioned in my first post. Has nothing to do with mic skills or freedom from creative or any of that stuff.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Nah, man, the schedule back then was 100% worse. Ever heard of the 'WWF Killer Kalendar?" If not, read Bret Hart's book. These guys have it easy as fucked compared to the 80s and 90s.
> 
> Charisma is not mic skills. Two entirely different things. Charisma is presence/way they look/that extra little factor and none of today's guys are shit compared to the guys I mentioned in my first post. Has nothing to do with mic skills or freedom from creative or any of that stuff.


Yes, but back then the wrestlers handled heavy schedules with booze and lots of meds. Plus, they were kind of like TV stars. Much more fame and hype to feed the work ethic.

Of course charisma doesn't mean mic skills. Charisma has a lot to do with being confident and relaxed. If someone believes in themself, others will too. The confidence of the current roster is LOW. And knowing that Vince might suspend them, bury them or worse for the tiniest of mistakes or deference from his instructions probably isn't helping them relax either.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Yes, but back then the wrestlers handled heavy schedules with booze and lots of meds. Plus, they were kind of like TV stars. Much more fame and hype to feed the work ethic.
> 
> Of course charisma doesn't mean mic skills. Charisma has a lot to do with being confident and relaxed. If someone believes in themself, others will too. The confidence of the current roster is LOW. And knowing that Vince might suspend them, bury them or worse for the tiniest of mistakes or deference from his instructions probably isn't helping them relax either.


I don't see what alcohol and drugs have to do with charisma, or anything to do with the fans, tbh. They were also much bigger TV stars back then because they had a fuck-ton of charisma that this roster simply can't touch, from top to bottom.

I kind of agree with your second point to a certain degree, though. (Y)


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

PPV is a growing business. They don't have it anymore.
They are making DVD Sales obsolete.
Vince sold the rights to USA for less than their worth, at which point the Network starts, throwing away the leverage of exclusivity for the next deal.
With 1.5 million paid subscribers, they make 15 million a year with it. 15 compared to 200 million. Even with ads, that's a comical difference.
Let's say they do get the entire Raw viewership on the Network. Let's be generous and say 4 million. That's still 40 million compared to 200 million.

So, they lose millions in PPV money, and at least 75% of TV money if they do that move.
In what way is the Network "genius"? It's genious in its hotshot inadequacy.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Just finished RAW.

The top of the third hour started with an eight women tag. Surefire way to drive would be viewers away.
Then it was Vaudevillains vs. Usos. 
Then Apollo vs. Curtis Axel.

The first 40 minutes were three straight things that people don't care about (including two out of three matches including people who seem like total randoms to people who don't know).

It's like they weren't even trying to make that third hour interesting. Doesn't the top of the hour usually start with something significant?

They already did AJ/Roman and Ambrose/Jericho. It's like they don't have any other storyline hook to start the top of the third hour.

They should have done the Bret/Ric reveal at the top of the hour, and done something special with just Nattie and Charlotte there. 

That crowd was deader than dead in that last hour. Says a lot, since they started off hot.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I don't see what alcohol and drugs have to do with charisma, or anything to do with the fans, tbh. They were also much bigger TV stars back then because they had a fuck-ton of charisma that this roster simply can't touch, from top to bottom.
> 
> I kind of agree with your second point to a certain degree, though. (Y)


Oh, wasn't saying the booze/drugs were creating charisma. Just that it probably helped them get through their schedules. That's why a lot of musicians have addiction problems. They start doing drugs/drinking heavily to cope with the constant hectic schedule. In WWE's case, their roster isn't allowed to do that.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Total Divas Season 5 Complete Viewership Report*


Season 5 of “Total Divas” closed with a whimper on Tuesday night, pointing to why the show is being re-booted next season.


Total Divas Season 5 Summary

April 19: The season finale drew 625,000 viewers on E!, according to TVByTheNumbers, falling below the season average by more than 100,000 viewers.

The season averaged 734,000 viewers, down 38 percent from Season 4 in the Tuesday night timeslot.

Only one episode drew more than 1.0 million viewers – the season premiere on January 19.

After the season premiere, viewership fell seven consecutive weeks, hitting an all-time low 580,000 viewers on March 8.

The show then hit a new all-time low of 563,000 viewers on March 29 during the hustle and bustle of WrestleMania Week.

When Total Divas moved timeslots for Season 4 in Summer 2015, the show was paired with “Tough Enough” on Tuesday nights within the NBCU family. That provided a tag partner to try to bring viewers to WWE-related programming the night after a three-hour Raw.

However, Season 5 was on an island in the crowded Tuesday night market. Plus, the show wrapped up its season at the same time WWE distanced itself from their long-promoted “Divas” label to describe the female roster, switching to “Superstars” and the “Women’s Title.”

WWE and E! are still promoting Season 6 of the series as “Total Divas” despite the company now acknowledging “Divas” as a dated representation of their female roster.

Caldwell’s Analysis: The “Total Bellas” spin-off is also starting up in Fall 2016, creating the question of whether it’s time to phase out the “Total Divas” show after Season 5 viewership fell 38 percent. WWE and E! are already committed to Season 6, though, with new cast members Maryse, Renee Young, and Lana in the mix. It remains to be seen what the landscape is during the second-half of 2016 in terms of how to market the show trying to bring back lapsed viewers – market the new cast members, market a different approach to the show, etc.?

Total Divas Progression

Sunday Nights…

Season 1 (Part 1 Fall 2013) – 1.375 million viewers
Season 1 (Part 2 Winter 2013) – 1.254 million viewers
Season 2 (Spring 2014) – 1.201 million viewers
Season 3 (Part 1 Fall 2014) – 1.012 million viewers
Season 3 (Part 2 Spring 2015) – 1.212 million viewers
Shift to Tuesday Nights…

Season 4 (Summer/Fall 2015) – 1.011 million viewers
Season 5 (Winter/Spring 2016) – 734,071 viewers

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/20/16949/


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Nah, man, the schedule back then was 100% worse. Ever heard of the 'WWF Killer Kalendar?" If not, read Bret Hart's book. These guys have it easy as fucked compared to the 80s and 90s.
> 
> Charisma is not mic skills. Two entirely different things. Charisma is presence/way they look/that extra little factor and none of today's guys are shit compared to the guys I mentioned in my first post. Has nothing to do with mic skills or freedom from creative or any of that stuff.


I would say the person with the most charisma ATM is someone who has just been called up from NXT, followed by a fatty, a king of strong style, the greatest man that ever lived and the most charismatic guy in New Day, That order could be different but it's just my feeling on it, however none can touch those you mentioned.
It's that something intangible,something that you struggle to put a name on. Those currently at the top just do not posses it enough for them to grow in the space they have.

They (those I mentioned) COULD but Vince won't bother and give them room and a platform to grow for obvious reasons, that being that they don't fit his proto-type (age, size, race, look, etc).


----------



## skarvika

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Season 1 (Part 1 Fall 2013) – 1.375 million viewers
> Season 1 (Part 2 Winter 2013) – 1.254 million viewers
> Season 2 (Spring 2014) – 1.201 million viewers
> Season 3 (Part 1 Fall 2014) – 1.012 million viewers
> Season 3 (Part 2 Spring 2015) – 1.212 million viewers
> Season 4 (Summer/Fall 2015) – 1.011 million viewers
> Season 5 (Winter/Spring 2016) – 734,071 viewers


That drop:mj2


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So for you it costs 10 a year? I still have to pay 10 a month, which would sum up to 15 * 12 = 180, which is pretty close to 200 for me.

4 million will then be 40 * 12 = 480, which is more than double what they get at the moment, even without advertising, which will come on board, once they are truly exclusive to the network.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> PPV is a growing business. They don't have it anymore.
> They are making DVD Sales obsolete.
> Vince sold the rights to USA for less than their worth, at which point the Network starts, throwing away the leverage of exclusivity for the next deal.
> With 1.5 million paid subscribers, they make 15 million a year with it. 15 compared to 200 million. Even with ads, that's a comical difference.
> Let's say they do get the entire Raw viewership on the Network. Let's be generous and say 4 million. That's still 40 million compared to 200 million.
> 
> So, they lose millions in PPV money, and at least 75% of TV money if they do that move.
> In what way is the Network "genius"? It's genious in its hotshot inadequacy.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw dying a slow miserable death these days. Worst part about it is that they show is pretty decent but I just have absolutely zero desire to watch it right now. I feel like there was no point to Wrestlemania and after paying money to attend it's kind of a sore point at the minute. Reigns can say he's THE GUY until he's blue in the face but he's THE GUY only in Vince's mind. He's damaged goods and nobody cares. Things are going to have to get a lot worse before they get better, that's for damn sure.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Switching RAW/SD to the Network exclusively would be one of the dumbest fucking moves in the history of dumb moves. You can only charge your fanbase for something if there's a large demand for it. The demand for WWE PPVs was growing weaker and weaker (which is WWE's own fault, not due to any decline in wrestling or fans or whatever) so they eliminated PPV from the business model and spewed a bunch of bullshit about how the PPV business is dying, which couldn't be further from the truth. It's dying for them because they have no draws anymore and they're too fucking lazy and/or incompetent to create new ones. So the fix to that is to eliminate PPVs and charge your former PPV audience $10 for what they know call PPV shows. Make them pay less because you're putting in significantly less effort, but cutting out the PPV providers so you're going to profit.

But there is still a huge portion of their audience that watches RAW simply because all they have to do is switch to the USA network on Monday nights. A huge portion of their audience who pays a cable/internet bill every month and probably will be pissed off if WWE suddenly tells them "Now you have to pay $10 a month to watch RAW!!". It would be a goddamn disaster. HBO or Netflix can charge customers money on top of their cable/internet bills because they have lineups of excellent original programming as well as vast movie selections, and for the record HBO has over 100 million subscribers and Netflix has over 80 million....so think about that the next time you want to go "WWE HAS 1.5 MILLION SUBSCRIBERS WHAT A HUGE SUCCESS THEY ARE!!!". Point being, a large portion of your audience watches the show because it's on Cable TV. It's fucking pro wrestling....people aren't going to pay a monthly fee to watch pro wrestling and you're out of your goddamn mind if you think they will. You would cut your audience in half if you put RAW exclusively on the Network. As well as eliminate ANY chance of ever building up a casual audience again, since the only people who will ever watch your show are those with Network subscriptions. John Smith can't switch through the channels and see The Rock appearing on RAW and think "Whoa, it's the Rock, I remember him from when I was a kid! I'll watch this episode of RAW. And maybe I'll watch next week too, to see what happens."

The NFL is the most popular sport in America, and there's no way in fuck they'd ever be remotely stupid enough to put every game on a Network and charge their audience $10 a month for viewership. They're happily making billions of dollars through the television industry.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(4/21) Vs last week(4/14) 

2.431M Vs 2.355M 
(+0.076M/+3.23%)*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown seems to have far more ratings stability than RAW, but,admittedly, I haven't been following its ratings too closely.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Smackdown seems to have far more ratings stability than RAW, but,admittedly, I haven't been following its ratings too closely.


Of course it has that stability. You know why? Raw has some casuals, Smackdown has none.
Only hardcore fans watch Smackdown, that's why the number stays relatively stable.
1.6 - 1.7 is the Raw number they'll be getting soon, when more casuals leave.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Update – Actual viewership for Week 2 of John Cena’s “American Grit” lowered*

Week 2 of John Cena’s new “American Grit” series on Fox did not fare better than the disappointing series premiere.


American Grit Viewership Tracking

April 21: In the overnight TV ratings, Grit drew 2.26 million viewers, according to TVBytheNumbers, down from 2.35 million viewers last week.

UPDATE: Actual viewership was even lower at 2.17 million viewers, according to TVBytheNumbers.

Grit’s lead-in, “Bones,” drew recorded 4.28 million overnight viewers and increased to 4.38 million actual viewers.

For the second consecutive week, Cena’s show was down more than 2.0 million viewers from the lead-in.

Grit ranked fourth in its timeslot and Fox ranked fourth for the night, trailing CBS’s half-hour comedies, ABC’s hour-long dramas, and NBC’s legacy show “The Blacklist.”

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/22/week-2-of-john-cenas-american-grit-dips-in-tv-viewership/

*4/21 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – soft increase for London show*

This week’s WWE Smackdown inched up in TV ratings and viewership, but remained below the First Quarter 2016 average.

WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

April 21: Thursday’s Smackdown scored a 1.71 TV rating on USA Network, up slightly from a 1.70 rating last week.

The show remained below the First Quarter average of a 1.77 rating, though.

Smackdown drew 2.431 million viewers, re-gaining three percent that was lost last week.

However, viewership was below the Q1 average of 2.481 million viewers.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Smackdown improved slightly in adults 18-49, males 18-49, and males 18-34.

Males 18-34 increased to a five-week high. The increase is interesting because Raw’s m18-34 rating fell hard to the lowest point of the year on Monday.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/22/421-wwe-smackdown-tv-ratings-soft-increase-for-london-show/


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE RAW Twitter TV Ratings
*

- Monday's WWE RAW ranked #1 among series & specials for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings. As noted, Nielsen recently confirmed to us that they have changed the way Twitter ratings are being released as Unique Audience will no longer be included. The weekly lists will now include and be ranked by tweet volume. RAW had 152,000 tweets with 35,000 unique authors. This is up from last week's show, which had 112,000 tweets with 26,000 unique authors.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0426/611126/what-happened-after-raw-in-hartford/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *WWE RAW Twitter TV Ratings
> *
> 
> - Monday's WWE RAW ranked #1 among series & specials for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings. As noted, Nielsen recently confirmed to us that they have changed the way Twitter ratings are being released as Unique Audience will no longer be included. The weekly lists will now include and be ranked by tweet volume. RAW had 152,000 tweets with 35,000 unique authors. This is up from last week's show, which had 112,000 tweets with 26,000 unique authors.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0426/611126/what-happened-after-raw-in-hartford/


Thanks for the info. I still don't know if there is any direct correlation between twitter and tv ratings.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Thanks for the info. I still don't know if there is any direct correlation between twitter and tv ratings.


If there's an increase in the TV Twitter ratings, that usually means the TV ratings went up. 

I was bored by last night's show but maybe more people enjoyed it. I wouldn't be surprised if the ratings rose this week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They will definitely raise this week just due to last week being the lowest rated Raw of all time, without NFL on and a 3rd hour that dipped below 3 million. Also, this was a go-home show to a PPV. They have no way to go but up after last week's all time low.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> If there's an increase in the TV Twitter ratings, that usually means the TV ratings went up.
> 
> I was bored by last night's show but maybe more people enjoyed it. I wouldn't be surprised if the ratings rose this week.


I'm probably going to speed watch all the post Mania RAWS so I am current on all the happenings before Payback.


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> I'm probably going to speed watch all the post Mania RAWS so I am current on all the happenings before Payback.


Just watch the YouTube clips. They feature everything that is worth watching from raw and last I checked go back weeks.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*4/25 Raw Social Media rebounds from last week’s year-low*

Monday’s Raw rebounded from year-low social media activity last week for the final show leading into Payback.


WWE Raw TV Social Media Tracking

April 25: Raw resumed the #1 spot among series & specials in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings after falling to #3 last week.

If compared to sports programming, Raw would have ranked #3 behind one NBA Playoffs game and one NHL Playoffs game, but ahead of the other two NBA and NHL games.

Raw generated tweet volume 152,000, up 36 percent from last week’s dreadful showing for a taped international show. The number of tweets was still well off the First Quarter average of 195,000, though.

The number of unique authors was 35,000, improving on 26k last week and matching the same number two weeks ago.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/26/17574/


----------



## Louaja89

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> They will definitely raise this week just due to *last week being the lowest rated Raw of all time, without NFL on and a 3rd hour that dipped below 3 million*. Also, this was a go-home show to a PPV. They have no way to go but up after last week's all time low.



Holy shit !!! It happened again ! I didn't even know, lol that's hilarious.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.263M
H2-3.184M
H3-2.938M
3H-3.128M*










*H2 Vs H1 (-2.42%/-0.079M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.73%/-0.246M)
H3 Vs H1 (-9.96%/-0.325M)
4/25/16 Vs 4/18/16 (-6.24%/-0.208M)*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2nd week in a row of Hour 3 going below 3 million. Don't think it's ever happened 2 weeks in a row. And on a go-home show to a PPV. They have a legitimate new problem here now. No trolling.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

These numbers. :ha

I haven't watched over the past few weeks and I see other people are having the same idea. This product is just so bad right now, even with the call-ups and new signings. It's just dull as fuck.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Is that better than last week? Doesn't look too great


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Average WWE RAW And SmackDown Ratings For February 2016 Down From The Previous Year*

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter

WWE RAW averaged a 2.56 rating with 3.62 million viewers in February 2016. That is down 12.3% in ratings and 9.7% in viewers from the 2.92 rating and 4.01 million viewers they averaged in February 2015. RAW averaged a 3.17 rating with 4.51 million viewers in February 2014 and a 3.34 rating with 4.60 million viewers in 2013.

SmackDown averaged a 1.77 rating with 2.48 million viewers in February 2016, down 3.3% from the 1.83 rating and down 1.6% from the 2.52 million viewers in February 2015. SmackDown averaged a 2.03 rating with 2.89 million viewers in February 2014, when it aired on Fridays, and a 2.05 rating with 2.92 million viewers in February 2013.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...and-smackdown-ratings-for-february-2016-down/


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



DAMN SKIPPY said:


> Is that better than last week? Doesn't look too great


Last week was:

Hour one: 3.49 million
Hour two: 3.54 million
Hour three: 2.98 million

http://uproxx.com/sports/wwe-raw-ratings-new-low-2/


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At least the drop from hour one to hour 3 is getting smaller :duck


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Last week was:
> 
> Hour one: 3.49 million
> Hour two: 3.54 million
> Hour three: 2.98 million
> 
> http://uproxx.com/sports/wwe-raw-ratings-new-low-2/


So the go-home did virtually the same thing (if not slightly worse) as a taped throwaway show. Yeah, not so good


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


>


That gif needs to be like 10x slower tbh. WWE has felt like WCW 2000 for like the last 2 years tbh. Awful ratings btw, I'd be more concerned with the 1st 2 hours than hour 3 tbh. Yeah, hour 3 was bad and dropped to under 3 million again, but the 1st 2 hours drew lower than last week. That should be a concern for them.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People probably saw Stephanie come out this week in the opening segment and peace'd the fuck out.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was Last Night's WWE RAW Viewership With Roman Reigns Vs. Alberto Del Rio In The Main Event?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Alberto Del Rio vs. WWE World Heavyweight Champion Roman Reigns in the main event and the much-hyped in-ring debuts of Luke Gallows and Karl Anderson vs. The Usos, drew 3.128 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.335 million viewers for the taped show from London.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.263 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.184 million viewers and the final hour drew 2.938 million viewers. This is the second week in a row that the third hour has dipped under 3 million.

RAW was #1 on cable for the night in viewership and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the NBA Playoffs, Love & Hip-Hop and Black Ink Crew 4.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ight-wwe-raw-viewership-with-roman-reigns-vs/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

All trolling aside, this is legit scary. *Don't think they've ever had two weeks in a row where Hour 3 went below 3 million viewers. * And this was a go home show to a PPV. And we're still in the same month of WM, the biggest show of the year; literally just a few weeks removed from WM.

Two weeks in a row of all time record lows. Terrible year for Raw ratings thus far. Worst ever, no hyperbole.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Those numbers are fucking horrible.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's a shame that they've done a better job building to Payback, but the ratings keep slipping. Still, Reigns' hourlies are pretty consistently lower when he's wrestling. Not saying he's the cause, but in a different time, promoters would be reconsidering their decision.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> All trolling aside, this is legit scary. *Don't think they've ever had two weeks in a row where Hour 3 went below 3 million viewers. *.


Not unless you count the 1995-1997 period. Back then I don't think they went OVER a 3.0 for two weeks in a row :lol

EDIT: nvm, you were talking about hour 3


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> All trolling aside, this is legit scary. *Don't think they've ever had two weeks in a row where Hour 3 went below 3 million viewers. * And this was a go home show to a PPV. And we're still in the same month of WM, the biggest show of the year; literally just a few weeks removed from WM.
> 
> Two weeks in a row of all time record lows. Terrible year for Raw ratings thus far. Worst ever, no hyperbole.


Yeah, this is bad. The increase in social media activity was possibly a good sign, but the TV ratings just went lower. The show bored me to tears but I expected a bump since it was live. 

As @Chrome pointed out, I think H1 and 2 are more worrying at this point. Not that less than 3 million for H3 is good. It seems like they can't maintain the 3-3.5 million average anymore.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lower than the taped show? Maybe the NBA playoffs are hurting them more than they should. Those numbers are scary low.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



DAMN SKIPPY said:


> Not unless you count the 1995-1997 period. Back then I don't think they went OVER a 3.0 for two weeks in a row :lol
> 
> EDIT: nvm, you were talking about hour 3


You're talking about the actual rating, which is different from viewership. This is the viewership numbers. The actual rating will be somewhere in the 2.0's.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The sad thing is that this is entirely predictable and not surprising in the slightest.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hey :vince2, those hardcores will keep watching no matter what huh?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










It's finally happening, isn't it? The show is so bad and so shit that even the WWE shills/sheep/marks can't even defend it anymore (especially casuals). WWE is bad television that happens to have good/great wrestling in between. That's all it is now. Shit is repetitive. If WWE didn't have the history, public image, and infrastructure of a wrestling business, RAW would have been cancelled years ago.

We're not even in the ballpark of football season, let alone the NBA Finals. If this keeps being consistent, we haven't seen *nothing* yet.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> You're talking about the actual rating, which is different from viewership. This is the viewership numbers. The actual rating will be somewhere in the 2.0's.


Yeah, my bad


It's alarming because they actually have a hot angle going right now and they're fresh off Wrestlemania season. It usually always gets worse creatively shortly after the first PPV post-Mania. Hopefully for them this Bullet Club angle has longevity and a great surprise to hook us this Sunday. This angle can't afford to fail right now


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Lower than the taped show? Maybe the NBA playoffs are hurting them more than they should. Those numbers are scary low.


It's time for the WWE to hit the panic button. Up until this point, they've been able to maintain a 3-3.5 million average. But they shouldn't be bleeding viewers at this rate two weeks after Wrestlemania and experiencing lows on social media. At least they rebounded this week on that front, but this is two weeks in a row that the 3rd hour couldn't scratch 3 million. It got close, but still. 

They had 3 good RAW's in a row; don't know why they put on that dry show last night. To be honest, RAW deserves this rating for their creative laziness.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Is Stone Hot perma banned? There's a lot of people who used to post about ratings but suddenly stopped a few weeks ago. If they're doing that bad with no NFL on then I don't know wanna think about how they'll do with Monday Night Football games.

Is Reigns still the champ?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think the disconnect between twitter ratings and tv ratings may be attributed to twitter measuring all users while tv ratings are based on a statistical sampling of only Nielsen families. Not really sure, but increased social media didn't produce more viewers this week.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well, at least there wasn't such a drop between hour 2 and 3 this week.











Iron Man said:


> *Is Stone Hot perma banned?* There's a lot of people who used to post about ratings but suddenly stopped a few weeks ago. If they're doing that bad with no NFL on then I don't know wanna think about how they'll do with Monday Night Football games.
> 
> Is Reigns still the champ?


Dude got perma'd back in December, where ya been man? :lol


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *It's time for the WWE to hit the panic button*. Up until this point, they've been able to maintain a 3-3.5 million average. But they shouldn't be bleeding viewers at this rate two weeks after Wrestlemania and experiencing lows on social media. At least they rebounded this week on that front, but this is two weeks in a row that the 3rd hour couldn't scratch 3 million. It got close, but still.
> 
> They had 3 good RAW's in a row; don't know why they put on that dry show last night. To be honest, RAW deserves this rating for their creative laziness.


I hope its the correct Panic Button, b/c with Vince the "panic button" tends to be old part-timers and turning the show into the John Cena show for a few months.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Do I need to update this?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> I think the disconnect between twitter ratings and tv ratings may be attributed to twitter measuring all users while tv ratings are based on a statistical sampling of only Nielsen families. Not really sure, but increased social media didn't produce more viewers this week.


They did change how they compile Twitter ratings. But last week's RAW scored a social media low and the TV rating reflected that too.


----------



## manstis1804

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> At least the drop from hour one to hour 3 is getting smaller :duck


Which really says that they're losing everyone but the hardcore fans who will actually sit through all 3 hours.

I usually don't put that much stock in ratings, but holy crap.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



manstis1804 said:


> Which really says that they're losing everyone but the hardcore fans who will actually sit through all 3 hours.
> 
> I usually don't put that much stock in ratings, but holy crap.


Actually at this point I think they are starting to lose the hardcores to...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And literally just 2 months ago (late February), morale was so high with Shane coming back. Here we are, 2 short months later, Shane is in charge of Raw despite losing at WM, and the go-home show to the PPV right after WM, and they've already found a way to make his presence almost completely meaningless.

fpalm

Scary. Even I was pumped as hell for Shane being back. Now? I barely even care, and I guess not too many others care, either, judging by these numbers.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Also, I just want to state the record that the "Bullet Club" storyline isn't as "must see" as people are making it out to be. It was advertised and known that not only Gallows and Anderson would be there but wrestling as well. This just tells me that the Bullet Club are relatively unknown to the WWE/"sports entertainment" world. Maybe it'll change down the road but WWE are already undercutting that angle by the looks of last night. 

Other than that angle and MAYBE Zayn/Owens, WWE has nothing going for them. I wouldn't watch the full show either and excuse me, Stephanie opened the show with Shane while ADR/Reigns closes the show? I would have left or tuned out too.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> I hope its the correct Panic Button, b/c with Vince the "panic button" tends to be old part-timers and turning the show into the John Cena show for a few months.


John Cena will be champ again before Summerslam. I'm calling it. That will probably be Vince's quick fix. At the very least, Cena will be moved to hour 3. His open challenge was very popular and I think it did good numbers.

@ShowStopper @WinNING DA BASED GAWD 

I agree that Shane's return and Bullet Club are falling flat. These should be the hottest angles right now. As I said in the RAW thread, I was ready to fall asleep last night.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> John Cena will be champ again before Summerslam. I'm calling it. That will probably be Vince's quick fix. At the very least, Cena will be moved to hour 3. His open challenge was very popular and I think it did good numbers.


I think Vince is dug in with this Reigns title reign for the long-term, Reigns is keeping the belt til Summerslam at the VERY LEAST. I expect Cena to win back the US Title and the US Title Open Challenge to return in June for sure.

I watched the Blues/Blackhawks game last night and watched Raw on DVR after the game and watched Raw in a little over an hour, total. Had I been watching Raw live and not on DVR I would have turned it off at some point in hour 2.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> I think Vince is dug in with this Reigns title reign for the long-term, Reigns is keeping the belt til Summerslam at the VERY LEAST. I expect Cena to win back the US Title and the US Title Open Challenge to return in June for sure.


Got a feeling Cena's going after the IC title when he gets back. He's never won the title before, and I'm sure WWE would love to add that to his list of accolades. I'd be surprised if he went after the US title again.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Good, they deserve the low ratings after announcing Reigns vs Del Rio


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Got a feeling Cena's going after the IC title when he gets back. He's never won the title before, and I'm sure WWE would love to add that to his list of accolades. I'd be surprised if he went after the US title again.


I could see that being more likely, as well now that I think about it. Either way one of the mid-card belts is being put on Cena so the "open challenge" can come back for the summer.

Poor Cesaro again :mj2


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

You guys are overthinking this. Cena will come back and take the US Title from Ryback. The Big Guy will win it this Sunday and probably call out Cena a few weeks before his return.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> I could see that being more likely, as well now that I think about it. Either way one of the mid-card belts is being put on Cena so the "open challenge" can come back for the summer.
> 
> Poor Cesaro again :mj2


I'd like to see Cena beat Miz for the IC title and then Cesaro beat him at Summerslam. Think a Cesaro/Cena match for the IC title at SS would be pretty good.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They may actually manage a sub 1.0 demo at this rate. 1.06 for hour three is very poor for RAW but, to keep things in perspective, it was still good for sixth on the night for cable.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cena would become a Grand Slam if he won the IC belt. I was actually looking forward to Cesaro having the belt though. 

I've actually missed Cena, as unpopular of an opinion that is around these parts. I still think he's higher on the pecking orders than Reigns. If Vince wants a quick fix, I could see Reigns losing to Cena before Summerslam and finally turning.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> You guys are overthinking this. Cena will come back and take the US Title from Ryback. The Big Guy will win it this Sunday and probably call out Cena a few weeks before his return.


God I hope not. Not because of Cena beating Ryback. That ship has sailed for Ryback.

It's because of this overrated US Open challenge Cena was doing last year. Yeah, it gave you great matches but it ultimately led nothing to the Cena character, the opponents he faced, and the US Championship itself. Where the fuck is Kalisto these days on RAW?

Doing it again would clearly be a panic decision to bring Cena back full time to stop the bleeding while not having him undercut their new golden child in Reigns.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Cena would become a Grand Slam if he won the IC belt. I was actually looking forward to Cesaro having the belt though.
> 
> I've actually missed Cena, as unpopular of an opinion that is around these parts. I still think he's higher on the pecking orders than Reigns. If Vince wants a quick fix, I could see Reigns losing to Cena before Summerslam and finally turning.


Cena's almost 40. They want Reigns to be the guy that takes over all of Cena's Make a Wish stuff. Turning him heel hurts that. I think they want Reigns to maintain a certain image for when Cena isn't in that spot anymore.


----------



## manstis1804

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> Actually at this point I think they are starting to lose the hardcores to...


They're losing everybody, just the hardcores at slower rates.

Personally, Mania 32 pretty much broke me. I care way less about everything going on now.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Cena's almost 40. They want Reigns to be the guy that takes over all of Cena's Make a Wish stuff. Turning him heel hurts that. I think they want Reigns to maintain a certain image for when Cena isn't in that spot anymore.


What happened last night was disgusting. I feel horrible because I care about kids, cancer and all that but it doesn't sit well with me using these causes for blatant propaganda. I'm one of the 10 Roman Reigns fans on this board and I can admit that he doesn't work as a face. If you need to use sick kids to get him cheers, that should ring a few bells. 

I don't get this desire to make him Cena 2.0. He can hold babies during the commercial break or after RAW if you really want the kid to have a feel good moment.

As for Cena himself, I just see Vince going into a panic mode and using him as a quick fix. His long term vision would still be Reigns, but Cena would be going to the drying well.

I've been on the record stating that some act as if the sky is falling when it comes to the ratings. But now, they're not even holding their base support. The bottom can't fall out. There's only so much social media can compensate for when it comes to a shrinking audience. A billion dollar company shouldn't be bleeding viewers a month after their biggest event. The least they can do is maintain.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why is it 3 hours?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WesternFilmGuy said:


> Why is it 3 hours?


Because USA Network pays them an extra $32 million for that 3rd hour.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They've been losing hardcore fans for a long time. I used to consider myself a hardcore - I haven't watched in weeks. Wrestlemania just left a sour taste in my mouth.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yes I know they get it because of the corporate sponsors and advertising revenue but...it's time to admit the three hour RAW structure is a failure. Wrestling is not in a boom period, is no longer cool, or justified to expanding a standard two hour wrestling program. It just isn't. I remember people blindly thought three hours would give talent "more chances" and all that nonsense. All it did was extend matches longer (which make PPVs/special events pointless in that case) and create more filler and commercials.

Time to get rid of the concept. It hasn't work and it will not work.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> What happened last night was disgusting. I feel horrible because I care about kids, cancer and all that but it doesn't sit well with me using these causes for blatant propaganda. I'm one of the 10 Roman Reigns fans on this board and I can admit that he doesn't work as a face. If you need to use sick kids to get him cheers, that should ring a few bells.
> 
> I don't get this desire to make him Cena 2.0. He can hold babies during the commercial break or after RAW if you really want the kid to have a feel good moment.
> 
> As for Cena himself, I just see Vince going into a panic mode and using him as a quick fix. His long term vision would still be Reigns, but Cena would be going to the drying well.
> 
> I've been on the record stating that some act as if the sky is falling when it comes to the ratings. But now, they're not even holding their base support. The bottom can't fall out. There's only so much social media can compensate for when it comes to a shrinking audience. A billion dollar company shouldn't be bleeding viewers a month after their biggest event. The least they can do is maintain.


Am not sure though, there are a few tweeners and even heels out there who get some make a wishes too. It's being said those are not hyped as much as Cena's or Reigns's because Cena's is in the hundreds and makes for a greater headline and Reigns is the current heir.

One thing's for sure, the average age of the smark has decreased exponentially since the attitude era and even the ruthless aggression era. So many outlets to get insider gossip, credibility notwithstanding. If a heel cole can turn face owing to a real life incident with lawler then surely the kids can root for heels too even if they themselves are struck with ailments. Entertainment is what counts, and faces dont have a monopoly on being entertaining even if parents especially the soccer mom variety would prefer their kids rooting for faces. They can turn Reigns heel and still make those wishes.

As for the current state for RAW, I am looking forward to that announcement on Payback, and Cenas Return and MITB. Everything else doesnt excite me until Summerslam that is.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Do I need to update this?


You may very well need to...

What does this translate into, rating wise? Like a 2.1?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KO Bossy said:


> You may very well need to...
> 
> What does this translate into, rating wise? Like a 2.1?


Only the RAWs between Survivor Series and TLC had identical viewership. And they all were in the 2.1s to 2.2s. There is a possibility this could be lower than their current record of 2.15 or barely scrape through with a 2.2+ , albeit ever so slightly.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Am not sure though, there are a few tweeners and even heels out there who get some make a wishes too. It's being said those are not hyped as much as Cena's or Reigns's because Cena's is in the hundreds and makes for a greater headline and Reigns is the current heir.
> 
> One thing's for sure, the average age of the smark has decreased exponentially since the attitude era and even the ruthless aggression era. So many outlets to get insider gossip, credibility notwithstanding. If a heel cole can turn face owing to a real life incident with lawler then surely the kids can root for heels too even if they themselves are struck with ailments. Entertainment is what counts, and faces dont have a monopoly on being entertaining even if parents especially the soccer mom variety would prefer their kids rooting for faces. They can turn Reigns heel and still make those wishes.
> 
> As for the current state for RAW, I am looking forward to that announcement on Payback, and Cenas Return and MITB. Everything else doesnt excite me until Summerslam that is.


I don't get why it matters if Reigns, Cena or whoever is heel/face when it comes to Make A Wish, charities, etc. Stephanie McMahon is a witch on a broom every RAW but yet she's branding herself as a philanthropist. We live in a reality era. The WWE openly acknowledges that they are a soap opera. So, it's silly that they believe their champ has to be face in order to grant wishes and represent the company.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The concern here about ratings is more than the product. It should be the other way round. Blame Titan Towers for that.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

BY

GAWD

BY GAWDDDD

DO YOU BELIEVE.

BACK TO BACK BELOW 3 MILLION HOURS FOR THE BIG DAWG REIGNS.

LETS ADD THAT TO HIS LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS.

LOWEST RATED RAW IN THE HISTORY OF THE COMPANY. CHECK.

BACK 2 BACK BELOW 3 MILLION VIEWERS IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COMPANY. CHECK.

LOWEST DEMO RATING FOR LIVE SHOW @ 2.16. CHECK.

THIS MAN. 

THIS MAN.

*BY GAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWD. SUCH CHARISMA. SUCH STAR POWER. PUSH THIS MOTHERFUCKER TO THE MOON. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I don't get why it matters if Reigns, Cena or whoever is heel/face when it comes to Make A Wish, charities, etc. Stephanie McMahon is a witch on a broom every RAW but yet she's branding herself as a philanthropist. We live in a reality era. The WWE openly acknowledges that they are a soap opera. So, it's silly that they believe their champ has to be face in order to grant wishes and represent the company.


Ever since the AE ended, Vince thinks all edginess has disappeared from society almost like it's 70's and 80's wrestling again where it was all about the clean-cut, babyface. He's lost. He thinks his company is like a movie where you have to have a clean-cut leading man, babyface to lead the way; especially since they are a publicly traded company now. He's gone. A complete lost cause.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*4/25 Raw TV Ratings – Raw falls to historical low-point pre-Payback*

Monday’s Raw continued a severe post-WrestleMania slide leading into the Payback PPV.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

April 25: Monday’s Raw fell to a 2.20 rating the week after falling to a 2.32 rating for a taped international show.

It was the lowest rating of the year and lowest since a 2.15 rating in December. If not for the Dec. 7 episode, this would have been the lowest-rated regular-week Raw TV rating in about 20 years.

April 4 post-WM: 2.93 rating
April 11: 2.50 rating
April 18: 2.32 rating (U.K.)
April 25: 2.20 rating (25% decline since WM32)
– Raw was especially hit hard among 18-49 viewers. General adults 18-49 fell one-tenth of a rating to easily the lowest a18-49 rating of the year. Also, males 18-49 fell eight percent to easily the lowest m18-49 rating of the year.

The only demographic that improved was males 18-34, which hit an extreme low-point last week and inched up from the basement level this week.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.128 million viewers, down six percent from last week’s audience of 3.335 million viewers.

It was by far the fewest viewers of the year and also the fewest since Dec. 7, 2015. Hourly Break Down:

First Hour: 3.263 million viewers (down about 200k from last week)
Second Hour: 3.184 million viewers (down about 350k from last week)
Third Hour: 2.938 million viewers (down 40k from last week)
For the second consecutive week, the third hour drew fewer than 3.0 million viewers. That is the first time that has happened in the modern era.

Even during last year’s difficult Fall TV season, there were no back-to-back shows where the third hour drew fewer than three million viewers.

The key this week appears to be a very soft second hour (with the big week-to-week drop-off), which then fed into the typically soft third hour.

Caldwell’s Analysis: The issues are obvious week after week. In summary, the loyal audience base is eroding, WWE is not a hot TV property right now, rejection of Roman Reigns as WWE champion, the casual viewers have little connection to the new stars and storylines hurriedly introduced after WrestleMania, over-exposed established stars who do not feel special, an interim tag on Shane McMahon running or not running Raw week-to-week, and a flimsy, incomplete vision from Vince McMahon as head of Creative trying to mix established and new stars coming out of WrestleMania. Short-term, trying to put a band-aid on a big problem, WWE is going to have to come up with a big angle coming out of Payback to re-energize the show. Otherwise, they’re looking at falling below 2.0 when John Cena shows up on Memorial Day.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/26/17593/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I don't get why it matters if Reigns, Cena or whoever is heel/face when it comes to Make A Wish, charities, etc. Stephanie McMahon is a witch on a broom every RAW but yet she's branding herself as a philanthropist. We live in a reality era. The WWE openly acknowledges that they are a soap opera. So, it's silly that they believe their champ has to be face in order to grant wishes and represent the company.


Because at the end of the day good always has to outshine evil and the PG demo they are still targetting still require their parents money to enjoy WWE more in terms of merch and other paid content. The parents themselves maybe ok with grey anti hero characters on TV. But they only want cookie cutter faces to be the guys their kids should root for.

Hogan had his massive kid demo. Warrior failed to succeed him in getting that. Austin and Rock broke the mold thanks to ingratiating lots of older audiences. Punk and Bryan couldnt succeed the above due to unfortunate reasons. WWE had plans set in place for 2011 and 2013 for punk and bryan. Their 2015 plan bombed and they are now dealing with a depleted roster too (Wyatt getting injured just after turning face).


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And to think, people thought all of these previous years were so bad, even just last year. :lol

Oh, and one thing is for sure, none of these guys (or girls) are 'must see' or 'mainstream.' We can put that argument to rest for a very, VERY long time.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *4/25 Raw TV Ratings – Raw falls to historical low-point pre-Payback*
> 
> Monday’s Raw continued a severe post-WrestleMania slide leading into the Payback PPV.
> 
> WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking
> 
> April 25: Monday’s Raw fell to a 2.20 rating the week after falling to a 2.32 rating for a taped international show.
> 
> It was the lowest rating of the year and lowest since a 2.15 rating in December. If not for the Dec. 7 episode, this would have been the lowest-rated regular-week Raw TV rating in about 20 years.
> 
> April 4 post-WM: 2.93 rating
> April 11: 2.50 rating
> April 18: 2.32 rating (U.K.)
> April 25: 2.20 rating (25% decline since WM32)
> – Raw was especially hit hard among 18-49 viewers. General adults 18-49 fell one-tenth of a rating to easily the lowest a18-49 rating of the year. Also, males 18-49 fell eight percent to easily the lowest m18-49 rating of the year.
> 
> The only demographic that improved was males 18-34, which hit an extreme low-point last week and inched up from the basement level this week.
> 
> – Raw’s three hours averaged 3.128 million viewers, down six percent from last week’s audience of 3.335 million viewers.
> 
> It was by far the fewest viewers of the year and also the fewest since Dec. 7, 2015. Hourly Break Down:
> 
> First Hour: 3.263 million viewers (down about 200k from last week)
> Second Hour: 3.184 million viewers (down about 350k from last week)
> Third Hour: 2.938 million viewers (down 40k from last week)
> For the second consecutive week, the third hour drew fewer than 3.0 million viewers. That is the first time that has happened in the modern era.
> 
> Even during last year’s difficult Fall TV season, there were no back-to-back shows where the third hour drew fewer than three million viewers.
> 
> The key this week appears to be a very soft second hour (with the big week-to-week drop-off), which then fed into the typically soft third hour.
> 
> Caldwell’s Analysis: The issues are obvious week after week. In summary, the loyal audience base is eroding, WWE is not a hot TV property right now, rejection of Roman Reigns as WWE champion, the casual viewers have little connection to the new stars and storylines hurriedly introduced after WrestleMania, over-exposed established stars who do not feel special, an interim tag on Shane McMahon running or not running Raw week-to-week, and a flimsy, incomplete vision from Vince McMahon as head of Creative trying to mix established and new stars coming out of WrestleMania. Short-term, trying to put a band-aid on a big problem, WWE is going to have to come up with a big angle coming out of Payback to re-energize the show. Otherwise, they’re looking at falling below 2.0 when John Cena shows up on Memorial Day.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/26/17593/


So they escaped the dreaded 2.15 and 2.16 ratings. Fallout from Payback will probably help stave off that likelihood next week. But Extreme Rules right now is looking so much like a filler PPV unless there are strong feuds booked by then.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A 2.2 rating. HO. LY. SHIT. 

No sympathy. None at all for this declining company.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How the hell was a go-home show to a PPV lower than the PRE TAPED show the previous week?

:drake

Special kind of FAIL and incompetency to achieve that.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Because at the end of the day good always has to outshine evil and the PG demo they are still targetting still require their parents money to enjoy WWE more in terms of merch and other paid content. The parents themselves maybe ok with grey anti hero characters on sitcoms. But they only want cookie cutter faces to be the guys their kids should root for.
> 
> Hogan had his massive kid demo. Warrior failed to succeed him in getting that. Austin and Rock brock the mold thanks to ingratiating lots of older audiences. Punk and Bryan couldnt succeed the above due to unfortunate reasons. WWE had plans set in place for 2011 and 2013 for punk and bryan. Their 2015 plan bombed and they are now dealing with a depleted roster too (Wyatt getting injured just after turning face).


I would agree that the WWE is trying to represent good and evil to their viewers, especially children. Except for the fact the Authority, Stephanie and HHH, are allowed to be the heroes off screen. HHH and Stephanie are always at some charity event. By the WWE's logic, little kids should be afraid of Stephanie. But yet, she's all about being the chief Ambassador of Connor's Cure and holding babies.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> How the hell was a go-home show to a PPV lower than the PRE TAPED show the previous week?
> 
> :drake
> 
> Special kind of FAIL and incompetency to achieve that.


Because this is the

*'philanthropy is the future of marketing' era*

:wink2:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow, they lost 25% from their rating in three weeks. Now post-Mania RAW was inflated, but not only did they not keep any of those extra viewers who sampled it, but they have also shed viewers to a near historic low. This won't be solved by trotting out Vince as a ratings lifeline. The McMahons are no longer ratings viagra. I'd like to see something groundbreaking, but maybe there is no new ground left to be broken in 2016.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I would agree that the WWE is trying to represent good and evil to their viewers, especially children. Except for the fact the Authority, Stephanie and HHH, are allowed to be the heroes off screen. HHH and Stephanie are always at some charity event. By the WWE's logic, little kids should be afraid of Stephanie. But yet, she's all about being the chief Ambassador of Connor's Cure and holding babies.


Because WWE is hypocritical. 0:47 to 1:07 here stands testament to that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HznErMk97B4


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Jesus, that's even lower than I was expecting. And this is with a PPV that was actually being built up quite well with a lot of solid feuds and potential for good matches. 

And what's worse is that their solution is probably to trot fucking Vince, Stephanie, and HHH back on for some main event angle, when in reality nobody could give a fuck about any of them anymore.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Wow, they lost 25% from their rating in three weeks. Now post-Mania RAW was inflated, but not only did they not keep any of those extra viewers who sampled it, but they have also shed viewers to a near historic low. This won't be solved by trotting out Vince as a ratings lifeline. The McMahons are no longer ratings viagra. I'd like to see something groundbreaking, but maybe there is no new ground left to be broken in 2016.


In all honesty, I think we care more about the ratings and product than the WWE it seems. They will still remain a million dollar company for the next few years. Maybe by 2020, they'll start to feel a financial strain. 

Shane's return could've been huge. I'm really surprised by how much it's been botched. I would think a McMahon has more creative control.


----------



## McNugget

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

All I can say is that I hope that motivates them to do something interesting at Payback. If Roman wins clean the fans will leave en masse.

I don't even care if Roman wins as long as he wins in a way that is actually engaging.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Wow, they lost 25% from their rating in three weeks. Now post-Mania RAW was inflated, but not only did they not keep any of those extra viewers who sampled it, but they have also shed viewers to a near historic low. This won't be solved by trotting out Vince as a ratings lifeline. The McMahons are no longer ratings viagra. I'd like to see something groundbreaking, but maybe there is no new ground left to be broken in 2016.


I'm sure USA and NBC Universal is thrilled with those numbers. And these Networks that pay WWE *ABSOLUTELY* care about these numbers. The next TV deal should be interesting, especially if they continue to decline to new historic lows every year.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It is said kayfabe should never be broken however hard it is to maintain continuity in real life. It is also said kayfabe can be broken for every character as todays audience knows its a soap opera through and through. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. It depends on the character, gimmick and feud. Bray Wyatt has started appearing on the Edge and Christian Show. Cena's American Grit is going head to head with SmackDown. And WWE has a fetish for booking random celebrities who dont contribute anything to the feuds by placing them in cringeworthy segments.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

i'd put their decline down to sacrificing a clear identity of their product in favour of trying to please every demographic of wrestling fan because they need them network subs.


----------



## McNugget

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And to the people saying that ratings don't matter - remember, that number may not directly matter to WWE, but it matters to the USA Network and NBC in general. Low numbers for one of their flagship brands aren't good and means a lot of lost money for them. They will pressure WWE to put on a better show and increase those viewership numbers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I'm sure USA and NBC Universal is thrilled with those numbers. And these Networks that pay WWE *ABSOLUTELY* care about these numbers. The next TV deal should be interesting, especially if they continue to decline to new historic lows every year.


I'm still waiting for them to hit their core base, a number that will always tune in. It would be bad if they hit that before the NFL brings their mega competition against them this fall. Who knows? Maybe their base contracts even more as some people simply tap out of the product.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Consistently doing 2 million viewers on cable isn't HORRIBLE. A lot of cable shows would hope for that kind of audience, UFC on FOX doesn't usually do much better. It's the shrinking of their audience that tells the story. Less and less people are watching every week. WWE can play like they're pleased with their audience, but guaranteed USA isn't because they see the trend. It's more so alarming because of the viewers they're losing and how consistently they are losing them, because that's giving you a grim outlook for a year from now.


----------



## The Nuke

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well you can't blame the new fresh talent. Wrestling fans are going to love them, but casuals(TV watchers) won't get what's so great when a lot of these guys are all of a sudden in the spotlight as main attractions to the show. They are the right talent to be pushing, and pretty much the only one's who could actually become big stars. Still, AJ went from mid-card feud with Jericho, a feud he's been in since he arrived, to all of a sudden being in a main event for the World title. AWESOME that he is, but why should the person at home care?

WWE has no stars except John Cena. Those numbers show that after 3 years of being built up as the next guy Roman Reigns isn't hitting a stride. Granted he is apparently a big merch seller. Little kids do love him, but most everyone else don't give a shit.

The show is dealing with a fresh influx of very good to great talent that if booked properly could all be big, but it won't happen overnight. The show also has a lead face that nobody sitting on the sofa really cares about. The show is also creatively bankrupt. They have nothing to get people who see Wrestling as a Soap Opera, and not a sport, anything to really get excited about. What they get they've seen a 100 times before.

If I were a casual guy, I wouldn't watch WWE. I'd be flipping through the channels, I'd see people I don't know, or care about, and thus would watch something else. 

IT all falls back to Vince. NJPW is a much smaller promotion than WWE, but it's a promotion that knows how to build talent and make stars. You can't replace Nakamura, but 4 months after losing a big chunk of their top talent, NJPW is already on the mend.


----------



## Wonderllama

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'll say it. The new superstars are boring. Gallows and Anderson--zzz! Corbin--whatever! Everything is just boring... !

I'm a fan of Roman Reigns too but is he gonna be a heel or not? John Cena was booed for years but he's a master on the mic and could always shrug it off, and obviously have great matches in the ring with the crowd heavily engaged. Roman doesn't have that. He can't be the next Cena, he just can't...

I'm dying for something interesting to happen, with interesting people of course.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Ever since the AE ended, Vince thinks all edginess has disappeared from society almost like it's 70's and 80's wrestling again where it was all about the clean-cut, babyface. He's lost. He thinks his company is like a movie where you have to have a clean-cut leading man, babyface to lead the way; especially since they are a publicly traded company now. He's gone. A complete lost cause.


I'd say it's moreso due to one of his top guys killing his family and then himself due to years of brain damage.


----------



## Goldusto

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Nuke said:


> Well you can't blame the new fresh talent. Wrestling fans are going to love them, but casuals(TV watchers) won't get what's so great when a lot of these guys are all of a sudden in the spotlight as main attractions to the show. They are the right talent to be pushing, and pretty much the only one's who could actually become big stars. Still, AJ went from mid-card feud with Jericho, a feud he's been in since he arrived, to all of a sudden being in a main event for the World title. AWESOME that he is, but why should the person at home care?
> 
> WWE has no stars except John Cena. Those numbers show that after 3 years of being built up as the next guy Roman Reigns isn't hitting a stride. Granted he is apparently a big merch seller. Little kids do love him, but most everyone else don't give a shit.
> 
> The show is dealing with a fresh influx of very good to great talent that if booked properly could all be big, but it won't happen overnight. The show also has a lead face that nobody sitting on the sofa really cares about. The show is also creatively bankrupt. They have nothing to get people who see Wrestling as a Soap Opera, and not a sport, anything to really get excited about. What they get they've seen a 100 times before.
> 
> If I were a casual guy, I wouldn't watch WWE. I'd be flipping through the channels, I'd see people I don't know, or care about, and thus would watch something else.
> 
> IT all falls back to Vince. NJPW is a much smaller promotion than WWE, but it's a promotion that knows how to build talent and make stars. You can't replace Nakamura, but 4 months after losing a big chunk of their top talent, NJPW is already on the mend.



Its the indie smark neckbeards fault, They try to catch lightning in a bottle that succeeds with the 100 dipshit fans at NXT and fail to grasp how they won't translate to the main show.

It make NO DIFFERENCE that Nxt is the better wrestling show or whatever, it is a tiny bubble compared to the global wwe. none of the characters are relevant to anyone except the nxt fans as you said. Look at Sami Zayn, one of the wrestling gods of NXt, biggest characters, has a legacy feud with kevin owens, and poof dead as a doornail upon hitting the main roster. 

Enzo and cass are the only ones who will get anywhere, they had the whole audience mouthing and echoing their quotes and lines, THAT is what is needed across the board, Crews? corbin? Zayn? Vaudevillans? no one cares.


ALSO Wrestling its true has been on life support ever since Benoit, if anything that should have killed WWE stone dead.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



nWoWolfpac98 said:


> I'd say it's moreso due to one of his top guys killing his family and then himself due to years of brain damage.


That was 9 years ago. What does adding *some* edginess to the show right now have to do with what happened nearly a decade ago?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Goldusto said:


> Its the indie smark neckbeards fault, They try to catch lightning in a bottle that succeeds with the 100 dipshit fans at NXT and fail to grasp how they won't translate to the main show.
> 
> It make NO DIFFERENCE that Nxt is the better wrestling show or whatever, it is a tiny bubble compared to the global wwe. none of the characters are relevant to anyone except the nxt fans as you said. Look at Sami Zayn, one of the wrestling gods of NXt, biggest characters, has a legacy feud with kevin owens, and poof dead as a doornail upon hitting the main roster.
> 
> Enzo and cass are the only ones who will get anywhere, they had the whole audience mouthing and echoing their quotes and lines, THAT is what is needed across the board, Crews? corbin? Zayn? Vaudevillans? no one cares.


No one cares about the non-Indy guys on the main roster right now, either. So, think again.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I didn't watch RAW but I had to go and check out my boi Zayn fighting Rusev. Love how he flipped off Lana at the end of the match. :lol


----------



## Goldusto

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> That was 9 years ago. What does adding *some* edginess to the show right now have to do with what happened nearly a decade ago?


social media mostly. Also what is defined as edgy these days from a wrasslin' perspective ? Cartoon fights with prop weapons? f bombs? cutting open your own fore head and pissing disease filled blood everywhere?

Look at the wire or sopranos and such forth for grittiness or edge.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Goldusto said:


> social media mostly. Also what is defined as edgy these days from a wrasslin' perspective ? Cartoon fights with prop weapons? f bombs? cutting open your own fore head and pissing disease filled blood everywhere?
> 
> Look at the wire or sopranos and such forth for grittiness or edge.


I'm not calling for them to go back to the AE. But there is a HUGE middle ground between the type of content they have right now and the content of the AE. Look at the shows that get good ratings today. Most of them are more adult themed shows with at least somewhat of an edge to them. One thing is for certain, this kiddish, cheesy era sure as hell isn't doing the job. That's for sure.


----------



## Kuja

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What does WWE make on merch? Is that more important than ratings now? I do not understand. Is being a huge merch seller more important than drawing in viewers?

I think they focus more on selling the network now than they do on selling the show. They need to focus on the product and not social media and subs. If the product is great then those subs will come and people will start talking.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> *I'm not calling for them to go back to the AE. But there is a HUGE middle ground between the type of content they have right now and the content of the AE. * Look at the shows that get good ratings today. Most of them are more adult themed shows with at least somewhat of an edge to them. One thing is for certain, this kiddish, cheesy era sure as hell isn't doing the job. That's for sure.


So basically a reboot of the Ruthless Aggression Era. I'd go for it. While it wasn't perfect if they put on a product similar to 2002-2006 I'll be satisfied.


----------



## CretinHop138

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

http://411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-raw-hits-four-month-ratings-low/

Raw does a 4 month low (since that bad ratings lull in December)


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Just terrible, terrible numbers. Really looks like Mania killed any hope some fans probably had. Back to back Mania main events for someone who's been getting go away heat for a while will do that. Not sure how they can even improve. They can spike it every now and then but never go a good month or 2 with good numbers.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's all Cena's fault, dammit.


----------



## Trivette

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They could put SCSA, Rock, and HBK in a HIAC in the Main Event and the current WWE creative paradigm would still botch it. They have no grasp of basic serial storytelling anymore, let alone how to book pro wrestling. As long as Frito Lay, Pepsi Cola Co. and Mattel are happy, don't expect anything to change.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A 2.20 in the spring, leading up to a PPV. That equates to about a 1.7 come NFL season.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

RAW ratings in a nutshell.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wrestlemania likely the final nail in the coffin for a lot of people. I mean they essentially made the entire show, everyone in it and the reason they're all there completely pointless. I'm not surprised by this and it shouldn't come as a shock to any of us here or WWE themselves. Things are going to hit rock bottom before they get better. They've lost the faith of the faithful pretty much. And when they're gone there's nobody left. Rebuild, rebuild, rebuild. It's going to take years to repair this damage. 

And yeah, get rid of fucking Reigns in this spot. WWE doesn't have the support system in place to fall back on like they did with Cena. He's poison at the top of the card like this and shit runs down. He's been rejected in every way. We need the next Daniel Bryan, not the next John Cena.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That first hour is really bad when you consider there was a chance that casuals might tune in to see if WWE did anything for Chyna. I guess nobody cares about WWE or Chyna anymore I just don't know how Vince could be ok with these ratings. If they were getting this back in the WCW vs WWE days, you'd have Vince firing writers and trying anything to get people to watch. Now, it's like he really doesn't care.

Vince once had a really lame excuse for moving from Ruthless Aggession to PG, and it was because he said people were too "desensitized" to violence. But, in the last 10 years or so, society has went the other way to where people are way too PC and soft , and the audience is begging for a show that breaks that mold. But instead of giving the people what they want, he keeps giving the people what they don't want and the result is fewer people watching his show than ever before.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And people, even fucking Vince Russo, were like "Oh, yadda yadda, Wrestlemania will be great!" Well look at it now.
And if Russo cuts you some slack, and you manage to even disappoint that, you're really heading towards a nasty place.

"Oh Wrestlemania will deliver!"

It has never been more irrelevant.

"Ratings will improve once Roman is champ!"

Lowest rated Road to Wrestlemania and beyond, bitch.

Coincidentally, I watched Nitro mid-99 the last few days, and that shit is riveting compared to Raw. Hell, until much later, it is more riveting. I watched Goldberg's promos when he started to speak, and Jesus, what a fucking god compared to Reigns (beside the fact WWE removed the word "screwed" fpalm).
Whoever says Reigns = Goldberg is a fucking liar.

Wrestlemania killed it. They killed it.
If there ever was definite proof that wins and losses matter, then Shane losing is the undeniable proof. His loss killed any potential interest in the product that might have been. The feud was Vince vs Shane. Now, Shane is in charge because of Vince. How can you expect any form of heat from this bullshit?

A 2 point fucking 2 14 days after Wrestlemania ...


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The biggest problem is WWE practically wasted their biggest storyline at WM between Shane and Taker. Shane has been in charge for a few weeks now but the ratings have gone down. WWE just sucked all the excitement from that storyline by having Taker go over. So going into the post WM RAW they didn't have any big storyline or anything shocking that happened.

They really need to do something big at Payback. Something that might inject excitement into the show is if they have a draft. While they lack starpower they certainly have depth on the roster. Come July they will have Rollins, Cena and Orton back on the roster. Not to mention guys like Bray and Neville.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That rating is hilarious they truly deserve it.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> That rating is hilarious they truly deserve it.


They are pushing new talent like Enzo, Cass, Corbin, Crews, etc. They are featuring a team/stable that is over with the IWC. They are having two of the brightest stars feud. They are having one of their greatest heels of all time work with one of their top faces. The best wrestler in the company is challening for the IC Title. Shane McMahon is running RAW. 

How do they deserve it? They are doing what the fans want. Or does it all fall on Reigns because he takes up all three hours of RAW?


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

hope they allow to let it grow, I just watched the WCW vs WWF thing on the network and it was the same back then, ratings were below shit and they tried new stuff which not from the start mirrored in the ratings. I think once they keep it like they do it now for the next couple of month and they still have shit ratings, then fine, WWE is screwed, but of course after this mania most of the poeple fucked off.


----------



## Kinjx11

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

that is what happens when you bank on Female fans watching the handsome boy hitting others and playing with his hair a lot


----------



## JTB33b

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think a big reason the 3rd hour is always the lowest is because the kids are going to bed. How many parents let their 8-10 year old stay up past 10pm on a school night? Put the kid favorites in the 1st 90 minutes and the adult favorites in the last 90 minutes.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Only because it was taped they said. I actually hope they have a predictable finish at Payback. Continue to fight the fans that are left.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JTB33b said:


> I think a big reason the 3rd hour is always the lowest is because the kids are going to bed. How many parents let their 8-10 year old stay up past 10pm on a school night? Put the kid favorites in the 1st 90 minutes and the adult favorites in the last 90 minutes.



They've been doing 3 hour RAWs for almost 4 years now and I don't recall any period of time in which the 3rd hour consistently drew less than 3 million viewers. People should stop looking for excuses.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JTB33b said:


> I think a big reason the 3rd hour is always the lowest is because the kids are going to bed. How many parents let their 8-10 year old stay up past 10pm on a school night? Put the kid favorites in the 1st 90 minutes and the adult favorites in the last 90 minutes.


How many parents let their 8-10 year old watch wrestling period?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> The biggest problem is WWE practically wasted their biggest storyline at WM between Shane and Taker. Shane has been in charge for a few weeks now but the ratings have gone down. WWE just sucked all the excitement from that storyline by having Taker go over. So going into the post WM RAW they didn't have any big storyline or anything shocking that happened.
> 
> They really need to do something big at Payback. Something that might inject excitement into the show is if they have a draft. While they lack starpower they certainly have depth on the roster. Come July they will have Rollins, Cena and Orton back on the roster. Not to mention guys like Bray and Neville.


Cena and Boreton won't make an ounce of difference.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

lol I knew it, after WM32 RAW had a fresh feel and you could feel a wind of change. But I knew it wont last.
then surprisingly they did a 2nd RAW in a row that was good, then a RAW that was slightly less good but still good enough.
And now we're back on track with a boring product.

I knew they wont be able to keep the streak of good RAW's past the 3rd one.
Gotta love that the only thing consistent in WWE is their lack of consistency.

Drop ratings drop!


----------



## Goldusto

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> That first hour is really bad when you consider there was a chance that casuals might tune in to see if WWE did anything for Chyna. I guess nobody cares about WWE or Chyna anymore I just don't know how Vince could be ok with these ratings. If they were getting this back in the WCW vs WWE days, you'd have Vince firing writers and trying anything to get people to watch. Now, it's like he really doesn't care.
> 
> Vince once had a really lame excuse for moving from Ruthless Aggession to PG, and it was because he said people were too "desensitized" to violence. But, in the last 10 years or so, society has went the other way to where people are way too PC and soft , and the audience is begging for a show that breaks that mold. But instead of giving the people what they want, he keeps giving the people what they don't want and the result is fewer people watching his show than ever before.


Sorry didn't realise a guy who got brain damage on their watch murdering his son and wife was a lame excuse


----------



## Dark_Raiden

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Like I said, start featuring Roman more and they'll be good. Also stop with Sheamus and Del Rio. They're charisma vacuums that kill all excitement in an instant.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Man, they're going to get under a 2.0 rating in May at this point. I shudder to think what the ratings will look like when the NFL comes back on. Shit's gonna get nasty. :ugh2


----------



## Squeege

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't know if it's been pointed out yet or not but....the Chicago vs St. Louis NHL playoff game 7 drew the highest rating that NBC has ever had for a first round playoff game. Chicago and STL are also extremely well known wrestling cities. I'm sure missing both those fanbases made some dent in the numbers, especially since the game spanned mainly between the 2nd and 3rd hours of RAW. Not saying that's the only factor, but I'm sure it made quite a difference.

Source



> Facts and Figures: Blues-Blackhawks Game 7
> 
> • *Highest-rated telecast ever* on FOX Sports Midwest.
> 
> • Number 1 program of the day in St. Louis all seven games of the series.
> 
> • Game 7's 19.6 rating higher than St. Louis' ABC (KDNL), CBS (KMOV), FOX (KTVI) and NBC (KSDK) affiliates combined (17.9) from 7:30-10:30 p.m.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Man, they're going to get under a 2.0 rating in May at this point. I shudder to think what the ratings will look like when the NFL comes back on. Shit's gonna get nasty. :ugh2


Good. I want the ratings to go lower because at this point, this will be the only way for WWE to actually wake the fuck up once USA/Universal start breathing down their necks.


----------



## Hypnotica

Apparently RAW hit a all time low rating again this week.
WWE really need to realise sooner rather than later that Reigns does not draw, yes he looks good but that's it, he isn't compelling in any other way.
It is also becoming obvious that AJ Styles is not a draw despite some IWC overrating. He may be a better wrestler than Reigns but he is plain bloody boring and has zero character or excitement around his persona, he just looks like some dopey ******* hippy with the charisma of a wet sock.
WWE need to take both Reigns and Styles out of the main event picture and get Rollins back in the Reigns spot and upgrade Kevin Owens you know people that actually put their characters over.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Goldusto said:


> social media mostly. Also what is defined as edgy these days from a wrasslin' perspective ? Cartoon fights with prop weapons? f bombs? cutting open your own fore head and pissing disease filled blood everywhere?
> 
> Look at the wire or sopranos and such forth for grittiness or edge.


The highest rated shows in the last several years have been Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, and Breaking Bad. All TVMA shows. 

If you want to have a high rated show - cater to Adults. WWE Attitude Era was an adult show and hence higher ratings.

Nobody wants to watch this watered down PG garbage as evidence by the ratings.


----------



## Redzero

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LOL Reigns


----------



## T0M

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's going to be very interesting in two time periods I'd say.

June / July once the NBA playoffs have ended and we're on the run up to Summerslam. Get anything below 3 million and that is truly pathetic. And then post-Summerslam. We could potentially be looking at a situation where they're averaging in the mid 2 million range at this rate.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

When a hockey game is getting record rating numbers while a wrestling show's ratings continue to plummet, you know that's bad.


----------



## Wrestling is Life

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What sucks is that the past few weeks have been quite good quality wise, but since they got low ratings it does not look good.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If you were one of the people trashing CM Punk back in 2012, you have to give Reigns the same kind of trash.

He's the only guy in the company that has been given top star booking. Ambrose is a fucking dork, AJ Styles has gotten arguably the worst build up leading to a WWE WHC match ever and outside of them, everyone else is obviously a fucking GEEK.

Who cares if booking has been a bit better recently? That doesn't erase the 50/50 booking they did to EVERYONE in the company outside of Reigns. The show has SLIGHTLY better booking, but who cares if prior to that everyone has been booked like a geek for the last year? It's going to take a LONG time to create another star because they've killed everyone on the roster except for Reigns, and he's not a needle mover to any major degree.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> *If you were one of the people trashing CM Punk back in 2012, you have to give Reigns the same kind of trash.
> *
> He's the only guy in the company that has been given top star booking. Ambrose is a fucking dork, AJ Styles has gotten arguably the worst build up leading to a WWE WHC match ever and outside of them, everyone else is obviously a fucking GEEK.


You think they'll take their medicine. Bryan, Rollins, Sheamus were all killed for ratings by certain people who said this guy would bring in the casuals and improve the numbers. Numbers are even worse now, breaking records during the NFL offseason too. It's all about Youtube Views, twitter followers and facebook likes now :mj


----------



## antdvda

The Inbred Goatman said:


> If you were one of the people trashing CM Punk back in 2012, you have to give Reigns the same kind of trash.
> 
> He's the only guy in the company that has been given top star booking. Ambrose is a fucking dork, AJ Styles has gotten arguably the worst build up leading to a WWE WHC match ever and outside of them, everyone else is obviously a fucking GEEK.


Well, thats because they ARE geeks. Just look at Owens, New Day, Ambrose, Zayne etc. These dudes look like clowns compared to dudes of previous generations.

Also, I would argue that even though Reigns is booked as the biggest star, the main focus of the shows have been the "new blood" which is basically all the guys that the IWC has been jerking too over the past few years.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> You think they'll take their medicine. Bryan, Rollins, Sheamus were all killed for ratings by certain people who said this guy would bring in the casuals and improve the numbers. Numbers are even worse now, breaking records during the NFL offseason too. It's all about Youtube Views, twitter followers and facebook likes now :mj


YouTube views is a legit metric to a degree. And Reigns' videos always get the most views. But who the fuck are we comparing them too? DEAN AMBROSE? Lol. 

They've killed EVERYONE on the roster(Except for Cena and the part timers), to get Reigns fucking over, and our claim to fame is some YouTube views? Give me a break.

Not to shit on Reigns more, but he's not even that big of a merch mover, New Day outsold him at Mania, and Bryan was overall #2 Merchandise mover in 2015, and he was off the damn show for the majority of the year.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> YouTube views is a legit metric to a degree. And Reigns' videos always get the most views. But who the fuck are we comparing them too? DEAN AMBROSE? Lol.
> 
> They've killed EVERYONE on the roster(Except for Cena and the part timers), to get Reigns fucking over, and our claim to fame is some YouTube views? Give me a break.
> 
> Not to shit on Reigns more, but he's not even that big of a merch mover, New Day outsold him at Mania, and Bryan was overall #2 Merchandise mover in 2015, and he was off the damn show for the majority of the year.


Reigns is completely interchangeable with practically everyone. Take him out and give someone else his two year push and they'll probably make the same amount of financial success that he has. And besides that, take notice into the fact that WM 32 drew nearly 100K people without Cena on the card at all. Are some of Reigns' fans honestly going to tell me that he's a bigger draw than Cena at this point? :mj


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> Reigns is completely interchangeable with practically everyone. Take him out and give someone else his two year push and they'll probably make the same amount of financial success that he has. And besides that, take notice into the fact that WM 32 drew nearly 100K people without Cena on the card at all. Are some of Reigns' fans honestly going to tell me that he's a bigger draw than Cena at this point? :mj


:cudi Don't forget some credited him for an hour 3 bump a while ago in which he wasn't even advertised. The same hour had Shane and Undertaker from what I remember. So don't underestimate them.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> They are pushing new talent like Enzo, Cass, Corbin, Crews, etc. They are featuring a team/stable that is over with the IWC. They are having two of the brightest stars feud. They are having one of their greatest heels of all time work with one of their top faces. The best wrestler in the company is challening for the IC Title. Shane McMahon is running RAW.
> 
> How do they deserve it?


WM just felt like a big fuck you for starters.

Just look at the "diva's revolution" they can't even get 5 minutes or 2 different feuds on Raw the whole Shane running raw thing sure it's cool to see him back but it's been of the most botched stories in a long time. The US title has been treated like shit basically being the pre-show title and the champ can barely get on Raw and they have taken away all of Cena's work on bring back it's prestige.

Also just because they're pushing people doesn't mean they are doing it well Apollo still has no character and is just doing squash matches.


----------



## The_Jiz

The Boy Wonder said:


> They are pushing new talent like Enzo, Cass, Corbin, Crews, etc. They are featuring a team/stable that is over with the IWC. They are having two of the brightest stars feud. They are having one of their greatest heels of all time work with one of their top faces. The best wrestler in the company is challening for the IC Title. Shane McMahon is running RAW.
> 
> How do they deserve it? They are doing what the fans want. Or does it all fall on Reigns because he takes up all three hours of RAW?


They deserve it because they buried their product at wrestlemania.

Shane/Taker will tell you the storylines are inconsequential. Their number one contender loss his biggest match of his wwe career CLEAN to Jericho. The IC title that could have benefited from Sami/Owens went to Zack Ryder and Miz (both really irrelevant for the past five years). The fresh faced New Day lost to LON so now they're both irrelevant. Rock and Cena pissed on the Wyatt's grave stone. And their bread and butter Roman Reigns gets no sold by 100,000 thousand people. 

These NEW talent are there to fill up time.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> How do they deserve it? They are doing what the IWC want. Or does it all fall on Reigns because he takes up all three hours of RAW?


Fixed it for ya. And that's a problem. They're catering to these type of fans whether Reigns is champ or not. The influx of NXT/NJ guys with generic names and limited to no character, along with the typical long, pointless workrate matches with no storylines to buffer and it's not that surprising why the numbers are low. But it's not the only issue:

-They deserve it because it's still presented as a "family show" despite ending past 11pm on the east coast on cable tv.
-They deserve it because Reigns has NOT been a success as a face, yet instead of correcting the problem Vince and his minions continue to roll with it(Make a Wish crap)
-They deserve it because their commentary is off-putting and downright atrocious.
-They deserve it because the format and presentation(stage, music, etc) has gotten stale.
-They deserve it because they don't understand 3 hours is too much for a wrestling program in an era that is NOT hot(or even warm) to begin with.
-More importantly, they deserve it because they made their biggest show ever a total waste of time. Nothing from that show made people want to tune in for WWE programming afterwards.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Marv95 said:


> Fixed it for ya. And that's a problem. They're catering to these type of fans whether Reigns is champ or not. The influx of NXT/NJ guys with generic names and limited to no character, along with the typical long, pointless workrate matches with no storylines to buffer and it's not that surprising why the numbers are low. But it's not the only issue:
> 
> -They deserve it because it's still presented as a "family show" despite ending past 11pm on the east coast on cable tv.
> -They deserve it because Reigns has NOT been a success as a face, yet instead of correcting the problem Vince and his minions continue to roll with it(Make a Wish crap)
> -They deserve it because their commentary is off-putting and downright atrocious.
> -They deserve it because the format and presentation(stage, music, etc) has gotten stale.
> -They deserve it because they don't understand 3 hours is too much for a wrestling program in an era that is NOT hot(or even warm) to begin with.
> -More importantly, they deserve it because they made their biggest show ever a total waste of time. Nothing from that show made people want to tune in for WWE programming afterwards.


Good post.

I puroresu, but you can't just expect your fans to know who these people are. You have to SHOW THEM that they're good, not just keep telling us or expecting their fans to go out and watch stuff they don't want too. It's ridiculous. Though I've always thought The Bullet Club sucked and that they were way more hype than substance. 

Plus, most of these people they're bringing in have little to no character. That's boring. Not to mention that no one can cut a promo these days and their two guys main eventing their next PPV are barely allowed to speak because they know they cant.

Could you imagine if before WrestleMania 17 all Austin said to The Rock before their match was "...I'm taking your title." while backstage. What the hell is happening to wrestling?

Or how about Apollo Crews. Why the hell is he there? Just to smile? 

How anyone can say they aren't catering to the smarks at this point is kidding themselves. My interest in WWE is hitting an all time low.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Marv95 said:


> But it's not the only issue:


The real issue is that Big Show and Kane are MIA.


----------



## antdvda

If you are a wrestling fan from the 80's-90's you are probably scratching your head wondering what exactly you should be interested in right now.

If you enjoy mic work, shit talking, bravado, larger than life appearances and personalities then the current product is leaving you in the dark.

How anybody thinks that the biggest wrestling company in the world can put out a product based around mostly average looking guys in-ring work is beyond comprehension. The decision makers in that company don't really think a vast amount of people truely enjoy in-ring work do they?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

"Average looking guys" 

Number of girls queuing up each night to get a piece of Ambrose: plenty, plus Renee Young, counting for ten.
Number of girls queuing up each night to get a piece of yourself: probably zero.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

"Average looking guys" 

Number of girls queuing up each night to get a piece of Ambrose: plenty, plus Renee Young, counting for ten.
Number of girls queuing up each night to get a piece of yourself: probably zero.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Honestly, the quality hasn't been that bad since WM. Sure, it's far from great, but they at least seem to be taking baby steps in the right direction. 

Something big HAS to happen at Payback, tho. Every once in a while you have to do something big to drum up interest. All this Bullet Club stuff just cannot all be for not.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> Honestly, the quality hasn't been that bad since WM. Sure, it's far from great, but they at least seem to be taking baby steps in the right direction.
> 
> *Something big HAS to happen at Payback, tho. Every once in a while you have to do something big to drum up interest. All this Bullet Club stuff just cannot all be for not.*


I think Finn Balor joins the Bullet Club and Vince McMahon will announce a brand split. Shane gets Smackdown and Authority keeps RAW.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I think Finn Balor joins the Bullet Club and Vince McMahon will announce a brand split. Shane gets Smackdown and Authority keeps RAW.


I don't know who you are but I like your style. 



















Nice new name, Empress.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> I don't know who you are but I like your style.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice new name, Empress.


:reigns2

As for your previous comment a few replies ahead, as a Reigns fan, I don't think Roman is bigger than John Cena. Reigns can be a monster heel in his own right and become a draw from there. I'm going into deep denial and hoping that the turn happens at Payback. Something big needs to happen. But then again, nothing too shocking happened at Mania.


----------



## HateaHeel

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> How anybody thinks that the biggest wrestling company in the world can put out a product based around mostly average looking guys in-ring work is beyond comprehension. The decision makers in that company don't really think a vast amount of people truely enjoy in-ring work do they?


I can honestly say I'm NOT a fan of pro wrestling because of the matches which are pretty much the same week in/week out. Matches are simply a means to an end *you need a reason* to want to see someone get punched in the face.

It's currently just a bunch of guys doing a routine and nothing matters. They will probably end up facing each other again several times on the weekly show and then for some reason again on a PPV event. No stakes added/no motivation to win given..just two guys rolling on a mat because.

I honestly miss the days of the 10 minutes fast action matches of the attitude era.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



HateaHeel said:


> I can honestly say I'm NOT a fan of pro wrestling because of the matches which are pretty much the same week in/week out. Matches are simply a means to an end *you need a reason* to want to see someone get punched in the face.
> 
> It's currently just a bunch of guys doing a routine and nothing matters. They will probably end up facing each other again several times on the weekly show and then for some reason again on a PPV event. No stakes added/no motivation to win given..just two guys rolling on a mat because.
> 
> *I honestly miss the days of the 10 minutes fast action matches of the attitude era.*


yes but thankfully lucha underground are now doing this exact thing to stop me from quit watching wrestling all together :rusevyes


----------



## Erik.

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The WWE catering towards internet fans is what is killing them as a company. Vince never done this during the most popular eras of all time, so I have no idea why he's doing it now.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

https://clyp.it/ehrf1cgm

Meltzer on the shit raw rating.

Basically what he said:

Losing a lot of the male viewers and this week the big drop was the guys(says it might of been because of the Roman vs Del Rio match) not the woman like it usually is.

Says the Shane storyline is something out of late WCW and by the time they decide to cut Raw to 2 hours it will properly be 2 late.

Thinks Total divas is not bringing in a woman audience to WWE as the amount of woman watching is not up and the only thing it's doing is driving men away as they feel it's not for them and it's making them less loyal to the product

A bit obvious but he also says ratings drop during NFL season.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> https://clyp.it/ehrf1cgm
> 
> Meltzer on the shit raw rating.
> 
> Basically what he said:
> 
> Losing a lot of the male viewers and this week the big drop was the guys(says it might of been because of the Roman vs Del Rio match) not the woman like it usually is.
> 
> Says the Shane storyline is something out of late WCW and by the time they decide to cut Raw to 2 hours it will properly be 2 late.
> 
> Thinks Total divas is not bringing in a woman audience to WWE as the amount of woman watching is not up and the only thing it's doing is driving men away as they feel it's not for them and it's making them less loyal to the product
> 
> A bit obvious but he also says ratings drop during NFL season.


Thanks for posting the podcast. 

I agree with Meltzer about the Shane story . It went bad rather quickly. 

WWE is trying to cut back on people abusing the Network. I've given my sister access to mine. I need to ask her if she can still use it. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/725704119940452352


----------



## Jeff'Hardy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The McMahons need to learn that they aren't wanted.


----------



## Jeff'Hardy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Thanks for posting the podcast.
> 
> I agree with Meltzer about the Shane story . It went bad rather quickly.
> 
> WWE is trying to cut back on people abusing the Network. I've given my sister access to mine. I need to ask her if she can still use it.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/725704119940452352


Just get a new debit card number and sign up to a free month. Thats what I do.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cena coming back will help slightly, but the other dorks, Rollins and Lesnar are ZERO in terms of needle movers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People acting like 1) ratings haven't been steadily declining for 10 years and 2) even in recent times when non-Indy guys like Cena, Lesnar, Reigns and others have been Champion, ratings weren't falling big time. :lol

It doesn't matter who they have as the Champion, or who they focus on; the ratings have fallen no matter WHO they focus on. It's been this way for 10 years now of a steady decline. That decline is just contiuing now even with the new World Champions and newer talent. It doesn't matter. No one talent is to blame, nor is one sub-set of talent to blame (Indy or Non-Indy). *THE SHOW SUCKS AND IS A BORING 3 HOUR MARATHON.* LOL at blaming it all on a single talent or a subset of talent. Haven't people learned their lesson yet??? It's the company AND the circumstances (3 hours, awful announcers, same boring set, EVERYTHING rolled into ONE). fpalm

Even if Cena does provide a bump in the rating, it's just going to die out soon afterwards anyway. WWE couldn't even maintain a Shane McMahon return which was 7 YEARS in the making and something that fans had been dreaming about for YEARS. If they can't capitalize on THAT, they can't capitalize on anything else. And people forget, Cena's last match was a main event for the US Title vs. Del Rio at a Brooklyn Raw, which was a return match for Cena since he was injured before that too, and the third hour still had a big drop.

Simply put, they are screwed until something BIG happens. Like changing the format and length of the show and some of the characters. Until then, it won't matter.


----------



## amhlilhaus

Dont worry, ratings dont matter and reigns is over huge with kids

Wwe is fine. Just fine


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(4/28) Vs last week(4/21) 

2.109M Vs 2.431M 
(-0.322M/-12.25%)*









*
Note: Lowest SD viewership since move to USA on 1/7 and lowest overall viewership since 12/3.*


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Over the last decade WWE has developed a reputation of bad low brow trashy second rate entertainment nothingness. 

If they want to remove themselves from the former, they'd need to put together QUALITY with QUALITY pay offs months on end or even years to stop the bleeding. But it doesn't seem like its gonna turn around anytime soon because in fact WWE is like a car without brakes careening into oncoming traffic. 

Its like TNA: even if they have been good recently the bad years outweigh it and they're that "bad wrestlecrap" television show.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Erik. said:


> The WWE catering towards internet fans is what is killing them as a company. Vince never done this during the most popular eras of all time, so I have no idea why he's doing it now.


Bullshit. The Most popular eras were Hogan and Austin, and Vince put over the guys People went crazy for because that's what wrestling always did. Only a moron would not do that. Russo made it a point to look at the breakdowns to weed out the useless fluff. For some amazing reason, Nobody Takes the numbers serious anymore.

The only difference between then and now is that some idiots think there is an actual difference between People in the audience and "internet Fans", and somehow Vince and his dumbass entourage think they both want different things, when in fact, they want the same thing.


----------



## Wrestlefire

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Erik. said:


> The WWE catering towards internet fans is what is killing them as a company. Vince never done this during the most popular eras of all time, so I have no idea why he's doing it now.


Did we get Vince Russo posting here and no one noticed?

And that's wrong -- if the "Internet fans" had their say, WWE would probably have been forced to future-endeavor John Cena a half-decade ago!


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown is a dead brand. No brand split, no part time wrestler appearance, no "long, five star wrasslin'" match is going to revive it. Nobody cares about Smackdown anymore. Period.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> People acting like 1) ratings haven't been steadily declining for 10 years and 2) even in recent times when non-Indy guys like Cena, Lesnar, Reigns and others have been Champion, ratings weren't falling big time. :lol
> 
> It doesn't matter who they have as the Champion, or who they focus on; the ratings have fallen no matter WHO they focus on. It's been this way for 10 years now of a steady decline. That decline is just contiuing now even with the new World Champions and newer talent. It doesn't matter. No one talent is to blame, nor is one sub-set of talent to blame (Indy or Non-Indy). *THE SHOW SUCKS AND IS A BORING 3 HOUR MARATHON.* LOL at blaming it all on a single talent or a subset of talent. Haven't people learned their lesson yet??? It's the company AND the circumstances (3 hours, awful announcers, same boring set, EVERYTHING rolled into ONE). fpalm
> 
> Even if Cena does provide a bump in the rating, it's just going to die out soon afterwards anyway. WWE couldn't even maintain a Shane McMahon return which was 7 YEARS in the making and something that fans had been dreaming about for YEARS. If they can't capitalize on THAT, they can't capitalize on anything else. And people forget, Cena's last match was a main event for the US Title vs. Del Rio at a Brooklyn Raw, which was a return match for Cena since he was injured before that too, and the third hour still had a big drop.
> 
> Simply put, they are screwed until something BIG happens. Like changing the format and length of the show and some of the characters. Until then, it won't matter.


That's all fine and good, but since 2014, they are in flat out freefall, both numbers, and creatively.
It started with botching Punk in 2011, continued with the mishandling of Daniel Bryan, not using Wrestlemania for two years in a row to create new talent (28&29), it became serious when Punk left, when Bryan was out injured, and the Dairy Queen topping is Reigns' mega push that disgusts pretty much everyone, and this Wrestlemania that took a huge dump on every fan's common sense and good will.

Over time, WWE taught their fans they don't matter. That is the real Problem. That can't be stopped or amended, they would have to do everything right for two years.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> That's all fine and good, but since 2014, they are in flat out freefall, both numbers, and creatively.
> It started with botching Punk in 2011, continued with the mishandling of Daniel Bryan, not using Wrestlemania for two years in a row to create new talent (28&29), it became serious when Punk left, when Bryan was out injured, and the Dairy Queen topping is Reigns' mega push that disgusts pretty much everyone, and this Wrestlemania that took a huge dump on every fan's common sense and good will.
> 
> Over time, WWE taught their fans they don't matter. That is the real Problem. That can't be stopped or amended, they would have to do everything right for two years.


That's pretty much what I'm saying. The product itself, the 3 hours, the announcers, the awful booking, the awful characters, the lack of charisma all over the roster, the same boring Raw set, etc. It's a combo of everything.

LOL at that SD fall from last week. Their ratings for all their shows are literally in a free-fall. They are experiencing the worst ratings they have EVER have RIGHT NOW. Even worse than last year. Incredible.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Smackdown fell big too. Product interest as reflected by ratings, is cratering. Smackdown may soon be below two million viewers. So much for the USA move creating a ratings bulwark.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Bullshit. The Most popular eras were Hogan and Austin, and Vince put over the guys People went crazy for because that's what wrestling always did. Only a moron would not do that. Russo made it a point to look at the breakdowns to weed out the useless fluff. For some amazing reason, Nobody Takes the numbers serious anymore.
> 
> The only difference between then and now is that some idiots think there is an actual difference between People in the audience and "internet Fans", and somehow Vince and his dumbass entourage think they both want different things, when in fact, they want the same thing.


Interesting you mentioned those two in particular. I really think they grew big enough to call more of their own shots, so they were somewhat more impervious to Vince's stupidity than most other guys. There's nobody in the locker room today that wields that kind of influence on their own characters and direction. Except for HHH, who really shouldn't. And that's another part of the problem.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Meltzer is wrong in one aspect: this TV is in no way better than WCW was. Whether you present TV with monstrously convoluted and dumbass storylines like WCW did, or whether you put on shows so boring, lame and predictable that your toenails Fall asleep, the result of both is television for the retarded and mentally ill.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At least WCW was never boring, Dave.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Because USA Network pays them an extra $32 million for that 3rd hour.


Which just happens to keep them in profit.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Ever since the AE ended, Vince thinks all edginess has disappeared from society almost like it's 70's and 80's wrestling again where it was all about the clean-cut, babyface. He's lost. He thinks his company is like a movie where you have to have a clean-cut leading man, babyface to lead the way; especially since they are a publicly traded company now. He's gone. A complete lost cause.


Indeed many on here have in the past brought up programs like the walking dead as current programs that are still edgy. 

I think someone needs to sit Vince down and make him watch some of it and then when he asks 'Is this a 90's show?' The reply need to be 'No it's being showed NOW'.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I'm sure USA and NBC Universal is thrilled with those numbers. And these Networks that pay WWE *ABSOLUTELY* care about these numbers. The next TV deal should be interesting, especially if they continue to decline to new historic lows every year.


I wouldn't be surprised if USA haven't got 'bottom' trigger numbers in the deal.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> They are pushing new talent like Enzo, Cass, Corbin, Crews, etc. They are featuring a team/stable that is over with the IWC. They are having two of the brightest stars feud. They are having one of their greatest heels of all time work with one of their top faces. The best wrestler in the company is challening for the IC Title. Shane McMahon is running RAW.
> 
> How do they deserve it? They are doing what the fans want. Or does it all fall on Reigns because he takes up all three hours of RAW?


History tells us that they will fuck it up and fuck over their talent. So everyone is waiting around for them to do just that. Shane LOST and then was given the job anyway thus making it pointless. In fact they made 3/4 of WM fluff or pointless. 

How the hell are they doing what the fans want? KO has become captain job, a totally rejected FOTC is champ, the USO's are STILL being given far to much TV time when their reaction is generally either 'fuck off' or 'don't care' reactions, etc.


----------



## Jeff'Hardy

WWE are doomed. They need the 3rd hr to be profitable and yet the 3rd hr is killing them.


----------



## Erik.

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Bullshit. The Most popular eras were Hogan and Austin, and Vince put over the guys People went crazy for because that's what wrestling always did. Only a moron would not do that. Russo made it a point to look at the breakdowns to weed out the useless fluff. For some amazing reason, Nobody Takes the numbers serious anymore.
> 
> The only difference between then and now is that some idiots think there is an actual difference between People in the audience and "internet Fans", and somehow Vince and his dumbass entourage think they both want different things, when in fact, they want the same thing.


Austins supreme microphone ability, story telling ringwise and his drawing ability is what got him to the top, no wonder why the fans wanted him. Casuals loved him and Vince pushed him because of it. Not to mention the fact that both of these guys had charisma out of the ass and made more money (along with The Rock) then other of the millions of guys that have become professional wrestlers. It's funny how at their most popular, the likes of Hogan, Rock and Austin were hated by the internet fans yet remained the three most over guys in the universe.

Internet fans are ALWAYS going to watch the product. Regardless of how shit it is. Fucking hell, you only have to look at this forum and all the people that BASH the product yet still watch the damn thing and moan in this thread every week.

The casuals are the ones you need to DRAW in because those are where your viewers are. You need something that brings THEM in. They don't particularly CARE about wrestling in its purest form like most internet fans do who will watch it for a Kevin Owens or a Dean Ambrose because of indy work etc. - hence why the most POPULAR eras of wrestling it was watched by people who enjoyed entertainment and favoured entertainment over ring work. MILLIONS of viewers, DOUBLE what they are getting now, TRIPLE what they are getting now. You don't lose hardcores. You lose casuals and that is why they've dropped their viewership. They have simply catered towards the hardcore fans who will always tune in to watch their favourites.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The reason Raw and SD isn't drawing and hasn't drawn in along time is because they don't know how to tell a good story anymore. They have terrible, boring characters from the very top of the card to the very bottom of the card. Nothing about the stories or the characters are compelling or complex. Everything is straight forward and boring. People thought once they went away from an "Indy guy" as World Champion that ratings would increase. Well, not only has that not happened, but the ratings have actually gotten worse with a non-Indy World Champion. It won't matter who the Champion is until WWE goes back to telling compelling stories again with good characters. Until then, they can have whoever they want as World Champ, and it won't matter.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wwe bk in 99 had a world champ. But that diddnt matter. Because the story telling and the show was the focus. It seems the Wwe title and who is the champ. Seems to outweigh great story telling. All you got is meaningless match after meaningless match. Because without psychology you got a empty show. Now ratings are subjective. So I don't expect millions to tune in. But until they realize Wwe is not trendy anymore. Because they are stuck on a outdated formulaic format the better. But why change? Wwe have no competition. By dominating the market, the very audience that they used to bring in has vanished. Wwe aint the event it once wss. Kinda like American Idol.


----------



## antdvda

No stars. 

Hogan, Austin, Rock, Cena, HHH, nWo, Flair, Savage - these were all 5 tool guys.

Amazing look, charisma, mic skills, athleticism etc.

There are no 5 tool wrestlers that can cross over today. They either have great mic skills but look like shit, amazing wrestling but can talk for shit, too fat, too skinny, look like a frat boy, no personality etc.

Nobody today has it all.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Wrestling INC is actually reporting Youtube ratings now: * http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/201...ents-ranked-the-highest-on-youtube-this-week/



> The WWE and USA Network often use Neilson ratings to gauge interest in their programs. With technology increasing, the ratings systems haven't changed that much, and we're stuck not getting an appropriate quarter-hour breakdown.
> 
> However, WWE's own Youtube page can lend a little more insight to which segments are performing and drawing viewers, as most segments are released in an abbreviated form.
> 
> Roman Reigns drew giant numbers to the page, garnering almost over a million views more for his match against Alberto Del Rio than any other part of the show. Reigns was also in the only segment on Smackdown with a million views, taking on the Miz. Other moments that cracks one million views were the Stephanie McMahon/Shane McMahon segment, the in-ring debut of Luke Gallows and Karl Anderson, as well as the New Day's promo with Enzo, Cass and the Vaudevillains.





> 1. Roman Reigns vs. Alberto Del Rio (2,484,5750)
> 
> 2. Stephanie McMahon interrupts her brother (1,492, 162)
> 
> 3. The New Day meet Enzo & Cass and the Vaudevillains (1,165,616)
> 
> 4. The Usos vs. Luke Gallows & Karl Anderson (1,154,688)
> 
> 5. Chris Jericho demands an apology from Dean Ambrose (935,261)
> 
> 6. A special look back at Chyna's trailblazing career (908,380)
> 
> 7. AJ Styles vs. Sheamus (776,304)
> 
> 8. Sami Zayn vs. Rusev (683,761)
> 
> 9. Dolph Ziggler ambushes Baron Corbin (652,478)
> 
> 10. The Miz insults the Cesaro Section (639,666)
> 
> 11. Apollo Crews vs. Stardust (481,822)
> 
> 12. Natalya vs. Emma (425,484)
> 
> 13.Primo & Epico explore Puerto Rico's rich nightlife (145,504)


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



nWoWolfpac98 said:


> At least WCW was never boring, Dave.


Every 3 hours Nitro was better than every Raw currently.

Some say they put up better matches today on a regular basis. Like hell they do. WCW had mid- and undercard talent that, even with a shitload of moves in a match, could make it look like a shoot. These days, it's choreographed to fuck. The Malenkos of that time knew how to have a spot-laden match while still being credible.

All WWE knows what to do with people like Malenko is giving them a stupid gimmick and transform them into monkeys.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Finally the viewers will come back knowing the WWE didn't give the belt to some *******. Great decision keeping title on Reigns.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm glad that Wrestling Inc is now reporting on the Youtube views, which have been widely mocked in this thread. Cageside seats shouldn't have stopped. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/725066216268808193


> Facebook and Snapchat get all the buzz these days with their billions of daily video views, but there’s really just one game in town when it comes to winning over any TV marketing money to the Web—YouTube.
> 
> YouTube has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of advertisers shifting spending from TV to chase viewers who have migrated to online video, but even the Google platform is siphoning away only a small fraction of marketers’ media budgets. YouTube faces several nagging challenges that are holding it back from capturing more TV revenue, including pricing concerns, the way agencies are structured and lingering doubts over the quality of its content, according to ad buyers.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I wonder what we'll resort to using to justify Reigns as a "draw" when youtube numbers start dropping. I predict Tout


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> I wonder what we'll resort to using to justify Reigns as a "draw" when youtube numbers start dropping. I predict Tout


For me, it's just the fact that many people in this thread act as if Youtube doesn't matter and has no financial incentives. However, WrestlingInc and the Wall Street Journal vindicate what myself and others have said all along.

Now the rationale is for some, "Of course he has the most views since he's the Champ" when it supposedly didn't matter before.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I expect the New Era to jump start RAW's failing ratings like a shot of atropine.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> For me, it's just the fact that many people in this thread act as if Youtube doesn't matter and has no financial incentives. However, WrestlingInc and the Wall Street Journal vindicate what myself and others have said all along.
> 
> Now the rationale is for some, "Of course he has the most views since he's the Champ" when it supposedly didn't matter before.


There's revenue in it, but let's not get out of hand and act like it's an amazing amount that will ever even cover a quarter of what the television deal does. And at this rate, there next TV deal is going to be a fraction of what it currently is, and YouTube isn't going to cover the difference.

Not to mention, I think everyone agrees that Reigns is the biggest star on the show, but he has no competition considering literally everyone else is booked like a complete dork, but that's a completely different topic.

I've actually done work for some bigger YT channels behind the scenes, and I know the general ins and outs of how the AD revenue works. There IS good money in it, but again, not to the level of the TV deal, no where close.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> *There's revenue in it, but let's not get out of hand and act like it's an amazing amount that will ever even cover a quarter of what the television deal does. * And at this rate, they're next TV deal is going to be a fraction of what it currently is, and YouTube isn't going to cover it.
> 
> Not to mention, I think everyone agrees that Reigns is the biggest star on the show, but he has no competition considering literally everyone else is booked like a complete dork, but that's a completely different topic.


I've never made that argument. I always stated that social media, including Youtube, were metrics in today's climate; especially in light of waning TV viewership. But others laughed off the thought and acted like it had no place in the discussion. 

As for Reigns being the only person who looks good, that has changed in recent weeks IMO. Enzo/Cass who just debuted, got over 2 million views a few weeks ago. It's about what some in the audience care enough to find outside of videos that are promoted or go viral.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I've never made that argument. I always stated that social media, including Youtube, were metrics in today's climate; especially in light of waning TV viewership. But others laughed off the thought and acted like it had no place in the discussion.
> 
> As for Reigns being the only person who looks good, that has changed in recent weeks IMO. Enzo/Cass who just debuted, got over 2 million views a few weeks ago. It's about what some in the audience care enough to find outside of videos that are promoted or go viral.


YouTube is really the only thing that has revenue attached to it as far as social media goes, Twitter and Instagram really don't, they bridge to revenue sources, but aren't BIG factors. 

And we are talking weeks of consistent booking where Reigns has had 2 years of extremely consistent booking. AJ's debut also got good views, but he's been booked like a total dork, and his luster has completely worn off. Owens came in and got good views on his debut video, good booking for a few weeks, then he becomes a dork. Sami Zayn's debut with Cena got over 4 million views, now he's been booked like everyone else. See what I mean? 

Reigns is the only one(and maybe Rollins) that gets consistently strong and competent booking. Sure, there may have been a misstep here or there with Reigns, but generally speaking, they've tried their hardest and always presented him as a top tier guy.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> For me, it's just the fact that many people in this thread act as if Youtube doesn't matter and has no financial incentives. However, WrestlingInc and the Wall Street Journal vindicate what myself and others have said all along.
> 
> Now the rationale is for some, "Of course he has the most views since he's the Champ" when it supposedly didn't matter before.


I'm ignorant on this subject, but i'd like to see their financials and watch the growth of youtube related ad revenue.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> I'm ignorant on this subject, but i'd like to see their financials and watch the growth of youtube related ad revenue.


YouTube is a big market for monetary gain, but at this point, I think the WWE has generally peaked with the platform. They might grow a little bit, but I don't see them getting much higher than they currently are.

And how it currently is, YouTube makes around 7% of what the TV deal makes them. The WWE, financially is mainly about two things, the Network and the TV deal.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@The Inbred Goatman

I've liked AJ's booking so far. It hasn't been completely flawless but I think he's been presented well. Unless I'm missing something. Owens did go through a geek period but seems to be on the rebound. I think they're going the underdog route with Sami.


@THE SHIV

Here's an article from the WSJ about Youtube and Ad revenue.
*
YouTube’s Quest for TV Advertising Dollars
While the Google platform has had the most success siphoning off some TV ad spending, its challenges offer a cautionary tale for Facebook, Twitter*

http://www.wsj.com/articles/youtubes-quest-for-tv-advertising-dollars-1461343177


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> @The Inbred Goatman
> 
> I've liked AJ's booking so far. It hasn't been completely flawless but I think he's been presented well. Unless I'm missing something. Owens did go through a geek period but seems to be on the rebound. I think they're going the underdog route with Sami.


He did a complete 50/50 program with Jericho, lost his Wrestlemania debut, and lost against Kevin Owens twice by a lame distraction finish(the same distraction mind you). He's 1-3 in PPV matches, about to be 1-4. 

He's a mid card geek, plain and simple.

And what you said about Owens exactly speaks to my initial point, there is ZERO consistency with anyone in this company outside of Reigns. Short bursts of potential, 2 months later they are back to being a geek, same is the story with Ambrose.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> @The Inbred Goatman
> 
> I've liked AJ's booking so far. It hasn't been completely flawless but I think he's been presented well. Unless I'm missing something. Owens did go through a geek period but seems to be on the rebound. I think they're going the underdog route with Sami.
> 
> 
> @THE SHIV
> 
> Here's an article from the WSJ about Youtube and Ad revenue.
> *
> YouTube’s Quest for TV Advertising Dollars
> While the Google platform has had the most success siphoning off some TV ad spending, its challenges offer a cautionary tale for Facebook, Twitter*
> 
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/youtubes-quest-for-tv-advertising-dollars-1461343177



Thank you. I love reading anything with new info for me.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> He did a complete 50/50 program with Jericho, lost his Wrestlemania debut, and lost against Kevin Owens twice by a lame distraction finish(the same distraction mind you). He's 1-3 in PPV matches, about to be 1-4.
> 
> He's a mid card geek, plain and simple.


I have a case of amnesia. When did Styles/Owens face off? I can only think of the Jericho/Styles program. I don't know why I can't remember him losing to Owens. 

As for Styles, he looked like a main eventer to me last night. I'd even say that he's the #1 babyface in the company. If you don't count New Day.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I have a case of amnesia. When did Styles/Owens face off? I can only think of the Jericho/Styles program. I don't know why I can't remember him losing to Owens.
> 
> As for Styles, he looked like a main eventer to me last night. I'd even say that he's the #1 babyface in the company. If you don't count New Day.


They had a Smackdown match, and a Raw match. He hit some moves and looked cool yesterday, I'll give you that. But he still took the pin clean in the middle AFTER interference on his behalf. 

With Reigns, whenever he gets pinned, they always go the extra mile to protect him. That isn't the case with anyone else.

And for the record, I DO NOT want everyone to be protected in losses, that's stupid, but Reigns always is, and that's stupid too.

I think it's painfully obvious that Reigns' booking is at a MUCH higher level than everyone else on the roster currently, and that's sad. I don't care if Reigns is booked well, I would just like others to be booked well too, and for the last two years, that hasn't been the case.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> They had a Smackdown match, and a Raw match. He hit some moves and looked cool yesterday, I'll give you that. But he still took the pin clean in the middle AFTER interference on his behalf.
> 
> With Reigns, whenever he gets pinned, they always go the extra mile to protect him. That isn't the case with anyone else.
> 
> And for the record, I DO NOT want everyone to be protected in losses, that's stupid, but Reigns always is, and that's stupid too.


Okay, thanks. I honestly forgot about Styles/Owens.

I do agree that Reigns is too protected but I think every top guy should be afforded protection. I'm not a fan of champs looking like geeks. Overall, the characters do need more credibility. It shouldn't just be Reigns. But I think they're doing alright with Styles.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> YouTube is a big market for monetary gain, but at this point, I think the WWE has generally peaked with the platform. They might grow a little bit, but I don't see them getting much higher than they currently are.
> 
> And how it currently is, YouTube makes around 7% of what the TV deal makes them. The WWE, financially is mainly about two things, the Network and the TV deal.


Thanks for posting this. Youtube is useful, but as I suspected all along; it's a drop in the bucket compared to the TV deal and their ad revenue/sponsorships on TV.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Posted this in another thread.

More YouTube views and subscribers=YouTube letting advertisers run commercials before or at intervals during your videos=YouTube sending you a monthly cheque for your portion of the advertising revenue.

This explains it nicely:



> Quote:
> On average, you can earn $.80 per 1,000 views monetized by banner ads, or, $5-$8 per 1,000 views on a video monetized by rollout ads (the commercials before the video). So, on a video with 1,000,000 views monetized by rollout ads, you could earn $5,000-$8,000.
> 
> Youtube/Google shares ~45% of their ad revenue from the content with the content creator. The ad revenue is collected when a viewer clicks on an ad. This is known as Cost Per Click. Now, CPC can vary based on the ad.
> 
> You can expect an accounting firm to pay a higher CPC than a toothbrush company because their Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) is higher. Youtube/Google is going to choose the ads they place based on the highest likelihood of a click. Factors that come in to play include the individual viewer and the data Google has on them, and the subject of the video.


I've heard that percentage be as high as 68%, so depending on the day and who you ask, it differs, but yeah. This is how its done. $5-8 grand per video with a million views, and look at how many videos are 1 million+ on WWE's YouTube and its a great way of making some extra money. Its not a $200 million TV deal, but it helps and does matter.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KO Bossy said:


> Posted this in another thread.
> 
> More YouTube views and subscribers=YouTube letting advertisers run commercials before or at intervals during your videos=YouTube sending you a monthly cheque for your portion of the advertising revenue.
> 
> This explains it nicely:
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard that percentage be as high as 68%, so depending on the day and who you ask, it differs, but yeah. This is how its done. $5-8 grand per video with a million views, and look at how many videos are 1 million+ on WWE's YouTube and its a great way of making some extra money. Its not a $200 million TV deal, but it helps and does matter.


It's not just a $250 million TV deal. It's also the ad revenue from Raw and SD. That's 3 hours worth of commercials on Raw and 2 hours worth of commercials on SD. So, it's even more than $250 million when talking about the TV aspect, which is INSANE money.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> It's not just a $250 million TV deal. It's also the ad revenue from Raw and SD. That's 3 hours worth of commercials on Raw and 2 hours worth of commercials on SD. So, it's even more than $250 million when talking about the TV aspect, which is INSANE money.


Of course. That being said, YouTube is still a platform that makes them some money. And views do ultimately equate to cash. Can't say that for Twitter, where merely talking about WWE doesn't mean they make any money. Twitter is more analyzing trends, but since they make no income from mere talking, I consider it a poor gauge. YouTube, they make something from it, so that at least deserves a modicum of consideration.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So is the "New Era" going to kill or be killed in the ratings?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KO Bossy said:


> Of course. That being said, YouTube is still a platform that makes them some money. And views do ultimately equate to cash. Can't say that for Twitter, where merely talking about WWE doesn't mean they make any money. Twitter is more analyzing trends, but since they make no income from mere talking, I consider it a poor gauge. YouTube, they make something from it, so that at least deserves a modicum of consideration.


Yup. That's what I've said. It is a factor, no doubt about it. It just doesn't make them anywhere near as much as 1) the TV deal 2) The ad revenue & Sponsorships they make off of 3 hours of Raw (which is alot if you sit through a Raw and see how many commercial breaks they have AND how long each commercial break is and the same deal for 2 hours of SD. 

Forget the TV deal, as huge as it is. The money they make off of commercial breaks for Raw and SD are monsterous themselves.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Rooting for this company to hit below 3 million tomorrow. Can't wait.

Can't wait.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> "Of course he has the most views since he's the Champ"


Well who can we even compare him to? every one is a midcard geek even Rollins would of been if he didn't get his injury.



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I've liked AJ's booking so far. It hasn't been completely flawless but I think he's been presented well


I mean they didn't even have him go over Jericho of all people even Fandango went over him not to mention him and bullet club have looked like complete geeks in his feud with Roman. Gallows,Anderson and AJ are just 3 more midcard geeks like everyone else not named Cena and Roman.(Isn't it wonderful what happens when you don't 50/50 book someone.)


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Well who can we even compare him to? every one is a midcard geek even Rollins would of been if he didn't get his injury.
> 
> 
> 
> I mean they didn't even have him go over Jericho of all people even Fandango went over him not to mention him and bullet club have looked like complete geeks in his feud with Roman. Gallows,Anderson and AJ are just 3 more midcard geeks like everyone else not named Cena and Roman.(Isn't it wonderful what happens when you don't 50/50 book someone.)


AJ Styles is being pushed hard right now as the #1 face in the WWE. I have no complaints. 

As for Reigns booking, I'd rather he booked like a champ. I can't tolerate champions being booked like little punks.

As for the Youtube views, it's free at the discretion of viewers outside of promoted videos/viral clips. If fans want to support their preferred wrestler on the platform, they can. The numbers speak for themselves. If Reigns is so bad and everyone is so great, others should be able to put up the same #'s.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KO Bossy said:


> Posted this in another thread.
> 
> More YouTube views and subscribers=YouTube letting advertisers run commercials before or at intervals during your videos=YouTube sending you a monthly cheque for your portion of the advertising revenue.
> 
> This explains it nicely:
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard that percentage be as high as 68%, so depending on the day and who you ask, it differs, but yeah. This is how its done. $5-8 grand per video with a million views, and look at how many videos are 1 million+ on WWE's YouTube and its a great way of making some extra money. Its not a $200 million TV deal, but it helps and does matter.


That's not correct at all, no one is getting $5-8, it's more around $3 on the high end. Most people are making $2. The TOP YouTubers might generate $8 per 1000 views(even that's doubtful), but YouTube takes a 45% cut of it.

And I would imagine that WWE has a pretty bad rate because Wrestling has always garnered poor ad revenue(hence why they call themselves sports entertainment), and a big factor of how high your ad rates are on YouTube is viewer retention, and because the majority of WWE's videos are short, that doesn't help your rates either.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> That's not correct at all, no one is getting $5-8, it's more around $3 on the high end. Most people are making $2. The TOP YouTubers might generate $8 per 1000 views(even that's doubtful), but YouTube takes a 45% cut of it.
> 
> And I would imagine that WWE has a pretty bad rate because Wrestling has always garnered poor ad revenue(hence why they call themselves sports entertainment), and a big factor of how high your ad rates are on YouTube is viewer retention, and because the majority of WWE's videos are short, that doesn't help your rates either.


Perhaps the actual figures are incorrect (I gathered my info from several articles), but the logic is 100% correct. YouTube views make money. More views=more money. WWE has tons of views on a lot of videos, so they are making money. How much? We can quibble over that. But they DO make money from YouTube. Hence, YouTube should be taken into at least some consideration. That's the point I was trying to make.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KO Bossy said:


> Perhaps the actual figures are incorrect (I gathered my info from several articles), but the logic is 100% correct. YouTube views make money. More views=more money. WWE has tons of views on a lot of videos, so they are making money. How much? We can quibble over that. But they DO make money from YouTube. Hence, YouTube should be taken into at least some consideration. That's the point I was trying to make.


Oh of course, but the difference of $2-$3 per 1000 views and $5-$8 is pretty huge lmao. 

YouTube 100% has it's merit, it's a legit metric.

I do think ratings are much more important to look at tho, and the increase of YouTube views doesn't explain the gigantic decline in live viewers.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If this Raw does better than the 2.2 it did last week, I'm losing faith in humanity.


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I thinking at the very least, there won't be such a huge drop off from the first/second hour to the third as there was last week. The main event announced for last week was Reigns vs Alberto Del Rio, which no one cares about. The main event announced this week was Reigns and the Usos vs Styles, Anderson and Gallows which is a lot more entertaining.

Then again, the first couple of hours were really boring, so I don't know. Its easy to see the audience getting ground down and not bothering to stay till the end.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Payback Twitter TV Ratings – how did the first PPV after WrestleMania fare?*

WWE’s first PPV after WrestleMania generated middle-of-the-road social media activity on Sunday, according to Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings.

WWE PPV Social Media Tracking

May 1: Payback ranked #2 among series & specials on Sunday night, trailing “Game of Thrones” on HBO.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Payback would have ranked #1 , topping all three NBA Playoffs games.

Raw generated 326,000 total tweets, which was up from Fast Lane and down from the Royal Rumble. (Nielsen did not report WrestleMania social media.)

Raw’s unique authors were 57,000, up slightly from Fast Lane, and down from the Rumble.

– Overall for the week of April 25, Payback ranked #5 among series & specials and Monday’s Raw leading into Payback ranked #6 .

The Top 6 included two editions of the NFL Draft, The Voice on NBC, Game of Thrones, Payback, and Raw.

Also, Payback topped all one-off sports programming last week. However, Raw would have fallen all the way to #7 . It points to a big gap between social media activity for Payback and Raw leading into the PPV.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/02/paybacksocialmedia/


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Any predictions for last nights rating? I suspect it'll be up by a good margin, 3.4 million average would be the minimum, I'd think.

Since the show revolves around Shane&Steph, and the McMahon's for whatever reason has always been draws, I figure the rating will be decent.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I would predict a slight bump to 2.3-2.4 but that is still a bad rating and they'll be lucky to even have that against that heated Spurs/Thunder game.

I wouldn't be surprised however if the rating drops lower, though. Well deserved for a shitty product.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/2 Raw Twitter TV Ratings – Social Media activity down post-PPV*


If the success of a modern-era WWE PPV is partly determined by whether it generates social media buzz the next night on Raw, then Payback did not do its job.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

May 2: Monday’s Raw following Payback fell in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings compared to the PPV lead-in last week.

Raw generated Twitter volume of 143,000, down six percent from 152k last week.

The total number of people tweeting about Raw was 30,000, down from 35k last week.

Comparatively, Raw was well below the First Quarter average of 195,000 tweets and 44,000 uniques.

The bright spot was Raw retained the #1 spot among series & specials on Monday night. If compared to one-off sports programming, though, Raw would have ranked #3 behind both NBA Playoffs games.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/03/52-raw-twitter-tv-ratings-social-media-activity-post-ppv/


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *5/2 Raw Twitter TV Ratings – Social Media activity down post-PPV*
> 
> 
> If the success of a modern-era WWE PPV is partly determined by whether it generates social media buzz the next night on Raw, then Payback did not do its job.
> 
> WWE Raw Social Media Tracking
> 
> May 2: Monday’s Raw following Payback fell in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings compared to the PPV lead-in last week.
> 
> Raw generated Twitter volume of 143,000, down six percent from 152k last week.
> 
> The total number of people tweeting about Raw was 30,000, down from 35k last week.
> 
> Comparatively, Raw was well below the First Quarter average of 195,000 tweets and 44,000 uniques.
> 
> The bright spot was Raw retained the #1 spot among series & specials on Monday night. If compared to one-off sports programming, though, Raw would have ranked #3 behind both NBA Playoffs games.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/03/52-raw-twitter-tv-ratings-social-media-activity-post-ppv/


Things looking promising already....


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This is proof AJ does not generate buzz!!!!!!!!!!?!?!!reignsfart


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.

Please be 2 hours below 2 mill.


----------



## gimsni

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The injuries haven't helped matters.


----------



## gimsni

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Neither has the adjustment to them with this horrible booking.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.458M
H2-3.457M
H3-3.383M
3H-3.433M*










*H2 Vs H1 (-0.03%/-0.001M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-2.14%/-0.074M)
H3 Vs H1 (-2.14%/-0.075M)
5/2/16 Vs 4/25/16 (+9.75%/+0.305M)

Note: Fallout from PAYBACK.*


----------



## Kabraxal

More anticipation for ratings than any main roster show in... Well a long long time. Says it all.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Solid ratings, as expected.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I knew that the fans would come back after seeing AJ Styles didn't get the belt. Nobody wanted him as champion, and these ratings prove it!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Solid ratings, as expected.


3.4 is solid? A night after a PPV?


The fact that this is the best case scenario for the night after a PPV is anything but 'solid.' It's downright scary.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Thank you @JonnyAceLaryngitis

The rating seems stable and didn't keep free falling.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Better than I expected tbh.


----------



## Kabraxal

Considering post PPV bumps.... That is god awful. Next week is going to be ugly since they couldn't even spike one hour. They had what... 200 thousand peek in compared to the first hour last week? Shows there is no excitement going forward.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How does this compare to the previous post ppv bump? Curious to see how much audience RAW retains next week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last year's Rating after Payback:

Hour one: 4.00 million
Hour two: 4.00 million
Hour three: 3.99 million


They got demolished yet again this year.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> 3.4 is solid? A night after a PPV?
> 
> 
> The fact that this is the best case scenario for the night after a PPV is anything but 'solid.' It's downright scary.


In comparison to what it could've been. 3.4 is fucking awful tbh, but in comparison to last week it's DECENT.

EDIT: Just Saw the post Payback rating last year, okay, that's a pretty terrible Rating lmao.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> In comparison to what it could've been. 3.4 is fucking awful tbh, but in comparison to last week it's DECENT.


Agree with that. Definitely better than the last 2 weeks where they fell below 3 million for the 3rd hour. Horrible compared to last year's rating after Payback, though.


----------



## Kabraxal

The Inbred Goatman said:


> ShowStopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.4 is solid? A night after a PPV?
> 
> 
> The fact that this is the best case scenario for the night after a PPV is anything but 'solid.' It's downright scary.
> 
> 
> 
> In comparison to what it could've been. 3.4 is fucking awful tbh, but in comparison to last week it's DECENT.
Click to expand...

Not really... Outside of hour 3 the numbers really didn't have an increased spike in numbers. And hearing that nothing came of the BC tease again in TME... Next weeks numbers will probably tank. The only reason it didn't last night was some had hope the BC swerve or Balor would finally happen. Now the heat is all but gone and I suspect more people just stop caring.


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This is good news. Are these rating "amazing"? Definitely not. They aren't a patch on what WWE used to get in their prime. But its still an improvement, and its still a good sign they are moving in the right direction with the current main event storyline. 

They barely lost any fans at all in the 3rd hour. Way more people stuck around to see Styles, Anderson and Gallows face off against Reigns and the Usos.

But A LOT of people turned off last week when the main event was announced to be Reigns vs Alberto Del Rio.

This Bullet Club story line is definitely a draw.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think they'll be around 3.7-3.8 million when Cena comes back, which is decent.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That is still a piss poor rating, no matter how people want to spin it and especially coming off from a PPV that was VERY mixed. Tells me people tuned in to give the Shane/Steph and AJ/Reigns stories one more chance and said fuck it.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Last year's Rating after Payback:
> 
> Hour one: 4.00 million
> Hour two: 4.00 million
> Hour three: 3.99 million
> 
> 
> They got demolished yet again this year.


To be fair, we should probably be comparing this rating to last year's Raw after Extreme Rules rating since they switched the ppvs this year. Don't know if it really matters though, obviously they've lost a big chunk of their audience in a year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> This is good news. Are these rating "amazing"? Definitely not. They aren't a patch on what WWE used to get in their prime. But its still an improvement, and its still a good sign they are moving in the right direction with the current main event storyline.
> 
> They barely lost any fans at all in the 3rd hour. Way more people stuck around to see Styles, Anderson and Gallows face off against Reigns and the Usos.
> 
> But A LOT of people turned off last week when the main event was announced to be Reigns vs Alberto Del Rio.
> 
> *This Bullet Club story line is definitely a draw.*


Drawing a 3.3 third hour isn't a draw. If it is, then last year's hour 3 the night after Payback is a SUPER draw since that 3rd hour got a 3.99. :lol


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Better than I expected tbh.


Same here. Ever since Twitter changed how they compile their ratings, Twitter/TV have not been in sync. Since their social activity was down, I expected the same for actual viewership. This rating isn't setting the world on fire but at least it's not more bleeding. The third hour held up well in comparison to 1 and 2.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> To be fair, we should probably be comparing this rating to last year's Raw after Extreme Rules rating since they switched the ppvs this year. Don't know if it really matters though, obviously they've lost a big chunk of their audience in a year.


Ok, here is the night after last year's ER:

Hour one: 3.82 million
Hour two: 3.85 million
Hour three: 3.59 million


Either way, this year gets destroyed.

What they're drawing right now is what they were drawing last year during the NFL season. :lol


----------



## Kabraxal

Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Chrome said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than I expected tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> Same here. Ever since Twitter changed how they compile their ratings, Twitter/TV have not been in sync. Since their social activity was down, I expected the same for actual viewership. This rating isn't setting the world on fire but at least it's not more bleeding. The third hour held up well in comparison to 1 and 2.
Click to expand...

PPV bumps should be higher... But just like the single draw spikes of 1 million, we are seeing diminishing returns every "bump" as people stop caring.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was Last Night's WWE RAW Viewership With Payback Fallout And A Big Six-Man Main Event?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Payback fallout and a six-man main event featuring Luke Gallows, Karl Anderson and AJ Styles vs. The Usos and WWE World Heavyweight Champion Roman Reigns, drew 3.432 million viewers. This is up from last week's 3.128 million viewers for the go-home episode.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.458 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.457 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.383 million viewers.

RAW was #3 on cable for the night in viewership, behind NBA Playoffs games, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the NBA Playoffs, Love & Hip-Hop and Black Ink Crew 4.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...we-raw-viewership-with-payback-fallout-and-a/


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And people arguing that the BC storyline is a draw need to stop. It hasn't been a draw otherwise the potential (not execution) of the BC officially forming or even a Balor debut would have bumped the ratings. The storyline has been a bust thus far. Anderson and Gallows are GEEKS one month into joining WWE and the AJ/Reigns dynamics are all screwed up to where fans KNOW Reigns will come out on top of this feud. There is really no incentive here for people to stick around.

That and the unapologetic forcing of a McMahon storyline in 2016 just says that the casuals are starting to leave and even the hardcore fans can barely watch the show fully anymore.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Down 600,000 viewers from last year.

Lol


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Kabraxal said:


> PPV bumps should be higher... But just like the single draw spikes of 1 million, we are seeing diminishing returns every "bump" as people stop caring.


I agree. The bumps should be higher. But all things considered, an increase is still an increase. 3 weeks of RAW not being able to reach their minimal audience would've been a serious issues.

Also, I've noticed that every time you quote me, I don't get a notification. I only saw this since I'm in the thread. My apologies if I've no sold you in other threads. I'm just not getting a notification.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Love and Hip Hop and Black Ink Crew beating Raw the night after a PPV in the all important demo.

:lmao

Sweet Christ, that is scary. :lol

People sure have gotten soft on this years ratings compared to last when every single week of last year has destroyed this year thus far. Awfully odd.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> To be fair, we should probably be comparing this rating to last year's Raw after Extreme Rules rating since they switched the ppvs this year. Don't know if it really matters though, obviously they've lost a big chunk of their audience in a year.


The show after ER last year did 3.75, not as big of a drop, but still significant. But that was a show with Cena and Orton on it, which right now we don't have either of them.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Thank you @JonnyAceLaryngitis
> 
> The rating seems stable and didn't keep free falling.


You are welcome anytime Empress. :smile2:

I am noticing that this AJ/BC Vs RR/Uso feud is getting lesser flak than most anticipated. Most of the positivity stemming from AJ's ring work, ring chemistry between AJ and RR, and a modicum of freshness the BC have brought forth. Only the Usos stick out like a sore thumb to many, inspite of having a valid reason to be booked in the feud.


----------



## Kabraxal

Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Kabraxal said:
> 
> 
> 
> PPV bumps should be higher... But just like the single draw spikes of 1 million, we are seeing diminishing returns every "bump" as people stop caring.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. The bumps should be higher. But all things considered, an increase is still an increase. 3 weeks of RAW not being able to reach their minimal audience would've been a serious issues.
> 
> Also, I've noticed that every time you quote me, I don't get a notification. I only saw this since I'm in the thread. My apologies if I've no sold you in other threads. I'm just not getting a notification.
Click to expand...

No issue on the quoting or no selling.

And an increase is a "positive" in they halted the slide for one week. But it used to be half a million plus jumps that would bleed off slower. Next week will probably see sub 3 million hours already. 

The WWE has run out if wiggle room. They need real change and a real new era now or it could get all time low levels of nasty.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> You are welcome anytime Empress. :smile2:
> 
> I am noticing that this AJ/BC Vs RR/Uso feud is getting lesser flak than most anticipated. Most of the positivity stemming from in-ring chemistry and a modicum of freshness the BC have brought forth.


I do like the freshness of it all and the chemistry between Styles/Reigns. I hope the solid third hour rating is validation for the WWE that the angle is coming along well.

I really don't care about the Uso's. I couldn't tell you which one is Jimmy or Jey, but they're tolerable in this program.



@Kabraxal
The WWE is running out of wiggle room. That's why the past few weeks were in the danger zone IMO. Not that these ratings are awesome but at least each hour got more than 3 million viewers.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Unfortunately it looks like the Mcmahons are properly what give the rating bump and both AJ and Roman being in the main event properly stopped a big third hour drop.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

AJ Styles The Super Draw, He really is Phenomenal :banderas


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Unfortunately it looks like the Mcmahons are properly what give the rating bump and both AJ and Roman being in the main event properly stopped a big third hour drop.


It only had one direction to go with Reigns/Del Rio being the main event last week and it getting under 3 million. Combine that with the night after a PPV, and you have a 3.3.

Still terrible numbers in general, and even just compared to last year. When your highwater mark of the night is a 3.4 the night after a PPV and no NFL on, there is something very wrong. Just because it didn't get an all time low like the past two weeks did doesn't mean much..


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I do like the freshness of it all and the chemistry between Styles/Reigns. I hope the solid third hour rating is validation for the WWE that the angle is coming along well.
> 
> I really don't care about the Uso's. I couldn't tell you which one is Jimmy or Jey, but they're tolerable in this program.


There are numerous reports of the Usos being booed like how heels should be booed. It was even evident when they did the frog splashes on the tables with the Dudleys on them who were themselves heels. At least its not dead heat.

Also RAW witnessed the resurgence(somewhat) of Rusev being booked into a singles feud not seen since last fall. Once Cena, Rollins, Wyatt & Orton are back, there should be a point where they dont plummet further, which still requires entertaining booking though.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@JonnyAceLaryngitis

The Usos have been booed for a while. They really need a character change. One of them has some heelish tendencies and a personality. I think it's the one married to Naomi. 

Rusev (starting last night), Cesaro, Sami and Owens have looked like stars in recent weeks IMO.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> @JonnyAceLaryngitis
> 
> The Usos have been booed for a while. They really need a character change. One of them has some heelish tendencies and a personality. I think it's the one married to Naomi.
> 
> Rusev (starting last night), Cesaro, Sami and Owens have looked like stars in recent weeks IMO.


Think Reigns with the Usos as a heelish Samoan stable would be best for all 3 of them tbh. Could even do the Triple Powerbomb to draw heat because people will think they "stole" the move or something. Naturally, this would lead to Rollins coming back as a face and calling them out for being a "Shield knockoff."


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> @JonnyAceLaryngitis
> 
> The Usos have been booed for a while. They really need a character change. One of them has some heelish tendencies and a personality. I think it's the one married to Naomi.
> 
> Rusev (starting last night), Cesaro, Sami and Owens have looked like stars in recent weeks IMO.


But the tag division will be significantly weaker without Enzo & Cass. Their promos with The New Day would have made for one of the best tag feuds in recent times. Hopefully Enzo returns sooner than later. Glad he is out of danger though.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Think Reigns with the Usos as a heelish Samoan stable would be best for all 3 of them tbh. Could even do the Triple Powerbomb to draw heat because people will think they "stole" the move or something. Naturally, this would lead to Rollins coming back as a face and calling them out for being a "Shield knockoff."


Reigns still retains the same Shield theme, look and demeanor, (at least most of it) so it can draw heat from fans as they will be reminded of the Shield but not in the way they wanted, as they will never see the Usos as anywhere near the vicinity of Dean and Seth.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Think Reigns with the Usos as a heelish Samoan stable would be best for all 3 of them tbh. Could even do the Triple Powerbomb to draw heat because people will think they "stole" the move or something. Naturally, this would lead to Rollins coming back as a face and calling them out for being a "Shield knockoff."


Rollins is such a wild card. Naturally, I think he should be a face since he'll be getting a return pop and absence makes the heart grow fonder. I'm torn if the WWE will do Rollins/HHH or Rollins/Reigns. Seth should come back as "The Man" and champ who never lost his belt and wants it back from "The Guy".

As for Roman being a stable with the Usos, I do like the idea of a Samoan stable. But I also want Reigns to stand on his own. The Usos could be back up when needed.
@JonnyAceLaryngitis

It seems time for the Usos to turn heel. I know that flipping everyone heel is the go to answer but the Usos are just there now. The tag team division is actually interesting again. Unfortunately, the Usos aren't accepted as faces. So, creative needs to change things with them. 

Enzo should be back May 20. Hopefully, we'll get Enzo&Cass vs. New Day by Summerslam.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Think Reigns with the Usos as a heelish Samoan stable would be best for all 3 of them tbh. Could even do the Triple Powerbomb to draw heat because people will think they "stole" the move or something. Naturally, this would lead to Rollins coming back as a face and calling them out for being a "Shield knockoff."


That would be a nice idea, but we all know they aren't turning Reigns. And judging by his recent promos, it's not like his promos will be any better than his face promos. That wooden/robotic delivery is here to stay.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/2 Raw TV Ratings – how did the post-Payback episode fare?*

Monday’s WWE Raw following the Payback PPV reversed the downward trend since WrestleMania.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

May 2: WWE Raw scored a 2.35 rating the night after Payback, up from a 2.20 rating last week.

To put the number in perspective, the rating was well below the 2016 average of a 2.54 rating. Also, the show did slightly better than the taped U.K. Raw on April 18.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.432 million viewers, up 10 percent (about 300,000 viewers) from last week. Hourly Break Down:

First Hour: 3.458 million viewers for immediate PPV fall-out
Second Hour: 3.457 million viewers
Third Hour: 3.383 million viewers. A decline of only two percent is a small victory for Raw’s third hour.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Raw improved one-tenth of a rating in adults 18-49 and males 18-34 compared to last week’s year-low levels. The improvement was more pronounced in males 18-49, surpassing U.K. Raw from two weeks ago.

Analysis: It’s an uptick, which is good. But, it’s still in that historical low territory. It will be interesting to see how the next two Raws fare without a PPV to follow up on.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/03/52-raw-tv-ratings-post-payback-episode-fare/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow, night after a PPV only did a tad better than the taped England Raw.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Rollins is such a wild card. Naturally, I think he should be a face since he'll be getting a return pop and absence makes the heart grow fonder. I'm torn if the WWE will do Rollins/HHH or Rollins/Reigns. Seth should come back as "The Man" and champ who never lost his belt and wants it back from "The Guy".
> 
> As for Roman being a stable with the Usos, I do like the idea of a Samoan stable. But I also want Reigns to stand on his own. The Usos could be back up when needed.
> 
> @JonnyAceLaryngitis
> 
> It seems time for the Usos to turn heel. I know that flipping everyone heel is the go to answer but the Usos are just there now. The tag team division is actually interesting again. Unfortunately, the Usos aren't accepted as faces. So, creative needs to change things with them.
> 
> Enzo should be back May 20. Hopefully, we'll get Enzo&Cass vs. New Day by Summerslam.


HHH/Seth can be fresh. Wonder if they would appear randomly and start a feud with no words spoken like how HHH/Taker kicked off their WM27 feud in 2011 though.

I dont think the Usos can turn heel because creative wouldnt want Reigns to be saddled with a heel baggage. Although they can make him a reluctant team leader to the unruly Usos like how AJ seems to have a hard time reining in Gallows and Anderson.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> But its still an improvement, and its still a good sign they are moving in the right direction with the current main event storyline.


One week's improvement off the worst ratings in the history of Raw does not signal a long term or even short term improvement.

Ratings are hardly ever linear. Raw will decline for 3 weeks, then increase. Then decline for 2 weeks. Then increase. Then decline for 3 weeks.

It's never a straight descent. I'd be interested to see when is the last time Raw gained viewers for 3 weeks in a row. Until they can put together momentum for people watching the show, I doubt anything has changed.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Love and Hip Hop and Black Ink Crew beating Raw the night after a PPV in the all important demo.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> Sweet Christ, that is scary. :lol
> 
> People sure have gotten soft on this years ratings compared to last when every single week of last year has destroyed this year thus far. Awfully odd.


That's the numbers for the first ppv post mania 31 http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-100-monday-cable-originals-4-27-2015.html

18-49 is actually slightly higher this year with love hip hop beating them last year too. The demo WWE continues to shred viewers are males over 50. Its not that long ago more than half of wwes audience was men over 50 but that's no longer the case


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> That's the numbers for the first ppv post mania 31 http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-100-monday-cable-originals-4-27-2015.html
> 
> 18-49 is actually slightly higher this year with love hip hop beating them Las year too. The demo WWE continues to shred viewers are males over 50. Its not that long ago more than half of wees audience was men over 50 but that's no longer the case


I heard a report like this on another podcast, but with the twist Stephanie likes to use that the % of female viewers is up compared to years past.

But the truth is that there are not more females watching WWE, there are just many less male viewers so the % of female viewers is technically higher :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> That's the numbers for the first ppv post mania 31 http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-100-monday-cable-originals-4-27-2015.html
> 
> 18-49 is actually slightly higher this year with love hip hop beating them last year too. The demo WWE continues to shred viewers are males over 50. Its not that long ago more than half of wwes audience was men over 50 but that's no longer the case


Yep, that's what I said. Just like these are for the 1st PPV post WM 32..

That's even sadder then. You'd think ratings would be doing better if they supposedly started to try to target the older audience. They're screwed no matter what.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I do like the freshness of it all and the chemistry between Styles/Reigns. I hope the solid third hour rating is validation for the WWE that the angle is coming along well.
> 
> I really don't care about the Uso's. I couldn't tell you which one is Jimmy or Jey, but they're tolerable in this program.
> 
> 
> 
> @Kabraxal
> The WWE is running out of wiggle room. That's why the past few weeks were in the danger zone IMO. Not that these ratings are awesome but at least each hour got more than 3 million viewers.


Am I the only one who never confuses the 2? I know exactly which one is Jimmy, and which one is Jey. They don't really look that alike to me. I have a harder time telling Brie from Nikki before Nikki dyed her hair, even with her implants...


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Am I the only one who never confuses the 2? I know exactly which one is Jimmy, and which one is Jey. They don't really look that alike to me. I have a harder time telling Brie from Nikki before Nikki dyed her hair, even with her implants...


You are the only one who cares enough about them to want to be able to tell the difference I would guess :draper2


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Those are decent numbers given the recent slump. The third hour drop off wasn't bad either. Reigns and AJ tore the house down on Sunday and got people talking.*



A-C-P said:


> You are the only one who cares enough about them to want to be able to tell the difference I would guess :draper2


*
It's actually obvious when they start talking. Jimmy has way more charisma and would make a great smug heel. Jey is just kind of there.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Solid ratings, as expected.





WesternFilmGuy said:


> I knew that the fans would come back after seeing AJ Styles didn't get the belt. Nobody wanted him as champion, and these ratings prove it!


:heston

“Come back“.
3.2 million compared to 3.4 is a major Comeback of course :ha


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> You are the only one who cares enough about them to want to be able to tell the difference I would guess :draper2


Lol I don't want to, I just do. I don't hate them, but they don't do it for me at all. They're good wrestlers IMO but they're staler than century old biscuits. I just don't think they look alike. They have another brother that honestly looks more like Jey than Jimmy does.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Those are decent numbers given the recent slump. The third hour drop off wasn't bad either. Reigns and AJ tore the house down on Sunday and got people talking.*
> 
> 
> *
> It's actually obvious when they start talking. Jimmy has way more charisma and would make a great smug heel. Jey is just kind of there.*


I think it was more of the Mcmahon thing they always bring in ratings no matter how shit it is.

Isn't that the one who is married to Naomi cause that's the one I prefer he is good on Total divas. Even the commentary team barely keeps track of them though this is the same commentary team that confused Kalisto and Sin Cara.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Isn't that the one who is married to Naomi cause that's the one I prefer he is good on Total divas. Even the commentary team barely keeps track of them though this is the same commentary team that confused Kalisto and Sin Cara.


*
Yeah, it's readily apparent who's who on Total Divas as well. Jimmy has more swagger. They're like Roman's Yin and Yang when he's switching between face and heel.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Am I the only one who never confuses the 2? I know exactly which one is Jimmy, and which one is Jey. They don't really look that alike to me. I have a harder time telling Brie from Nikki before Nikki dyed her hair, even with her implants...


I generally like most of the wrestlers on the roster but the Usos do nothing for me. I don't love or hate them. I can't be bothered to learn the difference between them. :lol All I know is that one of them has an engaging personality. 

The Usos have a brother? I never knew that.

Nikki and Brie are so easy to tell apart. For starters, Nikki is the perfect one. :grin2:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

There's something to be said for consistency. It held remarkably well. I'm sure the McMahons will credit themselves, leading to even more of their segments. I'll be watching next week, so maybe they did do something right.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Is anyone else slightly concerned that for werks now, no single hour stands out positively? This indicates a trend that the viewers watch no matter what, and not more people give Raw a chance in hour 1 or 2.
Hour 1 used to spike. Hour 2 used to spike. Not anymore. It is three flat hours of boredom.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Nikki is the perfect one. :grin2:


I respectfully disagree Brie > Nikki.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Those are decent numbers given the recent slump. The third hour drop off wasn't bad either. Reigns and AJ tore the house down on Sunday and got people talking.*
> 
> 
> *
> It's actually obvious when they start talking. Jimmy has way more charisma and would make a great smug heel. Jey is just kind of there.*


Yeah, but between Roman, Jimmy, and Jey, Jey is the only one who hasn't gotten arrested, so his "lack of charisma" seems to have kept him out of trouble...although it must be a sacrifice because his wife isn't nearly as top notch. Naomi and Galina are 10/10.



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I generally like most of the wrestlers on the roster but the Usos do nothing for me. I don't love or hate them. I can't be bothered to learn the difference between them. :lol All I know is that one of them has an engaging personality.
> 
> Nikki and Brie are so easy to tell apart. For starters, Nikki is the perfect one. :grin2:


They're so for early-mid 2000's little kids. If they had interesting gimmicks and attire, they could get over. The ring work is there, just nothing else. I'd be interested in seeing them split for awhile and how each one does on their own.

Brie is the one who can't act for sh*t and was the worst of the talented divas (non-talented = Rosa, Cameron, Eva, and Tamina) in the ring, but she is way prettier than her sister to me. Nikki is far more talented, but every facial expression she makes looks fake, and her RBF is STRONG! She also looks better without makeup. With Brie it doesn't matter. She looks amazing 24/7.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Anyone calling these decent numbers is seriously delusional.
Wrestlemania killed even more viewers. Fact.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@Iapetus

If the Usos are no longer of use in the tag team division, I'd like to see them broken up and set up a brother/brother feud. I'm not sure there's a large audience for it but it could be worth it. For now, they're in the title scene with Reigns. I'll give credit to the Usos, Styles, Reigns and the Balor Club for helping to hold up Hour 3. This week's drop wasn't severe and kept only at 2%.

And I do agree that Brie is very beautiful. Nikki is just my crush. She's also more capable in the ring and cut better promos.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> @Iapetus
> 
> If the Usos are no longer of use in the tag team division, I'd like to see them broken up and set up a brother/brother feud. I'm not sure there's a large audience for it but it could be worth it. For now, they're in the title scene with Reigns. I'll give credit to the Usos, Styles, Reigns and the Balor Club for helping to hold up Hour 3. This week's drop wasn't severe and kept only at 2%.
> 
> And I do agree that Brie is very beautiful. Nikki is just my crush. She's also more capable in the ring and cut better promos.


I wonder if a brother/brother feud would do them good, or just show everyone which twin is better, which probably wouldn't do their real relationship any favors. Only one way to find out.:shrug 

They actually have 2 brothers. The other one resembles Jimmy slightly, but doesn't really look like a lot like any of them. His face is fatter. They look real shady tho...

And yes Nikki is very good and much better than her sister talent wise. Top dog push well deserved.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nikkis way hotter then Brie. And overall more talented so deserves top push imo.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Horrible numbers in a general sense, but decent increase when compared to last week and the viewership stayed constant throughout its three hours.


----------



## Vito Corleone

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> I respectfully disagree Brie > Nikki.


Mate, what's that in your sig? A game?!


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Vito Corleone said:


> Mate, what's that in your sig? A game?!


Yes it's Total Extreme Wrestling 2016.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Anyone calling these decent numbers is seriously delusional.
> Wrestlemania killed even more viewers. Fact.


These are the same numbers they drew when during the 2015 NFL season; and this was the night after a PPV. And people called them horrible ratings then. Now, they're decent. Ahhh hypocrisy..

:heyman6

These are disasterous numbers. Only good thing about it is they are not "worst of all time" like the previous two weeks. Just a slight notch up. Last week was a 2.2 rating. This week was a 2.3 rating. Horrendous.


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Those are decent numbers given the recent slump. The third hour drop off wasn't bad either. Reigns and AJ tore the house down on Sunday and got people talking.*
> 
> 
> *
> It's actually obvious when they start talking. Jimmy has way more charisma and would make a great smug heel. Jey is just kind of there.*


I'm impressed by your misguided positivity, a couple of points to dampen your adulation of the ratings boost:

- it was a raw after a ppv THEY ALWAYS get a ratings boost

- nothing can ever be claimed from one stat alone, you have to look at trends, so look at this figure in light of my above point and whether this rating is out of keeping with recent trends? The answer is 'no'.

- the trend for over the last year has been downwards this hasn't halted. Until the ratings steady and start to rise over months, the only conclusion that can be drawn is the new era (from wm) is yet to work, note 'yet to'.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> These are the same numbers they drew when during the 2015 NFL season; and this was the night after a PPV. And people called them horrible ratings then. Now, they're decent. Ahhh hypocrisy..


*You mean just like how you used financials to justify Rollins' abysmal title reign and complain when we point out the multiple financial records being broken under Roman? Yeah, hypocrisy. We get it, Rollins is injured and you're bitter. Let it go. This shit got old 6 months ago.*


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Some serious defense mechanisms being used in the post above mine to justify the push and success of a Lex Luger version 2.0.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *You mean just like how you used financials to justify Rollins' abysmal title reign and complain when we point out the multiple financial records being broken under Roman? Yeah, hypocrisy. We get it, Rollins is injured and you're bitter. Let it go. This shit got old 6 months ago.*


Rollins' abysmal title reign is outdrawing Roman Reigns' even more abysmal title reign.

Just saying.



Also, only reason I even brought up the financial records was because multiple people used to say if Rollins, or, someone like Rollins ever got the strap, that he would 'bankrupt' the company. Just another L for that crowd.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Saw this incredible post by a fan on reddit [His name was Nature_Boy_Ric_Flair]. His thoughts sum up everything wrong with Reigns at the top of the card:

*"Pretending Roman can just replace Cena despite never getting over for more than a week as a singles competitor is such a slap in the face to Cena.
Cena carried the company for a decade after its two biggest stars, Austin and Rock, left. Nobody thought there would be a guy on their level ever again, but Cena found a way to do it. He kept the business from dropping any further than it did after Wrestlemania 17. And instead of a "New Generation" era where the WWE barely has a pulse, Cena's era had pretty solid business. Not the best, but miles away from the worst. Competent.

That's fucking incredible and Cena deserves every word of praise he gets for it.
And now WWE has built itself into this big thing that will draw no matter what. 100,000ish people will come see a 7-hour Wrestlemania where the biggest star is a 46 year old Triple H. Why? Because for the last ten years, they've had a top guy with no ego, no politicking, and an insane level of competence. And his reign allowed WWE to stop focusing on things like building new stars, and instead build their company and create a Network.

And they decide his successor should be Roman Reigns. Who is not a proven draw (nobody is nowadays because nobody is over), whose merch sales are good, but not great (#3 for 2015), who has not brought in an ounce of mainstream attention to the product, and who has probably not been universally cheered more than five times in two years.
And that's fine with WWE. That's good enough. That's all it takes to be a top guy now, according to them. You just pick a guy with a good look and athletic ability, disregard the fact that he can't talk, and you just push him for two straight years (longer than Luger or Diesel or any other failed top guy). You have him beat everyone. You never have him lose or even look weak. And then when he gets booed, you don't give a shit. You ignore it for months and months until one day you just shrug and say "Oh, people do it for fun."

Because the merch will sell no matter what. Whoever gets pushed, sells merch. Whoever gets pushed the hardest, sells the most. The tickets will sell no matter what. The arena will fill no matter what. It doesn't matter who the top guy is, if he's good, or if he's even popular. Literally anyone can do it. That's the mindset.

And that's bullshit. Because the only reason WWE has the luxury of keeping a guy like Roman Reigns at the top is because of the hard work and sacrifices of John Cena. The guy came back early from just about every injury he's ever had. He rarely takes time off. And he did everything WWE ever asked of him for a decade.

His successor is going to be a guy who would have fallen flat on his face in any other era. A guy who would have had a three-month monster run and then been defeated by a more talented, charismatic, and marketable babyface. But now they pretend that's all it takes to be the next John Cena. Is there anything Reigns can do that nobody on the roster can do? No. Is there anything they can do that he can't? It's possible they can have a more successful run on top than him, but they won't get the opportunity because he's good enough.

Good enough is all WWE cares about now. With the Network, WWE has a perfect product to sell. Hardcore fans will find SOMETHING on the Network they like watching, so they'll never get rid of it. And WWE itself is the draw now, so ticket sales are in no danger of dropping. All WWE has to do is put on a show that has an absurd workrate (because that's all hardcore fans care about) and then keep doing Hogan-booking for Reigns and they'll be fine. As long as they have those Network subs, they're good. TV ratings are important, but they're still head and shoulders above 90% of cable television. So they're fine.

And that's what WWE (and pro wrestling) is now. It's fine. It's not great. It's not popular. It's not mainstream. It's not culturally significant. It's just fine. And with Roman Reigns at the top, that's all it'll ever be."*


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Rollins' abysmal title reign is outdrawing Roman Reigns' even more abysmal title reign.
> 
> Just saying.


*Even more abysmal? All I see are great reviews from journalists and legends about his feud with AJ. I'm not sure what you're reading, but keep living in your fantasy world where everything Roman does is bad, simply because it's Roman.*



> Also, only reason I even brought up the financial records was because multiple people used to say if Rollins, or, someone like Rollins ever got the strap, that he would 'bankrupt' the company. Just another L for that crowd.


*Just like you and many others said since summer '14 that Roman being on top would put them out of business, when they're doing all time great business outside of television ratings. For the record, I always said Rollins would never be a credible champion since December 2014, and I turned out to be right. That never had anything to do with financials.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Even more abysmal? All I see are great reviews from journalists and legends about his feud with AJ. I'm not sure what you're reading, but keep living in your fantasy world where everything Roman does is bad, simply because it's Roman.*


I meant in terms of ratings. It's been WAY worse. And what has been so good in this feud? The amazing mic work between the two? :lol Good lord. Yeah, what a feud!





> *Just like you and many others said since summer '14 that Roman being on top would put them out of business, when they're doing all time great business outside of television ratings. For the record, I always said Rollins would never be a credible champion since December 2014, and I turned out to be right. That never had anything to do with financials.*


Big deal. They did great financials last year with Rollins, as a chickenshit heel, who barely ever won on TV. If they can do good financials with that character as World Champion for 7 months, they can do great business with anyone as World Champ. Even better that a Rollins that lost so damn much on TV is out-drawing every Raw of this year by a comfortable margin. Think about that for a moment. :lol

And why would any Rollins fan be bitter? We sat in this thread last year and watched everyone shit a brick over the awful ratings; only for this year to be even worse and those same people have disappeared for long amounts of time. You talk about me bringing up stuff from 6 months ago and you bring up stuff from 2014? The silence is deafening; and fucking fantastic.

:banderas


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Roman Reigns is such an easy scapegoat; it's a kneejerk reaction to blame everything on him and the reason why WWE has become a niche product in recent years and doesn't draw the mainstream attention it used to. Before Reigns touched the belt, Rollins had it for almost a full year. The ratings fell and SNL wasn't exactly asking him to make appearances. Brock Lesnar, the Beast Incarnate and who has a very public profile, didn't move the needle much. John Cena, whom this diatribe places on a pedestal, has seen ratings erode under his FOTC run. He never matched the heights of his predecessors---nor has he become a household name like them. 

Where is the new boom that "Anyone But Roman" can bring? That's not a shot at those performers, but the fallacy in that anyone on the current roster can suddenly turn into Rock, Austin or Cena. Not with today's booking.

Reigns isn't perfect, but he's not the root of all evil in the WWE or their fortunes.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Roman Reigns is such an easy scapegoat; it's a kneejerk reaction to blame everything on him and the reason why WWE has become a nice product in recent years and doesn't draw the mainstream attention it used to. Before Reigns touched the belt, Rollins had it for almost a full year. Brock Lesnar, the Beast Incarnate and who has a very public profile, didn't move the needle much. John Cena, whom this diatribe places on a pedastal, has seen ratings erode under his FOTC run. He never matched the heights of his predecessors---nor has he become a household name like them.
> 
> Where is the new boom that "Anyone But Roman" can bring? That's not a shot at those performers, but the fallacy in that anyone on the current roster can suddenly turn into Rock, Austin or Cena. Not with today's booking.
> 
> Reigns isn't perfect, but he's not the root of all evil in the WWE or their fortunes.


That's nice and all, but you seem to have no problem with other past Champions getting shit on. This is what comes with that spot. Plus, we were told once the amazing Roman Reigns got the belt, that ratings would increase. Yet, the exact opposite has happened.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I meant in terms of ratings. It's been WAY worse. And what has been so good in this feud? The amazing mic work between the two? :lol Good lord. Yeah, what a feud!


*Yeah, just ignore the great match and brawls because you can't nitpick them without looking like a desperate hater :kobelol.*



> Big deal. They did great financials last year with Rollins, as a chickenshit heel, who barely ever won on TV. If they can do good financials with that character as World Champion for 7 months, they can do great business with anyone as World Champ. Even better that a Rollins that lost so damn much on TV is out-drawing every Raw of this year by a comfortable margin. Think about that for a moment. :lol
> 
> And why would any Rollins fan be bitter? We sat in this thread last year and watched everyone shit a brick over the awful ratings; only for this year to be even worse and those same people have disappeared for long amounts of time. The silence is deafening; and fucking fantastic.
> 
> :banderas


*All I can see is over half a year of your words backfiring on you from constantly talking down on Youtube and Social Media when they've both become official measurements of viewership since January :quimby. Roman continues to top both and your only response continues to be "but...but... the TV ratings..." Neilsen's using Twitter and Facebook now, so all you do is deflect to TV ratings because you're so desperate to discredit Roman and there's no point in arguing with you. No one's scared of you. You're wrong, you've been wrong, and you will continue to be wrong. Those measurements won't stop mattering because you say they don't, and we won't stop bringing them up.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> That's nice and all, but you seem to have no problem with other past Champions getting shit on. This is what comes with that spot. Plus, we were told once the amazing Roman Reigns got the belt, that ratings would increase. Yet, the exact opposite has happened.


Did I shit on Seth Rollins when he was being blamed for bad ratings? No. If you're going to call me out, I'd appreciate if the accusations were true. I don't sit in this thread taking cheap shots and shitting on Rollins or any other performer. I'm more than willing to own up to anything I've done. But don't accuse me of things I'm not guilty of. 

My issues with Rollins were his booking and overexposure. I have never denied his talent or ever believed he may be the reason the WWE goes out of business. 

I also wasn't here when CM Punk got shit on for his bad ratings. Only Cena, Sheamus, Rollins, Lesnar and Reigns have been champion since I've been posting. I don't make a habit of trashing them just because. I made my defense of Reigns because it was another rant about how Roman is the root of all the ills in the WWE.

As for the ratings, they will increase once the show gets better overall. Week to week, RAW snapped their slide on Monday. There was a bump which you have gone out of your way to downplay.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Yeah, just ignore the great match and brawls because you can't nitpick them without looking like a desperate hater :kobelol.*


Great brawls? The ones where the same guy always comes out on top? What suspense. :lmao I wonder who will win this one! No reason for anyone to be a jealous hater of someone who can't even cut a 2 mintue promo consistently. Sorry, but it's the truth.





> *All I can see is over half a year of your words backfiring on you from constantly talking down on Youtube and Social Media when they've both become official measurements of viewership since January :quimby. Roman continues to top both and your only response continues to be "but...but... the TV ratings..." Neilsen's using Twitter and Facebook now, so all you do is deflect to TV ratings because you're so desperate to discredit Roman and there's no point in arguing with you. No one's scared of you. You're wrong, you've been wrong, and you will continue to be wrong. Those measurements won't stop mattering because you say they don't, and we won't stop bringing them up.*


TV ratings don't matter, but they mattered SO MUCH to you 6 months ago when you'd come in this thread and try to bring down Rollins. :lmao 

TV ratings, the TV deal, and Ad revenue and sponsorships for 3 hours of Raw and 2 hours of Smackdown are such a bigger factor than Youtube it's not even funny. When Youtube pays WWE over $200 Million dollars, let us know. Until then, it's a drop in the bucket compared to TV ratings and it always will be. The hypocrisy continues. TV ratings don't matter know, but they meant soooo much just a few months ago. :lmao You can't make this shit up. 

I honestly couldn't write a better script that the ratings for this year are even lower than they were for last year. I honestly didn't think it would happen. But the fact that it did? Oh man. Like I said, I couldn't write a better script if I tried.

And why would anyone be scared of me? I'm not trying to be scary. :lmao I'm just being honest just like you were last year, right?


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No offense Legit Boss. But your not exactly impartial now are you lol. I agree though Reigns is not responsible for the ratings. Nor was Seth, nor was Bryan, Nor was Cena, nor was Punk. Now Wwe won't ever find a Draw like Rock and Austin ever again. Rock Still has the highest rated raw segment ever. This is your life . Back then they booked their Raws like Ppvs. But with a ghost town like market. Wwe have no incentive. So they've been going through the motions since 2002 tbh. Its the overall product.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

AJ in main event and hour 3 doesn't go below 3 million.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Did I shit on Seth Rollins when he was being blamed for bad ratings? No. If you're going to call me out, I'd appreciate if the accusations were true. I don't sit in this thread taking cheap shots and shitting on Rollins or any other performer. I'm more than willing to own up to anything I've done. But don't accuse me of things I'm not guilty of.
> 
> My issues with Rollins were his booking and overexposure. I have never denied his talent or ever believed he may be the reason the WWE goes out of business.
> 
> I also wasn't here when CM Punk got shit on for his bad ratings. Only Cena, Sheamus, Rollins, Lesnar and Reigns have been champion since I've been posting. I don't make a habit of trashing them just because. I made my defense of Reigns because it was another rant about how Roman is the root of all the ills in the WWE.
> 
> As for the ratings, they will increase once the show gets better overall. Week to week, RAW snapped their slide on Monday. There was a bump which you have gone out of your way to downplay.


You sure as hell don't defend the others, though, that's for damn sure. Only weak excuses for Roman when he has been the face of this show the entire year. Sorry, but it's true.

Celebrating the increase this week from the 2 lowest rated Raws of all time? From a 2.2 to a 2.3? The same numbers WWE were drawing during the NFL season last year? Really? Alright then..


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Great brawls? The ones where the same guy always comes out on top? What suspense. :lmao I wonder who will win


*
It's just about as suspenseful as Rollins losing clean.*


> No reason for anyone to be a jealous hater of someone who can't even cut a 2 mintue promo consistently. Sorry, but it's the truth.


*
Yet you dedicate the vast majority of your time here to whining about Roman in every single thread with his name in the title(and some without). Maybe if you spent that much time on your favorites, they'd be half as relevant.
*



> TV ratings don't matter, but they mattered SO MUCH to you 6 months ago when you'd come in this thread and try to bring down Rollins. :lmao


*Did I say TV ratings don't matter? No, try to keep up. The show SUCKED under Rollins because he took up 40 minutes of it with mediocre, redundant promos and jobbing. At least now, the entire show is balanced. It's not JUST about Roman and his short, mediocre promos. I complained because more than half of the show was dedicated to a jobber champion. You have no real reason to complain, but you do because Roman is the champion and you're bitter about it.*



> TV ratings, the TV deal, and Ad revenue and sponsorships for 3 hours of Raw and 2 hours of Smackdown are such a bigger factor than Youtube it's not even funny. When Youtube pays WWE over $200 Million dollars, let us know. Until then, it's a drop in the bucket compared to TV ratings and it always will be. The hypocrisy continues. TV ratings don't matter know, but they meant soooo much just a few months ago. :lmao You can't make this shit up.


*
Yet WWE is still getting their $32 mil for that third hour, so Vince isn't hurting, and no amount of your doomsday warnings is going to change that. Remember when your argument for Rollins was conveniently "ratings decrease every year." Now all of a sudden with Rollins out of the crosshairs, all ratings drops are Roman's fault. What a surprise.*



> And why would anyone be scared of me? I'm not trying to be scary. :lmao I'm just being honest just like you were last year, right?


*You want to accuse me and other Roman fans of hiding when we haven't gone anywhere. We've been all over the place. We just ironically talk about him less than you and the other haters do. Maybe you should get your own Roman avatars too. I've got plenty to go around.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> You sure as hell don't defend the others, though, that's for damn sure. Only weak excuses for Roman when he has been the face of this show the entire year. Sorry, but it's true.
> 
> Celebrating the increase this week from the 2 lowest rated Raws of all time? From a 2.2 to a 2.3? The same numbers WWE were drawing during the NFL season last year? Really? Alright then..


You defend Seth Rollins enough for everybody. That's for damn sure. But I see you're backtracking from your earlier accusation. I think you're a cool poster but don't ever confuse with me with someone who is going to take being lied on. I do not shit on Rollins for the bad ratings and I sure as hell don't appreciate trying to lump me into whatever tit for tat you're going for. If that means you don't like me anymore, so be it. But that's not something I tolerate. If I'm wrong, I will say so. I've shown more than once that I'm not too proud to own up to any mistake. But I do not appreciate being made out to be some liar. 

@SnapOrTap posted the Reddit comment which was about Roman Reigns. I wasn't going to talk about the man in the moon in response to it. 

As for defending Reigns and not going into keyboard warrior mode for others, that's my business. I'm not trying to fit in with the cool kids around here who bash Reigns for sport. 

And yes, after two weeks of the ratings falling, I think it should be recognized when there is a bump.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> It's just about as suspenseful as Rollins losing clean.*
> *
> Yet you dedicate the vast majority of your time here to whining about Roman in every single thread with his name in the title. Maybe if you spent that much time on your favorites, they'd be half as relevant.
> *


Meh. It's no different than the whining you did all of last year. And my favorites being relevant? Oh, is that the reason everyone on here is awaiting Rollins' return more than current day Raw and have for months now? Seems pretty relevant to me.





> *Did I say TV ratings don't matter? No, try to keep up. The show SUCKED under Rollins because he took up 40 minutes of it with mediocre, redundant promos and jobbing. At least now, the entire show is balanced. It's not JUST about Roman. I complained because more than half of the show was dedicated to a jobber champion. You have no real reason to complain, but you do because Roman is the champion and you're bitter about it.*


You make it seem like I'm the only one complaining when a good 90%-95% of the people on this forum are bitching about the product. :lol People complain because the World Champion can't talk worth a damn, can't act worth a damn, and is also boring as hell. He bring NOTHING to the table. The fans have talked with their remotes and they aren't enjoying what they see, either.




> *
> Yet WWE is still getting their $32 mil for that third hour, so Vince isn't hurting, and no amount of your doomsday warnings is going to change that. Remember when your argument for Rollins was conveniently "ratings decrease every year." Now all of a sudden with Rollins out of the crosshairs, all ratings drops are Roman's fault. What a surprise.*


And yet it didn't stop you from blaming only Rollins last year. :shrug We also blame Reigns somewhat because we read on this board for years from you how Reigns has MASSIVE MAINSTREAM APPEAL. Hulk Hogan had it. Austin had it. Rock had it. Reigns does not have it. If he, or anyone on the roster did, they wouldn't be experiencing the lowest ratings in the 23 year history of Raw. :shrug





> *You want to accuse me and other Roman fans of hiding when we haven't gone anywhere. We've been all over the place. We just ironically talk about him less than you and the other haters do. Maybe you should get your own Roman avatars too. I've got plenty to go around.*


Weak comeback for hiding from this thread for so long, especially the last two weeks. Sorry.


----------



## Oxidamus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Roman Reigns is such an easy scapegoat; it's a kneejerk reaction to blame everything on him and the reason why WWE has become a nice product in recent years and doesn't draw the mainstream attention it used to.


Here's what I'm getting here.

I don't think ShowStopper is accusing you of anything. You are right about the product itself being in a decline. It's in a decline for many, many reasons that wrestlers themselves cannot control. No one despite how charismatic or fantastic they are in the ring is going to manage to 'fix' the company or wrestling as a whole if they were the WWE figurehead.

What I'm fairly sure ShowStopper's argument is, is basically exactly that. He's responding to the claims of Rollins being the reason the ratings declined according to many Reigns fans as for some reason The Shield is a real feud to them. He's now just pointing out that *if* they want to blame Rollins, they should also be blaming Reigns, because that's their mindset. However I firmly do believe ShowStopper thinks the same as both you _and_ I do, the show is not dictated by the champion themselves, and primarily by forces outside of the champion and other on-air talent.

TL;DR you agree, but you're defending something he isn't attacking. He's attacking the hypocritical mindset of many Reigns fans, not Reigns or Reigns fans themselves.


I have seen you post in defence of Rollins' reign when discussing it so I know you are impartial but it does seem that you often come to defend either Reigns, or other Reigns fans, more than others, and you have misinterpreted the point here, I think.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> You defend Seth Rollins enough for everybody. That's for damn sure. But I see you're backtracking from your earlier accusation. I think you're a cool poster but don't ever confuse with me with someone who is going to take being lied on. I do not shit on Rollins for the bad ratings and I sure as hell don't appreciate trying to lump me into whatever tit for tat you're going for. If that means you don't like me anymore, so be it. But that's not something I tolerate. If I'm wrong, I will say so. I've shown more than once that I'm not too proud to own up to any mistake. But I do not appreciate being made out to be some liar.
> 
> @SnapOrTap posted the Reddit comment which was about Roman Reigns. I wasn't going to talk about the man in the moon in response to it.
> 
> As for defending Reigns and not going into keyboard warrior mode for others, that's my business. I'm not trying to fit in with the cool kids around here who bash Reigns for sport.
> 
> And yes, after two weeks of the ratings falling, I think it should be recognized when there is a bump.


You didn't bash Rollins, but you did bash the rating itself, which is understandable, because they were bad last year, too. But this year you've been alot more quiet on the rating itself. That's all I'm gonna say.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> You didn't bash Rollins, but you did bash the rating itself, which is understandable, because they were bad last year, too. But this year you've been alot more quiet on the rating itself. That's all I'm gonna say.


Quiet how? I'm in this thread every week. I post the ratings and breakdowns, even when they reflect poorly on Reigns.

When the third hour dropped more than 16% the week Reigns was the main event, I was one of the first to comment on that. I could've no sold it but I've been here. Good numbers or bad, I've been here. I don't pretend that Roman has the drawing power of The Rock, Austin. I just don't think it all comes down to him. He and his angle own his part in any decrease but there are other factors involved.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Meh. It's no different than the whining you did all of last year. And my favorites being relevant? Oh, is that the reason everyone on here is awaiting Rollins' return more than current day Raw and have for months now? Seems pretty relevant to me.
> 
> 
> You make it seem like I'm the only one complaining when a good 90%-95% of the people on this forum are bitching about the product. :lol People complain because the World Champion can't talk worth a damn, can't act worth a damn, and is also boring as hell. He bring NOTHING to the table. The fans have talked with their remotes and they aren't enjoying what they see, either.


*Are you bunking with Patrick Star now? Again, all I've seen in the last 48 hours is raving from ex Reigns haters and neutral people about how great his feud with AJ is, not just Roman fans. You can continue to live in denial, but it's not changing the facts. Keep pretending Reigns can't wrestle in 2016 as if anyone with an ounce of credibility believes that horseshit. Roman's not a good actor. And? News Flash: 90% of Rollins promos sucked, mostly because they were 20 minutes of repetition, but you'll be quick to cry about Roman repeating one line.
*





> And yet it didn't stop you from blaming only Rollins last year. :shrug


*Here's another reminder that you and every other person whining about Reigns since WM 30 season brought this on yourselves when you said he'd put the company out of business. Rollins' title reign sent ratings into the ground and every excuse in the world was made, but now none of those excuses apply to Reigns. How predictable.*



> We also blame Reigns somewhat because we read on this board for years from you how Reigns has MASSIVE MAINSTREAM APPEAL. Hulk Hogan had it. Austin had it. Rock had it. Reigns does not have it.


*Did you miss the part where Roman had the highest ESPN ratings of any wrestler? I'm sure you did, so let me remind you:* http://www.wrestlingforum.com/gener...drew-highest-ratings-espn-9.html#post56716569
*
Did you miss Roman topping Youtube numbers for 6 months straight and consistently being the most discussed wrestler? Of course not, because lolYouTubedoesn'tcountcuzit'snotTV. *




> Weak comeback for hiding from this thread for so long, especially the last two weeks. Sorry.


*Do I need to use simpler terms? No one's hiding from you. You're a wall of hypocrisy. You get proven wrong regularly when Roman tops multiple metrics and desperately deflect by running to the TV ratings that you hand waved away during Rollins' mediocre title reign.*


----------



## 3ku1

SnapOrTap said:


> Saw this incredible post by a fan on reddit [His name was Nature_Boy_Ric_Flair]. His thoughts sum up everything wrong with Reigns at the top of the card:
> 
> *"Pretending Roman can just replace Cena despite never getting over for more than a week as a singles competitor is such a slap in the face to Cena.
> Cena carried the company for a decade after its two biggest stars, Austin and Rock, left. Nobody thought there would be a guy on their level ever again, but Cena found a way to do it. He kept the business from dropping any further than it did after Wrestlemania 17. And instead of a "New Generation" era where the WWE barely has a pulse, Cena's era had pretty solid business. Not the best, but miles away from the worst. Competent.
> 
> That's fucking incredible and Cena deserves every word of praise he gets for it.
> And now WWE has built itself into this big thing that will draw no matter what. 100,000ish people will come see a 7-hour Wrestlemania where the biggest star is a 46 year old Triple H. Why? Because for the last ten years, they've had a top guy with no ego, no politicking, and an insane level of competence. And his reign allowed WWE to stop focusing on things like building new stars, and instead build their company and create a Network.
> 
> And they decide his successor should be Roman Reigns. Who is not a proven draw (nobody is nowadays because nobody is over), whose merch sales are good, but not great (#3 for 2015), who has not brought in an ounce of mainstream attention to the product, and who has probably not been universally cheered more than five times in two years.
> And that's fine with WWE. That's good enough. That's all it takes to be a top guy now, according to them. You just pick a guy with a good look and athletic ability, disregard the fact that he can't talk, and you just push him for two straight years (longer than Luger or Diesel or any other failed top guy). You have him beat everyone. You never have him lose or even look weak. And then when he gets booed, you don't give a shit. You ignore it for months and months until one day you just shrug and say "Oh, people do it for fun."
> 
> Because the merch will sell no matter what. Whoever gets pushed, sells merch. Whoever gets pushed the hardest, sells the most. The tickets will sell no matter what. The arena will fill no matter what. It doesn't matter who the top guy is, if he's good, or if he's even popular. Literally anyone can do it. That's the mindset.
> 
> And that's bullshit. Because the only reason WWE has the luxury of keeping a guy like Roman Reigns at the top is because of the hard work and sacrifices of John Cena. The guy came back early from just about every injury he's ever had. He rarely takes time off. And he did everything WWE ever asked of him for a decade.
> 
> His successor is going to be a guy who would have fallen flat on his face in any other era. A guy who would have had a three-month monster run and then been defeated by a more talented, charismatic, and marketable babyface. But now they pretend that's all it takes to be the next John Cena. Is there anything Reigns can do that nobody on the roster can do? No. Is there anything they can do that he can't? It's possible they can have a more successful run on top than him, but they won't get the opportunity because he's good enough.
> 
> Good enough is all WWE cares about now. With the Network, WWE has a perfect product to sell. Hardcore fans will find SOMETHING on the Network they like watching, so they'll never get rid of it. And WWE itself is the draw now, so ticket sales are in no danger of dropping. All WWE has to do is put on a show that has an absurd workrate (because that's all hardcore fans care about) and then keep doing Hogan-booking for Reigns and they'll be fine. As long as they have those Network subs, they're good. TV ratings are important, but they're still head and shoulders above 90% of cable television. So they're fine.
> 
> And that's what WWE (and pro wrestling) is now. It's fine. It's not great. It's not popular. It's not mainstream. It's not culturally significant. It's just fine. And with Roman Reigns at the top, that's all it'll ever be."*


No one should ever post about the state of Wwe after this. Hes right Wwe strive to be accepted, almost be mediocre.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Are you bunking with Patrick Star now? Again, all I've seen in the last 48 hours is raving from ex Reigns haters and neutral people about how great his feud with AJ is, not just Roman fans. You can continue to live in denial, but it's not changing the facts. Keep pretending Reigns can't wrestle in 2016 as if anyone believes that horseshit. Roman's not a good actor. And? News Flash: 90% of Rollins promos sucked, mostly because they were 20 minutes of repetition, but you'll be quick to cry about Roman repeating one line.
> *


I've been on this board to be specific, and most are shitting on Payback and Raw, because NOTHING even happened. :lol If you want to think Reigns is a great wrestler, then go right ahead. Of course Rollins 20 minute promos were rough. He cut 20 minute promos EVERY week. I'd like to see Reigns even just attempt that.






> *Here's another reminder that you and every other person whining about Reigns since WM 30 season brought this on yourselves when you said he'd put the company out of business. Rollins' title reign sent ratings into the ground and every excuse in the world was made, but now none of those excuses apply to Reigns. How predictable.*


Hey, you guys should've thought about that last year in this thread and others blaming the ratings on Rollins. I told you that if the ratings ever dropped once Reigns finally got the belt, that this place would destroy him and that's exactly what happened. :shrug And people said Rollins would make WWE go bankrupt, too. :shrug




> *Did you miss the part where Roman had the highest ESPN ratings of any wrestler? I'm sure you did, so let me remind you:* http://www.wrestlingforum.com/gener...drew-highest-ratings-espn-9.html#post56716569
> *
> Did you miss Roman topping Youtube numbers for 6 months straight and consistently being the most discussed wrestler? Of course not, because lolYouTubedoesn'tcountcuzit'snotTV. *


That's nice, but that means fuck all in the long run. It hasn't done shit for WWE themselves. They're still in the same position, actually, worse than last year from a ratings standpoint for both of their shows.






> *Do I need to use simpler terms? No one's hiding from you. You're a wall of hypocrisy. You get proven wrong regularly when Roman tops multiple metrics and desperately deflect by running to the TV ratings that you hand waved away during Rollins' mediocre title reign.*


This coming from the guy who lived in this thread last year making ratings to be out a huge deal. The same guy who celebrated when Raw did a good rating the night after Reigns beat the snot out of H which was just a few months ago. Now, they convienently mean nothing. And I'm the hypocritical one? At least I was in this thread every week last year, unlike you this year, because you know this Reigns' experiment has been a HUGE failure. The guy whose gimmick is that people love to boo him. That's the most pathetic thing I've ever heard re: wrestling. This is pointless.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> Saw this incredible post by a fan on reddit [His name was Nature_Boy_Ric_Flair]. His thoughts sum up everything wrong with Reigns at the top of the card:
> 
> *"Pretending Roman can just replace Cena despite never getting over for more than a week as a singles competitor is such a slap in the face to Cena.
> Cena carried the company for a decade after its two biggest stars, Austin and Rock, left. Nobody thought there would be a guy on their level ever again, but Cena found a way to do it. He kept the business from dropping any further than it did after Wrestlemania 17. And instead of a "New Generation" era where the WWE barely has a pulse, Cena's era had pretty solid business. Not the best, but miles away from the worst. Competent.
> 
> That's fucking incredible and Cena deserves every word of praise he gets for it.
> And now WWE has built itself into this big thing that will draw no matter what. 100,000ish people will come see a 7-hour Wrestlemania where the biggest star is a 46 year old Triple H. Why? Because for the last ten years, they've had a top guy with no ego, no politicking, and an insane level of competence. And his reign allowed WWE to stop focusing on things like building new stars, and instead build their company and create a Network.
> 
> And they decide his successor should be Roman Reigns. Who is not a proven draw (nobody is nowadays because nobody is over), whose merch sales are good, but not great (#3 for 2015), who has not brought in an ounce of mainstream attention to the product, and who has probably not been universally cheered more than five times in two years.
> And that's fine with WWE. That's good enough. That's all it takes to be a top guy now, according to them. You just pick a guy with a good look and athletic ability, disregard the fact that he can't talk, and you just push him for two straight years (longer than Luger or Diesel or any other failed top guy). You have him beat everyone. You never have him lose or even look weak. And then when he gets booed, you don't give a shit. You ignore it for months and months until one day you just shrug and say "Oh, people do it for fun."
> 
> Because the merch will sell no matter what. Whoever gets pushed, sells merch. Whoever gets pushed the hardest, sells the most. The tickets will sell no matter what. The arena will fill no matter what. It doesn't matter who the top guy is, if he's good, or if he's even popular. Literally anyone can do it. That's the mindset.
> 
> And that's bullshit. Because the only reason WWE has the luxury of keeping a guy like Roman Reigns at the top is because of the hard work and sacrifices of John Cena. The guy came back early from just about every injury he's ever had. He rarely takes time off. And he did everything WWE ever asked of him for a decade.
> 
> His successor is going to be a guy who would have fallen flat on his face in any other era. A guy who would have had a three-month monster run and then been defeated by a more talented, charismatic, and marketable babyface. But now they pretend that's all it takes to be the next John Cena. Is there anything Reigns can do that nobody on the roster can do? No. Is there anything they can do that he can't? It's possible they can have a more successful run on top than him, but they won't get the opportunity because he's good enough.
> 
> Good enough is all WWE cares about now. With the Network, WWE has a perfect product to sell. Hardcore fans will find SOMETHING on the Network they like watching, so they'll never get rid of it. And WWE itself is the draw now, so ticket sales are in no danger of dropping. All WWE has to do is put on a show that has an absurd workrate (because that's all hardcore fans care about) and then keep doing Hogan-booking for Reigns and they'll be fine. As long as they have those Network subs, they're good. TV ratings are important, but they're still head and shoulders above 90% of cable television. So they're fine.
> 
> And that's what WWE (and pro wrestling) is now. It's fine. It's not great. It's not popular. It's not mainstream. It's not culturally significant. It's just fine. And with Roman Reigns at the top, that's all it'll ever be."*


Wow, that was a great read. Just shows you everything that's wrong today. You used to get sent to the back of the line when you failed which he has as a face but it seems so different now. Vince and Co seem to just not care anymore, that could explain why the ratings have hit record lows without NFL games on. 

Could be a bloodbath when the NFL starts.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> Saw this incredible post by a fan on reddit [His name was Nature_Boy_Ric_Flair]. His thoughts sum up everything wrong with Reigns at the top of the card:
> 
> *"Pretending Roman can just replace Cena despite never getting over for more than a week as a singles competitor is such a slap in the face to Cena.
> Cena carried the company for a decade after its two biggest stars, Austin and Rock, left. Nobody thought there would be a guy on their level ever again, but Cena found a way to do it. He kept the business from dropping any further than it did after Wrestlemania 17. And instead of a "New Generation" era where the WWE barely has a pulse, Cena's era had pretty solid business. Not the best, but miles away from the worst. Competent.
> 
> That's fucking incredible and Cena deserves every word of praise he gets for it.
> And now WWE has built itself into this big thing that will draw no matter what. 100,000ish people will come see a 7-hour Wrestlemania where the biggest star is a 46 year old Triple H. Why? Because for the last ten years, they've had a top guy with no ego, no politicking, and an insane level of competence. And his reign allowed WWE to stop focusing on things like building new stars, and instead build their company and create a Network.
> 
> And they decide his successor should be Roman Reigns. Who is not a proven draw (nobody is nowadays because nobody is over), whose merch sales are good, but not great (#3 for 2015), who has not brought in an ounce of mainstream attention to the product, and who has probably not been universally cheered more than five times in two years.
> And that's fine with WWE. That's good enough. That's all it takes to be a top guy now, according to them. You just pick a guy with a good look and athletic ability, disregard the fact that he can't talk, and you just push him for two straight years (longer than Luger or Diesel or any other failed top guy). You have him beat everyone. You never have him lose or even look weak. And then when he gets booed, you don't give a shit. You ignore it for months and months until one day you just shrug and say "Oh, people do it for fun."
> 
> Because the merch will sell no matter what. Whoever gets pushed, sells merch. Whoever gets pushed the hardest, sells the most. The tickets will sell no matter what. The arena will fill no matter what. It doesn't matter who the top guy is, if he's good, or if he's even popular. Literally anyone can do it. That's the mindset.
> 
> And that's bullshit. Because the only reason WWE has the luxury of keeping a guy like Roman Reigns at the top is because of the hard work and sacrifices of John Cena. The guy came back early from just about every injury he's ever had. He rarely takes time off. And he did everything WWE ever asked of him for a decade.
> 
> His successor is going to be a guy who would have fallen flat on his face in any other era. A guy who would have had a three-month monster run and then been defeated by a more talented, charismatic, and marketable babyface. But now they pretend that's all it takes to be the next John Cena. Is there anything Reigns can do that nobody on the roster can do? No. Is there anything they can do that he can't? It's possible they can have a more successful run on top than him, but they won't get the opportunity because he's good enough.
> 
> Good enough is all WWE cares about now. With the Network, WWE has a perfect product to sell. Hardcore fans will find SOMETHING on the Network they like watching, so they'll never get rid of it. And WWE itself is the draw now, so ticket sales are in no danger of dropping. All WWE has to do is put on a show that has an absurd workrate (because that's all hardcore fans care about) and then keep doing Hogan-booking for Reigns and they'll be fine. As long as they have those Network subs, they're good. TV ratings are important, but they're still head and shoulders above 90% of cable television. So they're fine.
> 
> And that's what WWE (and pro wrestling) is now. It's fine. It's not great. It's not popular. It's not mainstream. It's not culturally significant. It's just fine. And with Roman Reigns at the top, that's all it'll ever be."*


It's like I said earlier ITT, Reigns is absolutely interchangeable and it's not even funny. He's not a ratings or a business killer but he's not an integral part of the brand's overall draw, either. He's window dressing and nothing more. We don't have anyone in the company right now that can transcend the business and make the brand mainstream again. Last two who had that chance were Punk and Bryan.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> Saw this incredible post by a fan on reddit [His name was Nature_Boy_Ric_Flair]. His thoughts sum up everything wrong with Reigns at the top of the card:
> 
> *"Pretending Roman can just replace Cena despite never getting over for more than a week as a singles competitor is such a slap in the face to Cena.
> Cena carried the company for a decade after its two biggest stars, Austin and Rock, left. Nobody thought there would be a guy on their level ever again, but Cena found a way to do it. He kept the business from dropping any further than it did after Wrestlemania 17. And instead of a "New Generation" era where the WWE barely has a pulse, Cena's era had pretty solid business. Not the best, but miles away from the worst. Competent.
> 
> That's fucking incredible and Cena deserves every word of praise he gets for it.
> And now WWE has built itself into this big thing that will draw no matter what. 100,000ish people will come see a 7-hour Wrestlemania where the biggest star is a 46 year old Triple H. Why? Because for the last ten years, they've had a top guy with no ego, no politicking, and an insane level of competence. And his reign allowed WWE to stop focusing on things like building new stars, and instead build their company and create a Network.
> 
> And they decide his successor should be Roman Reigns. Who is not a proven draw (nobody is nowadays because nobody is over), whose merch sales are good, but not great (#3 for 2015), who has not brought in an ounce of mainstream attention to the product, and who has probably not been universally cheered more than five times in two years.
> And that's fine with WWE. That's good enough. That's all it takes to be a top guy now, according to them. You just pick a guy with a good look and athletic ability, disregard the fact that he can't talk, and you just push him for two straight years (longer than Luger or Diesel or any other failed top guy). You have him beat everyone. You never have him lose or even look weak. And then when he gets booed, you don't give a shit. You ignore it for months and months until one day you just shrug and say "Oh, people do it for fun."
> 
> Because the merch will sell no matter what. Whoever gets pushed, sells merch. Whoever gets pushed the hardest, sells the most. The tickets will sell no matter what. The arena will fill no matter what. It doesn't matter who the top guy is, if he's good, or if he's even popular. Literally anyone can do it. That's the mindset.
> 
> And that's bullshit. Because the only reason WWE has the luxury of keeping a guy like Roman Reigns at the top is because of the hard work and sacrifices of John Cena. The guy came back early from just about every injury he's ever had. He rarely takes time off. And he did everything WWE ever asked of him for a decade.
> 
> His successor is going to be a guy who would have fallen flat on his face in any other era. A guy who would have had a three-month monster run and then been defeated by a more talented, charismatic, and marketable babyface. But now they pretend that's all it takes to be the next John Cena. Is there anything Reigns can do that nobody on the roster can do? No. Is there anything they can do that he can't? It's possible they can have a more successful run on top than him, but they won't get the opportunity because he's good enough.
> 
> Good enough is all WWE cares about now. With the Network, WWE has a perfect product to sell. Hardcore fans will find SOMETHING on the Network they like watching, so they'll never get rid of it. And WWE itself is the draw now, so ticket sales are in no danger of dropping. All WWE has to do is put on a show that has an absurd workrate (because that's all hardcore fans care about) and then keep doing Hogan-booking for Reigns and they'll be fine. As long as they have those Network subs, they're good. TV ratings are important, but they're still head and shoulders above 90% of cable television. So they're fine.
> 
> And that's what WWE (and pro wrestling) is now. It's fine. It's not great. It's not popular. It's not mainstream. It's not culturally significant. It's just fine. And with Roman Reigns at the top, that's all it'll ever be."*


You know, that's right and good what he says, but just assuming Ticket sales and ratings will not drop because WWE is the draw is dangerous. Ticket sales DID drop, even for this Wrestlemania.
That's a fact that I'm genuinely surprised barely gets mentioned. The WWE crowd didn't give a fuck about Reigns, ticket sales were slow to the point of WWE actually being concerned about it. Meltzer this week reiterated that ticket sales significantly picked up AFTER Shane and Undertaker was announced. That was in February, when WM was on sale for months already.

Ratings indicate less and less people give a shit. Was Payback sold out? I don't think so.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I was following mania 32 ticket sales closely (as many in the travel thread were) and demand was higher for that event than any stadium mania since they started running stadiums again even more so than 29 in their home market. That was before anyone was announced. There are dozens of posts from November from posters panicking they can't find tickets and long time time folks like me and others assuring them WWE would release more (but that never happened)

There was fuck all tickets left outside behind the stage in mid November so not sure where the extra tickets would have come from as they never appeared on Ticketmaster. Travel packages sold out in record time, two batches of standing tickets sold out instantly, raw, Hof and nxt tickets were like goldust, even axxess sessions were selling out in advance which is unheard of

Payback was sold out yes


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE is pretending people love to boo. They blame weak ratings on TV as a whole. They pretend Reigns has something to do with selling 97.000 asses. Reigns marks pretend him being in the ring with some of the best ever equals him being able to wrestle. They blame the booking. They blame the cities. They blame casuals. They blame hardcores. They point to YouTube why he is supposedly over. They point to Facebook why he is supposedly over.

You know what this whole thing reminds me of?

Did you ever go through a phase early in life with women, when you just weren't able to succeed with them? You flirted and flirted, and you tried your damnest to score, and all you'd get was mostly friendliness, soft rejection, and responses like "oh, I bet many girls want to be with you", or "you're so nice and sweet, you'll find someone", or your grandma would say "you're a nice boy, it will Happen". And you'd lie to yourself and say "I'm good, there is nothing wrong with what I do". You'd probably even cuss someone out trying to be honest, accusing him to be bitter.
But you lie to yourself, you let everyone pat you on the back, and give you attention and pity comments, instead of being honest to yourself and admitting the obvious, namely that YOU SUCK AT DATING AND HAVE NO CLUE WHAT IT TAKES! 

That's what Roman Reigns is. All These people give those pathetic excuses why he is "not that bad" or that "it takes Time". "Give him more time" is the equivalent of "it's not you, it's me". Citing YouTube views equals the lie "See, that girl liked me, it just didn't work".

Please, by god, Vince, anyone, realize that Reigns lacks serious wrestling game, and just like a teenage boy failing at one girl after the other in school until he has an irreversible rep with EVERY girl, his stock is dropping with every week. PULL THE PLUG.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> I was following mania 32 ticket sales closely (as many in the travel thread were) and demand was higher for that event than any stadium mania since they started running stadiums again even more so than 29 in their home market. That was before anyone was announced. There are dozens of posts from November from posters panicking they can't find tickets and long time time folks like me and others assuring them WWE would release more (but that never happened)
> 
> There was fuck all tickets left outside behind the stage in mid November so not sure where the extra tickets would have come from as they never appeared on Ticketmaster. Travel packages sold out in record time, two batches of standing tickets sold out instantly, raw, Hof and nxt tickets were like goldust, even axxess sessions were selling out in advance which is unheard of
> 
> Payback was sold out yes


Nope, sorry, I do trust Meltzer because he has the hard Numbers, instead of "I followed closely" and hearsay.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@ShowStopper @Legit BOSS

To be fair, overall ratings for either guy have been bad, for various reasons the most of which are outside of both Rollins' and Reigns' control. Rollins was overexposed to a massive degree, and he made due with the typical chickenshit heel gimmick to the best he could. His promos were good when he was on point, but for a good amount of time he did come off as monotone and generally repetitive as all hell.

Reigns so far in his title reign has been decent, but he's also in a very interesting feud which includes one of the best in the industry in AJ Styles, as well as Gallows/Anderson, and the Usos (who have even become somewhat deeper characters after the last Raw). However, the whole badass tweener thing is overshadowed by WWE trying to make him out to be this so called face who the fans love to boo, which is a terrible excuse to justify the boos Reigns is getting. Also, with the exception of the one promo Reigns did on the first Raw following Mania, he's been pretty repetitive since then, and he doesn't have the delivery to pull it off multiple times. It's also early to compare their title reigns, so we'll have to see what happens with this. 

So, I'm just playing neutral Switzerland in your argument, because IDK. :lol


----------



## udarsha45

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Guys when does the football season starts again?

I would love to see how the RAW ratings would suffer then. Hope the ratings falls deeper.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings don't fall on one guy but no, Reigns isn't the casual savant he was made out to be. He didn't even need the title for that to be evident. Think back to the night WWE had their largest 3rd hour drop in history since moving to the 3 hour format. Guess who opened that show? 


Shane McMahon.


It was the night he returned. Reigns was announced for the main event afterwards, and over 800k of the casual and Attitude Era fans that tuned in to see Shane changed the channel afterwards. They didn't stick around for Roman because he isn't a draw. There was this notion that all it took for a guy to draw is having a "good look." 

*Wrong*.


Casual fans value personality and larger than life characters more than anything . Roman has *NEVER* had that quality. His biggest pro has always been (from the day he arrived) that he had "the look. " If Austin came along today, we'd likely *never* experience Austin 3:16 because Roman has a head full of hair and cool tattoos while Steve was just some bald ******* in black tights and knee braces from Texas. That would be Vince's rationale, despite us *all* knowing Austin was such a draw that he lit the match that sparked a legendary boom period.


It's why "the look" bring used to justify business is asinine. Romans "look" stands out compared to Steve, but Roman would look out of place standing across the ring and engaged in a feud with Austin because Steve's star power dwarfed his despite looking like your average white guy while Reigns looks like a Madgi from 'The Mummy.' It's hollow and casuals aren't interested in your look past first impression. They pause the channel after seeing him because of said look, and then he grabs the microphone, broods, does his best pouty lip impression, and mumbles about "Bringing the big fight." 


*And the channel changes. 
*



It's not just Reigns either. He's at the head of the ship so yes, fingers will be pointed in his direction when ratings tank, but the roster doesn't have anyone with the brand of charisma necessary to pull in new fans (or convince old ones to tune back in.) Part of that is because of booking and WWE not knowing how to make household names anymore, and the other half is simply due to their own personal shortcomings as talent.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Genuinely, I ask you guys, genuinely, what does Reigns bring to the table that no one on the roster can bring?

Is it some godlike mic ability he's hiding behind his dogshit promos?

Is it some incredible ***** star wrestling ability?

Is it some charisma that he's waiting to unleash and show us Super Saiyan Reigns version 2.0? 

What is it? The only thing I can say is that he's related to the Rock and they want another Rock but Reigns is far from that. Light years even. 

Austin had the mic skills. The Rock had the mic skills. Cena was a jack of all trades. What is about Reigns that warrants this super push? I just don't see it. 

And from the looks of it, most fans don't either.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

All this "oh this is solid. It's not good, but it's not that bad" is not going to cut it because at some Point, the product is beyond salvageable. All it takes is that last push, that last stupid angle, that last guy, and the time bomb starts ticking.
Like with WCW, not one single person killed it, but it was angle after angle, and one blow after the other, and in the end, Russo was the last straw. It was salvageable, until Russo killed any sense and good judgement, and people started to tune out in ever-growing numbers.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE is like the "nice guys". Not the actual kind gentlemen, but the ones that think they're entitled to pussy because they want to hold the door open for a lady. Those folks. WWE is them, only with their shitty ideas and business decisions. Coming up with irrational explanations to try and justify the fact they don't get what they want.

Its sad.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LPPrince said:


> WWE is like the "nice guys". Not the actual kind gentlemen, but the ones that think they're entitled to pussy because they want to hold the door open for a lady. Those folks. WWE is them, only with their shitty ideas and business decisions. Coming up with irrational explanations to try and justify the fact they don't get what they want.
> 
> Its sad.


Except they don't even hold the door open. They hold the door open to tease, and smack it in her ass as hard as possible behind her, and still expect pussy.


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> Saw this incredible post by a fan on reddit [His name was Nature_Boy_Ric_Flair]. His thoughts sum up everything wrong with Reigns at the top of the card:
> 
> *"Pretending Roman can just replace Cena despite never getting over for more than a week as a singles competitor is such a slap in the face to Cena.
> Cena carried the company for a decade after its two biggest stars, Austin and Rock, left. Nobody thought there would be a guy on their level ever again, but Cena found a way to do it. He kept the business from dropping any further than it did after Wrestlemania 17. And instead of a "New Generation" era where the WWE barely has a pulse, Cena's era had pretty solid business. Not the best, but miles away from the worst. Competent.
> 
> That's fucking incredible and Cena deserves every word of praise he gets for it.
> And now WWE has built itself into this big thing that will draw no matter what. 100,000ish people will come see a 7-hour Wrestlemania where the biggest star is a 46 year old Triple H. Why? Because for the last ten years, they've had a top guy with no ego, no politicking, and an insane level of competence. And his reign allowed WWE to stop focusing on things like building new stars, and instead build their company and create a Network.
> 
> And they decide his successor should be Roman Reigns. Who is not a proven draw (nobody is nowadays because nobody is over), whose merch sales are good, but not great (#3 for 2015), who has not brought in an ounce of mainstream attention to the product, and who has probably not been universally cheered more than five times in two years.
> And that's fine with WWE. That's good enough. That's all it takes to be a top guy now, according to them. You just pick a guy with a good look and athletic ability, disregard the fact that he can't talk, and you just push him for two straight years (longer than Luger or Diesel or any other failed top guy). You have him beat everyone. You never have him lose or even look weak. And then when he gets booed, you don't give a shit. You ignore it for months and months until one day you just shrug and say "Oh, people do it for fun."
> 
> Because the merch will sell no matter what. Whoever gets pushed, sells merch. Whoever gets pushed the hardest, sells the most. The tickets will sell no matter what. The arena will fill no matter what. It doesn't matter who the top guy is, if he's good, or if he's even popular. Literally anyone can do it. That's the mindset.
> 
> And that's bullshit. Because the only reason WWE has the luxury of keeping a guy like Roman Reigns at the top is because of the hard work and sacrifices of John Cena. The guy came back early from just about every injury he's ever had. He rarely takes time off. And he did everything WWE ever asked of him for a decade.
> 
> His successor is going to be a guy who would have fallen flat on his face in any other era. A guy who would have had a three-month monster run and then been defeated by a more talented, charismatic, and marketable babyface. But now they pretend that's all it takes to be the next John Cena. Is there anything Reigns can do that nobody on the roster can do? No. Is there anything they can do that he can't? It's possible they can have a more successful run on top than him, but they won't get the opportunity because he's good enough.
> 
> Good enough is all WWE cares about now. With the Network, WWE has a perfect product to sell. Hardcore fans will find SOMETHING on the Network they like watching, so they'll never get rid of it. And WWE itself is the draw now, so ticket sales are in no danger of dropping. All WWE has to do is put on a show that has an absurd workrate (because that's all hardcore fans care about) and then keep doing Hogan-booking for Reigns and they'll be fine. As long as they have those Network subs, they're good. TV ratings are important, but they're still head and shoulders above 90% of cable television. So they're fine.
> 
> And that's what WWE (and pro wrestling) is now. It's fine. It's not great. It's not popular. It's not mainstream. It's not culturally significant. It's just fine. And with Roman Reigns at the top, that's all it'll ever be."*


This well written post has one glaring error....

The John cena 'era' is a central reason we're in this fucking mess


----------



## Saved_masses

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

wow, since when did a 2.3 rating become "decent"? not only have ratings dropped, but standards too, jesus.

The only positive is that the viewership stayed steady throughout the show and I will give WWE their dues because I have enjoyed this AJ vs Roman feud, maybe purely due to the fact I'm supporting AJ quite heavily atm, but still they have peak a bit of interest. 

However it will be hard to keep viewers interested because most of the matches set for Extreme Rules are the same from Payback. We're gonna get AJ vs Roman, Nattie vs Charlotte, Owens vs Zayn vs Cesaro vs Miz (two feuds merged into one for some reason), Ziggler vs Corbin and Dean vs Y2J. It will be difficult to keep those fresh.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Except they don't even hold the door open. They hold the door open to tease, and smack it in her ass as hard as possible behind her, and still expect pussy.


Fair enough.


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Even more abysmal? All I see are great reviews from journalists and legends about his feud with AJ. I'm not sure what you're reading, but keep living in your fantasy world where everything Roman does is bad, simply because it's Roman.*
> 
> 
> 
> *Just like you and many others said since summer '14 that Roman being on top would put them out of business, when they're doing all time great business outside of television ratings. For the record, I always said Rollins would never be a credible champion since December 2014, and I turned out to be right. That never had anything to do with financials.*


Oh come on, I cannot believe you just said that. They treated him as nothing more than a transitional champion. He was booked like a complete chump, it's kinda hard to look credible when you're booked to lose matches left right & centre.


----------



## Kuja

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I have no idea if John Cena hurt or helped in the long run, but I watched Raw when he was there. I cannot watch the show now. That has got to count for something. Granted, we had HBK, Edge, CM Punk, and a bunch of awesome guys then, but I loved to watch even when it was mostly Cena.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> Oh come on, I cannot believe you just said that. They treated him as nothing more than a transitional champion. He was booked like a complete chump, it's kinda hard to look credible when you're booked to lose matches left right & centre.


This is something I have never understood either. As WWE used to book their heels very strongly and it was all about the chase. 
In fact Paul Hayman once went into details about it. He said that his way of booking was to have a strong hell and have a face chase and gain momentum then after a good chase you have a war of a match and the face wins to a huge reaction.

WWE today seems to be all about chicken shit heels, to much politics and unbeatable faces.


----------



## xio8ups

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope they go under 1.5


----------



## xDD

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Saved_masses said:


> wow, since when did a 2.3 rating become "decent"? not only have ratings dropped, but standards too, jesus.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't even miss John Cena. In theory, Cena being gone for this long should be good for WWE because it would force them to create new top guys for them to even secure a bright future. Unfortunately, this is PG era WWE where they no longer know, care, or think to create new stars and have to sign top talent from other promotions to cover that weakness. WWE, as much as I don't want to even say it, need John Cena to stop these ratings and viewership from bleeding profusely and even then, Cena as a ratings draw has been minimalized for the past few years recently.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Week 4 of John Cena’s “American Grit” falls again on Fox TV*

American Grit Viewership Tracking

May 5: Week 4 of John Cena’s “American Grit” TV series on Fox continued to fall in TV viewership.

This week’s episode drew 1.88 million viewers in the overnight TV ratings reported by TVbytheNumbers.com. That’s down from 2.19 million overnight and 2.10 million actual viewers last week.

The number already seems low, but it could slip even further based on the pattern of the actual number coming in lower than the overnight number each of the previous three weeks.

Grit has slipped in viewership each week since a poor start on April 14.

Most concerning this week is that Grit’s lead-in, “Bones,” improved from last week. Yet, Grit still dipped from last week.

Overall on Thursday night, Bones ranked #3 at 8:00 p.m. EST, then Grit fell to #4 at 9:00 p.m. Grit is now in the neighborhood of fifth-place CW, which drew 1.14 million viewers in the timeslot.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/06/week-4-john-cenas-american-grit-falls-fox-tv/


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE SmackDown Viewers For Roman Reigns And The Usos Vs. AJ Styles, Luke Gallows, Karl Anderson
*
Source: Showbuzz Daily

Last night's WWE SmackDown, with AJ Styles, Luke Gallows and Karl Anderson vs. The Usos and WWE World Heavyweight Champion Roman Reigns, drew 2.346 million viewers. This is up from last week's show, which drew 2.109 million viewers.

SmackDown was #4 for the night in viewership, behind the NBA Playoffs, The Kelly File and The O'Reilly Factor.

SmackDown was #4 for the night in the 18-49 demographic, behind the NBA, SportsCenter and 60 Days In.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...rship-up-for-roman-reigns-and-the-usos-vs-aj/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That's a nice rebound from the rating cratering last week. Speaking of rebounds, the NBA is certainly some stiff competition, especially in the demo.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> Oh come on, I cannot believe you just said that. They treated him as nothing more than a transitional champion. He was booked like a complete chump, it's kinda hard to look credible when you're booked to lose matches left right & centre.


Indeed. Having a performer play a sniveling heel that loses 99% of his televised matches isn't exactly the best way to gauge their marketability, and anybody who thinks otherwise is probably a little....well.....


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope Raw gets real low ratings the only reason I stayed watching was to see the fresh match-up of Big Cass vs Jericho but I got a shitty Ambrose segment.


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think there will be a significant drop off in the rating from the first hour to the third. The first hour was really boring, and the main event wasn't exactly one you would expect most casuals to consider must see.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE Reports Strong First-Quarter 2016 Results, Vince McMahon Comments, WrestleMania Highlights*


WWE® Reports Strong First-Quarter 2016 Results
First Quarter 2016 Highlights

* Revenue increased 13% on a pro-forma basis to $171.1 from $151.3 million in the prior year quarter, excluding the timing impact of WrestleMania (which occurred in Q2 2016 vs. Q1 2015)

* OIBDA increased 31% to $27.6 million from the prior year quarter (29% on a pro-forma basis)

* WWE Network averaged 1.29 million paid subscribers over the first quarter 2016, which represented a 39% increase from the first quarter 2015, and reached 1.47 million total subscribers at quarter-end

* WWE's YouTube channel reached 11 million subscribers and achieved Diamond Play Button status joining Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber; WWE content garnered 10 billion YouTube views over the last 12 months

* Announced new series spin-off, Total Bellas, to debut on E! in Fall 2016 along with the sixth season of Total Divas. Continued to develop exciting new content for WWE Network, including Camp WWE (May), Swerved Season 2 (June) and Holy Foley! (August)

Selected WrestleMania Highlights

* WrestleMania (April 3, 2016) achieved record breaking attendance, ticket sales, viewership, and social media activity

* WrestleMania broke WWE's attendance record, attracting 101,763 fans at AT&T Stadium

* WWE Network reached a record 1.82 million total subscribers following WrestleMania (as of April 4)

* During WrestleMania Week, WWE Network featured 19 hours of prime-time, premier programming and subscribers watched nearly 22 million hours of content, averaging 12 hours per subscriber

* WrestleMania generated more than 2.5 million mentions on Twitter in one day and over 250 million video views across WWE digital and social platforms during WrestleMania Week

STAMFORD, Conn.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--WWE (NYSE:WWE) today announced financial results for its first quarter 2016. For the quarter, the Company reported Net income of $13.9 million, or $0.18 per share, as compared to Net income of $9.8 million, or $0.13 per share, in the prior year quarter.

"Our strong performance in the first quarter reflected the successful execution of our content strategy," said WWE Chairman & CEO Vince McMahon. "The sustained year-over-year growth of WWE Network, the global consumption of our video content across all platforms, and the recent record breaking attraction of WrestleMania demonstrate the increasing strength of our brands. We believe we can continue to leverage these strengths to drive long-term growth."

George Barrios, Chief Strategy & Financial Officer, added "Our earnings growth was driven primarily by the increased monetization of our network and television content as well as higher licensing revenue from our franchise video game. Over the next year, we will continue to focus on producing engaging content across all platforms, investing in emerging markets, and deploying technology across the enterprise to drive our long-term growth."

Q2 2016 Business Outlook

For the second quarter 2016, the Company projects average paid subscribers of approximately 1.5 million. The Company also estimates second quarter 2016 Adjusted OIBDA of approximately $5 million to $9 million.1,2 This range represents an expected year-over-year decrease attributed to three primary factors: incremental strategic investments, the timing impact of WrestleMania production costs, and the timing of a lower effective royalty rate associated with the Company's franchise video game. (The lower video game royalty rate derives from an increasing rate structure over the 2015 year as compared to a flat rate structure in 2016. For the full year, the Company expects the rate for 2016 will be comparable to the average effective rate for 2015).

Click here for the full announcement on WWE Corporate.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0510/611592/wwe-reports-strong-first-quarter-2016-results/


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They just keep making more and more money from Wrestlemania. Say what you want about how they do business but they know how make a ton of money for that weekend.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

EDIT:

*Update On WWE Network Subscribers*

- WWE announced 1.469 million WWE Network subscribers the day after WrestleMania 32 with 1.357 million of those being paid subscribers. They announced a total of 1.824 million subscribers in today's first quarter 2016 earnings report with 1.454 million of those being paid subscribers. This shows an increase of 355,000 subscribers from March 31st to April 4th.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0510/611597/vince-mcmahon-confirms-wwe-returns/



*WWE Q1 2016 – WWE makes big reporting shift, eliminates PPV buys and monthly biz reports*

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...hift-eliminates-ppv-buys-monthly-biz-reports/
*
WWE Q1 2016 – Vince McMahon Conference Call Opening Remarks – McMahon addresses 17 talent injuries & what he thinks led to so many injuries, plus other topics*

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...nce-call-plus-overall-comments-first-quarter/

*WWE Q1 2016 – Full Revenue/Profit break down, including changes to key sources of revenue*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...-break-including-changes-key-sources-revenue/

*
WWE Q1 2016 – WWE’s latest Network subscriber count pre-WM32 – how does it compare to day-after WM32?, plus trendline & financial break down*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...s-official-network-subscriber-count-pre-wm32/

*WWE Q1 2016 – PPV Revenue nearing extinction*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/10/wwe-q1-2016-ppv-revenue-nearing-extinction/

*WWE Q1 2016 – WWE Reports First Quarter Revenue & Profit*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/10/wwe-q1-2016-wwe-reports-first-quarter-revenue-profit/


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> * WrestleMania broke WWE's attendance record, attracting 101,763 fans at AT&T Stadium


WWE be lying in the quarterly report again.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How long until this en fuego product starts reflecting it in the ratings?


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> WWE be lying in the quarterly report again.


Yeah, wasn't the actual number like 97,000 or something? Don't know why they'd be ashamed of that number, that's a hell of a lot better than I or most others thought they would do. :lol

Makes you wonder what else they're lying about? :hmm:


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, wasn't the actual number like 97,000 or something? Don't know why they'd be ashamed of that number, that's a hell of a lot better than I or most others thought they would do. :lol
> 
> Makes you wonder what else they're lying about? :hmm:


Isn't it illegal to lie to investors? 

Maybe @A-C-P knows since this is his wheelhouse. These numbers look decent, even without the inflation. The Network seems to be holding steady.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Isn't it illegal to lie to investors?
> 
> Maybe @A-C-P knows since this is his wheelhouse. These numbers look decent, even without the inflation. The Network seems to be holding steady.


Yes it is very illegal to outright lie to investors for a publicly traded company. But there are plenty of ways to be "creative" with your accounting without outright lying.

Not accusing the WWE of this, but wouldn't be surprised if there are some creative accounting tricks going on right now at Stamford.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, wasn't the actual number like 97,000 or something? Don't know why they'd be ashamed of that number, that's a hell of a lot better than I or most others thought they would do. :lol
> 
> Makes you wonder what else they're lying about? :hmm:


Yeah it was something like that number it would be nothing to be ashamed about but they were always bragging about how 100,000 people were going to be at WM.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, wasn't the actual number like 97,000 or something? Don't know why they'd be ashamed of that number, that's a hell of a lot better than I or most others thought they would do. :lol
> 
> Makes you wonder what else they're lying about? :hmm:


*According to Wikipedia (so take it with a grain of salt):*



> WWE reported an attendance of 101,763[7] in the AT&T Stadium, which surpassed the previous WWE record of 93,173 for WrestleMania III in 1987. Also, WWE reported the event grossing $17.3 million for WWE's highest grossing live event.[7]
> 
> However, journalist Dave Meltzer reported 93,370 as "the attendance as would be normally announced for an event" with a total 97,769 people in the stadium if one includes stadium personnel, WWE personnel, etc.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Which Raw And Smackdown Segments Ranked The Highest On Youtube Last Week? Main Angle Does Well*

Apparently we're in a new era in the WWE, and if the Youtube numbers are any indication, the main event angle appears to be working.

On both last week's Raw and Smackdown, the feud between The Club and The Family monopolized the top spots, with it getting two on Smackdown. Last week's Raw six-man tag main event did particularly strong numbers, cracking three million views.

Other segments that did exceptionally well include Chris Jericho's potted plant beatdown of Dean Ambrose, as well as the Stephanie McMahon and Shane McMahon announcement of the aforementioned 'new era.'

The United States Championship top contender battle royal did exceptional numbers, landing at number two on the Raw rankings. Battle Royals seem to do really good numbers on WWE's Youtube page, as one they've posted has over 40 million views, making it their most watched video ever.

Women's wrestling segments continued to under-perform, as three female spots fell well below average. The Big Cass and New Day segments were also in the bottom half, a big drop from the #3 spot they previously enjoyed.

It's worth noting that the Monday Night Raw clips have had a full week to accumulate numbers, while the Smackdown shot has only had a few days. This week we've opted to not include debut vignettes from Raw, which generally do low numbers. For reference, the Bob Backlund - Darren Young vignette did 170,751 viewers, and the Colon's from Raw did 109,755.

We'll update this week's rankings on Sunday. You can check out our Wrestling Inc. Podcast where we review this show at this link, and the full Youtube rankings for last week's Raw and Smackdown below.

Raw Rankings for 5/2

1. The Family vs. The Club (3,231,354)

2. US Title Contender Battle Royal (1,900,518)

3. Stephanie McMahon cancels "The Ambrose Asylum" (1,843,907)

4. Shane and Stephanie McMahon celebrate Raw's New Era (1,503,000)

5. Cesaro vs. Kevin Owens (1,162,863)

6. New Day Address Enzo Amore's injury (983,954)

7. New Day & Big Cass vs. Vaudevillains & Dudley Boyz (957,261)

8. Charlotte clears the air about Charles Robinson (894,815)

9. Goldust vs. Tyler Breeze (545,759)

10. Becky Lynch vs. Emma (429,387)

Smackdown Rankings for 5/5

1. The Family vs. The Club (1,659,227)

2. The Usos vs. Luke Gallows & Karl Anderson (698,253)

3. Sami Zayn vs. The Miz (642,039)

4. Rusev vs. Zack Ryder (612,056)

5. Sami Zayn on 'The Highlight Reel' (595,674)

6. Vaudevillains vs. Social Outcasts

7. Becky Lynch & Natalya vs. Charlotte & Emma (483, 108)

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...kdown-segments-ranked-the-highest-on-youtube/


----------



## Hawkke

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> Yes it is very illegal to outright lie to investors for a publicly traded company. But there are plenty of ways to be "creative" with your accounting without outright lying.
> 
> Not accusing the WWE of this, but wouldn't be surprised if there are some creative accounting tricks going on right now at Stamford.


I'd be far more surprised if there *wasn't* foul play in the WWE books. Sadly I doubt very highly we'd ever get the truth out of the ones who could probably sayi one way or the other. Maybe I'm just jaded, but I just keep waiting for the shoe to drop where WWE gets busted for stock tampering.

Wait.. .... is censored here? It's not even the right spelling!


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Battle Royals seem to do really good numbers on WWE's Youtube page, as one they've posted has over 40 million views, making it their most watched video ever.


Yeah I don't understand how battle royals always do such good numbers even the midget battle royal from like 5 years ago has 20 million views.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *According to Wikipedia (so take it with a grain of salt):*


:rock5 at anyone trying to put stadium personnel in with attendance figures.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Yeah I don't understand how battle royals always do such good numbers even the midget battle royal from like 5 years ago has 20 million views.


I like them too. I'm worried about the Diva segments. I wish they'd perform better.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> :rock5 at anyone trying to put stadium personnel in with attendance figures.


*Agreed. Who the fuck would do something that dumb?

BTW, I find it funny how WWE wanted to break WM III's record, only to get over 93,000. :lol*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/9 Raw Twitter TV Ratings – Raw retains #1 spot, but falls from last week*


WWE Raw retained the #1 spot among series & specials on Monday night in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

May 9: Raw’s social media metrics were down slightly from last week’s post-PPV show.

Raw’s Twitter volume was 129,000, down 10 percent from 143k last week.

The number of unique authors tweeting about Raw was 29,000, down from 30k last week.

– Raw ranked #1 in series & specials for the third consecutive week as veteran shows “The Voice” and “Dancing with the Stars” go through a lull period.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #3 behind both NBA Playoffs games. The overtime thriller between Steph Curry’s Golden St. Warriors and the Portland Trail Blazers beat Raw by three-and-a-half times.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/10/59-raw-twitter-tv-ratings-xyz/


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE Q1 2016 Chart – How the Revenues for Network, PPV & Home Video stack up – is WWE better off in Network era?*

The deeper into the WWE Network introduction, the more questions arise about whether WWE’s media business is better before or after the Network.

The First Quarter 2016 results indicate the media business is better from a revenue standpoint. Profitability is still a question because of the ramp-up costs that WWE is still recovering from.

However, looking at three key areas of WWE’s media division – Network Revenue, PPV Revenue, and Home Video Revenue – it appears the Network is growing at a solid rate.

Plus, even when PPV disappears completely and as Home Video continues to dwindle, the Network Revenue surpasses the previous era by itself. Again, profitability is still in question.

In the first quarter, Network Revenue was $38.2 million, topping the combined revenue of Network, PPV, and Home Video in Q1-2014 when the Network launched.

However, Network Revenue alone did not beat Q1-2015, which totaled $42.3 with the benefit of WrestleMania.

A more even comparison will be the half-year numbers released in the next financial report that cover January through June.

The following is a chart breaking down the effects of the Network on the media business, especially the soon-to-be-extinct PPV business and shrinking Home Video revenue as consumption habits move to digital and the Network.










http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...-home-video-stack-wwe-better-off-network-era/


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE is making a MINIMUM of 40 million off Youtube alone this year. All of the those lolYoutube people can shut the fuck up forever.*


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Given those numbers, I'd say the Network has definitely worked out for the WWE. Doesn't seem to matter how good or bad the current product is, since I bet a large number of people who have the Network probably just have to watch all the old content WWE has.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Dem YouTube views again fpalm

The main even will get the most views because IT'S THE MAIN EVENT.


----------



## Kuja

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *WWE is making a MINIMUM of 40 million off Youtube alone this year. All of the those lolYoutube people can shut the fuck up forever.*


They are? I had no idea. How do you know?

That alone would be massive profit.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Kuja said:


> They are? I had no idea. How do you know?
> 
> That alone would be massive profit.


I don't think they are, that 40 million number BBR got was the views from one of the battle royals WWE posted on their channel, said nothing about profit. No clue what WWE actually makes from their Youtube channel.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This link may help as to where WWE gets some of their profit from. The other links are posted on page 73. 

*WWE Q1 2016 – Full Revenue/Profit break down, including changes to key sources of revenue*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...-break-including-changes-key-sources-revenue/

I found this interesting since it deals with TV. The ratings have been in decline but the profit is up.




> – TV Rights Revenue: $60.7 million, up 4 percent from $58.2 million in Q1-2015.
> 
> WWE said TV Rights continues to escalate “due to contractual increases in key distribution agreements, the largest of which became effective in the fourth quarter 2014 and the first quarter 2015.” Plus, one additional episode of “Total Divas” in Q1-2016 vs. Q1-2015.
> 
> – TV Rights Profit: $28.3 million, up from $25.9 million in Q1-2015.
> 
> WWE noted: “The Company started allocating certain shared expenses between its Network and Television segments. Management believes this allocation more accurately reflects the operations of these segments. For the first quarter 2016, the implementation of this allocation methodology reduced Network segment profit by $3.3 million and increased Television segment profit by a corresponding $3.3 million.”


----------



## UFC200

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *WWE is making a MINIMUM of 40 million off Youtube alone this year. All of the those lolYoutube people can shut the fuck up forever.*


Why are you making shit up?

Last year they made $21.5 million from all of their Digital Media - which includes ad revenue from ALL websites (WWE.com and all 3rd party websites, including YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc.) The year before they made $20.9 million.

This year they made $5.4 million in Q1. They won't even reach $40 million for their entire Digital Media revenue, let alone for YouTube alone.

Revenue from YT alone is still an insignificant % of overall revenue.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *WWE is making a MINIMUM of 40 million off Youtube alone this year. All of the those lolYoutube people can shut the fuck up forever.*


No way they are going to make 40 million off youtube the top youtube guy earns like 7 million in a year.


----------



## Kuja

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I checked and they have over 11 million subscribers. 

Markiplier, a popular gamer on there, has about a million more subscribers. He makes a few million a year, and all his videos usually get over a million views and he uploads about two a day. 

In other words, I do not think WWE makes about 40 million now. That would be way above Pewdiepie and he has over 40 million subscribers.


----------



## UFC200

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Kuja said:


> I checked and they have over 11 million subscribers.
> 
> Markiplier, a popular gamer on there, has about a million more subscribers. He makes a few million a year, and all his videos usually get over a million views and he uploads about two a day.
> 
> In other words, I do not think WWE makes about 40 million now. That would be way above Pewdiepie and he has over 40 million subscribers.


They definitely don't make $40 million. That's a fact.

They've made about $21 million per year from ALL of their Digital Media (which includes ad revenue from YouTube, Twitter, FB, Instagram, etc) over the last few years. They made $5.4 million in Q1 this year from all Digital Media. Their entire Digital Media revenue won't even hit $40 million, let alone their YT revenue.

Legit Boss was just trying to make Reigns' YouTube views seem more significant than they are.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Don't believe that stuff about what Youtubers make. The vast majority of their money comes from product placement (i.e. check out this makeup review...pay no attention to the fact that the company is paying me to do it) & endorsement contracts outside of Youtube.

Fascinating how this Youtube bullshit gets clinged to when nary a word was said about it a year or two ago, when it was just as big of a thing then.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

PewDiePie has the biggest youtube channel and earns 12 million according to Forbes

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/gjdm45jih/1-pewdiepie-12-millio/
*
Legit Boss: "WWE MAKES 40 MILLION MINIMUM FROM THEIR YOUTUBE CHANNEL"*

Lmao come on man. I hate Reigns but even I'm not that delusional.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LilOlMe said:


> Don't believe that stuff about what Youtubers make. The vast majority of their money comes from product placement (i.e. check out this makeup review...pay no attention to the fact that the company is paying me to do it) & endorsement contracts outside of Youtube.
> 
> *Fascinating how this Youtube bullshit gets clinged to when nary a word was said about it a year or two ago, when it was just as big of a thing then.*


I started posting the social media stats at least six months ago. It was no sold. When others started noticing that Reigns did well on Youtube, it then became a point by some to downplay the platform. 

In any event, all the numbers speak for themselves. I don't know about $40 million but the WWE does draw money from their Digital Media.


----------



## UFC200

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I started posting the social media stats at least six months ago. It was no sold. When others started noticing that Reigns did well on Youtube, it then became a point by some to downplay the platform.
> 
> In any event, all the numbers speak for themselves. I don't know about $40 million but the *WWE does draw money from their Digital Media*.


Sure, but it's an insignificant amount. About 3-4% of total net revenue per year. Even less when you only consider YouTube.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LilOlMe said:


> Don't believe that stuff about what Youtubers make. The vast majority of their money comes from product placement (i.e. check out this makeup review...pay no attention to the fact that the company is paying me to do it) & endorsement contracts outside of Youtube.
> 
> *Fascinating how this Youtube bullshit gets clinged to when nary a word was said about it a year or two ago, when it was just as big of a thing then.*


Its pretty funny. No one used them as a positive or negative a year ago when ratings were bad. Now they're arguably worse( with no football) people ignore ratings to applaud YouTube views and Facebook likes :lol


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



UFC200 said:


> Sure, but it's an insignificant amount. About 3-4% of total net revenue per year.


Agree. I never said it was the most important thing; only that it is a metric and that is was being monetized. 

My only issue was other users acting like social media has no place in how viewing patterns are measured in the digital age.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I started posting the social media stats at least six months ago. It was no sold. When others started noticing that Reigns did well on Youtube, it then became a point by some to downplay the platform.
> 
> In any event, all the numbers speak for themselves. I don't know about $40 million but the WWE does draw money from their Digital Media.


He was talking about years ago.

Six months ago ....
That was around the time Rollins was out, Reigns took over, and ratings started tanking even harder, after it was claimed he would make them better, wasn't it?

I wonder if that prompted your reaching out to straws ... :hmm:


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> He was talking about years ago.
> 
> Six months ago ....
> That was around the time Rollins was out, Reigns took over, and ratings started tanking even harder, after it was claimed he would make them better, wasn't it?
> 
> *I wonder if that prompted your reaching out to straws* ... :hmm:


I've been posting on this board since June 2014. I keep it above board. If I don't care for a talent, I will let it be known. I don't need to hide behind Youtube, Twitter or anything else. If I want to bash Rollins, Ambrose, etc, I would simply do so. 

Furthermore, I stopped posting for around two months last year (the product didn't interest me and I had other stuff going on). When I returned to the forum as a regular user, I started posting the social media stats. I was no sold and that's fine. But I won't sit here and let others rewrite history because YouTube/Twitter/Facebook was not accepted as important. 

You're more than welcome to put me on ignore if you think I have some agenda when I post, especially in this thread. But don't act like I selectively come in this thread or pick and choose what I post for the purpose of "reaching at straws".


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nothing wrong with posting youtube views though saying they're making 40 million from it is just pure bullshit I also don't think it can support why Roman should be a top guy especially when he has no one to compare him with.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Here is what I am starting to think about all this Network Stuff and more so Youtube, and other social media stuff. The network has talked to the WWE about the declining viewer #s in some fashion. Yes, Raw and SD are very high rated shows for USA still, but with the stigma "pro-wrestling" has with advertisers, wrestling shows have to be far and above other shows for companies to want to advertise during those shows, b/c of the audience wrestling draws mainly.

My guess is Vince and company are trying everything they can to ramp up as many revenue sources they can during this current TV deal, b/c they are just planning on the next TV deal to not be as good, and instead of taking a risk and changing up things to maybe improve their TV metrics, they want to keep things the same and see if they can just make enough revenue from other sources after the TV deal is up.

Just a theory.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> What ended up as a key talking point is that *when it comes to social media and videos viewed, 70 to 80 percent comes from overseas, while when it comes to revenues, that number is reversed.* They were asked if so much social media and video viewing, metrics they are pushing as the most important, would indicate why overseas isn't generating revenue like stateside. *Laura Martin, who has been a strong company backer, even said she wondered if those statistics are meaningless if they aren't driving revenue.*
> 
> Barrios, in short form, talked about it as a long term strategy, noting in particular huge consumption in India but that the network, for example, hasn't done big numbers there.


http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/w...social-media-relevancy-discussion-more-212531


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

http://www.businessinsider.com/goog...-has-earned-8-million-on-youtube-alone-2013-1

*As usual, you're all wrong. Gangnam Style made 8 million alone off 1 video hitting 2 billion views, not including outside endorsements. WWE has 10 billion views this year. Provided that he made 4 mil per billion views, and 4 x 10 is 40, they made 40 million. Youtube takes half and brings that to 20 in profit. *


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Shouldn't the ratings be out by now? Don't tell me they're getting delayed because of fucking Mother's Day.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That person is literally arguing with WWE financial statements. My Lord....

Btw, people lie about what they make all the time for hype and better deals. Not to mention, you're equating views as a direct correlation with money. Gangnam Style was a global phenomenon. Something WWE will never be.


----------



## UFC200

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *As usual, you're all wrong. Gangnam Style made 8 million alone off 1 video hitting 2 billion views, not including outside endorsements. WWE has 10 billion views this year. Provided that he made 4 mil per billion views, and 4 x 10 is 40, they made 40 million. Youtube takes half and brings that to 20 in profit. *


Stop embarrassing yourself. WWE made $21 million all of last year from ALL Digital Media, which includes a lot more than just YouTube. They have never made anywhere near $40 million from YouTube, nor will they in 2016.

You're humiliating yourself.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

rofl at listening to these theoretical money numbers with absolutely no merit behind them whatsoever, it's literally a kid on the internet making things up. The overcompensating is at an all time high here.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.345M
H2-3.356M
H3-3.013M
3H-3.238M*


----------



## RDEvans

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ouch at that hour 3 drop

Raw ratings last year may 11 2015

Hour one: 3.824 million
Hour two: 3.853 million
Hour three: 3.385 million

that's more than a half a million viewership drop

NFL season later this year is gonna be scary


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.345M
> H2-3.356M
> H3-3.013M
> 3H-3.238M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+1.003%/+0.011M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-10.22%/-0.343M)
H3 Vs H1 (-9.93%/-0.332M)
5/9/16 Vs 5/2/16 (-5.68%/-0.205M)*


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.345M
> H2-3.356M
> H3-3.013M
> 3H-3.238M*


Last year (May 11, 2015):

Hour one: 3.824 million
Hour two: 3.853 million
Hour three: 3.385 million

All 3 Hours: 3.69 million.

And last year's article referred to RAW being in a slump. They're - 12% off their "slump." :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This year:

H1-3.345M
H2-3.356M
H3-3.013M


Last year: (5/11/15)

Hour one: 3.824 million
Hour two: 3.853 million
Hour three: 3.385 million

Yowza.

Edit: Ninja'd.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE RAW Viewership With Chris Jericho Vs. Big Cass Advertised As The Main Event?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Big Cass vs. Chris Jericho advertised as the main event, drew 3.238 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.432 million viewers for the post-Payback episode.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.345 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.356 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.013 million viewers.

RAW was #3 on cable for the night in viewership and #3 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the NBA Playoffs games.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...aw-viewership-with-chris-jericho-vs-big-cass/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow. Last year's lowest hour (3.385) outdid this year's highest hour (3.356).

:lol


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:LOL And we're back to business as usual.

Warriors/Trail Blazers and the ending of Heat/Raptors were heartstoppingly intense and entertaining. I am not surprised *AT ALL* on that Hour 3 drop.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Attention WWE Morons, you can say "New Era" on TV all you want, but if you really want people to buy into it you need to do something really NEW :draper2


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Oh there they are lol. Not surprising to see them drop from last week and last year too for that matter. But hey, business is booming apparently.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.345M
> H2-3.356M
> H3-3.013M
> 3H-3.238M*


:ha :ha :ha :ha

That's what you get when you put the USOS in the top feud.

The USOS!

USOS!


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> This year:
> 
> H1-3.345M
> H2-3.356M
> H3-3.013M
> 
> 
> Last year: (5/11/15)
> 
> Hour one: 3.824 million
> Hour two: 3.853 million
> Hour three: 3.385 million
> 
> Yowza.
> 
> Edit: Ninja'd.


Wow :lmao. So much for all the see you next week jokes. It looks like the lead up to Mania and the Mania results have hurt their numbers. This is during the NFL offseason too.

Some terrible numbers there.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

More Somoans in the mainevent = Bad for viewers.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

New Era to WWE means that this NXT takeover is now spreading onto the main show. There was no smooth transition or concerted effort from WWE to the casual audience to make them care about any of these call ups and quite honestly, NXT tends to be overrated and boring at weeks and all you are doing now is transforming that into an already stale main show product. You can have all the new NXT talent and long, unnecessary matches all you want but if there is no purpose and reason then nobody is going to end up caring in the long run and you are seeing those results.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> More Somoans in the mainevent = Bad for viewers.


Chris Jericho vs. Big Cass was the advertised main event. It ended up being Dean Ambrose defiling a glittering jacket.

I don't care for the Usos, but if the "Samoans" are being blamed for the Hour 3 drop, so should Styles and The Club.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It takes time to build new stars. 5 of WWE's top 6 players are either on the IR or taking a break.:brock4

That means the onus of drawing numbers lies on Roman and a group of guys who've never been main event status. Given the general landscape, I think these numbers are about inline with what you'd expect. 

The entire IC division is on fire and so is the main event storyline. You add those big names back in the fray and pair them up with the logical booking that has been taken place since Mania, and you'll see the numbers spike eventually. Won't happen overnight, but it should come.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Wow :lmao. So much for all the see you next week jokes. It looks like the lead up to Mania and the Mania results have hurt their numbers. This is during the NFL offseason too.
> 
> Some terrible numbers there.


They could have given the Plans for Wrestlemania to literally anyone on this board (except for those Cool Dude and Roamin Reigns pillocks), and they could have predicted this.
But it's apparently too much to grasp for a withered, 70 year old brain that is controlled by the withered, 70 year old prunes between the legs.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> More Somoans in the mainevent = Bad for viewers.


I disagree Samoa Joe is best for business it's a joke he is still in Nxt when people like Dana and Baron are being called up.


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings dont increase overnight. Still a more fresh product than a year ago and I for myself enjoy raw most of the time. But it takes some more month to get viewers back.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Wow :lmao. So much for all the see you next week jokes. It looks like the lead up to Mania and the Mania results have hurt their numbers. This is during the NFL offseason too.
> 
> Some terrible numbers there.


People who keep going on with the "see you next week" comments don't have a clue. I haven't watched any WWE weekly television since the night after Wrestlemania, so 5 weeks now or so? I don't even watch them when I record them - I read up on what happens and decide whether I'll watch or not. Nothing over the past 5 weeks has compelled me to watch. It's an immediate delete. The PPV they had last week (Payback? Extreme Rules? I don't even know) was also on my PVR (yay for the Canadian WWE Network) and I skipped the entire middle portion of the show. I went from Zayn/Owens straight to the main event.

Nothing on this product has compelled me to watch. It's all a joke. The best thing they have in the company is sitting in NXT (Nakamura). Maybe when he's called up I'll start watching Raw again, but god damn there is nothing on this show that compels me to watch and it sucks to say that because I enjoy guys like Styles, Owens, Zayn, etc. but it feels like nothing matters at all.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Surely this must be the nadir for ratings? Almost below 3 million for the low and flirting with a sub 1.0 demo. I can't imagine they'll tank to SD levels. Nothing new about the New Era.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ouch that hour 3 drop. At least it held over 3 mil, but still...

... Numbers don't paint a good picture for the main event angle (Reigns/Usos vs. "The Club") nor the advertised main event of Cass/Jericho.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



fabi1982 said:


> Ratings dont increase overnight.


While I agree ratings don't increase over night that Raw was shit and is not a good way to gain viewers the only match I wanted to see didn't even happen.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> It takes time to build new stars. 5 of WWE's top 6 players are either on the IR or taking a break.:brock4
> 
> That means the onus of drawing numbers lies on Roman and a group of guys who've never been main event status. Given the general landscape, I think these numbers are about inline with what you'd expect.
> 
> The entire IC division is on fire and so is the main event storyline. You add those big names back in the fray and pair them up with the logical booking that has been taken place since Mania, and you'll see the numbers spike eventually. Won't happen overnight, but it should come.


Yeah, I need to dispel this here. First off, WWE doesn't know how to create stars anymore and they haven't created any since arguably Cena. Him and Brock are the only legit starpower draws in the company currently. Nobody else even comes close to be a "star". Not Reigns, Rollins, Styles, Ambrose, Owens, Zayn, etc.

As for the IC division, it's only on fire for two reasons. The typical long, drawn out, unnecessary matches AND rematches the division is currently infatuated upon and because the Owens/Zayn storyline is being carried over to breathe some life into the division. If you really think about it, there is no storyline in this four way dance with Owens/Zayn/Miz/Cesaro other than "me want title" and it's not even effective when Miz AS IC champion keeps losing week after week as a loser GEEK champion (which is weird since Miz is always booked as a credible midcard champion for the most part).

Main event storyline is the ONLY story that matters to the company and they are starting to even botch that too. Not going to call Styles a GEEK or him being buried (although we're nearing that territory) but his supposed CLUB members have been treated as absolute GEEKS that are Roman and Usos's punk bitches. This is here to make Roman look strong at the expense of Styles's momentum (or lack there of).


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/9 Raw TV Ratings – Raw dips back to historical low territory*


WWE Raw returned to the historical low-point territory on Monday night, with one more show remaining before the Extreme Rules PPV.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

May 9: Monday’s Raw scored a 2.26 TV rating, down from a 2.35 rating post-Payback last week.

It was the second-lowest-rated show of the year, topping the April 25 show leading into Payback.

Next week’s TV rating will be interesting since WWE did not advertise anything in advance, and pre-PPV episodes have settled into a pattern of dipping from the show two weeks out.

This week, Raw was particularly hit hard in the key demo of males 18-34, falling 12 percent to a new historical low point even lower than at the end of April.

Adults and males 18-49 also fell one-tenth of a rating nearing historical low territory.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.238 million viewers, down six percent (about 200,000 viewers) from last week.

It was the second-fewest viewers of the year. Hourly Break Down:

First Hour: 3.345 million viewers (second fewest of 2016)
Second Hour: 3.356 million viewers for a slight uptick
Third Hour: 3.013 million viewers (down 10 percent from 2H)

Raw faced tough overlapping competition from two NBA games going to overtime. TNT’s broadcast drew 6.158 million viewers, nearly doubling Raw’s average audience.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/10/59-raw-tv-ratings-raw-dips-back-historical-low-territory/


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



RatedR10 said:


> People who keep going on with the "see you next week" comments don't have a clue. I haven't watched any WWE weekly television since the night after Wrestlemania, so 5 weeks now or so? I don't even watch them when I record them - I read up on what happens and decide whether I'll watch or not. Nothing over the past 5 weeks has compelled me to watch. It's an immediate delete. The PPV they had last week (Payback? Extreme Rules? I don't even know) was also on my PVR (yay for the Canadian WWE Network) and I skipped the entire middle portion of the show. I went from Zayn/Owens straight to the main event.
> 
> Nothing on this product has compelled me to watch. It's all a joke. The best thing they have in the company is sitting in NXT (Nakamura). Maybe when he's called up I'll start watching Raw again, but god damn there is nothing on this show that compels me to watch and it sucks to say that because I enjoy guys like Styles, Owens, Zayn, etc. but it feels like nothing matters at all.


Yeah, they think everyone will just continue watching something bad. I haven't watched Raw in over 6 months, even before that when I was watching it was never all of Raw because the show just drags and playing games or watching something else was just more fun. I caught some of the rumble for AJ but even then I didn't even bother to tune in. You'd think AJ freaking Styles finally appearing in a WWE ring would have me tuning in but nah. From what I hear it seems AJ hasn't even looked that great, same with the Bulletclub.

We'll see how they are after Summerslam.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Surely this must be the nadir for ratings? Almost below 3 million for the low and flirting with a sub 1.0 demo. I can't imagine they'll tank to SD levels. Nothing new about the New Era.


Just wait until Reigns has destroyed the Club four times until after Extreme Rules.
They will hit new all time lows this year constantly, not just a flub here or there.

And it will be ... Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawesome!


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> same with the Bulletclub.


They seem to be Roman's new LON he didn't even use his finisher to beat Gallows this raw.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Just wait until Reigns has destroyed the Club four times until after Extreme Rules.


Roman's been clubbing them like baby seals so far. One would hope the tables turn on the ER go home show.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> They seem to be Roman's new LON he didn't even use his finisher to beat Gallows this raw.


Why even bring in big names just to use them like that. Someone hears about the big free agent signings then tunes in to see them getting beat up left and right. Why would that person watch Raw again. 

I guess they don't care as long as their getting they're YouTube view and millions upon millions from YouTube.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

TV Ratings are at all time lows. 12% drop from last year. 
Live attendance is down 9% from last year (according to the WWE Financials that were released).

WWE is not growing, they are shrinking their customer base to levels not seen since the early 90s. If I was Vince, I'd be looking to sell this company before the next TV deal is negotiated. Whatever USA is paying them now to pull in a 2.26, which will probably crater to 1.8 during NFL season...ain't worth it.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> They seem to be Roman's new LON he didn't even use his finisher to beat Gallows this raw.


Yeah that was ridiculous. Legit the equivalent of Rock using a spine buster to pin Road Dogg and completely forgoing the actual elbow finish that follows.



On the topic, they owe this decrease to burned bridges. They nuked many of them with WM (from top to bottom of the card.) I'm not a proponent of one guy being liable for the entire ship but the irony is how callously and arrogantly most of Reigns fans dragged Seth (a guy I'm not even a fan of) and pointed at him for the ratings, only for ratings to *objectively* be lower over these last six months (the start of Romans telegraphed and predicted title push) and with him at the center of the product weekly is poetic. They're being served crow and I only hope it tastes like chicken.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Live attendance down 9%

TV Ratings at an all time Low.

I guess the Roman Empire and the USO abominations must be drawing really well

:ha :ha :ha :ha :ha

They've already jobbed out the Bullet Club into the Subway 6 inch club and ruined any credibility they had.

Can't wait to see these ratings dip further.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings down 12% from last year and live attendance down 9% from last year, especially with no competition.

:ha

Good enough for me.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> Live attendance down 9%
> 
> TV Ratings at an all time Low.
> 
> I guess the Roman Empire and the USO abominations must be drawing really well
> 
> :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha
> 
> They've already jobbed out the Bullet Club into the Subway 6 inch club and ruined any credibility they had.
> 
> Can't wait to see these ratings dip further.


 Roman needs more superman booking god damn it, have him put the BC through the table on the go home. That'll boost the ratings and get them amped up for ER :vince


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Is Roman officially the worst champion of all time (in terms of ratings)?

I wonder if Raw will crack 1's in the Roman era.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Ratings down 12% from last year and live attendance down 9% from last year, especially with no competition.
> 
> :ha
> 
> Good enough for me.


B...b...b...but them smarks!

And Roman is really popular with casuals, 3 million YouTube views out of 11 million subscribers!

*cry*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Is Roman officially the worst champion of all time (in terms of ratings)?
> 
> I wonder if Raw will crack 1's in the Roman era.


I have not a solitary doubt that they will.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I have not a solitary doubt that they will.


 I bet the fuckers have AJ win the title so they can blame him for the ratings mess lol. The ratings aren't making Roman look strong.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> I bet the fuckers have AJ win the title so they can blame him for the ratings mess lol. The ratings aren't making Roman look strong.


Why do you think they keep Roman away from opening the show and the third hour? For that very reason. They get to blame everyone else on the numbers. Even though as the top guy, it's his JOB to be so good that he draws numbers so you CAN put him in the main event, but hey, it's 2016. Face of the company can't stand on his own two feet.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People bringing up YT don't realize that many of those views aren't domestic. The US has always been their bread and butter, and with attendance down almost 10% from last year are they really growing?

Even with Cena, Orton and/Brock all on the same show they were stuck in the 2s during(and outside) football season. If there isn't a HUGE storyline or at least a big change in the presentation and format by September, get ready for the 1s.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This ain't Reigns fault. Sure Reigns being the top guy. Sure aint bringing in new fans haha. Ala Casuals. But this was the case with Seth, Punk, Bryan etc. Although Ratings and Attendance was better last year. So their you go. Point is its the over all product. Wwe has gone to safe. This aint telletubbies. Who cares if its 2016. Ppl want to see edgy shows with complex characters. Ala Breaking Bad, Got, Walking Dead. Wwe is some how out dated. And behind what is trendy. Until they get Rid of this formulaic format. Which was passe over a decade ago. And make a fundamental change of the product. Where everything is new. So no matter who is on tv. If the presentation isin't any different. Then its 1's baby!


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Punk and Seth are better draws than Roman, the ratings prove it.

I remember how the look guys had a go at Punk and Seth for their 'failed' title runs lmao.

Look at how well da look is doing now that he's on top and booked as the only important part of the show.

Booked as the be all to end all and still can't draw a dime.

:ha:ha:ha:ha:ha


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Punk and Seth are better draws than Roman, the ratings prove it.
> 
> I remember how the look guys had a go at Punk and Seth for their 'failed' title runs lmao.
> 
> Look at how well da look is doing now he's on top and booked as the only important part of the show :roman


Is it then fair to say that Roman Reigns is financially better for the WWE? The company announced record profit today for Q1 and there was an increase in their TV deal despite falling ratings. The Network has also grown despite #CancelWWENetwork and some other goodies. The WWE is more than "drawing a dime" with Reigns at the forefront.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Is it then fair to say that Roman Reigns is financially better for the WWE? The company announced record profit today for Q1 and there was an increase in their TV deal despite falling ratings. The Network has also grown despite #CancelWWENetwork and some other goodies.


 So all the credit goes to the guy who can't even break the top 2 merch sales? That too when the number 2 guy has been out for the most of 2015. The financial success is largely due to the network. Marks will buy regardless of who is on top, it's because they are die hards but even they have their limits.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I see this same fucking shit in here every week when the Monday ratings come out. Jesus Christ on a crutch. It's Rollins' fault. It's because see they're burying Daniel Bryan. It's Cena's fault. It's Reigns' fault. It's this guy, it's that guy, but mostly it's Reigns' fault, _because that's when the ratings really started falling_. My God. 

For fuck sake, go into any number of threads in here and see everything everybody is bitching about. Some of it is Reigns' push, but most of it isn't. THAT is why ratings and attendance are tanking. Doesn't matter who's at the top, it's the whole fucking product. Since WM, there are a bunch of new names, but it's mostly the same shit. We get excited when we see a parade of new faces, thinking maybe now they'll wake up and improve things, only to find they all eventually get McMahonified. Authority has been mostly out of the picture, but we know it's only a matter of time before they worm their way back onto our TV screens and jettison it all back 20 years again. 

Go watch every other promotion and see what they're doing that makes them look so appealing, and that's probably everything WWE isn't doing that's dragging the ratings down. Booking in general. The WWE 'style'. Idiotic and unbelievable characters and nonsensical, illogical story lines. Management insisting on their fat ugly faces and asses being in the top angles. Oh yeah, and don't think the whole heel announcer concept in any way mitigates any of the offensiveness of all that. Need I go on?


----------



## Bossdude

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

90% of the show is full of boring indy vanilla midgets, which is what you smarks wanted

Now ratings are in the trash because we have guys like Styles, Zayn and Cass 
We got rid of veterans like Show and Kane

Aside from Roman this is entirely a smark wet dream show, and ratings are in the toilet

Roman's to blame for low ratings? You honestly think putting the title on Styles would have an impact on ratings? (outside of a week or two)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

My one and only point this entire time dating back to last year was that you can replace Rollins last year with ANYONE else on the full time roster, and the ratings wouldn't improve. Not only have they not improved, but they're down. Attendance down, too. 

That was my one and only point. Not that Rollins is a draw, because he's not, but neither is anyone else. Point proven. Plus, if you're going to dish it, you damn well better be able to take it. Good night all.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Is it then fair to say that Roman Reigns is financially better for the WWE? The company announced record profit today for Q1 and there was an increase in their TV deal despite falling ratings. The Network has also grown despite #CancelWWENetwork and some other goodies. The WWE is more than "drawing a dime" with Reigns at the forefront.


Their tv contract was expected to increase this year wasn't it? That and WM would help their record profit for the first quarter. The free months of the Network to new subs also helped. It's not because of Reigns(who wasn't even champ it was Trips during Q1), but attendance and ratings dropping isn't because of Reigns either(though he's part of the problem).


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm glad Raw ratings suffered. After how the Bullet Club vs Roman match turned out, I decided to TUNE out. There's only so much "Roman Reigns is Superman and can't be hurt" a man can take. 

Also, one superman punch taking out Gallows...GTFO. The Superman punch looks nothing more than a jumping punch to the casual person, and they are supposed to believe that will take out a 6'7" man. Some of Roman's "regular" punches look like they hurt more.

Lastly, why are people talking about YouTube views. They are pretty meaningless other than figuring out what pisses people off. First off, the views are going to driven by the WWE homepage. I usually search WWE on Youtube, get directed to the homepage, that automatically gives whatever video they are showing a view, then I click on videos section even though I didn't even bother viewing the homepage video. Roman vs Bullet Club was the homepage video last night btw.

Moreover, a lot of the views on Youtube are driven by people just checking back to see what people are saying in the comments section. It's not uncommon for me to check on the same video 5 or 6 times just to see what people are saying.

If there was a way to see unique viewers and the max amount of time spent watching a particular YouTube video, that would be a useful gauge. For example, if a viewer clicks on the video 5 times, with the first view lasting the full segment, then the next 4 views averaging only 10 seconds or so, we could infer that the viewer really only watched the video once. If another person saw a video 3 times, but none for more than 15 seconds, we could infer that person didn't really watch the video. Etc, etc.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> So all the credit goes to the guy who can't even break the top 2 merch sales? That too when the number 2 guy has been out for the most of 2015. The financial success is largely due to the network. Marks will buy regardless of who is on top, it's because they are die hards but even they have their limits.


You made the inference that the bad ratings are solely due to Roman Reigns. I don't believe for one second that he is the cause of WWE's financial gains but he did play his part. If he's going to be mocked and ridiculed in this thread as the root of the bad TV ratings, the reverse should also hold true. He had something to do with the profit. 

As for merch sales, he was #2 last year and that was dismissed as a given because he was "pushed" so much. But yet, he was largely no sold for being a part of WWE's success. Another performer selling more ugly shirts doesn't mean he's not still part of the gravy train.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> You made the inference that the bad ratings are solely due to Roman Reigns. I don't believe for one second that he is the cause of WWE's financial gains but he did play his part. If he's going to be mocked and ridiculed in this thread as the root of the bad TV ratings, the reverse should also hold true. He had something to do with the profit.
> 
> As for merch sales, he was #2 last year and that was dismissed as a given because he was "pushed" so much. But yet, he was largely no sold for being a part of WWE's success. Another performer selling more ugly shirts doesn't mean he's not still part of the gravy train.


 Daniel Bryan was number 2, pretty sure Meltzer confirmed it. New Day were number 1 during WM weekend.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Marv95 said:


> Their tv contract was expected to increase this year wasn't it? That and WM would help their record profit for the first quarter. The free months of the Network to new subs also helped. It's not because of Reigns, but attendance and ratings dropping isn't because of Reigns either(though he's part of the problem).


I'm not arguing that Roman Reigns is solely responsible for the WWE's fortunes. My previous post was more in mocking. This thread has turned into blaming Roman Reigns for the bad TV ratings and that he's just the worst; an illness that is just spreading but on this same day, the WWE reported a strong Q1. It stands to reason that the "worst" isn't that bad on the actual bottom line.




Phenomenal One said:


> Daniel Bryan was number 2, pretty sure Meltzer confirmed it. New Day were number 1 during WM weekend.


Yeah, I know that. I have nothing against them and I'm quite happy for them. I just find WWE merch to be generally ugly.


----------



## The_Jiz

Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Is it then fair to say that Roman Reigns is financially better for the WWE? The company announced record *profit* today for Q1 and there was an increase in their TV deal despite falling ratings. The Network has also grown despite #CancelWWENetwork and some other goodies. The WWE is more than "drawing a dime" with Reigns at the forefront.


Please stop right there. If you're referring to the sources that you, yourself, posted it was about revenue(Something completely different from profit). 

*Because Revenue - Operation costs = profit*. 

In the article itself, it states the profitability is still a mystery.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_Jiz said:


> Please stop right there. If you're referring to the sources that you, yourself, posted it was about revenue(Something completely different from profit).
> 
> *Because Revenue - Operation costs = profit*.
> 
> In the article itself, it states the profitability is still a mystery.




I was responding to the comments that Roman Reigns is to solely to be blamed for the bad ratings and that he was the "worst" champion the WWE has ever had. By that same logic, Reigns would also be the most profitable. I don't believe he's the reason for the WWE making record bank; only pointing how the reverse could just as easily be true if the logic in this thread were to be followed. 

It was only a few hours ago that the WWE released their Q1 report and had a strong showing. I don't think Reigns is putting them out of business just yet.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_Jiz said:


> Please stop right there. If you're referring to the sources that you, yourself, posted it was about revenue(Something completely different from profit).
> 
> *Because Revenue - Operation costs = profit*.
> 
> In the article itself, it states the profitability is still a mystery.


Glad I'm not the only on who caught that. A few different times in that report it states that the profitability (which is completely different than Revenue) is still 'a mystery.' I believe it said that re: Network and a few other aspects, which is really, really odd. Glad I'm not the only one who caught that. And nothing about the Networks' profits should be 'a mystery' now in Year 3 of the Network. Also the fact that they have way less than 2 million, including the free trials they run practically every month and the fact that it is now worldwide, is odd, to say the least. I was also glad that someone pointed that alot of the Youtube views are from people across the world who simply don't watch Raw on an every week basis. Interesting stuff to say the least.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The commercial gains has zero to do with Reigns. But Becky with the good hair. Long Username lol. Maybe you should re read ppls views. No one is solely blaming Reigns. They are listing 1. The Over all product 2. The rating were this bad a year ago. PPL were saying this prooves Seth was not a draw. Now the same but worse numbers. Are happening. Which prooves The numbers were not Rollins fault. As they are not Reigns. So no one is saying Oh Reigns is driving the show into the ground. The argument is no one can make a difference. The age of draws is dead. The biggest draw they have is the brand itself. The brand it self is also the reason for the network subs. And mania buys. Not Reigns, Cena, Rock, Taker. The brand itself. We tall about the under utilised roster. But the most under utilized entity is the brand itself. Until the brand is deconstructed. Into a new, different format. And true change happens. This well continue. Now of course not expecting huge numbers. Seeing network tv is slowly becoming obsolete. Cable too. But at least a 2.5. By September need a new format. Or huge storyline. Wyatt Family v The Authority be cool.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> *The commercial gains has zero to do with Reigns. But Becky with the good hair. Long Username lol. Maybe you should re read ppls views. No one is solely blaming Reigns.* They are listing 1. The Over all product 2. The ratings tis bad a year ago. Prooves Seth was not a draw. Now the same but worse numbers. Are happening. Which prooves The numbers were not Rollins fault. As they are not Reigns. So no one is saying Oh Reigns is driving the show into the ground. The argument is no one can make a difference. The age of draws is dead. The biggest draw they have is the brand itself. The brand it self is also the reason for the network subs. And mania buys. Not Reigns, Cena, Rock, Taker. The brand itself. We tall about the under utilised roster. But the most under utilized entity is the brand itself. Until the brand is deconstructed. Into a new, different format. And true change happens. This well continue. Now of course not expecting huge numbers. Seeing network tv is slowly becoming obsolete. Cable too. But at least a 2.5. By September need a new format. Or huge storyline. Wyatt Family v The Authority be cool.


1. I didn't state so. It was a rhetorical question in response to the suggestions that Reigns was to blame for the bad ratings. 

2. My username is just fine. I picked it for a reason.

3. I did read the views. I quoted the user who declared Reigns as the "worst". I could've done a selection of quotes from posters who are blaming the "Samoans". 

4. I've always stated that the show needs to do well from top to bottom. 

5. Wyatt vs. HHH/Authority would be a great angle. 


I don't make arguments I cant support; throw them out there and see which can stick. I can defend my points.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> You made the inference that the bad ratings are solely due to Roman Reigns. I don't believe for one second that he is the cause of WWE's financial gains but he did play his part. If he's going to be mocked and ridiculed in this thread as the root of the bad TV ratings, the reverse should also hold true. He had something to do with the profit.
> 
> As for merch sales, he was #2 last year and that was dismissed as a given because he was "pushed" so much. But yet, he was largely no sold for being a part of WWE's success. Another performer selling more ugly shirts doesn't mean he's not still part of the gravy train.


 Am I factually correct or not? Has there been a champion in WWE history with worse ratings?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Am I factually correct or not? Has there been a champion in WWE history with worse ratings?


I can look into that and have a response for you by tomorrow. You have my word that I won't no sell you. 

I think Meltzer has some ratings stats and someone had posted a ratings chart a few weeks ago. I'll try to find it.

*EDIT:*

I found the chart.










*Average WWE Raw ratings by champion since 2005*
http://www.cagesideseats.com/2016/4/7/11388518/raw-ratings-per-champion-since-2005


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I'm not arguing that Roman Reigns is solely responsible for the WWE's fortunes. My previous post was more in mocking. This thread has turned into blaming Roman Reigns for the bad TV ratings and that he's just the worst; an illness that is just spreading but on this same day, the WWE reported a strong Q1. It stands to reason that the "worst" isn't that bad on the actual bottom line.


Rollins got the same treatment when he was champion and ratings were tanking though. That's just how it is.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I can look into that and have a response for you by tomorrow. You have my word that I won't no sell you.
> 
> I think Meltzer has some ratings stats and someone had posted a ratings chart a few weeks ago. I'll try to find it.
> 
> *EDIT:*
> 
> I found the chart.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Average WWE Raw ratings by champion since 2005*
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/2016/4/7/11388518/raw-ratings-per-champion-since-2005


Thanks for posting, that is interesting. You can see the trends there of when the fans last gave a shit, and when they stopped. Like...that is VERY telling in a lot of ways if you get the context behind that data. Here's what they tell me:

* The last time fans gave a fuck was when you were pushing two universally loved faces, in Punk's big breakout, and then Bryan along the way. During that timespan you also had the return of the Rock, and other part timers, etc.. 

* The last time fans gave a fuck was when the WWE champion was involved in BIG storylines/feuds. Punk vs. the WWE/Cena, Bryan vs. the Authority and the idea that he's not a top guy. 

* When the WWE resorts back to "status quo" of Cena, fans stop giving a fuck. When they push a discount version of Cena, in Reigns, fans are giving a fuck at their all-time least. 

* This says that the audience is tired of the "Cena model". So pushing an even less talented version of Cena, in the same manner of a John Cena, is obviously going to be awful. 

This is pretty much telling you exactly why Reigns is such a failure, and why WWE itself has been so fucking boring for the last two years. The last time the company was "hot" was when they had talented guys coming up who were different from the status quo. 

If they ever want to move on and become a BETTER program, or simply as good as they used to be, they need to go back to their old philosophies of running with guys when they are hot, and noticing the trends in what/who are over instead of trying to manufacture their own out of cardboard cutouts like a Roman Reigns.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Thanks for posting, that is interesting. You can see the trends there of when the fans last gave a shit, and when they stopped. Like...that is VERY telling in a lot of ways if you get the context behind that data. Here's what they tell me:
> 
> * The last time fans gave a fuck was when you were pushing two universally loved faces, in Punk's big breakout, and then Bryan along the way. During that timespan you also had the return of the Rock, and other part timers, etc..
> 
> * The last time fans gave a fuck was when the WWE champion was involved in BIG storylines/feuds. Punk vs. the WWE/Cena, Bryan vs. the Authority and the idea that he's not a top guy.
> 
> * When the WWE resorts back to "status quo" of Cena, fans stop giving a fuck. When they push a discount version of Cena, in Reigns, fans are giving a fuck at their all-time least.
> 
> * This says that the audience is tired of the "Cena model". So pushing an even less talented version of Cena, in the same manner of a John Cena, is obviously going to be awful.
> 
> This is pretty much telling you exactly why Reigns is such a failure, and why WWE itself has been so fucking boring for the last two years. The last time the company was "hot" was when they had talented guys coming up who were different from the status quo.
> 
> If they ever want to move on and become a BETTER program, or simply as good as they used to be, they need to go back to their old philosophies of running with guys when they are hot, and noticing the trends in what/who are over instead of trying to manufacture their own out of cardboard cutouts like a Roman Reigns.


I won't get into the Reigns/Cena criticism too much. The ratings have been in decline but I do agree with your overall point.

I wasn't posting here when CM Punk rose to the top. But he was HOT . He could've been a mainstream superstar. Entertainment Weekly was even name dropping him. I remember that because it was when Justin Timberlake was at the VMA's and they called him "Best In the World" and the pipe bomb was still fresh. It wasn't until I started posting here that I realized people thought Punk was a "flop" in the ratings. That moment shouldn't have fizzled out. 

Daniel Bryan and the Authority was another hot angle. They could've pushed that. I think he could've been a bridge between Cena and Reigns. 

Brock Lesnar seems to be the only mainstream superstar they have left. But they only book him to just stand in the ring and suplex people. It's a waste of a once in a generation performer.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I won't get into the Reigns/Cena criticism too much. The ratings have been in decline but I do agree with your overall point.
> 
> I wasn't posting here when CM Punk rose to the top. But he was HOT . He could've been a mainstream superstar. Entertainment Weekly was even name dropping him. I remember that because it was when Justin Timberlake was at the VMA's and they called him "Best In the World" and the pipe bomb was still fresh. It wasn't until I started posting here that I realized people thought Punk was a "flop" in the ratings. That moment shouldn't have fizzled out.
> 
> Daniel Bryan and the Authority was another hot angle. They could've pushed that. I think he could've been a bridge between Cena and Reigns.
> 
> Brock Lesnar seems to be the only mainstream superstar they have left. But they only book him to just stand in the ring and suplex people. It's a waste of a once in a generation performer.


Ratings are on the decline anyways, yeah, you're probably right. But they didn't have to decline this much. Punk would have brought them in if they didn't bury him then turn him heel. Bryan would have brought them in if he didn't get hurt. 

It's their own incompetence combined with some bad luck, really.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Seems like the ratings began their huge recent downfall when Vacant won the title last Fall. Obviously he didn't have what it takes to be a main-event player. :quimby


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Seems like the ratings began their huge recent downfall when Vacant won the title last Fall. Obviously he didn't have what it takes to be a main-event player. :quimby


 Vacant > Roman.

Anyone but you Roman, anyone but you.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings are down for most shows. It doesn't necessarily mean the audience has abandoned it. People are watching shows on a time shifted basis. Cable shows and now networks are eschewing Live +SD(Same Day)for the Live +3 and Live +7 day metric to measure interest. This article from last November explains the rationale behind it. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...31918/&usg=AFQjCNHqE_9VVHSpqGfjLqyoO7AAQoi_sg

This is the most recently available Live +3 ratings from April 25-May 01. http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...f-thrones-fear-the-walking-dead-on-top-again/

I noticed RAW still appears among the most watched shows in total viewers, but didn't crack the top 25 in the increased viewer metric. I had to go to the original ratings to compare the three day increase. For the April 25th episode Hour 1 increased 355k viewers from 3.266m to 3.621m. Hour 2 increased 370k viewers from 3.184m to 3.554m. Hour 3 increased 384k viewers from 2.938m to 3.322m. It averaged roughly an additional 370k viewers per hour.

So RAW does pick up additional viewers in just three days, but not in the same number as other shows. This could be because most people watch it like other sporting events that need to be seen live. Sports don't fare well in time shifted viewing because you gotta watch it live. So maybe this is why RAW lags in comparison to the top gainer Fear the Waking Dead which gained 2.155m in the three days. Maybe the increase doesn't crack the top 25 because there just isn't that much more interest beyond the live interest because it's a cold product. I'm curious to see how it fares in future time shifted ratings.


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> While I agree ratings don't increase over night that Raw was shit and is not a good way to gain viewers the only match I wanted to see didn't even happen.


I agree, but at least they tried something different, which went wrong, but at least no 6 man tag to close the show.

Not all RAWs were great when they changed the landscape back in the days, I definitely have faith in what they are doing


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> Rollins got the same treatment when he was champion and ratings were tanking though. That's just how it is.


Basically. It's nothing new, there were plenty of posters blaming poor ratings on the champ at the time; whether it was Punk, Bryan, Sheamus or Rollins. The current champ was supposedly some casual magnet according to some yet the numbers are even worse than they were last year. 

I guess part of the reason many go extra hard is because there were people dishing it out yet now they've either vanished or ignore ratings and just talk about YouTube views and mythical millions WWE gets from them. The ratings thread has always been stupid, full of marks who can't be objective. Good for business and amazing when numbers increase but when it's down the excuses roll in. Like some people took a 2nd job just to defend their favorites :lmao
I think everyone agrees that it's not on all one guy, but it never helps when people show bias and act like legit idiots. 

The cycle will always continue, the same ones who go crazy over YouTube views will ignore them and bash the next champ while the ones who don't care about them will bring them up.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Marv95 said:


> People bringing up YT don't realize that many of those views aren't domestic. The US has always been their bread and butter, and with attendance down almost 10% from last year are they really growing?


*Your point? Do they give a fuck where the millions are coming from as long as they get them? "OH MAN, THIS MONEY'S NOT FROM AMERICA, IT DOESN'T COUNT!" Please. The desperate excuses to discredit Youtube are straight laughable. First, it was they don't count unless they're making WWE millions, now, the millions don't count unless they're domestic. Pick an argument and stick to it. *


----------



## Oxidamus

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Basically. It's nothing new, there were plenty of posters blaming poor ratings on the champ at the time; whether it was Punk, Bryan, Sheamus or Rollins. The current champ was supposedly some casual magnet according to some yet the numbers are even worse than they were last year.
> 
> I guess part of the reason many go extra hard is because there were people dishing it out yet now they've either vanished or ignore ratings and just talk about YouTube views and mythical millions WWE gets from them. The ratings thread has always been stupid, full of marks who can't be objective. Good for business and amazing when numbers increase but when it's down the excuses roll in. Like some people took a 2nd job just to defend their favorites :lmao
> I think everyone agrees that it's not on all one guy, but it never helps when people show bias and act like legit idiots.
> 
> The cycle will always continue, the same ones who go crazy over YouTube views will ignore them and bash the next champ while the ones who don't care about them will bring them up.


This thread literally only exists as a containment zone so it doesn't spill out into other discussions. I love this thread.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> Rollins got the same treatment when he was champion and ratings were tanking though. That's just how it is.


*
And you forget that Rollins fans brought it on themselves when they declared (and STILL do) that Reigns would single handedly put WWE out of business, and Rollins was here to save us with his cash in. Ratings tanked, they looked foolish, and now they're trying to play the victim after bitching all throughout the Road to Wrestlemania 31 about the imminent doom coming from Reigns beating Lesnar. Financials were used to excuse his mediocre title reign, and ratings were deemed an archaic measurement that declines every year so it's not his fault, but now all of a sudden financials don't matter, it's all about ratings, and it's all Roman's fault they're declining, despite every other IWC favorite being on every show. And no, his low ratings weren't ONLY because of football-they sucked in the summer too, despite us being told that ratings ALWAYS increase in the summer when ratings increased during Roman's singles run from June to August 2014. I also gave dozens of reasons of why Rollins' title reign sucked outside of ratings, so it's yet another desperate cop out to excuse blatant butthurt pettiness.*


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF INDIVIDUAL WRESTLERS


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Basically. It's nothing new, there were plenty of posters blaming poor ratings on the champ at the time; whether it was Punk, Bryan, Sheamus or Rollins. The current champ was supposedly some casual magnet according to some yet the numbers are even worse than they were last year.
> 
> I guess part of the reason many go extra hard is because there were people dishing it out yet now they've either vanished or ignore ratings and just talk about YouTube views and mythical millions WWE gets from them. The ratings thread has always been stupid, full of marks who can't be objective. Good for business and amazing when numbers increase but when it's down the excuses roll in. Like some people took a 2nd job just to defend their favorites :lmao
> I think everyone agrees that it's not on all one guy, but it never helps when people show bias and act like legit idiots.
> 
> The cycle will always continue, the same ones who go crazy over YouTube views will ignore them and bash the next champ while the ones who don't care about them will bring them up.



Not only that, but ratings for Rollins' reign did not fall under a 2.5 until NFL season. This is a FACT. Some others try to say it isn't the truth, hoping that no matter how many times they say it is true, it will be true, but it is NOT. Here is the Raw rating chart for 2015. Raw doesn't fall below a 2.5 until the second week of September, which is when the NFL season started. Nowadays in 2016, they are BELOW a 2.5 in the NFL OFFseason EVERY. SINGLE. WEEK. So, LOL at making fun of the 2015 ratings when they absolutely SHIT on 2016:

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2015-tv-ratings/

If Raw ratings were trash in 2015, what does that make the 2016 ratings? :heyman6

Just like we were told ALL of last year, that when Rollins is no longer Champion, we will get all of these great promos from the NEW top guy and ALL of WWE's problems will vanish. Well, here we are in mid May and that is farthest from the truth. The new face of RAW is so TERRIBLE on the mic, they won't even let the guy talk. When was the last time a Face of the Company wasn't able to cut at least a 10-15 minute promo after winning the title at WM? Yet, here we are 5-6 weeks later, and they still won't let him because he is AWFUL. It has to be a running joke in WWE at this point. Has to be. The product is still horrible and the interest in the show is literally at an all time low. The Raw thread on here can't even break 1500 posts and this is a site full of Die Hards. The threads didn't have that problem at all last year.

Also, remember when people said WWE would go bankrupt if Rollins were Champion? How did that turn out? Well, Vince became a billionaire last year again, but no big deal there, I suppose...


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> Yeah, I need to dispel this here. First off, WWE doesn't know how to create stars anymore and they haven't created any since arguably Cena. Him and Brock are the only legit starpower draws in the company currently. Nobody else even comes close to be a "star". Not Reigns, Rollins, Styles, Ambrose, Owens, Zayn, etc.


Relative to the position of the company now, Rollins, Wyatt, Orton are all "stars", with Cena and Brock being a tier above them. Its no different then arguing whether Razor, Diesel, Bret and Shawn were stars in 95-96 just because the company was down. Those are there big guns, and they'll add a significant amount of interest to the product, because they are all extremely over with the current audience. 



> As for the IC division, it's only on fire for two reasons. The typical long, drawn out, unnecessary matches AND rematches the division is currently infatuated upon and because the Owens/Zayn storyline is being carried over to breathe some life into the division. If you really think about it, there is no storyline in this four way dance with Owens/Zayn/Miz/Cesaro other than "me want title" and it's not even effective when Miz AS IC champion keeps losing week after week as a loser GEEK champion (which is weird since Miz is always booked as a credible midcard champion for the most part).


Doesn't matter WHY its on fire. The Miz and Cesaro feud has been good and so has Zayn v Owens. Miz, while not my favorite, has a gift for grabbing heat through his mic work. Heat he transfers to the other guys when matching up with them. 



> Main event storyline is the ONLY story that matters to the company and they are starting to even botch that too. Not going to call Styles a GEEK or him being buried (although we're nearing that territory) but his supposed CLUB members have been treated as absolute GEEKS that are Roman and Usos's punk bitches. This is here to make Roman look strong at the expense of Styles's momentum (or lack there of).


The only way this feud is being botched is if you're looking at it with booking googles on. If you think Gallows and Anderson are being booked too weakly, just remember that they're going up against the strongest booked wrestler on the active roster. AJ, from a kayfabe standpoint, beat Roman twice last Sunday before losing to the spear later on. He hardly looks like a geek considering that the first win came because Roman was too hurt to return to the ring after a move he delivered. From a purely on screen perspective, this feud is lighting it up.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Not only that, but ratings for Rollins' reign did not fall under a 2.5 until NFL season. This is a FACT. Some others try to say it isn't the truth, hoping that no matter how many times they say it is true, it will be true, but it is NOT. Here is the Raw rating chart for 2015. Raw doesn't fall below a 2.5 until the second week of September, which is when the NFL season started. Nowadays in 2016, they are BELOW a 2.5 in the NFL OFFseason EVERY. SINGLE. WEEK. So, LOL at making fun of the 2015 ratings when they absolutely SHIT on 2016:
> 
> http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2015-tv-ratings/
> 
> If Raw ratings were trash in 2015, what does that make the 2016 ratings? :heyman6


*What part of the word DECLINE do you not understand? The decline began before summer and continued throughout the year. Do I need to explain downward trends to you too? This all came after Rollins title reign that was supposed to save all of the viewers from leaving. Whoops. *



> Just like we were told ALL of last year, that when Rollins is no longer Champion, we will get all of these great promos from the NEW top guy and ALL of WWE's problems will vanish.


*Name names instead of passively aggressively trolling. None of us have ever said Roman is a great mic worker. At least try to post something somewhat factual instead of spewing bullshit.*


> Well, here we are in mid May and that is farthest from the truth. The new face of RAW is so TERRIBLE on the mic, they won't even let the guy talk. When was the last time a Face of the Company wasn't able to cut at least a 10-15 minute promo after winning the title at WM? Yet, here we are 5-6 weeks later, and they still won't let him because he is AWFUL. It has to be a running joke in WWE at this point. Has to be.


*I for one am glad that Roman isn't taking up 40 minutes of the show with shitty promos like Rollins. It has less to do with a lack of trust and more to do with it being completely unnecessary. It must really bother you that the MAJORITY considers Roman vs. AJ to be the best part of the show :hunter.*



> The product is still horrible and the interest in the show is literally at an all time low. The Raw thread on here can't even break 1500 posts and this is a site full of Die Hards. The threads didn't have that problem at all last year.


*You make fun of Youtube, a very profitable media outlet sparking billions of views, and then use the RAW thread on this site as a measurement of global interest. That speaks for itself :kobe9. *



> Also, remember when people said WWE would go bankrupt if Rollins were Champion? How did that turn out? Well, Vince became a billionaire last year again, but no big deal there, I suppose...


*Name names or cut the crap. Find one post of me saying Rollins will put WWE out of business or pack it up.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *What part of the word DECLINE do you not understand? The decline began before summer and continued throughout the year. Do I need to explain downward trends to you too? This all came after Rollins title reign that was supposed to save all of the viewers from leaving. Whoops. *


They've been declining for 10 years. Try harder, bro. And they've declined even moreso now to the point of the lowest in the 23 year history of the show. Dat Mainstream appeal, tho. :heyman6




> *Name names instead of passively aggressively trolling. None of us have ever said Roman is a great mic worker. At least try to post something somewhat factual instead of spewing bullshit.*


You're kidding, right? Posting factual stuff? Up until around a month ago, you used to spew BS like Rollins is the lowest rated Champ of all time when that hasn't been true for quite sometime now. I bet you still believe that. And I'm sorry, but if you're going to trash someone's mic skills and acting for a year straight, you damn sure better hope that the guy you're such a fan of isn't as horrible as Reigns. It's called irony, and it's been freaking beautiful for months now.



> *I for one am glad that Roman isn't taking up 40 minutes of the show with shitty promos like Rollins. It has less to do with a lack of trust and more to do with it being completely unnecessary. It must really bother you that the MAJORITY considers Roman vs. AJ to be the best part of the show :hunter.*


The best part of an awful product? The best part of the lowest rated Raw run in history? The part of the show that is getting SHIT on? I*t must really bother you that Rollins' 40 minutes of airtime is killing Reigns' on Raw for half that time.* :lol OUCH.



> *You make fun of Youtube, a very profitable media outlet sparking billions of views, and then use the RAW thread on this site as a measurement of global interest. That speaks for itself :kobe9. *


I've said a million times that Youtube is a factor. It just isn't the biggest factor. Not my fault you can't grasp that. 





> *Name names or cut the crap. Find one post of me saying Rollins will put WWE out of business or pack it up.*


I never said you did, but I wouldn't be surprised. Find a post of me saying Reigns will put WWE out of business. Because pretty sure I've said WWE is safe no matter who is at the top, especially since they have zero competition in America.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Your point? Do they give a fuck where the millions are coming from as long as they get them? "OH MAN, THIS MONEY'S NOT FROM AMERICA, IT DOESN'T COUNT!" Please. The desperate excuses to discredit Youtube are straight laughable. First, it was they don't count unless they're making WWE millions, now, the millions don't count unless they're domestic. Pick an argument and stick to it. *


I don't understand this argument either. Just accept that digital media is a metric and important in today's social age. The WWE is a global entity. I would hope that their reach is beyond the United States. It doesn't matter where the clicks/views/money come from, just as long as they do. People in India, China, etc matter just as much as those from the United States. They're consumers as well. 

Financial executive George Barrios also commented on the WWE's International reach and initiatives during yesterday's call. If other countries and social media are good enough for the WWE to bring into the discussion, it's not going anywhere. 

Social media existed when Rollins was champ too. Nielson Twitter launched in October 2013. No one bothered to post the stats (to my knowledge). They were available for anyone to make use of.


----------



## Shenroe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> And you forget that Rollins fans brought it on themselves when they declared (and STILL do) that Reigns would single handedly put WWE out of business, and Rollins was here to save us with his cash in. Ratings tanked, they looked foolish, and now they're trying to play the victim after bitching all throughout the Road to Wrestlemania 31 about the imminent doom coming from Reigns beating Lesnar. Financials were used to excuse his mediocre title reign, and ratings were deemed an archaic measurement that declines every year so it's not his fault, but now all of a sudden financials don't matter, it's all about ratings, and it's all Roman's fault they're declining, despite every other IWC favorite being on every show. And no, his low ratings weren't ONLY because of football-they sucked in the summer too, despite us being told that ratings ALWAYS increase in the summer when ratings increased during Roman's singles run from June to August 2014. I also gave dozens of reasons of why Rollins' title reign sucked outside of ratings, so it's yet another desperate cop out to excuse blatant butthurt pettiness.*


I agree overall but let's not act like it was only Roman who brought ratings in 2014. It was the breakup of the fucking Shield. All 3 of them were far more bigger than they are today( maybe not Rollins).


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Shenroe said:


> I agree overall but let's not act like it was only Roman who brought ratings in 2014. It was the breakup of the fucking Shield. All 3 of them were far more bigger than they are today( maybe not Rollins).


*That's true, but Roman haters were looking for every excuse to discredit the ratings increase in the absence of Daniel Bryan, while he was briefly in the title picture that year. He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. *


----------



## UFC200

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I don't understand this argument either. Just accept that digital media is a metric and important in today's social age. The WWE is a global entity. I would hope that their reach is beyond the United States. It doesn't matter where the clicks/views/money come from, just as long as they do. People in India, China, etc matter just as much as those from the United States. They're consumers as well.
> 
> *Financial executive George Barrios also commented on the WWE's International reach and initiatives during yesterday's call. If other countries and social media are good enough for the WWE to bring into the discussion, it's not going anywhere. *


And Barrios was questioned during the conference call by an investor wondering why they should care given the fact that WWE isn't making money off of what appears to be their most avid fanbase at this point - people overseas. That's the problem. They are supposedly getting 80-90% of their YouTube views from international fans, yet the bulk of their revenue is domestic. That right there should be a strong sign that there is little correlation between YouTube views and revenue. 

Additionally, all of their Digital Media revenue is 3-4% of total revenue per year. YouTube alone would probably be close to about 1.5% at best. It's a very insignificant portion of their revenue and people are right to dismiss it at this point. The percentage could increase going forward, but probably not much, since ad rates for pro wrestling have, and always will be, low, because of the composition of the audience. This is why they have yet to be able to monetize their social media following. 

They could try to sign a multi year agreement with YouTube to broadcast some new original show(s), or even air PPVs on YouTube (as UFC does) at a price below $9.99. Something else UFC does - they have a second YT channel that's separate from their free channel, which is subscription based and where they add new content every week. 

Still, the declining interest domestically is a big worry for WWE, since that's where the majority of their revenue comes from. The TV contract is nearly 1/3 of their entire revenue, so it should be interesting to see how their next negotiation goes given the current state of the TV ratings.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Of course there has been a steady decline over the course of the last ten years, but that decline was only measurable over years. Now, you can see the decline almost month by month. 
Over the last 8-10 months or so, the ratings take massive hits and are in pure freefall. You'd have to be an idiot not to see that!

I'm sure Reigns smarks here won't hear any of it, but the decline - the rapid decline - started when Bryan was insignificant in the 15 Rumble, insignificant at WM 31, and disappeared for half a year.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> We'll see how they are after Summerslam.


This is WWE's problem.
It's always jam tomorrow. They say the are trying to fix it but then refuse to pull the trigger on a genuine reboot. 
Until they take genuine stock of where they are and where they need to be nothing will change and they will just keep bleeding viewers. 

The problem with that is that they currently don't NEED to fix anything because the numbers are good on the balance sheet. I don't think they are trying for these poor numbers I just think that complacency has set in and it's just easier to go with it.

I think the shit will hit the fan when the next set of TV deals come up because I can't see USA and the rest of the companies that broadcast their shows around the world being happy to pay anywhere near the amount they are today (which equates to 1/3 of WWE's total income) if the numbers keep bleeding like they are ATM. It's become a standard fact that every year is breaking unwanted records for WWE and that cannot continue no matter how WWE try and spin it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



UFC200 said:


> Additionally, all of their Digital Media revenue is 3-4% of total revenue per year. YouTube alone would probably be close to about 1.5% at best. It's a very insignificant portion of their revenue and people are right to dismiss it at this point.


Exactly. And FWIW, people have said that it IS a factor. It is. It's just that most reasonable people also state that it is nowhere near the biggest factor. It actually makes up a minuscule portion of their revenue.

Going forward, I hope WWE can make this aspect a much bigger revenue stream. I don't know how they should go about it and I'm not even going to make any suggestions, but they certainly need to get more revenue out of it than that.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



UFC200 said:


> And Barrios was questioned during the conference call by an investor wondering why they should care given the fact that WWE isn't making money off of what appears to be their most avid fanbase at this point - people overseas. That's the problem. They are supposedly getting 80-90% of their YouTube views from international fans, yet the bulk of their revenue is domestic. That right there should be a strong sign that there is little correlation between YouTube views and revenue.
> 
> Additionally, all of their Digital Media revenue is 3-4% of total revenue per year. YouTube alone would probably be close to about 1.5% at best. It's a very insignificant portion of their revenue and people are right to dismiss it at this point. The percentage could increase going forward, but probably not much, since ad rates for pro wrestling have, and always will be, low, because of the composition of the audience. This is why they have yet to be able to monetize their social media following.
> 
> They could try to sign a multi year agreement with YouTube to broadcast some new original show(s), or even air PPVs on YouTube (as UFC does) at a price below $9.99. Something else UFC does - they have a second YT channel that's separate from their free channel, which is subscription based and where they add new content every week.
> 
> Still, the declining interest domestically is a big worry for WWE, since that's where the majority of their revenue comes from. The TV contract is nearly 1/3 of their entire revenue, so it should be interesting to see how their next negotiation goes given the current state of the TV ratings.


Not surprised this didn't get a reply. I wouldn't even outright dismiss YouTube, it puts some pennies and nickels in their pockets. It's just funny how in the past people would talk about the terrible ratings but now these same people would rather talk about YouTube views and social media. 

Vince and Co could act like everything is alright but we know they'll bring in everyone when football starts to try and pop some numbers every week.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Not surprised this didn't get a reply. I wouldn't even outright dismiss YouTube, it puts some pennies and nickels in their pockets. It's just funny how in the past people would talk about the terrible ratings but now these same people would rather talk about YouTube views and social media.
> 
> Vince and Co could act like everything is alright but we know they'll bring in everyone when football starts to try and pop some numbers every week.


I have no hesitation in defending my posts or providing rebuttals. I'd appreciate if that was just respected and not assumed that I no sold it just because. I'm not sure where your "surprise" comes from when I'm here in this thread and not hiding out. 

As for the post in question, I will continue to discuss Youtube and social media. It is a means of methodology. It's good enough for Nielson and the WWE to incorporate into their Digital Media coffers. Thus far in this thread, you yourself have routinely mocked Youtube but now you offer that it "puts some pennies and nickels in their pockets". Money is money. It may not be bigger than their TV deal at the moment, but the company is still monetizing their social platforms. That should increase as the years go on.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This might seem like a relatively simple thought, but when was the last time we've had a universally over and appreciated WWE champion? Let's take a look at the last several champions.

*Roman Reigns*- A man that is voraciously booed out of most of the arenas he steps into, despite being booked as the top babyface in the company. 

*Triple H*- Evil authority figure and part time wrestler.

*Sheamus*- Probably the least over champion WWE have had in recent memory, and a heel to boot.

*Seth Rollins*- Heel champion that was given far too much promo time, despite promos not being his strong suit. Also booked to lose most of his televised matches.

*Brock Lesnar*- While undoubtedly a draw, is also a part timer that was absent more often than not.

*John Cena*- Another draw, but one who also draws ire from much of the fanbase. This simply being a transitional reign didn't help matters.

*Daniel Bryan*- Universally beloved champion who had his reign cut short due to injuries.

*Randy Orton*- Heel champion that arguably wasn't much of a draw in 2013/14.

*John Cena*- While this reign wasn't simply a transitional reign, the man still drew ire from much of the fanbase.

*The Rock*- Part time champion.

*CM Punk- * Probably the last time a universally over babyface had a lengthy title reign. However, was A) turned heel halfway through his reign, and B) was booked relatively low on the card despite being WWE champion.

The point of this post is simple. It is to point out that it has been a very long time since a universally beloved full time performer was WWE champion. Now, I'm aware that ratings don't solely revolve around whoever is holding the championship, but it obviously is a factor. The last time a universally beloved full time performer was champion was two years ago when Daniel Bryan was champion, and his run was obviously cut short due to injuries, so WWE were never able to reap the full benefits of him holding the title. Before that it was Punk, but, as a babyface, he rarely main evented PPV's, and was hence undermined as champion.

It obviously isn't the be all-end all answer, but I think that having a universally over full time babyface performer holding the championship for a relatively extended period of time would provide a ratings boost imo.

My two cents.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> This might seem like a relatively simple thought, but when was the last time we've had a universally over and appreciated WWE champion? Let's take a look at the last several champions.
> 
> *Roman Reigns*- A man that is voraciously booed out of most of the arenas he steps into, despite being booked as the top babyface in the company.
> 
> *Triple H*- Evil authority figure and part time wrestler.
> 
> *Sheamus*- Probably the least over champion WWE have had in recent memory, and a heel to boot.
> 
> *Seth Rollins*- Heel champion that was given far too much promo time, despite promos not being his strong suit. Also booked to lose most of his televised matches.
> 
> *Brock Lesnar*- While undoubtedly a draw, is also a part timer that was absent more often than not.
> 
> *John Cena*- Another draw, but one who also draws ire from much of the fanbase. This simply being a transitional reign didn't help matters.
> 
> *Daniel Bryan*- Universally beloved champion who had his reign cut short due to injuries.
> 
> *Randy Orton*- Heel champion that arguably wasn't much of a draw in 2013/14.
> 
> *John Cena*- While this reign wasn't simply a transitional reign, the man still drew ire from much of the fanbase.
> 
> *The Rock*- Part time champion.
> 
> *CM Punk- * Probably the last time a universally over babyface had a lengthy title reign. However, was A) turned heel halfway through his reign, and B) was booked relatively low on the card despite being WWE champion.
> 
> The point of this post is simple. It is to point out that it has been a very long time since a universally beloved full time performer was WWE champion. Now, I'm aware that ratings don't solely revolve around whoever is holding the championship, but it obviously is a factor. The last time a universally beloved full time performer was champion was two years ago when Daniel Bryan was champion, and his run was obviously cut short due to injuries, so WWE were never able to reap the full benefits of him holding the title. Before that it was Punk, but, as a babyface, he rarely main evented PPV's, and was hence undermined as champion.
> 
> It obviously isn't the be all-end all answer, but I think that having a universally over full time babyface performer holding the championship for a relatively extended period of time would provide a ratings boost imo.
> 
> My two cents.


The ratings graph pretty much told you that universally over champions like Bryan/Punk brought a lot more eyes to the product than garbage like Reigns or heels. 

Heel champions today are like DEATH to ratings. And it doesn't have to be that way. It only is that way because the heels have nothing to go against. They're generally more over than the faces because the only faces pushed are Cena/Reigns, whom nobody wants to see at this point. Then the heels get fed to them immediately, making any feud pointless. 

They have no idea how to use the face/heel dynamic to draw viewers anymore. And a huge reason for that is because they want to keep pushing these dopes that the crowd won't get behind.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Not surprised this didn't get a reply. I wouldn't even outright dismiss YouTube, it puts some pennies and nickels in their pockets. It's just funny how in the past people would talk about the terrible ratings but now these same people would rather talk about YouTube views and social media.
> 
> Vince and Co could act like everything is alright but we know they'll bring in everyone when football starts to try and pop some numbers every week.


The sky was falling past years because of the ratings. Now it's just 'ho-hum, no big deal,' even with them being worse than ever.

Unlike all of us in past years, I'm not going to blame it soley on the talent, though. It's more-so creative and Vince than anything else.


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The sky was falling past years because of the ratings. Now it's just 'ho-hum, no big deal,' even with them being worse than ever.
> 
> Unlike all of us in past years, I'm not going to blame it soley on the talent, though. It's more-so creative and Vince than anything else.


Add into the fact that they have producing RAW in its current form for almost 20 years and the rating bleed makes all the more sense. 

RAW went to its current arena setup in March of 1997. With the exception of set changes and technology changes, RAW has been produced and presented in the same fashion since that time. 

It is time for a serious reboot. But McMahon is just too fucking stubborn at this point, even when he has an alternative product blueprint starring him right in the face with NXT.


----------



## ToddsAutographs

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

let's fight over whos favorite wrestler is responsible for bad ratings


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ToddsAutographs said:


> let's fight over whos favorite wrestler is responsible for bad ratings


I seriously hope this version of the thread finally moves past that. 

It is glaringly obvious that the RAW draws a shit rating not because of the talent but because of the presentation. 

Three hours is just too long for a weekly TV show. I believe the only other TV property airing that long is the NFL, but they take half the year off. 

On top of that they are literally cannibalizing there own rating by posting every segment to YouTube... And if you don't have time to watch all of those they make a top ten video shortly afterwards that shows you everything you need to see in one video. 

It's the same reasons I no longer watch late night talk shows. All the funny bits get loaded up to YouTube. 

For all intents and purposes the talent roster has never been better. The wrestling featured on raw is really good. It's just unfortunate that all of it is so meaningless because there army of writers isn't writing for us, but for McMahon.


----------



## Hyphen

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The problem is not that one specific individual is the top star, the problem is that there is only one top star at a time. There is Reigns and that's it. Brock isn't showing up as often anymore, Cena is injured, Orton is injured (although can't really call him a big draw anymore) and Rollins is injured. The only others who are big time over are Styles, who is currently being booked as only a fringe main eventer due to his subsequent losses to Roman, and Shinsuke, who isn't even on the main roster yet.

Let Styles pick up a win first against Roman at ER to establish himself as a main eventer first. Boom, two guys who can be considered top stars already. Then book Cena and Rollins and possibly Orton and Wyatt as top guys as well. Have Taker, Brock and Trips be main eventers when they do appear as well. Try to book major future call ups like Shinsuke, Balor and Joe as actually strong. Have the current upper mid card guys (IC title picture) be able to win once in a while against the top guys and you suddenly have a huge group of people who could realistically be the champion (similar to the mid 2000s when you had Triple H, Orton, Cena, Batista, Edge and Taker all being top guys at the same time). It won't suddenly create a third wrestling boom but it could at the very least get some more interest in the product again and halt the decline.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Hyphen said:


> The problem is not that one specific individual is the top star, the problem is that there is only one top star at a time. There is Reigns and that's it. Brock isn't showing up as often anymore, Cena is injured, Orton is injured (although can't really call him a big draw anymore) and Rollins is injured. The only others who are big time over are Styles, who is currently being booked as only a fringe main eventer due to his subsequent losses to Roman, and Shinsuke, who isn't even on the main roster yet.
> 
> Let Styles pick up a win first against Roman at ER to establish himself as a main eventer first. Boom, two guys who can be considered top stars already. Then book Cena and Rollins and possibly Orton and Wyatt as top guys as well. Have Taker, Brock and Trips be main eventers when they do appear as well. Try to book major future call ups like Shinsuke, Balor and Joe as actually strong. Have the current upper mid card guys (IC title picture) be able to win once in a while against the top guys and you suddenly have a huge group of people who could realistically be the champion (similar to the mid 2000s when you had Triple H, Orton, Cena, Batista, Edge and Taker all being top guys at the same time). It won't suddenly create a third wrestling boom but it could at the very least get some more interest in the product again and halt the decline.


I like this post. Right now with the way the WWE audience is seemingly split in regards to what they favor in their superstars the WWE does not have ONE GUY with a big enough fanbase to carry the show themselves. Even Cena's personal drawing power has lessened over the past few years. Given this is a "new era" the WWE (IMO) really needs to scrap the "ONE GUY" method and just make a group of top guys that all look equal.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Hyphen said:


> The problem is not that one specific individual is the top star, the problem is that there is only one top star at a time. There is Reigns and that's it. Brock isn't showing up as often anymore, Cena is injured, Orton is injured (although can't really call him a big draw anymore) and Rollins is injured. The only others who are big time over are Styles, who is currently being booked as only a fringe main eventer due to his subsequent losses to Roman, and Shinsuke, who isn't even on the main roster yet.
> 
> Let Styles pick up a win first against Roman at ER to establish himself as a main eventer first. Boom, two guys who can be considered top stars already. Then book Cena and Rollins and possibly Orton and Wyatt as top guys as well. Have Taker, Brock and Trips be main eventers when they do appear as well. Try to book major future call ups like Shinsuke, Balor and Joe as actually strong. Have the current upper mid card guys (IC title picture) be able to win once in a while against the top guys and you suddenly have a huge group of people who could realistically be the champion (similar to the mid 2000s when you had Triple H, Orton, Cena, Batista, Edge and Taker all being top guys at the same time). It won't suddenly create a third wrestling boom but it could at the very least get some more interest in the product again and halt the decline.


:clap

I agree with the majority of this post, but you don't establish AJ Styles at Roman's expense. That's what you have folks like Orton and Cena for. They can give him that main event rub without compromising their own momentum. 

After the doldrum of the past several months, a time where we had less established main event talent than any time in recent memory, we are about to enter a season of proverbial riches. We'll have as many as 7 credible threats to the crown. War of the 7 Kings anyone?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Anyone subscribe to Meltzer's site? I used to, but don't anymore. Reason being on his Twitter, he posted a tease to a new article he wrote. Here's the tweet:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/730807238298718208
I'm sure this is probably a real interesting article. Didn't know Raw had a 'huge' departure from their male audience..


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> Relative to the position of the company now, Rollins, Wyatt, Orton are all "stars", with Cena and Brock being a tier above them. Its no different then arguing whether Razor, Diesel, Bret and Shawn were stars in 95-96 just because the company was down. Those are there big guns, and they'll add a significant amount of interest to the product, because they are all extremely over with the current audience.


They're stars in the sense that they are guys being in top positions, not necessarily that they are recognizable faces outside of the WWE/wrestling bubble. Again, John Cena and Brock Lesnar (and to a VERY lesser extent, people like Taker and Jericho) are the only legit superstars that draw outside appeal to the company. 





> Doesn't matter WHY its on fire. The Miz and Cesaro feud has been good and so has Zayn v Owens. Miz, while not my favorite, has a gift for grabbing heat through his mic work. Heat he transfers to the other guys when matching up with them.


Their feud has been a typical midcard feud for a typically booked midcard title. There is no purpose or endgame to where this feud benefits Miz and Cesaro. Miz continues to lose and go down almost every RAW and SD so his credibility as IC champion is pretty much nonexistent so even if Cesaro won the title, there is no long term (or even short term) impact for him to doing anything significant with I. That's why they had to bring Zayn and Owens (who are having a good feud with one another) into this four way cluster to draw and heat and attention to the IC title.



> The only way this feud is being botched is if you're looking at it with booking googles on. If you think Gallows and Anderson are being booked too weakly, just remember that they're going up against the strongest booked wrestler on the active roster. AJ, from a kayfabe standpoint, beat Roman twice last Sunday before losing to the spear later on. He hardly looks like a geek considering that the first win came because Roman was too hurt to return to the ring after a move he delivered. From a purely on screen perspective, this feud is lighting it up.


Gallows and Anderson should have been wrecking shit from the moment they debuted. If that means the Usos and Reigns are down on the mat at weeks then so be it. They are protected and booked strong enough to take that kind of beating and it makes Luke and Karl an immediate threat to anything they do rather than being the Samoan KLIQ's punching bags for a month. And I didn't say AJ was a GEEK. They have been making sure (for now) not to making him looks completely inferior to Roman but the non finishes and lack of character progression is starting to show the cracks of this feud. Extreme Rules is where this most likely ends so AJ needs to do SOMETHING come Monday to reassure that this feud is still an even and competitive title match.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Meltzer Quote About Ratings and Male Viewership Decline



> There was an interesting tweet recently by WWE’s Chief Revenue and Marketing Officer Michelle Wilson, noting that two-thirds of the viewers of “Total Divas” are new to the brand.
> 
> There’s probably something to that, given the audience makeup of “Total Divas” is completely different from every other show because it’s mostly comprised of women under 35 and teenage girls, audiences that have in the past had some affinity for pro wrestling at certain times, but as a general rule, not in large numbers.
> 
> The flip side is with that show garnering a new audience, that should, if anything, lead to increases in the other key products, Raw, Smackdown and arena business, which are not increasing at all, and in fact, so far this year, all three are in decline. But there is a change, particularly in Smackdown more than Raw, but it’s there in both, where the percentage of women viewers is increasing. What that indicates is that “Total Divas” is probably making some, not a lot of new female fans for the brand.
> 
> But that hides a huge problem that has gone almost completely overlooked. The core audience, the male viewership, has declined far greater than anyone has realized and more than a cursory look at ratings or arena attendance would indicate.
> 
> Nearly every long-time follower and people with long histories in the business that we’ve talked with of late has noted just from television and the reactions, combined with revenue that pro wrestling has become more-and-more a hardcore-based entertainment. It’s a smaller audience following wrestling than at any time, perhaps aside from the 1992-95 period when wrestling bottomed out, in the modern era.
> 
> The flip side is that audience is more into the product, because there is so much more too the product, because there is so much available. The few big events of the year are bigger than ever before, just because they are “big events” as opposed to in the past when big events were big events based on having the right attraction that clicks with the audience.
> 
> But the stuff that isn’t as big doesn’t matter as much. Because of the plethora of product, and also because that product, whether it be angles, storylines or match results, is less meaningful as far as repercussions, it’s harder to get a reaction.
> 
> But as far as the numbers watching the two key television shows, here’s the situation.
> 
> Smackdown is hard to judge because the numbers should have increased going to the more powerful network, and they did at first. But now they’re slightly below last year even with the network upgrade and the far better announcing. The thing with Smackdown is that the three hour exhaustion factor that hurts Raw at the end doesn’t play into effect as a two-hour show that is more wrestling oriented.
> 
> The issue with Smackdown is that it’s so much made into a “B” show (even, weirdly, they have by far the “A” announcing team because Lawler is revitalized and blows away JBL, and Ranallo is far and away the best announcer they’ve had in years). I thought with the move to USA, they’d try and equal it out more. But with Raw, while the women audience isn’t as hardcore (they tune out at a far faster rate than men, particularly for shows that drag), by percentage, they are holding steady while the overall audience is declining double digits. Thus, the actual decline in male viewership is stronger than anyone notices.
> 
> If there are also more women attending house shows, and given nobody knows if that’s the case or not, because overall attendance is down, that would also indicate the 16 percent drop in January and 8 percent drop in February would be even more within the male demo.
> 
> For example, the April 27, 2015 Raw did 2.6 million male viewers and 1.2 million female viewers. The April 28, 2014 Raw did 3.2 million male viewers and 1.4 million female viewers. But the April 25, 2016 Raw did 1,963,000 male viewers and 1,153,000 female viewers.
> 
> So you look and see a 32 percent drop over two years, and a and 17 percent over one year and it does look bad.
> 
> But the male audience drop is actually 38 to 39 percent over two years and 24 to 25 percent over the past year.
> 
> The other aspect is when they tout so-called gains by percentages of women, that women are still down 18 percent over the past two years (although there is virtually no decline from last year) when it comes to Raw viewership, but the higher percentage of women viewers camouflages those declines because women, by percentage, are higher.
> 
> Another interesting ratings notes as it pertains to the idea ratings are going to fall because TV viewing is down relates to the NBA this past year. When it comes to local market ratings, the ratings were overall up, but they told an interesting story. Sports Business Journal got ratings information for 27 out of the 30 teams. Of those, 17 were down and ten were up, which sounds negative. And it is, presented alone. But it also tells an interesting story.
> 
> The teams that were up the most (Golden State, Orlando, New York Knicks) were far more up than those down, and overall viewership was up.
> 
> In the modern era, since the formation of the local sports networks, there has never seen a season where three NBA teams topped an 8.0 average for their entire season.
> 
> But this year, three teams, the Warriors, Cleveland and San Antonio all topped an 8.7 average rating for the season. What’s the obvious conclusion?
> 
> If you have larger than life stars and win most of your games, you will do better today than even in the past. Seems obvious. So the key is to create larger than life stars and win most of the time. The NBA overall was strong because they had superstars and dominant teams. But rank-and-file, the .500 teams, they did decline more or less. Below .500 declined even more. Now you don’t need NBA ratings to figure out the obvious lesson. If you want to rely on the brand itself, and this goes for WWE or UFC, you’re probably going to decline. But with WWE, since they’re in control of outcomes, anyone they book at .500 is probably going to struggle to mean anything. And just relying on WWE as a brand will get you consistent but declining numbers. But the mentality that you are doomed to decline and that’s just how it is, well, the dominant teams contradict. In fact, Golden State was NBA champions last year and nearly tripled their average rating, going from a 3.8 average rating last season to a 9.8 this season, largely due to winning most of their games and having Stephen Curry as the larger-than-life star of the team setting three point shooting records and being the MVP.
> 
> While that kind of movement in this era is very difficult for anything on television and this isn’t suggesting there’s anything that can be done in UFC or WWE that can approach that. What it does show is when you get something hot, it still can explode. We’ve seen the same thing with UFC on PPV. UFC’s PPVs last year were just under record levels, but a rank and file show is way down from a few years ago, but the big shows with the big names, well, they are bigger than ever. WWE’s big show of the year was also bigger than ever, but they only have one and they don’t have the big name movers.


Long read but interesting stuff.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Shit, I just realized viewership has dropped below 3 million for an hour twice now after Wrestlemania. That London show and this week.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Anyone subscribe to Meltzer's site? I used to, but don't anymore. Reason being on his Twitter, he posted a tease to a new article he wrote. Here's the tweet:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/730807238298718208
> I'm sure this is probably a real interesting article. * Didn't know Raw had a 'huge' departure from their male audience..*


It really is the New Generation all over again! History is repeating itself, cept there's no WCW murdering them. Ha.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's not surprising. What do the males have to watch for? All of the top guys are dopes, there's nobody the male audience relates to. Guys like Reigns/Ambrose come across as dudes you don't want to let your girlfriend hang around, when they should come across as dudes you want to drink beer and get into bar fights with.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Meltzer Quote About Ratings and Male Viewership Decline
> 
> 
> 
> Long read but interesting stuff.


Thanks, bro! Before you posted this, I actually found the entire issue online. There are two things to take from this issue of the Observer:



> The obvious conclusions are that social media aren’t correlating to the key spending, which is network subscriptions, or any significant new income. Even with ever increasing social media numbers, the new network business really only grows during a three month period each year.
> 
> Again, that’s not a knock on social media, which the company should push and use. But the creation of new social media followers and where they come from doesn’t correlate to people buying the network, one of the two key business drivers along with television rights fees.


As Meltzer himself says here, the Youtube and Twitter stuff isn't translating into profit for WWE. There are 2 big aspects WWE gets their money from; 1)TV rights fees and 2) The WWE Network. The Youtube and Twitter stuff is way down the list for WWE as far as making money goes.



> For example, the April 27, 2015 Raw did 2.6 million male viewers and 1.2 million female viewers. The April 28, 2014 Raw did 3.2 million male viewers and 1.4 million female viewers. But the April 25, 2016 Raw did 1,963,000 male viewers and 1,153,000 female viewers.
> 
> So you look and see a 32 percent drop over two years, and a and 17 percent over one year and it does look bad.
> 
> But the male audience drop is actually 38 to 39 percent over two years and 24 to 25 percent over the past year.


32% drop in the male demo from 2014 to 2016 and a 17% in the male demo from 2015 to 2016. Those numbers are astonishing. And while ratings across TV are down, they are not losing male viewers, especially not in this fashion. Scary.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Thanks, bro! Before you posted this, I actually found the entire issue online. There are two things to take from this issue of the Observer:
> 
> 
> 
> As Meltzer himself says here, the Youtube and Twitter stuff isn't translating into profit for WWE. There are 2 big aspects WWE gets their money from; 1)TV rights fees and 2) The WWE Network. The Youtube and Twitter stuff is way down the list for WWE as far as making money goes.
> 
> 
> 
> 32% drop in the male demo from 2014 to 2016 and a 17% in the male demo from 2015 to 2016. Those numbers are astonishing. And while ratings across TV are down, they are not losing male viewers, especially not in this fashion. Scary.


What does a guy who has the numbers, metrics, and research to back up his claims matter compared to the sad Roman Reigns mark who said WWE made "40 million dollars off of Youtube" and has the irrefutable "Because I said so" argument to back himself up??


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










The google trends for Pay per views it seems Payback done rather poor especially since there is an increasing trend I guess no Cena or Brock really hurt the pay per view.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> 32% drop in the male demo from 2014 to 2016 and a 17% in the male demo from 2015 to 2016. Those numbers are astonishing.



... apparently not scary enough for them. Otherwise we would have seen some significant changes already.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Week 5 of John Cena’s “American Grit” – did TV viewership finally increase?*

Viewership for John Cena’s “American Grit” show was flat Thursday night on Fox.

American Grit Viewership Tracking

May 12: Week 5 of “American Grit” hosted by John Cena remained in the lower-rung of TV Viewership on Fox.

The overnight TV audience was 1.89 million viewers, reports TVBytheNumbers, nearly identical to 1.88 overnight viewers last week.

Last week’s actual viewership total dipped to 1.77 million viewers. It remains to be seen if this week’s final number matches last week’s.

The pattern also continued for Grit losing half of its lead-in, “Bones.” The 8:00 p.m. episode drew 4.17 million overnight viewers, then Grit drew less than half of the viewers in the 9:00 p.m. timeslot.

Bones led Fox to a third-place finish at 8:00, then Grit fell to fourth in the 9:00 timeslot. Fox finished in fourth place on Thursday night, trailing CBS, ABC, and NBC.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...american-grit-tv-viewership-finally-increase/


----------



## Jeff'Hardy

The decline in male viewers is really troubling. I think sponsors would have rather have lost the female viewers than the male, because its easier to target one demographic. If it gets to 50:50 then advertisers will be confused. 

I definitely think USA is considering cancelling. They will be having board meetings on a weekly basis on RAW viewership. The best WWE can get is a lower deal but even that would be financially grim. Having a "ratings juganaught" is pointless if you are losing money on it and that jugganaught is sinking.

USA Net should consider putting that 200m into different pots. Bragging about having the most boring TV show on your network doesnt gove your Network credibility.

Cant wait for the sub 2.0


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(5/12) Vs last week(5/5) 

2.262M Vs 2.346M 
(-0.084M/-3.58%)*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/12 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – audience dips from last week*

This week’s WWE Smackdown slid to a near-year-low against the NBA Playoffs.

WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

May 12: Thursday’s Smackdown scored a 1.59 TV rating on USA Network, down from a 1.65 rating last week.

Smackdown nearly dipped back to the year-low 1.54 TV rating on April 28 leading into Payback.

Despite the overall TV rating dipping, the key demographics held up reasonably well. Males 18-34 and males 18-49 inched up from last week, but adults 18-49 fell slightly.

Overall, the demos were a wash against the NBA Playoffs, which drew 5.229 million viewers on ESPN.

– Smackdown drew 2.262 million viewers on Thursday night, down four percent (about 84,000 viewers) from last week’s audience of 2.346 million viewers.

– Through the first six weeks of the second quarter, Smackdown has not reached the First Quarter average of a 1.77 rating and 2.481 million average viewers per episode.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/13/512-wwe-smackdown-tv-ratings-audience-dips-last-week/


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

To elaborate on my above post, what happened during the New Generation era was that a huge chunk of their adult male audience left them. And then once the nWo came about, it further depleted.

I love HBK...but he was part of the reason for that. It's just how it is. Adult males at the time didn't want to see a guy like him.

If that is apparently happening again...well...you put two and two together.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> To elaborate on my above post, what happened during the New Generation era was that a huge chunk of their adult male audience left them. And then once the nWo came about, it further depleted.
> 
> I love HBK...but he was part of the reason for that. It's just how it is. Adult males at the time didn't want to see a guy like him.
> 
> If that is apparently happening again...well...you put two and two together.


WCW had the NWO. WWF had a bunch of cartoon characters running around in kiddy like storylines. Not a hard choice to make.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Bruh, Smackdown is such an irrelevant ass show. Like I said, nobody really gives a fuck about it anymore than hardcore wrestling fans.

Shows that the move to USA Network hasn't done dick and has only dropped it further down. 

We're about three months away till football season, folks. You ain't seen nothing yet.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> Bruh, Smackdown is such an irrelevant ass show. Like I said, nobody really gives a fuck about it anymore than hardcore wrestling fans.
> 
> Shows that the move to USA Network hasn't done dick and has only dropped it further down.
> 
> *We're about three months away till football season, folks. You ain't seen nothing yet*.


Cant wait!:mark::mark::mark:



TheGeneticFreak said:


> The google trends for Pay per views it seems Payback done rather poor especially since there is an increasing trend I guess no Cena or Brock really hurt the pay per view.


I don't think it has anything to do with Brock or Cena, has there been a huge drop off since Cena left? no, just the usuall steady decline, same with Brock.
Those 2 aren't realy moving the needle.

This has everything to do with a B PPV that everyone know nothing will happen, and nothing did happen, no title change, no feud concluded, nothing.



Cipher said:


> It really is the New Generation all over again! History is repeating itself, *cept there's no WCW murdering them. Ha*.


That's not a good thing.



ShowStopper said:


> WCW had the NWO. WWF had a bunch of cartoon characters running around in kiddy like storylines. Not a hard choice to make.


Spot on, nothing in particular to do with HBK, if I had a choice between watching a bunch of bad ass, black wearing dudes wrecking shit up or watch a garbage man, a country singer and a sumo wrestler...its not a hard choice.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw will need to drop below 2.0 in order for Vince to make changes. I think that number will finally be the wake up call. These people had a formula in the Attitude Era that worked. The show was edgy, it was current, it was fearless. Now, it's just a boring safe generic wrestling show. And nobody wants to watch that. WWE may still have brand name appeal, but the brand by itself will not draw (except for Wrestlemania).

I can still remember the justification for going away from Attitude. Vince or Stephanie said "the fans have grown too desensitized" or "we need to create new younger fans". But as we've seen over the last 13 years (and especially after ruthless agression era), more fans have NOT been created. Marketing towards children has NOT grown the WWE, but rather shrunk the audience.

It just floors me that the key demo for ANY tv show - is the 18-35 demo because they have the most disposable income and buying power. Yet, WWE decides to instead of targeting a show for them, they make a watered down show for kids. WTF? Did they not think kids were watching the Attitude Era? The AE was popular because you had a bunch of teenagers and young adults super involved in the show. Those people are now older themselves and have kids of their own - and they probably tune into Raw and are like "What the hell is this?". They probably don't even let their kids watch because the show is lame.

I want to believe Vince is a competitive person. I'd like to think he is angered by the shit ratings, and is motivated to do whatever it takes to make the show hot again. But then I think maybe he just DGAF. As long as the financials are stable or what not, he doesn't care about being popular. He'd rather be wealthy than popular, so he doesn't take any risk.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I believe RAW is up against Game1 of the Warriors/OKC. The first hour will be unopposed, but good luck the rest of the night. Hour 3 might be in some serious trouble.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Raw Youtube Rankings For 5/9: Reigns - AJ Angle Continues To Do Well, Big Cass, Women See Jump, More*

This week's Raw Youtube numbers saw some surprising jumps, falls, and some not-so-surprising trends with the main event program.

The Roman Reigns vs. AJ Styles angle continues to perform well, with Karl Anderson, Luke Gallows and The Usos also involved in the program. The storyline has consistently been near the top as it pertains to drawing viewers to the company's videos.

The women saw a major bump this week, as Paige vs. Charlotte and the debut of Dana Brooke both did well. The female segments have been in the bottom half pretty regularly, but Dana Brooke's first WWE main roster appearance was the median of all segments. Paige vs. Charlotte ranked 6 of 13 overall.

Chris Jericho was in two big clips that managed over 1 million views each. His opening promo that was interrupted by Big Cass got a promising amount of attention, and Dean Ambrose destroying the infamous light up jacket did well over two million.

The New Days' numbers have been sinking of late, not garnering nearly the levels in which they did during their heel run. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Rusev's upset loss to Sin Cara was the fourth highest ranked segment on the show.

You can see WWE's full Raw segment rankings below. All numbers are accurate as of Sunday at 3 PM EST.

Youtube Rankings for Raw 5/9:

1. The Family vs. The Club (2,422,339)

2. Dean Ambrose destroys Chris Jericho's jacket (2,101,244)

3. Big Cass confronts Chris Jericho (1,076,593)

4. Sin Cara vs. Rusev (854,857)

5. Sami Zayn vs. The Miz (741,853)

6. Paige vs. Charlotte (737,596)

7. Dana Brooke debuts (606,520)

8. The New Day vs. The Dudley Boyz (530,715)

9. R-Truth vs. Fandango (526,114)

10. Zack Ryder vs. Kevin Owens (494,945)

11. Baron Corbin vs. Dolph Ziggler (461,416)

12. All hail the "Extreme Booty-O" (396,526)

13. Shane and Stephanie McMahon recap their night (389,837)

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...-for-59-reigns-aj-angle-continues-to-do-well/


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Rather worrying that Jericho-Ambrose is getting views not too far off the main event feud.

I've actually started to enjoy their feud more than the main event feud the last few week tbh.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Those frickin' embarassing YouTube numbers shouldn't even be allowed in this RATINGS thread.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Rather worrying that Jericho-Ambrose is getting views not too far off the main event feud.
> 
> I've actually started to enjoy their feud more than the main event feud the last few week tbh.


Well Y2J is properly the most recognizable wrestler they have behind Cena and Brock.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Those frickin' embarassing YouTube numbers shouldn't even be allowed in this RATINGS thread.


While I don't think they matter that much this is also a "draw" thread here and they do show that to an extent and if you don't like them it's not that hard to ignore them I don't mind them as long as I don't have to see Cyclone ramble on about global parameters.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The moderators/admin staff have already stated that there is no issue with posting the Youtube performance/numbers or anything else deemed a draw. I'll continue to post them and other social media activity.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Those frickin' embarassing YouTube numbers shouldn't even be allowed in this RATINGS thread.


Just ignore them. While I don't think it's a strong source, there is some merit to them being in the discussion as far as who's drawing and who's not. Although there are a lot of factors that go into Youtube views that can easily be manipulated (not saying WWE does or doesn't) and that always needs to be taken into account. 

Anyway, not going to get dragged into a big discussion on this but just my two cents. If you don't see value in them, ignore them. If you do, don't put more weight in it than it probably should get (at least at this point in time). No issue with posting that stuff, of course.


----------



## Lavidavi35

Phenomenal One said:


> Rather worrying that Jericho-Ambrose is getting views not too far off the main event feud.
> 
> I've actually started to enjoy their feud more than the main event feud the last few week tbh.


That's what happens when two guys like Y2J and Ambrose get paired together. The basis may have started as extremely petty and childish, but over the past two weeks this feud has definitely evolved in terms of meaning. I'm hoping for a very fun stipulation between those two. 

Plus, Jericho is the biggest known name on the roster, really.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



#BadNewsSanta said:


> Just ignore them. While I don't think it's a strong source, there is some merit to them being in the discussion as far as who's drawing and who's not. Although there are a lot of factors that go into Youtube views that can easily be manipulated (not saying WWE does or doesn't) and that always needs to be taken into account.
> 
> Anyway, not going to get dragged into a big discussion on this but just my two cents. If you don't see value in them, ignore them. If you do, don't put more weight in it than it probably should get (at least at this point in time). No issue with posting that stuff, of course.


Exactly. Well said. Also, the fact that Meltzer just last week said that it is not leading to bucks for WWE is more than enough for me.

:lenny5


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't really care if someone posts them. It's more so when marks try throwing "views" out as some kind of barometer for anything, or like it's a leading money maker for WWE. None of that is true, and it makes you look like an idiot when you attempt to throw this shit in people's faces without knowing what you're talking about.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah, posting Youtube views is fine, since it sorta fits in with the "draw" talk. Obviously, it's been proven they're not a huge source of income, but still a source nonetheless, and worth keeping an eye on. TV is still king obviously.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> I don't really care if someone posts them. It's more so when marks try throwing "views" out as some kind of barometer for anything, or like it's a leading money maker for WWE. None of that is true, and it makes you look like an idiot when you attempt to throw this shit in people's faces without knowing what you're talking about.


 I bet most of those views come from India. A lof them still think wrestling is still real (just have a read through some of the FB posts...) and are huge Roman and Cena marks. They'll support whoever the company tells them to support.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> I bet most of those views come from India. A lof them still think wrestling is still real (just have a read through some of the FB posts...) and are huge Roman and Cena marks. They'll support whoever the company tells them to support.


One way or another, the numbers are horse shit and not a true barometer of what is what in the American wrestling market. They are easily manipulated and don't reflect what audiences are doing on a weekly basis when it comes to watching RAW. I'm tired of hearing how "popular" Roman Reigns is because of Youtube views when I'm watching audiences not give a fuck about him, boo him, walk out of his matches, for two years, while the state of the show is at an all-time worst in terms of quality because of this guy. 

If these "stats" meant dick then it would translate to the program and the overall response to the guy and it doesn't, because the stats are bullshit.


----------



## UFC200

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> *I bet most of those views come from India*. A lof them still think wrestling is still real (just have a read through some of the FB posts...) and are huge Roman and Cena marks. They'll support whoever the company tells them to support.


This is probably true. It was already revealed last week during the conference call that the 80-90% of their YouTube views come from overseas, most of which probably come from India.

People in the US have the opportunity to watch RAW live at a reasonable hour if they so choose, hence the low number of YouTube views in comparison to other countries. The problem is that many people in the US are not even choosing to watch it live.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ratings will see a jolt at the end of this month when Cena comes back followed by other stars. Rollins, Wyatt and Orton aren't needle movers to any big degree, but all of them returning parlayed with Cena coming back should make the ratings jump. They SHOULD be seeing high 3 million maybe even low 4 million in some hours by the end of this month/early June.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> The ratings will see a jolt at the end of this month when Cena comes back followed by other stars. Rollins, Wyatt and Orton aren't needle movers to any big degree, but all of them returning parlayed with Cena coming back should make the ratings jump. They SHOULD be seeing high 3 million maybe even low 4 million in some hours by the end of this month/early June.


I don't know, man. Ratings were falling even with all of those guys on the show, including Cena, the big name of the bunch. I think they will increase alittle bit (would be downright scary if they didn't), but 4 millions, I don't know. They got that for the first week of Shane's comeback and the numbers went right back down the very next week. Having said that, I would think they would increase at least somewhat. Like I said, it would be scary if they didn't.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I don't know, man. Ratings were falling even with all of those guys on the show, including Cena, the big name of the bunch. I think they will increase alittle bit (would be downright scary if they didn't), but 4 millions, I don't know. They got that for the first week of Shane's comeback and the numbers went right back down the very next week. Having said that, I would think they would increase at least somewhat. Like I said, it would be scary if they didn't.


It will be short lived of course, they'll have some momentum for a few weeks, but as typical WWE fansion, they'll render them all(except Cena) useless within 2 months. Cena might have long term impact on ratings in a positive direction tho, but at the same time, is that adult male audience that's leaving going to come back for Cena? I doubt it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> It will be short lived of course, they'll have some momentum for a few weeks, but as typical WWE fansion, they'll render them all(except Cena) useless within 2 months. Cena might have long term impact on ratings in a positive direction tho, but at the same time, is that adult male audience that's leaving going to come back for Cena? I doubt it.


It will be interesting, right? The rest of the guys not so much, because we now know for a fact that no one on the main roster is a TV draw. Cena will be interesting, though. Before he got hurt, his last match was a main event US Title match with Del Rio on a Raw in Brooklyn, and the 3rd hour saw a huge drop. So, it will be interesting to see if Cena brings back any viewers, and even moreso, if he does, does he keep them glued to Raw? I doubt it, because of the product in general, but it will be interesting.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ok, I just have to say it: compared to the 11 million subscribers, the 3 million TV viewers, 2 million views is piss poor.

There are videos about making ranch gummy bears that have around that many views.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE, whatcha gonna do, when :chefcurry runs wild on you?


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hmmm I wonder what the numbers well be with the closing being Steph slaps the taste out of Flairs mouth? 2 mill? 1 mill? 2 people?


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Ok, I just have to say it: compared to the 11 million subscribers, the 3 million TV viewers, 2 million views is piss poor.
> 
> There are videos about making ranch gummy bears that have around that many views.


2 million views? Adam Lambert gets more then that for his music videos :lol


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> 2 million views? Adam Lambert gets more then that for his music videos :lol


Bro I would listen to 3 hours of Adam Lambert over watch 3 hours of the horse shit they call Sports Entertainment.

And while we're at it:

Fuck you Kris Allen. Fucker stole Lambert's Idol win. Who the fuck spells Kris with a K. Fucker.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SnapOrTap said:


> Bro I would listen to 3 hours of Adam Lambert over watch 3 hours of the horse shit they call Sports Entertainment.
> 
> And while we're at it:
> 
> Fuck you Kris Allen. Fucker stole Lambert's Idol win. Who the fuck spells Kris with a K. Fucker.


Hey if I had to listin to any pop music in pop currently. Lamberts version of pop prob beats them all lol. Its a popularit contest though. Last I heard KRis was dropped by his label. I hear LAmbert is fronting Queen currently. So their you go.

But as for Raw. I really hope the numbers keep dropping, so they are forced to change their product.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Are we all in agreement the numbers will be worse than last week?


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Did Raw even manage to trend worldwide? I didn't see it when I was checking and the WWE kept tweeting US trends.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Are we all in agreement the numbers will be worse than last week?


After that awful Main Event, it deserves to be.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Are we all in agreement the numbers will be worse than last week?


I surely hope so.
Styles being made a whining wimp again in the opener, Stephanie closing the show, JBL calling a Uso match "dream matchup", it has to be disaster top to bottom.

I zoomed through the show right now in 20 minutes.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I mean WWE right now is like a ESPN Highlight Package, without any Highlights lol. I mean you could watch a YT montage of 2016 Raw. And find maybe 2 or 3 good moments. I mean its not rocket science. Give out a shit product, your going to get a shit response.


----------



## ManiT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

"Mr. Kennedy seeing stars"

Really Michael Cole?

Really????


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> I bet most of those views come from India. A lof them still think wrestling is still real (just have a read through some of the FB posts...) and are huge Roman and Cena marks. They'll support whoever the company tells them to support.


I can confirm this. Even Arabs still think that wrestling is real, when I drove miles to Jeddah and Dubai for a live event I could not see one smark except Roman or Cena fans. Once I heard someone say that The Undertaker must be a cursed soul that needs fixing. I died ???


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I surely hope so.
> Styles being made a whining wimp again in the opener, Stephanie closing the show, JBL calling a Uso match "dream matchup", it has to be disaster top to bottom.
> 
> I zoomed through the show right now in 20 minutes.


20 minutes was about all I could manage to get through. I watch less and less of RAW every week. At this point I don't give a fuck if I watch it at all. There's nothing at all holding me to the product.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> 20 minutes was about all I could manage to get through. I watch less and less of RAW every week. At this point I don't give a fuck if I watch it at all. There's nothing at all holding me to the product.


I freely admit, the only thing keeping me interested is how bad the booking is, and how the numbers drop.
If this shit succeeds, I am done for good.


----------



## Wildcat410

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The only decent things are the tag division and Jericho vs Ambrose.

On it's surface, The IC title picture should be good. But it is always the same thing. Miz constantly gets his ass kicked by everyone. It is far too predictable. The US Title feud barely qualifies as one. The womens title feud is hot garbage. Reigns and the Family vs Styles and the Club was rather overrated a few weeks back and is now seen for the dull by the numbers dreg it is.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> 20 minutes was about all I could manage to get through. I watch less and less of RAW every week. At this point I don't give a fuck if I watch it at all. There's nothing at all holding me to the product.


I recorded it for the following day as I usually do. Got as far as the first woman's match and found I wasn't watching it and just thought 'fuck it' and deleted.

I honestly can't remember the last time I watched Smackdown.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I freely admit, the only thing keeping me interested is how bad the booking is, and how the numbers drop.
> If this shit succeeds, I am done for good.


Dude, I know exactly what you mean. It's like almost worth watching just to see how badly they continue shooting themselves in the foot.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I freely admit, the only thing keeping me interested is how bad the booking is, and how the numbers drop.
> If this shit succeeds, I am done for good.


I've tried that. I've tried watching it just to observe how badly it's booked/written but it's impossible. The product is just so boring, bland, embarrassing, infuriating, unimaginative and frustrating to watch I can't do it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Dude, I know exactly what you mean. It's like almost worth watching just to see how badly they continue shooting themselves in the foot.


If numbers don't keep sucking, this will never change. We'll be stuck with this fluff forever.
And people should keep in mind that this year's Raw does numbers equal or worse (!) than Russo-written Impact episodes.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> If numbers don't keep sucking, this will never change. We'll be stuck with this fluff forever.
> And people should keep in mind that this year's Raw does numbers equal or worse (!) than Russo-written Impact episodes.


I don't think the numbers are getting any better. Fans loathe the current RAW format, it couldn't be any clearer. The three hours is killing them dead, and it's a huge reason why they spend half of their show doing recaps of shit or commercials or ads or ads within commercials...fuck. 

They might go up a little bit here and there, but this is pretty much where their fanbase has fallen to in the last year, thanks Roman. And that's the other part of it....they're so fucking arrogant that they think they can push a mannequin for two years and go "LOL they'll watch anyways, we got the monopoly, we're so smart! Watch as they give Roman all their money!" yet it couldn't be further from what is actually happening. What is actually happening is, you've finally started driving away your most loyal fans, aka the only ones who were still left, since you don't draw casuals anymore. 

How do they respond to these trends? Signing AJ Styles and the Bullet Club and feeding them to Roman the first month they're in the company :lol Like fuck...this shit is all so counter-productive and in no other era would it be happening.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Piper's Pit said:


> I've tried that. I've tried watching it just to observe how badly it's booked/written but it's impossible. The product is just so boring, bland, embarrassing, infuriating, unimaginative and frustrating to watch I can't do it.


It's not even infuriating anymore. And not offensive. That's the point. It's neutered. Neutered by PG, neutered by PC, neutered by writers knowing not an ounce of booking mechanisms, neutered by Vince.
It's like watching Bible TV hosted by Brazzers girls. They think they add quality and demographics to the product just by using performers who have the ability to accomplish that, ignoring that you have them perform your shitty inoffensive Lowest-Common-Denominator TV.

It's apathy what I feel. Ok, here's Steph burying everyone again, there is the bottom of the barrel main eventing, there is top notch performers booked to fuck, here is The McMahons TV ... you can't even be mad at it anymore because on some level, they're doing something ok-ish. But they do nothing to engage anyone. Everybody wins, everybody loses, everybody is in a title picture, it's just fucking tedious.
They try to make everybody important, and in the process, nobody is important. You can put anybody in the main event at any point, and honestly, would somebody feel even a mild form of anger or surprise if Reigns was suddenly feuding Owens for the IC Belt at MitB? 
Shit is interchangeable as fuck.

I don't care how many numbers people present me, this is WCW 2000 reloaded. Actually no, it's WCW 1999 reloaded, when shit was just stale as hell, which led into the 2000 "crash TV" phase. Yet to come.

I don't care what anybody says, WCW 2000 was ridiculous, infuriating, but you know what, at least it evoked some form of passion.
This evokes nothing, except nagging apathy.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Vince McMahon Sells Nearly $40 Million Of WWE Stock For 'Estate Planning Purposes'*



WWE announced in an SEC filing on Monday that Vince McMahon sold 2,191,894 shares of WWE stock this week, worth approximately $38 - 39 million. That amounts to 6% of the company's outstanding shares, which leaves McMahon with 37,080,747 shares, or around 48.8% of the company. It was noted that McMahon sold the shares "for estate planning purposes for the benefit of Mr. McMahon and certain members of Mr. McMahon's family."

From the SEC filing:

On May 16, 2016, the Vincent K. McMahon 2013 Irrev. Trust U/A dtd. December 5, 2013 (the "GRAT") sold 2,191,894 shares of Class A common stock of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (the "Company") in a block trade made in accordance with the provisions of Rule 144 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The GRAT was established by Vincent K. McMahon ("Mr. McMahon"), the Company's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, for estate planning purposes for the benefit of Mr. McMahon and certain members of Mr. McMahon's family. The GRAT sale was executed for liquidity and asset diversification. After the sale, the GRAT continues to own 1,547,372 shares of the Company's Class B common stock. The GRAT may, at any time, subject to compliance with applicable securities laws, dispose of some or all of its remaining shares of the Company's common stock depending on various factors, including, but not limited to, the price of the shares of the Company's Class A common stock, the terms and conditions of the transaction and prevailing market conditions, as well as liquidity, family planning and diversification objectives. Other than possible additional sales by the GRAT, Mr. McMahon informed the Company that he has no current plans to sell any shares of the Company's stock and that he intends to continue in his capacity as the Company's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer for the foreseeable future.
The 2,191,894 shares sold by the GRAT represent approximately 6% of the Company's outstanding shares of Class A common stock. After the sale, Mr. McMahon beneficially owns 37,080,747 shares of the Company's Class B common stock, which represents approximately 86% of the Company's total voting power and approximately 48.8% of the Company's total outstanding shares of common stock.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/732374010999246848
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ls-nearly-40-million-of-wwe-stock-for-estate/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I know those "estate planning purposes". More like bloodline planning purposes.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/16 Raw Twitter TV Ratings – unchanged from last week, but how did Raw compare to NBA & NHL Playoffs?*

Monday’s Raw leading into Extreme Rules drew essentially the same social media interest as last week’s show, according to Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

May 16: Raw ranked #1 among series & specials for the fourth consecutive week.

The total number of tweets about Raw was 125,000, down slightly from 129,000 last week.

The number of unique authors was 29,000, the same as last week.

– If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #2 or 3. Game 1 of the NBA Western Conference Finals between the Golden St. Warriors and OKC Thunder beat Raw by 7.5 times.

The overtime NHL Hockey Playoffs game between the Penguins and Lightning beat Raw in unique authors, but Raw topped the NHL in total tweets.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...anged-last-week-raw-compare-nba-nhl-playoffs/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No ratings today? That shitty, huh?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE Network – Where will WWE find the predicted 3.0 million subscribers?*

In 2015, WWE financial executive George Barrios predicted that WWE Network would eventually reach 3.0 million-plus paid subscribers.

At the time, it seemed like a far-fetched claim considering WWE was struggling to reach 1.0 million paid subscribers – the break-even point for the Network. Also, international subscriptions were just a drop in the bucket.

It’s now apparent the leap will come from the international market. How long it takes to get there is the big question, which financial website Seeking Alpha broke down in a strong review of WWE Network in the international marketplace.

Notably, WWE released a chart in their Annual Shareholder meeting breaking down each country’s affinity for WWE and potential for subscribing to the Network.

The chart shows India as the #1 international market in terms of “strong global affinity.” Then, there is Japan, which has about half of India’s “global affinity” for WWE, but has the second largest number of available broadband households behind the U.S. to access the Internet-based Network.

Financial executive George Barrios noted on the First Quarter 2016 conference call last week that India is their top international market for growth, but right now the Network is not a good value proposition for the fanbase. One is the lack of high-speed Internet access and the other is WWE having a strong regular TV presence. The question is how long will it take for WWE to turn “affinity” into strong subscriber numbers.

In other conference calls, Barrios has downplayed Japan as a market the company cares about, but not as much as India and other emerging markets in Asia. The company especially wants to get into China, which has a massive population that could boost WWE’s Network subscriber numbers just reaching a fraction of the people.

The number of domestic Network subscriptions has been flat for a year now. It appears the best way for WWE to reach Barrios’s goal is marketing the Network to each individual country.

Going back in time to 2014 when the Network launched in the U.S. only, WWE planned to roll out the Network on a country-by-country basis to launch in each individual language. When the initial Network numbers came in at a disappointing level, WWE decided to open up the U.S. version of the Network to a vast majority of the world, delaying the customization to each language.

The key to future growth in the international sphere will likely come from offering the Network in each country’s language, combined with reaching the untapped market of China and expanding market of India.

But, WWE also has stars on their roster like Shinsuke Nakamura, Asuka, and Hideo Itami for a reason. Reaching a country like Japan with high-speed Internet capabilities is also a key factor over the next 2-3 years.

International Paid Trendline

Q1-2015: 196,000 paid subs (post-WM31) (15% total)
Q2-2015: 217,000 subs (19% total)
Q3-2015: 243,000 subs (20% total)
Q4-2015: 277,000 subs (23% total)
Q1-2016: 330,000 subs (24% total)
April 4: 345,000 subs (day after WM32) (24% total)

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/17/wwe-network-will-wwe-find-predicted-3-0-million-subscribers/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.376M
H2-3.302M
H3-2.894M
3H-3.191M*


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.376M
> H2-3.302M
> H3-2.894M
> 3H-3.191M*


*H2 Vs H1 (-2.19%/-0.074M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-12.36%/-0.408M)
H3 Vs H1 (-14.28%/-0.482M)
5/16/16 Vs 5/9/16 (-1.45%/-0.047M)*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince Russo correctly predicted the ratings last night. He said the third hour would dip below 3 million.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hour 3 with a 2.89 million viewers on the go-home show to a PPV.

The WWE Universe has spoken...with their remotes, Maggle!

:jbl


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn, 2.89? :lol

Looks like WWE jobbed HARD to the NBA. LOL at anyone who watched Raw over Thunder/Warriors. That was a good game and a nice comeback by the Thunder.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Vince Russo correctly predicted the ratings last night. He said the third hour would dip below 3 million.


It wasn't that hard to predict to be honest. That angle is hardly over with anyone and they really tried to play the hometown card I guess. Reigns-Styles should have closed the show and Ambrose-Jericho should have opened.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And although Hour 3 will get most of the (negative) attention, Hours 1 & 2 are putrid, as well. Especially since this was a go-home show to a PPV.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> 5/16/16 Vs 5/9/16 (-1.45%/-0.047M)


Well it's marginal and 47,000 is nothing really, but it's still a trend in the wrong direction. The actual rating should go down as well.

I struggle to judge WWE Raw by "good" and "bad" terms anymore. It was just uneventful and felt like nothing happened at all. A couple of things like an asylum cage and a weird last segment and a time machine occured, but it felt like it was all meaningless, no titles or divisions have any prestige, adverts mean too much, and eventually people just drop off.

This drop off will continue now, and it's not like they don't deserve it.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Surprised 2.8 million still stuck around for the 3rd hour of that trainwreck last night :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw *TOPPING *out at 3.3 million viewers with no NFL competition.

:ha


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Damn, 2.89? :lol
> 
> Looks like WWE jobbed HARD to the NBA. LOL at anyone who watched Raw over Thunder/Warriors. That was a good game and a nice comeback by the Thunder.





JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> It wasn't that hard to predict to be honest. That angle is hardly over with anyone and they really tried to play the hometown card I guess. Reigns-Styles should have closed the show and Ambrose-Jericho should have opened.


I know Vince Russo isn't respected by many around these parts but I really do recommend last night's Wrestling Inc podcast. He said that the WWE didn't even try against the Warriors/Thunder. It's one thing to put up a fight but there was a passing effort. I liked some things, but there was no real effort overall. 

I think it was 8:50 and the Primo stuff started. I started to reach for my remote.

Thunders/Warriors was a damn good game. I can't believe the Warriors blew a 13 point lead.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I saw this coming a mile away. You got 3 of the top 5 NBA talents in one series. I'm typically a faithful Raw watcher, but even I had to turn the channel for Russ/Durant v Steph. Such is life.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> And although Hour 3 will get most of the (negative) attention, Hours 1 & 2 are putrid, as well. Especially since this was a go-home show to a PPV.


Its a B PPV that is nearly identical to the previous B PPV but with stipulations to the matches.

Not defending it, just pointing the context. There really is no reason for ratings to increase.
And I hope it wont bounce back after the PPV like it usually does.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw ratings for this week last year: 5/18/15

Here's the hourly breakdown:

Hour one: 4.00 million
Hour two: 4.00 million
Hour three: 3.99 million

This year:

H1-3.376M
H2-3.302M
H3-2.894M


WOW. It's like night and day. And people thought last year was bad. :lmao


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I know Vince Russo isn't respected by many around these parts but I really do recommend last night's Wrestling Inc podcast. He said that the WWE didn't even try against the Warriors/Thunder. It's one thing to put up a fight but there was a passing effort. I liked some things, but there was no real effort overall.
> 
> I think it was 8:50 and the Primo stuff started. I started to reach for my remote.
> 
> Thunders/Warriors was a damn good game. I can't believe the Warriors blew a 13 point lead.


Nah, actually I like listening to Russo. I'll have to check that later.

To be fair to WWE, if I knew Charlotte was gonna end up barefoot in the last segment, I definitely would've tuned in then. :trips8


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> Its a B PPV that is nearly identical to the previous B PPV but with stipulations to the matches.
> 
> Not defending it, just pointing the context. There really is no reason for ratings to increase.
> And I hope it wont bounce back after the PPV like it usually does.


A PPV is a PPV. I posted the ratings to the same week last year, and they are better by 700,000 viewers. Believe me, I didn't expect an increase. But that's neither here nor there. WWE is booking the things they wanted, and it's failing big time. Even if it goes up next week, the increases after PPVs this year have been very small in comparison to the past.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Raw ratings for this week last year: 5/18/15
> 
> Here's the hourly breakdown:
> 
> Hour one: 4.00 million
> Hour two: 4.00 million
> Hour three: 3.99 million
> 
> This year:
> 
> H1-3.376M
> H2-3.302M
> H3-2.894M
> 
> 
> WOW. It's like night and day. And people thought last year was bad. :lmao


Those damn hardcores and smarks they will always watch no matter what. :vince2

Heya Pop, Look at these #s :HHH2

:vince7


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not surprised at all by the ratings I can usually sit through the pain of watching Raw but I had to turn off as soon as I saw the Uso's.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> Those damn hardcores and smarks they will always watch no matter what. :vince2
> 
> Heya Pop, Look at these #s :HHH2
> 
> :vince7


Another great week in the books for WWE ratings, even with Vince getting his way in terms of the content.

:vince5

In reality, another great week for us.

:hbk1


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They're getting beaten by the ghost of WCW.


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

RAW is just a steaming pile of shit nowadays. How they even get 3 million viewers is amazing.

I haven't watched since Bray Wyatt got injured.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That 3rd hour lost over a million viewers from last year.









Next year's 3rd hour gonna be under 2 million.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

You HAD to know hour 3 was going to drop below 3 million last night against that intense Warriors/Thunder game, especially when a heatless ass feud between a lukewarm champion in Charlotte and a uninteresting contender in Natalya for a contract signing was closing the show. There was NO incentive to stay in for the third hour, hence the huge drop between hours 2 and 3.

Again, I'll just say that NFL season is coming in less than three months (where the Summerslam hype will begin too). Boy if they don't start shaping the fuck up, this *will* get uglier.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That's two weeks in a row now below 3 million for hour 3. And there was already slightly below 3 million four weeks or so ago.

That's 25% less viewers than 12 months ago. TWENTY-FIVE!

This Reign(s) kills them.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Oh how I can't wait until some delusional smarks start blaming Styles for this.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Oh how I can't wait until some delusional smarks start blaming Styles for this.


It's not Styles' fault, it's not Reigns' fault. Bad creative will kill any company. The show has been garbage for years now and people are just giving up.

Look at all the talent in the New Generation era, but the creative was so bad the company started to die. Only reason they were able to pull ahead was Stone Cold falling into their laps and WCW shooting themselves in the foot one last, fatal time at Starrcade 98.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE Raw Viewership For The Extreme Rules Go-Home Show?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's episode of Monday Night Raw saw polarizing numbers, as the first hour increased, and the last two hours dropped, with the third hour going below three million viewers. The show drew an average of 3.22 million viewers, just down from last week's 3.238 million.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.376 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.302 million viewers and the final hour drew 2.984 million viewers.

RAW was #4 on cable for the night in viewership, behind NBA Playoff, the NBA playoffs post-show, and Love and Hip Hop, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the aforementioned shows.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...iewership-for-the-extreme-rules-go-home-show/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *How Was WWE Raw Viewership For The Extreme Rules Go-Home Show?*
> 
> Source: Showbuzz Daily
> 
> Monday's episode of Monday Night Raw saw polarizing numbers, as the first hour increased, and the last two hours dropped, with the third hour going below three million viewers. *The show drew an average of 3.22 million viewers*, just down from last week's 3.238 million.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.376 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.302 million viewers and *the final hour drew 2.984 million viewers.
> *
> RAW was #4 on cable for the night in viewership, behind NBA Playoff, the NBA playoffs post-show, and Love and Hip Hop, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the aforementioned shows.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...iewership-for-the-extreme-rules-go-home-show/


They miscalculated due to their own typos? Their own chart says H3 drew 2.894M. That means the 3H average will be 3.19M, and not 3.22M.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Mentioned it before, but it's also worth nothing how Raw threads have also diminished in activity. Hell, 3 years ago, the Raw on the 3rd Monday of May got almost 4k replies:

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/wwe-raw-smackdown/812962-5-20-monday-night-raw-discussion-hail-shield.html

This year's thread didn't even get to 2k. And granted, even though that Raw was coming off a ppv, I don't think it really makes a difference tbh. It's fairly obvious even on here, where the most hardcore and loyal wrestling fans roam, that interest has diminished in the product. People don't even want to go in to the Raw thread to complain about it anymore.

Fwiw, I had that thread bookmarked, just for everyone's reactions when Heyman announced that he was managing Curtis Axel. Oh that was fun.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> A miscalculation from typos? Their graph says 2.894M that means the average will be 3.19M not 3.22M.


Yeah, it may be a typo. A more comprehensive analysis should be available soon.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Of course the first hour increased. It was unopposed by :chefcurry I wish RAW would stop teasing and give me all three hours below three million. RAW was garbage and viewer interest waned because of it. Let the ratings hit the floor.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> It's not Styles' fault, it's not Reigns' fault. Bad creative will kill any company. The show has been garbage for years now and people are just giving up.
> 
> Look at all the talent in the New Generation era, but the creative was so bad the company started to die. Only reason they were able to pull ahead was Stone Cold falling into their laps and WCW shooting themselves in the foot one last, fatal time at Starrcade 98.


Agree. You could give this company Hogan, Andre, Savage, Austin and Rock in their prime right now and creatively they wouldn't have a clue what to do with them. Not a clue.

It's not Cena, Reigns, Brock or any other talents fault that the product has been mostly terrible since 2004 at least. It's the idiots in the back whether they're a geek sitcom writer, a crazy old man or the bosses moronic daughter.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Big mistake to end RAW with the contract signing. I remember in 2014 RAW was having hour-by-hour rating increases until they did the Steph/Brie segment. That trend stopped after that.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Piper's Pit said:


> Agree. You could give this company Hogan, Andre, Savage, Austin and Rock in their prime right now and creatively they wouldn't have a clue what to do with them. Not a clue.
> 
> It's not Cena, Reigns, Brock or any other talents fault that the product has been mostly terrible since 2004 at least. It's the idiots in the back whether they're a geek sitcom writer, a crazy old man or the bosses moronic daughter.


Still, I guarantee you Savage or Hogan could hold that Beanstalk promo, and it would be fucking amazing.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> Big mistake to end RAW with the contract signing. I remember in 2014 RAW was having hour-by-hour rating increases until they did the Steph/Brie segment. That trend stopped after that.


I can't fault them for mixing the final segment up a bit, but they chould've done better than Charlotte/Natalya. Probably should've done Ambrose/Jericho or something.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> I can't fault them for mixing the final segment up a bit, but they chould've done better than Charlotte/Natalya. Probably should've done Ambrose/Jericho or something.


Jericho/Ambrose got the final spot last week. You're right about them mixing it up. It's a good thing.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Meh, I'm not a fan of the women, generally speaking. But, let's be honest. There's been plenty of times where the men have been in the last segment and the third hour still fell below 3 million. :shrug I don't think it mattered what they had in the last segment last night. The show was boring and had a boring atmosphere. Also, the Club vs Usos with AJ and Reigns ringside segment took place in the first segment of the third hour. So, they were in the third hour anyway and it still fell below 3 million.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> Jericho/Ambrose got the final spot last week. You're right about them mixing it up. It's a good thing.


Forgot about that lol. Don't know what they could've ended the show with then. May as well have just had the Club vs Roman and his cousins end it. :toomanykobes


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Meh, I'm not a fan of the women, generally speaking. But, let's be honest. There's been plenty of times where the men have been in the last segment and the third hour still fell below 3 million. :shrug I don't think it mattered what they had in the last segment last night. The show was boring and had a boring atmosphere. Also, the Club vs Usos with AJ and Reigns ringside segment took place in the first segment of the third hour. So, they were in the third hour anyway.


If you're going to put women in the final segment then let them do what they do best: wrestle. For instance if Sasha is going to win the Women's Championship they should let it happen in the main event of RAW, possibly announcing the match in the first hour.


----------



## Muerte al fascismo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They're mixing it up because Roman's a complete failure and on that Diesel run.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Muerte al fascismo said:


> They're mixing it up because Roman's a complete failure and on that Diesel run.


Bingo and I like Roman, actually but facts are facts. He is your World champion and the new face of the company and yet this is the second week in a row that he doesn't close the show.

They're covering up for him to make sure he doesn't take full blame of the ratings (which it isn't) but some does have to lie upon him as well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> If you're going to put women in the final segment then let them do what they do best: wrestle. For instance if Sasha is going to win the Women's Championship they should let it happen in the main event of RAW, possibly announcing the match in the first hour.


I don't even think that would've mattered, tbh. Until WWE goes under a massive overhaul of their set, the announcers, the atmosphere, and the format of Raw; they will always be fighting an uphill battle. They do it to themselves by absolutely refusing to change any of that even on a minute level.


----------



## McNugget

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Meltzer talked about this on WOR today - no facts, just speculation. Basically his theory is that they've given up on the third hour and specifically this week knew that it'd have a huge drop due to the Warrior game, so they just kind of threw the third hour together out of whatever. This definitely seems to back that up. I wonder how many people tuned out after Reigns/AJ's segment was done? The breakdown will be interesting.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Giving up before attempting to fight? That's pathetic.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

[USER][/USER]


Chrome said:


> Forgot about that lol. Don't know what they could've ended the show with then. May as well have just had the Club vs Roman and his cousins end it. :toomanykobes


Na the real stars of the show Shane and Steph have to be the main event.


----------



## BKelly237

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2.27 according to Wade Keller


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/16 Raw TV Ratings – Raw steady vs. Game 1 of NBA WCF; third hour smallest of 2016*

This week’s Raw was even with last week’s TV rating. Considering it was a pre-PPV reinforcement episode, and Raw was against Game 1 of the NBA Western Conference Finals and an overtime NHL Playoffs game, it counts as a small victory in this era of historically low TV ratings. However, the concern is the third hour drew the smallest audience of the year.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

May 16: Raw leading into Extreme Rules scored a 2.27 TV rating, virtually even with a 2.26 rating last week.

In the demographic ratings, Raw actually increased one-tenth in males 18-34 and slightly increased in males 18-49.

However, adults 18-49 fell to the lowest rating of the year, even lower than the pre-Payback episode three weeks ago.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.190 million viewers, down 1.5 percent from last week’s show.

The first two hours were virtually even with last week’s show. However, the third hour fell by 12.4 percent after Raw came to its natural conclusion at the top of the third hour.

First Hour: 3.376 million viewers
Second Hour: 3.302 million viewers
Third Hour: 2.894 million viewers

The third hour audience was the smallest of the year and smallest since December 2015. WWE put their main event angle at the end of the second hour/start of the third hour, trying to combat the inevitable third hour decline leading into Extreme Rules.

There was also the factor of the Warriors-Thunder NBA Playoffs game drawing 8.7 million viewers on TNT, more than doubling Raw’s audience.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...y-vs-game-1-nba-wcf-third-hour-smallest-2016/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BKelly237 said:


> 2.27 according to Wade Keller


OUCH.

:ha


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2.27. Vince: Okay for the Third Hour Lets put people in the ring no one cares about. But Vince what about.... Just do it Damn it! Vince I have the numbers. You go out their and tell them to subscribe to the WWE Network Damn it! But Vince what about the Ratings.. Yes I know do it Damn it..

ETA: It also diddn't help the Warriors Thunder game was on. With Steven Adams dominating the paint . Doubling the audience impression over Raw. Face it no casual wants to watch WWE atm. But as long as theirs 11 million Network Subs. And with all those buys from Mania. Company still making money. I doubt Vince cares, if ten ppl watched Raw.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I really think Wrestlemania 32 was the crunch time, and the point of no return. 
People finally lost faith.
Shane returning for control was a legit dream storyline. And I cannot imagine one possible scenario worse than what they ended up doing.
If they fuck this up, there is not one ounce of possibility left they truly want to give people what they want.

It's done. There is no way to go except further down.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I know it's Wade Keller's job to promote wrestling being cool and to make excuses for bad ratings, but a 2.27 outside of football season is NOT a "victory". And I like how he tries to excuse it by calling this an "era of historically low ratings". More people than ever watch cable TV. Good shows do great ratings. Raw is not a good show, and it's evident that it loses viewers every month. 

When you lose almost a million viewers from last year, and last year's ratings were bad...i mean what does it take to set off a panic for WWE? I hope 1.80 works because they'll be lucky to get that when football season starts.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw was getting these kinda numbers in 1995. What is it going to take to convince Vince he needs a fundamental change of the product. And its time for this wishy washy, 90's good guy vanilla midget/big guy thing to end. And bring an edgier component back to the product. If he wants WWE to be trendy again, that time has come. But Vince is just too damn stubborn.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Raw was getting these kinda numbers in 1995. What is it going to take to convince Vince he needs a fundamental change of the product. And its time for this wishy washy, 90's good guy vanilla midget/big guy thing to end. And bring an edgier component back to the product. If he wants WWE to be trendy again, that time has come. But Vince is just too damn stubborn.


Gonna take more than ratings falling it seems. Feels like I've been reading "record low" regarding ratings for like a year now, and the product largely remains the same. Attendance and Network numbers need to drop next.


----------



## J-B

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I feel bad for the people in the UK who stay up to watch this shit live, I packed that in years ago. They can convince themselves that millions of people will watch Raw through DVR or Sky+ or whatever you want to call it rather than watch it live but it won't actually occur to them that their product sucks until it's too late.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Gonna take more than ratings falling it seems. Feels like I've been reading "record low" regarding ratings for like a year now, and the product largely remains the same. Attendance and Network numbers need to drop next.


Attendance is down 9%, and this Raw didn't sell out, despite being in traditional wrestling country, and despite local heroes, Flair family, being there.

Network numbers will inevitably drop when people have seen all the old shows to Death. I doubt people buy this for PPVs, certainly not for Raw.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> I know it's Wade Keller's job to promote wrestling being cool and to make excuses for bad ratings, but a 2.27 outside of football season is NOT a "victory". And I like how he tries to excuse it by calling this an "era of historically low ratings". More people than ever watch cable TV. Good shows do great ratings. Raw is not a good show, and it's evident that it loses viewers every month.
> 
> When you lose almost a million viewers from last year, and last year's ratings were bad...i mean what does it take to set off a panic for WWE? I hope 1.80 works because they'll be lucky to get that when football season starts.


Seriously. Keller might want to sign up as a WWE spokesman because using victory in conjunction with this rating is pure spin. They are lucky the Warriors game didn't start an hour earlier because they may have flirted with record lows.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:LOL RAW is legit getting Smackdown numbers out here while Smackdown is nearing TNA Spike TV-era numbers and NFL season is approaching. 

Popcorn already stored for August.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I guess if Network subs go down. And Attendance drops like say 20% Vince may take notice. Or he proba wouldent notice if their was one person in Attendance haha.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Think Keller was just being nice with his analysis lol.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> :LOL RAW is legit getting Smackdown numbers out here while Smackdown is nearing TNA Spike TV-era numbers and NFL season is approaching.
> 
> Popcorn already stored for August.


The day Raw does an ALL TIME low, football or not, popcorn won't do. I'll get myself a jumbo pizza extra cheese, jug it down with a gallon of coke, and work my way through Ben & Jerrys afterwards - Chunky Monkey, to celebrate John Cena, who paved the way.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

When is the next PPV, are the numbers getting worse instead of better when a big show in coming soon? Actually thought of going to the PPV since it was in Newark but decided to just wait for Summerslam.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> When is the next PPV, are the numbers getting worse instead of better when a big show in coming soon? Actually thought of going to the PPV since it was in Newark but decided to just wait for Summerslam.


The next PPV is this Sunday.

:ha

It's actually about 20 minutes from me, but I'm not going, obviously.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well the numbers are the lowest since Dec 2015. The numbers are even from last week. With alot of talent coming back. Rollins, Cena, Wyatt, Orton e.t.c. It creates alot of new storylines. So possibly if they book it right, and thats a big IF. Some storylines may create a buzz . Personally I think Wyatt Family v The Authroity storyline coming into Summerslam could be big.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Reigns.

Brace yourself. Monday Night Football is looming on the horizon

:brady4:brady4:brady4:brady4:brady4:brady4:brady4:brady5:brady5:brady5


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










It's just some cord cutters and some YouTube watchers guys!


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn 7% drop from 2014-2016.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2.27 is the 3rd lowest demo rating this year lmfao.

Wade Keller: Don't worry guys this is a step in the right direction.

:ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think we can all agree the ratings are crap. And no one currently on WWE is a draw. Katy Perry naked woulden't be a draw. Its the product. But how many times has this been said? It's all on Vince. We can come here every week for the next year. Until Vince either wakes up from his slumber, or F's off lol. Nothing well change.


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> I know it's Wade Keller's job to promote wrestling being cool and to make excuses for bad ratings, but a 2.27 outside of football season is NOT a "victory". And I like how he tries to excuse it by calling this an "era of historically low ratings". More people than ever watch cable TV. Good shows do great ratings. Raw is not a good show, and it's evident that it loses viewers every month.
> 
> When you lose almost a million viewers from last year, and last year's ratings were bad...i mean what does it take to set off a panic for WWE? I hope 1.80 works because they'll be lucky to get that when football season starts.



It's James Caldwell who does the ratings on pw torch?


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> It's just some cord cutters and some YouTube watchers guys!


The drops perfectly coincide with Roman Reigns ascension. Weird.


----------



## SnapOrTap

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Low ratings - Check

Low live show attendence - Check

Dead crowds - Check

My favorite feud of the last decade was the WWE vs its fans. I guess we're seeing who won.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> Bingo and I like Roman, actually but facts are facts. He is your World champion and the new face of the company and yet this is the second week in a row that he doesn't close the show.
> 
> They're covering up for him to make sure he doesn't take full blame of the ratings (which it isn't) but some does have to lie upon him as well.


He hasn't closed the show for 2 weeks? He's still feuding with AJ right? I'm gonna assume the Title match is the main feud over the IC or US title so why would they not end the show with their bigger match. 

Would they really mix it up so other take the blame. He is still the champ and form what I learned in this thread and past versions is that the champ is responsible for it all no matter how silly that sounds.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Bryan outdrawing Reigns by roughly a million viewers 

:ha :ha :ha


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> When is the next PPV, are the numbers getting worse instead of better when a big show in coming soon? Actually thought of going to the PPV since it was in Newark but decided to just wait for Summerslam.


Next PPV is this upcoming Sunday, so this week's Raw was the go home Raw.


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> *Raw was getting these kinda numbers in 1995. What is it going to take to convince Vince he needs a fundamental change of the product.* And its time for this wishy washy, 90's good guy vanilla midget/big guy thing to end. And bring an edgier component back to the product. If he wants WWE to be trendy again, that time has come. But Vince is just too damn stubborn.


competition, when ratings were last plummeting big time it was wcw that got vince's ass in gear, keep saying this but wwe fans going to twitter and slagging off wwe won't make any difference but if those same fans instead helped spread awareness of other wrestling products on twitter it would be a step in the right direction, a small step obviously but it would be a start.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

In 1995, Nitro still had to catch on. Ratings were sliding Even without Nitro, WCW just made it worse. It's a myth that WWF did low numbers because of Nitro. It did later, but it started sooner.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think at this point Vince will only listen if we completely boycott the product. Stop watching RAW and overall boring PPVs and going to the events as well. I mean why should he listen if we are still paying money and watching his product. 

Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Damn 7% drop from 2014-2016.


20% drop, not 7%.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> I think at this point Vince will only listen if we completely boycott the product. Stop watching RAW and overall boring PPVs and going to the events as well. I mean why should he listen if we are still paying money and watching his product.
> 
> Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


Sadly, it doesn't make a fuck's difference when I don't watch, they don't give a fuck about international viewers.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Sadly, it doesn't make a fuck's difference when I don't watch, they don't give a fuck about international viewers.


Not trying to be racist or anything but didnt this years financial report say they have more viewers overseas like in India? If so we are screwed. They worship anyone that is made to look strong. ?

Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> Not trying to be racist or anything but didnt this years financial report say they have more viewers overseas like in India? If so we are screwed. They worship anyone that is made to look strong. &#55357;&#56834;
> 
> Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


Well, let me tell you something brother ...

A little excursion to German Raw viewership. First of all, the show is aired four days after the fact on free TV. If you want it live, you have to watch online, pay 9 bucks for it (and I'm not talking about the Network), and put up with shitty German commentary, old fucks who are doing this since the early 90s.

It's not easy finding ratings, but Raw viewership in August 2015 was 220.000 viewers, with a 1.7 percent share in the target age group. And that was last year, and the go-home Summerslam Show.
Reasons for low viewership given by the Most popular German wrestling Magazine are, among other things, old-fashioned presentation and not having it live.
Plus, after WWE didn't renew their cooperation with Sky Germany in 2014, Raw, Smackdown and NXT were still on free TV on a second station, which is now taken out of the Sky catalogue of channels, starting May 30th, which further reduces viewership.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Well, let me tell you something brother ...
> 
> A little excursion to German Raw viewership. First of all, the show is aired four days after the fact on free TV. If you want it live, you have to watch online, pay 9 bucks for it (and I'm not talking about the Network), and put up with shitty German commentary, old fucks who are doing this since the early 90s.
> 
> It's not easy finding ratings, but Raw viewership in August 2015 was 220.000 viewers, with a 1.7 percent share in the target age group. And that was last year, and the go-home Summerslam Show.
> Reasons for low viewership given by the Most popular German wrestling Magazine are, among other things, old-fashioned presentation and not having it live.
> Plus, after WWE didn't renew their cooperation with Sky Germany in 2014, Raw, Smackdown and NXT were still on free TV on a second station, which is now taken out of the Sky catalogue of channels, starting May 30th, which further reduces viewership.


Here you can watch it live of course but the WWE Network isnt exactly $9.99. Actually it is the problem here is I still have to pay for my cable that has normal channels because the cable company only provides the WWE network and have to pay the the $9.99 seperately so it isn't exactly cheap to watch Raw and all the good programming legally. 

Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> Here you can watch it live of course but the WWE Network isnt exactly $9.99. Actually it is the problem here is I still have to pay for my cable that has normal channels because the cable company only provides the WWE network and have to pay the the $9.99 seperately so it isn't exactly cheap to watch Raw and all the good programming legally.
> 
> Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


Well, cable companies here do not provide the Network. That's the problem. You can buy the Network, and watch it on your PC, or at most on Apple TV, but if you want Raw live, and Smackdown close to original air date, you need to purchase Maxxdome (similar to Netflix) for 8 bucks a month.
And the kicker is, if you want to watch PPVs on actual TV, you have to buy them separately through Maxxdome for 25 Euro each, 30 for Wrestlemania. And that's only if you have a Smart TV with internet access. If not, you have to watch it on PC or Tablet, which sucks.

Before this clusterfuck, up until Wrestlemania 30, one could simply book PPVs and watch them live on TV including replays, one could watch Raw live with original commentary, Smackdown that same day, NXT, Main Event etc. It was like this for 15 years.
Now, they just fuck it up. If you want to do the Switch, do it properly you fuckers, and introduce it on ALL platforms!


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> Not trying to be racist or anything but didnt this years financial report say they have more viewers overseas like in India? If so we are screwed. They worship anyone that is made to look strong. ?
> 
> Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


They think wrestling is real in India and will lap up anyone presented as the top guy.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> It's just some cord cutters and some YouTube watchers guys!


Not once did they get over a 3.0 rating this year.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> I think at this point Vince will only listen if we completely boycott the product. Stop watching RAW and overall boring PPVs and going to the events as well. I mean why should he listen if we are still paying money and watching his product.
> 
> Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


Nah. Creatively they're finished. With Vince in charge they're finished for sure and perhaps even if he isn't.

Even if Vince decided the time was right to listen to the fans and accept he isn't the creative genius he thinks he is who's he going to ask for help ?? Stephanie ? Kevin Dunn ? Or how about one of the 55 geek sitcom writers they employ for reasons unknown to anyone with common sense ?

All the people in power at that company can't help because they either know nothing about pro wrestling or they know about it but ignore it because they believe that they're sports entertainment and not pro wrestling.

The people who *could* help them creatively are guys like Heyman, Mantel, Austin, Jake Roberts etc. etc. But they will never be hired because they're all pro wrestling people and the WWE isn't pro wrestling anymore in Vince and his inner circle's mind.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> It's just some cord cutters and some YouTube watchers guys!


The one thing I noticed is that the ratings for the Raw after WrestleMania 31 (The one where Rollins cashed in) were pretty much as high as the ratings for the Raw after WrestleMania 30 (The one where Bryan won the title and the streak ended), and actually higher than the two post 'Mania Raws before it.

:rollins

The ratings for the Raw after WrestleMania 32 (The one where Reigns won the title).........not so much :lol


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Night after WM

Night After Wm Reigns : 2.93 

2.50 

2.32 

2.20 

2.35+

2.27

Average: 2.51

How low can they gooooooooooooo

WM Rollins: 3.67

2.81
2.71
2.83 
2.67
2.55
2.66
2.87

Average: 2.89

Now I am not saying because Rollins numbers were stronger. That means Rollins is better lol. Ratings are subjective. But after all those posts that Rollins is the sole reason for thew plummeting of the ratings and driving the show into the ground. Now coincdentally Reigns as champion gets worser numbers. It prooves its a sign of the times, and the product it self.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> The one thing I noticed is that the ratings for the Raw after WrestleMania 31 (The one where Rollins cashed in) were pretty much as high as the ratings for the Raw after WrestleMania 30 (The one where Bryan won the title and the streak ended), and actually higher than the two post 'Mania Raws before it.
> 
> :rollins
> 
> The ratings for the Raw after WrestleMania 32 (The one where Reigns won the title).........not so much :lol


Probably because imo the product comparitively was better. Love or Hate Rollins. The man could evoke a reaction. I remember the amount of heat he would get as champ on Raw. OBviousley his booking as champ was shit. Reigns is better their. But overall with J and J . Kane in the Authority, I Think from an entertainment stand point it was better.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> They think wrestling is real in India and will lap up anyone presented as the top guy.


Let goa Ceeena


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> It's just some cord cutters and some YouTube watchers guys!


And people thought CM Punk was bad for ratings....his era looks like a wrestling boom compared to now lol.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Is WWE gonna die then like WCW? A slow painful death? I heard that Vince sold 40 million worth of stock for estate planning. Being in a family where most people made their fortune through stock they were all saying that if a CEO sells a lot his stock for his own company..then he knows that shits about to come down. 

Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


----------



## The Figure 4

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

From Wrestling Observer Newsletter:



> Raw on 5/16 against very tough competition did a 2.26 rating and 3,174,000 viewers (1.47 viewers per home), down two percent in viewers from the prior week’s second lowest number outside of holidays and football season since 1997. The rating was identical to last week as the second lowest in that category.
> 
> The only episode of Raw that did worse outside of football season was the 4/25 episode that did a 2.19 rating and 3,116,000 viewers. Raw was third on cable, trailing only the NBA game and postgame show.
> 
> Still, the number isn’t that bad given hours two and three went head-to-head with the Golden State Warriors vs. Oklahoma City Thunder conference final game that did 8,706,000 viewers on TNT, up 28 percent from the similar game last season with the Warriors in game one of the conference finals. It also went against Dancing With The Stars which included Paige VanZant of UFC (11,637,000 viewers although that is largely a female demo) and the Stanley Cup playoffs with the San Jose Sharks vs. St. Louis Blues that did 1,705,000 viewers. This may be the toughest competition until football season because the 5/23 show will go against the Cleveland vs. Toronto game, which isn’t as strong, plus the rating should increase being the day after the Extreme rules show. The 5/30 show will only have a game if the Warriors and Thunder go seven games, which would do a giant number, but John Cena’s heavily pushed return should help the number. The NBA finals usually don’t run on Monday nights.
> 
> The first two hours were roughly the same level as the prior week, but there was a big drop in the third hour, which I kind of figured watching Kalisto vs. Alberto Del Rio and Big Cass vs. Devon so late in the show. They also put the main event of Usos vs. Luke Gallows & Karl Anderson, a weak main event, on early, meaning the only thing pushed after the early part of the third hour was the contract signing for the Charlotte vs. Natalya match. They put the McMahons out for it and really the focal point was more Stephanie (designed to get her over more than anyone) and Charlotte, with some Shane and Ric Flair and Natalya as just kind of the opponent.
> 
> The 8 p.m. hour, which didn’t oppose the NBA game, was the highest at 3,376,000 viewers. The 9 p.m. hour averaged 3,302,000 viewers and the 10 p.m. h our averaged 2,894,000 viewers.
> 
> The show did a 0.98 in 12-17 (up 4.3 percent), 0.96 in 18-34 (identical to last week), 1.27 in 35-49 (down 2.3 percent) and 1.29 in 50+ (down 0.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 66.5 percent male in the 18-49 demo and 72.3 percent male in the 12-17 demo, so even with the NBA game, the big viewer losses were on the women’s side.
> 
> Smackdown on 5/12 drew its second lowest rating to date on the USA Network with a 1.59 rating and 2,262,000 viewers (1.49 viewers per home). The show was fifth for the night on cable.
> 
> They were hurt by going head-to-head with the Oklahoma City Thunder vs. San Antonio Spurs NBA playoff game that did 5,229,000 viewers, as well as the San Jose Sharks vs. Nashville Predators seventh game that did 1,061,000 viewers.
> 
> The audience skewed older than usual as it did a 0.52 in 12-17 (down 18.8 percent from last week), 0.60 in 18-34 (down 3.2 percent), 0.74 in 35-49 (down 8.6 percent) and 1.03 in 50+ (identical to last week).
> 
> The audience was 58.5 percent males in 18-49 and 57.5 percent males in 12-17.


----------



## The Figure 4

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> They think wrestling is real in India and will lap up anyone presented as the top guy.


I'm from India and I can confirm... most of the people here are casual fans and a very small percentage are "smart marks" - I don't even know how many people frequent internet wrestling forums or "dirt sheets" or whatever (I certainly haven't come across many, not even on Facebook groups or whatever). But I haven't watched any wrestling at all for a few years now and only just started watching again with WrestleMania a few months ago so I missed all of the Indian tours or whatever that WWE did so I can't say how those went down and how the people here reacted to it, etc.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> Is WWE gonna die then like WCW? A slow painful death? I heard that Vince sold 40 million worth of stock for estate planning. Being in a family where most people made their fortune through stock they were all saying that if a CEO sells a lot his stock for his own company..then he knows that shits about to come down.
> 
> Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


It doesn't mean the company will die any time soon, but it also mean we're not in front of some boom period or a "NEW ERA" like WWE are laughably trying to convince us.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nah the network has 11 mill subs. The revenue is still through the roof. The buys from Mania. The net income is still profitable. WWE won't go out of buisness. RAtings mean nothing these days and Vince knows it. I don't know why he doesent just take Raw off Cable completely. And put it on the Network. I mean more people probably watch online these days. But his shareholders have a stake in SD and Raw. He would lose to much revenue. It's all money at the end of the day. Based on Quality Simpsons would of ended years ago. Same with The Big Bang Theory. But the shows make so much Ad Revenue. Its Quantity over Quality. Ratings mean nothing until their is a opponent to compare them too. Unitl that happens its all relative.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> It doesn't mean the company will die any time soon, but it also mean we're not in front of some boom period or a "NEW ERA" like WWE are laughably trying to convince us.


Yeah the New Era still has the same creative team, the same matchups every RAW and Smackdown and hey Vince still exists in it!



3ku1 said:


> Nah the network has 11 mill subs. The revenue is still through the roof. The buys from Mania. The net income is still profitable. WWE won't go out of buisness. RAtings mean nothing these days and Vince knows it. I don't know why he doesent just take Raw off Cable completely. And put it on the Network. I mean more people probably watch online these days. But his shareholders have a stake in SD and Raw. He would lose to much revenue. It's all money at the end of the day. Based on Quality Simpsons would of ended years ago. Same with The Big Bang Theory. But the shows make so much Ad Revenue. Its Quantity over Quality. Ratings mean nothing until their is a opponent to compare them too. Unitl that happens its all relative.


So wait the three hour RAW is because he gets more money out of those persistent ads?! Wow just wow.

Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Nah the network has 11 mill subs. The revenue is still through the roof. The buys from Mania. The net income is still profitable. WWE won't go out of buisness. RAtings mean nothing these days and Vince knows it. I don't know why he doesent just take Raw off Cable completely. And put it on the Network. I mean more people probably watch online these days. But his shareholders have a stake in SD and Raw. He would lose to much revenue. It's all money at the end of the day. Based on Quality Simpsons would of ended years ago. Same with The Big Bang Theory. But the shows make so much Ad Revenue. Its Quantity over Quality. Ratings mean nothing until their is a opponent to compare them too. Unitl that happens its all relative.


No, more people do not watch online. Cable still has a vast audience, and the money WWE makes from TV is one of the only things contributing to their profit. They would lose an absurd amount of money if RAW was only on the Network, and they would lose half their viewers, which is already dwindling now. You have to realize that Cable allows them the opportunity to hook casual viewers, the network does not. If your show is on the Network, and something big or cool happens on RAW, how is John Smith going to know about it if he doesn't have the Network? On cable, you have the odds of him switching through channels and seeing RAW and being like "Hey, I'll watch this for 5 minutes." That's the difference between 15 years ago and today. Those viewers are gone, because the show sucks. Instead of watching for 5 minutes and seeing something they like, they'll watch for two minutes and say "This sucks." and turn on something else.

The reason the audience is shrinking is because the show is dreadful. It has nothing to do with a decline of cable and rise of online viewership. There isn't any "fix" behind this except putting on a better show. The audience is still very much out there in Cable land, they're just watching other shows.

It's not like WWE is on life support or anything, they're doing fine financially. It's just a matter of what they SHOULD or COULD be doing if they put on a better product. By having zero competition, they should be more popular than ever yet they are at an all-time low in everything.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> No, more people do not watch online. Cable still has a vast audience, and the money WWE makes from TV is one of the only things contributing to their profit. They would lose an absurd amount of money if RAW was only on the Network, and they would lose half their viewers, which is already dwindling now. You have to realize that Cable allows them the opportunity to hook casual viewers, the network does not. If your show is on the Network, and something big or cool happens on RAW, how is John Smith going to know about it if he doesn't have the Network? On cable, you have the odds of him switching through channels and seeing RAW and being like "Hey, I'll watch this for 5 minutes." That's the difference between 15 years ago and today. Those viewers are gone, because the show sucks. Instead of watching for 5 minutes and seeing something they like, they'll watch for two minutes and say "This sucks." and turn on something else.
> 
> The reason the audience is shrinking is because the show is dreadful. It has nothing to do with a decline of cable and rise of online viewership. There isn't any "fix" behind this except putting on a better show. The audience is still very much out there in Cable land, they're just watching other shows.
> 
> It's not like WWE is on life support or anything, they're doing fine financially. It's just a matter of what they SHOULD or COULD be doing if they put on a better product. By having zero competition, they should be more popular than ever yet they are at an all-time low in everything.


You basically said what I Said, but in a different way. I know the products shit. People watching online doesen't change that. The ratings decrease does effect Raw actually. Less people are watching tv. That and the product being shit.


----------



## nopc

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It must be a bit boring for Vince without competition.

He has all the money in the world, and he is #1 . He has no threat, and he has already won the war with WCW.

There is nothing left for him to do, expect keep the wheels spinning.

If he was worried, you would see the attitude era make a come back.

He just don't care and has nothing to kick him into high gear.

It is what it is.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*What Smackdown Segments Ranked Highest On WWE's Youtube?: Chris Jericho Does Well, Women Dive, More*

The Extreme Rules go-home Smackdown takes place tonight, and if WWE's Youtube rankings are any indication, the fans may be growing a little tired of the repeated Usos vs. Anderson and Gallows contests.

Typically anything involving the Club vs. Family rivalry is among the top viewed parts of Raw or Smackdown. That wasn't the case last week, as The Usos vs. Karl Anderson and Luke Gallows fell to fourth in what was their fifth match with each other in three weeks.

Chris Jericho continues to excel, as his angle with Dean Ambrose was the top-ranked segment of the show at 807,285 views. Jericho and Ambrose have performed well with regularity in the company's Youtube rankings.

After a jump on Raw, the women's segment on Smackdown took another dive, with Dana Brooke's in-ring debut landing at number 7.

In what can't be a good sign for interest in New Day's appearances, both of them were in the bottom half of the rankings. Since their babyface turn, their numbers have taken a steep dip, but they had two of the last four spots for last week's Smackdown.

You can see the full Youtube rankings for the 5/12 Smackdown below.

1. Chris Jericho gets payback on Dean Ambrose (807,285)

2. Cesaro & Sami Zayn vs. Kevin Owens & Miz (649,124)

3. Rusev vs. Sin Cara (620,382)

4. Usos vs. Karl Anderson & Luke Gallows (588,897)

5. Kofi Kingston vs. Aiden English (537,283)

6. Gorgeous Truth vs. Goldango (529,300)

7. Becky Lynch vs. Dana Brooke (380,351)

8. The Vaudevillains interrupt The New Day (213,955)

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...segments-ranked-highest-on-wwe-youtube-chris/


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It feels like we've seen BC vs Usos 300 times already. Just like it feels as if the New Day has been cutting the same promo for a year. Pounding your audience over the head with the same exact thing every week is a great way to make them see what else is on.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

From the observer.









Interesting to see that NXT house show outdrew both main roster house shows that were held on the same day.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*TV Viewership for Week 6 of John Cena’s “American Grit” Fox TV series*


ohn Cena’s “American Grit” TV series appears to have found its low-point, as this week’s episode slightly increased in viewership.

American Grit TV Viewership Tracking

May 19: Week 6 of John Cena’s Fox TV series stayed below the 2.0 million viewership mark.

Thursday’s airing drew 1.99 million overnight viewers, reports TVBytheNumbers.com.

Last week’s overnight viewership was 1.89 million viewers before falling to 1.78 million actual viewers.

As usual, Grit lost half of its lead-in, “Bones,” which drew 4.19 million viewers.

Bones ranked #3 in its timeslot, but Grit fell to fourth. This led to Fox ranking fourth overall on the night, slightly trailing NBC.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/20/tv-viewership-week-6-john-cenas-american-grit-fox-tv-series/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Nah the network has *11 mill subs*. The revenue is still through the roof. The buys from Mania. The net income is still profitable. WWE won't go out of buisness. RAtings mean nothing these days and Vince knows it. I don't know why he doesent just take Raw off Cable completely. And put it on the Network. I mean more people probably watch online these days. But his shareholders have a stake in SD and Raw. He would lose to much revenue. It's all money at the end of the day. Based on Quality Simpsons would of ended years ago. Same with The Big Bang Theory. But the shows make so much Ad Revenue. Its Quantity over Quality. Ratings mean nothing until their is a opponent to compare them too. Unitl that happens its all relative.


Forgot a comma there, dude?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

11 million subs? :lmao fpalm

Maybe in 10 years, at the rate they're going...

:heyman6


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(5/19) Vs last week(5/12) 

2.295M Vs 2.262M 
(+0.033M/+1.46%)*


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> 11 million subs? :lmao fpalm
> 
> Maybe in 10 years, at the rate they're going...
> 
> :heyman6


In 10 years, the number will be 0 because they'll be long gone by then. :heyman6


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/19 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – how did the pre-Extreme Rules episode fare?*

This week’s Smackdown TV rating inched up from last week, but the show remains stuck at the bottom rung.

WWE Smackdown Ratings Tracking

May 19: Smackdown scored a 1.62 rating leading into Extreme Rules, slightly up from a 1.59 rating last week.

Through the first seven weeks of the second quarter, Smackdown has averaged a 1.65 rating, down one ladder rung from a 1.77 average rating in the first quarter.

– Smackdown drew 2.295 million viewers, slightly up from 2.262 million viewers last week.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Smackdown fell one-tenth of a rating in males 18-34 to the lowest point of the year.

Males 18-49 also fell slightly, but adults 18-49 increased slightly.

Overall, the show has been stuck in below-average territory since WrestleMania Season.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/20/519-wwe-smackdown-tv-ratings-pre-extreme-rules-episode-fare/


----------



## Eddie05

Hey guys maybe im in the wrong thread but I'm going to Raw in a couple weeks and would you do Floor seats Row 3 right behind the commentating table or Row A in the actual arena seats?? Thanks!


----------



## LilOlMe

Eddie05 said:


> Hey guys maybe im in the wrong thread but I'm going to Raw in a couple weeks and would you do Floor seats Row 3 right behind the commentating table or Row A in the actual arena seats?? Thanks!


First 3 rows are good. I wouldn't do anything beyond three or four rows, I don't think, though.

Get those. They're good seats.

If Row A is literally the first row of the lower level, I'm not sure how great those seats are. The floors are huge, so you're really not gonna be up much further above all the rows on the floor.

I had 4th row lower level NXT tickets, and the view was great, but there are many less floor seats for NXT. I could see how the view could be not so great if I were a few rows lower and the floor seats went on and on for more rows. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Someone else can chime in.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> 11 million subs? :lmao fpalm
> 
> Maybe in 10 years, at the rate they're going...
> 
> :heyman6


:lol sorry guys my bad.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> In 1995, Nitro still had to catch on. Ratings were sliding Even without Nitro, WCW just made it worse. It's a myth that WWF did low numbers because of Nitro. It did later, but it started sooner.




They weren't setting the whole world ratings wise before Nitro, but nobody cared about ratings before nitro.


----------



## Eddie05

LilOlMe said:


> Eddie05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey guys maybe im in the wrong thread but I'm going to Raw in a couple weeks and would you do Floor seats Row 3 right behind the commentating table or Row A in the actual arena seats?? Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> First 3 rows are good. I wouldn't do anything beyond three or four rows, I don't think, though.
> 
> Get those. They're good seats.
> 
> If Row A is literally the first row of the lower level, I'm not sure how great those seats are. The floors are huge, so you're really not gonna be up much further above all the rows on the floor.
> 
> I had 4th row lower level NXT tickets, and the view was great, but there are many less floor seats for NXT. I could see how the view could be not so great if I were a few rows lower and the floor seats went on and on for more rows. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Someone else can chime in.
Click to expand...

Thank You So Much for that! I guess my main issue really was worrying about my view being obstructed from people standing in the1st and 2nd Rows but think it would only apply if I was like 10 rows backs?


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Oh boy so now the two HHH pets gonna feud, the ratings are going to decrease a ton.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I expect 4 or above. Fans were way too hyped for Seth's return not to get that boost.


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What happens if Seth's return doesn't do much to improve ratings?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Extreme Rules Twitter TV Ratings – Second PPV since WrestleMania tumbles in social media activity*


The quick turnaround from Payback to Extreme Rules and more distance from WrestleMania seems to have hurt Extreme Rules’s social media interest on Sunday night.

WWE PPV Social Media Tracking

Extreme Rules (May 22): Extreme Rules ranked #3 among series & specials Sunday night in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings.

WWE’s second PPV since WrestleMania trailed the “Billboard Music Awards” on ABC and “Game of Thrones” on HBO.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Extreme Rules would have ranked #2 way behind the NBA Playoffs game between the Warriors and Thunder, but well ahead of the NHL Playoffs game between the Lightning and Penguins.

– In the individual metrics, Extreme Rules tumbled from Payback in Twitter activity.

The PPV drew 268,000 tweets, down 18 percent from Payback.

Also, the number of unique authors was 50,000, down 12 percent from 57,000 for Payback.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...e-wrestlemania-tumbles-social-media-activity/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> What happens if Seth's return doesn't do much to improve ratings?


Then they can already look for new tenants for Titan Towers.

Because there is no way they will survive this downfall.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> What happens if Seth's return doesn't do much to improve ratings?


Do people even read posts on here? He's not going to improve ratings. We've been saying it his entire absence. No one improves the ratings anymore.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> What happens if Seth's return doesn't do much to improve ratings?


if such an anticipated return and a post PPV Raw doesn't prouduce a 4, then WWE has legit lost a good chunk of their fanbase



ShowStopper said:


> Do people even read posts on here? He's not going to improve ratings. We've been saying it his entire absence. No one improves the ratings anymore.


I wouldn't be so sure. I was an avid Seth basher as far as ratings, but even I think his return will do a nice bump. Anticipation has been high for his return.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> if such an anticipated return and a post PPV Raw doesn't prouduce a 4, then WWE has legit lost a good chunk of their fanbase
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't be so sure. I was an avid Seth basher as far as ratings, but even I think his return will do a nice bump. Anticipation has been high for his return.


Maybe a small bump, but nothing crazy at all. Before his return, there was literally zero buzz about the product at all. It was DEAD. It's barely above dead now. And what little increase there might be, I predict goes back down again next week. Look at Shane McMahon. He had a one week bump, and right back down the next and he's a bigger name and was gone for 7 years..


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Maybe a small bump, but nothing crazy at all. Before his return, there was literally zero buzz about the product at all. It was DEAD. It's barely above dead now. And what little increase there might be, I predict goes back down again next week. Look at Shane McMahon. He had a one week bump, and right back down the next and he's a bigger name and was gone for 7 years..


That is true. Bumps tend to be very temporary and short term now days. Still, it will show how many people tuned in because of Seth coming back. Still gotta give him credit for bringing what, at least 300,000 more eyes if they reach 4? That first hour will definitely be telling. 

How many stay next week will of course depend on the success of the episode. It also does help Cena and Orton are coming back. More so Cena. He could maybe bring some of the casuals they lost. Love him or hate him, he brought a certain energy to shows and is over as FUCK with casuals.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> That is true. Bumps tend to be very temporary and short term now days. Still, it will show how many people tuned in because of Seth coming back. Still gotta give him credit for bringing what, at least 300,000 more eyes if they reach 4? That first hour will definitely be telling.
> 
> How many stay next week will of course depend on the success of the episode. It also does help Cena and Orton are coming back. More so Cena. He could maybe bring some of the casuals they lost. Love him or hate him, he brought a certain energy to shows and is over as FUCK with casuals.


I love Rollins as much as anyone, but I don't see some big bump taking place. WWE has alienated a healthy portion of their audience to the point where below 3 million viewers has almost become somewhat of a norm for hour 3. And hours 1 and 2 have been in the low 3's for awhile now, too. I just don't see it.

If any of the injured guys bring in more viewers, it will be Cena, as it should be, given his booking over the past 10 years. But I think his bump will be temporary, as well. He was on those Raws before he got hurt, too. I think they've lost the faith of a big chunk of their former audience and outside of some huge changes, like the formula of the show, the look and atmosphere, I don't see any change to the ratings. They don't deserve it, either. This is all on them.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think there could be a small bump, but it will be a one week only thing.

Returns are a fun thing in wrestling...but the fans aren't stupid. The bigger factor is what Seth is returning to... 3 hours of boredom. Seth/Cena cannot save the sinking ship. It's sinking very very slowly, I admit, but nevertheless it's going down. Rollins is just plugging a small hole for a couple hours but he can't plug them all.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If anything I expect that Seth fanboys at least have the decency of no use the Roman Reigns You Tube views defense.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/20 Raw TV Replay Viewership – numbers for the first replay on Syfy*

– The WWE Raw episode from Monday, May 16 replayed in two-hour form on Friday, May 20…

Raw TV Ratings Tracking

The baseline for a Raw replay four days later on cable TV was 467,000 viewers in the first airing on Syfy.

A general movie that aired in the timeslot last Friday, May 13 drew 361,000 viewers.

It remains to be seen what the regular audience will do with more notice about a tw0-hour version of Raw. The caveat is this is a replay four days later and after Smackdown airs Thursday nights on USA Network.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: The replay drew a median age viewer of 49.2 years-old.

There were actually more female 18-49 than male 18-49 viewers, with a split of 48 percent m18-49 and 52 percent f18-49.

The split could be the result of the typical Friday night audience on Syfy before a replay was inserted in the timeslot. It also remains to be seen what the typical split is going forward.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/23/520-raw-tv-replay-viewership-numbers-first-replay-syfy/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LeBron game vs RAW. I imagine there will be a post ppv bump,but I imagine it will be an ephemeral gain.


----------



## NavierStokes

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The two performers most responsible for the drastic decline in ratings since the 2nd half of 2014 will be teaming up to destroy the ratings together in a main event feud.

Should be a fun time for the 12 people that will be watching it.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Brodus Clay said:


> If anything I expect that Seth fanboys at least have the decency of no use the Roman Reigns You Tube views defense.


Yeah Reigns Raw Ratings are a better defense huh.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



NavierStokes said:


> The two performers most responsible for the drastic decline in ratings since the 2nd half of 2014 will be teaming up to destroy the ratings together in a main event feud.
> 
> Should be a fun time for the 12 people that will be watching it.


Lol still ppl thinking talent is responsible for the ratings. So based on that logic, Punk and Cena getting the same numbers. Or Bryan for that matter. Means they were responsible for 2012 sucking, or 2013? No ppl using ratings to justify the talent's lack of worth fml.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Lol still ppl thinking talent is responsible for the ratings. So based on that logic, Punk and Cena getting the same numbers. Or Bryan for that matter. Means they were responsible for 2012 sucking, or 2013? No ppl using ratings to justify the talent's lack of worth fml.


Hate to tell you, but both Punk and Bryan drew roughly a million viewers more. Ratings were 3.0 - 3.5 YEARS before Punk became champ. In fact, Punk's year-long reign drew the same rating average as Triple H's 7 month reign in 2008 :eagle


----------



## skarvika

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *Extreme Rules Twitter TV Ratings – Second PPV since WrestleMania tumbles in social media activity*
> 
> 
> The quick turnaround from Payback to Extreme Rules and more distance from WrestleMania seems to have hurt Extreme Rules’s social media interest on Sunday night.
> 
> WWE PPV Social Media Tracking
> 
> Extreme Rules (May 22): Extreme Rules ranked #3 among series & specials Sunday night in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings.
> 
> WWE’s second PPV since WrestleMania trailed the “Billboard Music Awards” on ABC and “Game of Thrones” on HBO.
> 
> If compared to one-off sports programming, Extreme Rules would have ranked #2 way behind the NBA Playoffs game between the Warriors and Thunder, but well ahead of the NHL Playoffs game between the Lightning and Penguins.
> 
> – In the individual metrics, Extreme Rules tumbled from Payback in Twitter activity.
> 
> The PPV drew 268,000 tweets, down 18 percent from Payback.
> 
> Also, the number of unique authors was 50,000, down 12 percent from 57,000 for Payback.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...e-wrestlemania-tumbles-social-media-activity/


These are the numbers we should start following imo, WWE's always going on about their social media stats, so I believe that's where they feel they can gauge how large and/or invested their active consumer base is.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How can Rollins return give them a bump when their audience has shrunk since he left, and their PPV probably had less eyes on it because of that? If he does give them a bump under these circumstances, they need to turn him face and give him a legit run already.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Rollins may give a bump in hour 1 however as soon as it became clear that nothing has changed, that he is still a chickenshit heel and it's just going to be him fed to Reigns. I can imagine the numbers falling like a stone.


----------



## NavierStokes

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Lol still ppl thinking talent is responsible for the ratings. So based on that logic, Punk and Cena getting the same numbers. Or Bryan for that matter. Means they were responsible for 2012 sucking, or 2013? No ppl using ratings to justify the talent's lack of worth fml.


When did I say they were they only two people responsible? I said, out of all the performers, they are the ones who shoulder most of the blame because they've been the two that have received the biggest pushes. Yes, creative/booking is to blame as well (two of the biggest booking mistakes have been pushing these two geeks.)

Learn to read.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Triple H's 2016 title run is a lower rated title run than Seth Rollins' 2015 title run.

:lmao :lmao :lmao

:ha :ha :ha


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



skarvika said:


> These are the numbers we should start following imo, WWE's always going on about their social media stats, so I believe that's where they feel they can gauge how large and/or invested their active consumer base is.


That I'm not so sure of. At least on Sunday night's where they are going against Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. Those are shows with huge social followings. Even diehards are likely to tune out in favor of those juggernauts.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yes, let's follow numbers that records people ripping them apart, and not numbers bringing them 200 million a year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> That I'm not so sure of. At least on Sunday night's where they are going against Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. Those are shows with huge social followings. Even diehards are likely to tune out in favor of those juggernauts.


How many tune in to Walking Dead, expecting WWE programming though?


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> How many tune in to Walking Dead, expecting WWE programming though?


No. What I meant is that shows on that level almost demand to be watched live, lest you run the risk of having it spoiled for you the next day. 

Personally, I always make it a point to watch PPVs, but if they are running along side WD or GOT, I'm tuning to those between the hours of 9-10 pm EST, and tweeting my little heart away in the process.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Renegade said:


> No. What I meant is that shows on that level almost demand to be watched live, lest you run the risk of having it spoiled for you the next day.
> 
> Personally, I always make it a point to watch PPVs, but if they are running along side WD or GOT, I'm tuning to those between the hours of 9-10 pm EST, and tweeting my little heart away in the process.


I think you missed a joke in my post


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I think you missed a joke in my post


I didn't.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Considering it was yet another Blah Raw, I hope they get another Blah rating. Assholes.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*RAW - Twitter
*
- Monday's WWE RAW ranked #2 among series & specials for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings, behind The Bachelorette. As noted, Nielsen recently confirmed to us that they have changed the way Twitter ratings are being released as Unique Audience will no longer be included. The weekly lists will now include and be ranked by tweet volume. RAW had 153,000 tweets with 32,000 unique authors. This is up from last week's show, which had 125,000 tweets with 29,000 unique authors.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0524/612067/new-scott-hall-wwe-dvd-trailer/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This show will be up, but will the gains be short lived?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> This show will be up, but will the gains be short lived?


Let's be honest here, the ratings Seth drew last year would be a huge improvement over the current Diesel light.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/23 Raw Twitter Ratings – bump for post-Extreme Rules Raw*

Monday’s Raw generated a post-Extreme Rules PPV bump in social media activity tracked by Nielsen. The result topped the post-Payback Raw earlier this month.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

May 23: Raw fell to #2 among series & specials on Monday night, trailing “The Bachelorette” on ABC. It broke Raw’s streak of ranking #1 four consecutive weeks.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw also would have ranked #2 behind the NBA Playoffs, but ahead of the NHL Playoffs.

– Raw generated a total of 153,000 tweets, up 22 percent from last week’s Extreme Rules lead-in show. It was the most tweets since the Raw two shows after WrestleMania.

The number of unique authors tweeting about Raw was 32,000, up 10 percent from 29,000 last week.

Post-Payback vs. Extreme Rules Raw comparison

Post-Payback: 143,000 tweets
Post-Extreme Rules: 153,000 tweets
Post-Payback: 30,000 uniques
Post-Extreme Rules: 32,000 uniques

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/24/may23rawtwitter/


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

THE MAN a twitter draw :rollins


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was Last Night's WWE RAW Viewership With The Extreme Rules Fallout And Seth Rollins' Return?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Seth Rollins' return and the fallout from Extreme Rules, drew 3.268 million viewers. This is up from last week's 3.191 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.359 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.332 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.115 million viewers.

RAW was #2 on cable for the night in viewership, behind the NBA Playoffs, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the NBA, SportsCenter and Love & Hip-Hop.

http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/201...ht-wwe-raw-viewership-with-the-extreme-rules/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:lmao :lmao :lmao

This company is DEAD when it comes to ratings. 

Better than last week, but still SHIT. I love it.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *How Was Last Night's WWE RAW Viewership With The Extreme Rules Fallout And Seth Rollins' Return?*
> 
> Source: Showbuzz Daily
> 
> Monday's episode of WWE RAW, with Seth Rollins' return and the fallout from Extreme Rules, drew 3.268 million viewers. This is up from last week's 3.191 million viewers.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.359 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.332 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.115 million viewers.
> 
> RAW was #2 on cable for the night in viewership, behind the NBA Playoffs, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the NBA, SportsCenter and Love & Hip-Hop.
> 
> http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/201...ht-wwe-raw-viewership-with-the-extreme-rules/


Interesting, I was refreshing the showbuzzdaily page for the past hour and they didnt even update anything regarding a delay. It still does not show on their page. Anyway looks like the opening hour did better than the norm. But an overall gain of just 0.077M is tepid.

Anyway thanks Becky With The Good Hair for posting it and saving me time. Showbuzzdaily needs to work on their update notifications.


----------



## Kabraxal

Can't even get a half million bump anymore ???? 

WWE is failing and it is wonderful to watch this corrupt company sinking.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ppv bump was minuscule. Maybe they can get an increase once the NBA Playoffs, but the NFL is just over three months away and the product seems lukewarm at best, right now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Bring on the NFL, plz. Sink 'em all the way.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Interesting, I was refreshing the showbuzzdaily page for the past hour and they didnt even update anything regarding a delay. It still does not show on their page. Anyway looks like the opening hour did better than the norm. But an overall gain of just 0.077M is tepid.
> 
> Anyway thanks Becky With The Good Hair for posting it and saving me time. Showbuzzdaily needs to work on their update notifications.


I kept waiting for you to post the ratings. :lol

I'm curious as to what numbers John Cena's return will put up. But it will be Memorial Day. So, who knows.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At least they didn't go under 3 million in hour 3 which has become somewhat of a norm since November and like they just did last week. That's the *only* positive here.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I kept waiting for you to post the ratings. :lol
> 
> I'm curious as to what numbers John Cena's return will put up. But it will be Memorial Day. So, who knows.


Its never been this delayed before in the past year. :grin2: And at this very moment, the chart still isnt on the charts page either. So I wonder how wrestlinginc got those numbers before its even on showbuzzdailys page.

Its memorial day, so my guess is there will be a delay of a day or two for the ratings. But the increase should also be more than what we witnessed this week. How much more I cant say.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/23 Raw TV Ratings – how did post-Extreme Rules fare?*

Despite being the night after a PPV, Monday’s Raw TV rating only slightly increased from last week.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

May 23: Raw scored a 2.29 rating, compared to a 2.27 last week leading into Extreme Rules and 2.26 two weeks ago.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.268 million viewers, up 2.4 percent (about 78,000 viewers) from last week.

First Hour: 3.359 million viewers
Second Hour: 3.332 million viewers
Third Hour: 3.115 million viewers (6.5% decline from the second hour)

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Raw was virtually unchanged from last week in males 18-34 and males 18-49. There was an increase in adults 18-49 from a year-low a18-49 rating last week.

– FORECAST: Next week’s Raw falls on the Memorial Day holiday, which WWE is countering with the return of John Cena from injury.

Last year’s Memorial Day Raw fell 11 percent from the previous week. If applied to this year, Raw would still be above a 2.0 TV rating.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/24/523-raw-tv-ratings/


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> At least they didn't go under 3 million in hour 3 which has become somewhat of a norm since November and like they just did last week. That's the *only* positive here.


Styles and Owens keeping the third hour respectable.

wens2:sip


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's amazing how much damage they've done in their relationship with their fanbase. Everyone keeps saying people don't tune out of Raw and 'keep watching.' But the numbers over the past year and change indicate that is farthest from the truth.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> It's amazing how much damage they've done in their relationship with their fanbase. Everyone keeps saying people don't tune out of Raw and 'keep watching.' But the numbers over the past year and change indicate that is farthest from the truth.


Vince has severally miscalculated what his hardcore fanbase will tolerate and the WWE's ability to draw in "new fans"


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Those fans Vince has lost over the last couple of years? Yeah. They are not coming back.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They lost the older male viewership.

I don't know if it was mentioned but there was a post on reddit that showed that the amount of female viewers on the RAW(s) after Wrestlemania stayed pretty much the same (small decline still) during the last three years, while the WWE lost about 20-30% of the male audience.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Kabraxal said:


> Can't even get a half million bump anymore ????
> 
> WWE is failing and it is wonderful to watch this corrupt company sinking.


Vince is too cheap for corruption.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Here it is finally. After their unexpected delay of around 90 minutes.










*H1-3.359M
H2-3.332M
H3-3.115M
3H-3.269M

H2 Vs H1 (-0.008%/-0.027M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-6.51%/-0.217M)
H3 Vs H1 (-7.26%/-0.244M)
5/23/16 Vs 5/16/16 (+1.5%/+0.078M)
2.29R Vs 2.27R(+0.009%)

Note: Seth Rollins returns and fallout from Extreme Rules.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Also, tournament matches do not draw on Raw these days. The last tournament they had, for the World Title after Seth got hurt last November, they had the tournament matches on those Raw's. And that was the exact time that Hour 3 of Raw slipped under 3 million viewers for the first time ever. So, I don't know what it is, but tournament matches are not a draw to the TV viewers for now the last two WWE tournaments in a row. Interesting.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



DoubtGin said:


> They lost the older male viewership.
> 
> I don't know if it was mentioned but there was a post on reddit that showed that the amount of female viewers on the RAW(s) after Wrestlemania stayed pretty much the same (small decline still) during the last three years, while the WWE lost about 20-30% of the male audience.


I did see this and did you see how Stephanie tried to spin it?

Stephanie went around touting how the percentage of female viewers is the highest it has ever been (leaving out this is only b/c they are driving the male audience away)

:reneelel


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So the Rollins return barely did shit? THAT is a sad state, then. Not surprised in a way since Rollins's ratings as the champion were BAD. Not Reigns or HHH 2016 bad but they weren't impressive at all but I would have thought his return would have sparked some significant upward trajectory and it barely reached a half million ratings bump.

The NBA playoffs are starting to become a huge detriment to them this year with two entertaining series in both conferences. NFL season is approaching in about less than three months. If these ratings don't start growing huge during this road to Summerslam, this is going to be a VERY rough year if it hasn't already.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wrestlemania 32 will go down as an event that did amazingly well in a bubble, but did permanent damage to the WWE as a brand.

People will tout revenue, but that revenue is only so high from the TV deal, if ratings keep falling at this rate, I just don't know if they are going to get the same kind of deal.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not much of a bump tbh. With Memorial Day being next week, I'm expecting another hour under 3 million. LOL.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This rating is just outstandingly bad, as I've said for a while, Rollins isn't a big difference maker, but the fact that we did get a surprise return on a PPV, you would think ratings would see a decent bump, but nothing. What does that say about everyone else coming back? Who gives a shit about Wyatt or Orton? Cena will help, but I don't even know to what degree, they ran away the adult male audience, and are they really going to come back for John Cena?

The rest of the year is going to be very interesting.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'll say this too. If a returning John Cena (Memorial Day or not) doesn't see a big increase next week in the ratings, that will be absolute proof (or should be to the majority) that there are no more "stars". There are no more draws. WWE's name, history, and public image is the only reason they are a worldwide name at this point it time.

Next week will be crucial. They better hope Cena can be a ratings draw one more time.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Wrestlemania 32 will go down as an event that did amazingly well in a bubble, but did permanent damage to the WWE as a brand.
> 
> People will tout revenue, but that revenue is only so high from the TV deal, if ratings keep falling at this rate, I just don't know if they are going to get the same kind of deal.


The next TV deal contract will still be a huge number but I can't see how it could be the same as the current (160 million a year IIRC).

The next deal will likely be significantly lower than that considering ratings have permanently dropped by quite a margin since the last deal was signed.

Each quarterly financial report reveals that while the company is bringing in huge revenue they are not making huge profits.

A third of their revenue is TV deals if that takes a big hit and with Network subs not growing and live attendance down too it's going to be interesting to see how the company reacts.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> *I'll say this too. If a returning John Cena (Memorial Day or not) doesn't see a big increase next week in the ratings, that will be absolute proof (or should be to the majority) that there are no more "stars".* There are no more draws. WWE's name, history, and public image is the only reason they are a worldwide name at this point it time.
> 
> Next week will be crucial. They better hope Cena can be a ratings draw one more time.


:kobe9 you just figuring this out now. Were the numbers insane when Brock or Undertaker were on the show? Cena hasn't been out for 5 years, he was around and the ratings were still shit. Ir's been pretty obvious there are no draws. They can spike a good rating every now and then but they'll never keep it. It'll increase a little but no way it'll be the jump where we're going like Cena is really is the only draw :CENA


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Piper's Pit said:


> The next TV deal contract will still be a huge number but I can't see how it could be the same as the current (160 million a year IIRC).
> 
> The next deal will likely be significantly lower than that considering ratings have permanently dropped by quite a margin since the last deal was signed.
> 
> *Each quarterly financial report reveals that while the company is bringing in huge revenue they are not making huge profits imagination.*
> 
> A third of their revenue is TV deals if that takes a big hit and with Network subs not growing and live attendance down too it's going to be interesting to see how the company reacts.


The apologists only pay attention to the revenue, not the losses. Go figure.

In terms of profit margins, they are rather thin. They make around $24million net profit per year.

Meaning if the TV deal alone dipped from $160m to $135m (entirely feasible given terrible ratings) then WWE would be only just breaking even.

Another interesting factoid, is that Cena makes WWE around $25m in merchandise per year. Meaning without him they would be making an overall loss.


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Happy to see their wasn't a _huge_ drop for the 3rd hour. AJ vs Owens as a main event did well to keep too many people from changing the channel, especially with the NBA playoffs on around that time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What made me really realize it was over was when Shane only popped a rating for one week. This is a guy who was gone for 7 years. This is a guy who both smarks and casuals wanted to see back for YEARS. He comes back, and the rating disappears in literally one week. That was the big eye-opener for me that WWE is completely shit out of luck. This is what happens when you consistently don't give people what they want and your product is as edgy as Barney the Dinosaur in a world where all of the highest rated programs are at least somewhat edgy.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Can someone who follows the ratings closely mind explaining whether that 3rd hr number was decent or not?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Wrestlemania 32 will go down as an event that did amazingly well in a bubble, but did permanent damage to the WWE as a brand.


Nail on the head right here. The permanent damage of Wrestlemania 32 lies in WWE's complete and utter disregard for storyline progression and conclusion, it lies in burning its bridges with good natured fans who don't expect the world but are continuously let down. There's only so many times you can insult a persons intelligence before they check out. This year people have been checking out in droves and they won't come back until WWE earns their trust back. And that's going to take a lot longer than a string of passable shows. They are completely fucked post Summerslam this year, so completely and utterly fucked that I feel sorry for whoever is champion. That poor person just might be held responsible as the one who finally sunk the ship below 3 million viewers permanently.

EDIT - Cena will do nothing. Nobody can. Diminishing returns have long set in on the part timers too; Lesnar, Taker, HHH, even The Rock...none of them move the needle in their appearances any more. The last true difference maker was Daniel Bryan and even he lost his shine towards the end. WWE finally got what it wanted, the brand is the biggest draw. But the big problem with that is when the brand is fucking shit, it's the only draw they have and everything suffers.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings are subjective these days. Raws ratings well always fluctate between a 1.0 and a 2.0 and below 3 mill. Can we stop being apologists. And going oh this means Rollins tanked the ratings, this means Reigns tanked the ratings. Oh if Cena comes back and theirs no increase, theirs no star power anymore. Yeah he really increased the ratings the past five or past years or so lol. Face it no one person can effect ratings. Other then Maybe Rock or to a lesser degree Brock possibly. ONly because Rock is a huge star outside of the WWE. But point is the time of a draw is gone. The only draw WWE have left, is WWE itself. IF they worked on making the product better. Maybe the ratings may go up, maybe. But good to see the ratings diddn't drop hugely for the 3rd hr. Even though their should be 2 hrs. But guess that Ad Revenue Baby!!!


----------



## SiON

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Would it be all that surprising if Wrassling just wasn't as popular as it used to be?


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> What made me really realize it was over was when Shane only popped a rating for one week. This is a guy who was gone for 7 years. This is a guy who both smarks and casuals wanted to see back for YEARS. He comes back, and the rating disappears in literally one week. That was the big eye-opener for me that WWE is completely shit out of luck. This is what happens when you consistently don't give people what they want and your product is as edgy as Barney the Dinosaur in a world where all of the highest rated programs are at least somewhat edgy.


He only popped the rating for one week because it never got better than it did during that first week. WWE does this all time. How many storylines are there where the best moment in the storyline was the first segment for the storyline. 

The Invasion? Shane McMahon's promo on Nitro is the most memorable part of the whole feud.
The Nexus? Their debut segment was the best part of the whole storyline.
Summer of Punk? It was his first promo where it all peaked.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



FITZ said:


> He only popped the rating for one week because it never got better than it did during that first week. WWE does this all time. How many storylines are there where the best moment in the storyline was the first segment for the storyline.
> 
> The Invasion? Shane McMahon's promo on Nitro is the most memorable part of the whole feud.
> The Nexus? Their debut segment was the best part of the whole storyline.
> Summer of Punk? It was his first promo where it all peaked.


Oh, I agree. And I'm by no means blaming Shane. It's not on any of the performers all that much. Or, it's at least on Creative and Vince much more than anyone else. But even still, people could've been curious in week 2 of the storyline, and apparently they were not. It's concerning.

Also, I think that one other poster has a point. Simple and concise; wrestling just isn't as popular as it once was. They've thrown EVERY one and EVERY type at us. Indy darlings, WWE made guys, big guys, small guys, medium sized guys. In ring guys, promo guys, etc and nothing has worked.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Maybe the fact they are trying all this shit and still theirs no spike in the ratings Is because I agree Pro Wrestling just ain't what it was. It's not trendy its not cool. Hardcore fans who grew up with it. Well continue to watch, even if its shit. But Casuals coulden't give a shit. They are watching TWD, GOT, Breaking Bad e.t.c. Pro Wrestling was last popular probably in the AE. And around 2003-2007. So you know, the ratings are what they are. They are not horrible, they are not amazing. They just are. You know. Maybe if they had a fundamental change to the product. But while Vince is in charge that won't happen. So Cena well come back, Brock well wreck some shit up. Wyatt well go boo! And we well laugh and we well cry, and we well all die a little inside


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> What made me really realize it was over was when Shane only popped a rating for one week. This is a guy who was gone for 7 years. This is a guy who both smarks and casuals wanted to see back for YEARS. He comes back, and the rating disappears in literally one week. That was the big eye-opener for me that WWE is completely shit out of luck. This is what happens when you consistently don't give people what they want and your product is as edgy as Barney the Dinosaur in a world where all of the highest rated programs are at least somewhat edgy.



The issue as with every wwe story line is....it wasn't compelling. They ruined the Shane story the first week with the nonsensical reasoning behind him needing to fight to gain control of something he already had the power to take. And then even more idiotically they put him against a face at wm. Fans just went 'what' this is stupid.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

TBH the only way ratings or interest in this dying product well change. Is a change in format by September. Or a compelling storyline. Wyatts v Authority could be compelling. But they would prob screw that up haha. Have Taker come out and bury Wyatt again. Wyatt v HHH at SS be cool. After HHH puts Rollins over.


----------



## Sincere

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



bullshitter said:


> The issue as with every wwe story line is....it wasn't compelling. They ruined the Shane story the first week with the nonsensical reasoning behind him needing to fight to gain control of something he already had the power to take. And then even more idiotically they put him against a face at wm. Fans just went 'what' this is stupid.


And then he lost, and ended up back on Raw running the show anyway, communicating to viewers that their build ups, their matches, their stipulations, their stories--even the most high profile ones--none of it has any bearing on anything if they decide behind the scenes that they don't want it to. IMO, this problem can't be overstated, as it permeates the WWE and the sad excuses for the current product, in general.

The message to viewers is--don't bother trying to make sense of anything, don't bother getting invested in anything one way or another, don't bother caring about the stories or matches, because at the end of the day, we can't be bothered to care about any of that. We will write and book some nonsensical shit, then retcon it and disregard it like it never happened, and push whoever and whatever we want to push, and expect you to swallow it all.

So it isn't at all surprising to see viewers check out.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Oh, I agree. And I'm by no means blaming Shane. It's not on any of the performers all that much. Or, it's at least on Creative and Vince much more than anyone else. But even still, people could've been curious in week 2 of the storyline, and apparently they were not. It's concerning.
> 
> Also, I think that one other poster has a point. Simple and concise; wrestling just isn't as popular as it once was. They've thrown EVERY one and EVERY type at us. Indy darlings, WWE made guys, big guys, small guys, medium sized guys. In ring guys, promo guys, etc and nothing has worked.


This shit needs a time machine. GO back to 2005 when it was last good. Or go to 2062 Vince Mcmahon is world champ ha.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The two-hour Raw replay last Friday on Syfy averaged 467k with no promotion: http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...cable-originals-network-finals-5-20-2016.html


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Is that half of Raws Audience? :lol


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If they are legitimately thinking of taking 40% of the roster and moving it to Smackdown exclusively, and filling that time with Baron Corbin and Apollo Crews matches, it will be RIP come the fall.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well seeing its a draft. Who knows who well be on SD. So no guareentee's it well be crews and corbin. Who ain't that bad.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*
Most-Watched WWE Network Shows For Week Ending May 12th: WWE NXT, Edge And Christian, The Kliq, More
*
1. WWE NXT
2. The Edge and Christian Show
3. Table For 3 with The Kliq
4. WWE Payback
5. NXT from the week before
6. WrestleMania 32
7. Camp WWE
8. The E&C Show from the week before
9. Beyond The Ring on The Kliq
10. NXT "Takeover: Dallas"
11. Table For 3 with Pat Patterson, Hillbilly Jim, Ricky Steamboat
12. Making of Camp WWE
13. RAW from a month earlier
14. NXT from two weeks earlier
15. Royal Rumble 2016
16. WrestleMania 31
17. Table For 3 with Horsemen
18. WWE Ride Along with Roman Reigns, Dean Ambrose, Paige and Alicia Fox
19. Warrior's Greatest Matches
20. A video of The Rock

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...twork-shows-for-week-ending-may-12th-wwe-nxt/


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Nail on the head right here. The permanent damage of Wrestlemania 32 lies in WWE's complete and utter disregard for storyline progression and conclusion, it lies in burning its bridges with good natured fans who don't expect the world but are continuously let down. There's only so many times you can insult a persons intelligence before they check out. This year people have been checking out in droves and they won't come back until WWE earns their trust back. And that's going to take a lot longer than a string of passable shows. They are completely fucked post Summerslam this year, so completely and utterly fucked that I feel sorry for whoever is champion. That poor person just might be held responsible as the one who finally sunk the ship below 3 million viewers permanently.
> 
> EDIT - Cena will do nothing. Nobody can. Diminishing returns have long set in on the part timers too; Lesnar, Taker, HHH, even The Rock...none of them move the needle in their appearances any more. The last true difference maker was Daniel Bryan and even he lost his shine towards the end. WWE finally got what it wanted, the brand is the biggest draw. But the big problem with that is when the brand is fucking shit, it's the only draw they have and everything suffers.


Starbucks finally took a step into 2009 and beyond. 

Pre 2009 wasn't anything to write home about either but at least wwe tried to masked their true agendas and evil doings. But now? They don't even try. Its WWE - "lol fuck you" all the way to the bank while talents continue to get under paid. 

Whoever is running things will stay ambiguous and things will continue to spiral because no one needs to take responsibility.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/23 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – which segments were the most-watched following Extreme Rules?*

The quarter-hour ratings for Monday’s post-Extreme Rules Raw episode indicate strong interest for the immediate PPV fall-out, dips at the end of each hour, solid increases at the top of the each hour (including the over-run), and very noticeable viewer fatigue in the third hour.

It’s the typical Raw TV pattern, especially for a post-PPV episode where the audience tunes in at the start of the show (now conditioned for the earlier 8:00 p.m. EST start) to see how WWE follows up on the previous night’s PPV.

Because of that early tune-in, there was a significant late tune-out.

On a Raw not following a PPV, WWE tries to hit the sweet spot of catching the most viewers in the middle of the show when there is cross-over between the early and late arrivers before the “party dissipates.”

On a post-PPV Raw, the sweet spot is the opening segment wrapping up the previous PPV and setting the stage for the next PPV. As a result, the third hour really suffers.

March 23 Raw – Top Segments

(1) Opening Segment – Seth Rollins, then Roman Reigns.

(2) Third Quarter-Hour – Conclusion of Sami Zayn vs. Sheamus and New Day cake spot.

(3) Charlotte & Ric Flair in-ring segment at top of the third hour representing the “natural conclusion of the show.”

(4) Enzo Amore’s return with Big Cass in the middle of the second hour.

– Although not in the Top 5 in terms of viewership, the A.J. Styles vs. Kevin Owens main event produced a decent over-run bump after third hour viewership fatigue.

***

PWTorch received a quarter-hour and minute-by-minute break down in the bellwether males 18-49 demographic…

March 23 Raw – M18-49 Break Down

OVERALL SHOW: 1.47 average rating / 925,000 average viewers (nearly identical to over-run)

– Q1: 1.68 rating / 1.059 million viewers

This was the peak audience of the show for Seth Rollins’s big return promo, confrontation with Roman Reigns, and MITB main event announcement. This was the only segment to average more than 1.0 million viewers.
– Q2: 1.52 rating / 955,000 viewers (-9.8% from previous)

There were two commercial breaks dragging down the follow-up audience.
The peak audience of the entire show was 1.199 million viewers at 8:15 p.m. spilling into Q2 for the conclusion to the opening segment.
– Q3: 1.54 rating / 970,000 viewers (+1.6%)

There was a peak for the conclusion of Sami Zayn vs. Sheamus, then a similar peak for New Day’s cake spot after a commercial.
– Q4: 1.42 rating / 896,467 viewers (-7.6%)

There were two commercial breaks dragging down the follow-up audience.
The actual content of New Day vs. Social Outcasts held up well following the pre-match cake bit.
FIRST HOUR: 1.54 average rating / 970,117 average viewers

– Q5: 1.50 rating / 945,000 viewers (+5.4%, but below First Hour average)

IC champion The Miz vs. Cesaro held up well, but did not have a significant top-of-the-hour bump.
– Q6: 1.50 rating / 942,000 viewers (essentially even)

Chris Jericho vs. Apollo Crews in a MITB qualifying match held steady.
– Q7: 1.49 rating / 939,000 viewers (essentially even)

Enzo Amore’s return with Big Cass held steady.
– Q8: 1.45 rating / 920,214 (-2.0%)

There were two commercial breaks dragging down the audience.
The audience held up, though, due to a strong two minutes before the first commercial and interest in the follow-up Big Cass vs. Dudley match.
SECOND HOUR: 1.48 average rating / 936,554 average viewers (-3.5% from First Hour)

– Q9: 1.53 rating / 965,000 viewers (+4.9%)

This was the “natural main event segment” for Charlotte and Ric Flair’s in-ring verbal exchange.
Included were five consecutive minutes drawing more than 1.0 million viewers until a commercial break. It points to Charlotte’s promo (and Flair’s tears) holding the audience’s attention.
– Q10: 1.38 rating / 867,000 viewers (-10.2%)

And the exodus started. Affected this week was the Dean Ambrose vs. Dolph Ziggler face vs. face MITB qualifying match.
No minute of the segment reached 1.0 million viewers; the peak audience was 982,000 viewers at 10:19 p.m. for the first-half of the match.
– Q11: 1.34 rating / 847,000 viewers (-2.3%)

The third hour exodus continued. The peak was 959,000 viewers at 10:44 p.m. for the conclusion of A.J. Styles ending his relationship with The Club.
– Q12: 1.27 rating / 797,000 viewers (-5.9% from previous, -17.4% from Q9)

The third hour exodus was complete with two commercial breaks and the first-half of the A.J. Styles vs. Kevin Owens main event.
THIRD HOUR: 1.47 average rating / 869,000 average viewers (-10.4% from first hour, -7.2% from Second Hour)

– Q13 Over-Run: 1.47 rating / 928,667 viewers (+16.5% from Q12)

The over-run jumped back to nearly an exact match to the overall show average.
The main event of A.J. Styles vs. Kevin Owens attempted to bring the show back to a decent conclusion after the third hour decline.
11:00 p.m.: 916,000 viewers
11:01 p.m.: 905,000 viewers
11:02 p.m.: 937,000 viewers
11:03 p.m.: 933,000 viewers
11:04 p.m.: 955,000 viewers
11:05 p.m.: 924,000 viewers
11:06 p.m.: 933,000 viewers
11:07 p.m.: 952,000 viewers
11:08 p.m.: 903,000 viewers going off-air

OVERALL SHOW: 1.47 average rating / 925,000 average viewers (nearly identical to over-run)










http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...ngs-segments-watched-following-extreme-rules/


----------



## BryansBeard

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *
> Most-Watched WWE Network Shows For Week Ending May 12th: WWE NXT, Edge And Christian, The Kliq, More
> *
> 1. WWE NXT
> 2. The Edge and Christian Show
> 3. Table For 3 with The Kliq
> 4. WWE Payback
> 5. NXT from the week before
> 6. WrestleMania 32
> 7. Camp WWE
> 8. The E&C Show from the week before
> 9. Beyond The Ring on The Kliq
> 10. NXT "Takeover: Dallas"
> 11. Table For 3 with Pat Patterson, Hillbilly Jim, Ricky Steamboat
> 12. Making of Camp WWE
> 13. RAW from a month earlier
> 14. NXT from two weeks earlier
> 15. Royal Rumble 2016
> 16. WrestleMania 31
> 17. Table For 3 with Horsemen
> 18. WWE Ride Along with Roman Reigns, Dean Ambrose, Paige and Alicia Fox
> 19. Warrior's Greatest Matches
> 20. A video of The Rock


Wait, you are telling me NXT and three retired stars talking outdrew their PPV?

:ha


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/26 Smackdown Twitter TV Ratings – lack of buzz captures decision to change Smackdown*

On a competitive Thursday night of television, WWE Smackdown’s lack of buzz for a show featuring two advertised title matches captures one reason why WWE and USA Network are making a change this summer.

WWE Smackdown Social Media Tracking

May 26: Smackdown drew the fifth-most social media activity among the five big TV events Thursday night, according to Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings.

In the series & specials category, Smackdown ranked #3 behind ESPN’s dramatic National Spelling Bee and NBC’s “Red Nose Day” special.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Smackdown also would have ranked #3 behind Thunder-Warriors NBA Playoffs and a Game 7 NHL Playoffs between the Penguins and Lightning.

The result is Smackdown placing fifth overall.

– Smackdown’s metrics were 41,000 tweets and 12,000 unique authors.

The number of unique authors was the same as last week, while Twitter volume slightly improved from 35,000 last week.

The magic number for Smackdown, though, is 42,000 tweets. Through eight episodes following WrestleMania, Smackdown has fallen below the magic number five out of eight weeks.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...lack-buzz-captures-decision-change-smackdown/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Great to see Rollins do the best QH of the night.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*John Cena’s “American Grit” – Week 7 falls to season-low overnight viewership*

Week 7 of John Cena’s “American Grit” series fell to the lowest overnight viewership thus far.

American Grit Viewership Tracking

May 26: Overnight viewership for the “American Grit” show hosted by John Cena fell 8.5 percent from last week’s episode.

Week 7 drew 1.82 million viewers in the overnight ratings reported by TVBytheNumbers.com. This number will likely decline based on the pattern the previous six weeks.

Last week’s overnight viewership was 1.99 million before falling to 1.88 million actual viewers.

The concern this week is Grit’s lead-in, “Bones,” had a decent bump in overnight viewership. Yet, that did not translate to Grit.

Because of the bump, Bones nearly ranked #2 in the 8:00 p.m. timeslot, but settled for a strong third place behind CBS and ABC.

Grit then fell to fourth place behind CBS, NBC’s “Red Nose Day” special, and ABC’s two-hour special.

Fox did rank #3 on Thursday night for the first time during Grit’s run, though that was mainly due to Bones’s bump. The nightly ranking was CBS, ABC, Fox, NBC, and CW.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...week-7-falls-season-low-overnight-viewership/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Good to know that Cena has a career to fall back on because American Grit is an unqualified flop.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE SmackDown Viewership With Seth Rollins' Return And A MITB Qualifying Match?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Last night's WWE SmackDown, with Seth Rollins' return to the blue brand, drew 2.112 million viewers. This is down from last week's show, which drew 2.295 million viewers.

SmackDown was #6 for the night in viewership, behind the NBA Playoffs, Inside The NBA, the NHL Playoffs, The Kelly File and The O'Reilly Factor.

SmackDown was #5 for the night in the 18-49 demographic, behind two NBA airings, Inside The NBA and the NHL Playoffs.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...wn-viewership-with-seth-rollins-return-and-a/


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

With ratings like that, I can see why they're making Smackdown live and having half the roster exclusive on it.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SPECIAL REPORT – WWE exec George Barrios reveals big shifts to WWE’s business model, what they’ve learned from WWE Network, biggest mistake?, being called “idiots” in Network Year 1, desired domestic/int’l splits, future investments, more interesting nuggets*

WWE financial executive George Barrios gave a detailed presentation on WWE’s current and future business at the Needham Emerging Technology Conference last Thursday, May 19 in New York City.

The interesting aspect of the conference is Barrios revealed more about WWE’s business than a typical quarterly conference with investors & analysts who regularly track WWE’s business.

The Needham conference was aimed at a room of people with zero to full knowledge of WWE’s business model, prompting Barrios to explain more than usual in order to bring everyone up to speed. As part of explaining more about the business, Barrios revealed several interesting items, detailed below…

Three Pillars of WWE Content

In 2015, WWE measured about 4.0 billion hours of consumption worldwide.

2.4 billion hours – Raw & SD viewing outside of the U.S.
1.0 billion hours – Raw & Smackdown on U.S. TV
400 million hours – YouTube & Facebook
250 million hours – WWE Network

*(1) YouTube* – entry level. Barrios said what is very interesting is WWE had 650 million hours of social & digital consumption in 2015. Five years ago, they had under 20 million hours of consumption.

Back in 2010, WWE was trying to track down their content uploaded illegally to YouTube. It was more about preventing others from profiting from WWE’s content, not actually profiting from their own content. Now, YouTube is a significant part of monetizing content.

Barrios noted that several years ago, 5-6 percent of revenue came from digital media. In 2015, it was 30 percent, mainly due to WWE Network, but he said other digital avenues are growing.

But, as Needham host Laura Martin asked, why should investors care about YouTube views if it translates to only about $10 million in revenue?

Layer 1 – Barrios stressed WWE’s buzzword of “engagement.” He said WWE’s ability to drive the consumption is “hugely important” to them. Barrios said it leaks into all other businesses – more engagement leads to more action figures, viewers, t-shirt sales, etc.

Layer 2 – Barrios said WWE is looking to reach the next generation. Barrios said they built the previous generation of wrestling fans with multi-family viewing in front of the TV. He said that will still happen going forward, but they want to bring in the next generation of fans on new platforms.

Layer 3 – Barrios said money follows the eyeballs. The NFL putting games on social media is a huge marker in content delivery. Barrios said the old money slowly starts to go where the new money is.

Barrios relayed a New York Times article that equated it to the “old money” TV executives sitting in one room with a ton of cash coming in, while also looking at “new money” sitting in another room. He said there is a long, dark hallway that connects to where the new money is located. “When behavior changes, there is a tipping point,” Barrios said. So, WWE wants to be where the new money is when the tipping point happens.

*(2) Core Programming*. Barrios referenced WWE’s recently negotiating their Top 7 TV agreements in the U.S., U.K., India, and other countries.

Barrios said the renewal cycle yielded an increase of $45 million in TV Rights Revenue in 2015 and they are set to receive another $60 million in the next few years.

Within the core programming, Barrios described their monthly PPV events as the Playoffs and WrestleMania as their Super Bowl, with the PPVs being the “Playoffs” building to the Super Bowl.

*(3) Long-Form Content*. The WWE Network is the third pillar built on “long-tail content.” This essentially means turning their tape library into WWE Network offerings, plus offering new long-form content, reality series, and animated series trying to keep fans engaged year-round.

Barrios said WWE Network ranks #5 in the over-the-top services behind Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and MLB TV. Barrios said the Network is behind HBO, Sling, and CBS.

Barrios also said the Network is the second-biggest and second-most profitable business segment in WWE.

*Future Investments*

Barrios said 25 percent of WWE’s revenue comes from outside the U.S., However, 80 percent of their social engagement is outside of the U.S. So, how will they turn engagement into revenue?

Barrios said the Network’s increased presence internationally will drive revenue going forward. Plus, WWE plans to make their chief investments overseas in China, India, and Latin America.

The other aspect is behaviors from country to country. Barrios said they have to convert their business to be more digital and direct-to-consumer in key markets. Plus, use a ton of data at their disposal from WWE Network to drive growth.

*WWE Network Education*

– Barrios said when WWE first launched the Network, they had one data point to determine and measure subscriber behavior, churn, etc.

Now, WWE is running a “sophisticated attribution model” to determine where Network subscriptions come from and why people unsubscribe, come back, etc.

Barrios said social and digital channels are a “huge part” of acquiring Network subscriptions, pointing back to why WWE is focused on social media because they believe it leaks into all other areas of their business.

Barrios said social media is driving their business. “There is no hope involved. It’s happening,” he said, noting many companies are just hopeful there is a net-gain from social media emphasis, whereas Barrios said they are seeing it actually play out. “It shows up in the traditional revenue metrics,” he said.

– After starting with one Network subscriber model, they now have about 25 different models to forecast behavior and analyze the data they are collecting.

Barrios said one year from now, he hopes they have 50 data models.

Within the data models, Barrios said they have about 12 customer segments dividing up their audience. By comparison, Barrios said Netflix has about 72,000 customer segments to try to analyze behavior of groups of subscribers.

Barrios said it’s no longer about demographics or sampling to determine behavior of their fanbase; he said they can cross-reference people from different ages, genders, locations, types of video watched, how much content watched, and other small categories to find larger behavior.

“The power of data is to divide up the audience,” he said. “It’s super-powerful in how to market the Network itself. We’re a long way off from 72,000, but a lot more than 1 – the predictive model had one prediction for that one customer base. Now we have 25 different models to forecast behavior.”

Barrios described their data points and customer segments as part of the “Holy Grail” using social media to create WWE 2.0.

“All these social platforms have different data structures. How do we link Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and ticketing data together? How do we do that? That is super-powerful to us,” Barrios said, adding that data will redefine how they look at behavior of WWE fans to determine where they need to be in the future.

*WWE Network Mistakes*

Barrios was asked by Laura Martin what WWE’s biggest mistake was with the Network. Barrios did one of those job interview answers to “what’s your biggest weakness?” by saying they should have launched the Network sooner. She said that doesn’t count.

Barrios thought about it, then said starting with the subscription model of $59.99 locked in for six months.

“If we went back in time, I’d go back to the $9.99/cancel anytime model and have a free month,” Barrios said. Barrios said every other subscription service has the free month entry. He said there are no reasonable arguments to not have a free trial month, even giving away WrestleMania for free to new subscribers.

Barrios did not address the over-arching issue of whether a free month to watch premium content devalues the content itself, driving down value over time.

Barrios also did address WWE’s terrible marketing out of the gate on how to access the Network. WWE infamously ran confusing commercials trying to market the 20+ devices customers could access the Network outside of the fanbase’s traditional cable/satellite TV consumption. The confusing sign-up process and first-day crashing led to slow subscription out of the gate, which WWE eventually recovered from.

Barrios did acknowledge that people were calling WWE idiots during Year 1 for how they launched the Network and what their business model was. But, he was encouraged by the New York Times article about having to travel a long, dark hallway to get to the other room where “new money” was located.

“You have to have the courage and conviction to get through it. You learn how to fight through it. As a public company, you’re exposed. People are saying, ‘It’s a dumb idea. You’re idiots for doing this.’ It was a calculated risk and a lot of work led up to the lunch.”

Barrios added that WWE’s willingness to prepare was a big aspect of getting the Network through Year 1. Now they are applying this learning to finding “the next big thing – whatever it is.”

Along the way, Barrios revealed that WWE learned they did not have to go at this alone. He said WWE’s mindset has always been a pioneer and doing everything themselves, but Barrios said they learned how to “depend on others” to push through.
*
WWE Network Future*

– Barrios addressed the Churn factor, which they are trying to learn about through their data points to address customer behavior.

Barrios said they’re also having to change their mindset. He said WWE’s mindset is like the retail business where you’re trying to get people to “buy, buy, buy,” since that’s what they’re used to from the PPV model of selling a PPV once per month, or selling a house show ticket.

Barrios said it’s a new ground game of “retaining and continually wooing” the fanbase to stick around. He said they have to do “a lot of little things right” to retain customers, which they are learning about through the growing data points.

Barrios said there will always be churn because of the nature of their “season” building to the WrestleMania Super Bowl, but they want it lower than it currently is. He stressed that the key to WWE’s business right now is keeping the churn down.

– Barrios said WWE decided to push forward with the Network plans after seeing PPV business being flat for about 10 years (after the peak of the Attitude Era). He said they sat down and had to decide what was the best way to monetize their growing library archive and monetize new content.

Barrios said all three items – PPV, tape library, and non-PPV new content – were in three separate parts of the business. So, WWE decided to bring them all together to form the Network.

Barrios said WWE looked at the idea of about 1.0 million homes around the world buying 2-3 PPVs per year. He said at $9.99 per month, with no PPV middleman, there was more money to be had with a year-round Network subscription from the 1.0 million homes than what WWE would receive from the 2-3 PPV buys.

“At $9.99, with all of this content, the value proposition was so immense,” Barrios said. Barrios added that the core idea is a “lower price point with more content will penetrate the huge fanbase.”

– Barrios said WWE’s surveys show that 100 million worldwide homes have someone in the house who has an affinity for WWE. If they could get 3-4 percent of those people to be year-round Network subscribers, that’s where the 3-4 million subscriber base is generated on the long arc of time.

Barrios said WWE does not have a timeline in mind for reaching the 3-4 million subscriber base. WWE also does not know what the Network will look like at maturity in terms of domestic versus international splits.

At the end of the First Quarter, the split was about 75 percent domestic and 25 percent international. Barrios said they consider the window to be 25-30 percent international at maturity, which points to WWE also expecting domestic to rise with international.

Barrios pointed back to 80 percent of their digital/social audience being international, so they would like to get to a point of 2.5 million domestic and 1.0 million international subs, which is a split of 71/29.

It sounds like a long ways off from the Q1-2016 finishing point of 1.03 million domestic and 330,000 international subs.

Part of that will be having to address stagnant domestic subscriptions. Asked about domestic subs being flat over the past year since WrestleMania 31, Barrios said it’s the cyclical nature of the “WWE season” mixed with old behaviors from WWE fans. Barrios said people drop off, then come back, and he hopes that with each passing “WrestleMania Season,” there will be incremental increases, like two steps forward after one step back.

“The special events bring people in,” Barrios said. “We have to woo people to stay.” He said he saw similar peaking when he worked for HBO under their model. “Not as big as WrestleMania, which is our Super Bowl,” but it was there. Barrios said he was one of the only WWE employees who had subscription-like experience before coming to WWE. Now, everyone seems like a seasoned veteran two years into the Network and with all of the data available to them to learn from.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/27/barrios-conference-call/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BryansBeard said:


> Wait, you are telling me NXT and three retired stars talking outdrew their PPV?
> 
> :ha


Yikes. Not hard to see why they're going to do the brand split. If nothing else, it will breathe some much needed life into the product, at least in the short term. If they book it right (big 'if', I know) it could be something that will benefit all of the wrestlers from top to bottom and will obviously be something that all of us fans (hardcores and casuals, 'smarks' and 'non-smarks') will all enjoy. I'm looking forward to it tbh, but I almost wish that I won't allow myself to get excited, because I know there's such a decent chance that it all goes to hell in a hand-basket at some point.

Also, Smackdown is such a dead show right now. I can see why they want to attempt to breathe some life into it. We all shit on Raw ratings and the quality of Raw every week, and rightfully so. But as bad as Raw is, Smackdown is even worse and much more 'dead' than Raw ever was. It's a cunt-hair away from being completely and utterly irrelevant. Going live with it every week is a step in the right direction. Only thing is I think it's not the best idea to air Raw and SD in back to back nights from a viewing perspective. Even if both shows are actually good, it's not necessarily going to be easy to get fans to sit in front of the TV for 5 hours in back to back nights. Should've kept it on Thursday nights, but live.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Let's face it, NXT is the Attitude Era. And Raw and Smackdown is Thunder. The fact that NXT and Three old stars talking drew more then their currrent product. IT shows you how neglectful they have been in changing things. No wonder a Brand Split is coming. They need to do something desperate.


----------



## B316

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The live broadcast of Payback was May 1st, that network list is for the week ending May 12th.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/26 Smackdown TV Ratings – Smackdown takes a big hit on Thursday night*

This week’s WWE Smackdown continued to slump in the soon-to-be-departing Thursday night timeslot on USA Network. The overall rating was down, but the key demographics were pitiful…

WWE Smackdown Ratings Tracking

May 26: Smackdown after Extreme Rules scored a 1.57 TV rating, down from a 1.62 rating last week leading into Extreme Rules.

Smackdown faced tough TV competition, including a hotly-contested NBA Western Conference Playoffs series, NHL Playoffs Game 7, and one-off ESPN Spelling Bee special.

As a result of competition or general disinterest, Smackdown nosedived in each key demographic, reaching year-lows across the board.

Adults 18-49 fell 16 percent from last week
A18-49 was down 23 percent from the Q1 avg.
Males 18-34 fell 15 percent from last week
M18-34 was down 39 percent from the Q1 avg.
Males 18-49 fell 20 percent from last week
M18-49 was down 32 percent from the Q1 avg.

– Smackdown drew 2.112 million viewers, down eight percent (about 183,000 viewers) from last week.

It was nearly the fewest viewers of the year. Smackdown on April 28 drew 2.109 million viewers to retain the low-point.

Caldwell’s Analysis: Smackdown was in need of a shake-up long before this week’s announcement of Smackdown moving to live Tuesday night broadcasts in July. This week’s numbers definitely capture that point.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...tings-smackdown-takes-big-hit-thursday-night/


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings Killer Rollins strikes again, Maggle.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> Ratings Killer Rollins strikes again, Maggle.


Lol lord not this again. Is that why when Rollins was champ last year he had stronger ratings then Reigns as champ? How can you possibly justify that Rollins is the resaon for the ratings going down. When they are the same they were before Rollins return? Do you have that much of an anti biast towards Seth. Your ignoring all of that? Honestly.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Lol lord not this again. Is that why when Rollins was champ last year he had stronger ratings then Reigns as champ? How can you possibly justify that Rollins is the resaon for the ratings going down. When they are the same they were before Rollins return? Do you have that much of an anti biast towards Seth. Your ignoring all of that? Honestly.


Because it was a joke and Rollins fans are incredibly easy to provoke. If you'd paid attention , I have stated that no one person is to blame for the downward spiral.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If only Raw could get their 2015 ratings back somehow.

:mj2


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw rating is going to be smacked silly this week by Game 7.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Raw rating is going to be smacked silly this week by Game 7.


 Game 1 of Stanley Cup on too.

Cena's return is going to draw some horrible numbers :lol

Any idea what's on July 4th? Meltzer tweeted Raw would draw it's lowest rating on that day.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BryansBeard said:


> Wait, you are telling me NXT and three retired stars talking outdrew their PPV?
> 
> :ha


 Think that's Payback replays.... 

How many people would actually go back and rewatch a show you've already seen live a few weeks later?


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

You know I know they say WWE has no direct competition. But they kinda do from other shows on the same cabel. So maybe Vince should realize that, and improove their product to compete with other shows.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Whatcha gonna do RAW ratings when Game 7 and :chefcurry run wild on you? :hogan


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Memorial Day, start of the Stanley Cup Finals and game 7 of the NBA WCF's this upcoming Monday. R.I.P. next week's Raw rating.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Game 1 of Stanley Cup on too.
> 
> Cena's return is going to draw some horrible numbers :lol
> 
> Any idea what's on July 4th? Meltzer tweeted Raw would draw it's lowest rating on that day.


July 4th is Independence Day. That rating will be horrendously bad.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Shit I forgot Cena was coming back Monday. That might be the only thing that keeps the Raw rating from entering WOAT territory.


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Let's move SmackDown from Friday to Thursday, that'll help boost the ratings! Nope. 

Let's move SmackDown from SyFy to USA, that'll surely help ratings! Nope.

See the trend here? :kobelol


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_Jiz said:


> Starbucks finally took a step into 2009 and beyond.
> 
> Pre 2009 wasn't anything to write home about either but at least wwe tried to masked their true agendas and evil doings. But now? They don't even try. Its WWE - "lol fuck you" all the way to the bank while talents continue to get under paid.
> 
> Whoever is running things will stay ambiguous and things will continue to spiral because no one needs to take responsibility.


No idea what you mean by this lol.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Raw Youtube Rankings For 5/23: Seth Rollins, Enzo, Charlotte, AJ Styles, Kevin Owens' Big Numbers*

Last week's Raw Youtube numbers saw a giant dip, as have the WWE's ratings in recent years. Perhaps not coincidentally, the WWE announced that Smackdown would be going live in July. This week, however, saw quite a rebound in the company's Youtube numbers.

Seth Rollins, Enzo Amore, AJ Styles/Kevin Owens, and Charlotte all delivered big. Seth Rollins nearly got to three million views for his first appearance on Raw since the Slammy Awards in December. His segment with Stephanie McMahon terminating their business relationship also gained over one million. It's worth noting his Smackdown numbers only were in fourth place.

Enzo Amore's return ranked number two, with over 1.3 million views. Big Cass' match with Bubba Ray didn't do so hot, ranking at number 12 of 15. AJ Styles vs. Kevin Owens, as well as Charlotte kicking her father out of the WWE also earned over one million.

Three Money in the Bank qualifier matches finished in the bottom half, along with several non-wrestling segments.

The New Days's numbers for their match was the median of the show, coming in at 642,012 views. However, their antics in celebrating Raw's 1200th episode were the lowest on the entire program.

You can see the full rankings for the 5/23 show below, as of 4:55 PM EST.

1. Seth Rollins returns (2,969,615)

2. Enzo Amore returns from injury (1,337,788)

3. AJ Styles vs. Kevin Owens (1,228,746)

4. Stephanie McMahon ends her business relationship with Seth Rollins (1,033,105)

5. Charlotte kicks her father to the curb (1,019,478)

6. The Club breaks up (922,857)

7. John Cena return vignette (744,640)

8. New Day vs. Social Outcasts (642,012)

9. Chris Jericho vs. Apollo Crews (618,674)

10. Sami Zayn vs. Sheamus (573,472)

11. Cesaro vs. Miz (572,548)

12. Big Cass vs. Bubba Ray Dudley (439,762)

13. Sheamus attacks Apollo Crews (363,477)

14. Dolph Ziggler challenges Baron Corbin (275,180)

15. New Day celebrate Raw's 1200th (266,047)

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0529/612207/raw-youtube-rankings-for-523-seth-rollins/



*Raw Youtube Rankings For 5/16: Main Event Angle Way Down, Contract Signing Performs Well, Ambrose*
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...e-rankings-for-516-main-event-angle-way-down/


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Tempest said:


> Let's move SmackDown from Friday to Thursday, that'll help boost the ratings! Nope.
> 
> Let's move SmackDown from SyFy to USA, that'll surely help ratings! Nope.
> 
> See the trend here? :kobelol


Well at least they won't have 2 shows getting their asses kicked by the NFL in the Fall. There's that I suppose. :draper2

Unless the NFL started doing Tuesday night games too.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm not a Youtube guy, but fucking hell, Rollins' return getting *3* million views?

:wtf2

I mean, 1 million is considered great. 3 million is fucking outrageous, though. In less than a week, too.

It's just too bad the ratings are dead.

:heyman6


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People actually like Seth, well clearly the masses do. Smarks on this site maybe don't. But face facts Seth can draw clearly. Just when it comes to the ratings, you can't say oh Rollins plummets the ratings, or Reigns. It is just short sighted. Seeing the Ratings fluctate depending on alot of things. Their competition, like the NBA maybe on, the Stanley cup. I mean when Seth was the champ last year ratings were stronger. That doesen't mean he is better. It's just the numbers imo, fluctate.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I'm not a Youtube guy, but fucking hell, Rollins' return getting *3* million views?
> 
> :wtf2
> 
> I mean, 1 million is considered great. 3 million is fucking outrageous, though. In less than a week, too.


Seth is bigger than Khali in India. :Cocky


----------



## RKing85

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

that NBA game is going to wreck havoc on the RAW ratings tomorrow, especially if it's a close game.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hopefully The Thunder win. My boy Steven Adams into the NBA Finals.


I was thining in terms of the ratings. Is Raw back in 1996. When Diesel and HBK were the top guys. Like Seth and Reigns are. You could argue seeing HBK was drawing just above Diesel. That Seth is HBK of now, and Roman is Diesel haha. OF course this was before Austin really blew up and then Rock. But I don't know if WWE are going to get that luckey this time around. Spoiler they don't.


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> No idea what you mean by this lol.


Really wrestlemania 32 was the final nail? 

Pushing Reigns 2 years straight prior was a red flag. I think half way into Cena's decade long super run was another red flag. 

Any reasonable long time fan could see WWE heading into the gutters when fucking hornswoggle was relevant. 

These days the "wait and see" marks and "this will be the year" marks are from fans who have watched at most 2 years of wwe.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Seth is bigger than Khali in India. :Cocky


:reigns2 is the only one that can come close to The Great Khali.











I hope Raw get WOAT ratings everything was shite except for Ziggler kicking Corbin in the balls and Cena/AJ.


----------



## JBLoser

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Warriors-Thunder got an 11.2 (!!!)



> *TurnerSportsPR* ‏@TurnerSportsPR
> TNT’s Warriors/Thunder Game 7 averaged an 11.2 HH MM rating, cable’s highest rated NBA game telecast of all time based on overnights


https://twitter.com/TurnerSportsPR/status/737660501635792896

Pray for RAW.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

RAW is about to get fucked in the ass tonight. That was a GREAT game. The drama, the game, the story, everything. You know...what WWE used to be able to create. Add that to it being Memorial Day and RAW may possibly get a 2.0 or heaven forbid a lower rating than that.

WWE better hope the Cena return paid off.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Stanley Cup Finals will probably cause a dent too, given that it was a close game and on NBC instead of NBCSN.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2016 has been just as bad as 1995, even in terms of quality of product. I'm happy as fuck Seth isn't champion for this shit. Yikes.


----------



## JBLoser

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Stanley Cup Finals will probably cause a dent too, given that it was a close game and on NBC instead of NBCSN.


Game 1 of the SCF got a 2.7/2.8 overnight, the lowest since 2012. 

So if _THAT'S_ the case, I can only imagine what RAW is gonna get.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/30 Raw Twitter Ratings – Raw jumps to most social activity since WM32*

Whether it was John Cena’s big Raw TV return, A.J. Styles’s big heel turn on Cena, some questionable segments, or a combination of other factors, Monday’s Memorial Day edition of Raw produced the most social media activity since WrestleMania.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

May 30: Raw returned to the #1 spot among series & specials in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings, topping “The Bachelerotte” and “Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta.”

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw ranked #3 . Game 7 of the NBA Playoffs’s Western Conference Finals drew a huge audience and Game 1 of the NHL Stanley Cup Finals narrowly edged out Raw.

– Raw produced 198,000 tweets, up 29 percent from last week. It was the highest Twitter volume since the post-WrestleMania Raw episode.

The total number of unique authors was 43,000, up 34 percent from last week. It was also the most since post-WM32 Raw.

– Raw’s metrics of 198,000 tweets and 43,000 uniques was nearly the exact average of the First Quarter – 194,769 avg. tweets and 43,692 avg. uniques per show from January to March.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/31/530-raw-twitter-ratings-raw-jumps-social-activity-since-wm32/


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *5/30 Raw Twitter Ratings – Raw jumps to most social activity since WM32*
> 
> Whether it was John Cena’s big Raw TV return, A.J. Styles’s big heel turn on Cena, some questionable segments, or a combination of other factors, Monday’s Memorial Day edition of Raw produced the most social media activity since WrestleMania.
> 
> WWE Raw Social Media Tracking
> 
> May 30: Raw returned to the #1 spot among series & specials in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings, topping “The Bachelerotte” and “Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta.”
> 
> If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw ranked #3 . Game 7 of the NBA Playoffs’s Western Conference Finals drew a huge audience and Game 1 of the NHL Stanley Cup Finals narrowly edged out Raw.
> 
> – Raw produced 198,000 tweets, up 29 percent from last week. It was the highest Twitter volume since the post-WrestleMania Raw episode.
> 
> The total number of unique authors was 43,000, up 34 percent from last week. It was also the most since post-WM32 Raw.
> 
> – Raw’s metrics of 198,000 tweets and 43,000 uniques was nearly the exact average of the First Quarter – 194,769 avg. tweets and 43,692 avg. uniques per show from January to March.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/31/530-raw-twitter-ratings-raw-jumps-social-activity-since-wm32/


I'd like to know how they did with the ratings in the first hour with the crap opening segment. 

Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I'm not a Youtube guy, but fucking hell, Rollins' return getting *3* million views?


Damn, those Indian fans who still think this shit is real will watch anything related to Reigns or anyone feuding with him. But we already know they make next to no money from them.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Damn, those Indian fans who still think this shit is real will watch anything related to Reigns or anyone feuding with him. But we already know they make next to no money from them.


:lol

Yeah, it don't mean much. Was just surprised to see the number. They have to find a way to monetize that shit, even Meltzer said so.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> :lol
> 
> Yeah, it don't mean much. Was just surprised to see the number. They have to find a way to monetize that shit, even Meltzer said so.


The reason they haven't been able to is because all of their YT money comes in the form of ad revenue, and ad rates for pro wrestling have always been incredibly low (due to pro wrestling fans, on average, earning low income.) 

The only way they'll be able to considerably increase their YT revenue would be to have some sort of contractual agreement to air exclusive content on YT.


----------



## Algernon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Thunder/Warriors did an 11.2 rating. Highest rated cable TV NBA game of all time. I can't think of a good reason why WWE couldnt have helf Cena's return and AJ's heel turn off for a week for a bigger audience. Still would have had another RAW and 2 Smackdown's to build the match.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Damn, those Indian fans who still think this shit is real will watch anything related to Reigns or anyone feuding with him. But we already know they make next to no money from them.


Lol my elder relatives son who are just 8 years old(so obviously dont know what kayfabe is) think Seth Rollins is a damn coward. WWEs plan is working, they are ruining everyone just for Reigns. If they wanted to make Rollins look like a real champ then they should have booked him properly


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> Lol my elder relatives son who are just 8 years old(so obviously dont know what kayfabe is) think Seth Rollins is a damn coward. WWEs plan is working, they are ruining everyone just for Reigns. If they wanted to make Rollins look like a real champ then they should have booked him properly


They've made people far better than Rollins look like shit just to protect Reigns. It's been happening for a couple of years now. It's nothing new. They clearly give zero fucks, which is very baffling and short sighted.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> They've made people far better than Rollins look like shit just to protect Reigns. It's been happening for a couple of years now. It's nothing new. They clearly give zero fucks, which is very baffling and short sighted.


I always wondered why would WWE not suffer financially? Its only because Vince has fans that agree to his horrible booking and storylines aka fans who still think that Charlotte does not actually like her dad for real.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> I always wondered why would WWE not suffer financially? Its only because Vince has fans that agree to his horrible booking and storylines aka fans who still think that Charlotte does not actually like her dad for real.


They have such a stranglehold on the wrestling industry that they won't start to feel the effects immediately. If they continue to piss of their consumers for an extended period of time, those effects will be felt. The steep decline in interest in their product should definitely be cause for concern.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings for RAW won't be in until tomorrow.  *Monday May 30 nationals rescheduled to Wednesday June 1 at 1 pm (normally Tuesday afternoon.)* courtesy of ShowBuzzDaily


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> They have such a stranglehold on the wrestling industry that they won't start to feel the effects immediately. If they continue to piss of their consumers for an extended period of time, those effects will be felt. The decline in interest in their product should definitely be cause for concern.



Its funny that Vince made the company what it is today not too long ago and now he is killing his own company. As long Vince, Kevin Dunn and his crappy soap opera creative team are running this joint the probability of change happening is as high as Cesaro winning the WHC. I have always said that either Shane and Hunter should run the company as they listen to the fans. Steph should stay in the damn kitchen because she makes herself look strong at every damn opportunity as seen in this RAW.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> Its funny that Vince made the company what it is today not too long ago and now he is killing his own company. As long Vince, Kevin Dunn and his crappy soap opera creative team are running this joint the probability of change happening is as high as Cesaro winning the WHC. I have always said that either Shane and Hunter should run the company as they listen to the fans. Steph should stay in the damn kitchen because she makes herself look strong at every damn opportunity as seen in this RAW.


If you listen to the talent back in the Attitude Era, it's actually questionable how much Vince had to do with the success of the company during that period. If anything, it sounds as if they succeeded in spite of him. You hear many stories, including on Monday Night Wars, of guys taking matters into their own hands and doing anything they wanted to. Then Vince would chew them out backstage, and it wasn't until the ratings were released the next day that he would chill out. Vince himself stated that he never saw anything in Steve Austin that would make him a legitimate main eventer. It was until everyone in attendance started wearing Austin 3:16 shirts and he became by far the most over guy on the roster that he decided to run with him as "the guy."

The difference back then was that they had WCW breathing down their necks. So Vince was forced to listen to the fans - otherwise he would risk bankruptcy.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> If you listen to the talent back in the Attitude Era, it's actually questionable how much Vince had to do with the success of the company during that period. If anything, it sounds as if they succeeded in spite of him. You hear many stories, including on Monday Night Wars, of guys taking matters into their own hands and doing anything they wanted to. Then Vince would chew them out backstage, and it wasn't until the ratings were released the next day that he would chill out. Vince himself stated that he never saw anything in Steve Austin that would make him a legitimate main eventer. It was until everyone in attendance started wearing Austin 3:16 shirts and he became by far the most over guy on the roster that he decided to run with him as "the guy."
> 
> The difference back then was that they had WCW breathing down their necks. So Vince was forced to listen to the fans - otherwise he would risk bankruptcy.


I didn't even know that! I thought Vince's old age has got to the poor mans brain! I guess the talent today don't have balls to do this although I think they should because seriously even if he fires you, so what? WWE isn't only the company that pays a lot. Granted the indies don't pay you six figures but they pay enough to survive and plus you build credibility so that the old man is forced to bring you back because you are a draw(Luke Gallows, ladies and gentlemen). I remember recently watching an interview with Scott Steiner in it and he said that Piper and Savage would not let creative give them bad booking. 

I don't think we will ever have another Monday Night Wars because every wrestling company beneath WWE doesn't simply have the star power to compete with WWE because WWE has taken so many talents.


----------



## Mandrake

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheClub said:


> I don't think we will ever have another Monday Night Wars because every wrestling company beneath WWE doesn't simply have the star power to compete with WWE because WWE has taken so many talents.


TNA in 2010-12 had Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Sting, Kurt Angle, Jeff Hardy, Eric Bischoff, RVD, Mick Foley, Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, AJ Styles, Samoe Joe at a time Miz and R-Truth were maineventing ppvs even Wrestlemania.

Panda have far more money than Vince and TNA was on a national cable channel in 100 million homes.

There won't be another Monday Night War simply because you can't catch lightning in a bottle twice. Had the NWO angle never happened the Monday Night War would have been nothing but a damp squib.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/27 Raw Replay Viewership – Week 2 dips from first Raw Replay on Syfy*

– TV Viewership for the WWE Raw episode on Monday, May 23 replayed in two-hour form on Friday, May 27…

Raw TV Ratings Tracking

The second Raw replay on Syfy drew fewer viewers despite more notice about the existence of a Friday night replay.

The two-hour replay on May 27 drew 403,000 viewers, down 14 percent from 467,000 viewers for the unadvertised first replay on May 20.

Viewership was still up from a general movie that aired in the timeslot on Friday, May 13 that drew 361,000 viewers.

It appears the water level for the Raw replay is 400,000 viewers (about 12 percent of Raw’s first-run audience on Monday nights).

– DEMOGRAPHICS: The replay drew a median age viewer of 54.3 years-old, older than 49.2 last week.

Because of the older audience, adults 18-49 viewership fell 26 percent from last week’s replay.

Also, the first replay drew more female 18-49 than male 18-49 viewers. That was not the case for the second replay.

Female 18-49 viewership fell off 40 percent for the most-recent replay. It points to solid f18-49 viewership in the timeslot before Raw took over. Then, when f18-49 viewers checked in on May 20 to find a Raw replay, they did not return to Syfy on May 27.

As a result, the male/female split went from 48/52 on May 20 to 58/42 m18-49 on May 27.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/31/527-raw-replay-viewership-week-2-dips-first-raw-replay-syfy/


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Same old sh*t huh? Ratings are like a swing these days for RAW XD


----------



## amhlilhaus

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> TheClub said:
> 
> 
> 
> I always wondered why would WWE not suffer financially? Its only because Vince has fans that agree to his horrible booking and storylines aka fans who still think that Charlotte does not actually like her dad for real.
> 
> 
> 
> They have such a stranglehold on the wrestling industry that they won't start to feel the effects immediately. If they continue to piss of their consumers for an extended period of time, those effects will be felt. The steep decline in interest in their product should definitely be cause for concern.
Click to expand...

If wwe loses their last base, theyre fucked. Ratings plummet, then the big one in house show attendance

And the worst part, those fans wont come back for a long time


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Recent WWE Attendance*

- Below are recent WWE attendance figures:

* May 20th in Venice, FL for NXT drew 350 fans
* May 20th in Utica, NY drew 2,500 fans (Roman Reigns tour)
* May 21st in Winter Haven, FL drew a sellout of 350 fans
* May 21st in Albany, NY drew 6,000 fans (Reigns tour)
* May 21st in Reading, PA drew 2,900 fans (Dean Ambrose tour)
* May 22nd in Newark, NJ for Extreme Rules drew a sellout of 12,500 fans
* May 23rd in Baltimore for RAW drew around 7,000 fans

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0531/612258/possible-main-roster-plans-for-wwe-nxt-team/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

1PM tomorrow for the rating? What BS. For the first time in awhile, I won't be around for that. Have a meeting at work tomorrow that will last awhile, until right before I get out. Will be back later on at night, though. Damnit.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well I Read House Show numbers are down with Reigns. But you know it is what it is. Wonder what the numbers well be. For the last hour. 1.5? Well see.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.282M
H2-3.324M
H3-3.081M
3H-3.229M*


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The viewership went UP against the Basketball game??? Wtf lol, weird ratings.

I guess pretty good all things considered.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I guess people really wanted to see Cena as I was expecting a drop from the first hour due to it being one of the worst hours of raw ever.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

My ratings prediction was right. I thought RAW would do a 3.2 but that was due to social media spike. Not because of RAW's quality. 

I'm surprised all three hours were above 3 million. John Cena as a draw must have some juice left in him.


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

disappointed. That train-wreck of a show deserved much less.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.282M
> H2-3.324M
> H3-3.081M
> 3H-3.229M*


*
H2 Vs H1 (+1.28%/+0.042M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.31%/-0.243M)
H3 Vs H1 (-6.12%/-0.201M)
5/30/16 Vs 5/23/16 (-1.22%/-0.040M)
Note: John Cena returns full time after 7+ months and RAW faces off against the NBA Conference Finals.*


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> The viewership went UP against the Basketball game??? Wtf lol, weird ratings.
> 
> I guess pretty good all things considered.


Weren't one of teams down by a lot? Properly plastics who changed the channel.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How bad have things gotten for the WWE?

People are actually celebrating and saying how good the #s are this week....

The fact that the #s this week legitimately can be considered "good" is really BAD. Cena definitely has an effect, the low quality of the show, however, will probably have more of an effect on next week's Raw # more so than this weeks.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> How bad have things gotten for the WWE?
> 
> People are actually celebrating and saying how good the #s are this week....
> 
> The fact that the #s this week legitimately can be considered "good" is really BAD.


*In all honesty, this number could've been far, far worse.

These numbers aren't worth celebrating tbh, but it is surprising they managed to stay above 3 million for all three hours.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *In all honesty, this number could've been far, far worse.
> 
> These numbers aren't worth celebrating tbh, but it is surprising they managed to stay above 3 million for all three hours.*


I was honestly about to post the same. I expected a worse number, given the competition and the piss poor quality of RAW. But after seeing the Twitter rating yesterday, I began to think that they'd do their usual and not fall below 3 million.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *In all honesty, this number could've been far, far worse.
> 
> These numbers aren't worth celebrating tbh, but it is surprising they managed to stay above 3 million for all three hours.*


I agree given the current environment, but really think about what we are saying here, keeping viewership over 3 million is "good" for them, thats bad in the grand scheme of things, I don't care what else was on.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE RAW Viewership With John Cena's Return On Memorial Day And Stiff NBA Competition?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's Memorial Day episode of WWE RAW, with John Cena's return, drew 3.229 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.268 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.282 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.324 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.081 million viewers.

RAW was #3 on cable for the night in viewership, behind the NBA Playoffs and Inside The NBA, and #3 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the same programs.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ership-with-john-cena-return-on-memorial-day/


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:cena helping the 3rd hour stay barely above 3 million. What a hero.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Still, being down the week the biggest draw in the company returns is still pretty bad. Competition was stiff but a lot of that got weighted by a heavily promoted Cena return.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I would think people started coming in at the beginning of the show, continued watching waiting for the Cena return and more and more people came in, explaining the hour 2 growth, and after the Cena segment everyone tuned out explaining why hour 3 was down.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> :cena helping the 3rd hour stay barely above 3 million. What a hero.


Glad to see all those years of Cena burying other talents have finally paid off:vince$




The Inbred Goatman said:


> I would think people started coming in at the beginning of the show, continued watching waiting for the Cena return and more and more people came in, explaining the hour 2 growth, and after the Cena segment everyone tuned out explaining why hour 3 was down.


Hour 3 is always down, this is nothing new.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

John Cena = DA DRAW


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not even Cena is a TV draw anymore. Depressing.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last years Memorial Day Raw ratings, which also went against an NBA Playoff game head to head (A Warriors game, too, Warriors/Rockets Game 4)

Hour one: 3.79 million
Hour two: 3.58 million
Hour three: 3.42 million

And to think people thought last year was so bad..


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cena has basically been a mid carder for over a year now. Not sure why people are expecting him to still pop a huge rating from week to week.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Still, being down the week the biggest draw in the company returns is still pretty bad. Competition was stiff but a lot of that got weighted by a heavily promoted Cena return.


Yeah, despite the competition, a Cena return should've made the numbers rise a little bit at least. Good thing for the WWE is they don't have to deal with the NBA anymore as none of the Finals games will be played on a Monday. But of course, we're starting to get close to the NFL season.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Last years Memorial Day Raw ratings, which also went against an NBA Playoff game head to head (A Warriors game, too, Warriors/Rockets Game 4)
> 
> Hour one: 3.79 million
> Hour two: 3.58 million
> Hour three: 3.42 million
> 
> And to think people thought last year was so bad..


Interested to know what the viewership for the competition was last year. 

Yeah, the rating was pretty bad, but it'll be interesting to see how they do next week with no competition and with Cena back.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, despite the competition, a Cena return should've made the numbers rise a little bit at least. Good thing for the WWE is they don't have to deal with the NBA anymore as none of the Finals games will be played on a Monday. But of course, we're starting to get close to the NFL season.


Does Smackdown count? The first game of the finals is tomorrow night. 

Personally, I think the rating would've been worse without Cena, small bump or not. I tuned out after the first hour (well after Roman/Seth) and kept changing back to see the Cena segment. After that, I tuned out for good.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Does Smackdown count? The first game of the finals is tomorrow night.
> 
> Personally, I think the rating would've been worse without Cena, small bump or not. I tuned out after the first hour (well after Roman/Seth) and kept changing back to see the Cena segment. After that, I tuned out for good.


Yeah I guess it does. Wasn't even really thinking about Smackdown when I said that lol. Smackdown likely set to draw a lower number than it usually does, as this Cavs/Warriors finals rematch should do some monster numbers.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:no: biggest draw couldn't even get them above a 3.3, let alone anything near a 4

Biggest star in your company got a rating that's been achieved in the past months. There was competition, yes. But they put stock into Cena big time to do something big for the viewership. 

WWE has successfully ran off a nice chunk of their fans. A little above 3 million seems to be their norm now.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It could have been worse, so Cena's return stopped RAW from bleeding out. But Cena can't have a big return every week. Still I expect RAW to be up next week with no NBA competition.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And Game 5 of this NBA Finals is not this upcoming Monday, but the following Monday (6/13). If this series isn't a sweep, which is almost a guarantee that it won't be, the 6/13 Raw is FUCKED.



A-C-P said:


> How bad have things gotten for the WWE?
> 
> People are actually celebrating and saying how good the #s are this week....
> 
> The fact that the #s this week legitimately can be considered "good" is really BAD. Cena definitely has an effect, the low quality of the show, however, will probably have more of an effect on next week's Raw # more so than this weeks.


Yep. Meanwhile last year's Memorial Day Ratings were alot better, and some people were acting like WWE was going out of business or close to it. They were awful compared to years' past no doubt. But I never thought they'd get even worse. I thought they'd stay the same.

LOVE this year's turn of events as long as Vince is gonna Vince.


----------



## Mandrake

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Last years Memorial Day Raw ratings, which also went against an NBA Playoff game head to head (A Warriors game, too, Warriors/Rockets Game 4)
> 
> Hour one: 3.79 million
> Hour two: 3.58 million
> Hour three: 3.42 million
> 
> And to think people thought last year was so bad..


Who thought last year was bad?

2014 Memorial Day viewership did almost identical viewership to 2015 Memorial Day so why would last year be considered bad?

Did last years Memorial Day show have a NBA game 7 and Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Final on Network tv to compete with?


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

You have to wonder if the announcement of the brand split also bumped viewership in anyway, I know it was an online thing, but that spread pretty fast.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mandrake said:


> Who thought last year was bad?
> 
> 2014 Memorial Day viewership did almost identical viewership to 2015 Memorial Day so why would last year be considered bad?
> 
> Did last years Memorial Day show have a NBA game 7 and Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Final on Network tv to compete with?


Lots of people did. It had a Warriors/Rockets Game 4 of the WCF to compete with.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> And Game 5 of this NBA Finals is not this upcoming Monday, but the following Monday (6/13). If this series isn't a sweep, which is almost a guarantee that it won't be, the 6/13 Raw is FUCKED.


Yeah I missed that. NBA Finals games have usually always been played on Sundays-Tuesdays-Thursdays IIRC, so I just assumed it was the same without looking at the schedule. Yeah, barring a sweep, looks like Raw will have to deal with the NBA again after all. Good news for them lol.


----------



## Xenoblade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

nobody cares about cena anymore. Nobody cares he came out to cut a promo on memorial day.. Nobody..


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Apparently Raw scored a 2.19 rating this week. Wow...


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*5/30 WWE Raw TV Ratings – how did Memorial Day Raw fare?*

Monday’s holiday edition of WWE Raw was the lowest-rated of the year, falling below a 2.2. However, TV viewership help up reasonably well on a holiday against strong sports competition.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

May 30: Raw scored a 2.19 TV rating, down from a 2.29 rating last week.

It was the lowest rating of the year, but not the “historical low-point” that Monday’s show seemed destined for. Last year, the December 7 edition of Raw scored a 2.15 rating to set the low-mark for this era.

WWE holding off on John Cena’s return until Memorial Day likely kept them out of that territory, based on the demographic ratings…

Males 18-49 fell about one-tenth of a rating to a tie for year-low
Males 18-34 was down 12%, falling way off the table to a year-low
But, adults 18-49 (male and female viewers) was steady, drawing the same a18-49 rating as last week

– Raw held up reasonably well in TV Viewership.

Raw’s three hours averaged 3.229 million viewers, down one percent from last week’s post-PPV audience of 3.268 million viewers.

Also, all three hours drew more than three million viewers, including the third hour, which was likely helped by John Cena’s return and the A.J. Styles confrontation spilling into the third hour.

First Hour: 3.282 million viewers
Second Hour: 3.324 million viewers
Third Hour: 3.081 million viewers (down 7.3%)

It marks 11 straight weeks the third hour has declined from the second hour. However, staying above 3.0 million viewers against Game 7 of the Western Conference Finals and Game 1 of the NHL Stanley Cup Finals is a positive for WWE.

The Warriors-Thunder NBA Playoffs game on TNT drew 15.9 million viewers, a cable TV record for the NBA.










http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/01/530-wwe-raw-tv-rating-memorial-day-raw-fare/


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *5/30 WWE Raw TV Ratings – how did Memorial Day Raw fare?*
> 
> Monday’s holiday edition of WWE Raw was the lowest-rated of the year, falling below a 2.2. *However, TV viewership help up reasonably well on a holiday against strong sports competition.
> *
> WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking
> 
> May 30: Raw scored a 2.19 TV rating, down from a 2.29 rating last week.
> 
> It was the lowest rating of the year, but not the “historical low-point” that Monday’s show seemed destined for. Last year, the December 7 edition of Raw scored a 2.15 rating.
> 
> 
> First Hour: 3.282 million viewers
> Second Hour: 3.324 million viewers
> Third Hour: 3.081 million viewers (down 7.3%)
> 
> It marks 11 straight weeks the third hour has declined from the second hour. However, staying above 3.0 million viewers against Game 7 of the Western Conference Finals and Game 1 of the NHL Stanley Cup Finals is a *positive f*or WWE.


Only in PWTorch's universe can the 2nd worst rating of all time be spun as a positive.

:lmao


----------



## The_Jiz

Randy Lahey said:


> Only in PWTorch's universe can the 2nd worst rating of all time be spun as a positive.
> 
> :lmao


Have no love loss for the WWE but the ratings didn't drop off the face of the earth with a wcf game 7 and the stanley cup finals on memorial day which is what I had expected. 

Was fully expecting under 3 million for all three hours. 

But lowest of the year is good enough for me.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

HOLY FUCK :LOL

So not even John Cena can save these ratings from a freefall. Imagine if Cena didn't return and other factors (like the brand split announcement and Rollins's recent return) didn't come into play. For sure they were rocking under 2.0.

Can't wait for the apologists and sheep to spin this one.


----------



## skolpo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If there were no Cena, this past Monday's viewership was heading straight dead in the water. The competition was tough and Raw barely got its head above water.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lowest of the year is good enough? Wow. So medicority flows through to ratings, and the fans too. Omg not lower then last week, 0.1 up its still good its still good. Just a little dirty, its still good, its still good. Just a little air bourne, its still good, its still good :lol. Simpsons Reference. But hey if not the lowest of the year means Good to you, then whatever. To me its still very poor ratings.


----------



## SashaXFox

*Raw gets a 2.19 On the Cena return...Lol not even Cena draws.*

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0601/612286/wwe-raw-posts-lowest-rating-of-2016/

Lool im dead. .04 from the Sheamus 2.15 lol the hyped Cena for weeks what a shame. Now were getting a brand split with half this roster gone? Lol WWE is dieing for real you can tell fans are wising up.


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: Raw gets a 2.19 On the Cena return...Lol not even Cena draws.*

If it does die, it won't happen over night. It's gonna take awhile. If this brand split 2.0 doesn't boost ratings then I wouldn't be shocked if USA tells Vince to take a hike and he has to put all his content on the network. He may also have to raise the subscription fee as well to make up for it.


----------



## Achilles

*Re: Raw gets a 2.19 On the Cena return...Lol not even Cena draws.*

Here's the report from Wrestling Observer.



> John Cena wasn't quite the miracle worker, but his return was enough to keep the Memorial Day Raw viewership numbers above the all-time seasonal low -- even with the show going against the single most-watched NBA game in the history of cable television.
> 
> Raw did 3.22 million viewers, the second lowest non-football total other than a major holiday (which Memorial Day is not considered) where people don't watch television since 1997, beating only the 4/25 show that did 3.16 million viewers.
> 
> The surprise is that the third hour stayed above 3 million viewers.
> 
> Without the advertising of Cena, it was very unlikely the show would have beaten the 4/25 record low. His return was promoted for weeks and he did media like NBC's Today show that morning.
> 
> The seventh game of the Golden State Warriors vs. Oklahoma City Thunder Western Conference semifinal did 15,996,000 viewers. The opening game of the Stanley Cup playoffs with the San Jose Sharks losing to the Pittsburgh Penguins did 4,081,000 viewers.
> 
> Raw was third for the night on cable.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.28 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.32 million viewers
> 10 p.m 3.08 million viewers


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well if Raw can't get above a 2.0 with the brand split. Well I agree, won't be surprised if USA Go you know your not worth it f off :lol. So Vince chucks Raw on the Network. Seeing Streaming is the way of the future. And only ppvs exclusively on live tv. At the moment a 3 mill in audience is acceptable. But If Cena can only just bump them. Well what can they use as a draw Rock? You can't rely on Rock and his 30 million IG followers forever.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn what a sad rating. They had to go through crazy competition so I guess that rating was a "win" in a sort of way. Could've been worst with no advertisement of Cena. Still wondering what would happen if/when Reigns main events RAW. I want to see how his segments do in that case.


----------



## Mr. Socko

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I thought they'd do worse. In the face of some serious competition this week they didn't go down as much as I would've thought.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: Raw gets a 2.19 On the Cena return...Lol not even Cena draws.*



JDP2016 said:


> If it does die, it won't happen over night. It's gonna take awhile. If this brand split 2.0 doesn't boost ratings then I wouldn't be shocked if USA tells Vince to take a hike and he has to put all his content on the network. He may also have to raise the subscription fee as well to make up for it.


I don't think they tell Vince to take a hike. The WWE/USA relationship is pretty solid, though the brand split is telling that they're being effected by Smackdown's ratings at the very least.

If anything, they could be getting a lowered rights fee if the decline continues. They already got a rate lower than they wanted last time and, after years of under performing, it would take a crazy network exec to give them more or the same going forward.

We're still about 3 years off from that, though.


----------



## JTB33b

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cena being a ratings draw was always a myth. If anything they lost viewers when he became the face of the company. But everyone always blamed it on the PG era being why the ratings were declining. Cena is a merch draw but I wonder how many of kiddie fanbase watch Raw live on TV.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JTB33b said:


> Cena being a ratings draw was always a myth. If anything they lost viewers when he became the face of the company. But everyone always blamed it on the PG era being why the ratings were declining. Cena is a merch draw but I wonder how many of kiddie fanbase watch Raw live on TV.


Ratings actually went up significantly from 2004-2006 after years of falling, but after it was clear they were pushing Cena over Batista, they started going down again.

Not to say Cena isn't a draw, but the older fans wanted Batista.

As for these, I'm surprised they aren't lower. Without Cena it probably would have been really bad.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: Raw gets a 2.19 On the Cena return...Lol not even Cena draws.*



Mifune Jackson said:


> I don't think they tell Vince to take a hike. The WWE/USA relationship is pretty solid, though the brand split is telling that they're being effected by Smackdown's ratings at the very least.
> 
> If anything, they could be getting a lowered rights fee if the decline continues. They already got a rate lower than they wanted last time and, after years of under performing, it would take a crazy network exec to give them more or the same going forward.
> 
> We're still about 3 years off from that, though.


I'm not so sure about that.

I would be stunned if USA hadn't insisted on required low end numbers, as 5 years is one hell of a long time to be locked into a show that has failed if not. Now what those numbers are is a mystery but I doubt WWE in their worst nightmares would have seen a 2.1 in their futures. At this rate it won't take 3 years for USA to force a renegotiation.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah, I doubt USA is dropping WWE anytime soon, if at all. They seem to have a pretty strong relationship, considering they've taken in Smackdown, will be finally making it live in a few months, and have defended Raw's low ratings over the past year. Fact that they haven't gotten on Vince and co. about the poor ratings makes them part of the problem too imo. Shame they don't get on Vince either, with how big a pushover he is these days, no doubt telling him to get those ratings up quickly would cause him to change up shit QUICK.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, I doubt USA is dropping WWE anytime soon, if at all. They seem to have a pretty strong relationship, considering they've taken in Smackdown, will be finally making it live in a few months, and have defended Raw's low ratings over the past year. Fact that they haven't gotten on Vince and co. about the poor ratings makes them part of the problem too imo. Shame they don't get on Vince either, with how big a pushover he is these days, no doubt telling him to get those ratings up quickly would cause him to change up shit QUICK.


I'm not saying they will drop them. I can however see them forcing WWE to renegotiate the price if the numbers keep falling as I fail to see how USA won't have required bottom end numbers.
Let us remember that WWE didn't get what they wanted at the start of this deal so it's clear they were/are not in a position of any strength.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cena's 2:19 says: Just wait for July 4th bitch!:cena


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well I am not sure we can blame Cena. Point is the age of a draw is dead. Other then Rock. I don't think anyone can make all of a difference tbh. SO the question Ain't is Cena a draw. Do draws exist at all anymore? I don't think so. Ratings for Raw seem to fluctate anyway, it is hard to predict or determine. I mean they went up when Reigns won the title. Then suddenly went down again. When Seth was champion, they were stronger then they are now. But its unpredictable. WWE it self is their biggest draw, and that is shit atmm, so no surprises


----------



## tomjh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Who actually wants to watch RAW live on Memorial day anyway? Have you not got better things to do on such a special day for your country? There are memorial day specials on other channels or just spending time with family.

Maybe you do all that stuff during the day then watch tv all evening, I geninunely have no idea.


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, I doubt USA is dropping WWE anytime soon, if at all. They seem to have a pretty strong relationship, considering they've taken in Smackdown, will be finally making it live in a few months, and have defended Raw's low ratings over the past year. Fact that they haven't gotten on Vince and co. about the poor ratings makes them part of the problem too imo. Shame they don't get on Vince either, with how big a pushover he is these days, no doubt telling him to get those ratings up quickly would cause him to change up shit QUICK.


To be fair, USA is absolutely pissed that SD is doing pitiful numbers on Thursday. If SD is going live, it's because of them, while Vince came up with the brand split idea. So at the end of the day, this is just a panic move because of the recent ratings. I really doubt USA is happy about RAW either.

If live SD doesn't make decent numbers, they may as well drop the show altogether, no ifs or buts, if this doesn't help, nothing will, thus killing the show is the ultimate solution.


----------



## murder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Tempest said:


> if this doesn't help, nothing will


Oh there are several options other than going live. For example, a completely new concept, including 

a) less sripted promos, less micro managing in general
b) more edgy characters and storylines
c) different production to give the show a different look, much like NXT

Going live and changing nights won't do anything, if the entire show stays exactly the same, which is what will happen.


----------



## amhlilhaus

Just wait til nfl season


----------



## Frost99

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Ratings THEN vs. Ratings NOW*








#WWELogic #REGINS-ISNT-RATINGS #RAWisaBORE​


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Tempest said:


> To be fair, USA is absolutely pissed that SD is doing pitiful numbers on Thursday. If SD is going live, it's because of them, while Vince came up with the brand split idea. So at the end of the day, this is just a panic move because of the recent ratings. I really doubt USA is happy about RAW either.
> 
> If live SD doesn't make decent numbers, they may as well drop the show altogether, no ifs or buts, if this doesn't help, nothing will, thus killing the show is the ultimate solution.


Yeah, I think this brand split is a sign that they've already had that meeting to some degree (mostly about SD) and the brand split is their quick fix, which tells me that USA isn't aware of why they got rid of the last brand split, they're unaware that taped vs live doesn't make that huge of a difference, so I think Vince can lay out any sort of plan and have their faith.

Of course, if it doesn't work, like you said, they'll likely be losing two of those hours they're making money off of in rights fees down the road, or making significantly less for them. 

I'd like to believe that there is some sort of minimum rating they have to hit, but with such a rock solid history and track record in the ratings like WWE has, I could see them not worrying about that. It's still going to hit them hard if they don't improve things.


----------



## Overcomer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown going alive isn't really going to make all that much of a difference.

The current product is really poor- Monday Night's ratings are telling. I know the game was on and all that, but the number shouldn't of been that pathetic.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

From the latest Observer:

Per Meltzer:



> It is still largely secretive, if things have even been figured out past the top guys, regarding what will happen with WWE talent when they do the brand split in July.
> 
> The most likely reason that the move was made, was because the USA Network was not happy with the ratings of Smackdown. The hope was that Smackdown on USA would do close to the numbers of Raw, particularly when it opened strong at around 2.7 million viewers. The reality is that WWE was not using as much primary talent on Smackdown, nor were they doing the obvious, shooting angles for matches on Mondays that would lead to Thursday. For wrestling fans, Smackdown remained no more important, nor must.see, on USA as it had been in recent years on Syfy. What shocked everyone is that ratings had fallen below what they were a year ago, even with the move to a much stronger station. While ratings weren’t down from last year as much as Raw, the expectation was that a Thursday night prime time show on USA would do better.
> 
> Key to this is that, even though WWE will be adding expenses by going live, USA is not paying more for the increase in costs. It’s the first sign, while hidden from the public, that USA is concerned that the approximately $127 million they pay WWE this year for Raw and Smackdown is not delivering at the level they would like. Given that the key economic driver of the company is not the network but the television rights fees, in the long run, until economic conditions change greatly, ratings are still the most important barometer for the company, and they are consistently falling.


USA getting concerned. Not a surprise. Things are starting to get interesting between USA Network and WWE, and not in a good way. They are also acknowledging ratings for Raw are down from last year.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> From the latest Observer:
> 
> Per Meltzer:
> 
> 
> 
> USA getting concerned. Not a surprise. Things are starting to get interesting between USA Network and WWE, and not in a good way. They are also acknowledging ratings for Raw are down from last year.


Meltzer also said that the Male Audience was an all time low for that Raw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D23dLgYiqVY&feature=youtu.be&t=15m19s


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



amhlilhaus said:


> Just wait til nfl season


It's going to be rough on them this year. They bled constantly and never rebounded during mania season. The bleed will continue until they are forced to make a format change.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Meltzer also said that the Male Audience was an all time low for that Raw.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D23dLgYiqVY&feature=youtu.be&t=15m19s


Holy shit, House Show attendance is down TEN percent within 5 months?

I don't get how Dave can say so nonchalantly "but, you know, Cena should help".

Yeah, Right.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So Cena their last draw can't bump the ratings. USA are concerned, house show attendances are down ten percent. NXT is outdrawing their product. Bayley is probably a bigger draw at this point in time then Roman. But hey network subs continue to go up, WM buys were great, ppvs buys up. Ad Revenue going up. Vince is set . It's just a little dirty, its' still good, its still good. Just a little air bourne its still good, its still good. That Simpsons Gif though.. Maybe Vince should get 10 ppl off the street, and do a test. Column A we Got Roman, Column B we got Seth, and Column C we got a shit product.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's extremely alarming how much of their male audience is gone. Like I've said before, the only other time thay happened was the New Generation era which is notorious for being the near downfall of the company. 

I miss WCW. Hell, I even miss wCw.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Holy shit, House Show attendance is down TEN percent within 5 months?
> 
> I don't get how Dave can say so nonchalantly "but, you know, Cena should help".
> 
> Yeah, Right.


Is that true? House Shows are down 10% in 5 months? HOW MANY MORE SIGNS MUST THERE BE FOR THESE FUCKS TO STOP WITH REIGNS? Jesus fucking Christ. Terribly received Mania, booed out of the building by 100,000 strong, audio manipulation to mute boos, house shows down 10% with him at the helm, ratings falling into a bottomless pit? I mean good lord. Obviously not all of that is Reigns fault but he isn't even capable of stopping the bleeding never mind healing the wound. What pure and utter incompetence.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Is that true? House Shows are down 10% in 5 months? HOW MANY MORE SIGNS MUST THERE BE FOR THESE FUCKS TO STOP WITH REIGNS? Jesus fucking Christ. Terribly received Mania, booed out of the building by 100,000 strong, audio manipulation to mute boos, house shows down 10% with him at the helm, ratings falling into a bottomless pit? I mean good lord. Obviously not all of that is Reigns fault but he isn't even capable of stopping the bleeding never mind healing the wound. What pure and utter incompetence.


Some recent house show numbers with Reigns as the headliner.

5/20 Utica, NY (WWE - 2,500)

5/21 Albany, NY (WWE - 6,000)

5/27 Springfield, IL (WWE - 2,600)

5/28 Peoria, IL (WWE - 2,200)

5/29 Madison, WI (WWE - 2,300)

The Ambrose tours don't do any better, but Reigns is supposedly a far bigger star and you would think would draw more.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Some recent house show numbers with Reigns as the headliner.
> 
> 5/20 Utica, NY (WWE - 2,500)
> 
> 5/21 Albany, NY (WWE - 6,000)
> 
> 5/27 Springfield, IL (WWE - 2,600)
> 
> 5/28 Peoria, IL (WWE - 2,200)
> 
> 5/29 Madison, WI (WWE - 2,300)
> 
> The Ambrose tours don't do fare any better, but Reigns is supposedly a far bigger star and you would think would draw more.


Well to be fair to them I wouldn't exactly call those 'hot' towns. Like you said though, Ambrose hasn't been given half the backing of Reigns. It's not fair to expect him to produce better or even the same results. That's one of the biggest differences between Reigns and Cena. Cena was actually moving numbers at the start of his ascent and once fully established he and Batista together brought WWE to a mini little boost from 2005-2007. Reigns? He's completely and utterly disposable.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Look Reigns is not a draw, he has flopped I Think theirs proof now. But that is not Reigns fault. It is WWE and Vinces fault. They chucked a guy out theirs simply because he is pretty. And sure he can work a match. But point is it was sink or swim. As it turns out the ratings are drowning. I mean clearly if Reigns is the man for the next year, and the product suffers as a consequence They would be forced to stop the Reigns push. I mean Vince likes money, and if Reigns is not drawing at house shows, well you know. Their is no such thing as draws these days, no one even cares about pro wrestling anymore. But Reigns ain't even capable of at least gaining a little bit of levarage. Ratings are the be end and end all. They are the very reason shows get cancelled, or get renewed. IF you've got a guy out their, not his fault at all. And the ratings are dropping. Well I don't see that as Reigns fault, I just see it as bad bad timing.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Is that true? House Shows are down 10% in 5 months? HOW MANY MORE SIGNS MUST THERE BE FOR THESE FUCKS TO STOP WITH REIGNS? Jesus fucking Christ. Terribly received Mania, booed out of the building by 100,000 strong, audio manipulation to mute boos, house shows down 10% with him at the helm, ratings falling into a bottomless pit? I mean good lord. Obviously not all of that is Reigns fault but he isn't even capable of stopping the bleeding never mind healing the wound. What pure and utter incompetence.


I hate to defend The Big Dog but the ratings would hardly be through the roof no matter who the face of the company is due to the product being absolute shite though maybe if they put as much effort into trying to get Roman over then the product might be better but still.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hold on a minute...so what you're trying to tell me is...





...ratings ACTUALLY matter?! 0_o I need to sit down. This is too much to handle all at once.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

SD vs :chefcurry and







Let the ratings hit the floor.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Look Reigns is not a draw, he has flopped I Think theirs proof now. But that is not Reigns fault. It is WWE and Vinces fault. They chucked a guy out theirs simply because he is pretty. And sure he can work a match. But point is it was sink or swim. As it turns out the ratings are drowning. I mean clearly if Reigns is the man for the next year, and the product suffers as a consequence They would be forced to stop the Reigns push. I mean Vince likes money, and if Reigns is not drawing at house shows, well you know. Their is no such thing as draws these days, no one even cares about pro wrestling anymore. But Reigns ain't even capable of at least gaining a little bit of levarage. Ratings are the be end and end all. They are the very reason shows get cancelled, or get renewed. IF you've got a guy out their, not his fault at all. And the ratings are dropping. Well I don't see that as Reigns fault, I just see it as bad bad timing.


That Reigns is hated because he is pushed by Vince is a lie though. He is hated because he sucks at wrestling. He sucks at sports entertainment. And he is in a place he has no right to be.
And worse, he has bought shills like Flair sent out to back him.
He can work a match .... Yeah, if he can work with the Bryans and AJs of this world. When he works Someone like Sheamus, Big Show, Brock, or Haitch, the Match either has to be gimmicked up, or it sucks. Or both.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It is bad when Cena can't even help!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*“American Grit” Viewers Week 8 – John Cena’s Fox show gets a boost*

John Cena’s Fox series “American Grit” showed signs of life after four down weeks. Was it due to John Cena returning to WWE TV to raise his profile?

American Grit Viewership Tracking

May 2 (Week 8): After four consecutive weeks drawing fewer than 2.0 million viewers, this week’s episode rebounded 14 percent.

“American Grit” drew 2.08 million viewers in the overnight ratings reported by TVbytheNumbers.com.

Last week’s show drew a season-low 1.82 million overnight viewers.

Now the question is whether Grit’s actual viewership stays above the 2.0 million mark, as each week’s show has dipped in the final tally.

– Grit ranked #3 or #4 in its timeslot, depending on which metric being evaluated. Cena’s show drew a 0.7 a18-49 rating – the highest since Week 3 – to rank #3 ahead of NBC programming.

However, the show drew fewer viewers than NBC’s “Game of Silence.” Regardless, it’s the first time this season that Cena’s show has not ranked #4 in its timeslot.

As usual, Grit lost half of its lead-in, “Bones,” which drew 4.49 million viewers at 8:00 p.m. EST on Fox.

Cena’s show was also up against Game 1 of the NBA Finals, which drew a Game 1 ABC record of 15.58 million viewers.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/03/american-grit-viewers-week-8-john-cenas-fox-show-gets-boost/


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Holy shit, House Show attendance is down TEN percent within 5 months?
> 
> I don't get how Dave can say so nonchalantly "but, you know, Cena should help".
> 
> Yeah, Right.


Cena WILL help the house show attendance.


----------



## SonOfAnarchy91

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

SmackDown! going live won't solve much, especially if the rumors of it going 3 Hours are true. They can barely fill RAW up for 3 hours (hence the commercial fest it has become) if anything by making SmackDown! 3 hours they might aswell be writing their own death warrant.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*











*5/30 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings Report – Cena-Styles saves the show & third hour, Minute-by-Minute on key segment, surprises*

The quarter-hour ratings for Monday’s Memorial Day Raw confirm that John Cena’s return segment and A.J. Styles’s confrontation saved the show and the third hour from historical low points.

The top-of-the-third-hour with Cena’s return and A.J. Styles’s confrontation/heel turn was the top-drawing segment of the night, easily topping the rest of the show.

The rest of the third hour fell off the table, but the impact was lessened by Cena-Styles at the top of the hour.

In the key males 18-49 demographic that we track, Styles-Cena drew 1.056 million viewers. The only other segment to top the 1.0-million mark was the top of the second hour with 1.016 million m18-49 viewers for Roman Reigns calling out Seth Rollins.

The show started off slow, following the typical Raw viewership pattern. A post-PPV episode, like Extreme Rules last week, draws the most interest at the start of the show, then viewership slowly drops off over the course of three hours.

On a typical Raw without a PPV lead-in, interest peaks in the middle of the show, then falls off hard in the third hour.

That was especially the case this week to the point where over-run viewership actually declined from the Q12 quarter-hour, exacerbated by Game 7 of the NBA Western Conference Finals.

– The other interesting item was the Third Hour decline matching up.

Overall third hour viewership was 3.081 million, down 7.3 percent from 3.324 million in the second hour.

Males 18-49 viewership was 830,000 in the second hour, down 7.1 percent from 912,667 in the second hour.

March 30 Raw – Top Segments

(1) John Cena, then A.J. Styles (Q9 – top of the third hour).

(2) Roman Reigns-Seth Rollins WWE Title business (Q5 – top of the second hour).

And then some surprises…

(3) Tyler Breeze & Fandango vs. The Usos (Q4 – end of the first hour)

(4) Rusev vs. Zack Ryder and post-match with Titus O’Neil (Q6 – middle of the second hour)

The #2-4 rankings capture peak interest in the middle of the show before reaching ultimate peak in Q9 for the Cena-Styles segment.

***

PWTorch received a quarter-hour and minute-by-minute break down in the bellwether males 18-49 demographic…

March 30 Raw – M18-49 Break Down

OVERALL SHOW: 1.40 average rating / 870,000 average viewers

– Q1: 1.44 rating / 909,000 million viewers

The difference between a post-PPV and non-post-PPV Raw is captured by how Raw starts.
Last week post-Extreme Rules: 1.68 rating / 1.059 million viewers (#1 rank)
This week non-PPV: 1.44 rating / 909,000 viewers (#5 rank)

The segment’s content was debatably dreadful, but viewership climbed as the segment went on and maintained the peak. It appears viewers were enjoying the segment or waiting for something big to happen after a lot of talking…

8:10 p.m. – 981,000 viewers
8:11 p.m. – 1.022 million viewers
8:12 p.m. – 1.017 million viewers
*8:13 p.m. – 1.034 million viewers*
8:14 p.m. – 1.031 million viewers
8:15 p.m. – 1.023 million viewers (cross-over to Q2)
8:16 p.m. – 1.030 million viewers
8:17 p.m. – 1.020 million viewers (cut to break)

– Q2: 1.32 rating / 832,000 viewers (-8.5% from previous)

There were two commercial breaks dragging down the follow-up audience for the first-half of New Day vs. Vaudevillains.
The spill-over from Q1 kept the quarter-hour respectable.
– Q3: 1.43 rating / 900,000 viewers (+8.2%)

The segment had two solid peaks for The Club attacking New Day in the opening match vs. Vaudevillains, then after a break, another peak for Apollo Crews and Big Show backstage.
– Q4: 1.48 rating / 932,667 viewers (+3.6%)

There was only one commercial, as opposed to WWE typically putting two commercials in Q4, helping reverse the trend of Q4 typically falling from Q3.
The content of Tyler Breeze & Fandango vs. The Usos produced a decent peak.

*FIRST HOUR*: 1.42 average rating / 893,417 average viewers

– Q5: 1.61 rating / 1,016,000 viewers (+8.9%)

WWE World Hvt. champion Roman Reigns calling out Seth Rollins produced the #2-ranked segment of the show, following the pattern of peaks in Q5 and Q9.
The minute-by-minute break down:
8:59 p.m. – 1.043 million viewers
9:00 p.m. – 1.116 million viewers (cross-over to Q5)
9:01 p.m. – 1.156 million viewers
*9:02 p.m. – 1.163 million viewers*
9:03 p.m. – 1.154 million viewers
9:04 p.m. – 1.156 million viewers
9:05 p.m. – 1.142 million viewers
9:06 p.m. – 1.047 million viewers (cut to break)

– Q6: 1.46 rating / 919,000 viewers (-9.5%)

The follow-up segment took a blow, but had a three-minute peak in the middle of the quarter-hour for the end of Rusev vs. Zack Ryder and Titus O’Neil’s post-match involvement. Those three minutes helped the segment rank #4 on Raw, ahead of the opening segment.

– Q7: 1.41 rating / 891,000 viewers (-3.0%)

There were two commercial breaks dragging down the quarter-hour.
The actual content was Enzo & Big Cass calling out the Dudleys, leading to the first-half of their match. Their pre-match promo hit a nice three-minute peak in-between commercials.

– Q8: 1.31 rating / 825,467 viewers (-7.4%)

This marked three consecutive down quarters.

The audience did not come back for the second-half of the tag match at the same level as Q7.

*SECOND HOUR:* 1.45 average rating / 912,867 average viewers (+2.2% from First Hour)

– Q9: 1.68 rating / 1,056,000 viewers (+27.9%)

This was the money segment of the show with John Cena’s return promo and cues to the audience that someone was going to interrupt for a confrontation.
The segment then peaked for A.J. Styles’s interruption and set-up for his heel turn.

9:59 p.m. – 950,000 viewers
10:00 p.m. – 952,000 viewers (cross-over to Q9)
10:01 p.m. – 952,000 viewers
10:02 p.m. – 957,000 viewers (last time under 1.0 million in Q9)
10:03 p.m. – 1.013 million viewers
10:04 p.m. – 1.055 million viewers
10:05 p.m. – 1.064 million viewers
10:06 p.m. – 1.026 million viewers
10:07 p.m. – 1.052 million viewers
10:08 p.m. – 1.084 million viewers
10:09 p.m. – 1.102 million viewers
10:10 p.m. – 1.137 million viewers
*10:11 p.m. – 1.138 million viewers*
10:12 p.m. – 1.104 million viewers
10:13 p.m. – 1.102 million viewers
10:14 p.m. – 1.099 million viewers
10:15 p.m. – 998,000 viewers (cross-over to Q10; cut to break)

– Q10: 1.28 rating / 807,000 viewers (-23.6%)

And the weekly exodus started. After Raw reached its natural conclusion in Q9, the show fell hard for the rest of the hour.
There were two commercial breaks and a quick Natalya vs. Dana Brooke match.
– Q11: 1.13 rating / 709,000 viewers (-12.1%)

The third hour exodus continued. Again, there were two commercial breaks and a quick Dolph Ziggler vs. Baron Corbin “match.”
– Q12: 1.19 rating / 709,000 viewers (+5.5%)

The plane nosed up for the end of the third hour for the first-half of the main event six-man tag match hyping the Money in the Bank ladder match.

*THIRD HOUR:* 1.32 average rating / 830,000 average viewers (-7.1% from second hour)

Notably, the overall viewership fell 7.3 percent from the second to third hour and m18-49 fell 7.1 percent from the second to third hour, aided by Cena-Styles lessening the Q10-12 decline.

*– Q13 Over-Run:* 1.17 rating / 735,222 viewers (-1.7% from Q12)

This was a rarity for Raw for the over-run to dip from Q12. It appears the combination of the NBA Playoffs game and nothing on the line in the throw-’em-together main event did not draw people in for the over-run.
The main event did not produce much movement…
10:59 p.m. – 747,000 viewers
11:00 p.m. – 747,000 viewers (cross-over to over-run)
11:01 p.m. – 729,000 viewers
11:02 p.m. – 757,000 viewers
11:03 p.m.- 787,000 viewers
11:04 p.m. – 821,000 viewers
*11:05 p.m. – 899,000 viewers*
11:06 p.m. – 882,000 viewers
11:07 p.m. – 552,000 viewers going off the air

OVERALL SHOW: 1.40 average rating / 870,000 average viewers

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...ird-hour-minute-minute-key-segment-surprises/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(6/2) Vs last week(5/26) 

2.169M Vs 2.112M 
(+0.057M/+2.7%)

Note: Aftermath of AJ Styles's heel turn on RAW.*


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'd hardly call the Cena/AJ segment a 'money' segment. 

*Cena/AJ in Q9: 1.68 rating / 1,056,000 viewers (+27.9%)
*
*Reigns/Rollins in Q5: 1.61 rating / 1,016,000 viewers (+8.9%)
*
The Cena/AJ segment obviously did its job in stopping the bleeding in the third hour but given the minuscule difference between the two, I don't think it's unfair to argue that were the segments switched around the result would have been the same.

Those demo numbers though... :lol. Atrocious. I'm almost sure that the Bryan/HHH segments heading into Mania 30 ON THEIR OWN were outdrawing entire hours of recent Raw shows lol.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/2 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – Did the NBA Finals affect Thursday’s show?*

This week’s WWE Smackdown held up against Game 1 of the NBA Finals, but remained in the doldrums overall.

WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

June 2: WWE Smackdown scored a 1.59 rating Thursday night on USA Network, up slightly from a 1.57 rating last week.

To put the number in perspective, Smackdown averaged a 1.77 rating in the first quarter and has averaged a 1.64 rating thus far in the second quarter.

– Smackdown drew 2.169 million viewers, up 2.7 percent (about 57,000 viewers) from last week.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Smackdown rebounded from last week’s dreadful numbers in the key demos.

Adults 18-49 increased one-tenth of a rating, males 18-34 increased more than one-tenth, and males 18-49 increased two-tenths. M18-49 rebounded to a six-week high.

*Caldwell’s Analysis*: It’s interesting to see the effect of a major one-time sporting event opposite WWE programming. It can hurt in that regular viewers tune out of Raw or Smackdown. Or, it can help in that more people are in front of their TVs, making more people available to flip over to Raw or Smackdown. In this case, it appears this week’s Smackdown was minimally affected by the NBA Finals. Although, the current TV ratings level is still poor, necessitating the brand split reset this summer.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/03/62-wwe-smackdown-tv-ratings-nba-finals-affect-thursdays-show/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



dougfisher_05 said:


> Cena WILL help the house show attendance.


Hooray for those 200 kids and mirgins.


----------



## LilOlMe

The quarter hour breakdowns only look at a specific demograhic, one that makes up less than a third of the audience as well.

Has it always been that way? I thought in the past there used to be breakdowns for total viewership.

Would be a better picture.


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Hooray for those 200 kids and mirgins.


More like 2000-3000, but whatevs. There are plenty of articles showcasing Cena tours outdrawing non Cena tours all the time. Vince LOVES good ol Johnny boy on the road because, despite the fact that half the crowd still boos him, people still show up in droves to see him. 

I've argued in the past that Cena has been a failure in terms of being the next major start coming after the attitude era in terms of ratings. But there is no denying that the WWE has remained a strong live event ticket due to families showing up to watch Cena do his thing.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings for Raw anyway, ceased to exist post 2002. I mean no direct compeition. Ratings are always going to be so so. I jsut think USA may be concerned. Based on the drop from last year. They are loosing money, fair enough. I think the biggest concern is the drop in house show attendances. All Reigns numbers, Cena may help that though. 1.6 is just a typical demo. They well never get the heights of a 5.0 Rock and Foley generated in 1999, still the highest rated raw segment of all time to this day. The climate has changed too. If they can get over 2.0, that would be an acheivement. But only when the product it self improoves.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Ratings for Raw anyway, ceased to exist post 2002. I mean no direct compeition. Ratings are always going to be so so. I jsut think USA may be concerned. Based on the drop from last year. They are loosing money, fair enough. I think the biggest concern is the drop in house show attendances. All Reigns numbers, Cena may help that though. 1.6 is just a typical demo. They well never get the heights of a 5.0 Rock and Foley generated in 1999, still the highest rated raw segment of all time to this day. The climate has changed too. If they can get over 2.0, that would be an acheivement. But only when the product it self improoves.


Think the concern is that they're setting record lows almost every week. Feels like I've read that "lowest rating on a non-holiday episode" or whatever almost every week for the past year now lol.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

On an off topic side note, looking at your sig, what happened to those feet tickling sigs? So much depressing stuff here lately, it could use something to put smiles on faces.

The only positive news this forum produces lately are Tuesday ratings.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Apparently Ratings don't matter anyway. I mean diddn't Vince say He is not concerned about them? So their you go. I suspose that is the purpose of the brand split, to create more buzz. And ratings to go up, so well see what happens post July.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Apparently Ratings don't matter anyway. I mean diddn't Vince say He is not concerned about them? So their you go. I suspose that is the purpose of the brand split, to create more buzz. And ratings to go up, so well see what happens post July.


Vince also said Orton VS Batista was the biggest Wrestlemania Main Event of all time.
Vince also said he is sorry for firing Punk on his wedding day.
Vince also said he is not wrestling.

The man lives in his own world, and nothing, _nothing_, he says can ever be taken at face value.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Vince also said Orton VS Batista was the biggest Wrestlemania Main Event of all time.
> Vince also said he is sorry for firing Punk on his wedding day.
> Vince also said he is not wrestling.
> 
> The man lives in his own world, and nothing, _nothing_, he says can ever be taken at face value.


ORton Batista was pretty big, but biggest of all time? Nah that was Hogan Andre

To be fair Punk walked out on them and put him the lerch, his contract expired on his wedding day. And its not like he was employed anyway, so whats the difference. In any case Vince runs the company, and he thinks that ratings are not a big deal. Maybe they are now that USA are concerned haha.


----------



## fulcizombie

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Rating are the bread and butter of the wwe . The worse they are , the bigger the danger the wwe is in . Dark times are coming, or are already here, for the company .


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I agree Ratings are the be end and end all. Even with ratings in all tv declining by about 13% this year alone since 2015. With of course this day in age of in demand streaming. The tv pie slice is getting smaller and smaller. More people are watching their tv online. Most advertisers look to target the 18-35 demo. How many shows have been cancelled this year alone due to poor ratings? Ratings are shit everywhere. Other then probably The Walking Dead and The Big Bang Theory. But when it comes to WWE while they are financially doing well elsewhere. PPV Buys, Revenue e.tc. What is more important is the ratings. The more they drop, the more they are in danger of maybe having to find somewhere else to put Raw. As USA are just loosing too much money. It's like a blood clot, Roman ain't the clot, Cena is not the clot, theirs no one stopping the blood flow. Well see what happens, with the brand split. WWE won't ever go out of buisness, but Raw and SD are in danger, if the brand split does not help. Well see what happens post July.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Oh look, a ratings breakdown which shows Reigns being at the top of the most watched segments, but Youtube is an anomaly :eyeroll. I guess this statistic is the only one that matters .*



Starbuck said:


> Well to be fair to them I wouldn't exactly call those 'hot' towns. Like you said though, Ambrose hasn't been given half the backing of Reigns. It's not fair to expect him to produce better or even the same results. That's one of the biggest differences between Reigns and Cena. Cena was actually moving numbers at the start of his ascent and once fully established he and Batista together brought WWE to a mini little boost from 2005-2007. Reigns? He's completely and utterly disposable.


*Oh please. Ambrose was given a high profile feud with Lesnar. He was given MULTIPLE main events throughout the year. It's HIS fault they all flopped. WWE doesn't book his terrible offense, stupid faces, awkward character, and boring matches. He can't even make people give a fuck about a main event with Owens. I find it funny how you're so quick to shift the blame from Ambrose and his obvious flaws, but put most of the ratings drops on Reigns, despite Seth's return not even putting a dent in the spillage. What's the excuse for that? If you don't make Reigns THE GUY, then who? Who is this magical mega draw that will single handedly revive the Attitude Era if WWE stops holding them back? At least Reigns actually moves merch. No suggested alternative can even beat him in that, let alone spike the ratings. Outside of Cena, only The New Day is at his level.*


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Oh please. Ambrose was given a high profile feud with Lesnar. He was given MULTIPLE main events throughout the year. It's HIS fault they all flopped. WWE doesn't book his terrible offense, stupid faces, awkward character, and boring matches. He can't even make people give a fuck about a main event with Owens. I find it funny how you're so quick to shift the blame from Ambrose and his obvious flaws, but put most of the ratings drops on Reigns, despite Seth's return not even putting a dent in the spillage. What's the excuse for that?  If you don't make Reigns THE GUY, then who? Who is this magical mega draw that will single handedly revive the Attitude Era if WWE stops holding them back? At least Reigns actually moves merch. No suggested alternative can even beat him in that, let alone spike the ratings. Outside of Cena, only The New Day is at his level.*


Calm down. Why the hostility? I don't even think you know what you're trying to argue here tbh, jumping from Ambrose to Reigns and Rollins. You're all over the place. 

You really want to bring up the Lesnar feud? Ok then. Why don't you compare Ambrose's match with Lesnar against Reigns match with Lesnar. If Reigns was booked the way Ambrose was...oh wait, that would never happen because Reigns is receiving premier top guy booking. When you receive said booking and are promoted above every other person on the show, it's kind of expected that you move the needle or at the very least stop the bleeding yet Reigns has fuck all to show for it. Again, it's not entirely his fault and I'm a lot more forgiving than most when it comes to Roman, but he could be so easily switched out of his spot and it wouldn't make a difference. That's the problem. A disposable 'top guy' is not a top guy. 

At least Reigns actually moves merch? :lmao Are you kidding me lol? He can't even surpass Cena in merch sales for a week which is something plenty of other guys have shown they can do during their peaks (Hardy, DX, Punk, Orton). He can't even outsell the fucking New Day. Why on earth you think that's some sort of redeeming point about him is beyond me. HE'S THE 3RD BEST AT SOMETHING YAY!!!! Lol. 

There is no magical mega draw. WWE as a brand is the draw. Roman Reigns is the face of that brand and has been positioned above every other person on the show. They have moved mountains to get him in this spot and absolutely nothing has changed. In fact, it's only gotten worse. How about you take those blinkers off and look at the facts here instead of acting like a butthurt fucking mark, eh?


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Calm down. Why the hostility? I don't even think you know what you're trying to argue here tbh, jumping from Ambrose to Reigns and Rollins. You're all over the place.


*
I'm arguing that you have no point whatsoever because NO ONE put in Roman's position can do any better.*



> You really want to bring up the Lesnar feud? Ok then. Why don't you compare Ambrose's match with Lesnar against Reigns match with Lesnar. If Reigns was booked the way Ambrose was...


*Look at this deflection :lmao. You still fail to accept that it's Ambrose's own fault he's mediocre. They don't book his terrible offense or character. Stop blaming booking when it's a clear personal error.*



> Again, it's not entirely his fault and I'm a lot more forgiving than most when it comes to Roman, but he could be so easily switched out of his spot and it wouldn't make a difference. That's the problem. A disposable 'top guy' is not a top guy.


*Do you not realize your entire post is a contradiction? "Reigns should be replaced even though no one else would make a difference." :what? *



> At least Reigns actually moves merch? :lmao Are you kidding me lol? He can't even surpass Cena in merch sales for a week which is something plenty of other guys have shown they can do during their peaks (Hardy, DX, Punk, Orton). He can't even outsell the fucking New Day. Why on earth you think that's some sort of redeeming point about him is beyond me. HE'S THE 3RD BEST AT SOMETHING THEY HAVE!!!! Lol.


*We don't even know if Roman outsold Cena for a week because merch sales were only reported on a monthly and yearly basis. "Can't even outsell the New Day." Neither can any of the guys you're mentioning as alternatives. They outsold EVERYONE at Wrestlemania. You have no point.*



> There is no magical mega draw. WWE as a brand is the draw. Roman Reigns is the face of that brand and has been positioned above every other person on the show. They have moved mountains to get him in this spot and absolutely nothing has changed. In fact, it's only gotten worse. How about you take those blinkers off and look at the facts here instead of acting like a butthurt fucking mark, eh?


*And guess what? Not a damn thing will change if they replace him with ANYONE else on the roster. They have worse numbers than him in merch AND views, yet you're so convinced that he's easily replaceable, and then start using his booking as an excuse. If Roman is so replaceable and rejected, then his booking shouldn't matter. Those guys should easily be able to replace him, his merch sales, and his views since he's so interchangeable. Also LOL @ calling anyone a butthurt mark when all you do is sit here and whine about Roman killing the company. Talk about irony.*


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> You really want to bring up the Lesnar feud? Ok then. Why don't you compare Ambrose's match with Lesnar against Reigns match with Lesnar. If Reigns was booked the way Ambrose was...oh wait, that would never happen because Reigns is receiving premier top guy booking. When you receive said booking and are promoted above every other person on the show, it's kind of expected that you move the needle or at the very least stop the bleeding yet Reigns has fuck all to show for it. Again, it's not entirely his fault and I'm a lot more forgiving than most when it comes to Roman, but he could be so easily switched out of his spot and it wouldn't make a difference. That's the problem. A disposable 'top guy' is not a top guy.


Spot on.
This is like comparing oranges and apples, you cant compare some one like Ambrose to Roman Reigns, they have a completely different booking, its not an even level playing fields.

This reminds me a lot about WOR discussion here with Meltzer:





The discussion about it start at 13:00 or so but the relevant part is at 20:00.
In this discussion he is talking about CM Punk and Daniel Bryan but its exactly the same story. Punk and Bryan got over with the fans but they never really capitalized on it and changed their booking, and then when WWE have them headline shows and they don't sell like Cena the WWE goes: see? they cant draw. Well no duh they cant draw with this shitty ass booking.

You cant have a guy like Ambrose and expect him to be a mega draw when you book him to be a goof and lose all the time.
Same thing with Rollins, how can he be a mega draw when he is booked to lose all the time and run away cowardly all the time?

You cant really tell if any of these guys will ever draw like Roman because they will never be put in the same position like him, not really, they will never be booked to be as dominant, as protected or be put in the hottest feuds like Roman so how can you expect them to ever out draw him?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Good to see we're at the place where we can admit ALL of these guys are not TV draws (at least with how they are all being booked). It's a fact now. Ratings were terrible last year, but I never thought they would get even lower...and they did.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> Spot on.
> This is like comparing oranges and apples, you cant compare some one like Ambrose to Roman Reigns, they have a completely different booking, its not an even level playing fields.
> 
> This reminds me a lot about WOR discussion here with Meltzer:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion about it start at 13:00 or so but the relevant part is at 20:00.
> In this discussion he is talking about CM Punk and Daniel Bryan but its exactly the same story. Punk and Bryan got over with the fans but they never really capitalized on it and changed their booking, and then when WWE have them headline shows and they don't sell like Cena the WWE goes: see? they cant draw. Well no duh they cant draw with this shitty ass booking.
> 
> You cant have a guy like Ambrose and expect him to be a mega draw when you book him to be a goof and lose all the time.
> Same thing with Rollins, how can he be a mega draw when he is booked to lose all the time and run away cowardly all the time?
> 
> You cant really tell if any of these guys will ever draw like Roman *because they will never be put in the same position like him, not really*, they will never be booked to be as dominant, as protected or be put in the hottest feuds like Roman so how can you expect them to ever out draw him?


And if someone will, like Bryan for about two months, the WWE Marks scream bloody murder because he "had his moment", while with Roman, they argue "you know, it takes time of consistently strong booking".

It's hilarious.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Good to see we're at the place where we can admit ALL of these guys are not TV draws (at least with how they are all being booked). It's a fact now. Ratings were terrible last year, but I never thought they would get even lower...and they did.


Since 2013, there was one guy who was a TV draw. Took the Champ average ratings from 2.x to 3.x. 

Who was that again ...

:bryanlol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm shocked that SD didn't fall vs :chefcurry and







. Maybe it can't fall much farther. I wonder what rock bottom is?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw after WM did not break 4 million.
I predict right now that next year's won't break 3.5 Million.


----------



## Mandrake

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> I'm shocked that SD didn't fall vs :chefcurry and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Maybe it can't fall much farther. I wonder what rock bottom is?


SD was highest rated show on cable Thursday night so potentially there is nowhere to go but down for the top show.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> And if someone will, like Bryan for about two months, the WWE Marks scream bloody murder because he "had his moment", while with Roman, they argue "you know, it takes time of consistently strong booking".
> 
> It's hilarious.


This is so true. The Reigns/WWE marks sound like fucking imbeciles when they sit there saying "____ had his chance, he failed!!" Absolutely NOBODY in the WWE has had a legitimate chance at being the top guy in the past 10 years, other than John Cena, Randy Orton (sometimes), and Roman Reigns. Dean Ambrose being put in random main events to job to people isn't a push. Just like beating midcarders isn't a push, either. Seth Rollins holding the belt while jobbing on RAW every week and chasing the US champ isn't a push either :lol 

WWE does just enough with these guys to say "We tried, they have opportunities!" Ignoring that the ones who actually have made the most out of their opportunities get shit for it. They love talking shit about how Punk got a 300 day reign, yeah, of being under Cena on the card, and as a lame heel when he was bursting at the seams as the most over face in the company with his anti-Corporate shtick.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> This is so true. The Reigns/WWE marks sound like fucking imbeciles when they sit there saying "____ had his chance, he failed!!" Absolutely NOBODY in the WWE has had a legitimate chance at being the top guy in the past 10 years, other than John Cena, Randy Orton (sometimes), and Roman Reigns. Dean Ambrose being put in random main events to job to people isn't a push. Just like beating midcarders isn't a push, either. Seth Rollins holding the belt while jobbing on RAW every week and chasing the US champ isn't a push either :lol
> 
> WWE does just enough with these guys to say "We tried, they have opportunities!" Ignoring that the ones who actually have made the most out of their opportunities get shit for it. They love talking shit about how Punk got a 300 day reign, yeah, of being under Cena on the card, and as a lame heel when he was bursting at the seams as the most over face in the company with his anti-Corporate shtick.


Just imagine if the machine was behind Punk like it was behind Reigns until the end of 2013.
And then Bryan rising 2013-2014. They would have had two MEGAstars who could have headlined PPV After PPV. 

And imagine them taking care of the MRSA infections of their employees ... Just to think that with basic healthcare, Punk might still Be here.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> I'm arguing that you have no point whatsoever because NO ONE put in Roman's position can do any better.*


Actually I don't think you really know all that much about what you're arguing. 



Legit BOSS said:


> *Look at this deflection :lmao. You still fail to accept that it's Ambrose's own fault he's mediocre. They don't book his terrible offense or character. Stop blaming booking when it's a clear personal error.*


*

I'm starting to think you have some reading comprehension problems here. Reigns was booked to overcome Lesnar in his match and the only reason he lost is because Rollins interfered. Ambrose was booked like an absolute moron who was always going to lose and eventually did lose. I'm not even trying to say Dean is the savior and will change the situation. You're seeing what you want to see here and getting butthurt because of what you think I'm saying. 



Legit BOSS said:



Do you not realize your entire post is a contradiction? "Reigns should be replaced even though no one else would make a difference." :what? 

Click to expand...



That's not my point. Not even close. It's not even what we were originally talking about. With all the booking prowess Reigns has received he hasn't made a lick of difference. Not one. Things are actually looking worse than better. That's what makes him replaceable. I don't know why you're finding it so hard to understand that. All the other legitimate top guys...when they're out it's actually noticed. If they replaced Cena or Batista in 2005 there would actually be a noticeable impact on WWE's bottom line. If tomorrow WWE decided to switch Reigns for Ambrose it probably wouldn't make a difference. Look at Rollins. He was out for months, returned and that didn't make a difference either. Truth be told, there are no needle movers on the roster right now. They're all disposable if you want to look at it like that. Being 'the guy' in an era where just about anybody could be 'the guy' is hardly something to brag about. 



Legit BOSS said:



We don't even know if Roman outsold Cena for a week because merch sales were only reported on a monthly and yearly basis. "Can't even outsell the New Day." Neither can any of the guys you're mentioning as alternatives. They outsold EVERYONE at Wrestlemania. You have no point.

Click to expand...



A week? You're going to hang your hat on him outselling Cena for a week? Oh wait, you can't even prove that he did it for a week because he's the third best merch seller in the company...if he even is that lol. 



Legit BOSS said:



And guess what? Not a damn thing will change if they replace him with ANYONE else on the roster. They have worse numbers than him in merch AND views, yet you're so convinced that he's easily replaceable, and then start using his booking as an excuse. If Roman is so replaceable and rejected, then his booking shouldn't matter. Those guys should easily be able to replace him, his merch sales, and his views since he's so interchangeable. Also LOL @ calling anyone a butthurt mark when all you do is sit here and whine about Roman killing the company. Talk about irony.

Click to expand...



You do realize that merchandise makes up about 10% of WWE's income right? So Roman probably accounts for 1% of that. There you go, you finally have some definitive numbers to boast about since you seem so happy to flaunt his less than accomplishments. 

What do you mean IF he's so rejected? Do you have ears lol? I'm almost certain that if a select few other guys were to receive the exact same booking as Roman over the past year or so that yeah, they would likely be the top march sellers and yeah, their YouTube views would be better too. 

I had heard about you being a dead end Reigns mark but had never experienced it myself...until now. You continue being completely delusional if it makes you happy. I won't stop you.*


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Just imagine if the machine was behind Punk like it was behind Reigns until the end of 2013.
> And then Bryan rising 2013-2014. They would have had two MEGAstars who could have headlined PPV After PPV.
> 
> And imagine them taking care of the MRSA infections of their employees ... Just to think that with basic healthcare, Punk might still Be here.


If they actually treated Punk as a star, yeah, he's still be there and he'd be a megastar, 100% agreed. The whole wrestling world knew it too, that was the last time wrestling was HOT and Punk made it that way. The whole fucking wrestling world was talking week in and week out about what Punk was doing next, what Punk is going to say, etc.. Compare that to NOW...where all it is is complaining about Reigns, or shilling for Reigns, or making excuses for Reigns, it's so FAR from the point of what wrestling is supposed to be.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The only thing to look forward to now is what will Stephanie say, what will Reigns squash next, and that is 90% dread instead of anticipation.
They had the opportunity to make Wrestling hot in 2011 and 2014. That passed.
My opinion may be solitary, but Daniel Bryan was the last true champion WWE will ever have.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Punk made a difference for 3 weeks. By the time Summerslam came along nobody cared anymore. The only time CM Punk started to impact ratings on his own was after he worked with The Rock. Before then he always needed a bigger name to spike a quarter or he flopped miserably. Selling t-shirts does not = changing the business. Too many people get caught up in the internet hype of CM Punk. Everybody on the internet was talking about him. It didn't translate to television viewers or PPV buyers until almost 2 years later. Don't get me wrong, he definitely would have made for a better top guy than Reigns and I have no doubt his numbers would be slightly better too. But he was never going to be the next Stone Cold and to say so is to do a great disservice to Steve Austin. It's a borderline insult really because they're not even in the same stratosphere. 

The last person to be a true difference maker was Daniel Bryan. When paired with established names he drew the highest rated segments in years. When paired with less established names he drew the best numbers on any given night. In terms of the television audience he was the next guy in a way that CM Punk never was and he didn't need to sit on a stage and bitch for 10 minutes to do it. His real momentum started the night after Summerslam 2013 and it carried all the way through to the end. It never faltered. It wasn't a 3 week stint where he continusously needed bigger names to pop a number. He did it with guys from the top of the card to the bottom. He turned an entire Royal Rumble on its head so severely that nobody even noticed CM Punk was gone. That's real change. Not internet hype with nothing to show for it.


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Punk paved the way for guys similar to himself. That is pretty big change. 

Look at the wwe right now.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Punk made a difference for 3 weeks. By the time Summerslam came along nobody cared anymore. The only time CM Punk started to impact ratings on his own was after he worked with The Rock. Before then he always needed a bigger name to spike a quarter or he flopped miserably. Selling t-shirts does not = changing the business. Too many people get caught up in the internet hype of CM Punk. Everybody on the internet was talking about him. It didn't translate to television viewers or PPV buyers until almost 2 years later. Don't get me wrong, he definitely would have made for a better top guy than Reigns and I have no doubt his numbers would be slightly better too. But he was never going to be the next Stone Cold and to say so is to do a great disservice to Steve Austin. It's a borderline insult really because they're not even in the same stratosphere.
> 
> The last person to be a true difference maker was Daniel Bryan. When paired with established names he drew the highest rated segments in years. When paired with less established names he drew the best numbers on any given night. In terms of the television audience he was the next guy in a way that CM Punk never was and he didn't need to sit on a stage and bitch for 10 minutes to do it. His real momentum started the night after Summerslam 2013 and it carried all the way through to the end. It never faltered. It wasn't a 3 week stint where he continusously needed bigger names to pop a number. He did it with guys from the top of the card to the bottom. He turned an entire Royal Rumble on its head so severely that nobody even noticed CM Punk was gone. That's real change. Not internet hype with nothing to show for it.


Punk was assassinated the moment he got his ass kicked by Kevin Nash. The thing about Bryan/Punk, Bryan basically received the storyline that Punk SHOULD have had two years before him. Had they ran with HHH heel turning, Punk being the rebel anti-hero who tells it like it is, fighting against the Corporate machine that is WWE, you probably see numbers moving. 

You're selling Punk short because he didn't make a huge change on numbers when he was still in the ground floor of what he COULD have been. Even despite all of that, he was still the most transcendent star of this era. The guy who non-wrestling fans could look at in an interview and say "lol he's pretty cool." 

There's never going to be an Austin/Rock type boom again, those days are done, wrestling is too overexposed and niche at this point. Punk/Bryan were the closest things to an Austin-level star that you're going to see anymore. And both guys were done very dirty by the company for not being Cena or Reigns.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Punk was assassinated the moment he got his ass kicked by Kevin Nash. The thing about Bryan/Punk, Bryan basically received the storyline that Punk SHOULD have had two years before him. *Had they ran with HHH heel turning, Punk being the rebel anti-hero who tells it like it is, fighting against the Corporate machine that is WWE, you probably see numbers moving.*
> 
> You're selling Punk short because he didn't make a huge change on numbers when he was still in the ground floor of what he COULD have been. Even despite all of that, he was still the most transcendent star of this era. The guy who non-wrestling fans could look at in an interview and say "lol he's pretty cool."
> 
> There's never going to be an Austin/Rock type boom again, those days are done, wrestling is too overexposed and niche at this point. Punk/Bryan were the closest things to an Austin-level star that you're going to see anymore. And both guys were done very dirty by the company for not being Cena or Reigns.


Look at you inadvertantly crediting HHH for the numbers in Bryan's RTWM. I'm proud you've come so far, basically admitting Punk needed HHH to turn heel in order to make it. Aww. 

Anyway, Punk wasn't the savior. He had 3 good weeks and that was it. Summerslam 2011 bombed and that was before anything with Nash or HHH happened. Summerslam 2013 featuring him against Lesnar didn't meet expectations. He wasn't able to pop a decent rating on his own until mid 2013. He needed WAY more help and time than Bryan did. According to Punk he was never given opportunities. Neither was Bryan and in the span of 7 months he managed to do what Punk couldn't in 3 years. 

I'm not selling him short. He came up short. All you can do is point to what you think could have happened. I'm looking at what did happen and telling you that the guy was no Steve Austin. Hell, he wasn't even a Batista never mind a Stone Cold. When he wasn't shooting on the McMahon's, working with Cena or working the part-timers he was just another guy like everybody else. And it showed. Bryan eclipsed so easily it's quite frightening actually. It probably played a big role in his decision to leave although he'd never admit it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Punk was assassinated the moment he got his ass kicked by Kevin Nash. The thing about Bryan/Punk, Bryan basically received the storyline that Punk SHOULD have had two years before him. Had they ran with HHH heel turning, Punk being the rebel anti-hero who tells it like it is, fighting against the Corporate machine that is WWE, you probably see numbers moving.
> 
> You're selling Punk short because he didn't make a huge change on numbers when he was still in the ground floor of what he COULD have been. Even despite all of that, he was still the most transcendent star of this era. The guy who non-wrestling fans could look at in an interview and say "lol he's pretty cool."
> 
> There's never going to be an Austin/Rock type boom again, those days are done, wrestling is too overexposed and niche at this point. Punk/Bryan were the closest things to an Austin-level star that you're going to see anymore. And both guys were done very dirty by the company for not being Cena or Reigns.


The perversity is that WWE turns itself into a niche product by wanting to be mainstream, by presenting the purest, most inoffensive, boring vanilla wrestling that only wrestling fans could endure for a prolonged period of time.

Punk had a personality that speaks a lot to the younger generation. But Vince didn't understand because he's an old fuck. He also could not control it. This company nowadays kills everything they didn't create or don't control. They forgot the booking Art of riding developing dynamics.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I wouldent feel so sorry for Punk. The guy had one of the longest title reigns ever. YEs he diddn't main event mania. But Punk had an ego, and it was all about #1 . So I am not sure I agree that the company treated him badly. But point is context. Punk and Bryan were the best your gonna get to a Rock Austin level in this day in age. Cena like WWE is just so over exposed, and I agree niche. In this climate this is what it is. Probably luckey they still have Cena. Because they have failed to create any mainstream stars. And in the context of ratings, maybe that is a big factor why the ratings are so consistently bad. Nothing against Roman, but I Doubt any casual is like Omg let's watch Raw, Roman Reigns is champion :lol. 

That's not to say Seth is any different, Although ratings were slightly stronger last year with him on top. And that is not a oh that means Seth is better. No that means ratings fluctate. I mean ratings are down because they are down everywhere tbh. The only draw WWE have left, is WWE it self. The product. The more they diminish the product, in favor of well Roman. The ratings well continue to plummet. Let's be real its 2016 no one gives a shit about pro wrestling, outside hardcores who grew up with it. WWE has not been trendy or cool for a very looong time, and I Don't see that changing any time soon, no matter whos the champion. With the brand split coming up, well see if this creates enough buzz to convince USA to hold onto Raw. WWE is also a publically traded company these days. They trade with a ton of family corporations. Most of what they do is product placement tbh. I mean watch Camp WWE, all the characters are swearing cursing. Because its online. Their are different restrictions under a PG rating. IT shows if WWE were not so restricted or wanted to, they could improve. The talent is their, they just don't want to, or can't.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Look at you inadvertantly crediting HHH for the numbers in Bryan's RTWM. I'm proud you've come so far, basically admitting Punk needed HHH to turn heel in order to make it. Aww.
> 
> Anyway, Punk wasn't the savior. He had 3 good weeks and that was it. Summerslam 2011 bombed and that was before anything with Nash or HHH happened. Summerslam 2013 featuring him against Lesnar didn't meet expectations. He wasn't able to pop a decent rating on his own until mid 2013. He needed WAY more help and time than Bryan did. According to Punk he was never given opportunities. Neither was Bryan and in the span of 7 months he managed to do what Punk couldn't in 3 years.
> 
> I'm not selling him short. He came up short. All you can do is point to what you think could have happened. I'm looking at what did happen and telling you that the guy was no Steve Austin. Hell, he wasn't even a Batista never mind a Stone Cold. When he wasn't shooting on the McMahon's, working with Cena or working the part-timers he was just another guy like everybody else. And it showed. Bryan eclipsed so easily it's quite frightening actually. It probably played a big role in his decision to leave although he'd never admit it.


Are you going to twist posts around just to try and troll, or are you going to say something interesting? Bryan didn't need HHH, neither did Punk. He did nothing but hold either of them back. 

All he needed from HHH was to not be buried by his bullshit, which is what the entire company needed, as he killed TV for like 4 months with his horrendous 'no confidence' storyline. You're acting like numbers needed to come immediately or Punk is a failure, and it's a fucking idiot way to look at things. Punk was at the stage Austin was at when he was still feuding with the Harts, where he's starting to become a huge star but he's not quite there yet. 

Summerslam 2013 :lol Main evented by Cena/Bryan. Brock's drawing power killed by HHH months before. Yeah, that's all Punk's fault. Goddamn you're reaching.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Are you going to twist posts around just to try and troll, or are you going to say something interesting? Bryan didn't need HHH, neither did Punk. He did nothing but hold either of them back.


You said it buddy. Not me. Don't go trying to back out of what you said just because you didn't realize that you said it. 

:trips2



Godway said:


> All he needed from HHH was to not be buried by his bullshit, which is what the entire company needed, as he killed TV for like 4 months with his horrendous 'no confidence' storyline. You're acting like numbers needed to come immediately or Punk is a failure, and it's a fucking idiot way to look at things. Punk was at the stage Austin was at when he was still feuding with the Harts, where he's starting to become a huge star but he's not quite there yet.
> 
> Summerslam 2013 :lol Main evented by Cena/Bryan. Brock's drawing power killed by HHH months before. Yeah, that's all Punk's fault. Goddamn you're reaching.


Here we go again with the what ifs and could haves. Punk was never going to be Austin and he was never changing the business no matter what happened. You compare him to somebody like Bryan who actually was in a position to do it and you _should_ be able to clearly see why.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

To be fair their is never going to be a Rock and Austin who change the buisness and the face of sports entertainement forever. Two megastars at one time. So can we stop this Punk could of, Bryan could of. Bryan won the titles at wm main event. Hell REigns has been on the MR what 4 years, and he got the main event at mania and went over hunter for the titles. I am sure that pissed off Punk. LEt's focus on the present. Presently Roman is stinking up the joint, and the ratings are the worst they have been since 1997. Now you can't change that. Ratings suck everywhere. But you would think you would see some changes, but they just get worser every week. I Don't know about you but I Would take back the summer of Punk in a heartbeat..


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Ratings for Raw anyway, ceased to exist post 2002. I mean no direct compeition. Ratings are always going to be so so. I jsut think USA may be concerned. Based on the drop from last year. They are loosing money, fair enough. I think the biggest concern is the drop in house show attendances. All Reigns numbers, Cena may help that though. 1.6 is just a typical demo. They well never get the heights of a 5.0 Rock and Foley generated in 1999, still the highest rated raw segment of all time to this day. The climate has changed too. If they can get over 2.0, that would be an acheivement. But only when the product it self improoves.


I don't know why anyone would even try and compare today's numbers to the attitude era. Rock and Foley's "This is your life" segment drew an epic 8.4 rating that night and that episode of RAW averaged 6.8, with hours of 6.5 and 7.0. 

House show attendance during the attitude era consisted of mostly SOLD OUT houses that were rarely papered. 

On one channel you had WCW doing 4.5 and 5.0 and on the other channel you had WWF pulling 6.0 and 7.0 ratings. During the pro wrestling heyday in the late 90s there were over 12 million homes tuned into professional wrestling between the two companies on Monday nights. 

Today there are just 3 million watching RAW. Where did the 9 million others go and why has no one, including WWE been able to capture them again?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Because in the mid-90s, they reaped the fruits of nearly 15 years of not having this kind of television. Just let that sink in for a second. Years and years since the early 80s, stars were wrestling a couple times a year on TV, and TV itself consisted mostly of squash matches. It wasn't even until the early 90s that WWF expanded to more than four PPVs.
And then Eric Bischoff completely turned the format around, started Nitro, where you saw top stars - TOP stars - facing off every week! And in a way, he had to, because how else would you draw viewers from WWF? Then the nWo happened in 1996, and they rode those guys hard and long, so that by 1999, they burned out their viewers with the same old stuff.
At the same time in WWF, Russo was let loose with his crash TV, and shit and Angles were shot week after week after week. And because they had to compete with hot shit in WCW, their stuff was batshit out there crazy. And of course they did record ratings with that!

Fans were fed family-friendly Wrestling with WWF for over a decade, they had their Turner Product that became Even MORE clean because of Disney, they saw long, top matches a couple times a year, and suddenly within 18 months, you have reality TV, Sex and tits everywhere, violence, heel Hogan wrestling on free TV, Savage vs Luger, Sting VS Luger, Steiners VS Legion of Doom, Hogan VS Luger, Luchadors, Horsemen, DX, everything.
But that was never going to Last. That was relentless hotshotting, and you can only watch it for so long. Most hot TV shows are really hot for 3-5 seasons max, before it goes back down because you can only do so much before only your fans keep watching. And most TV shows have off-seasons to keep anticipation up.
But during that time, both companies put on 9-10 hours of television per week, EVERY week of the year.

And when you look at the numbers, that period of both companies doing huge numbers can be measured in months. WCW started to fold first because their audience was burned out, and when Raw started beating them permanently, they hotshotted even more, culminating in the famous Goldberg title win. 
They had nowhere to go, and failed to evolve, and ultimately lost everything.
WWF had the same problem, just a bit later, when their TV became same-y and stale. Ironically, they infused their TV with the same things WCW did years prior: took talent that was brought up by the competition (Jericho, Benoit, Guerrero, Malenko, Saturn ...), and turned their babyface heel. Only it didn't work to that extent. 

The fans that watched in that time will not come back anytime soon because Cena happened. And they taught them that something like Attitude will never happen again. Hell, they will soon succeed teaching their fans they will never ever be exciting again if they go on like this.
What's left is old fans hanging on to their wrestling, and trying to get their kids excited. But if they keep up this kiddie shit, those kids when then are teens, will turn their backs on it.
WWE is simply not cool.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> I'm arguing that you have no point whatsoever because NO ONE put in Roman's position can do any better.*


Has there ever been a truer statement made?

For all the hate towards Roman and all the comments about how he's replaceable...well so are Rollins, Ambrose, KO, Cesaro, and all the other guys that people claim will single handily save WWE and turn the ratings around. Ratings have been on a steady decline for years, around the time CM Punk won the Title and went on that long ass reign. Everyone since hasn't made a difference, the ratings have still trended downwards. For all the talk about "zomg Seth Rollins will spike the ratings", when he got the belt the ratings were higher than when he lost the belt. When he returned it didn't change the ratings. Its the product overall, everyone is replaceable.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Uuuuuh, wrong.
A lot of guys with a lot more charisma and skills would get a hell of a lot better results. Reigns pisses off countless fans to the point of not watching and moves the needle zero with casuals. Numbers prove it.
Take someone fans actually enjoy, and you would produce AT LEAST the same numbers. The few and far between Reigns smarks whining are neglectable.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

^ Problem is the only guy who has charisma on the roster, that being Bray Wyatt, has been completely annihilated to a point beyond recovering. Bray actually can talk like a Superstar and he has a unique, cool look.

Legit could have been the greatest wrestler of this generation if he hadn't been ruined.

Now he's just the Box Ghost.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@Eva Maryse

No one with a brain ever thought Seth was going to save the ratings. :lmao That was never going to happen, especially with his booking. He doesn't receive God-like booking like Cena and Reigns. If *anyone* on the roster should save it, it is one of those two guys. But they won't and can't because nobody cares. Starbuck nailed it.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

There's a lot more to be said about Reigns being expendable than an Ambrose, Owens, or Rollins since they're not booked as "The Guy". I mean, maybe if they were all pushed on a similar platform, I can see where the deflection comes from but until that day comes, the onus to transcend the business and pull in numbers is on Reigns.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> There's a lot more to be said about Reigns being expendable than an Ambrose, Owens, or Rollins since they're not booked as "The Guy". I mean, maybe if they were all pushed on a similar platform, I can see where the deflection comes from but until that day comes, the onus to transcend the business and pull in numbers is on Reigns.


*You're deluded if you think Owens with FOTC booking could put a dent in these ratings. His booking isn't even bad as is. He's consistently a highlight of the show and no one is watching. There's absolutely nothing to complain about in regards to Owens. Don't even bother with Ambrose because his mediocrity has been exposed on multiple occasions, and it has nothing to do with booking.*


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Uuuuuh, wrong.
> A lot of guys with a lot more charisma and skills would get a hell of a lot better results. Reigns pisses off countless fans to the point of not watching and moves the needle zero with casuals. Numbers prove it.
> Take someone fans actually enjoy, and you would produce AT LEAST the same numbers. The few and far between Reigns smarks whining are neglectable.


Fact is though and this is a genuine fact coming from someone who stopped watching WWE all together for a while because of Super Reigns booking his matches/segments generally get the biggest or some of the biggest ratings/views every night. There's no need for people to pretend that only the hardcore Reigns marks like the guy, he has most of the casuals fans as well. Its not like the casuals are ignoring Roman and then showing up in droves for Ambrose, Rollins, etc.

Numbers prove that there's no one else on the roster that would change the downward trend.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Eva Maryse said:


> Fact is though and this is a genuine fact coming from someone who stopped watching WWE all together for a while because of Super Reigns booking his matches/segments generally get the biggest or some of the biggest ratings/views every night. There's no need for people to pretend that only the hardcore Reigns marks like the guy, he has most of the casuals fans as well. Its not like the casuals are ignoring Roman and then showing up in droves for Ambrose, Rollins, etc.
> 
> Numbers prove that there's no one else on the roster that would change the downward trend.


What ratings? 2016 has been their lowest rated year of all time. He's also been booed out of every Raw arena and PPV of 2016, or at least since February. If 2016 Raw ratings and attendance are down, which they are, then they should at the very least start booking multiple strong going forward since this is clearly not working.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> What ratings? 2016 has been their lowest rated year of all time. He's also been booed out of every Raw arena and PPV of 2016, or at least since February. If 2016 Raw ratings and attendance are down, which they are, then they should at the very least start booking multiple strong going forward since this is clearly not working.


The ratings they are getting. We cant pin this all on Reigns. Ambrose, KO, Cesaro, Zayn, Styles, Rollins are all featured prominently yet there's no spikes for them either. Of the ratings WWE are getting Reigns tends to get the most eyeballs.

I do agree entirely, and you'll find that generally most Reigns fans also agree that they need to book multiple people at the top not just one.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Eva Maryse said:


> The ratings they are getting. We cant pin this all on Reigns. Ambrose, KO, Cesaro, Zayn, Styles, Rollins are all featured prominently yet there's no spikes for them either. Of the ratings WWE are getting Reigns tends to get the most eyeballs.
> 
> I do agree entirely, and you'll find that generally most Reigns fans also agree that they need to book multiple people at the top not just one.


How do you know Reigns get the most eyeballs re: Raw ratings? Is there any proof of this? Even if that was true, that still wouldn't be saying much with what 2016 has drawn. Because none of us in here have seen it. And none of them look 1/10 as strong as the top two guys (Cena/Reigns). You can say 'that's how top guys should be booked." and that is fair. But so is then expecting something from those guys in terms of ratings and whatnot. And we haven't seen any of that.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> How do you know Reigns get the most eyeballs re: Raw ratings? Is there any proof of this? Even if that was true, that still wouldn't be saying much with what 2016 has drawn. Because none of us in here have seen it. And none of them look 1/10 as strong as the top two guys (Cena/Reigns). You can say 'that's how top guys should be booked." and that is fair. But so is then expecting something from those guys in terms of ratings and whatnot. And we haven't seen any of that.


When the breakdowns come out Reigns is usually in the highest rated segments, his youtube views are the largest. 

It doesn't matter if 2016's ratings are crap in this context, Roman is getting the most eyeballs, not the guys who we're told will save WWE if given the chance or will spike ratings, yet the ratings stagnate or even dip when they're put in big spots on the card.

For all the hooplah a while back about Owens v Ambrose Main Eventing a houseshow...people walked out on the match...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Eva Maryse said:


> When the breakdowns come out Reigns is usually in the highest rated segments, his youtube views are the largest.
> 
> It doesn't matter if 2016's ratings are crap in this context, Roman is getting the most eyeballs, not the guys who we're told will save WWE if given the chance or will spike ratings, yet the ratings stagnate or even dip when they're put in big spots on the card.
> 
> For all the hooplah a while back about Owens v Ambrose Main Eventing a houseshow...people walked out on the match...


 Youtube views are nice, but WWE hasn't monetized it yet. And USA Network is going to have to object to that if Vince tells them that 'someone is bringing in the most eyeballs!" at their next contract negotiaition.


And yes , it absolutely matters if 2016 ratings are crap in context. 

I don't know where you read that these indy guys are going to save the ratings. That literally never gets said. We were also told last year Reigns would save the ratings, and what happened? They fell to the lowest ratings in Raw's 23 year history. Fact. Sorry, bro. It's not going to work in here.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Eva Maryse said:


> When the breakdowns come out Reigns is usually in the highest rated segments, his youtube views are the largest.
> 
> It doesn't matter if 2016's ratings are crap in this context, Roman is getting the most eyeballs, not the guys who we're told will save WWE if given the chance or will spike ratings, yet the ratings stagnate or even dip when they're put in big spots on the card.
> 
> For all the hooplah a while back about Owens v Ambrose Main Eventing a houseshow...people walked out on the match...


Meltzer has begun to post the RAW ratings breakdowns. Reigns was in the highest segment last week and second this week, only to Cena and Styles. I post them on Fridays after they go up.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Meltzer has begun to post the RAW ratings breakdowns. Reigns was in the highest segment last week and second this week, only to Cena and Styles. They're usually posted on Friday.


Eh, to be fair, Meltzer has also said house show attendance is down 10% since January and that the male audience viewership is at an all time low.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> Eh, to be fair, Meltzer has also said house show attendance is down 10% since January and that the male audience viewership is at an all time low.


I'm looking at the numbers and what Meltzer can support by fact. I think he has a certain bias but numbers don't lie. I have no reason to believe he's lying about these. 



*
5/30 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings Report – Cena-Styles saves the show & third hour, Minute-by-Minute on key segments, surprises
*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...ird-hour-minute-minute-key-segment-surprises/


*
5/23 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – which segments were the most-watched following Extreme Rules?*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...ngs-segments-watched-following-extreme-rules/


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Youtube views are nice, but WWE hasn't monetized it yet. And USA Network is going to have to object to that if Vince tells them that 'someone is bringing in the most eyeballs!" at their next contract negotiaition.
> 
> 
> And yes , it absolutely matters if 2016 ratings are crap in context.
> 
> I don't know where you read that these indy guys are going to save the ratings. That literally never gets said. We were also told last year Reigns would save the ratings, and what happened? They fell to the lowest ratings in Raw's 23 year history. Fact. Sorry, bro. It's not going to work in here.


This:



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Meltzer has begun to post the RAW ratings breakdowns. Reigns was in the highest segment last week and second this week, only to Cena and Styles. I post them on Fridays after they go up.





ShowStopper said:


> Youtube views are nice, but WWE hasn't monetized it yet. And USA Network is going to have to object to that if Vince tells them that 'someone is bringing in the most eyeballs!" at their next contract negotiaition.
> 
> 
> And yes , it absolutely matters if 2016 ratings are crap in context.
> 
> I don't know where you read that these indy guys are going to save the ratings. That literally never gets said. We were also told last year Reigns would save the ratings, and what happened? They fell to the lowest ratings in Raw's 23 year history. Fact. Sorry, bro. It's not going to work in here.


It doesn't matter what 2016 ratings are in this discussion. You want to dismiss Roman and claim that numerous other people could draw the same numbers at worst and do even better at best. But Roman is typically the best draw on the show every week. Not Styles, not Rollins, not Ambrose, but Reigns. Thats the topic here, you want anyone but Roman and to push the idea that anyone else can do better when he is currently generally the best draw they have.

Youtube numbers matter under this context as well, we're discussing who is the biggest draw, and if youtube numbers dont matter for Roman, then they dont mean shit for anyone else either.

In this very thread you're suggesting that others could outdraw Reigns and turn things around. Before Rollins was WHC people claimed it all the time. People love to claim such and such IWC darling will turn WWE's numbers around.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> Eh, to be fair, Meltzer has also said house show attendance is down 10% since January and that the male audience viewership is at an all time low.


Ratings are down 12% from last year and attendance is down 10% from last year. Male viewership at an all time low. But no big deal.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Eva Maryse said:


> This:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter what 2016 ratings are in this discussion. You want to dismiss Roman and claim that numerous other people could draw the same numbers at worst and do even better at best. But Roman is typically the best draw on the show every week. Not Styles, not Rollins, not Ambrose, but Reigns. Thats the topic here, you want anyone but Roman and to push the idea that anyone else can do better when he is currently generally the best draw they have.
> 
> Youtube numbers matter under this context as well, we're discussing who is the biggest draw, and if youtube numbers dont matter for Roman, then they dont mean shit for anyone else either.
> 
> In this very thread you're suggesting that others could outdraw Reigns and turn things around. Before Rollins was WHC people claimed it all the time. People love to claim such and such IWC darling will turn WWE's numbers around.


Um, bro, I hate to tell you this, but Rollins as Champ last year outdrew what is going on right now, by a comfortable margin. Every Raw last year has beaten every Raw this year head to head every week. And it hasn't even been close.

I'm not saying anyone can do better. I was the one saying this last year when everyone wanted to label me a bunch of things. When peopel flatout told me ratings would increase as soon as Rollins dropped the title. And what happened? The EXACT opposite. Ratings have fallen since he dropped the title.

Also, please stop putting words in my mouth. I never said if they make someone else FOTC that things would turn around. Why? Because they already drove away a large portion of their audience. They are fucked because of that. Doesn't matter who they put it on now. They aliented the huge part of their fanbase and they are gone. This year proves it.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@Eva Maryse

Youtube makes $10 million for the WWE. It may be a drop in the bucket but they do monetize it and the WWE does make it a priority. Any company in today's digital age that does not use social media is just asking to be irrelevant IMO. 

I posted this last week if you want to know more about it.


*SPECIAL REPORT – WWE exec George Barrios reveals big shifts to WWE’s business model, what they’ve learned from WWE Network, biggest mistake?, being called “idiots” in Network Year 1, desired domestic/int’l splits, future investments, more interesting nuggets*

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/27/barrios-conference-call/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And Meltzer has also said WWE has failed to monetize Twitter, as well. It's a nice way to promote, though.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Guys like Ambrose have been featured more on the show in the last few months than Reigns. The show has been revolving around indy-type wrestlers since Mania. Still think he has failed as a face but to put the blame on him when he's barely on the show and barely main events when Meth Rollins got 8 segments per Raw and main evented every week and numbers still fell is ridiculous.

At the end of the day the show sucks. It's not just the individual, not just Rollins, Reigns, Cena, though they aren't really helping. The PG stuff has lasted way too long. Raw airs past 11pm on the east coast so why would you insult adult males' intelligence and water it down for replaceable sponsors? The presentation(stage, tron, music, etc.) is beyond stale. The announcing needs an overhaul. They need storylines and actual characters to get invested in, not spotfests and workrate.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*1st quarter average raw ratings (live+dvr)*

2016 = 3.1
2015 = 3.5
2014 = 3.7
2013 = 3.7
2012 = 3.5
2011 = 3.7
2010 = 3.8
2009 = 3.8
2008 = 3.7
2007 = 4.1 

WWE reported results differently prior to 2007 ie may to April instead of January to December

*1st quarter Average north American paid attendance *

2016 = 6,100 paid fans at 72 events @ $47.79 per ticket
2015 = 6,700 paid fans at 72 events @ $44.88 per ticket
2014 = 6,400 paid fans at 80 events @ $41.82 per ticket
2013 = 6,400 fans at 77 events @ $39.40
2012 = 6,200 fans at 69 events @ $38.50
2011 = 6,400 fans at 73 events @ $36.40
2010 = 7,300 fans at 70 events 
2009 = 6,100 fans at 82 events @ $33.54
2008 = 6,300 fans at 65 events @ $38.08
2007 = 6,900 fans at 63 events @ $36.30


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Um, bro, I hate to tell you this, but Rollins as Champ last year outdrew what is going on right now, by a comfortable margin. Every Raw last year has beaten every Raw this year head to head every week. And it hasn't even been close.
> 
> I'm not saying anyone can do better. I was the one saying this last year when everyone wanted to label me a bunch of things. When peopel flatout told me ratings would increase as soon as Rollins dropped the title. And what happened? The EXACT opposite. Ratings have fallen since he dropped the title.
> 
> Also, please stop putting words in my mouth. I never said if they make someone else FOTC that things would turn around. Why? Because they already drove away a large portion of their audience. They are fucked because of that. Doesn't matter who they put it on now. They aliented the huge part of their fanbase and they are gone. This year proves it.


When did I say otherwise?

Yes ratings were better in 2015, and ratings were better in 2014 than they were in 2015. The ratings have steadily declined. The ratings at the end of Rollins reign were worse than at the beginning because ratings regardless of who is on top are in a constant decline. Thats a fact, it doesn't matter who WWE have pushed ratings are continually getting lower and lower.

But fact is right now Roman is getting the best ratings, thats another fact. Last year doesn't matter in this discussion. The Rock drew better ratings in 2003ish than Rollins could ever even dream of, but thats irrelevant to right now. The ratings have declined since then and since Rollins reign as they did during it, but Reigns is getting the best ratings right now.

You did say others could get the same ratings as Reigns at least, implying they would do better.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I said that ratings would stay the same but they actually got worse. He is getting the best ratings of a show getting its worst ratings in its 23 year history. Last years way rating has been better than this year.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> *1st quarter average raw ratings (live+dvr)*
> 
> 2016 = 3.1
> 2015 = 3.5
> 2014 = 3.7
> 2013 = 3.7
> 2012 = 3.5
> 2011 = 3.7
> 2010 = 3.8
> 2009 = 3.8
> 2008 = 3.7
> 2007 = 4.1


So in 9 years, they've dropped a whole rating point? :larry


----------



## SóniaPortugal

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If you want to put the blame on wrestlings put the blame whoever is in Mainevent, that at moment are Reigns (champion), AJ and Rollins (although has returned from injury).

The problem is that is already affecting the show house
"Live Event Attendance Dropping For Shows Headlined By Roman Reigns"


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> @Eva Maryse
> 
> Youtube makes $10 million for the WWE. It may be a drop in the bucket but they do monetize it and the WWE does make it a priority. Any company in today's digital age that does not use social media is just asking to be irrelevant IMO.
> 
> I posted this last week if you want to know more about it.
> 
> 
> *SPECIAL REPORT – WWE exec George Barrios reveals big shifts to WWE’s business model, what they’ve learned from WWE Network, biggest mistake?, being called “idiots” in Network Year 1, desired domestic/int’l splits, future investments, more interesting nuggets*
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05/27/barrios-conference-call/


$10 million is 1.5% of their 2015 revenue. That's awful, given their social media following. Investors pointed this our during their last conference call. But that's to be expected, since all of their YouTube revenue is ad revenue, and ad rates for pro wrestling have always been incredibly low.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Fearless Maryse said:


> When did I say otherwise?
> 
> Yes ratings were better in 2015, and ratings were better in 2014 than they were in 2015. The ratings have steadily declined. The ratings at the end of Rollins reign were worse than at the beginning because ratings regardless of who is on top are in a constant decline. Thats a fact, it doesn't matter who WWE have pushed ratings are continually getting lower and lower.
> 
> But fact is right now Roman is getting the best ratings, thats another fact. Last year doesn't matter in this discussion. The Rock drew better ratings in 2003ish than Rollins could ever even dream of, but thats irrelevant to right now. The ratings have declined since then and since Rollins reign as they did during it, but Reigns is getting the best ratings right now.
> 
> You did say others could get the same ratings as Reigns at least, implying they would do better.


What do you expect when a large portion of the fans stopped watching the product just as this guy was getting his massive push? The very few people who have stuck around are obviously going to be people who are fans of his and approve of his push. The problem is, again, that there are very few of them (domestically - where they've made most of their money.)

Also, Reigns isn't getting the best ratings. John Cena very clearly is. Look at the change in viewership from the segments before and after Cena's. That's the sign of a guy who can move the needle.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> $10 million is 1.5% of their 2015 revenue. That's awful, given their social media following. Investors pointed this our during their last conference call. But that's to be expected, since all of their YouTube revenue is ad revenue, and ad rates for pro wrestling have always been incredibly low.


There should be more profitability in regards to WWE's social media. But they are making $10 million and that refutes the notion that they aren't seeing any revenue in that regard. They could be making more and that seems to be on their agenda going forward if their stated plans are to be believed.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SóniaPortugal said:


> If you want to put the blame on wrestlings put the blame whoever is in Mainevent, that at moment are Reigns (champion), AJ and Rollins (although has returned from injury).
> 
> The problem is that is already affecting the show house
> "Live Event Attendance Dropping For Shows Headlined By Roman Reigns"


Interesting that mid card Dean Ambrose has been drawing on par, and at times more than the world champ, at house shows.

It would be nice to see an analysis that takes into account the baseline attendance of the cities each headlines based on the previous 5 year average. I have a feeling the numbers would be even worse for Reigns, since he gets sent to larger cities.


----------



## Onyx

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The champion can't be blamed for the poor ratings. They've gradually declined over the years and continue to do so. And sure, when a megastar appears, they may go up by a bit. But the problem is the actual product as a whole. It's not the fault of Rollins or Reigns.


----------



## all in all...

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_Jiz said:


> Punk paved the way for guys similar to himself. That is pretty big change.
> 
> Look at the wwe right now.


hehe, indeed


----------



## jim courier

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Rollins and Reigns marks arguing over who is the bigger draw is like 2 bald men fighting over a comb.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

^

It's stupid. And it's not even so much about them, IMO. This is all on Vince, not even Creative. This product has Vince's fingerprints all over it from top to bottom. I blame Vince more than the actual Creative staff and a whole hell of alot more than any of the wrestlers. Are they Austin/Rock level? Of course not. But Jesus, at least utilize them correctly and accentuate their strengths and hide their flaws to the best of your ability. It's not that hard.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Are you guys really comparing Reigns, Cena, Rollins numbers. When at best it fluctates between 2.5 and 3.0 million? :lol. i mean come on now. All 3 of them at their best got over 3 million. And at their worst the ratings were at their worst. Are you guys still using this shitty argument to support who tank the ratings. It is all relative. Any point last year with Seth it was over 3 mill. A year later with Reigns it plummeted to a 2.21 in audience impression. But at some point it was also like that with Seth, and Cena e.t.c. So you know, it is no indicator of anything. Other then the current climate. For the record Seth as champ, the product averaged over 3 mill. Reigns just under 3 mill currently. All that means is the ratings fluctate, and ratings in all tv has declined over the past year. It also means, no one man can effect the ratings. IF they go up and Say Reigns is champ it is just a coicnidence. As they well go down a week later haha. Oh no I had a 3 mill, ah ha Roman had a 3.01 mill, I am better . None of them are draws, because their is no such thing as draws anymore, other then The Rock. 

But they can't rely on The Rock forever. They need to create new stars. Something they have always been good at, but this is fhte first time in WWE history they have failed on that part. Point is ratings been at their worst when Seth last year was not Seths fault. And now with Roaman its not his fault. Although he ain;t maing it better lol. Point is no matter who they push, Ratings are not improoving at all. Clearly their is no Austin or Rock on this roster, and their nnever well be. But that does not mean they can't utilioze the already very talent roter. I blame Creative and Vince for how bad the ratings are. Adnd if the brand split fails, well who knows whtat is gonna happen.


----------



## THANOS

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

All I can speak for is myself, and the Reigns push has pushed me completely out of the show. I don't even think about watching RAW on Mondays anymore, and every PPV I've tried to watch has been a letdown, so i'm done with that as well.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ambrose is boring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE Raw Youtube Rankings For 5/30: John Cena Draws Huge, Midcard Gets Low Numbers, Rollins, More*

WWE's Youtube numbers saw a jump for Monday Night Raw this week, and John Cena could be to thank for it.

John Cena led the way, as his return to the WWE did an incredible 3.055 million views. The segment also featured AJ Styles and The Club, who have been participating in some of the most watched angles on the show of late. Cena's return nearly doubled the next biggest segment, the Seth Rollins and Roman Reigns 'face-off.'

Shane McMahon and Stephanie McMahon were a pretty good draw, clocking in at over 1.35 million views. The New Day were also in the segment, which could probably help them as they've consistently finished in the bottom half of the rankings since their babyface turn.

Non-wrestling angles that involved the Shining Stars, Maryse, Miz, Big Show and Apollo Crews did rock bottom numbers, and the female matches continue to struggle. WWE's lower midcard scene also keeps drawing at about the level it's booked.

You can see the full Youtube Raw rankings below, as of 6 PM EST.

1. John Cena returns to WWE and officially enters WWE's New Era (3,055,671)

2. Roman Reigns wants Seth Rollins to prove he's not a coward (1,551,459)

3. Shane & Stephanie McMahon address rumors surrounding the 2016 WWE Brand Extension (1,356,915)

4. Dean Ambrose, Sami Zayn & Cesaro vs. Chris Jericho, Alberto Del Rio & Kevin Owens (939,396)

5. Dolph Ziggler drops Baron Corbin (864,231)

6. Memorial Day 10-bell salute (745,918)

7. Enzo Amore & Big Cass have some snacks for The Dudley Boyz (612,127)

8. New Day vs. Vaudevillians (549,604)

9. Zack Ryder vs. Rusev (541,769)

10. Usos vs. Breezango (540,031)

11. Natalya vs. Dana Brooke (469,929)

12. Big Show gives Apollo Crews some veteran advice (455,560)

13. The Miz provides an update from the set of "The Marine 5: Battleground" (181,912)

14. The Shining Stars admire the bioluminescence of Mosquito Bay (133,874)

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...outube-rankings-for-530-john-cena-draws-huge/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> *$10 million is 1.5% of their 2015 revenue. That's awful, given their social media following.* Investors pointed this our during their last conference call. But that's to be expected, since all of their YouTube revenue is ad revenue, and ad rates for pro wrestling have always been incredibly low.


It really is. And the 1.5% is why I'm not even getting involved in the discussions with social media anymore. 1.5% is fucking miniscule. Definitely nowhere near worth arguing about for hours and hours over 1.5%. :lmao


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Having a presence on social media isn't a bad thing, but I still don't understand why people think social media = money. Or "followers" are a good thing. Followers don't necessarily mean FANS. You're talking about something that is as complicated as clicking a button....it isn't like being a follower on social media is dedication. I could order pizza from somewhere and enjoy it, then follow that shop on social media, but have a better slice of pizza a week later and forget I ever followed that place. Followers don't = money. They don't even = eyes on your product, as WWE is rapidly finding out this year. They went all-in to improve their presence on social media and all it's done is drive their viewership down.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> *Having a presence on social media isn't a bad thing, but I still don't understand why people think social media = money. Or "followers" are a good thing. Followers don't necessarily mean FANS.* You're talking about something that is as complicated as clicking a button....it isn't like being a follower on social media is dedication. I could order pizza from somewhere and enjoy it, then follow that shop on social media, but have a better slice of pizza a week later and forget I ever followed that place. Followers don't = money. They don't even = eyes on your product, as WWE is rapidly finding out this year. They went all-in to improve their presence on social media and all it's done is drive their viewership down.


That's true. But if you can monetize a social media following, it can be quite the windfall. This problem is bigger than WWE though which is why companies generally employ social media campaigns. Most companies take increased traffic and awareness as a plus. The WWE is an already known commodity. So, their primary goal should be pumping out more revenue from those clicks. $10 million from Youtube, combined with their other digital media, is fertile ground to do more IMO.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Uuuuuuuh, how would you Even come across a WWE Social Media account if you don't already follow or watch WWE in some form? Does someone just accidentally come across Reigns' twitter account and say Heyyyy, wanna watch this dude?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Weekend Box Office Results for TMNT2 featuring Sheamus*

Update: The “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2” movie featuring Sheamus came in right at expectations at the weekend box office.

The movie started slow Friday, then had a good Saturday before finishing with an estimated weekend draw of $35.2 million. The prediction was $34.2 million.

The movie was down 46 percent from opening weekend for the first movie, which is an average decline for similar sequels, reports BoxOfficeMojo. Movie studio Paramount is hoping to make up for the dip in revenue and an extra $10 million spent on the sequel through merchandise sales.

***

WWE star Sheamus has not been featured regularly on TV the past few weeks leading up to the release of a major movie this weekend.

Sheamus plays “Rocksteady” in the new “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2” movie also featuring WWE celebrity Stephen Amell.

Sheamus says he got the part through an audition process that went through WWE. He also noted to WWE’s website that he was a big fan of the Turtles growing up, making it special for him that he got the role.

“I ended up getting a call from WWE letting me know about the auditions. I didn’t hear anything for a while and I just thought, ‘It’s such a massive role, I’ll be amazed if I get it,’ but I had to give it a go. My expectations weren’t too high, but I eventually met with one of the producers, talked about my desire for the role and the plan around it, and then I was offered the role,” Sheamus told WWE.

“I can’t tell you how much pressure I felt to do this right. Naturally, with any role like this, you want to take your interpretation of it and add that to the character. There was definitely a lot of pressure, but walking away from the premiere after seeing the movie, I was very happy.”

Sheamus has been busy with media obligations promoting the movie, even traveling to Dublin, Ireland this week to be part of the Irish movie premier.

“Getting a little bit of a break in between WWE shows is fantastic, I get to see the parents, and everyone’s coming to the premiere,” Sheamus told The42 in Ireland. “We’re constantly on the go in the States, but we’re living in Tampa (Florida) and you can’t really walk anywhere. You take it all for granted, but walking around in Dublin (is great).”

The movie is predicted to rank #1 this weekend in U.S. theaters, with a projected domestic box office haul of $34.2 million.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/05/tmnt2-sheamus/


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> That's true. But if you can monetize a social media following, it can be quite the windfall. This problem is bigger than WWE though which is why companies generally employ social media campaigns. Most companies take increased traffic and awareness as a plus. The WWE is an already known commodity. So, their primary goal should be pumping out more revenue from those clicks. $10 million from Youtube, combined with their other digital media, is fertile ground to do more IMO.


You monetize it by getting people to BUY whatever you're selling. WWE hasn't been able to do this, likely because WWE has a horrendous product. Followers are only so dedicated to them as to click a follow button, or occasionally watch RAW clips on YouTube. They aren't watching RAW or PPVs and they don't give a shit about the WWE.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> You monetize it by getting people to BUY whatever you're selling. WWE hasn't been able to do this, likely because WWE has a horrendous product. Followers are only so dedicated to them as to click a follow button, or occasionally watch RAW clips on YouTube. They aren't watching RAW or PPVs and they don't give a shit about the WWE.


I do agree with you that a hot product does help turn fans/followers and even a neutral party into $$$ consumers. 

Although, sometimes, the quality of product doesn't even matter. I've been told to my face not to worry too much about content. It's about click bait, traffic and the ads that come from that. From what I've seen of the WWE at times, they must adhere to that particular policy: traffic first, quality of content second.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I do agree with you that a hot product does help turn fans/followers and even a neutral party into $$$ consumers.
> 
> Although, sometimes, the quality of product doesn't even matter. I've been told to my face not to worry too much about content. It's about click bait, traffic and the ads that come from that. From what I've seen of the WWE at times, they must adhere to that particular policy: traffic first, quality of content second.


It's money, yet significantly less money than more traditional business in the entertainment industry. WWE was the king of live attendance, TV, and PPV. They ran away from the PPV business, and their TV/attendance is dropping. They sell one event a year, in Mania. 

It's like they try overcompensating with reporting of their social media numbers, since they no longer want to put the effort into drawing real numbers.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> It's money, yet significantly less money than more traditional business in the entertainment industry. WWE was the king of live attendance, TV, and PPV. They ran away from the PPV business, and their TV/attendance is dropping. They sell one event a year, in Mania.
> 
> *It's like they try overcompensating with reporting of their social media numbers, since they no longer want to put the effort into drawing real numbers.*


A lot of companies are doing this. For instance, I can't stand how streaming is now bundled with the amount of pure sales an artist sells. I get it though. The digital climate has eroded sales, but now an artist gets to claim that they're multi platinum without actually crossing that line. I think it should be its own separate thing but it is what it is. 

WWE really does only sell one event a year and that's Mania. What concerns me is the lack of effort on their part for the past few years. It seems to prove my point that they are traffic first, content/quality second. Mania sells itself and so there's minimal effort. Social media can be a great weapon if a product is hot. But when it's stagnant and almost cold to the touch, it makes what should be an easy tool much harder to use.

In any event, I appreciate this exchange with you. You showed me the courtesy and respect of recognizing my POV even if you don't agree. You didn't dismiss or mock it. That's appreciated on my end.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> *Having a presence on social media isn't a bad thing, but I still don't understand why people think social media = money. * Or "followers" are a good thing. Followers don't necessarily mean FANS. You're talking about something that is as complicated as clicking a button....it isn't like being a follower on social media is dedication. I could order pizza from somewhere and enjoy it, then follow that shop on social media, but have a better slice of pizza a week later and forget I ever followed that place. Followers don't = money. They don't even = eyes on your product, as WWE is rapidly finding out this year. They went all-in to improve their presence on social media and all it's done is drive their viewership down.


Exactly. We've been saying that in this thread for along time, only to be no-sold the entire time. Once you get no-sold the entire time despite the numbers being clear as day, so you know there is literally no trolling involved, that's when you just give up and don't try anymore. Regardless, I'm happy people are seeing it now.


----------



## flyinghigh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't know if this has been posted but Roman Reigns house show are not doing all that good.

This is from the Observer:



> "Reigns tour opened on 5/27 in Springfield, IL, before 2,600 fans. 5/28 in Peoria drew 2,200. 5/29 in Madison WI, drew 2,300. Those are pretty bad numbers for WWE title shows. The Ambrose crew had the star show of the weekend on 5/28 in Winnipeg before 6,000 fans, largely due to Jericho as the headliner. 5/29 in LaCrosse, WI, drew 3,500."


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Exactly. We've been saying that in this thread for along time, only to be no-sold the entire time. Once you get no-sold the entire time despite the numbers being clear as day, so you know there is literally no trolling involved, that's when you just give up and don't try anymore. Regardless, I'm happy people are seeing it now.


I think everyone recognizes it's important to have a presence on social media. But everything tells you that WWE is trying to suck their own dicks with certain numbers that largely mean nothing. Reigns is a dreadful top guy and everything around him is tanking, nobody gives a shit if he has social media presence because it doesn't translate to money or fans or viewers or whatever.

So it's irritating watching WWE or anyone try to use social media hyperbole as a shield to this fact.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw rating should be pretty good this week with the Lesnar hype and John Cena w/o Basketball.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Expecting a nice bump on RAW this week following the hot AJ/Cena angle, coupled with no NBA. I doubt it'll be for that Seth/Roman dreck.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What you gonna say if the Ratings don't get a bump? Not sure Cena and Styles well cause so much of a bump. But with No NBA. The ratings should be back to a solid 2.50. SO Jericho drawed more then Roman at a House show with Ambrose on the card haha. My god Roman he is really stinking up the joint ain't he #Flop


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Raw rating should be pretty good this week with the Lesnar hype and John Cena w/o Basketball.


Pretty good would be what it was a few years ago. They are way, way, way past pretty good.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/6 Raw Social Media – Sharp decline week after big surge*

After a big social media surge last week, this week’s Raw fell back to earth with a sharp decline in key metrics for a show in-between PPVs.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

June 6: Monday’s Raw fell 30 and 23 percent in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings.

Raw’s Twitter volume was 138,000, down 30 percent from last week.

Unique authors tweeting about Raw was 33,000, down 23 percent from last week.

– Raw ranked #1 or #2 among series & specials on Monday night, as Nielsen’s rankings show Raw listed at #2 , but with more social media activity than “The Bachelorette” on ABC.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw was narrowly edged out by Game 4 of the NHL Stanley Cup Finals.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/07/66-raw-social-media-sharp-decline-week-big-surge/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How the hell was there decline from last week? There was no NBA game last night. :lmao


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not a surprise considering there was no big return this week, so I'm expecting a pretty bad rating number tbh. And fwiw, the Raw thread this week barely has over 1,500 posts in it, think that's the lowest I've ever seen in my 4 and 1/2 years on this site.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> How the hell was there decline from last week? There was no NBA game last night. :lmao


No big return of Big Match John plus the World title feud in Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins was just embarrassing last week.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

AJ's turn and Cena's return were "big moments" that would make people talk more on Twitter. Nothing like that happened this week even though the RAW as a whole seemed better.

The opening segment was awesome, but I don't think the ratings will be that good.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> No big return of Big Match John plus the World title feud in Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins was just embarrassing last week.


Yeah, but there was an NBA and NHL game last week, and it was Memorial Day. :lmao


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Yeah, but there was an NBA and NHL game last week, and it was Memorial Day. :lmao


Vince somewhere PRAYING that the Warriors sweep the Cavs otherwise the Raw ratings will take another ass whoopin' by the NBA.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

30 ... thirty .... THIRTY percent dropoff in activity?

Holy cow.

:supercena


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Not a surprise considering there was no big return this week, so I'm expecting a pretty bad rating number tbh. And fwiw, the Raw thread this week barely has over 1,500 posts in it, think that's the lowest I've ever seen in my 4 and 1/2 years on this site.


Yeah, I've noticed on a few other boards I post at the same thing happening. Even the hardcores on the internet are dwindling since there's seriously nothing at all to talk about with this show. Like all we're doing anymore is repeating the same discussions over and over again because the show does nothing exciting, new, or different. 

There's less reason than ever to watch it.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Will we be seeing two sub 3 million hours on the same show this summer, or do we have to wait for NFL season for that? It would be hilarious if it happens before the NFL season.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Yeah, I've noticed on a few other boards I post at the same thing happening. Even the hardcores on the internet are dwindling since there's seriously nothing at all to talk about with this show. Like all we're doing anymore is repeating the same discussions over and over again because the show does nothing exciting, new, or different.
> 
> There's less reason than ever to watch it.


Reigns VS AJ was literally Hulk "I ain't putting that midget over" Hogan VS Bret "can I have the title PLEASE?" Hart - what WWF would have looked like, had Hogan stayed.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I guess everyone saw that there was no new Rollins/Reigns segment and were too depressed to tweet. :reigns2 I still look for this week to beat last week. It would be a bad sign if they don't.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Where are the "see you next week" people. Haven't watched in almost a year, guess plenty of others have just stopped watching. 

You guys keep watching a bad Raw every week though :kobe9


----------



## The_Jiz

Wwes most exciting part of the week!!


----------



## Kabraxal

Iron Man said:


> Where are the "see you next week" people. Haven't watched in almost a year, guess plenty of others have just stopped watching.
> 
> You guys keep watching a bad Raw every week though


And if people on this forum stop watching it is bad... A lot of us are the diehards that normally would stay until it goes belly up. We didn't stay. But then the WWE beached itself firstand the wait for its death was just too much.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I finally stopped watching even clips after Extreme Rules.
Frankly, people claiming Reigns was barely protected put me over the edge more than the event itself.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.371M
H2-3.490M
H3-2.903M
3H-3.255M*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Third hour under 3 million becoming a norm in 2016.

:lmao


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.371M
> H2-3.490M
> H3-2.903M
> 3H-3.255M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+3.53%/+0.119M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-16.82%/-0.587M)
H3 Vs H1 (-13.88%/-0.468M)
6/6/16 Vs 5/30/16 (+0.0081%/+0.026M)*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hour 3 bellyflops hard with 2.903m and a horrid 1.02 demo. Well done, WWE. :clap


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

H3 fell by 16.82% after a relatively unusual H2 gain over H1. Needless to say, some thing is working, and some other thing is plummeting.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Yeah, I've noticed on a few other boards I post at the same thing happening. Even the hardcores on the internet are dwindling since there's seriously nothing at all to talk about with this show. Like all we're doing anymore is repeating the same discussions over and over again because the show does nothing exciting, new, or different.
> 
> There's less reason than ever to watch it.


Exactly, only so many different ways you can say the show sucks and nothing happens on it. People's enthusiasm has been drained because they know their fantasy booking ideas will NEVER happen under the current WWE.

And LOL at this week's rating. Another sub 3 million hour. Mad props WWE. (Y)


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well, that's a decent rating.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

When 3.4 million viewers is your PEAK hour, there is a problem. That is scary.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This week is odd in that they almost hit 3.5M in H2 which is rarely attained by them now a days and that too after a rather unusual H1-H2 gain. Only for the very next H3 to almost sink below 2.9M. And with no NBA competition at that.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> H3 fell by 16.82% after a relatively unusual H2 gain over H1. Needless to say, some thing is working, and some other thing is plummeting.


What's plummeting is the concept of Raw.


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What happened in the second hour to cause the increase?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Exactly, only so many different ways you can say the show sucks and nothing happens on it. People's enthusiasm has been drained because they know their fantasy booking ideas will NEVER happen under the current WWE.
> 
> *And LOL at this week's rating. Another sub 3 million hour. Mad props WWE.* (Y)


I thought the Cena/Styles stuff would save Hour 3 since Styles/New Day was announced as the main event. 

It's odd that last week managed to scrap 3 million despite stiff competition and this week couldn't.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> What happened in the second hour to cause the increase?


Was wondering that too tbh.



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I thought the Cena/Styles stuff would save Hour 3 since Styles/New Day was announced as the main event.
> 
> It's odd that last week managed to scrap 3 million despite stiff competition and this week couldn't.


Seems like the Cena effect only lasted a week. Guess it's time to unload another bullet in the return chamber....



Spoiler: BIG RETURN


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Cena come back has wornoff after one week. Same as the Rollins comeback did in one week. Even the injured big names coming back isn't helping past one week. There is a problem.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> What happened in the second hour to cause the increase?


I think it was Cena and Styles. I believe this was when their confrontation occurred.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Looks like the NBA doesn't take too many of their viewers. WWE has done a more than able job of driving them off on their own


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> What's plummeting is the concept of Raw.


That 16.82% H2 drop is one of the biggest drops of recent times. Since RAW has plummeted to average viewerships of 3 to 3.5M, if we were to adjust a similar drop for a RAW that averaged 5M-6M viewers around the onset of the PG era, then that translates to a drop of 0.8M to 1M viewers which is humongous and more alarmingly noticeable.

And the fact that this occurred after a rare gain seen in the previous hour and with no NBA competition is telling in itself.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Now, they're going to cut this very same roster in half with the brand split, and expect better ratings? They'll be lucky to get THESE ratings with half of this roster..


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE RAW Viewership With The Club And The New Day In The Main Event*


Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's WWE RAW, with The Club vs. WWE Tag Team Champions The New Day in a six-man main event, drew 3.255 million viewers. This is up from last week's 3.229 million viewers for the Memorial Day episode.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.371 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.490 million viewers and the final hour drew 2.903 million viewers.

RAW was #3 on cable for the night in viewership, behind two airings of Rizolli & Isles, and #2 in the 18-49 demographic, behind Love & Hip-Hop.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...wership-with-the-club-and-the-new-day-in-the/


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Now, they're going to cut this very same roster in half with the brand split, and expect better ratings? They'll be lucky to get THESE ratings with half of this roster..


One theory I have is they're not doing the brand split for Raw's sake, but for Smackdown's sake. Maybe they figure Raw ratings can't get much worse but making Smackdown live and having half the roster exclusive to it will increase Smackdown's ratings, thus the combined rating for Raw and Smackdown will be higher each week.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Will know soon if they go below a 2.2R or hit around a low 2.2R for the 2nd week in a row.

Also wonder how much the quasi Shield reunion next week will impact the viewership and ratings.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Will know soon if they go below a 2.2 or hit around a 2.2 for the 2nd week in a row.
> 
> *Also wonder how much the quasi Shield reunion next week will impact the viewerships and ratings.*


Bray is rumored to come back as well.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The only thing the Vince can do at this point (he's already proven he can no longer put on a good show) to improve the ratings is to marry half of India and bring them to the US as sponsored spouses.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> One theory I have is they're not doing the brand split for Raw's sake, but for Smackdown's sake. Maybe they figure Raw ratings can't get much worse but making Smackdown live and having half the roster exclusive to it will increase Smackdown's ratings, thus the combined rating for Raw and Smackdown will be higher each week.


Yeah, maybe they think Raw's ratings have hit rockbottom. Only thing is when the NFL season starts, they are bound to get even lower, and with a smaller roster. Will be interesting to see if they shift big names to each show each week to bolster the rating every week. Only problem is the big names aren't even drawing.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> What happened in the second hour to cause the increase?


:delrio


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Bray is rumored to come back as well.


They didnt turn Seth face or turn Roman or Dean heel yet. Will they let Bray remain face or tweenerish? Also wonder if Orton would come in and feud with someone like Baron or Rusev. The Titus Rusev feud is befuddling for a ppv like MITB.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So a show with no LOLRoman does a solid rating?


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think ratings will increase during the first few weeks of the split but once people realise the show's content will still be the same regurgitated crap like RAW is now, they'll drop off again.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Yeah, maybe they think Raw's ratings have hit rockbottom. Only thing is when the NFL season starts, they are bound to get even lower, and with a smaller roster. Will be interesting to see if they shift big names to each show each week to bolster the rating every week. Only problem is the big names aren't even drawing.


Or maybe they'll do another "Supershow" again. OMGZ SMACKDOWN SUPERSTARS CAN NOW APPEAR ON RAW!!!1! THIS IS CRAZY MAGGLE!!!!!


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Now, they're going to cut this very same roster in half with the brand split, and expect better ratings? They'll be lucky to get THESE ratings with half of this roster..


If, IF Cena and AJ have something to do with that hour 2 increase, them moving to SD means Raw is fucked.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> They didnt turn Seth face or turn Roman or Dean heel yet. Will they let Bray remain face or tweenerish? Also wonder if Orton would come in and feud with someone like Baron or Rusev. The Titus Rusev feud is befuddling for a ppv like MITB.


I hope Bray is a face. He'd be good in that role.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> I think ratings will increase during the first few weeks of the split but once people realise the show's content will still be the same regurgitated crap like RAW is now, they'll drop off again.


The Draft is supposed to be a "Big Event" so yeah, if that episode in particular doesn't do well, that's a bad sign of things to come.

Really, what it's going to take is a concerted effort to tell interesting stories with characters people care about. They've shown that they can do this to an extent (AJ/Reigns was an interesting feud, at the very least) but never follow through and do anything beyond the interesting setup that makes people care more about what happens next.

Now they have to do it across two shows with two main event feuds when they've shown that they have trouble even doing one right.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Or maybe they'll do another "Supershow" again. OMGZ SMACKDOWN SUPERSTARS CAN NOW APPEAR ON RAW!!!1! THIS IS CRAZY MAGGLE!!!!!


You know what's even crazier? That the brand split takes place with literally no hype.
It's not like Steph and Shane are so vicious they can't coexist. It's not like there are guys who are out of control.
No.
It just, like, happened.

One week, Vince puts both Steph and Shane in charge of Raw, two weeks later, the roster acts like the brand split is common knowledge. What in the FUCK?

Where is the poison, the fishing for talent by Shane and Steph, where is the reasons, the LOGIC?

Fuck this!


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> If, IF Cena and AJ have something to do with that hour 2 increase, them moving to SD means Raw is fucked.


We know that anyways. Cena will still be on RAW more often than he's not I bet. Roman being the franchise of RAW is LAUGHABLE. Like...that's going to crash and burn harder than anything they've done in the last 10 years. He can't carry a show by himself, and we've already seen that by the way WWE has to resort to fucking HIDING him from the fans despite him allegedly being the top guy.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> You know what's even crazier? That the brand split takes place with literally no hype.
> It's not like Steph and Shane are so vicious they can't coexist. It's not like there are guys who are out of control.
> No.
> It just, like, happened.
> 
> One week, Vince puts both Steph and Shane in charge of Raw, two weeks later, the roster acts like the brand split is common knowledge. What in the FUCK?
> 
> Where is the poison, the fishing for talent by Shane and Steph, where is the reasons, the LOGIC?
> 
> Fuck this!


Yeah, I mean we all know the real reason this is happening, but has there even been a kayfabe explanation to why it's happening? When the original split happened, it was because Vince and Ric were co-owners at the time and couldn't co-exist, so they comprised and agreed to split up the rosters and take control of 1 brand each. Here, this split is happening just because it seems. Dat storytelling.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> We know that anyways. Cena will still be on RAW more often than he's not I bet. Roman being the franchise of RAW is LAUGHABLE. Like...that's going to crash and burn harder than anything they've done in the last 10 years. He can't carry a show by himself, and we've already seen that by the way WWE has to resort to fucking HIDING him from the fans despite him allegedly being the top guy.


If this absurd brand split should happen at all, Cena should be Raw, AJ Smackdown, and Reigns should work on reaching Great Khali's popularity.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, I mean we all know the real reason this is happening, but has there even been a kayfabe explanation to why it's happening? When the original split happened, it was because Vince and Ric were co-owners at the time and couldn't co-exist, so they comprised and agreed to split up the rosters and take control of 1 brand each. Here, this split is happening just because it seems. Dat storytelling.


I was assuming they were going to work up to announcing a split by showing Steph and Shane could not work together, but nope, it just is happening :draper2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Yeah, I mean we all know the real reason this is happening, but has there even been a kayfabe explanation to why it's happening? When the original split happened, it was because Vince and Ric were co-owners at the time and couldn't co-exist, so they comprised and agreed to split up the rosters and take control of 1 brand each. Here, this split is happening just because it seems. Dat storytelling.


I mean, is this how we book major angles today? 

Is this how they want to draw more casuals, by booking angles assuming everyone knows what's going on because they're wrestling fans?

:heston


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:StephenA6 That third hour. This brand split may not help them at all with the ratings dropping every week.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't see how trying to split their own audience is supposed to help the drastically declining RAW viewership. They're outright creating another show saying "For those of you who really don't like Roman Reigns...here you go" like daring their own fans to not watch RAW.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

1 thing that would help is Raw going back to 2 hours. I feel like they have to do that because there's no way they can fill up 3 hours with half the roster. Shit, they can't even do that with the full roster. :lol


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/6 WWE Raw TV Ratings – extremely mixed bag on Monday night*

This week’s WWE Raw produced an extremely mixed bag in the TV Ratings department…

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

June 6: Monday’s Raw scored a 2.28 rating, rebounding from a 2.19 rating last week on the Memorial Day holiday.

The show was nearly identical to a 2.29 rating two weeks ago following the Extreme Rules PPV.

A big concern remains the key demographic ratings. Adults 18-49 was essentially even with last week and males 18-34 did not move from a basement-level, historical low-point last week.

However, males 18-49 rebounded one-tenth of a rating to essentially the same point as two weeks ago.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.254 million viewers, up less than one percent from 3.229 million viewers last week.

The mixed bag especially kicked in with the hourly viewership trend:

First Hour: 3.371 million viewers (four-week high)
Second Hour: 3.490 million viewers (two-month high)
Third Hour: 2.903 million viewers (16.8% decline from the second hour)

The third hour was the second-least-watched hour this year, just topping 2.894 million third hour viewers on May 16.

The final hour decline of 16.8 percent set a new record in the three-hour era. The previous record was a 16.3 percent decline on February 22 for the post-Fast Lane/Shane McMahon Return episode where the audience peaked in the first two hours, like this week’s Raw, then fell off the table in the third hour.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/07/66-wwe-raw-tv-ratings-extremely-mixed-bag-monday-night/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So, the rating itself actually went down from the show after ER, from 2.29 to 2.28 this week.


----------



## Brock

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> 1 thing that would help is Raw going back to 2 hours. I feel like they have to do that because there's no way they can fill up 3 hours with half the roster. Shit, they can't even do that with the full roster. :lol


Vince gets that bonus TV money for hour 3, i don't think we'll be seeing a reduction for a good while yet tbh, if ever, because Vince can't miss out on that moniez. Plus don't the network demand the extra hour stay, or?

100% agree tho of course, from a quality standpoint, Raw going back to 2 hours would surely work out for the better. Maybe they could trial it one time or something.

Hang on, I'm in the darn ratings thread *runs quick*.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Brock said:


> Vince gets that bonus TV money for hour 3, i don't think we'll be seeing a reduction for a good while yet tbh, if ever, because Vince can't miss out on that moniez. Plus don't the network demand the extra hour stay, or?
> 
> 100% agree tho of course, from a quality standpoint, Raw going back to 2 hours would surely work out for the better. Maybe they could trial it one time or something.
> 
> Hang on, I'm in the darn ratings thread *runs quick*.


Good point. Wonder if the live Smackdown could make up for it if Raw went back to 2 hours? Wouldn't know, no idea how that shit works lol. USA's paying 32 million a year or whatever it is for the 3rd hour, and that thing has been getting awful ratings for at least a year. Seems like a waste of money to me.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










And Vince and fans be like:


----------



## Brock

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Good point. Wonder if the live Smackdown could make up for it if Raw went back to 2 hours? Wouldn't know, no idea how that shit works lol. USA's paying 32 million a year or whatever it is for the 3rd hour, and that thing has been getting awful ratings for at least a year. Seems like a waste of money to me.


I can't wait to see how they get away with shit when the brand split kicks in.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

There's been some rumors in some dirt sheets that SD might go 3 hours, but I haven't seen Meltzer report it, so I won't put much stock into it. But, imagine if they did that?!

:ha

And you really have to wonder if when WWE and USA negotiate a new deal, if USA will still want to pay WWE $32 million for that third hour. Seems like an awful waste of money for USA.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Absolutely fantastic ratings! Glad to see The Loud House is doing so well. That show will save Nick.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> There's been some rumors in some dirt sheets that SD might go 3 hours, but I haven't seen Meltzer report it, so I won't put much stock into it. But, imagine if they did that?!
> 
> :ha
> 
> And you really have to wonder if when WWE and USA negotiate a new deal, if USA will still want to pay WWE $32 million for that third hour. Seems like an awful waste of money for USA.


Dear god, that'd be insane. Imagine if there was a ppv that week too. That'd be 9 hours of WWE programming in 3 nights. That's way too much. :lol


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The fuck happened to that third hour?


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Stuff like NBA games will probably not take too much of RAW's audience since the male viewers have already declined considerably anyways.


----------



## The_Jiz

A-C-P said:


> I was assuming they were going to work up to announcing a split by showing Steph and Shane could not work together, but nope, it just is happening :draper2


Next thing you know they will also start announcing who is feuding with who on television. Feuds happen for no reason. 


Oh wait thats called a Bray Wyatt feud.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Good point. Wonder if the live Smackdown could make up for it if Raw went back to 2 hours? Wouldn't know, no idea how that shit works lol. USA's paying 32 million a year or whatever it is for the 3rd hour, and that thing has been getting awful ratings for at least a year. Seems like a waste of money to me.


Its actually closer to $25m annually for the third hour ($127m divided by 5 weekly hours)

NBC pay less for each hour of raw than they do for an hour total divas

USA badly need the 3rd hour of raw as they have nothing else to replace it with. Raw at 10pm did a 1.08 rating in the 18-49 demo with 3.08 million viewers last week

Compare that to the other shows on USA at 10pm that charted last week
Motive on sunday did a 0.21 in 18-49 and 862,000 viewers
Royal pains did a 0.31 and 1.26 million
Chrisley knows best did a 0.58 and 1.44 million

USA and cable in general has far more problems than wwes numbers right now. USA has lost over 5 million homes since August 2013..some like espn have lost more than that. Losing homes means you lose viewers and subscription fees which runs into millions a year


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That's what Meltzer reported a few months ago. That USA pays them $32 million for the third hour. :shrug: Either way, it's alot.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Valid brings up a good point, we can all laugh at the 3rd hour numbers, but really what else can USA point there that would replicate those numbers? By WWE's standards, they're pretty bad, but it's still better than anything else they could put there. Knowing that, looks like we're stuck with 3 hour Raws for the foreseeable future. So either we're getting 3 hour Smackdowns too or Raw having an unfair advantage because it gets 1 extra hour each week. Neither scenario is really ideal tbh.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> So, the rating itself actually went down from the show after ER, from 2.29 to 2.28 this week.


Which basically means the return of John Cena did literally nothing. 

Adult males do not want to watch a PG or G rated wrestling show. And without the adult male demographic, WWE is done.

I predict by next year, any hour over 3 mils will be considered "good".


----------



## ToddsAutographs

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No Rollins. No Reigns. Ratings up. 

Sooo Vince & the internet are out of touch senile old fucks killin the business???

Edit forgot bout the other 2 fuckboys.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What I find strange is that I'm really looking forward to Money in the Bank, like I think it's going to be an amazing show and might be their best show of the year. That being said I don't have any desire to watch Raw. I just remember laughing when Cole said that one of the random matches between the MITB contestants would have "major implications" for the PPV. It's not. For the most part the segment where they announce the match is cool and then you can usually skip everything until the PPV match and you will probably end up enjoying the PPV match MORE than if you had watched all the TV segments.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> Compare that to the other shows on USA at 10pm that charted last week
> Motive on sunday did a 0.21 in 18-49 and 862,000 viewers
> Royal pains did a 0.31 and 1.26 million
> Chrisley knows best did a 0.58 and 1.44 million


Those shows cost so little to make they should not even be compared to WWE. USA isn't taking losses on that programming. That's why as long as USA keeps their place on the basic package of cable channels offered by Comcast/DirecTV,Dish, etc...they probably don't care that some of those shows don't pull that many viewers. 

But paying WWE what they are paying them, and most certainly taking a loss on it given the low ad revenue as it is - there's no way they re-up WWE at anything close to their current rates if they do at all.

I think USA probably thought it'd be easier to keep the channel as a basic cable channel if they had WWE as an exclusive show to sell. But since nobody cares about WWE anymore, I doubt that is much of a selling point. 

How many WWE fans would drop DirecTV, if Directv decided to drop USA network because they thought that USA was charging to much in rights fees? Way fewer now than ever before. 

The days of using WWE as a bargaining chip to keep your rights fees high with satellite providers is gone.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lol these days I just watch the RAW fallout after PPVs. I ain't got time for a show that regularly features a guy with pubes on his face and has a childish finisher aka Reigns. 

Sent from my XT1033 using Crapatalk


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

In a few years time these current ratings will look amazing.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> 1 thing that would help is Raw going back to 2 hours. I feel like they have to do that because there's no way they can fill up 3 hours with half the roster. Shit, they can't even do that with the full roster. :lol


Financially they can't. Hour 3 gives them more than their profits are.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> Its actually closer to $25m annually for the third hour ($127m divided by 5 weekly hours)
> 
> NBC pay less for each hour of raw than they do for an hour total divas
> 
> USA badly need the 3rd hour of raw as they have nothing else to replace it with. Raw at 10pm did a 1.08 rating in the 18-49 demo with 3.08 million viewers last week
> 
> Compare that to the other shows on USA at 10pm that charted last week
> Motive on sunday did a 0.21 in 18-49 and 862,000 viewers
> Royal pains did a 0.31 and 1.26 million
> Chrisley knows best did a 0.58 and 1.44 million
> 
> USA and cable in general has far more problems than wwes numbers right now. USA has lost over 5 million homes since August 2013..some like espn have lost more than that. Losing homes means you lose viewers and subscription fees which runs into millions a year


But it's not as black and white as that. USA need to cover the costs of their shows by advertising and less watching=less per advert.
Those shows will cost a fraction of what an hour of WWE is costing them. The ratings are not the problem the costings are, get that wrong and it goes really wrong really fucking quick.


----------



## The Power that Be

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *6/6 WWE Raw TV Ratings – extremely mixed bag on Monday night*
> 
> This week’s WWE Raw produced an extremely mixed bag in the TV Ratings department…
> 
> WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking
> 
> June 6: Monday’s Raw scored a 2.28 rating, rebounding from a 2.19 rating last week on the Memorial Day holiday.
> 
> The show was nearly identical to a 2.29 rating two weeks ago following the Extreme Rules PPV.
> 
> A big concern remains the key demographic ratings. Adults 18-49 was essentially even with last week and males 18-34 did not move from a basement-level, historical low-point last week.
> 
> However, males 18-49 rebounded one-tenth of a rating to essentially the same point as two weeks ago.
> 
> – Raw’s three hours averaged 3.254 million viewers, up less than one percent from 3.229 million viewers last week.
> 
> The mixed bag especially kicked in with the hourly viewership trend:
> 
> First Hour: 3.371 million viewers (four-week high)
> Second Hour: 3.490 million viewers (two-month high)
> Third Hour: 2.903 million viewers (16.8% decline from the second hour)
> 
> The third hour was the second-least-watched hour this year, just topping 2.894 million third hour viewers on May 16.
> 
> The final hour decline of 16.8 percent set a new record in the three-hour era. The previous record was a 16.3 percent decline on February 22 for the post-Fast Lane/Shane McMahon Return episode where the audience peaked in the first two hours, like this week’s Raw, then fell off the table in the third hour.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/07/66-wwe-raw-tv-ratings-extremely-mixed-bag-monday-night/


Was just looking at some May and June 2000 WCW Thunder ratings from the Russo era to compare how low the ratings have sunk.

May 8th 2000 -- 2.5
May 15th 2000-- 2.55
May 22nd 2000 -- 2.1 (started 45m min late due to Nascar event)
May 29th 2000-- 2.8
June 5th 2000-- 2.5



So it appears that WCW Thunder, not Nitro, but WCW Thunder, pause for second and think about that ............. fing 2000 WCW Thunder consistently had higher ratings than Raw is garnering at the same time of the year


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I searched WWE RAW on Google Trends just for fun and it shows search interest at the lowest point since 2008.

https://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore#q=wwe raw

Smackdown is doing even worse. Before all this brand split stuff it was at it's lowest point ever.

https://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore#q=wwe smackdown

I don't know how much any of this stuff matters, but anything that shows the WWE's popularity declining is a good thing to me. (Y)


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

To be fair back in 2000 all their was TV. So the pie slice was much larger. TV had about 60% of the audience. Now its like under 20%. So WCW ain't that above WWE now, in terms of ratings, but still above. Quality is the real question, right now? I would watch a Russo Trainwreck booked show. Over Vince's out of touch, doesen't know what the fuck he is doing anymore booked show. WCW still had some stars on their show. The fact that Cena was on. So their is like a .11 percent increase in audience impression, and that is all says not even Cena can save this, only Rock but he won't be back to boost you to a 3.0 for a very long time. And their key demos 18-49 and 18-34 basically haven't moved. Compounded to by a 16% decrease in the third hour. Maybe that's because no one wants to watch a 3 hr show. Particularly when their is like 20 minutes of good stuff. Then 2 hours and 40 minutes of shit. If Cena can't save this show from the ratings decline. Maybe it needs to hit like a 1.0 and hit rock bottom. Till Vince finnally wakes up, and starts booking his Raws like PPVS. Because while their is no direct competition anymore. Vince needs to be as desperate as he was in 1998. Because if this continues past brand split. USA may tell them to take a hike.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> I think ratings will increase during the first few weeks of the split but once people realise the show's content will still be the same regurgitated crap like RAW is now, they'll drop off again.


That's exactly what will happen. The buzz of a fresh brand split will energize Vince to make some sort of an effort with the booking of both shows to the point they might even be watchable for a few weeks. But it won't last. It never does.
Within a month of the brand split starting they'll be back to the same old beyond stale crap we've been getting since at least 2004.


----------



## PirateMonkE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> *One theory I have is they're not doing the brand split for Raw's sake, but for Smackdown's sake.* Maybe they figure Raw ratings can't get much worse but making Smackdown live and having half the roster exclusive to it will increase Smackdown's ratings, thus the combined rating for Raw and Smackdown will be higher each week.


That's what Meltzer and Alvarez have been saying. 

Apparently the USA Network isn't happy with Smackdown's ratings and this brand split and going live on Tuesday is an attempt to boost the ratings.


----------



## LilOlMe

Something I've noticed is that every time they put New Day in the main event, the third hour bombs.

I guess it's because everyone knows that it'll be a meaningless match, but you'd think they'd stop doing it at this point.

Also interesting that New Day is one of their biggest merch sellers, but can't seem to draw casual viewers in.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Power that Be said:


> Was just looking at some May and June 2000 WCW Thunder ratings from the Russo era to compare how low the ratings have sunk.
> 
> May 8th 2000 -- 2.5
> May 15th 2000-- 2.55
> May 22nd 2000 -- 2.1 (started 45m min late due to Nascar event)
> May 29th 2000-- 2.8
> June 5th 2000-- 2.5
> 
> 
> 
> So it appears that WCW Thunder, not Nitro, but WCW Thunder, pause for second and think about that ............. fing 2000 WCW Thunder consistently had higher ratings than Raw is garnering at the same time of the year


.... and DDP is said to still be laughing.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



PirateMonkE said:


> That's what Meltzer and Alvarez have been saying.
> 
> Apparently the USA Network isn't happy with Smackdown's ratings and this brand split and going live on Tuesday is an attempt to boost the ratings.


Yes this seems to be a general consensus...

I don't disagree with Dave/Bryan's thought process because they are trying to imagine why WWE are doing it. But don't you think in the medium-long term, SD going live will adversely effect their ratings?

Remember that a move such as Raw going form 2 hours to 3, actually over-exposed a poor creative team, thin roster, and a weak show overall. I think SD going live will have a similar effect as Raw going 3 hours. Initial buzz, stretch out the hype for 4-6 weeks, and then ratings subside back down to where they were. And then slide further down to a worse position once you've over-exposed the weaknesses within.

It's not just a random guess... I truly believe that over-exposing your product, now, in 2016, at the worst possible time, will do terrible things for both brand splits and ratings for both shows are going to plummet lower than we ever could have imagined, but not before the initials 4, 6, 8 week spike, something like that...


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well lets no jump the gun. We don't know that thebrand split won't impact ratings in the long term. I welcome it as it well create buzz. And might mean they book the shows better. Give the talent more time. By having two brands. You get more Talent getting more screen time. I Get over exposure. But theirs talent in the WWE who need the brand split. And theirs an audience who want to see that talent. So they won't be over exposed. If managed correctly, depending on who is on what brand, it could work. In any case I Don't think WCW ppl are laughing their ratings were stronger. That was 2000, all their was TV. Ratings on tv were much stronger back then. This was before the internet, and streaming. In the long term I think the brand split is the best thing. The ratings well plummet with an under exposed product. And well with an over exposed product. At least this way with two brands. Talent like Wyatt, Owens, Ambrose maybe on SD could create a point of difference. I would rather over exposure, then same old. Because same old ain't working is it.


----------



## Drago

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/740289420385996800


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Coincidentally 90+ weeks ago, when the numbers for the third hour were last low. And before that periord when they were over a 3. mill in audience impression (Raw is now under 3 mill). This man was on top :Rollins. I am not saying anything lol. Just reassuring t know Seth was not the reason Ratings plumetted. If I had a dollar for all those Seth is destorying the product threads, please strip him of the title last year, I Would be a millioanre. Now the ratings are even worser, with Reigns as champ. So you know we see a trend here. NO matter who they push, ratings are on a downwad spiral. Because well you know Ratings in tv have actually declined alot since last year. Combine that with a shit product with little to no stars, well why would anyone want to watch a third hour of shit? Brand Split may over expose the product. But it can't be any worser then it is now. IF it spikes ratings, then at least USA may be more reasssured.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Valid brings up a good point, we can all laugh at the 3rd hour numbers, but really what else can USA point there that would replicate those numbers? By WWE's standards, they're pretty bad, but it's still better than anything else they could put there. Knowing that, looks like we're stuck with 3 hour Raws for the foreseeable future. So either we're getting 3 hour Smackdowns too or Raw having an unfair advantage because it gets 1 extra hour each week. Neither scenario is really ideal tbh.


That is not everything though like @Randy Lahey pointed out. USA is having problems even breaking even on the WWE due to what they pay WWE for the programming versus what USA is making on add revenue for the WWE programming. Why do you think the # of commercials seems to get higher every week on Raw? USA is having to make the add revenue up on volume b/c companies are not willing to pay enough per add on the WWE programming like they used to. Pro-Wrestling programming has always been a tougher sell to advertisers b/c of the perceived fanbase that tunes in for it. So where you can say the #s are bad for the WWE but still good overall compared to other stuff on USA, that can be deceiving b/c WWE's #s HAVE to be that much better for it to be worth USA having the programming on.

This is why this is such a potential problem for the WWE down the road, their TV deal is set in with USA for the next few years (assuming there is no out for USA if ratings get to a certain level) so the WWE is safe from a TV revenue standpoint for the immediate future. But if this down trend in their TV product continues their next TV deal is going to take a HUGE hit, and even this current deal was not as lucrative and Vince thought it was going to be, or what he sold to investors it was going to be. So the WWE is on the clock here to either improve their TV product or turn the WWE Network into a viable revenue stream able to replace what they are going to lose in their next TV deal. Otherwise in 5-10 years the WWE will look VERY different.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Are people still using the 'they have more time so they can book better' excuse? The exact same thing was said when Raw went three hours. Naive people thought more time would improve their booking.

It doesn't work like that. If you can't book a two hour show, you can't book three. Likewise, if you can't book a three hour show you won't be able to book two of them.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Videos packages of Seth and Roman plus Charlotte getting lately ton of mic time, I'm glad the ratings are showing the true, HHH pets are a fucking disaster.


----------



## Sick Graps-V2

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Power that Be said:


> Was just looking at some May and June 2000 WCW Thunder ratings from the Russo era to compare how low the ratings have sunk.
> 
> May 8th 2000 -- 2.5
> May 15th 2000-- 2.55
> May 22nd 2000 -- 2.1 (started 45m min late due to Nascar event)
> May 29th 2000-- 2.8
> June 5th 2000-- 2.5
> 
> 
> 
> So it appears that WCW Thunder, not Nitro, but WCW Thunder, pause for second and think about that ............. fing 2000 WCW Thunder consistently had higher ratings than Raw is garnering at the same time of the year


While I can see what you mean: Raw drawing a lower rating than WCW Thunder truly is the darkest timeline - you need to look at total viewership for Mondays in each respective era before you compare the figures. 

On May 1st 2000 Raw and Nitro earned ratings of 7.35 and 2.5 which made for a total mainstream wrestling audience of 9.85 in rating terms for Monday May 1st 2000. 

This week the rating for Monday night Raw was 2.28, and being that they're the only wrestling show on Monday nights that makes the rating for the total mainstream wrestling audience for Monday 2.28. While 2.28 is undoubtedly a deservedly terrible number for a horribly produced/booked show; 2.5 of a total possible mainstream audience of 9.85 is much worse than 2.28 of an audience of 2.28. Though WWE take full blame for shrinking the number to 2.28 which is arguably much worse. 

Although Raw in it's current state is terrible, WWE aren't yet reaching the level of shitstorm that was WCW in the year 2000. I'll only say this once. _David Arquette _. 




Ugh......


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Drago said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/740289420385996800


It's fucking scary when John Cena coming back did absolutely NOTHING. I mean, there was no NBA playoff game on Monday night. So, if the younger guys like Rollins, Reigns, and everyone else are a disaster, that makes Cena even a bigger one since he's the one who's been pushed like God for 10 years straight.

Wow.
@Brodus Clay

Seth and Roman weren't in Hour 3 where the HUGE drop took place. Stop blind hating and pay the fuck attention for once.

fpalm


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> It's fucking scary when John Cena coming back did absolutely NOTHING. I mean, there was no NBA playoff game on Monday night. So, if the younger guys like Rollins, Reigns, and everyone else are a disaster, that makes Cena even a bigger one since he's the one who's been pushed like God for 10 years straight.
> 
> Wow.
> @Brodus Clay
> 
> Seth and Roman weren't in Hour 3 where the HUGE drop took place. Stop blind hating and pay the fuck attention for once.
> 
> fpalm


When I talked about hour 3?, They still didn't even draw decently and they are feuding for the most important title, with that context imo I can complain.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Brodus Clay said:


> When I talked about hour 3?, They still didn't even draw decently and they are feuding for the most important title, with that context imo I can complain.


Well, if it wasn't for Hour 3, it might have done a decent rating, certainly one of the higher ones of this awful era. Either way, you would've found something ridiculous to complain about.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Game 5 is official now, so Raw's ratings about to take another L to the NBA.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Using the logoc HHH pets Seth and Roman are fully responsible for the ratings takog. Is nothing but Selective Bisad. IF so why does Cena return. And they get the biggest loss in the third hour in 90+ Weeks? Point is no matter who is on screen the ratings are relative. This ain't anyones fault. But the climate, and the current product being shit. Until they bookl someone like DAvid Arquette winning the WWE WHC title. WWE is no where near as bad As WCW. The ratings weere worseer for wCW in 200 then WWE now, as the ratings share was much larger then it is now. I think thinkong now the brand split well create buzz. But it well still be 3 hours, It means they well book two shows now, so by booking two brands, which might be over exposing the product. But well see. IT well give talent more oppurutnities on a second brand, they woulden't get other wise.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm pretty sure the 3rd hour dropped so much because they had already shown the AJ/Cena segment and the Rollins/Reigns promos before the 2nd hour had ended. Thus, the two main reasons to watch WWE had already been shown leaving little incentive to stay up.

Moreover, I think the main event of New Day vs. the Club wasn't advertised until like 15 minutes into the 3rd hour. So a lot of people probably had tuned out before then to even know if the third hour was worth watching.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Or they diddn't tune in at all..


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Thunder consistently beating RAW is the best thing I've read all week.

Remember, WWE, feel free to keep burying WCW while using it as one of the main selling points of your Network and latest video games...haha.



Sick Graps-V2 said:


> Although Raw in it's current state is terrible, WWE aren't yet reaching the level of shitstorm that was WCW in the year 2000. I'll only say this once. _David Arquette _.


His title win has had higher ratings than some of the latest RAW's too.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Arquette was one week, and the triple cage match was better than WM's Hell in a Cell.


----------



## murder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Just as a reminder: WCW's ratings in 99 were in the 4's and 5's range (even a 5.8in February 99), so WCW doing a 2 in 2000 is actually far worse than WWE doing a 2 in 2016.


----------



## Crippler97

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> I'm pretty sure the 3rd hour dropped so much because they had already shown the AJ/Cena segment and the Rollins/Reigns promos before the 2nd hour had ended. Thus, the two main reasons to watch WWE had already been shown leaving little incentive to stay up.
> 
> Moreover, I think the main event of New Day vs. the Club wasn't advertised until like 15 minutes into the 3rd hour. So a lot of people probably had tuned out before then to even know if the third hour was worth watching.


IMHO 3 hours is too long for a wrestling show, who has that attention span now days?. ive been watching a ton of old nitros for a podcast i am doing and they really hit their stride when the show was 2 hours long. When nitro was only 1 hour it seemed a little rushed, even a 90 minute show would suffice.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wonder if SD can make up ground ratings-wise on RAW this week?


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



murder said:


> Just as a reminder: WCW's ratings in 99 were in the 4's and 5's range (even a 5.8in February 99), so WCW doing a 2 in 2000 is actually far worse than WWE doing a 2 in 2016.


I disagree. WCW only did a 2 because other wrestling fans were watching another wrestling show. The WWE has no competition at all. Doing a 2 vs no competition is worse IMO than doing a 2 against other wrestling shows.

I believe moving Smackdown to Tuesdays is going to kill Raw even more. Even hardcore fans don't want to watch 5 hours of wrestling on back to back nights. It's overkill. In the end, both shows will be weaker.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> I disagree. WCW only did a 2 because other wrestling fans were watching another wrestling show. The WWE has no competition at all. Doing a 2 vs no competition is worse IMO than doing a 2 against other wrestling shows.
> 
> *I believe moving Smackdown to Tuesdays is going to kill Raw even more. Even hardcore fans don't want to watch 5 hours of wrestling on back to back nights. It's overkill. In the end, both shows will be weaker.*


There's also the NXT factor on Wednesdays. That makes it three nights of wrestling. During PPV's, there's going to be four more hours on Sunday. And the cycle starts on Monday with RAW. That's excessive. I've already dropped NXT and skip most Smackdowns.


----------



## murder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> I disagree. WCW only did a 2 because other wrestling fans were watching another wrestling show. The WWE has no competition at all. Doing a 2 vs no competition is worse IMO than doing a 2 against other wrestling shows.


Competition can be beneficial to the Rating as well because if something boring was happening on Raw or they went to commercial, people would switch to Nitro. I'm sure you've heard about "that'll put some butts in the seat" and the "Fingerpoke of Doom".

Raw nowadays doesn't have that advantage. WCW fans have stopped watching and there's no other wrestling whow they can steal viewers from.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*TV Viewership for Season Finale of John Cena’s “American Grit”*

For a season finale, John Cena’s “American Grit” drew a minimal audience Thursday night on Fox.

American Grit Viewership Tracking

June 9: The two-hour season finale of “American Grit” slightly upticked from last week’s viewership.

In the overnight numbers, Week 9 drew 2.16 million viewers, according to TVBytheNumbers.com, compared to 2.08 million overnight last week.

Last week’s actual numbers ended up below 2.0 million viewers, but this week’s should stay above the water level.

Grit/Fox ranked #4 on the night, trailing the NHL Stanley Cup Finals on NBC, CBS re-runs, and an ABC movie.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/10/tv-viewership-season-finale-john-cenas-american-grit/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(6/9) Vs last week(6/2) 

1.996M Vs 2.169M 
(-0.173M/-7.98%)
Note: Lowest viewership since move to USA and lowest since 11/26 thanksgiving week episode and 9/3 regular week episode*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


















*Cena and Styles *




*6/6 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – Cena-Styles huge audience, what happened in the third hour?*

WWE Raw on Monday, June 6 included an historical second-to-third-hour decline in TV viewership.

The quarter-hour ratings indicate that Raw peaked in a big way at the top of the second hour for the John Cena-A.J. Styles exchange. Then, the third hour started very poorly and never recovered.

WWE broke from the recent formula of putting their most-important content at the top of the third hour to try to save the hour. Instead, Cena-Styles went at the top of the second hour to maximize viewership. The feud built on last week’s opening exchange…

5/30 Raw – Q9 (Cena-Styles): 1.68 m18-49 rating / 1.056 million viewers
6/6 Raw – Q5 (Cena-Styles): 1.86 m18-49 rating / 1.173 million viewers

The surge in Q5 viewership led to Raw’s second hour hitting a two-month high point and the overall m18-49 demographic increasing one-tenth of a rating from last week.

Then, the third hour started with a poorly-presented Kevin Owens vs. Dean Ambrose match. Even watching the broadcast live, it felt like a cold match with both men already in the ring without lead-in and nothing on the line.

The rest of the hour had no chance and the audience did not come back for the over-run in the “fourth hour” of Raw for New Day vs. The Club.
*
June 6 Raw – Top Segments*

(1) John Cena-A.J. Styles confrontation (Q5 – top of the second hour).

(2) Enzo Amore & Big Cass, then facing The Vaudevillains (Q6 – follow-through from Q5).

(3) Opening Segment with six dudes on ladders, Teddy Long, and Stephanie McMahon. (Q1).
*
June 6 Raw – Audience Flow*

First Hour: 3.371 million viewers
Second Hour: 3.490 million viewers (two-month high)
Third Hour: 2.903 million viewers (16.8% decline – largest drop in three-hour Raw history)
*AVERAGE: 3.254 million viewers*

First Hour: 1.47 m18-49 rating
Second Hour: 1.63 m18-49 rating
Third Hour: 1.36 m18-49 rating (16.6% decline – matching overall audience)
*AVERAGE: 1.48 m18-49 rating*

PWTorch received a quarter-hour and minute-by-minute break down in the bellwether males 18-49 demographic…

June 6 Raw – M18-49 Break Down
*
OVERALL SHOW AVG.: 1.48 rating / 932,000 viewers*

– Q1: 1.59 rating / 1.001 million viewers

The opening segment peaked with 1.139 million viewers at 8:12 p.m. for the end of the segment before break.
– Q2: 1.37 rating / 862,000 viewers

– Q3: 1.44 rating/ 908,000 viewers

– Q4: 1.48 rating/ 931,000 viewers

*HOUR AVG.: 1.47 rating / 926,000 viewers*

– Q5: 1.86 rating / 1.173 million viewers (26% increase from Q4)

John Cena and A.J. Styles dominated the show.
The peak audience of the segment and the show was 1.298 million viewers at 9:11 p.m. at the climax of the promo exchange.

Last week’s Q9 segment with Cena-Styles drew a 1.68 rating / 1.056 million viewers.
The historical comparison is Daniel Bryan’s retirement speech on the February 8 Raw.
The Q14 over-run for Bryan’s speech scored a 1.86 m18-49 rating and averaged 1.173 million m18-49 viewers.

– Q6: 1.70 rating/ 1.069 million viewers

Enzo Amore & Big Cass vs. The Vaudevillains drew the second-highest audience of the show building on the Cena-Styles momentum.
– Q7: 1.56 rating / 980,000 viewers

The end of the Alberto Del Rio vs. Sami Zayn match was the last time Raw topped 1.0 million viewers for the rest of the show. No minute from Q8 to the over-run reached 1.0 million.
– Q8: 1.41 rating / 888,000 viewers

*HOUR AVG.: 1.63 rating / 1.028 million viewers*

– Q9: 1.45 rating / 914,000 viewers (minimal 2.8% increase)

From here, the show kept falling all the way to the over-run…
– Q10: 1.38 rating / 872,000 viewers

– Q11: 1.31 rating / 823,000 viewers

– Q12: 1.30 rating / 817,000 viewers
*
HOUR AVG.: 1.36 rating / 856,000 viewers*

– OVER-RUN: 1.29 rating / 814,000 viewers

*OVERALL SHOW AVG.: 1.48 rating / 932,000 viewers*

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/10/66-raw-tv-quarter-hour-ratings-happened-third-hour/


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE SmackDown Garners Near Record Low Audience, Drops Below 2 Million Viewers*

This week's episode of WWE SmackDown garnered their lowest audience since their move to the USA Network in January.

Thursday's episode averaged just 1.996 million viewers, down 8% from last week's show, which averaged 2.169 million viewers.

It was the second least watched first-run non-holiday episode in the show's history, barely beating out the September 2, 2015 show on SyFy, which averaged 1.981 million viewers.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0610/612540/wwe-smackdown-garners-near-record-low-audience/


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Below 2 milions :ha

On USA :ha

SmackDown :ha


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

SD better hope Tuesdays and being live are greener pastures because going below 2 million viewers is not a good sign. Time will tell.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown below 2 million now. fpalm

HOLY SHIT. IS THERE ANYONE AWAKE IN STAMFORD???? :lmao Do they even give a fuck anymore?

2016 has been the year from hell for WWE in terms of their TV numbers. Great job, Vince.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Jesus Christ, those ratings are almost at the levels of Impact on Spike. :lmao

If the draft doesn't save SD!'s ratings, nothing will.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/9 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings fall to year-low; SD draws fewer than 2.0 million viewers*

This week’s WWE Smackdown drew an embarrassingly-low audience Thursday night on USA Network.

WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

June 9: WWE Smackdown scored a year-low 1.51 TV rating, down from a 1.59 rating last week.

The previous low was a 1.54 rating on April 28 leading into the Payback PPV.

Smackdown drew fewer than 2.0 million viewers, registering 1.996 million viewers.

It represents one of the smallest audiences in Smackdown history for a first-run episode. Smackdown registered a handful of sub-2.0 million totals in 2015 for episodes that landed on or near holidays.

Perhaps most alarming are the key demographic numbers compared to last week’s show…

Adults 18-49 fell one-tenth of a rating (15%) to a year-low
Males 18-34 fell off the table by 25% to a year-low
Adults 18-49 fell 21% to a near-year-low

Smackdown was against the season finale of John Cena’s “American Grit” show on Fox, which drew just above 2.0 million viewers, and the NHL Stanley Cup Finals. Plus, Presidential election coverage.

By comparison, a re-run of “Big Bang Theory” at 9:30 p.m. on TBS drew 1.940 million viewers and outdrew Smackdown in adults and adult male viewers.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...-year-low-sd-draws-fewer-2-0-million-viewers/


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Jesus Christ Smackdown is in trouble.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown under 2 million viewers :bryanlol

Seeing WWE slowly dying brings me a lot of joy.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LOL. USA isn't going to be definitely be happy about this and if WWE doesn't do anything about it, they can kiss their deal that has a lot of money goodbye!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince is the modern day Nero, fiddling while his ratings are burning.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If a live SD and brand split doesn't save this show, it's time to kill off Smackdown and for good. Quite frankly, it has long overstayed its welcome and with NXT being a brand, SD is a non-entity. Fans will always look at Smackdown as the weaker brand of the WWE that tends to have good wrestling matches.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Somebody sold a bit of stock and got rid of his sole ownership at a nice point.

Why are quarterly breakdowns relevant for the first hour of Raw? People watch Raw to see what the opening segment is, not because it's "six dudes on ladders".

At this rate, by Summerslam, the UFC 202 PPV will have more buys than there are viewers for free Smackdown :eagle


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

BS may create initial buzz. But going live won't make a difference, if they don't book it better. IT may over expose a already deficient product. Plus is hopefully get more talent on Screen. I mean if Wyatt, Ambrose, Owens, Paige e.t.c. Are on SD, I well be watching SD exclusively. I am hoping Reigns and Cena are both on Raw. But unlikely. SD under 2 mill. Well let's hope the Brand Split creates enough buzz. Because USA want more. But what do you expect SD has no stars. Their is no one on SD worth watching atm.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I still can't believe SD is UNDER 2 Million viewers. They are literally in the "1.X" area. I don't even care if it's a "1.9" million viewers. There should NEVER be an hour of Raw, SD, or overall viewership for either show with a "*1*" at the front of the number. That is downright frightening and I am not kidding or exaggerating. They better pray to God that this brand split performs a miracle for them, or they might have made things even worse. The fact that their numbers are continuing to fall even BEFORE the brand split is insane. If the brand split doesn't work, then that is a huge problem. There is no adjective in the English language to describe what it would be like if the brand split fails and the numbers continue to fall even from this week's pathetic number..


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

To those delusional marks who still believe Reigns and Rollins will somehow lead to that elusive double turn: I watched Raw from last week today, after seeing a live feed rip of it the day after the fact, and Reigns' crowd reactions are heavily edited with a ton of cheers. And not only that, but Rollins' initial pop was literally muted.

I hate this company so much. Wow.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Spring TV Viewership Report – WWE Smackdown & “American Grit” peak early on Thursdays*

The nine-week run of WWE Smackdown and John Cena’s “American Grit” sharing TV space on Thursday nights peaked early and faded late.

From April 14 to June 9, Smackdown averaged 2.23 million viewers, down 10 percent from the First Quarter 2016 average of 2.48 million viewers during WrestleMania Season.

During the same period that “American Grit” aired on Fox, John Cena’s show averaged 1.98 million viewers.

The two shows combined to average 4.21 million viewers.

The first week of Smackdown and Grit airings on April 14 combined to draw 4.71 million viewers. Week 2 combined for 4.60 million viewers. After that, the next seven weeks fell below the average.

Included was Thursday’s season finale of Grit, which combined with Smackdown to actually draw fewer viewers than last week, mainly due to Smackdown drawing a year-low audience.

The final tally of which show drew more viewers was Smackdown with eight and Grit with one. Grit’s season finale outdrew Smackdown, mainly due to Smackdown’s year-low viewership.










http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...own-american-grit-peak-early-thursday-nights/


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*American Grit outdrew SmackDown! :ha

Un-fucking-real.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's official, John Cena is bigger than WWE.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why are people surprised that SD drew such awaful numbers? When was the last time WWE drew any big numbers in any format? So it not like oh that show drew better. SD is no longer trendy or current like it was in 2001. OR 2008. John Cena is probably their last draw left. And he can't even spike the ratings, signifcantly. USA well see SD went below 2 mill. So they well be hoping once it goes live, it well help it. IF they actually treated SD as a actual show. Not some recap of Raw Show. And not have random matches, and actually have stakes involved. But alas. The Grit drew a bigger audience impression then SD. It's not rocket science, no stars no ratings.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's not surprising, it's shocking.
And it drops at a time when everybody knows Smackdown will have more Spotlight again. Fans should be like "I will watch this to see if something new already happens", and not like "fuck this, we will watch even less".

I suppose it was about to happen, since Smackdown can't stay unaffected when Raw slides towards a cliff. But this is TNA.

Wait, is this their Plan, renaming themselves TNA, to make the fall less embarassing?


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> On an off topic side note, looking at your sig, what happened to those feet tickling sigs? So much depressing stuff here lately, it could use something to put smiles on faces.
> 
> The only positive news this forum produces lately are Tuesday ratings.


Been a week, but I'm just now seeing this lol. I don't know, just haven't had them for awhile I guess. Never know, could bring them back, still have the link. :side:


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown is a flagging show. Smackdown has just kinda been in air pilot motion for years now. Creative have not treated SD any differenly since Raw went 3 hrs, big mistake. SD has just kinda been a recap show of Raw. I don't even watch SD, because nothing moves until Raw. So most people don't even watch SD. That and most of the matches are the same, or random. And little to no stars. It's not surprising SD's ratings went below 2 mill. I guess they think with a brand split it well create buzz, and SD going live well change things. But they may end up over exposing the product. But I guess a pro is that, more talent well get screen time that they are not getting on One Brand. Like Wyatt, Ambrose e.t.c.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> By comparison, a re-run of “Big Bang Theory” at 9:30 p.m. on TBS drew 1.940 million viewers and outdrew Smackdown in adults and adult male viewers.


That basically tells USA - "why pay big $$$$$ for a wrestling show, when I can pay way less for some syndicated shows and get a similar rating with higher ad rates".

USA would probably make more money putting shows like Parks and Recreation/Community/The Office on than wrestling.

I don't even know how Vince even negotiates with USA with these types of numbers. He has no bargaining position at all.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Monday could produce another interesting rating. RAW vs the potential crowning moment of the greatest single season in NBA history, featuring :chefcurry. A close game might wreak havoc upon RAW's hapless ratings.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> That basically tells USA - "why pay big $$$$$ for a wrestling show, when I can pay way less for some syndicated shows and get a similar rating with higher ad rates".
> 
> USA would probably make more money putting shows like Parks and Recreation/Community/The Office on than wrestling.
> 
> I don't even know how Vince even negotiates with USA with these types of numbers. He has no bargaining position at all.


Everyone here would rather watch Parks and Rec over the shit WWE's been putting out.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I would watch Five reruns of Married With Children instead of Raw. Even that would be top modern edginess compared to Raw.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Something no one is talking about is the fact the male viewers are dropping like flies. This brand won't be carried without them despite the incessant need to pretend they don't matter. Women viewers are remaining stagnant and aren't increasing, so why this is being glossed over is baffling. They don't find a way to reel male viewers in, then they have no chance at digging themselves out of this hole. You tell a demographic they're irrelevant and book your show to spite them, and they'll eventually decide to go elsewhere. Vince only thinks he's god but I assure you, the suits at USA are his God and he will answer to them when it comes to these ratings. 

SD is absolutely atrocious and they deserve the headache that's on the way. Lord help them when football season arrives and fans realize nothing has changed.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lol SD hitting below 2 mill hs abeen comiogn a lomng time. They have treated SD like a B show, a crap show, a recap of raw show for years. So the fact male viewership and women viewership is dropping like flies is no shock. With the brand split coming, I guess they beleive it well create buzz. But is it too late Well SD going live actually get it over 3 mill again? Do they hve the talent or creative to intise people to watch SD again? IF Cena and Roman are on Raw. Well wheres SD Stars? Ambrose, Seth, and Wyatt should be all stars now. But they scrwewed Ambrose about last year with shit bookign after his seth feud. They have screwed Seth with his chicken shit heel booking sd champ last year. And of course Wyatt when he got buried by Cena a t Wm, then TAker, then TAker and KAne again at Surviivor Series. So you know. IF we look at the future, they can't rely on the old AE stars or Cena forever. USA are not happy, and they shoulden't be. Hypothetically if the brand split does over expose an already stifled roster and product, Who knows where Raw and SD well be. But lets give the brand split a shot, at least more talent well get more screen time.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Lothario said:


> Something no one is talking about is the fact the male viewers are dropping like flies. This brand won't be carried without them despite the incessant need to pretend they don't matter. Women viewers are remaining stagnant and aren't increasing, so why this is being glossed over is baffling. They don't find a way to reel male viewers in, then they have no chance at digging themselves out of this hole. You tell a demographic they're irrelevant and book your show to spite them, and they'll eventually decide to go elsewhere. Vince only thinks he's god but I assure you, the suits at USA are his God and he will answer to them when it comes to these ratings.
> 
> SD is absolutely atrocious and they deserve the headache that's on the way. Lord help them when football season arrives and fans realize nothing has changed.


Is it honestly _any_ surprise the males are tuning out?

The old motto used to be: you've got to have a character so that every guy wants to be you and every Woman wants to be with you.
And frankly, not many guys want to have people as Idols that talk like jackasses, get emasculated, or ponce around in purple, dressing up as unicorns.
Nowadays, where guys want to be badasses, you can't admit to watching that because it's embarassing and profoundly geeky.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I tried telling people last year that it didn't matter who the World Champion or Face of the Company is, that no matter who it is, the ratings won't improve. Even if it's Vince's chosen one. And not only did the ratings not improve, they didn't even stay the same as last year. They actually went DOWN even more. :lmao

2016, and everyone associated as being the biggest deal of 2016, and those in charge, have been the biggest failure in WWE history.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Of course the ratings are going down. Who the fuck would want to watch this:






When you could ignore all of the childish shit and watch this:






More interesting personalities, the match ups are far better promoted and hyped, and the fights are real.

The only thing this UFC/WWE "cross promotion" will achieve is get most WWE fans who tune in to UFC 200 for Brock to realize that the UFC is all they've ever wanted.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Guaranteed that RAW's biggest angle is saved for halftime of the NBA game.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

UFC is not WWE's comp tho lol. They are not on the opposite cabel provider. So while I see the logic. I don't think its the reason ratings are low. UFC has always been kinda an alternative to WWE, if you want real fights. Of course we can use Reigns as the reason WWE is been drivien into the ground. You could argue booking in 2011 post eras, excrewed WWE up. Then The Authoirty angle. e.t.c. No compelling stoylines atm at all. I Think A Wyatt Family taking down the Authority. With HHH Wyatt at summerslam could help things. It's time WWE has a spike, obviousley thebrand split well be that. But well be that enough. But I wonder how the Shield Cena/Styles segment well fair.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

UFC is what wrestling used to be. Add more colorful characters and you're there.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> UFC is not WWE's comp tho lol. They are not on the opposite cabel provider. So while I see the logic. I don't think its the reason ratings are low. UFC has always been kinda an alternative to WWE, if you want real fights. Of course we can use Reigns as the reason WWE is been drivien into the ground. You could argue booking in 2011 post eras, excrewed WWE up. Then The Authoirty angle. e.t.c. No compelling stoylines atm at all. I Think A Wyatt Family taking down the Authority. With HHH Wyatt at summerslam could help things. It's time WWE has a spike, obviousley thebrand split well be that. But well be that enough. But I wonder how the Shield Cena/Styles segment well fair.


What the WWE claims is its advantage over the UFC is the fact that it can script its shows and write entertaining storylines. The problem is that WWE hasn't been doing that for ages. In fact, UFC's feuds and build up for their fights have been far superior for a while now. So while UFC isn't a direct competitor, it does provide an alternative, especially for WWE fans of the Attitude Era. You could start watching UFC and completely drop WWE and you wouldn't feel a void at all.

Pro wrestling wise, there's not much competition in North America. But I'm sure more and more people are choosing NJPW or Lucha Underground over WWE - although I'm not a fan of either.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/13 WWE Raw Social Media Report, plus interesting stat for pre-MITB episode*

Monday’s WWE Raw continued to dip in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings two weeks removed from Memorial Day Raw.

*WWE Raw Social Media Tracking*

– June 13: Raw retained the #1 spot among series & specials on Monday night for the third consecutive week.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw ranked #2 or 3 depending on the metric. Raw was of course topped by Game 5 of the NBA Finals, but also trailed Mexico vs. Venezuela futbol from Houston in the number of unique authors tweeting about the game.

– Raw generated 125,000 tweets, down nine percent from last week and 37 percent from two weeks ago on Memorial Day.

The number of unique authors tweeting about Raw was 31,000, down slightly from 33,000 last week.

– An interesting stat is Raw registered a year-low stat of tweets-per-person.

The ratio of tweets to uniques was 4.0 tweets per person. The previous year-low was 4.1 tweets the night before WrestleMania on March 28. The next week’s Raw after WM32 generated 5.6 tweets per person.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...eport-plus-interesting-stat-pre-mitb-episode/


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I actually tweeted about RAW. It was "I blame this terrible RAW on everyone who didn't watch Nitro. You did this. #RAW"


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And the spiral continues.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow at this....

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/wwe-raw-smackdown/837441-official-raw-discussion-thread-6-10-13-a.html

3 years ago, the Raw thread got a little more than 3.3k replies, this year just slightly over 1.1k. That's some crazy shit right there lol.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How can a Raw after a week with a shitload of competition still go down in social media activity?


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Maybe the people who didn't watch decided not to come back.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah, but even more decided to not to do so than Last week.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

RAW used to have main events like this. lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> RAW used to have main events like this. lol


Makes me remember the question: why didn't Nash have a match at WM X-8?


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Makes me remember the question: why didn't Nash have a match at WM X-8?


You know, I've wondered that myself. I need to look into that. 

Edit: found this http://www.wrestlingforum.com/classic-wrestling/826265-why-kevin-nash-did-not-wrestle-wm18.html

Ugh. You made me look up the card, I forgot that Edge beat Booker T in less than 10 minutes. At least DDP beat Christian in a pretty underrated match. WM 18 was a colossal step down from 17. The only great/memorable match was Hogan/Rock. Well, HHH/Jericho was too for all the wrong reasons.

In other news, I finally found "Voodoo Child" in 256 kbps (almost HQ) with all of the nWo quotes, so I'm a happy panda.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Still pisses me off that they removed Voodoo child from the Network. Basically the only great thing left about Hogan at that point.

Nash VS Kane, LOL, WTF?


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> I actually tweeted about RAW. It was "I blame this terrible RAW on everyone who didn't watch Nitro. You did this. #RAW"


Oh man, I agree with the sentiment, but Nitro was pretty unwatchable at the end. Like WWE today, WCW's job was to create television people wanted to watch and they just never had the creative team post-nWo that could do that.

People don't want to watch a sinking ship.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> Oh man, I agree with the sentiment, but Nitro was pretty unwatchable at the end. Like WWE today, WCW's job was to create television people wanted to watch and they just never had the creative team post-nWo that could do that.
> 
> People don't want to watch a sinking ship.


It was a joke, m8

Late 2000/01 WCW was good, though. Russo was off the book and the quality was going back up. New guys being pushed. Things were on the up imo. They could have recovered, never as big as they once were, but a viable alternative.

WCW had a loyal fanbase till the end. When it died, fans left and never came back.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.043M
H2-3.109M
H3-2.758M
3H-2.970M*


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LOL!!!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@A-C-P @Chrome

Hour one ALMOST under 3 milion.

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's funny reading they could have recovered, when Nitro did better than Raw today.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow. That's horrible. The first hour barely got 3 million viewers, a slight bump for the second and the third bombed completely.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Holy fucking shit hour 3 :ha

holy fucking shit at hour 1 BARELY getting more than 3m


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The highest of the 3 hours being a 3.1 million.

:lmao


----------



## Kabraxal

So... How many "ratings don't matter" qoutes will we get from the WWE brass after that. Show not only averaged less than 3... But hour 3 is getting close to 2.5.

Time to change Vinnie boy.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The highest of the 3 hours being a 3.1 million.
> 
> :lmao


I'm really looking forward to Meltzer's breakdown this week. But I did think Cena/Styles would save Hour 3 as it has in recent weeks. 

Game 5 was a good one though. So, this bad rating isn't all that surprising.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

One Step Closer to Raw 1.9 :YES


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I'm really looking forward to Meltzer's breakdown this week. But I did think Cena/Styles would save Hour 3 as it has in recent weeks.
> 
> Game 5 was a good one though. So, this bad rating isn't all that surprising.


Meltzer's breakdown is useless to me this week. The show bombed from start to finish. Especially hours 1 and 3. 

The 3 hour average being under 3 million. WOW.

:heyman6


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.043M
> H2-3.109M
> H3-2.758M
> 3H-2.970M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+2.17%/+0.066M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-11.29%/-0.351M)
H3 Vs H1 (-9.37%/-0.285M)
6/13/16 Vs 6/6/16 (-8.76%/-0.285M)*

*H3 is the 2nd lowest H for 19 years since RTWM 97 next to the 2.712M which they hit on 11/23 RAW after SS.

Overall 2nd lowest 3H viewership since that same above episode which did 2.964M.

The final rating could be the lowest ever here or among the lowest.*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Meltzer's brakdown is useless to me this week. The show bombed from start to finish. Especially hours 1 and 3.
> 
> The 3 hour average being under 3 million. WOW.
> 
> :heyman6


At least The Shield got some traction in Hour 2. But yeah, this is bad. I knew it would be after the Twitter rating. 

It's weird because a lot of people have been saying that RAW was good last night. If so, it sucks when a good show bombs.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The 3 hour average being under 3 million.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










Gah damn! AJ and Cena couldn't even save that hour 3. Jesus Christ.

:ha Ran of the casuals and it seems the "smarks" are slowly leaving too.

Continue the same mistakes and be arrogant about how loyal your fans will be to you and your fuckery, brehs.

I haven't watched Raw in a while. i check a segment out if someone says something was particularly good, but I've checked out for the most part. I used to be passionately into it. But meh, things feel stale. I didn't even tune in for the Shield segment. And there was a time I would never miss anything those guys were in.

Ah well :shrug


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> At least The Shield got some traction in Hour 2. But yeah, this is bad. I knew it would be after the Twitter rating.
> 
> It's weird because a lot of people have been saying that RAW was good last night. If so, it sucks when a good show bombs.


Let's not forget, this wasn't a meaningless Raw, either. It was the go-home show to a PPV.

Only segments I cared for were the Shield one and Cena/AJ, so I don't care too much if the show got abused in the ratings, tbh. I won't care until they make major changes to the characters. That will solve the problem.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Holy shit....










That's pitiful. Hilarious, but pitiful. REALLY think it's time WWE and USA executives have a talk.


----------



## RDEvans

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

For a funny giggle Raw's MITB go home show last year 6/8/2015

Hour one: 3.67 million
Hour two: 3.60 million
Hour three: 3.64 million

And Raw 6/15/2015

Hour one: 4.09 million
Hour two: 4.24 million
Hour three: 3.99 million


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Meltzer's breakdown is useless to me this week. The show bombed from start to finish. Especially hours 1 and 3.
> 
> The 3 hour average being under 3 million. WOW.
> 
> :heyman6


Do people still say see you next week in the Raw thread?

Looks like WWE killed themselves with what they did at Mania. Seems it has gotten worse and worse for them as the year goes on and this is with no NFL. Do you still watch every week? 

My mondays have been entertaining playing Overwatch and other things


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Holy fook! Hour 3 way below 3 million and a .9 demo. WWE truly outdid themselves this week. I salute you, Vince. :clap


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince will be going down with this sinking ship:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Do people still say see you next week in the Raw thread?
> 
> Looks like WWE killed themselves with what they did at Mania. Seems it has gotten worse and worse for them as the year goes on and this is with no NFL. Do you still watch every week?
> 
> My mondays have been entertaining playing Overwatch and other things


No, no one says anything about anything anymore. I think everyone realizes no one is going to draw under these circumstances. I watch, these past few weeks I've been also watching other stuff while Raw is on and change the channel alot more frequently than I ever have.

Does anyone even want to be Champion while this is happening? I'm glad the one person I like isn't Champ for this. Fuck that. There was once a time where NBA ratings didn't hurt WWE Ratings. Only NFL ratings hurt them. The fact that the NBA is even hurting them now is a sad commentary on the WWE product.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

God bless Smackdown ratings. They're gonna receive the initial bump because of it being live the first week. But it won't be long until that wares off.

WWE trying to ADD more wrestling hours when they can't even get people to be interested in the hours they already have fpalm


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well, I like me some shit ratings.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Holy fook! Hour 3 way below 3 million and a .9 demo. WWE truly outdid themselves this week. I salute you, Vince. :clap


Even their previously lowest viewed episode last thanksgiving during the SS fallout had the lowest hourly demo at 0.93 for H3 compared to 0.90 of this one's H3. I am really expecting the rating to either scrape through somehow by a tiny fraction or be the lowest ever in 19 years since RTWM 97.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Vince will be going down with this sinking ship:


Just make sure when you look at this, that you realize this is the picture Vince wanks to every night.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's real. It's fucking real now, folks. This company, although won't be completely dead within our lifetime, is on a sharp downward spiral and is slowly dying. Yes I know all the reflection posts will come and say "Well, TNA is barely surviving, LU is drawing some of its lowest ratings, ROH is stagnant, NBA Finals, climate of entertainment, UFC and Brock, yadda yadda yadda....."

This is about WWE here and the fact is showing that this company is seeing its past days behind and some even darker ones ahead. Might I add that we are about two months away until football season kicks in. This is THE year WWE is at a crossroads.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> No, no one says anything about anything anymore. I think everyone realizes no one is going to draw under these circumstances. I watch, these past few weeks I've been also watching other stuff while Raw is on and change the channel alot more frequently than I ever have.
> 
> Does anyone even want to be Champion while this is happening? I'm glad the one person I like isn't Champ for this. Fuck that. There was once a time where NBA ratings didn't hurt WWE Ratings. Only NFL ratings hurt them. The fact that the NBA is even hurting them now is a sad commentary on the WWE product.


Not surprised the NBA is hurting them, Lebron is the Tom Brady of the NBA. He's a HUGE draw, plenty of people tune in hoping he'll lose unlike what is happening with the WWE. People aren't tuning in to see the champ win or lose, they're just tuning out. 

They better get used to these numbers. Think they'd caused so many fans to just stop watching I doubt many will come back. They can always spike a rating by stacking and promoting an episode but they'll never get consistent good numbers anymore. Rock/Austin/HBK could use New Days time machine and be in their prime again and I doubt it'll help.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Not surprised the NBA is hurting them, Lebron is the Tom Brady of the NBA. He's a HUGE draw, plenty of people tune in hoping he'll lose unlike what is happening with the WWE. People aren't tuning in to see the champ win or lose, they're just tuning out.
> 
> They better get used to these numbers. Think they'd caused so many fans to just stop watching I doubt many will come back. They can always spike a rating by stacking and promoting an episode but they'll never get consistent good numbers anymore. Rock/Austin/HBK could use New Days time machine and be in their prime again and I doubt it'll help.


It's just surprising to me. LeBron has been in the league for awhile now, and in quite a bit of NBA Finals, but I don't recall any of those Finals' hurting Raw this much. If we think this is bad, wait until the NFL season starts. They are the ratings monster of our time.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Holy fucking hell, I was not expecting that rating. :lmao :lmao :lmao

This company has killed their ratings. More & more people are done watching, and it's so fucking great to see this company get what they deserve.*


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The funny thing is we all thought we'd get this kinda rating 2 weeks ago on Memorial Day. Aside from the NBA, there really wasn't much else on last night aside from baseball. And it wasn't a holiday either, which makes this week's numbers all the more staggering.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Can we please imagine the straight anal slaughter football is going to do to Raw...


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Just wait til SD goes live and splits their audience. Who the fuck wants to watch a live 3 hour show centered around Roman Reigns when there's a live two hour show centered around Cena/Styles the next day?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> The funny thing is we all thought we'd get this kinda rating 2 weeks ago on Memorial Day. Aside from the NBA, there really wasn't much else on last night aside from baseball. And it wasn't a holiday either, which makes this week's numbers all the more staggering.


I think these big returns, Shane and Cena, only have a week long impact. 

The next person up is Brock Lesnar. That's if he doesn't quit. Brock sounds passionate when he talks about UFC and goes through the motions with WWE. If he wins against Hunt, I think he's gone.

I agree that LeBron is like Tom Brady. I'm watching to see him lose.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I think these big returns, Shane and Cena, only have a week long impact.
> 
> The next person up is Brock Lesnar. That's if he doesn't quit. Brock sounds passionate when he talks about UFC and goes through the motions with WWE. If he wins against Hunt, I think he's gone.
> 
> I agree that LeBron is like Tom Brady. I'm watching to see him lose.


It's a one-off deal. If he wins, it doesn't really matter. He's still under contract for two years (I think) so he's not going to be fighting again.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Just wait til SD goes live and splits their audience. Who the fuck wants to watch a live 3 hour show centered around Roman Reigns when there's a live two hour show centered around Cena/Styles the next day?


Yeah, I could see Raw getting even worse. The brand split might not last long if the numbers go in the toilet. SD could improve but Vince wouldn't care because Raw is what he truly cares about. They'll end up pillaging SD and leaving them with scraps.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Can we please imagine the straight anal slaughter football is going to do to Raw...


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I guess to be fair, a finals game has never been on a Monday, at least not in recent memory. Doesn't excuse a rating THAT shitty though. That's just embarrassing and everyone associated with WWE should be ashamed.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Fantastic news.

:yeahyeah


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> It's a one-off deal. If he wins, it doesn't really matter. He's still under contract for two years (I think) so he's not going to be fighting again.


If this contract involved anyone else, I'd believe it was a one-off. But Brock is a bit unpredictable at times (outside of being in it for the money). He seems like the type to just quit. He does appear to love UFC more and they are paying him a ransom too.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Yeah, I could see Raw getting even worse. The brand split might not last long if the numbers go in the toilet. SD could improve but Vince wouldn't care because Raw is what he truly cares about. They'll end up pillaging SD and leaving them with scraps.


I know, and that's exactly what will happen. This split isn't going to last. Just like the first time around, they'll realize RAW is fading and bring over all the SD guys to carry it.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Let's see here:

WWE drove off their casual fans quite impressively.

Somehow they beat defeat into what was such a loyal fanbase in "smarks". The hardcore fans now laugh in the face of "see you next week. You will always be here!"

Roman's title reign is a failure. His program with AJ was great, but that doesn't mean shit when it ain't moving the needle.

The "dream match" of AJ vs Cena, while getting the highest rating out of all segments, aint doing shit for viewership worth noting.

Fan favorites are getting tv time, but the damage of past decisions have rared its ugly head. Plus, too many people don't care to really come in to watch their favorites when there is a pre determined glass ceiling hovering of many of their heads.

Hot storylines are like a rare anomaly now days.

They could have shaken things up with building up a double turn with Roman and Seth. Shield triple threat is meh when you pretty much know how things will go down.

Product is just ass right now.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE RAW Viewership Drops Below 3 Million Viewers*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's WWE RAW, the go-home episode for Sunday's Money In the Bank pay-per-view, drew 2.97 million viewers. This is down 9% from last week's 3.255 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.043 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.109 million viewers and the final hour drew 2.758 million viewers.

RAW was #3 on cable for the night in viewership, behind Rizolli & Isles, Major Crimes and The O'Reilly Factor, and #1 in the 18-49 demographic.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ership-for-the-final-episode-before-money-in/


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I agree that LeBron is like Tom Brady. I'm watching to see him lose.


Well, other than the fact that Brady has a winning record in the Super Bowl, and LeBron "The Choke Artist" James has a losing record in the NBA Finals. 

By the way, I disagree with the claim that Brock will return to the UFC, win or lose. He might win this fight vs Hunt (although I don't think he will) but he's not going to be competitive against any of the top guys in the division. He's far too competitive of an individual to fight lower ranked guys, and I doubt he wants to be embarrassed like he was in his previous two fights (which is exactly what would happen if he fought any of the top 5 guys in the division.)

I've stated before that this cross promotion between UFC/WWE won't do much for the WWE. A bunch of WWE fans will tune in to UFC 200, they'll like what they see, because not only are the fights real, but the personalities and the build up for the fights are far better than anything the WWE has done in years, and most won't have much of a reason to come back to the WWE.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> I know, and that's exactly what will happen. This split isn't going to last. Just like the first time around, they'll realize RAW is fading and bring over all the SD guys to carry it.


We'll get the return of guest hosts for Raw again. First host being President Trump, they'll get attitude era type numbers for that Raw for sure.

But WWE is shit, haven't watched in almost a year and it really does seem like I'm not the only one. I was just smarter than all of you and tuned out a lot earlier :Rollins. I'll still be at Summerslam though because I have tickets @Becky With The Good Hair


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> If this contract involved anyone else, I'd believe it was a one-off. But Brock is a bit unpredictable at times (outside of being in it for the money). He seems like the type to just quit. He does appear to love UFC more and they are paying him a ransom too.


I think there's always an open door, but I think the fact that it's UFC 200 and that they want to make it a special event has more to do with it than anything. They wanted Connor for it, didn't work out. Don't know what Rousey's deal was, but they couldn't get her. So, Brock was their next huge draw and it made sense since he headlined UFC 100. 

It's like when WWE brings in Legends for special one-offs at PPVs.

Obviously, if he does well, there'll be more. If he doesn't, maybe he'll take another long break. Either way, he's a part-time UFC guy and a part-time WWE guy.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

First hour almost went under 3m :wtf I knew the number would be bad, but I didn't think it would look like that :lmao


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Let's see here:
> 
> WWE drove off their casual fans quite impressively.
> 
> Somehow they beat defeat into what was such a loyal fanbase in "smarks". The hardcore fans now laugh in the face of "see you next week. You will always be here!"
> 
> Roman's title reign is a failure. His program with AJ was great, but that doesn't mean shit when it ain't moving the needle.
> 
> The "dream match" of AJ vs Cena, while getting the highest rating out of all segments, aint doing shit for viewership worth noting.
> 
> *Fan favorites are getting tv time, but the damage of past decisions have rared its ugly head. Plus, too many people don't care to really come in to watch their favorites when there is a pre determined glass ceiling hovering of many of their heads.*
> 
> Hot storylines are like a rare anomaly now days.
> 
> They could have shaken things up with building up a double turn with Roman and Seth. Shield triple threat is meh when you pretty much know how things will go down.
> 
> Product is just ass right now.


This is a great point right here. It's why I don't really watch because I know guys like Ambrose and Owens will never get that true main event push, and it's frustrating because they deserve better. But the way both guys were handled on the RTWM leads me to believe that's how WWE will always view them. Only way they get a true push is if the crowds start hijacking shows for them, or, what seems to be the more likely scenario at this point, that WWE gets in such bad shape they have no choice but to push guys them. And not just those 2 either, plenty of other guys deserve an opportunity they're not getting.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> If this contract involved anyone else, I'd believe it was a one-off. But Brock is a bit unpredictable at times (outside of being in it for the money). He seems like the type to just quit. He does appear to love UFC more and they are paying him a ransom too.


I agree that he's definitely regretting his decision to resign that WWE deal, even though he's getting an absurd amount of money to do nothing. He's clearly much more into UFC on a personal level, since he's competitor. WWE isn't competition. 

I blame WWE for this, too, because they haven't used him in an inspiring way since he was champion. He doesn't give a fuck because they don't give him a reason to give a fuck. I think that was a big reason he worked Taker for an extended period, since they're buddies and Brock wanted to, as he had already worked Cena and there are no other stars on the roster for him to go against. Brock is so gone when his contract is up.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> I think there's always an open door, but I think the fact that it's UFC 200 and that they want to make it a special event has more to do with it than anything. They wanted Connor for it, didn't work out. Don't know what Rousey's deal was, but they couldn't get her. So, Brock was their next huge draw and it made sense since he headlined UFC 100.
> 
> It's like when WWE brings in Legends for special one-offs at PPVs.
> 
> Obviously, if he does well, there'll be more. If he doesn't, maybe he'll take another long break. Either way, he's a part-time UFC guy and a part-time WWE guy.


You and Brownian make good points as to why Brock wouldn't return to UFC full time. But I think you may be more on the money in your theory. If this fight goes well, Brock will be a part timer for both companies. Vince doesn't have the nerve to enforce the no compete clause. Brock pretty much told Vince he was fighting at UFC. Everything else has been spin IMO. 

WWE has been in a poor state lately but Summerslam should be good. I hope. At the very least, I'll be able to nag @Iron Man in person after I get my hands on some tickets and convert him to the Empire. :reigns2


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I knew the ratings would suck, but damn... :lmao


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bubba Chuck said:


> First hour almost went under 3m :wtf I knew the number would be bad, but I didn't think it would look like that :lmao


Plus the first hour was on TV BEFORE the NBA game even started...


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The thing you're both forgetting is that being part time in WWE is far different from being part time in the UFC. With Brock being part time in the WWE, he would likely have time to train and have fight camps, but being out of the octagon for long periods of time wouldn't bode well for him, especially since he's older and since he'll probably never _fully_ recover from his bout with diverticulitis. If he doesn't fully commit to the UFC, he'll get dusted by even the lower ranked guys, and his drawing power would take a huge hit - as would his health.

Ring rust is real, and the adverse effects are much more detrimental in an actual combat sport than in a scripted environment.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> This is a great point right here. It's why I don't really watch because I know guys like Ambrose and Owens will never get that true main event push, and it's frustrating because they deserve better. But the way both guys were handled on the RTWM leads me to believe that's how WWE will always view them. Only way they get a true push is if the crowds start hijacking shows for them, or, what seems to be the more likely scenario at this point, that WWE gets in such bad shape they have no choice but to push guys them. And not just those 2 either, plenty of other guys deserve an opportunity they're not getting.


It gotta be discouraging. To root so hard for a guy who has all the tools, but the company only views them at a certain level has to be frustrating. The roster is full of talented people, but why does that matter when Vince has already decided who will be main event and who will not. It's one of the long term damages of a company like WCW crashing and burning. Vince has no incentive to capitalize on someone getting over if he doesn't particularly want to push them to the moon. Vince is writing the show for himself and it's crazy to see the level his stubborn and arrogance can go.

Even with the brand split, guys like AJ, Dean and Owens winning the SD title feels like a consolation prize. "Hey, we know the fans love ya, but we don't quite think you have it. So here, take this title and let's hope this placate those pesky fans!" No matter what they're trying to promote, Raw will be their flagship show and the World Heavyweight belt is THE title. 

Brand split ain't nothing but them getting desperate and trying to smack band aids in the colossal hole on their sinking ship. I won't be naive to think WWE is going out of business, but outside of a major event/shake up, they might permanently run a good chunk of their fans off this time. Wrestling is already a niche. Running off the people who enjoy it is beyond dumb.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> WWE has been in a poor state lately but Summerslam should be good. I hope. At the very least, I'll be able to nag @Iron Man in person after I get my hands on some tickets and convert him to the Empire. :reigns2


You'd have to be a magician to do that :Seth

Summerslam will be good. They can still put on some amazing shows and if they actually give matches time with no fuckery . Their problem is everything between PPVs, not surprised the build up to MITB has been awful.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> Plus the first hour was on TV BEFORE the NBA game even started...


I liked the New Day/Cass & Enzo segment but it seemed a bit weird that the WWE was advertising the NBA game. Steph Curry's shoes are ugly but that promo should've been all WWE related IMO. Don't remind people that Game 5 is on.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Apparently the final rating was a 2.03. Ooooh, so close lol.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I liked the New Day/Cass segment but it seemed a bit weird that the WWE was advertising the NBA game. Steph Curry's shoes are ugly but that promo should've been all WWE related IMO. Don't remind people that Game 5 is on.


Yeh I also did not get that part at all. I mean I understand Vince and Co have an addiction to trying to be "mainstream" but why in the hell would you choose last night, during the OPENING SEGMENT of your show remind your audience of the competition you will be facing later.



Chrome said:


> Apparently the final rating was a 2.03.


So close to Raw 1.9 :trips5

SHIV has to redo his Roman 2:16 gif now :reigns2


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If that's true, that'd be a new record low. 2.15 was the last one, no?

mfw


----------



## squeelbitch

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

uh oh vince and your running out of quick fixes as well, cena return hasn't helped them, news of brock back in the ufc hasn't helped them, signing a bunch of smark favourites like members from the bullet club hasn't helped them and seth rollins return hasn't helped them....


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That's what I've been saying for months, especially After the Bryan fiasco, that if WWE continues like that, they will completely lose fans' faith because they become conditioned to expect their favorites become crushed by McMahon pet projects. And in this light, WM 32 was complete and utter havoc on fan loyalty.

Here's a guy who fans treat like a king, let's job him to Jericho.
Here's a guy who is the most over guy next to Styles, drew awesome reactions against Triple H, let's have Lesnar squash him.
Here's a guy who people adore and want to be a flicker of hope, let's job him out to the Undertaker to kill his heat.
Here's a girl who all fans consider a front woman of the new women's generation, let's have her lose to a Flair.
Here's a stable that are absolute fan faves for years and whose leader is awesome, let's have them squashed in devastating fashion to Cena and Rock.
Here is the most over team on the roster, #1 merch seller, and here are four Former (world) Champions, let's have them ridiculed by Foley, Austin and Michaels.
Here's the guy nobody in the entire arena wants to see as Champion, and who can't work, let's have him go over Triple H in a long ass piss poor Match.

Yeah, and let's have 100.000 people witness it live.

It's Death. Death to anybody involved. You're killing your Fan base. Not even WCW firing Flair 30 years ago, or Starrcade 1997 did that much damage out of so much stupidity.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> The thing you're both forgetting is that being part time in WWE is far different from being part time in the UFC. With Brock being part time in the WWE, he would likely have time to train and have fight camps, but being out of the octagon for long periods of time wouldn't bode well for him, especially since he's older and since he'll probably never _fully_ recover from his bout with diverticulitis. If he doesn't fully commit to the UFC, he'll get dusted by even the lower ranked guys, and his drawing power would take a huge hit - as would his health.
> 
> Ring rust is real, and the adverse effects are much more detrimental in an actual combat sport than in a scripted environment.


Totally. I'm not even sure this UFC 200 thing will go well for Brock and it could just be his last pay day. It almost feels like it's UFC's equivalent of what Bellator is doing, bringing in past Legends for special attraction fights. Except they chose Mark Hunt, who's very capable of flooring him in the first round.

I don't think Brock's going to be in title contention or anything, but I could see UFC doing special attraction fights with him, like Brock-Fedor if the stars align. 

I think Brock talks a good game about wanting to be a fighter in interviews, but also talks about the money, and really that's as good of an incentive as any. If he gets to really fight someone, win or lose, even better. I don't see Brock doing anything more than proving he's "still got it" and getting a pay day.

Of course, the stars have to align.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wade Keller has just tweeted that the final rating is a 2.03R.

*Wade Keller
‏@thewadekeller
OH BOY! 2.03. So very very close to under 2.0. Wow. #WWERaw*

https://twitter.com/thewadekeller/status/742827321195958272


----------



## Shifde

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

when i see numbers like this i have the same feeling as gary johnston from team america world police in the puke scene

soon not even jesus will be able save them

time to call bischoff and russo(more so) let them take it down as fast as they can so the embarrassment is too great on the mcmahons and creative..let the roster find new wrestling homes across the globe


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2.03 rating.

Holy balls.

:buried

:cena4


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> You'd have to be a magician to do that :Seth
> 
> Summerslam will be good. They can still put on some amazing shows and if they actually give matches time *with no fuckery*


WWE PPV with no fuckery? need I remind you of Summerslam 2015? :lol


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> WWE PPV with no fuckery? need I remind you of Summerslam 2015? :lol


Yeah, I'm expecting a Bill Simmons run-in this year.


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2.03 :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

RAW 1.9 coming soon, looking forward to it burhs :sundin

Where are those geeks that keep saying "You'll watch anyway" 'cause I'm here waiting for you to show up :kobe3


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> That's what I've been saying for months, especially After the Bryan fiasco, that if WWE continues like that, they will completely lose fans' faith because they become conditioned to expect their favorites become crushed by McMahon pet projects. And in this light, WM 32 was complete and utter havoc on fan loyalty.
> 
> Here's a guy who fans treat like a king, let's job him to Jericho.
> Here's a guy who is the most over guy next to Styles, drew awesome reactions against Triple H, let's have Lesnar squash him.
> Here's a guy who people adore and want to be a flicker of hope, let's job him out to the Undertaker to kill his heat.
> Here's a girl who all fans consider a front woman of the new women's generation, let's have her lose to a Flair.
> Here's a stable that are absolute fan faves for years and whose leader is awesome, let's have them squashed in devastating fashion to Cena and Rock.
> Here is the most over team on the roster, #1 merch seller, and here are four Former (world) Champions, let's have them ridiculed by Foley, Austin and Michaels.
> Here's the guy nobody in the entire arena wants to see as Champion, and who can't work, let's have him go over Triple H in a long ass piss poor Match.
> 
> Yeah, and let's have 100.000 people witness it live.
> 
> It's Death. Death to anybody involved. You're killing your Fan base. Not even WCW firing Flair 30 years ago, or Starrcade 1997 did that much damage out of so much stupidity.


If they booked like this with competition, they'd be out of business by now. They're that fucking arrogant that they don't give a shit how stupid their results are, because nothing can challenge them. Even though they have 100% of the wrestling market, they're actually managing to SHRINK that market and make wrestling fans into non-wrestling fans. It's unbelievable.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> WWE PPV with no fuckery? need I remind you of Summerslam 2015? :lol


I've always believed that most of WWE's current problems started at Summerslam 2013. Daniel Bryan should've stayed champ and I don't think they ever gave a valid reason as to why HBK turned heel. This just started a chain reaction, leading up to WM 30.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

RAW 2:03 says: whoops I fucked up! :lol
So glad I stopped watching.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> That's what I've been saying for months, especially After the Bryan fiasco, that if WWE continues like that, they will completely lose fans' faith because they become conditioned to expect their favorites become crushed by McMahon pet projects. And in this light, WM 32 was complete and utter havoc on fan loyalty.
> 
> Here's a guy who fans treat like a king, let's job him to Jericho.
> Here's a guy who is the most over guy next to Styles, drew awesome reactions against Triple H, let's have Lesnar squash him.
> Here's a guy who people adore and want to be a flicker of hope, let's job him out to the Undertaker to kill his heat.
> Here's a girl who all fans consider a front woman of the new women's generation, let's have her lose to a Flair.
> Here's a stable that are absolute fan faves for years and whose leader is awesome, let's have them squashed in devastating fashion to Cena and Rock.
> Here is the most over team on the roster, #1 merch seller, and here are four Former (world) Champions, let's have them ridiculed by Foley, Austin and Michaels.
> Here's the guy nobody in the entire arena wants to see as Champion, and who can't work, let's have him go over Triple H in a long ass piss poor Match.
> 
> Yeah, and let's have 100.000 people witness it live.
> 
> It's Death. Death to anybody involved. You're killing your Fan base. Not even WCW firing Flair 30 years ago, or Starrcade 1997 did that much damage out of so much stupidity.


This is why I stopped watching, just couldn't take it anymore.
WWE, in their arrogance, are literally daring the fans to stop watching.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/13 WWE Raw TV Ratings – Raw falls to historical low-point*

WWE Raw fell hard to one of the lowest TV ratings in the 23-year history of the show Monday night against the NBA Finals.

*WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking*

June 13: WWE Raw drew a 2.03 TV rating, down 11 percent from last week’s 2.28 rating.

It was easily the lowest-rated show of the year. Historically, it was in the territory of an all-time low for Raw. (We will further research the mid-1990s era.)

Raw was especially hit hard in the key demographics.

Adults 18-49 fell 14% from last week, falling below a 1.0 household rating
Males 18-34 fell 15% from last week, also falling below a 1.0 household rating
Males 18-49 fell 21% from last week. The show scored a 1.17 m18-49 rating compared to 1.48 last week.

– Raw’s three hours averaged fewer than 3.0 million viewers for the first time since November of last year.

The November 23, 2015 episode averaged 2.964 million viewers. This week’s Raw averaged 2.970 million viewers to avoid being in the all-time-low category.

Raw’s average of 2.970 million viewers was down 9 percent from last week’s audience. The show started sluggish in the first two hours, then fell hard in the third hour.

First Hour: 3.043 million viewers (year-low)
Second Hour: 3.109 million viewers (year-low)
Third Hour: 2.758 million viewers (year-low / 11.3% decline from 2H)

– The NBA Finals drew 20 million viewers on ABC. The episode of NBC’s “American Ninja Warrior” with Zach Gowen drew 7 million viewers.

*Caldwell’s Analysis*: Pick a concern. Yes, it was a pre-PPV episode against the NBA Finals, but the product is not hot right now. The only feud consistently drawing interest right now is John Cena vs. A.J. Styles.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/14/613-wwe-raw-tv-ratings-raw-falls-historical-low-point/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Lowest WWE RAW ratings since 9/4/95.

6/13/16 2.03R
12/30/96 1.6R
12/23/96 1.5R
10/28/96 2.0R
10/14/96 1.8R
9/23/96 2.0R
8/12/96 2.0R
9/25/95 1.9R*

http://www.twnpnews.com/information/wwfraw.shtml


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Tempest said:


> 2.03 :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> RAW 1.9 coming soon, looking forward to it burhs :sundin
> 
> Where are those geeks that keep saying "You'll watch anyway" 'cause I'm here waiting for you to show up :kobe3


Those geeks tend to just pop up in the financial threads now, where they're easily fooled by the WWE spinning all their numbers into a positive.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How long before WWE gets TNA level of ratings and viewers?  xD


----------



## Sick Graps-V2

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn, the 8th lowest rating over the last 21 years. That's a terrible number, but they deserve it for fucking the product up.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> 2.03 rating.
> 
> Holy balls.
> 
> :buried
> 
> :cena4


:lmao :lmao :lmao those numbers are terrible. I thought things were supposed to turn around  




Reotor said:


> WWE PPV with no fuckery? need I remind you of Summerslam 2015? :lol


 I was supposed to Summerslam with my cousin but he didn't wanna spend the money because he was getting married. We ended up going to the Raw the following night which was fun because the Dudley's return and Sting but the whole time I was crying inside that I missed my favorite talent being involved in an amazing match and making history :mj2. I wish I could have been their for that fuckery.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao those numbers are terrible. I thought things were supposed to turn around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was supposed to Summerslam with my cousin but he didn't wanna spend the money because he was getting married. We ended up going to the Raw the following night which was fun because the Dudley's return and Sting but the whole time I was crying inside that I missed my favorite talent being involved in an amazing match and making history :mj2. I wish I could have been their for that fuckery.


I also don't know why some are saying Raw was a really good show. It was two good segments and the rest was your usual, meaningless filler crap.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I swear, I've read several times that "Raw has dropped to it's lowest since 199x." in the past year Wouldn't this be the lowest since, well the last lowest Raw in modern times? :lol


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Kids even no selling this shit.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I also don't know why some are saying Raw was a really good show. It was two good segments and the rest was your usual, meaningless filler crap.


You shouldn't be surprised. Raw could be awful for 2 hours but if there's a surprise or something awesome at the very end some act like Raw was good.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And a giant fuck you for turning Styles and Rollins into chicken shit heels for your 2 boy toys that can't draw stick people if you gave them crayons.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sick Graps-V2 said:


> Damn, the 8th lowest rating over the last 21 years. That's a terrible number, but they deserve it for fucking the product up.


Ratings for RAWs before 9/4/95 starting from 1/11/93 are not easily available online. So we can't be sure if any of those did this badly either. However what is certain is this is indeed the 8th lowest (or as low as 5th if you consider those 3 other episodes with 2.0R marked to a more accurate decimal point) after around 1080 episodes over nearly 21 years.

And only 6 Nitros did around this rating or lower than this and some of those were when they were shutting down themselves.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well after tanking, RAW should surely have a relatively strong rebound following MITB next Monday.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> I swear, I've read several times that "Raw has dropped to it's lowest since 199x." in the past year Wouldn't this be the lowest since, well the last lowest Raw in modern times? :lol


I've said the same thing too. :lol

It's like a running gag at this point.


----------



## StraightYesSociety

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Who would've thought that literally insulting and mocking your fans would turn them away?


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Well after tanking, RAW should surely have a relatively strong rebound following MITB next Monday.


Haven't PPV bumps been meh lately? Something big has to happen at MITB to grab attention. If everything stays pretty much the same after MITB, what is the incentive to tune in on Raw?


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:lol An AVERAGE under 3 mils...First of many to come.


----------



## antdvda

Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work. 

Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along? 

One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *– Raw’s three hours averaged fewer than 3.0 million viewers for the first time since November of last year.*
> 
> The November 23, 2015 episode averaged 2.964 million viewers. This week’s Raw averaged 2.970 million viewers to avoid being in the all-time-low category.
> 
> Raw’s average of 2.970 million viewers was down 9 percent from last week’s audience. The show started sluggish in the first two hours, then fell hard in the third hour.
> 
> First Hour: 3.043 million viewers (year-low)
> Second Hour: 3.109 million viewers (year-low)
> Third Hour: 2.758 million viewers (year-low / 11.3% decline from 2H)
> 
> – The NBA Finals drew 20 million viewers on ABC. *The episode of NBC’s “American Ninja Warrior” with Zach Gowen drew 7 million viewers.*
> ]











How does it feel the other way around Vince.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


And all of those guys get to pretty much look like geeks every week and are way under guys like Cena and Reigns when it comes to looking strong and being booked strong. WWE's booking tells us only Cena and Reigns are worth a damn.

Try harder.

I'm not gonna blame talent, but IF someone wants to go that route..


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince gonna looking at these ratings and go "Should I have Dean win in a swerve that can shake things up a little? Roman's title reign isn't doing well, so what can we lose doing this...Might bring some interest back..."










"What the hell was I just thinking. Dean will win MITB, cash in on the same night and eat the pin. Now THAT'S brilliant!"

Vince will light a cigar on the flames of this burning ship and believe everything will be fine and the fans will surely be back. Because I think he's arrogant enough to think his way WILL work in the end.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Haven't PPV bumps been meh lately? Something big has to happen at MITB to grab attention. If everything stays pretty much the same after MITB, what is the incentive to tune in on Raw?


Not much, but there won't be an NBA game to take their lunch money. If Raw barely increases, then I don't know if anything will be a ratings viagra for RAW.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


Yes because Cena and Reigns aren't the top guys. Blame the other guys who aren't booked strongly at all :Rollins. If you blamed booking I guess I could agree but blaming smarks and saying they got what they wanted :lmao


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


*Oh fucking please. The roster are the last people you should be blaming for this crap rating. The blame lies on the idiots writing the show, and no one else.

Blaming Roman Reigns, or "the Indy darlings" is fucking stupidity.*


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No one can honestly blame the "vanilla midgets punk2)" when they haven't even been given the ball to run with. How is someone supposed to draw main event numbers when they are getting midcard pushes? :lol

It's a "Won't know until WWE tries." type situation. Yes, they are getting a lot of shine on tv, but it feels like most guys are spinning their wheels and going nowhere. They all face each other, trade wins for the most part and that's pretty much it. They may end up fighting against guys like Roman or Cena, but no one truly goes over those two. Cena and Roman win even when they lose :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw, in pure average numbers, lost about half a million viewers permanently the day Wrestlemania ended.
And more than a million viewers compared to Wrestlemania Fall-out.

Shocking.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Apparently the final rating was a 2.03. Ooooh, so close lol.


That equates to what, a 1.6 during NFL season? For a LIVE tv show...:lmao


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> The "dream match" of AJ vs Cena, while getting the highest rating out of all segments, aint doing shit for viewership worth noting.
> 
> Fan favorites are getting tv time, but the damage of past decisions have rared its ugly head. Plus, too many people don't care to really come in to watch their favorites when there is a pre determined glass ceiling hovering of many of their heads.


Could it be that the majority of fans simply don't care about these IWC heroes like Rollins, Styles, Owens and New Day who are featured so prominently on the show? I don't want to start an argument when we should all be celebrating the RAW rating, but I can't help but feel there's a difference in what the casual fans at home are tuning in for and what the IWC want. If you were a casual fan who never heard of AJ Styles until he stepped foot in the WWE, would you really care about seeing him face John Cena?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Raw, in pure average numbers, lost about half a million viewers permanently the day Wrestlemania ended.
> And more than a million viewers compared to Wrestlemania Fall-out.
> 
> Shocking.


If that doesn't open up Vinces' eyes, nothing will. WM was literally only 2.5 months ago. That is a STAGGERING amount of viewers to lose in such a short amount of time.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People are STILL blaming Reigns and Cena? C'mon, most fans don't read that much into it. They don't say, "hey, that Reigns guy that's barely been on the show for the past several weeks beat up some of these guys in the main event one time, so I don't care about ANYONE on the roster anymore."

People don't care about this show one way or another. People don't care about Reigns, I'll be the first to say that, I just wish smarks would also admit that no one cares about the indy guys either... And don't pull the "booking" card, because that goes both ways. The story used to go that those guys just didn't get ME booking... Now they're getting it while Roman takes a backseat and is barely featured.

The show is just awful. It's too long, there's too much wrestling, there isn't enough character/story-build, the storylines rarely resolve themselves... I can't imagine what it's going to be like with half the roster once the brand split happens :lol :lol :lol Raw doing a 1.5 is going to be hilarious 



With all of that said, it's unfortunate that Raw did such low numbers... Now far fewer people will know that this upcoming MITB is "The most historic MITB event of all time!" (Yes, that includes 2011!!)


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Vince gonna looking at these ratings and go "Should I have Dean win in a swerve that can shake things up a little? Roman's title reign isn't doing well, so what can we lose doing this...Might bring some interest back..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "What the hell was I just thinking. Dean will win MITB, cash in on the same night and eat the pin. Now THAT'S brilliant!"
> 
> Vince will light a cigar on the flames of this burning ship and believe everything will be fine and the fans will surely be back. Because I think he's arrogant enough to think his way WILL work in the end.


The problem with a move like putting the title on Dean or AJ at this point is the same problem WCW ran into at this point in its decline. They finally put the title on someone like Booker T when it was too late and when they'd already established that he wasn't in the same league as Hogan or those other guys.

Even when they put him over Goldberg on Nitro, after Goldberg's drawing power had waned, it didn't really do much for Booker T. Sure, Booker was the alpha and was rightfully where he should have been at a certain point, but it was too little, too late.

After Ambrose got wiped out by Brock, his spot on the card was firmly established. He needs a major win over someone huge like HHH (which is supposedly what he's there for, even though he beat Dean) or Cena or Brock before they put the belt on him, but I doubt they go there.

And AJ, while he certainly proved that he can hang with Reigns, it's really all about how this Cena feud goes for him and the prognosis isn't great. 

Fortunately, WWE still has all of the capabilities to build a star. WrestleMania is still a big deal, as is the Rumble, but if interest continues to decline, they won't have those tentpoles forever.

Unfortunately, WWE doesn't use those resources very well. They need to create a big time star that its base likes (forget about crossover stars, just someone their audience likes) and build from there.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



AVGN said:


> Could it be that the majority of fans simply don't care about these IWC heroes like Rollins, Styles, Owens and New Day who are featured so prominently on the show? I don't want to start an argument when we should all be celebrating the RAW rating, but I can't help but feel there's a difference in what the casual fans at home are tuning in for and what the IWC want. I made a post in the thread If you were a casual fan who never heard of AJ Styles until he stepped foot in the WWE, would you really care about seeing him face John Cena?


Well, Cena is back. Reigns is on top. Why aren't people tuning in for them?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> People are STILL blaming Reigns and Cena? C'mon, most fans don't read that much into it. They don't say, "hey, that Reigns guy that's barely been on the show for the past several weeks beat up some of these guys in the main event one time, so I don't care about ANYONE on the roster anymore."
> 
> People don't care about this show one way or another. People don't care about Reigns, I'll be the first to say that, I just wish smarks would also admit that no one cares about the indy guys either... And don't pull the "booking" card, because that goes both ways. The story used to go that those guys just didn't get ME booking... Now they're getting it while Roman takes a backseat and is barely featured.
> 
> The show is just awful. It's too long, there's too much wrestling, there isn't enough character/story-build, the storylines rarely resolve themselves... I can't imagine what it's going to be like with half the roster once the brand split happens :lol :lol :lol Raw doing a 1.5 is going to be hilarious
> 
> 
> 
> With all of that said, it's unfortunate that Raw did such low numbers... Now far fewer people will know that this upcoming MITB is "The most historic MITB event of all time!" (Yes, that includes 2011!!)


2 different people just tried to blame the Indy darlings, meanwhile Cena is back, and Reigns is on top. Why aren't people tuning in for them?

See. This is why 'anti smarks' get destroyed on this thread. They try to start shit before getting put back in their place.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> And all of those guys get to pretty much look like geeks every week and are way under guys like Cena and Reigns when it comes to looking strong and being booked strong. WWE's booking tells us only Cena and Reigns are worth a damn.
> 
> Try harder.
> 
> I'm not gonna blame talent, but IF someone wants to go that route..


Well, Haitch said in the SC Podcast, when you're the top guy, "if the number stinks, that's on you". 
So, case closed actually.

And Cena still headlines over Reigns and Rollins.

:heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Well, Haitch said in the SC Podcast, when you're the top guy, "if the number stinks, that's on you".
> So, case closed actually.
> 
> And Cena still headlines over Reigns and Rollins.
> 
> :heston


Not only H. That's what we heard on this thread all 2015. Now, that line of thinking doesn't stand anymore?

Ah, I love the stench of hypocrisy..

I'm not one to blame the talent, but if you want to go down that route, it won't be pretty for any of the talent..


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm actually kind of disappointed that Cena/AJ isn't doing so well in the ratings. I mean, Cena's been basically done as top guy since losing to Brock two years ago, but he's still a guy they can use to make a new star. 

I do kind of wonder if they'd just given up on Reigns, had AJ go over him as a heel and done the Club turn at Extreme Rules, and then done this same feud with Cena, if that would have helped matters.

Armchair booking, I know, but the thought process of thinking Cena/AJ would be a hot feud after AJ lost to Jericho, Reigns, and Reigns on "PPV" is pretty fundamentally flawed, even though it's been a pretty decent buildup otherwise.


----------



## jcmmnx

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


It doesn't matter who's on the roster if Vince doesn't want anybody besides Reigns and Cena to be over.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They'd better not be surprised at these numbers after that massive steaming pile of shit they mailed in last night. I don't know about the rest of you, but every time I turned it on in the hopes of catching maybe a glimpse of something watchable, I had to turn it right off again in less than 10 seconds. I'm just about to the point where I'm not even going to give it that much of a chance any more. And it wasn't because of the fucking roundball game, either.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think WWe simply overestimated the buzz that would come from AJ vs Cena. They expected this to be so big, it would surely bring people back. Their biggest star of the past ten years versus a guy who earned respect and adoration around the world, they saw big money in it. It's why that feud is being treated like the main event while their Champ and a Seth have been second fiddle.

There is far too much damage and a straight up lack of interest for Cena vs AJ to spike ratings/viewership. I expected better of course. But, I understand why.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



AVGN said:


> Could it be that the majority of fans simply don't care about these IWC heroes like Rollins, Styles, Owens and New Day who are featured so prominently on the show? I don't want to start an argument when we should all be celebrating the RAW rating, but I can't help but feel there's a difference in what the casual fans at home are tuning in for and what the IWC want. If you were a casual fan who never heard of AJ Styles until he stepped foot in the WWE, would you really care about seeing him face John Cena?


By that logic, WCW was absolutely right in letting Benoit, Jericho, Malenko, Guerrero and Saturn go because clearly falling ratings indicated nobody wanted to see those indie midgets, while Nash, Sid, Savage and Hogan did great in the main event.

That's also known as "the Nash logic", aka talking bullshit.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> If that doesn't open up Vinces' eyes, nothing will. WM was literally only 2.5 months ago. That is a STAGGERING amount of viewers to lose in such a short amount of time.


Or the NFL that's 2.5 months ahead. Which can be more precarious comparatively.


----------



## jcmmnx

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> People don't care about this show one way or another. People don't care about Reigns, I'll be the first to say that, I just wish smarks would also admit that no one cares about the indy guys either...(Yes, that includes 2011!!)


When one of those indy guys gets a Roman Reigns style push then it'll be a fair comparison. Even Rollins was booked like a geek despite a long title run. Guys playing second fiddle to the Authority, and being involved in 50/50 booking will never draw.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Not only H. That's what we heard on this thread all 2015. Now, that line of thinking doesn't stand anymore?
> 
> Ah, I love the stench of hypocrisy..
> 
> I'm not one to blame the talent, but if you want to go down that route, it won't be pretty for any of the talent..


I don't blame the talent. My gripes about the product have nothing to do with the talent other than how they're being used, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. The whole product is just shit. Even the recaps and highlight segments that used to be the best part of the shows are shit. The irony is, if anything I feel bad for the talent -- yes, even Reigns and Cena -- because of the crap situation they're all in.


----------



## jcmmnx

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> I think WWe simply overestimated the buzz that would come from AJ vs Cena.


Maybe they shouldn't have had AJ lose his first two feuds in WWE is they wanted his next one to be a big deal.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Cleaner said:


> I don't blame the talent. My gripes about the product have nothing to do with the talent other than how they're being used, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. The whole product is just shit. Even the recaps and highlight segments that used to be the best part of the shows are shit. The irony is, if anything I feel bad for the talent -- yes, even Reigns and Cena -- because of the crap situation they're all in.


I agree. I don't blame talent, either. BUT, if someone wants to go down that road, it's not gonna be pretty no matter what "type" of talent you like; whether that be 'Indy Darlings' or the non-Indy Darlings. Doesn't matter. No one has drawn in this era. And that's what tells you it's on Vince more than it is ANY of the talent, again, whether that be the former Indy guys or the non-Indy guys.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Forget the NFL. The real enemy is father time. When viewership drops even more (WHEN), and more people tune out to watch football, they should pray to god that those viewers come back when it's over. And hope that those viewers didn't realize that they can live well without WWE.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


New 'ring rats', but the same imbeciles writing the scripts. New names, same shit.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



jcmmnx said:


> Maybe they shouldn't have had AJ lose his first two feuds in WWE is they wanted his next one to be a big deal.


A hot match up is a hot match up. People who are fans of AJ and don't watch WWE anymore would come back to watch if a feud with Cena is as big as WWE feels it is. They're selling this as a DREAM MATCH. That's a lot of stock to put in it. The fans who are still here are generally interested in the feud and they've been given great reactions when they're in the ring together. But as far as fresh eyes and people not watching running back to see this "big"match up? It hasn't done that.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I know damn well people aren't blaming the Finals. Yall realize how long Raw's been in existence and how many times they've competed against NBA Finals, NHL Finals, World Series, etc. right? It's no excuse. Too bad it's not in the 1s.

And they want to split a weak roster? With no starpower? With a "family-friendly" show?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Marv95 said:


> I know damn well people aren't blaming the Finals. Yall realize how long Raw's been in existence and how many times they've competed against NBA Finals, NHL Finals, World Series, etc. right? It's no excuse. Too bad it's not in the 1s.
> 
> And they want to split a weak roster? With no starpower? With a "family-friendly" show?


That's what I said earlier. NBA playoff games haven't hurt them this much in the past. And this was a straight up massacre. Not even a holiday.


----------



## B316

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Staggering numbers, unbelievable. 6 months ago, apparently Vince wasn't concerned, he had big names to come back, and Mania season to fall back on, well most (and the biggest) of those names are back, Mania has come and gone (it was awful) and now the numbers are worse! Football season looms and McMahon thinks that just sitting on his roof will keep him safe. 

Looking ahead, I see the split helping Smackdown but further damaging Raw, but just how much more damage can Raw take? The numbers aren't even holding, they continue to drop at a frightening rate. I understand some folk taking great pleasure in this but for a old fan like myself it's just sad. I hope Vince wakes the fuck up soon or just holds his hands up and realises that his time has come and gone. Sports entertainment is officially on it's knees.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


The last time the "smarks" got what they truly wanted was the 2 months around WM30 and those #s are AMAZING compared to what we are seeing now. And before that was for a few months in the Summer of 2011, again those #s are FAR better then they are now. The other thing that "smarks" are getting (or at least were) what they "want" was in NXT and that has a HUGE positive buzz b/c of it....

Though people just claiming that the "smarks" or "hardcores" just want their indy darlings on top is so passe, and completely wrong. They want a good product, with good storylines, and good characters, and good matches, they just see their "indy darling" as the best way to get this, whether that be right or wrong. But its obvious the way they are doing things currently are not working.



AVGN said:


> Could it be that the majority of fans simply don't care about these IWC heroes like Rollins, Styles, Owens and New Day who are featured so prominently on the show? I don't want to start an argument when we should all be celebrating the RAW rating, *but I can't help but feel there's a difference in what the casual fans at home are tuning in for* and what the IWC want. If you were a casual fan who never heard of AJ Styles until he stepped foot in the WWE, would you really care about seeing him face John Cena?


The "casual" fans are not tuning in anymore at all, and they will not be tuning at all anymore, I don't care what Vince does. The old "casual" fan is not going to tune into ANYTHING that is even close to pro-wrestling anymore. Pro-wrestling is a niche product now, it is a very big niche but a niche none the less, and the more the WWE keeps alienating the fans in that niche to chase these imaginary "casuals" that are never coming back the worse things are going to get. Hell the new "casuals" are former "hardcore fans" that either grew up or were driven off from being a hardcore by the WWE and are now only casual viewers for that reason.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The anti smarks are coming :kobe9. Blaming the guys who aren't headlining or being pushed as the main guys. A year ago just blame the champ was what people did, now some are blaming the guys who are booked like geeks rather than the ones who WWE push as big deals.


----------



## LordKain

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



B316 said:


> Staggering numbers, unbelievable. 6 months ago, apparently Vince wasn't concerned, he had big names to come back, and Mania season to fall back on, well most (and the biggest) of those names are back, Mania has come and gone (it was awful) and now the numbers are worse! Football season looms and McMahon thinks that just sitting on his roof will keep him safe.
> 
> Looking ahead, I see the split helping Smackdown but further damaging Raw, but just how much more damage can Raw take? The numbers aren't even holding, they continue to drop at a frightening rate. I understand some folk taking great pleasure in this but for a old fan like myself it's just sad. I hope Vince wakes the fuck up soon or just holds his hands up and realises that his time has come and gone. Sports entertainment is officially on it's knees.


Live attendance is down as well.


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Well, Cena is back. Reigns is on top. Why aren't people tuning in for them?


Maybe, after 14 years, people are finally bored of Cena? You can't expect someone to be a draw forever.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> By that logic, WCW was absolutely right in letting Benoit, Jericho, Malenko, Guerrero and Saturn go because clearly falling ratings indicated nobody wanted to see those indie midgets, while Nash, Sid, Savage and Hogan did great in the main event.
> 
> That's also known as "the Nash logic", aka talking bullshit.


But that's not what I said...

And either way it's a stupid comparison. Jericho and Guerrero have more charisma in one finger than almost everyone on the current WWE roster. And that's the problem. I'm not hating on the current guys because of their size, I'm just questioning whether they're entertaining casual fans.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



AVGN said:


> Maybe, after 14 years, people are finally bored of Cena? You can't expect someone to be a draw forever.
> 
> 
> 
> But that's not what I said...
> 
> And either way it's a stupid comparison. Jericho and Guerrero have more charisma in one finger than almost everyone on the current WWE roster. And that's the problem. I'm not hating on the current guys because of their size, I'm just questioning whether they're entertaining casual fans.


Then what about Reigns?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm usually rather easy on WWE but they deserve this 100%. This isn't completely Roman's fault, more the way WWE is self-sabotaging everything else around him to make him work. We all know how every one of his feuds is going to play out and he isn't John Cena when it comes to hyping his matches or even getting people to like him. The burnout is real and it just isn't good TV. This draft ought to be really fucking interesting. They either go all out and create some REAL change across the board - slowly earning people back...or they completely destroy any chance Raw has of turning things around by centering it around a guy nobody really wants to see. 

When MNF comes back you all may pray Roman still has that title because if one of your own favorites has it, whoever it is, they're going to get slaughtered over the ratings come September.

Also, they need to stop putting Jericho in the main event spot. He bombs every single time. Dude is up there with the worst of them as a top 'drawing' act.


----------



## B316

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LordKain said:


> Live attendance is down as well.


Yeah I know, but I think that's a little bit easier to manage. TV on the other hand is a big old ship to turn around and they haven't even put the brakes on yet. The whole show needs gutting, it's rotten to the core.


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Then what about Reigns?


What about him? He sucks. I never claimed he was a draw.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I do have a problem with blaming the wrestlers on most occasions... _most_ occasions. Sometimes I do think certain guys they promote can drive people away, if they're not who the fans want to see. 

Talent can't _always_ be blameless. Of course they do what the script tells them to, but some people will never connect no matter the booking.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



AVGN said:


> What about him? He sucks. I never claimed he was a draw.


Exactly. No one is under these circumstances.


----------



## antdvda

I completely agree that the "casual" is dead. There is no more caslual that tunes in now and again to watch. 

The product as is has no growth potential. There are only "wrestling fans" left. Nobody else will be tuning in.

With that said, I still think there is an opportunity to get people who aren't fans or people who were casual 15 years ago to tune in. And that is by having a larger than life, compelling personality that people are drawn to see no matter what their entertainment choice is.

They found one in Hogan and they found one in Austin. People tuned in not because they were fans of pro wrestling but because they HAD TO see this guy that everyone was talking about. It can happen again.

The question is: will lightning strike 3 times for WWE?

In order for this to happen, I believe that the following criteria has to be in place:

1) The freedom for this wrestler to act how he feels appropriate for his character

2) has to be physically appealing to look at (not necessarily attractive, but have a strong physical presence)

3) has to be exceptionally captivating verbally

4) has to have a larger than life presence and personality

5) has to identify one way or another with current culture

You find a guy like that and that's basically wrestlings only hope for "growth" going forward. Too bad a person like this is once in a lifetime and you can't predict when they'll show up or create them from scratch.


----------



## B316

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> The "casual" fans are not tuning in anymore at all, and they will not be tuning at all anymore, I don't care what Vince does. The old "casual" fan is not going to tune into ANYTHING that is even close to pro-wrestling anymore. Pro-wrestling is a niche product now, it is a very big niche but a niche none the less, and the more the WWE keeps alienating the fans in that niche to chase these imaginary "casuals" that are never coming back the worse things are going to get. Hell the new "casuals" are former "hardcore fans" that either grew up or were driven off from being a hardcore by the WWE and are now only casual viewers for that reason.


Completely in agreement with this, and nicely put too.

By going after the fan base they want, they're loosing the one they have, and will end up with neither.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lighting already struck 3 times. The Rock. That's it. Outside The Rock WWE has no draws, and never well ever again.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The last time the NBA finals was on a Monday was June 19, 2000. This was the clinching game 6 of the Lakers vs Pacers. That Raw saw its lowest rating since Valentine's Day of that year and, excluding Valentines Day, it would have been the lowest rated show since Dec 27, 1999.

So for those saying the NBA doesn't affect ratings, the numbers suggest otherwise. Of course, now I suspect those same people will probably grasp at straws and try to claim something else caused the (relatively) low ratings for that day.


----------



## Japanese Puroresu

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


Cena and Reigsn, WWE created talent, are the primary focuses.

For some reason people don't give a crap about the WWE's 1)A and 1)B

MUST BE THE REST OF THE ROSTER THAT ISNT BEING FOCUSED ON THOUGH


----------



## LordKain

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



B316 said:


> Yeah I know, but I think that's a little bit easier to manage. TV on the other hand is a big old ship to turn around and they haven't even put the brakes on yet. The whole show needs gutting, it's rotten to the core.


I think they both go hand in hand at this point.


----------



## wwetna1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Japanese Puroresu said:


> Cena and Reigsn, WWE created talent, are the primary focuses.
> 
> For some reason people don't give a crap about the WWE's 1)A and 1)B
> 
> MUST BE THE REST OF THE ROSTER THAT ISNT BEING FOCUSED ON THOUGH


Reigns nor Cena nor Rollins have main evented for weeks. In fact the big names always used to main event and be in the over run. Now they are the start of each hour. 

It's been Ambrose, New Day, Jericho, The Club, MITB guys closing Raw.

Bryan, HHH, Cena, Orton, etc always closed Raw. They don't do that formula any more sense all the new era talk and it's hurting them too


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> So for those saying the NBA doesn't affect ratings, the numbers suggest otherwise. Of course, now I suspect those same people will probably grasp at straws and try to claim something else caused the (relatively) low ratings for that day.


Competition obviously effects things, and I expect them to bounce back up a little once it's over until Monday Night Football starts, but that's the thing: Isn't it just as bad when MNF is on regularly every Monday night in the fall?


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LMAO at those trying to pin that rating on AJ and Rollins.

AJ hasn't won a single feud in his run so far and you expect casual fans to be invested in him?

Rollins was over exposed and booked like a chicken shit for almost a year, you expect casuals to be invested in him?

The ones to blame here are Roman and Cena, despite the over protected booking they still can't get those casual eye balls watching.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Marv95 said:


> I know damn well people aren't blaming the Finals. Yall realize how long Raw's been in existence and how many times they've competed against NBA Finals, NHL Finals, World Series, etc. right? It's no excuse. Too bad it's not in the 1s.
> 
> And they want to split a weak roster? With no starpower? With a "family-friendly" show?


It's not a weak roster -- they have plenty of talent, even for a split crew. Maybe not much star power, but the blame for that is basically the same as why the product is shit -- Vince's idea of what's entertaining and that of the viewers are in completely different universes.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If anyone is really sick of the WWE, and wants similar levels of drama and the spectacle we once knew it for, I would highly recommend checking out UFC. 

Yes, it's not Wrestling, but there's a lot of appeal in it, and I can't remember a time where the products been hotter. From Michael Bisping winning the Middleweight title, to the McGregor/Diaz feud, to Jones/DC, there is so much engaging stuff, not only from the athletic point of view, but the stories have never been better. It's just so much more enthralling.

I know there is other Wrestling out there, but for me I can't really enjoy it since I know at the highest level(which is WWE), it all goes to shit.


----------



## Arkham258

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE the highest level?
:ha


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> If anyone is really sick of the WWE, and wants similar levels of drama and the spectacle we once knew it for, I would highly recommend checking out UFC.
> 
> Yes, it's not Wrestling, but there's a lot of appeal in it, and I can't remember a time where the products been hotter. From Michael Bisping winning the Middleweight title, to the McGregor/Diaz feud, to Jones/DC, there is so much engaging stuff, not only from the athletic point of view, but the stories have never been better. It's just so much more enthralling.
> 
> I know there is other Wrestling out there, but for me I can't really enjoy it since I know at the highest level(which is WWE), it all goes to shit.


If you can't find wrestling that entertains you in any of the current promotions, then maybe you're just not really a wrestling fan. I do enjoy a UFC show every once in awhile, but it's a totally different animal and strikes a completely different nerve than pro wrestling. I would also disagree that WWE is the highest level of wrestling right now. Sure it's the biggest, but it's also about the shittiest.


----------



## B316

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LordKain said:


> I think they both go hand and hand at this point.


They do to a certain degree for sure. Over the next six months though, with Cena being back on the marquee we could very well see attendances go back up whilst the ratings continue to slide. It's like an old classic rock band who are not able to sell new albums whilst maintaining the ability to draw a live crowd. 

Ultimately though, if you've got a hot TV product then attendances take care of themselves.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Cleaner said:


> If you can't find wrestling that entertains you in any of the current promotions, then maybe you're just not really a wrestling fan. I do enjoy a UFC show every once in awhile, but it's a totally different animal and strikes a completely different nerve than pro wrestling. I would also disagree that WWE is the highest level of wrestling right now. Sure it's the biggest, but it's also about the shittiest.


Those other wrestling organizations are entirely irrelevant. The WWE is still the biggest and most prestigious organization. The fact that it absolutely fucking sucks, and that no legitimate competition has emerged, speaks volumes about the state of professional wrestling in general. I agree with the other guy - I have no interest in less prestigious organizations. It would be like watching the little league. It's either WWE or nothing (and lately it's been mostly nothing) unless a serious competitor that actually focuses on the entertainment side emerges.


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



antdvda said:


> Well smarks, this is basically the roster that you've wanted for the past 5-6 years. A bunch of ring rats with a focus on in-ring work.
> 
> Now you guys are blaming past atrocities on current viewer attrition? Don't you think it's possible that your idea of what the roster should look like was wrong all along?
> 
> One thing is certain that nobody is a draw right now, but it is also fact that your indy favorites are getting a lot of shine and the ratings are fading fast.


You do get the roster is only as good as how it's booked yeah?

And at the moment they booked like fucking ten day old dog shit.


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why should we believe AJ cena is a big deal? AJ has won fuck all and cena as is always his style fucking buries him and calls him a pussy, for a face he's a fucking dipshit heel bully.

And why should we care about reigns and Rollins, they've literally bored the shit out of me. Reigns doesn't give a fuck and Rollins is just a chickenshit heel who's more fucking over. It's a confused mess.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwetna1 said:


> Reigns nor Cena nor Rollins have main evented for weeks. In fact the big names always used to main event and be in the over run. Now they are the start of each hour.
> 
> It's been Ambrose, New Day, Jericho, The Club, MITB guys closing Raw.
> 
> Bryan, HHH, Cena, Orton, etc always closed Raw. They don't do that formula any more sense all the new era talk and it's hurting them too


Even when Reigns, Cena, and Rollins have main evented, the third hour rating has been shit. It doesn't matter who it is. It's not about Indy guys vs WWE made guys. No matter who it is, when WWE gets their hands on them these days, none of them are drawing. That's a WWE problem.


----------



## Japanese Puroresu

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwetna1 said:


> Reigns nor Cena nor Rollins have main evented for weeks. In fact the big names always used to main event and be in the over run. Now they are the start of each hour.
> 
> It's been Ambrose, New Day, Jericho, The Club, MITB guys closing Raw.
> 
> Bryan, HHH, Cena, Orton, etc always closed Raw. They don't do that formula any more sense all the new era talk and it's hurting them too


I dont think you understand the timing of segments created for Reigns and Cena. Yes, they're trying to make new stars but the prime hours of TV time is not 9:45 at night. It's the opening of the show and the transition hours. Not the main event.


----------



## Goldusto

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I am not a reigns smark far from it however *the problem is REIGNS/shield IS NOT THE FOCUS OF THE SHOW, Just a PART of it.

*

What do i mean by this ? All these big dramas have a hook and a huge running storyline, a central core and baseline, for you to tune into.

By fragmenting the show, you have essentially made WWE RAW into a golden variety show, you literally pick and choose the few segments that correlate to the storyline that interests you and skip the rest, womens, comedy segments whatever.

REIgns was supposed to be built up and be the main story, the main draw, the GUY. Not the focus, You say ' reigns is the focus' he is the focus

*BUT FOR ONLY 10-20 MINUTES OUT OF 3 HOURS* .

Everything else has been treated as nothing bout hot air by most people, they got no reason to care about the side stories, and when the main storyline is fudged into a 2nd hour segment, that means there is nothing to stay to the end to watch for, you already seen the main story that is the end of the show as far as you are concerned.

WHYi is the show not built around the shield if that is the current main event angle ? what are Social OUtcasts, New Day, Bullet Club, all these factions all these other guys are either lost in the shuffle or in pisspoor side stories and feuds NO ONE CARES ABOUT.

The show should be the Shield Show, and how they respond to them. *this fragmented storytelling is bullshit.*


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Goldusto said:


> I am not a reigns smark far from it however *the problem is REIGNS/shield IS NOT THE FOCUS OF THE SHOW, Just a PART of it.
> 
> *
> 
> What do i mean by this ? All these big dramas have a hook and a huge running storyline, a central core and baseline, for you to tune into.
> 
> By fragmenting the show, you have essentially made WWE RAW into a golden variety show, you literally pick and choose the few segments that correlate to the storyline that interests you and skip the rest, womens, comedy segments whatever.
> 
> REIgns was supposed to be built up and be the main story, the main draw, the GUY. Not the focus, You say ' reigns is the focus' he is the focus
> 
> *BUT FOR ONLY 10-20 MINUTES OUT OF 3 HOURS* .
> 
> Everything else has been treated as nothing bout hot air by most people, they got no reason to care about the side stories, and when the main storyline is fudged into a 2nd hour segment, that means there is nothing to stay to the end to watch for, you already seen the main story that is the end of the show as far as you are concerned.
> 
> WHYi is the show not built around the shield if that is the current main event angle ? what are Social OUtcasts, New Day, Bullet Club, all these factions all these other guys are either lost in the shuffle or in pisspoor side stories and feuds NO ONE CARES ABOUT.
> 
> The show should be the Shield Show, and how they respond to them. *this fragmented storytelling is bullshit.*


Yeah because their segment really proved how hot they are 

.................


(It was terrible and dull)


----------



## TD_DDT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The only way to make WWE great again is to get rid of PG, but I understand the money is in the kids so it won't happen. Some of my friends have returned to WWE recently and we all know it's crap mostly. I know the day of head shots and dangerous spots are gone, and that is understandable. But there's no reason why they cannot be edgier. Learn to make it meaningful. What worked in the attitude era would work again if they could come up with the creativity but it's all moot because it will not happen. I want to see back-stage wars. I want to see good heat like Cena-AJ feud has. Less comedy, more seriousness. People should HATE each other. Quit having guys wrestle every week and then go to a PPV. If two guys are going to feud each week in some capacity, it's no longer must-see TV. Champs need protection too. Charlotte lost clean, and quick. What does that do for anything? Bring back an old school ring announcer like WCW had. Make the commentators actually bring a sport feel to the damn match. You can even make the Charlotte thing realistic if you talk about her being a cold streak and how dangerous that is going into a PPV - it's like going in cold to the playoffs in a real sport. IDK, maybe this garbage isn't fixable.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



StraightYesSociety said:


> Who would've thought that literally insulting and mocking your fans would turn them away?


They're the only company on the plant that openly hates it's own customers.

It's a small miracle they're still in business, I guess that proves that there's still a huge appetite for professional wrestling it's just a shame that the company who has a total monopoly on pro wrestling not only hates it's own fans but hates professional wrestling and tries to distance themselves from it at every opportunity (we're sports entertainment, we make movies etc. etc.)


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Goldusto said:


> I am not a reigns smark far from it however *the problem is REIGNS/shield IS NOT THE FOCUS OF THE SHOW, Just a PART of it.
> 
> *
> 
> What do i mean by this ? All these big dramas have a hook and a huge running storyline, a central core and baseline, for you to tune into.
> 
> By fragmenting the show, you have essentially made WWE RAW into a golden variety show, you literally pick and choose the few segments that correlate to the storyline that interests you and skip the rest, womens, comedy segments whatever.
> 
> REIgns was supposed to be built up and be the main story, the main draw, the GUY. Not the focus, You say ' reigns is the focus' he is the focus
> 
> *BUT FOR ONLY 10-20 MINUTES OUT OF 3 HOURS* .
> 
> Everything else has been treated as nothing bout hot air by most people, they got no reason to care about the side stories, and when the main storyline is fudged into a 2nd hour segment, that means there is nothing to stay to the end to watch for, you already seen the main story that is the end of the show as far as you are concerned.
> 
> WHYi is the show not built around the shield if that is the current main event angle ? what are Social OUtcasts, New Day, Bullet Club, all these factions all these other guys are either lost in the shuffle or in pisspoor side stories and feuds NO ONE CARES ABOUT.
> 
> The show should be the Shield Show, and how they respond to them. *this fragmented storytelling is bullshit.*


It is, though. Since mid-late 2014, The Shield has been the main focus of the show one way or another and the ratings have tanked since then. I like them, I liked Rollins the most during their run, but they are just proving to not be draws. 

I think they're all damaged goods at this point. It sucks because I thought they were all great as a team.

Still, there's more to it than just them...but I don't see them carrying the company into prosperity any time soon.


----------



## VitoCorleone

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> LMAO at those trying to pin that rating on AJ and Rollins.
> 
> AJ hasn't won a single feud in his run so far and you expect casual fans to be invested in him?
> 
> Rollins was over exposed and booked like a chicken shit for almost a year, you expect casuals to be invested in him?
> 
> The ones to blame here are Roman and Cena, despite the over protected booking they still can't get those casual eye balls watching.


I agree with styles and rollins but i would not blame cena or roman.
alot of things are going in to the false way
-rollins being a heel and chicken shit
-styles being jobbed to roman (i dont care about cena vs styles cause we know who will win the feud and if he cant beat roman how the fuck is he gonna beat cena hahaha)
- ignoring the crowd for 2 years 
- roman as face


I blame Vince for all the ratings he gets. He should change alot of things but hes not doing it.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> 2 different people just tried to blame the Indy darlings, meanwhile Cena is back, and Reigns is on top. Why aren't people tuning in for them?
> 
> See. This is why 'anti smarks' get destroyed on this thread. They try to start shit before getting put back in their place.


What? I just said that Reigns isn't doing WWE any favors before saying that the Indy darlings aren't either. The "anti smarks" get "put in their place" because smarks have ever evolving logic and reasons for who to put the blame on. 

I'm not anti smark, per se, in that I don't dislike a wrestler for being from the indy's, though I do think smarks have a ridiculously overrated view of Indy wrestlers and Indy wrestling itself.

With that said, to say that Reigns or Cena is to blame for this when they're barely featured on the show is ridiculous. To assume that the few people that still watch wrestling analyze it to the point of not wanting to see their supposedly favorite guys perform in the main event on Raw because they've been "devalued by Reigns" is either idiotic or disingenuous. 

Smarks are the exact same thing as anti-smarks... It's always the fault of the other end of the spectrum, while "their" guys couldn't possibly be to blame. 

The blame needs to be placed squarely on the writers and the excessive programming.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hope SD closes some ground on RAW this week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> What? I just said that Reigns isn't doing WWE any favors before saying that the Indy darlings aren't either. The "anti smarks" get "put in their place" because smarks have ever evolving logic and reasons for who to put the blame on.
> 
> I'm not anti smark, per se, in that I don't dislike a wrestler for being from the indy's, though I do think smarks have a ridiculously overrated view of Indy wrestlers and Indy wrestling itself.
> 
> With that said, to say that Reigns or Cena is to blame for this when they're barely featured on the show is ridiculous. To assume that the few people that still watch wrestling analyze it to the point of not wanting to see their supposedly favorite guys perform in the main event on Raw because they've been "devalued by Reigns" is either idiotic or disingenuous.
> 
> Smarks are the exact same thing as anti-smarks... It's always the fault of the other end of the spectrum, while "their" guys couldn't possibly be to blame.
> 
> The blame needs to be placed squarely on the writers and the excessive programming.


I agree that Vince and the writers are to blame first and foremost. After that though, it's the guys on top. That's what we were told in this very thread last year, all year long. Maybe you missed it, but that's what we were told. Quite ridiculous when it comes to the talent to blame a bunch of mid carders and low carders, but not the top 2 faces of the company. Hoo boy. :lmao


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Do people still say see you next week in the Raw thread?
> 
> Looks like WWE killed themselves with what they did at Mania. Seems it has gotten worse and worse for them as the year goes on and this is with no NFL. Do you still watch every week?
> 
> My mondays have been entertaining playing Overwatch and other things


WWE has made their TV shows obsolete. I'm really excited about Money in the Bank on Sunday. I had no interest in watching Raw on Monday. Just tell me the card, play the highlight video before the match on the PPV and I'm good to go. 



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Those other wrestling organizations are entirely irrelevant. The WWE is still the biggest and most prestigious organization. The fact that it absolutely fucking sucks, and that no legitimate competition has emerged, speaks volumes about the state of professional wrestling in general. I agree with the other guy - I have no interest in less prestigious organizations. *It would be like watching the little league.* It's either WWE or nothing (and lately it's been mostly nothing) unless a serious competitor that actually focuses on the entertainment side emerges.


I would probably say it would be like seeing an indy movie at a smaller theater or seeing an indy band at a smaller venue... 

Wrestling isn't a real sport. It's a form of entertainment. Bigger doesn't have to mean better. It just means it appeals to the largest audience.


----------



## Seafort

*RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*

The company - in terms of its television audience - is in real trouble. The erosion of their audience over the last year far outstrips year over year declines.

Between 2012 and 2014, the Monday Night Raw episode at this time of the year averaged 4.2M viewers. This year it was 2.97M, a whopping 27.8% year over year drop. The 2.03 rating itself represents a 28% drop from last year.

Put another way, if the June 12, 2017 episode shows a similar rate of decline, that RAW will enjoy a 1.45 rating, with 2.14M viewers. Extend that to the June 11, 2018 episode, and RAW will draw a *1.04* rating with just 1.55M viewers. 

That said, the question is why? Is it just general erosion in television viewership? I think that the numbers show otherwise, and that this accelerated decline which began last year is beating the pace of general declines in tradition television versus steaming service. And why? Very simple...cliched storytelling, a lack of more than a handful of compelling characters, incremental or no plot movement, and a full year of unpopular champions. The latter is key.

*Seth Rollins*: Holds the belt from WM 31 to Nov 2015. Is generally portrayed as a very weak, Honkytonk Man like champion who usually needs constant interference to retain
*Sheamus*: A largely rejected, bland heel character following his return, Sheamus has a brief, uninspiring reign
*HHH*: Another heel, HHH never wrestles and is the crown jewel of a multi-year Authority angle
*Roman Reigns*: Obstensibly the face, Reigns is largely rejected post-WM 32 and has been involved in no real big angles since winning the title

If they cannot reverse the trend, the company is in trouble. Their TV deal will eventually come up for renewal, and a RAW that is well ahead of the curve of TV viewership declines will not earn WWE a huge renewal fee. And without that huge renewal fee, their profitability will take a substantial hit.

*
RAW TV Ratings, Viewers, and Changes from Previous Year*
6/13/16: 2.03 (2.97M viewers) -27.4% from previous year
6/15/15: 2.83 (4.11M viewers) -00.5% from previous year
6/16/14: n/a (4.13M viewers) +3.5% from previous year
6/10/13: 3.04 (3.990 viewers) -13.6% from previous year
6/09/12: 3.20 (4.62M viewers)
6/13/11: 3.30 
6/14/10: 3.40
6/15/09: 3.70
6/16/08: 3.70
6/11/07: 3.80


----------



## KurtAngle26

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*

Anybody but the golden boy Roman


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*

I have to disagree with Reigns not being in any big feuds since Mania...the AJ/Club feud was the biggest WWE has had for a while. And the Rollins feud could have been big.

I will add though that the way people watch TV has changed, we dont have to watch live anymore, we can record anything, delay, rewind, pause live TV thesedays.

But the audience is definitely diminishing. The WWE's stubborn way of booking Cena and Reigns has driven people away and despite what many thinks the 5'9 150 pound "vanilla midgets" are turning people away as well. If you're used to Rock, Austin, Hogan, etc. then you tune into WWE in 2016 and see Zayn, Rollins, etc. they're just not the same. There's no huge Superstar aura there.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*

Their is a ratings thread you could of posted this in, so I am sure this thread well be moved. But you got to understand all tv has declined in ratings by 13% the past year alone. NO matter who WWE push, no matter what they do. Nothing is impacting the ratings signifcantly. Now they think the brand split well create buzz, and SD going live well impact the numbers. To hopefully at least over 4 million. Well they hope. I could say its the indy midgets. But to me Seth is an exception he is the most charasmatic midget I have ever seen :lol. The booking of Cena and now Reigns is just stale superman shit. No one wants to see. The tv audience is diminshing true. TV used to get 60% share of the audience. Now it's around 20%. The pie tv slice is getting smaller every year. Now we can blame Roman, we can blame Seth, we can blame Cena, we can blame the guy who cleans the toilets lol. But more people are watching online. And the actual casuals are actually the fans who grew up watching the AE and maybe the RGE. And have tuned out.


----------



## amhlilhaus

AVGN said:


> The Last Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "dream match" of AJ vs Cena, while getting the highest rating out of all segments, aint doing shit for viewership worth noting.
> 
> Fan favorites are getting tv time, but the damage of past decisions have rared its ugly head. Plus, too many people don't care to really come in to watch their favorites when there is a pre determined glass ceiling hovering of many of their heads.
> 
> 
> 
> Could it be that the majority of fans simply don't care about these IWC heroes like Rollins, Styles, Owens and New Day who are featured so prominently on the show? I don't want to start an argument when we should all be celebrating the RAW rating, but I can't help but feel there's a difference in what the casual fans at home are tuning in for and what the IWC want. If you were a casual fan who never heard of AJ Styles until he stepped foot in the WWE, would you really care about seeing him face John Cena?
Click to expand...

Yeah a fan who doesnt know aj styles wont care hes facing cena because....

HE LOST TO CHRIS THE JOBBER JERICHO AND GOT THAT ASS WHIPPED BY ROMAN REIGNS


----------



## hbgoo1975

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*

The Great Khali and his diminished skills drew higher ratings than this shit!


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> If anyone is really sick of the WWE, and wants similar levels of drama and the spectacle we once knew it for, I would highly recommend checking out UFC.
> 
> Yes, it's not Wrestling, but there's a lot of appeal in it, and I can't remember a time where the products been hotter. From Michael Bisping winning the Middleweight title, to the McGregor/Diaz feud, to Jones/DC, there is so much engaging stuff, not only from the athletic point of view, but the stories have never been better. It's just so much more enthralling.
> 
> I know there is other Wrestling out there, but for me I can't really enjoy it since I know at the highest level(which is WWE), it all goes to shit.


I'm exactly the same. The UFC is essentially what pro wrestling used to be - A combat sport with interesting characters who have feuds and vendettas against other interesting characters, the vendettas are always eventually settled in a well built and anticipated fight, often for one of the highly prestigious championship belts. Simple.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*

I love the people who are blaming it on 'how people watch TV now' didn't use that excuse the past couple of years.


----------



## bullshitter

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Fearless Maryse said:


> I have to disagree with Reigns not being in any big feuds since Mania...the AJ/Club feud was the biggest WWE has had for a while. And the Rollins feud could have been big.
> 
> I will add though that the way people watch TV has changed, we dont have to watch live anymore, we can record anything, delay, rewind, pause live TV thesedays.
> 
> But the audience is definitely diminishing. The WWE's stubborn way of booking Cena and Reigns has driven people away and despite what many thinks the 5'9 150 pound "vanilla midgets" are turning people away as well. If you're used to Rock, Austin, Hogan, etc. then you tune into WWE in 2016 and see Zayn, Rollins, etc. they're just not the same. There's no huge Superstar aura there.



How many 5ft 9 150 pound wrestlers are there?


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



amhlilhaus said:


> Yeah a fan who doesnt know aj styles wont care hes facing cena because....
> 
> HE LOST TO CHRIS THE JOBBER JERICHO AND GOT THAT ASS WHIPPED BY ROMAN REIGNS


 I wonder if the ratings would have been better if AJ took the title off Cena then went face to face with Cena on his return. 

Right now, the title feels like an afterthought with Roman as champ.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Fearless Maryse said:


> I have to disagree with Reigns not being in any big feuds since Mania...the AJ/Club feud was the biggest WWE has had for a while. And the Rollins feud could have been big.
> 
> I will add though that the way people watch TV has changed, we dont have to watch live anymore, we can record anything, delay, rewind, pause live TV thesedays.
> 
> But the audience is definitely diminishing. The WWE's stubborn way of booking Cena and Reigns has driven people away *and despite what many thinks the 5'9 150 pound "vanilla midgets" are turning people away as well. If you're used to Rock, Austin, Hogan, etc. then you tune into WWE in 2016 and see Zayn, Rollins, etc. they're just not the same.* There's no huge Superstar aura there.


Agree. A casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to have their attention grabbed by the sight of Kevin Owens or Sami Zayn, just isn't happening. Doesn't matter how talented either of those guys is but the first thought that would likely enter their head on seeing Zayn or KO is "damn, standards have slipped, I remember watching the Rock and Hulk Hogan back in the day now there's a fat midget in basketball shorts and a skinny ginger geek wrestling, I could take either of them in a street fight (changes channel)".


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Piper's Pit said:


> Agree. A casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to have their attention grabbed by the sight of Kevin Owens or Sami Zayn, just isn't happening. Doesn't matter how talented either of those guys is but the first thought that would likely enter their head on seeing Zayn or KO is "damn, standards have slipped, I remember watching the Rock and Hulk Hogan back in the day now there's a fat midget in basketball shorts and a skinny ginger geek wrestling, I could take either of them in a street fight (changes channel)".


Whoever they are pushing isn't drawing as well.
Let them focus on retaining the fans they have before trying to get new ones.

Zayn and KO in the Main Event would actually keep their hardcore fans and not turn them away.
All they need is focus on them for 3min and see that what they do with their storytelling and MOVES and they can be hooked.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Piper's Pit said:


> Agree. A casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to have their attention grabbed by the sight of Kevin Owens or Sami Zayn, just isn't happening. Doesn't matter how talented either of those guys is but the first thought that would likely enter their head on seeing Zayn or KO is "damn, standards have slipped, I remember watching the Rock and Hulk Hogan back in the day now there's a fat midget in basketball shorts and a skinny ginger geek wrestling, I could take either of them in a street fight (changes channel)".


Aaaaand pushing a non-vanilla Midget to the top has not only not grown them any new viewers, it's actually pushed their most loyal fans of YEARS/DECADES away more and more every week.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> LMAO at those trying to pin that rating on AJ and Rollins.
> 
> AJ hasn't won a single feud in his run so far and you expect casual fans to be invested in him?
> 
> Rollins was over exposed and booked like a chicken shit for almost a year, you expect casuals to be invested in him?
> 
> The ones to blame here are Roman and Cena, despite the over protected booking they still can't get those casual eye balls watching.


pretty much.

I can't believe some people are stupid enough to blame the ratings on the guys booked like shit, instead of the two most protected guys in the company.
Reminds me of people blaming Bryan for SummerSlam 2013 buyrates, when Cena and Lesnar were the supposed " big draws"


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I agree that Vince and the writers are to blame first and foremost. After that though, it's the guys on top. That's what we were told in this very thread last year, all year long. Maybe you missed it, but that's what we were told. Quite ridiculous when it comes to the talent to blame a bunch of mid carders and low carders, but not the top 2 faces of the company. Hoo boy. :lmao


 You can't blame AJ or Rollins as neither is booked as a top guy. They're booked as bad guys/losers who take pins. 

AJ hasn't won shit and Rollins was pinned by everyone and their dog during his run last year.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



etrbaby said:


> pretty much.
> 
> I can't believe some people are stupid enough to blame the ratings on the guys booked like shit, instead of the two most protected guys in the company.
> Reminds me of people blaming Bryan for SummerSlam 2013 buyrates, when Cena and Lesnar were the supposed " big draws"


 Roman 2.03 just made you change the channel :lol


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well that is stupid. When it has been prooved no matter who they push Ratings keep getting lower. Considering the shit booking Styles and Rollins have got. Style slost all his feuds. You could argue the same with Wyatt if hewas champ, shit booking. Seth was so overexposed last year, why would anyone invest in him. It was a blessing in disguise he hot injured. The ones who have had super protected booking is Roman and Cena. IF anthing you blame them, they are susposed to be the draws. But they are prooving to not be. I mean they cannot rely on Rock and his 30 odd million followers on IG forever. The inability to book the talent they have into legit stars is what is killing WWE Atm. I don't care what you say book Owens in his bball shorts, and his bear gut into a legit guy ppl well watch. You don't tune into the NBA and watch Steve Curry miss 3 3p shots. And blame the captain of the Warriors for the shit ratings :lol, do you know. So you don't blame Seth or Styles. When they are not the reason ppl are tuning in for.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> Competition obviously effects things, and I expect them to bounce back up a little once it's over until Monday Night Football starts, but that's the thing: Isn't it just as bad when MNF is on regularly every Monday night in the fall?


MNF doesn't average 20+million viewers (that's how many people watched game 5).


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This is from an ongoing poll at a WWE ratings site.
http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2015-tv-ratings/

*Who wins at Money in the Bank?

Kevin Owens (43%, 273 Votes)
Dean Ambrose (28%, 179 Votes)
Cesaro (15%, 93 Votes)
Alberto Del Rio (5%, 33 Votes)
Chris Jericho (5%, 31 Votes)
Sami Zayn (5%, 29 Votes)
Total Voters: 638*

An interesting thing to note here is we don't know how many voted for who they think will win as compared to who they want to win. The smark-mark divide is unknown. Otherwise KO having such a significant lead over Dean is quite telling. So is Zayn coming under ADR and having a fraction of the top choices.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's not just Reigns. It's...well...everyone. I honestly can't believe when I read stuff about how great this roster is. I was playing SVR 06 earlier and I was reminded of how bad the roster was then too.

All the stars of the past had defining characteristics. Take the names like Sting, Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, The Undertaker, Kane, Stone Cold, The Rock, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Kevin Nash, Goldust, Vader, Diamond Dallas Page, Booker T, Scott Steiner, Roddy Piper, Randy Savage, Scott Hall and etc.

I bet everyone in here can immediately picture them in their head and all of their different traits. Who on the roster today has any unique traits? They all just look and act like a bunch of regular guys. Kevin Owens' attire is what I wear when I go play basketball with my friends. 

What is any of these guys characters? Why should I care about any of them? Why should a casual fan who's only watched WWE care about the two bald white guys from Japan? Why should they care about their history with AJ Styles? It doesn't help that no one can cut a decent promo and no one has any mainstream appeal.

As I said before, they had Bray, but they killed him dead. Now he's just the box ghost. They needed to do more of this:




Instead of long, pointless, fake awesome matches they need to spend way more time developing stories and building character. Wrestling doesn't draw. Entertainment does.
And it doesn't help that every heel is a total coward and can't win anything on their own these days.

John Cena was a big draw. I guess his drawing ability is waning over time similar to Hogan's in 95.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> What? I just said that Reigns isn't doing WWE any favors before saying that the Indy darlings aren't either. The "anti smarks" get "put in their place" because smarks have ever evolving logic and reasons for who to put the blame on.
> 
> I'm not anti smark, per se, in that I don't dislike a wrestler for being from the indy's, though I do think smarks have a ridiculously overrated view of Indy wrestlers and Indy wrestling itself.
> 
> With that said, to say that Reigns or Cena is to blame for this when they're barely featured on the show is ridiculous. To assume that the few people that still watch wrestling analyze it to the point of not wanting to see their supposedly favorite guys perform in the main event on Raw because they've been "devalued by Reigns" is either idiotic or disingenuous.
> 
> Smarks are the exact same thing as anti-smarks... It's always the fault of the other end of the spectrum, while "their" guys couldn't possibly be to blame.
> 
> The blame needs to be placed squarely on the writers and the excessive programming.


I agree with you. If anything, Cena stopped the bleeding of viewers. For a week, at least. At this point, no one on the roster is a draw. New Day doesn't bring more viewers. Ambrose, Owens, Jericho, etc didn't for the main event. And now Cena/Styles seems to have run out of juice. 

Maybe things will change after the brand split. Probably not.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If anyone on this roster SHOULD be a draw, it's Cena and Reigns. Cena has been the FOTC for 10 years. Reigns is booked as an ass-kicker and destroys everyone in his path. Everyone else is booked as a joke.

When it comes to the talent, it falls on them two first and foremost. Everyone else miles and miles behind those two.

i do get a kick out of some of the people from last year who pinned it all on the Champion now blaming the midcard, though. The hypocrisy is REAL.

Even Cena's return was a HUGE flop.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> MNF doesn't average 20+million viewers (that's how many people watched game 5).


It averages roughly 10 million, plus you have all of the fall network shows coming back. Regardless, ratings always take a hit when football is back.

I expect the ratings to go up next week because the finals will be over and it'll be the day after MITB, but there's no guarantee that this week's rating is rock bottom for WWE because we keep seeing it go lower and lower, especially with competition.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> If anyone on this roster SHOULD be a draw, it's Cena and Reigns. Cena has been the FOTC for 10 years. Reigns is booked as an ass-kicker and destroys everyone in his path. Everyone else is booked as a joke.
> 
> When it comes to the talent, it falls on them two first and foremost. Everyone else miles and miles behind those two.
> 
> i do get a kick out of some of the people from last year who pinned it all on the Champion now blaming the midcard, though. The hypocrisy is REAL.


Cena vs Styles was the highest rated segment last week and probably will be this week too. It caused the 2nd hour to achieve a two month high. How is that not draw power?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> Cena vs Styles was the highest rated segment last week and probably will be this week too. It caused the 2nd hour to achieve a two month high. How is that not draw power?


Because the 2nd hour drew a lousy 3.1 million. On what planet is 3.1 million viewers for one of the hours of Raw, good? The fact that that is the highest rated hour of Raw is sickening. 2015 Raw shits all over that number and laughs in its' face.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm not even Cena's biggest fan, but I have to defend him. He's been the one anchor on this sinking ship. If it weren't for him, the ratings would've sunk lower. Cena isn't the draw he used to be but the WWE has been able to squeeze some juice out of him. Cena/Styles were highest rated, followed by Reigns and Rollins. 

Case In Point:

*6/6 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – Cena-Styles huge audience, what happened in the third hour?*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/10/66-raw-tv-quarter-hour-ratings-happened-third-hour/

*5/30 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings Report – Cena-Styles saves the show & third hour, Minute-by-Minute on key segments, surprises*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...ird-hour-minute-minute-key-segment-surprises/

*5/23 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – which segments were the most-watched following Extreme Rules?*
http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/05...ngs-segments-watched-following-extreme-rules/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If Cena was such a draw in 2016, they'd be doing better than what they've done. Being the best number of an awful bunch of numbers is not 'drawing.'


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> It averages roughly 10 million, plus you have all of the fall network shows coming back. Regardless, ratings always take a hit when football is back.
> 
> I expect the ratings to go up next week because the finals will be over and it'll be the day after MITB, but there's no guarantee that this week's rating is rock bottom for WWE because we keep seeing it go lower and lower, especially with competition.


Sure they can take a hit, but it's not as bad which is all I was trying to point out. If MNF was shown instead of the NBA finals yesterday, the decrease wouldn't have been as bad. Rock bottom ratings will probably result from the continuing overall downward trend.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The hit they will take when Football comes back will be glorious. I'm already :dance just thinking about it. I don't even care if Seth is Champion then. The overall creative will probably still be terrible, so..


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> If Cena was such a draw in 2016, they'd be doing better than what they've done. Being the best number of an awful bunch of numbers is not 'drawing.'


That's certainly true and I've conceded that he's lost some of his drawing power. But he still has more than most on the roster. I do think think could be worse if it weren't for him. I don't even feel like kicking Cena anymore. He's not even the root of the issue. Unless of course, he's playing politics backstage.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> That's certainly true and I've conceded that he's lost some of his drawing power. But he still has more than most on the roster. I do think think could be worse if it weren't for him. I don't even feel like kicking Cena anymore. He's not even the root of the issue. Unless of course, he's playing politics backstage.


He certainly has lost a good deal of it. I agree he has more than the entire roster, but he should. He's the only guy whose been pushed like God for a decade. I don't feel like bashing him, either. It's not even really a bash on him. I mean, after 10 years straight of being pushed hard, eventually your starpower is going to die down, especially couple that with a bland product. I'm not suggesting anyone would do any better, either. I know they wouldn't.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Because the 2nd hour drew a lousy 3.1 million. On what planet is 3.1 million viewers for one of the hours of Raw, good? The fact that that is the highest rated hour of Raw is sickening. 2015 Raw shits all over that number and laughs in its' face.


Dude the second hour drew 3.490 million viewers a two-month high. You're confusing last week with this week.

This week the 2nd hour was about the Shield segment. The beginning of the 3rd hour was the Styles/Cena segment. 

6/13 qtr hour ratings haven't been released yet, but I suspect those two segments performed well while the rest of the qtr hours not containing said segments probably performed extremely poorly. In fact, I bet once the Styles/Cena styles segment ended the viewers probably dropped dramatically as Cena/Styles is the most interesting angle going on right now to most viewers.


----------



## Hawkke

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> If anyone on this roster SHOULD be a draw, it's Cena and Reigns. Cena has been the FOTC for 10 years. Reigns is booked as an ass-kicker and destroys everyone in his path. *Everyone else is booked as a joke.
> *
> When it comes to the talent, it falls on them two first and foremost. Everyone else miles and miles behind those two.
> 
> i do get a kick out of some of the people from last year who pinned it all on the Champion now blaming the midcard, though. The hypocrisy is REAL.
> 
> Even Cena's return was a HUGE flop.


And there in lies the problem, it has been the problem for a long time, it always will be the problem until it ceases. The various apologists cry out that people complain because "their favorite(s) aren't the champion!" Let's clear up this BS now. I don't believe it is just that, I don't think I ever will, that's just an obfuscation. The I feel the crux of the matter is people want their favorites to seem like they at least matter in a story. Jobbers will be jobbers, but a steady, reasonable presentation of the rest of the roster would go so far to clearing up so many issues.

And I don't think the sheer putridity of the commentary can ever be overlooked when plummeting ratings are discussed.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> Dude the second hour drew 3.490 million viewers a two-month high. You're confusing last week with this week.
> 
> This week the 2nd hour was about the Shield segment. The beginning of the 3rd hour was the Styles/Cena segment.
> 
> 6/13 qtr hour ratings haven't been released yet, but I suspect those two segments performed well while the rest of the qtr hours not containing said segments probably performed extremely poorly. In fact, I bet once the Styles/Cena styles segment ended the viewers probably dropped dramatically as Cena/Styles is the most interesting angle going on right now to most viewers.


Oh, you meant last week instead of this week. Ok, my bad. Even so, a 3.4 is nothing great. 2015 was doing that number even during NFL season. It's not some great number. Even worse considering the guy (Cena) literally just came back. I thought he'd do alot better than that within the first month or so of his return. That's not a number for a FOTC of the past 10 years to hang your hat on, honestly.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If Brock and Cena are said to be the only two draws mentioned begrudgingly here, I wonder how much UFC 200 will hamper Brock's drawing power if he loses. Granted if he wins, WWE will continue to build him as an unstoppable part-time force of nature. But if he loses, will that set him for a heel run to build an emerging star or solidfy an existing one? When he returned in 2012 after leaving UFC with a loss, he wasn't seen in WWE for nearly 8 years. So there was that initial euphoria. This time, I wonder if WWE let him loose so they can decide upon his character depending on the outcome at UFC 200.

Also am looking forward to how Bray's re-entry works out in all this, although I do think Harper returning sooner will aid that.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Meltzer will post the ratings breakdown on Friday. He started sharing them ever since Rollins returned. That should answer some things.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> Meltzer will post the ratings breakdown on Friday. He started sharing them ever since Rollins returned. That should answer some things.


What is there to answer, really, though? Look at the hourly numbers of this week. They were bad with hour 3 being really bad, and hour 1 being bad for an hour 1. The fact that they topped out at 3.1 tells the story and that is that no one is drawing.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

You know if they took even an ounce of the booking they give Reigns and Cena. To booking top heels. Some of the stories maybe more compelling. You don't watch Batman and The Joker is a geek, hey Joker got your nose :lol. So to reiterate once and all for good. The TALENT is not at fault for the bad ratings, CREATIVE is.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> What is there to answer, really, though? Look at the hourly numbers of this week. They were bad with hour 3 being really bad, and hour 1 being bad for an hour 1. The fact that they topped out at 3.1 tells the story and that is that no one is drawing.


I'm interested in the breakdown of Cena/Styles as they've held steady in recent weeks. This is the one feud that some effort has been put into. The numbers will still be bad but I'm just curious how much interest fell for them. I do hope they can rebound next week. But that depends on MITB and what happens there.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I'm interested in the breakdown of Cena/Styles as they've held steady in recent weeks. This is the one feud that some effort has been put into. The numbers will still be bad but I'm just curious how much interest fell for them. I do hope they can rebound next week. But that depends on MITB and what happens there.


Yeah, they took a huge hit this week, no doubt.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Hawkke said:


> And there in lies the problem, it has been the problem for a long time, it always will be the problem until it ceases. The various apologists cry out that people complain because "their favorite(s) aren't the champion!" Let's clear up this BS now. I don't believe it is just that, I don't think I ever will, that's just an obfuscation. The I feel the crux of the matter is people want their favorites to seem like they at least matter in a story. Jobbers will be jobbers, but a steady, reasonable presentation of the rest of the roster would go so far to clearing up so many issues.
> 
> And I don't think the sheer putridity of the commentary can ever be overlooked when plummeting ratings are discussed.


Let's be honest, the whole "you just don't like it because your favorites aren't winning!!1!" was always a bullshit argument from trolls and contrarians. I'm not a Rollins or Cesaro mark, but I definitely believe they deserve better. Hell, I think Rollins would be a great FOTC and I prefer Ambrose over him too. Whole roster deserves better booking, but atm it's just Cena and Reigns who are booked great. Shame too, because they've got a pretty good roster right now.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Lowest WWE RAW ratings since 9/4/95.
> 
> 6/13/16 2.03R
> 12/30/96 1.6R
> 12/23/96 1.5R
> 10/28/96 2.0R
> 10/14/96 1.8R
> 9/23/96 2.0R
> 8/12/96 2.0R
> 9/25/95 1.9R*
> 
> http://www.twnpnews.com/information/wwfraw.shtml





JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Ratings for RAWs before 9/4/95 starting from 1/11/93 are not easily available online. So we can't be sure if any of those did this badly either. However what is certain is this is indeed the 8th lowest (or as low as 5th if you consider those 3 other episodes with 2.0R marked to a more accurate decimal point) after around 1080 episodes over nearly 21 years.
> 
> And only 6 Nitros did around this rating or lower than this and some of those were when they were shutting down themselves.


I missed out a *1.9R* which they did on *3/3/97* so 97 did have a rating lower than the past RAW but that's not really a bright spot in the grand scheme of things. Let's not forget that, RAW was routinely trounced by their competition back then with WCW having that unprecedented 84 week ratings win streak unlike today.

Also, the following comprehensive excerpt from Wiki can help draw some historical parallels, in terms of innovation stemming from attrition and competition. If they decide to reinvigorate/re-innovate that is.

_''The poor rating (2.2) for the January 20, 1997 episode of Raw, the night after the Royal Rumble, caused the WWF and USA Network to increase Raw to two hours and prevent TNT's Nitro from having an unopposed hour. The WWF also decided to run Raw as a live show more often to combat Nitro, with the normal schedule being one live Raw followed by a taped episode. On February 3, 1997, Raw went to a two-hour format, as an edgier, more hostile attitude was starting to come in full stream in the WWF. In an attempt to break the momentum of what had turned into ratings domination by Nitro, Extreme Championship Wrestling (ECW) was brought in as Jerry Lawler challenged ECW on February 17, 1997. In an episode where Raw returned to the Manhattan Center, the challenge was answered with Taz, Mikey Whipwreck, Sabu, Tommy Dreamer, D-Von Dudley, and The Sandman and "ECW representative" Paul Heyman appearing and performing ECW-style matches for the WWF audience.

*On March 3, 1997, a house show from Berlin, Germany, which was filmed with few cameras and poor lighting and featured an array of cold matches with no storyline builds to them, aired as that week's episode of Raw. The show was very poorly received by fans (earning only a 1.9 rating, one of the lowest the show has ever recorded) and WWF executives, alike. The following week, Raw was completely revamped with a new set, new theme music (originally "The Beautiful People" by Marilyn Manson, later a WWF-created song), and was renamed Raw Is War.*

The March 17, 1997 episode featured a heated Bret Hart/Vince McMahon altercation where Hart shoved McMahon to the mat and engaged in a profanity-laden tirade, much of which went uncensored. Throughout 1997, further controversial elements emerged with Raw Is War and WWF programming. Notable angles included Bret Hart and his Hart Foundation declaring war on the United States lifestyle, Paul Bearer delivering an intense promo on June 30 claiming that The Undertaker's brother Kane was still alive after surviving a house fire twenty years prior and claiming that The Undertaker had started it, gang warfare between the Nation of Domination, The Disciples of Apocalypse and Los Boricuas erupting in the summer, Stone Cold Steve Austin's building feud with WWF executives, and primarily Vince McMahon (who was now known as the legit owner of the WWF), and the emergence of D-Generation X (DX) as an anti-establishment group. On November 17, Vince McMahon was interviewed by Jim Ross about the infamous Montreal Screwjob at the Survivor Series, and said to the world that "Bret screwed Bret" and claimed that Hart was a tragic figure on that night, thus starting the Mr. McMahon gimmick. Hart had then left for WCW immediately following the Survivor Series event.''_


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Since we're on the subject of Cena....



He does something that's totally unacceptable and not conductive to good business and getting over your roster. He legitimately attempts to bury talent, and it's gotten progressively worse since his return. He'd always done it to an extent, but around the broken nose vs Seth, he'd really began digging in. Though I laughed because I'm not a fan of Roman's at all, how is the backhanded retort of "You couldn't beat Reings, but you think you can beat me?" supposed to get Roman over? Removing my bias emotion concerning my disdain for Roman , from a business perspective, that makes zero sense. If John was going heel -- or was a heel -- then sure, it'd be fitting, but that's likely not happening. He's a *face*, so why put the guy the boss desperately want fans to sell as the alpha male of the roster down in order to prop yourself up? 


He totally patronizes and talks down to Styles to the point it's uncomfortable (again, nothing new from John in that regard but he's OD'ing on it.) This wouldn't be an issue if these guys were scripted to rail into him in return, but Cena gets to call you all types of punks and bitches whilst the soccer mom in the first row wags her finger and applauds, relishing in John sticking it to the bad guy..... while anyone channel surfing just sees a guy getting owned and getting talked down to by a man that may as well be father. These guys aren't even scripted to hit back. 


John calls the Bullet Club the "Pull it Club" and *yet he's the guy with the move called 'The 5-Knuckle Shuffle.' *I had that retort five seconds after he saud the diss and I'm sure I'm not the only one, so why can't these guys you want fans to buy as stars respond in the same manner as they're being addressed? Why can't they hit low past the typical bs they greenlight for Johns opponents?


He's entirely too talented of a speaker to HAVE to rely on semishooting on his opponents in order to get oohs-&-ahhs. He's rapidly turning into the grump old guy, and just like Wyatt and Seth had to take it, so does every other guy he feuds with, and then you wonder why no one cares about them. *Not only are they booked to lose the war, they lose the verbal war.* You can claim AJ is a poor speaker, but you can't tell me Bray didn't gave ANY ammo he could unload once John began mocking and patronizing him. They take abuse as he intentionally insults them at a level that goes deeper than their characters and they can only stand and grit their teeth (or, do like Seth and break his nose, but still lose the war.) 

It's unacceptable. Great promo guys can put themselves over without attempting to ruin their opponents credibility. He's too good to be relying on such bush league tactics but he only does it because Vince allows him to get away with it. It's not good for business at all in the long run, especially when you're not allowing these guys to win the feuds with him.


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hilarious ratings, so much for Cena being a draw huh?

edit:



Lothario said:


> Since we're on the subject of Cena....
> 
> 
> 
> He does something that's totally unacceptable and not conductive to good business and getting over your roster. He legitimately attempts to bury talent, and it's gotten progressively worse since his return. He'd always done it to an extent, but around the broken nose vs Seth, he'd really began digging in. Though I laughed because I'm not a fan of Roman's at all, how is the backhanded retort of "You couldn't beat Reings, but you think you can beat me?" supposed to get Roman over? Removing my bias emotion concerning my disdain for Roman , from a business perspective, that makes zero sense. If John was going heel -- or was a heel -- then sure, it'd be fitting, but that's likely not happening. He's a *face*, so why put the guy the boss desperately want fans to sell as the alpha male of the roster down in order to prop yourself up?
> 
> 
> He totally patronizes and talks down to Styles to the point it's uncomfortable (again, nothing new from John in that regard but he's OD'ing on it.) This wouldn't be an issue if these guys were scripted to rail into him in return, but Cena gets to call you all types of punks and bitches whilst the soccer mom in the first row wags her finger and applauds, relishing in John sticking it to the bad guy..... while anyone channel surfing just sees a guy getting owned and getting talked down to by a man that may as well be father. These guys aren't even scripted to hit back.
> 
> 
> John calls the Bullet Club the "Pull it Club" and *yet he's the guy with the move called 'The 5-Knuckle Shuffle.' *I had that retort five seconds after he saud the diss and I'm sure I'm not the only one, so why can't these guys you want fans to buy as stars respond in the same manner as they're being addressed? Why can't they hit low past the typical bs they greenlight for Johns opponents?
> 
> 
> He's entirely too talented of a speaker to HAVE to rely on semishooting on his opponents in order to get oohs-&-ahhs. He's rapidly turning into the grump old guy, and just like Wyatt and Seth had to take it, so does every other guy he feuds with, and then you wonder why no one cares about them. *Not only are they booked to lose the war, they lose the verbal war.* You can claim AJ is a poor speaker, but you can't tell me Bray didn't gave ANY ammo he could unload once John began mocking and patronizing him. They take abuse as he intentionally insults them at a level that goes deeper than their characters and they can only stand and grit their teeth (or, do like Seth and break his nose, but still lose the war.)
> 
> It's unacceptable. Great promo guys can put themselves over without attempting to ruin their opponents credibility. He's too good to be relying on such bush league tactics but he only does it because Vince allows him to get away with it. It's not good for business at all in the long run, especially when you're not allowing these guys to win the feuds with him.


If I could rep you a 1000 times I would. Spot on.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Unlike a lot of people here, I actually like WWE and want to see them do well. I can only hope that big changes are coming soon, and by that I don't mean a roster split or any of that shit. It's the late 90s all over again. Unless Vince is content with losing another million viewers in the next 12 months, the old man needs to wake the fuck up and smell the coffee.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I didn't think things could get worse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KC Armstrong said:


> Unlike a lot of people here, I actually like WWE and want to see them do well. I can only hope that big changes are coming soon, and by that I don't mean a roster split or any of that shit. It's the late 90s all over again. Unless Vince is content with losing another million viewers in the next 12 months, the old man needs to wake the fuck up and smell the coffee.


Totally. And I know this is obvious, but it really needs to be emphasized. I don't think anyone actually wants WWE to die. They just want WWE in its current form to die in favor of a better WWE that people want to watch.

I want to see them do well, too, but yeah, it goes hand-in-hand with making the positive changes that they need to make. Bad shows get bad ratings. Happened to WCW, happening to WWE.

I didn't want WCW to die either.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

When you have Reigns, Charlotte, Miz, Russev and New Day as your fucking champions, the anti-smark should honestly STFU and not even dare put the blame on KO, Zayn, Cesaro, AJ, Rollins.. these indy geeks who suffer from 50/50 booking, or jobber to the stars, and are given no direction.. when ratings are like that and we say we want put like the "indy geeks" to get noticed, all we're asking for is a chance, because your WWE guys failed ( not really Miz/Russev who just recently got some credibility back, but New Day-Reigns-Charlotte for example should be able to hold people's interest way more than they do with the push they were given)


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



etrbaby said:


> When you have Reigns, Charlotte, Miz, Russev and New Day as your fucking champions, the anti-smark should honestly STFU and not even dare put the blame on KO, Zayn, Cesaro, AJ, Rollins.. these indy geeks who suffer from 50/50 booking, or jobber to the stars, and are given no direction.. when ratings are like that and we say we want put like the "indy geeks" to get noticed, all we're asking for is a chance, because your WWE guys failed ( not really Miz/Russev who just recently got some credibility back, but New Day-Reigns-Charlotte for example should be able to hold people's interest way more than they do with the push they were given)


 LMAO as a AJ mark, I would love 50-50 booking.

AJ is getting 20-80 booking at PPV's and that could be 17-83 after MITB and some fans have the audicatiy to blame AJ for the ratings. I'm surprised people are still invested in the feud despite AJ going down to nearly everyone decent on the roster.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> LMAO as a AJ mark, I would love 50-50 booking.
> 
> AJ is getting 20-80 booking at PPV's and that could be 17-83 after MITB and some fans have the audicatiy to blame AJ for the ratings. I'm surprised people are still invested in the feud despite AJ going down to nearly everyone decent on the roster.



The PPV losses were not even the worst part. Making a guy lose a MITB qualifier clean to Kevin Owens on RAW right before he starts a feud with John Cena is pretty absurd.

However, none of that matters in terms of ratings. Stop blaming individual wrestlers, start looking at creative, start looking at the overall direction of the show and most importantly start pointing the finger at Vince. Enough with this "Cena/Rollins/Reigns is not a draw" bullshit. If you cast a great actor in the worst show ever created, the show is going to bomb miserably. End of story.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



bullshitter said:


> How many 5ft 9 150 pound wrestlers are there?


At a glance; a lot. If you're a casual fan and you're used to seeing Batista, Lesnar, Cena, Rock, Austin, Taker, Kane, Hogan, HHH, Macho Man, etc. etc. then you tune in thesedays and see Zayn and Owens going at it...a tiny hipster doofus and a neckbearded short and fat guy going at it, they dont stack up.



Piper's Pit said:


> Agree. A casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to have their attention grabbed by the sight of Kevin Owens or Sami Zayn, just isn't happening. Doesn't matter how talented either of those guys is but the first thought that would likely enter their head on seeing Zayn or KO is "damn, standards have slipped, I remember watching the Rock and Hulk Hogan back in the day now there's a fat midget in basketball shorts and a skinny ginger geek wrestling, I could take either of them in a street fight (changes channel)".


100% People thesedays are so against Roman Reigns push and blame him for everything, but these guys that the IWC in general love to Champion dont draw either, they dont spike ratings, they dont bring in droves of fans because they dont have that same stature/aura/look.

The look does matter.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Lothario said:


> Since we're on the subject of Cena....
> 
> 
> 
> He does something that's totally unacceptable and not conductive to good business and getting over your roster. He legitimately attempts to bury talent, and it's gotten progressively worse since his return. He'd always done it to an extent, but around the broken nose vs Seth, he'd really began digging in. Though I laughed because I'm not a fan of Roman's at all, how is the backhanded retort of "You couldn't beat Reings, but you think you can beat me?" supposed to get Roman over? Removing my bias emotion concerning my disdain for Roman , from a business perspective, that makes zero sense. If John was going heel -- or was a heel -- then sure, it'd be fitting, but that's likely not happening. He's a *face*, so why put the guy the boss desperately want fans to sell as the alpha male of the roster down in order to prop yourself up?
> 
> 
> He totally patronizes and talks down to Styles to the point it's uncomfortable (again, nothing new from John in that regard but he's OD'ing on it.) This wouldn't be an issue if these guys were scripted to rail into him in return, but Cena gets to call you all types of punks and bitches whilst the soccer mom in the first row wags her finger and applauds, relishing in John sticking it to the bad guy..... while anyone channel surfing just sees a guy getting owned and getting talked down to by a man that may as well be father. These guys aren't even scripted to hit back.
> 
> 
> John calls the Bullet Club the "Pull it Club" and *yet he's the guy with the move called 'The 5-Knuckle Shuffle.' *I had that retort five seconds after he saud the diss and I'm sure I'm not the only one, so why can't these guys you want fans to buy as stars respond in the same manner as they're being addressed? Why can't they hit low past the typical bs they greenlight for Johns opponents?
> 
> 
> He's entirely too talented of a speaker to HAVE to rely on semishooting on his opponents in order to get oohs-&-ahhs. He's rapidly turning into the grump old guy, and just like Wyatt and Seth had to take it, so does every other guy he feuds with, and then you wonder why no one cares about them. *Not only are they booked to lose the war, they lose the verbal war.* You can claim AJ is a poor speaker, but you can't tell me Bray didn't gave ANY ammo he could unload once John began mocking and patronizing him. They take abuse as he intentionally insults them at a level that goes deeper than their characters and they can only stand and grit their teeth (or, do like Seth and break his nose, but still lose the war.)
> 
> It's unacceptable. Great promo guys can put themselves over without attempting to ruin their opponents credibility. He's too good to be relying on such bush league tactics but he only does it because Vince allows him to get away with it. It's not good for business at all in the long run, especially when you're not allowing these guys to win the feuds with him.


I'm glad somebody beside me notices this as well. I actually pointed that out in another thread, that I noticed this way of doing promos when WWE wants someone to look, well, not good. And not in the bitchy heelish way, but legitimately like a chump.
Remember the Sting VS Hunter feud? When Hunter cut that promo on PPV, and made all the sense in the world, and one fan in front row goes "He's got a point Sting"? And Sting just stands there? And then he loses at WM? 
That was in the same Style (no pun intended). 
Make the non-WWE guy look like a bitch by having him not retort to any of it, then have him lose the feud.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Fearless Maryse said:


> At a glance; a lot. If you're a casual fan and you're used to seeing Batista, Lesnar, Cena, Rock, Austin, Taker, Kane, Hogan, HHH, Macho Man, etc. etc. then you tune in thesedays and see Zayn and Owens going at it...a tiny hipster doofus and a neckbearded short and fat guy going at it, they dont stack up.
> 
> 
> 
> 100% People thesedays are so against Roman Reigns push and blame him for everything, but these guys that the IWC in general love to Champion dont draw either, they dont spike ratings, they dont bring in droves of fans because they dont have that same stature/aura/look.
> *
> The look does matter.*


 Daniel Bryan and Roman's runs suggest otherwise.

Reality is, a mixture of compelling stories, talent and interesting characters draw. Bryan's RTWM proves it, Roman's run was so forced and manufactured that it failed miserably, he isn't talented nor was he an underdog and he has certainly not being held back. This is why guys like Bryan, Punk and Rollins' moments felt far more special than say Roman or ADR's.

The look is so over rated in 2016, Messi doesn't have superstar good looks like Ronaldo yet everyone and their dog acknowledges Messi as the best in the world and are an awe of him whenever he plays. Without those superstar good looks he has risen to megastar level and is one of the most recognizable faces on the planet purely because of his exceptional skill. Lebron, Curry, Conor and Virat Kohli are the same, they prove it's skill and or charisma that draws. If looking the part mean't a thing, the likes of Sage Northcutt would be the megastars, but it doesn't. Skill trumps looking the part, it's simply a bonus if you have both. 

My point is, you don't deserve to be at the top just because you look the part especially in 2016 when people can call bs. People are exposed to actual talent day in day out that it's very easy to identify the real deals.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

In a sports that has been all about male viewers forever, how can look matter to the extent some people think it does? It is way more important that somebody can be a badass. Rusev has not A+ look, and that fucker is over. Bryan was way more of a badass in the ring than Reigns.
Men don't want pretty boys, they want badasses. And so do women.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



etrbaby said:


> When you have Reigns, Charlotte, Miz, Russev and New Day as your fucking champions, the anti-smark should honestly STFU and not even dare put the blame on KO, Zayn, Cesaro, AJ, Rollins.. these indy geeks who suffer from 50/50 booking, or jobber to the stars, and are given no direction.. when ratings are like that and we say we want put like the "indy geeks" to get noticed, all we're asking for is a chance, because your WWE guys failed ( not really Miz/Russev who just recently got some credibility back, but New Day-Reigns-Charlotte for example should be able to hold people's interest way more than they do with the push they were given)


Don't wanna take their medicine. It's really funny the tiny hipster doofus and the short fat neckbeard guy get the blame :lmao. Once again, majority blamed the champ last year whether it was Seth or Sheamus but now some are trying to put the blame on the midcarders who get shit booking.

Gotta love the spin though. Could easily say a casual viewer tunes into Raw and sees Zayn pull off a crazy move and stays to watch or tune in and see Owens cut a great promo and decides to stick around. Or they see The Look cut a promo and sound robotic as hell and decide to change the channel because it's so bad.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I agree that Vince and the writers are to blame first and foremost. After that though, it's the guys on top. That's what we were told in this very thread last year, all year long. Maybe you missed it, but that's what we were told. Quite ridiculous when it comes to the talent to blame a bunch of mid carders and low carders, but not the top 2 faces of the company. Hoo boy. :lmao


It makes more sense to blame whoever is featured the most, if we're going to blame the actual talent. When Reigns closes out the show and the third house does poorly, it's because people tune out when Reigns comes on. When KO or Ambrose close out the show and it does poorly, it's because people didn't watch at all because Reigns is the champ. After DB won the title and ratings began to decline, people blamed everyone BUT him, despite him being the Champ. 

I don't frequent this thread all that much, mostly because the ideas floated as to why ratings are down are absurd, but blaming Rollins last year was stupid as well (of course, there were still those that blamed Reigns, because, "everyone knows he's next in line so no one wants to watch", which was even dumber). Maybe I'm biased because I'm a Rollins mark, but putting ANY of the blame on him was absurd. Rollins is nearly the total package, he was just booked poorly as champ. From one HBK mark to another, it's like blaming HBK for 1995 ratings. 

As an aside, it's interesting how terrible that first hour rating was, despite New Day being, possibly, the most over group on the entire roster.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> It makes more sense to blame whoever is featured the most, if we're going to blame the actual talent. When Reigns closes out the show and the third house does poorly, it's because people tune out when Reigns comes on. When KO or Ambrose close out the show and it does poorly, it's because people didn't watch at all because Reigns is the champ. After DB won the title and ratings began to decline, people blamed everyone BUT him, despite him being the Champ.
> 
> I don't frequent this thread all that much, mostly because the ideas floated as to why ratings are down are absurd, but blaming Rollins last year was stupid as well (of course, there were still those that blamed Reigns, because, "everyone knows he's next in line so no one wants to watch", which was even dumber). Maybe I'm biased because I'm a Rollins mark, but putting ANY of the blame on him was absurd. Rollins is nearly the total package, he was just booked poorly as champ. From one HBK mark to another, it's like blaming HBK for 1995 ratings.
> 
> As an aside, it's interesting how terrible that first hour rating was, despite New Day being, possibly, the most over group on the entire roster.



I agree to blame Vince and the writers first and foremost. But, if someone wants to go down the road of blaming any of the wrestlers for 2016 ratings being literally the lowest of all time, then just like we all just did, we will show you who is being pushed like GODS this year, and who isn't. That's all. No offense, but your post is kind of all over the place, too.

The hypocrisy will be pointed out and exposed.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Even with it's relatively poor rating, RAW was still #1 in the demo on cable Monday night. USA could trumpet that even though the rating was horrid for RAW.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Rollins and Cena returns did not do shit and Reigns as champs has been a failure. I don't know if things would randomly get better if he drops it, though.

The "three hours are too much" excuse does not work imo, because that was not an issue the last two years (the numbers were posted a few pages ago and they were doing fairly well then). It's just not "must-see" TV for quite some time now (even including the previous few years, though); nothing big happens anymore, it's all very standard and because of the 2 million recaps and social media presence, you do not really have to watch the show live anymore.

They are still earning shitton of money so not sure if much will change. The sponsors have them by the balls, anyways.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



ShowStopper said:


> Aaaaand pushing a non-vanilla Midget to the top has not only not grown them any new viewers, it's actually pushed their most loyal fans of YEARS/DECADES away more and more every week.


Terrible booking, decision making and openly insulting their own fans has pushed the hardcores away not Roman Reigns.

You've completely missed the point I was originally trying to make. Ratings and everything else are going down not just because they're losing fans but because they're not making new fans, there is close to nothing currently on WWE programming that would create new fans.
And yes I stand by my point about Zayn and Owens, a casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to see those two and think "wow that small fat guy and that geeky ginger guy look like interesting characters and amazing athletes I'll stop what I'm doing and watch now".


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Piper's Pit said:


> Terrible booking, decision making and openly insulting their own fans has pushed the hardcores away not Roman Reigns.
> 
> You've completely missed the point I was originally trying to make. Ratings and everything else are going down not just because they're losing fans but because they're not making new fans, there is close to nothing currently on WWE programming that would create new fans.
> And yes I stand by my point about Zayn and Owens, a casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to see those two and think "wow that small fat guy and that geeky ginger guy look like interesting characters and amazing athletes I'll stop what I'm doing and watch now".


How do you know what millions of people think? Talk about an assumption. They could also see their quality matches and be intrigued that way.

Say what you want about Owens' and Zayns' looks, but it's not like Cena and Reigns' 'looks' have drawn in any viewers, either. And they supposedly have the look down to a tee..


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Piper's Pit said:


> Terrible booking, decision making and openly insulting their own fans has pushed the hardcores away not Roman Reigns.
> 
> You've completely missed the point I was originally trying to make. Ratings and everything else are going down not just because they're losing fans but because they're not making new fans, there is close to nothing currently on WWE programming that would create new fans.
> And yes I stand by my point about Zayn and Owens, a casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to see those two and think "wow that small fat guy and that geeky ginger guy look like interesting characters and amazing athletes I'll stop what I'm doing and watch now".


*If the look matters so much, then explain why Daniel Bryan was the hottest thing WWE has had in years?

Look doesn't fucking matter anymore. Especially when you consider that in the sports world, you have guys like Conor McGregor (5'9, 170 lbs) being one of the biggest stars in UFC.*


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *If the look matters so much, then explain why Daniel Bryan was the hottest thing WWE has had in years?
> 
> Look doesn't fucking matter anymore. Especially when you consider that in the sports world, you have guys like Conor McGregor (5'9, 170 lbs) being one of the biggest stars in UFC.*


Conor McGregor first is a larger than life character and looks like a professional athlete as did Daniel Bryan who may have been small but looked like a pro athlete or like he could compete in MMA even. Owens and Zayn do not.
If Bryan had had a beer gut and no muscle definition would he haven been such a draw ?? Doubt it.

And IMO the reason he was such a draw was because his character was in the right place at the right time. His down to earth persona came at a time when fans had had enough of the WWE's soulless, corporate garbage and then along came a humble wrestler who was the antithesis of the Cena and Orton.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Picking Owens and Zayn out is really random and odd. Who said either guy would be a draw? Zayn is pushed as an underdog babyface that loses the majority of the time. Owens, up until now, has been a midcarder. Neither one has been pushed to be a draw. When those guys are pushed at the top and to be draws and they fail, then sure, bash 'em. But they're not the ones who have been built as drawing cards for the company, especially not Zayn. :lol


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Actually at this point I wish the WWE would take all the perceived "indy darlings" off Raw completely and fill the show with only guys that the people knocking them think will draw in the (imaginary) "casuals" just so even more of the hardcore fans will be driven off and Raw will sink even lower so those people can shut up about that argument for good.


----------



## Wildcat410

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



etrbaby said:


> When you have Reigns, Charlotte, Miz, Russev and New Day as your fucking champions, the anti-smark should honestly STFU and not even dare put the blame on KO, Zayn, Cesaro, AJ, Rollins.. these indy geeks who suffer from 50/50 booking, or jobber to the stars, and are given no direction.. when ratings are like that and we say we want put like the "indy geeks" to get noticed, all we're asking for is a chance, because your WWE guys failed ( not really Miz/Russev who just recently got some credibility back, *but New Day-Reigns-Charlotte for example should be able to hold people's interest way more than they do with the push they were given)*


I'll give New Day a break since they got and stayed over with a gimmick that people were pre-burying them for getting stuck with for quite a while.

But yeah Reigns and Charlotte are examples of upstairs betting on the wrong horses. Roman should probably be an upper midcard heel working his way through the card at the moment. Charlotte is mid-level womens material. She cannot carry a top spot in the division, and it shows.


----------



## Londrick

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Notice how Vince tried blaming Summerslam 2013's unimpressive pre-number (even though the final numbers end up being good)on Daniel Bryan in a coneference call but yet won't put any blame on Roman for being the lowest drawing champ of all time? :ha


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

To the people blaming Indy guys for the drop in numbers....Daniel Bryan says hi.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Another reason why people lose interest in this is because by ruling, nothing can happen. No title can change hands on TV unless it is ruled by the Authority. Why would I watch it when I know exactly that in 95% of all shows, nothing will happen? You don't have to Play hot potato with your belts, but at least make it possible that titles can change hands on TV so there is that factor. When I read X VS Y will happen on Raw, why would I watch it when the title isn't on the line and there is a chance I will see exactly the same match on PPV where the title will be defended? In a way, fans not watching is a way of keeping wrestling Special for yourself. I only ever watch the PPVs these days, so that in the rare case I find myself liking a pairing, I don't let it be ruined by a gazillion hours of bad TV and meaningless matches.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Piper's Pit said:


> Conor McGregor first is a larger than life character and looks like a professional athlete as did Daniel Bryan who may have been small but looked like a pro athlete or like he could compete in MMA even. Owens and Zayn do not.
> *If Bryan had had a beer gut and no muscle definition would he haven been such a draw ?? Doubt it.*
> 
> And IMO the reason he was such a draw was because his character was in the right place at the right time. His down to earth persona came at a time when fans had had enough of the WWE's soulless, corporate garbage and then along came a humble wrestler who was the antithesis of the Cena and Orton.


*If Bryan was booked well, and treated like a star, he would've been one even if he had a beer gut.

And Sami Zayn & Kevin Owens would be stars, if they were booked well, treated & pushed like stars. Regardless of their looks.*


----------



## The_Jiz

Piper's Pit said:


> ShowStopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Aaaaand pushing a non-vanilla Midget to the top has not only not grown them any new viewers, it's actually pushed their most loyal fans of YEARS/DECADES away more and more every week.
> 
> 
> 
> And yes I stand by my point about Zayn and Owens, a casual TV viewer surfing the channels is not going to see those two and think "wow that small fat guy and that geeky ginger guy look like interesting characters and amazing athletes I'll stop what I'm doing and watch now".
Click to expand...

People with this kind of attention span we can deal without. Casual viewers mean casual viewing. Just that.

Thing is bandwagonners or "casuals" just aren't loyal fans. They gravitate toward what the big crowds are talking about. wwe has gotten a negative reaction for the last decade. And they just aren't worth to white knight over.


----------



## AVGN

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why do people suddenly believe casual fans don't exist?


----------



## Wildcat410

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's early in the game, but at this point I think Owens has more upside than Zayn.

Kev can be a top star. Not "the" star (which they don't need anyway), but a top tier one regardless. KO is pretty badass and one of their better talkers. Zayn I just cannot take seriously above the midcard. The hopping to the ring thing is one of the dorkiest looking entrances ever. He needs a remake or upgrade all around (save ringwork) to have a shot at the top.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Phenomenal One said:


> Daniel Bryan and Roman's runs suggest otherwise.
> 
> Reality is, a mixture of compelling stories, talent and interesting characters draw. Bryan's RTWM proves it, Roman's run was so forced and manufactured that it failed miserably, he isn't talented nor was he an underdog and he has certainly not being held back. This is why guys like Bryan, Punk and Rollins' moments felt far more special than say Roman or ADR's.
> 
> The look is so over rated in 2016, Messi doesn't have superstar good looks like Ronaldo yet everyone and their dog acknowledges Messi as the best in the world and are an awe of him whenever he plays. Without those superstar good looks he has risen to megastar level and is one of the most recognizable faces on the planet purely because of his exceptional skill. Lebron, Curry, Conor and Virat Kohli are the same, they prove it's skill and or charisma that draws. If looking the part mean't a thing, the likes of Sage Northcutt would be the megastars, but it doesn't. Skill trumps looking the part, it's simply a bonus if you have both.
> 
> My point is, you don't deserve to be at the top just because you look the part especially in 2016 when people can call bs. People are exposed to actual talent day in day out that it's very easy to identify the real deals.


Kohli is a good looking dude tho.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



AVGN said:


> Why do people suddenly believe casual fans don't exist?


Suddenly? This has been a trend for last # of years...

Its not that they do not exist, technically the people that were the old "casuals" still exist as human beings, what they will never exist as again are WWE consumers. Pro-wrestling now has to negative of a stigma, the WWE is NEVER going to get back, I don't care who they push or what they do, as long as WWE is pro-wrestling in any form those fans are gone and not coming back. Casual Fans do exist, but the new "casual" fan are the former hardcore fans (I am talking from the last few years not back from the AE) that have either grown up and left wrestling behind or that the WWE has driven off from chasing the old casuals that are never coming back.

Wrestling, even the WWE, is a completely niche product now. Its a big niche and a company that has a strangle hold on the market of that niche (like the WWE) can make HUGE profits. But like I said the WWE seems more interested in trying to chase fans that are NEVER coming back and doing just enough (in their mind) to keep the niche fans, are and at a point now where they are alienating that niche audience and they are starting to leave as well. And the more the WWE tries and chase these fans they are never getting back the worse things will continue to get for them.

People keep bring up this argument about people flipping through the channels are not going to stop on the WWE to see X. People do not "flip" through channels anymore, they all have guides on their cable and thats how they look for what to watch, and these "casuals" that everyone wants to claim the WWE needs to be catering to look and see "WWE Raw" on the guide and skip right over it and never stop and see whats on the screen, so that argument is awful. The ONLY chance the WWE has got to ever get them to maybe click on USA to check out WWE Raw is if a member pf the niche audience that is still around is pleased with the product and has told this former fan to check it out.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Gay for Clay said:


> Notice how Vince tried blaming Summerslam 2013's unimpressive pre-number (even though the final numbers end up being good)on Daniel Bryan in a coneference call but yet won't put any blame on Roman for being the lowest drawing champ of all time? :ha


Wow, he really did that?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The pure Notion that "casuals" would zap to WWE just in time "casually" for that five minute Reigns segment ... :ha

In fact, if they thought Reigns was any draw for casuals, he would be all over Raw. The fact they hide him and put Cena/AJ in the prominent spots is Self-explanatory.


----------



## KPnDC

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I guess I'm classified as a former hardcore fan that's become a casual fan now. I have a wrestling YouTube channel, and I pay thousands of dollars for Mania trips, but I can't for the life of me watch RAW or SD. I use to be able to sit through the 90 min Hulu version but even that is cumbersome now. The WWE product isn't must see anymore. It takes me back to late 96 (which I'm watching on the Network). Nitro was on all cylinders and RAW just had a match w/ the Goon vs Marc Mero. Why watch RAW when you can easily catch up w/ the recaps during the PPV. The talent is there, I don't even mind when they do over the top shit like talking while sitting on ladders.


----------



## Japanese Puroresu

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



AVGN said:


> Why do people suddenly believe casual fans don't exist?


Because according to the ratings, the don't


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I agree to blame Vince and the writers first and foremost. But, if someone wants to go down the road of blaming any of the wrestlers for 2016 ratings being literally the lowest of all time, then just like we all just did, we will show you who is being pushed like GODS this year, and who isn't. That's all. No offense, but your post is kind of all over the place, too.
> 
> The hypocrisy will be pointed out and exposed.


I'm at work, and rushing when I respond.

But, the point I was trying to make is that most casual fans (the ones that are needed to increase views) aren't all that concerned about booking; or, at the very least, and concerned about how a guy got "buried" a year ago. Reigns has nothing to do with the Owens/Zayn/Jericho/etc. ME angle, yet, still no one tunes in to see it. The excuse is, "well, everyone knows that how that's going to turn out", but that's a VERY lame excuse, IMO. 

The rhetoric used to be, "these guys aren't given enough spotlight and aren't put in the ME/primetime, so it's Cena/Reigns fault for hogging those timeslots." Now, it's, "well, they're in the ME, but they weren't pushed like Reigns has been, so people don't care." It's ever-changing. Same thing with DB, after he won the title and ratings began declining after RTWM was over, people said, "it's not his fault, LOOK AT THE QUARTERLY BREAKDOWN!!" There's always a way to twist it to make it not the fault of whoever you're a fan of. This board consists of a lot of indy fans, so, most of this board is going to defend the indy guys at all costs and blame the homegrown talent.

Just going back to the "anti-smark" stuff you mentioned earlier. Like I said before, the smarks are the loudest voices, and the smarks are always moving the ball and using indy-apologetics. I'm not saying it's all the indy guys's fault here, I'm just saying that they make up the majority of a 3 hour show, while Reigns has been relegated to short speaking segments, if you want to blame the talent, go with the guys that are featured for the vast majority of the show. 

Indys are indys for a reason; because the masses don't care about them. At the peak of wrestling's popularity the closest thing to "indy success" was ECW, which was far more innovative at the time than most any other comparable indy promotion, and we all know how that worked out (they all bailed for mainstream promotions, where the majority of which had little-to-no success , and the company folded). 

Again, I don't care who people like, I just get annoyed at the lengths people will go to in order to deny why their guys aren't the problem. Just to reiterate what I've said several times, I don't think Reigns should have the title, and I don't think he's helping WWE... But I don't think there's anyone else at this point that could do a whole lot better, all things considered. I mean, Cena's indestructible, multi-year, title run was SOOOOOO much worse, and they were still drawing in the 3.0's then. 


TL;DR: If you want to blame anyone, blame who the majority of the show features (a la HBK in '95), though Reigns certainly isn't helping (and please don't think I'm comparing him to HBK in '95). The roster is phenomenal right now in terms of pure wrestlers, but "casuals"/the fans that don't watch anymore aren't interested in pure wrestling, much less THREE hours of it. 3 hour Raw + virtually no intriguing storylines = awful ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_It_Factor said:


> I'm at work, and rushing when I respond.
> 
> But, the point I was trying to make is that most casual fans (the ones that are needed to increase views) aren't all that concerned about booking; or, at the very least, and concerned about how a guy got "buried" a year ago. Reigns has nothing to do with the Owens/Zayn/Jericho/etc. ME angle, yet, still no one tunes in to see it. The excuse is, "well, everyone knows that how that's going to turn out", but that's a VERY lame excuse, IMO.
> 
> The rhetoric used to be, "these guys aren't given enough spotlight and aren't put in the ME/primetime, so it's Cena/Reigns fault for hogging those timeslots." Now, it's, "well, they're in the ME, but they weren't pushed like Reigns has been, so people don't care." It's ever-changing. Same thing with DB, after he won the title and ratings began declining after RTWM was over, people said, "it's not his fault, LOOK AT THE QUARTERLY BREAKDOWN!!" There's always a way to twist it to make it not the fault of whoever you're a fan of. This board consists of a lot of indy fans, so, most of this board is going to defend the indy guys at all costs and blame the homegrown talent.
> 
> Just going back to the "anti-smark" stuff you mentioned earlier. Like I said before, the smarks are the loudest voices, and the smarks are always moving the ball and using indy-apologetics. I'm not saying it's all the indy guys's fault here, I'm just saying that they make up the majority of a 3 hour show, while Reigns has been relegated to short speaking segments, if you want to blame the talent, go with the guys that are featured for the vast majority of the show.
> 
> Indys are indys for a reason; because the masses don't care about them. At the peak of wrestling's popularity the closest thing to "indy success" was ECW, which was far more innovative at the time than most any other comparable indy promotion, and we all know how that worked out (they all bailed for mainstream promotions, where the majority of which had little-to-no success , and the company folded).
> 
> Again, I don't care who people like, I just get annoyed at the lengths people will go to in order to deny why their guys aren't the problem. Just to reiterate what I've said several times, I don't think Reigns should have the title, and I don't think he's helping WWE... But I don't think there's anyone else at this point that could do a whole lot better, all things considered. I mean, Cena's indestructible, multi-year, title run was SOOOOOO much worse, and they were still drawing in the 3.0's then.
> 
> 
> TL;DR: If you want to blame anyone, blame who the majority of the show features (a la HBK in '95), though Reigns certainly isn't helping (and please don't think I'm comparing him to HBK in '95). The roster is phenomenal right now in terms of pure wrestlers, but "casuals"/the fans that don't watch anymore aren't interested in pure wrestling, much less THREE hours of it. 3 hour Raw + virtually no intriguing storylines = awful ratings.


Blaming lower carders and midcarders for failing ratings when Cena is back and Reigns is on top of the world is literally completely and utterly backwards. None of those guys have even been pushed as a drawing card by Vince yet, and most of them very well might never be. Previous years it was all on the World Champion, now it isn't. Give me a break.

It is by no means crazy to blame the top of the card for failing to deliver (when it comes to blaming talent). It's been this way since the beginning of time. Vince and creative first and foremost, then the top of the card, and so on and so forth. That's how it's always been. Blaming midcarders and lower carders is literally lolworthy. Also, at some point, you have to ask just why is Vince hiding his new cover boy?

And just for the record, I agree the midcarders aren't drawing in any new viewers. Never said they would. But it's alot more-so on the top. When you're the face of the company, it's on you. Nevermind the world title, but when you're the Face of the Company (which is even higher up than the World Title), it's on you. If it's all good, you get credit. If it's not, you get 'blame.'


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

lol

Getting into a thesis about the success of indie promotions while it's clear the main event talent sucks.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> lol
> 
> Getting into a thesis about the success of indie promotions while it's clear the main event talent sucks.


Yep.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

lol it's midcarders fault that Roman Reigns is the biggest failure in wrestling history, and they end up getting thrown into can't-win situations on account of WWE needing to HIDE Roman from the audience. Who's push did all of these viewers tune out on? Roman Reigns. Who's main events were these viewers shitting on and tuning out on? Roman Reigns. Who's SUPPOSED to be opening the show, closing the show, having every key moment on the show revolve around him? Roman Reigns. Yet they tried that and it FAILED miserably. So now they randomly toss Ambrose or Owens or whoever in the main events, just so they can throw THEM under the bus for numbers, ignoring how absurd it is that they have to gut their own third hour every week and essentially sabotage themselves. But it just speaks volumes to how overall worthless Reigns is. If they had any faith that he'd draw an audience, he'd be where he's supposed to be, but he's not. This would be like having Road Dogg vs. DLo main event RAW instead of Austin vs. McMahon. And the funny thing is, even if Austin/Mcmahon wasn't drawing record numbers, it STILL would have main evented over the midcard....you know why? Because Austin was the motherfucking man. He was the lifeblood of the show and everything a top guy is supposed to be. 

I do sort of agree that HHH's influence on the product and trying to make it indie shit is killing it, though. If you look at JR's track record of signing talent compared to HHH's, it's fucking laughable. As JR was signing people to be pro wrestling superstars. HHH is signing them to be indie gods because he thinks that's what the business is about in 2016. Wrong as usual.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: RAW Ratings Decline - Worse than you think*



Phenomenal One said:


> Daniel Bryan and Roman's runs suggest otherwise.
> 
> Reality is, a mixture of compelling stories, talent and interesting characters draw. Bryan's RTWM proves it, Roman's run was so forced and manufactured that it failed miserably, he isn't talented nor was he an underdog and he has certainly not being held back. This is why guys like Bryan, Punk and Rollins' moments felt far more special than say Roman or ADR's.
> 
> The look is so over rated in 2016, Messi doesn't have superstar good looks like Ronaldo yet everyone and their dog acknowledges Messi as the best in the world and are an awe of him whenever he plays. Without those superstar good looks he has risen to megastar level and is one of the most recognizable faces on the planet purely because of his exceptional skill. Lebron, Curry, Conor and Virat Kohli are the same, they prove it's skill and or charisma that draws. If looking the part mean't a thing, the likes of Sage Northcutt would be the megastars, but it doesn't. Skill trumps looking the part, it's simply a bonus if you have both.
> 
> My point is, you don't deserve to be at the top just because you look the part especially in 2016 when people can call bs. People are exposed to actual talent day in day out that it's very easy to identify the real deals.


Im not saying the Look > all else or that it is all that matters. But the look does matter just like everything else. People are drawn in by larger than life superstars, not average Joes. As great as Bryan is and as over as he was he wasnt bringing in any new fans, just keeping the same ones.


----------



## wwetna1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Japanese Puroresu said:


> I dont think you understand the timing of segments created for Reigns and Cena. Yes, they're trying to make new stars but the prime hours of TV time is not 9:45 at night. It's the opening of the show and the transition hours. Not the main event.


Edge and Litas live sex was at the main event and over run slot
Rocks return to the company was there
Michaels goodbye
Flairs retirement
Trish's return in Toronto
Batista choosing what contract to sign
Cena and Ortons unification announcement
Jerichos return to save us
Mysterios run in on the Shield from injury
Austin, Trump, Lashley, Vince
Kane returning masked


They used to traditionally end big. They always ate peaked in the over run and main event back when they actually put the A talent in that slot. Now they are using the finale moments of Raws last quarter and its over run as a slot to elevate the B- guys now and that third hour is also taking a hit because it progressively closes worse that last hour quarter by quarter.

I would bet you that if Cena closed the show in the last 15 minutes plus the over run or even ORton if they announced and held off his return would show that as history has always shown with the old formula no matter if Raw was 2 or 3 hours.

WWE eats them losses to try and appease the new era and put them over


----------



## Japanese Puroresu

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwetna1 said:


> Edge and Litas live sex was at the main event and over run slot
> Rocks return to the company was there
> Michaels goodbye
> Flairs retirement
> Trish's return in Toronto
> Batista choosing what contract to sign
> Cena and Ortons unification announcement
> Jerichos return to save us
> Mysterios run in on the Shield from injury
> Austin, Trump, Lashley, Vince
> Kane returning masked
> 
> 
> They used to traditionally end big. They always ate peaked in the over run and main event back when they actually put the A talent in that slot. Now they are using the finale moments of Raws last quarter and its over run as a slot to elevate the B- guys now and that third hour is also taking a hit because it progressively closes worse that last hour quarter by quarter.
> 
> I would bet you that if Cena closed the show in the last 15 minutes plus the over run or even ORton if they announced and held off his return would show that as history has always shown with the old formula no matter if Raw was 2 or 3 hours.
> 
> WWE eats them losses to try and appease the new era and put them over


Right, you end big but thats not how you get viewers. The blowoff isn't what gets viewers. Its why CSI doesn't start with them capturing the bad guy.

"B- guys"

im done talking with you fam, i'm not sitting here and debating or discussing someone who uses adhominems about talents, especially when they aren't getting opening segments or transition segments to capture viewers


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I can't help but feel this is all Roman Reigns' fault.

DON'T WORRY, I KID I KID. 

Seriously, lol at the numbers. Has there been a third hour lower than this week's this year/in the last few years?


----------



## wwetna1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Japanese Puroresu said:


> Right, you end big but thats not how you get viewers. The blowoff isn't what gets viewers. Its why CSI doesn't start with them capturing the bad guy.
> 
> "B- guys"
> 
> im done talking with you fam, i'm not sitting here and debating or discussing someone who uses adhominems about talents, especially when they aren't getting opening segments or transition segments to capture viewers


To the general fan they are B, B- and C guys. You don't make a Zayn, Ambrose, KO, or Cesaro important by simply letting them main event. You do it by leading them to the main event and big attraction. They should be the feature closing the second hour last quarter and introducing the last hour first quarter for weeks on end before one moves up to that slot. They randomly popped up after Mania from midcard to closing raw because of "new era" but that makes as little sense as Charlotte ending Raw with contract signings. Trish and Lita worked the fuck up to main eventing Raw for a reason. 

Its like letting damn Hawkeye close the Avengers movies fam over Tony or Cap.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why would anyone want to see Zayn and Owens in the main event at this point? No offense to partic Owens. But you finish strong. Raw back in the day would tease the top guys, but you woulden't see them till the end. Then when they show up that is when the viewers tune in. SO no surprise ratings are down in the third hour. Theirs a reason why the indy guys diddn't make it, only in ECW. Their seems to be tons of them in WWE atm. And I am not displacing blame towards the indy guys. In terms of pure wrestling the current roster is the best its ever been. But I agree casuals partic don't want to see spot after spot, or pure wrestling for 3 hrs. 3 hrs of the same matches over and over with no stakes involved is too much. When you could skip 5 Raws, and just watch the ppv. Their is no must see about Raw or SD. And I am not sure the brand split while create buzz for the product. Well change the overall quality all that much. But it seems WWE care more about quantity then quality these days.


----------



## wwetna1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



3ku1 said:


> Why would anyone want to see Zayn and Owens in the main event at this point? No offense to partic Owens. But you finish strong. Raw back in the day would tease the top guys, but you woulden't see them till the end. Then when they show up that is when the viewers tune in. SO no surprise ratings are down in the third hour.


Honestly I'd bet on the fact they flip the script and make Raw the workers to fill up 3 hours. Then they put the stars or talkers on SD for 2 hours and book it like the old Raw and it suddenly wins in ratings not because of its length but because it is logically built and if it is character filled with Cena, Miz, ORton, guys like that ... they don't have to give a damn thing away on tv until a ppv or special comes up

It isn't even that I don't like Owens. I like Owens. Hell I like Charlotte. But there is no reason they close Raw for their matches or contract signings or to hype the mitb ladder match. They aren't the guys you put on a damn billboard ... yet. They should lead into the closing acts. You should go low card, mid card, guys who are in the great between and then top of the card to write the show. 

There is no damn reason Cena returning shouldn't have closed Raw. There is no damn reason HHH on his first night after winning the title should have opened it at 8/7 and then not be seen again. It makes no sense


----------



## Mister Sinister

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

1. The plot/booking for Raw was the worst this year. Days of Our Shield needs to be cancelled. And the big sell for Cena v Styles was a damned contract signing (10/10 in lazy promotion).

2. Vince pulled the plug on the two hottest acts in the company a few weeks ago with the heel turn of Rollins and the heel turn of Styles. When you pour water on the fire there is no mystery why the fucking heat went away. Vince tied a rope around the company's neck and threw it off a bridge.

3. The main events have not been interesting because Owens, Zayn, Cesaro, and Ambrose are BORING! 

4. The mid-card titles are failing because they are used as floating devices for wrestlers permanently stuck in the mid-card when the IC and US belts should be used to build the next HWC (AJ Styles).

5. The issue isn't small wrestlers. You can have cruiserweights as long as they actually fucking work a cruiserweight pace and style (see WCW). Cruiserweights give the show some variety and would break up the sluggish pace of everything else on the card.

6. It's the same damned matches every week with some minor shuffle.

7. Roman Reigns. Vince is killing anyone who gets more attention than Reigns.


----------



## NiKKi_SEGA

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

but they broke this years wrestlemania attendance, the ratings lie...


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Blaming lower carders and midcarders for failing ratings when Cena is back and Reigns is on top of the world is literally completely and utterly backwards. None of those guys have even been pushed as a drawing card by Vince yet, and most of them very well might never be. Previous years it was all on the World Champion, now it isn't. Give me a break.
> 
> It is by no means crazy to blame the top of the card for failing to deliver (when it comes to blaming talent). It's been this way since the beginning of time. Vince and creative first and foremost, then the top of the card, and so on and so forth. That's how it's always been. Blaming midcarders and lower carders is literally lolworthy. Also, at some point, you have to ask just why is Vince hiding his new cover boy?
> 
> And just for the record, I agree the midcarders aren't drawing in any new viewers. Never said they would. But it's alot more-so on the top. When you're the face of the company, it's on you. Nevermind the world title, but when you're the Face of the Company (which is even higher up than the World Title), it's on you. If it's all good, you get credit. If it's not, you get 'blame.'


Well, maybe what I should have said was that I don't agree that it SHOULD always be on the champ or top guy. If that's the way people want to put it, then you're right, I was just voicing my opinion more than anything. I made this same argument back when Rollins had the belt, because there are just so many other factors that go into it. 

I guess to clarify, in MY personal opinion, the blame (if it should go to any performers at all) should go to the guys that make up 90% of the show, and CERTAINLY the guys in the ME (obviously I think Vince and the writers are to blame way before any of them). Though, I admit that's a lot harder to say with the 3-hour format. With 2-hours, it's much easier for fans to "stick around" waiting for the main event than it is with the 3-hour format (again, I blame Vince). However, you've GOT to have interest in the mid/low card. That's why the AE was so great, because ALL of the performers had depth to the characters, as well as solid storylines (again, I blame booking).


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

From Reddit :

*Meltzer: "Numbers for both the Reigns and Ambrose tour ended up being roughly identical [...] which indicates the value of the championship has never been less."
Talks about it on the latest WON.
Numbers for both tours were roughly 3,900 for each.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



etrbaby said:


> From Reddit :
> 
> *Meltzer: "Numbers for both the Reigns and Ambrose tour ended up being roughly identical [...] which indicates the value of the championship has never been less."
> Talks about it on the latest WON.
> Numbers for both tours were roughly 3,900 for each.*


Maybe it's time for a lunatic champion. :ambrose4


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Maybe it's time for a lunatic champion. :ambrose4


Guy's almost outdrawing the champion and he's been booked like Al Snow for the past year. Amazing stuff. Imagine if he had even semi-decent booking?


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:rusev:taker:rock5


etrbaby said:


> From Reddit :
> 
> *Meltzer: "Numbers for both the Reigns and Ambrose tour ended up being roughly identical [...] which indicates the value of the championship has never been less."
> Talks about it on the latest WON.
> Numbers for both tours were roughly 3,900 for each.*


:done

LOL what? I mean, I wouldn't have been surprised if Reigns' house shows drew a bit more than Ambrose's. Reigns is bound to gain a couple more casual fans than that comedy geek after years of getting booked like a megastar. It only makes sense that he would. But identical numbers? lol. Makes you wonder where his position on the card would be right now if he looked like CM Punk or Daniel Bryan. :serious:



Chrome said:


> Guy's almost outdrawing the champion and he's been booked like Al Snow for the past year. Amazing stuff. Imagine if he had even semi-decent booking?


Oh man. If they didnt stop booking him like a serious character from late '14 and never tried to make him look like a complete joke anytime he got over (post MITB '15, RTWM '16), he might've actually become somewhat of a draw by now. :kobe2 We'll never know.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow doesn't Roman also have AJ and Rollins on his houseshows as well plus Roman will usually get the best cities(Which I guess means Ambrose is outdrawing him as The Big Dog gets the Big cities.) as well insane how they are doing the same numbers considering Ambrose has never even won the title and Roman has main evented 2 Wrestlemania's in a row.

I had to avoid the house show that rarely comes my way because it was a Roman house show.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Wow doesn't Roman also have AJ and Rollins on his houseshows as well plus Roman will usually get the best cities(Which I guess means Ambrose is outdrawing him as The Big Dog gets the Big cities.) as well insane how they are doing the same numbers considering Ambrose has never even won the title and Roman has main evented 2 Wrestlemania's in a row.


:sodone

That's even more insane. Not to mention Ambrose has actually been losing to Kalisto of all people (who I like) in some of the recent house shows he's been headlining. :lol


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Can we now stop with the "you can't blame Reigns for the ratings" nonsense? Sure, it's not entirely his fault, but he's a significant part of the problem. The house show numbers corroborate that.

He has been an enormous failure as champ - can't draw at house shows, can't draw on TV, and receives "go away" heat unlike anything we've seen since X-Pac.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> Wow doesn't Roman also have AJ and Rollins on his houseshows as well


All guys who are very good in ring workers (including Reigns, according to some) who have received much bigger pushes than Ambrose, and yet still cannot outdraw him.

Maybe it's time to put less emphasis on guys who can work and focus more on the guys who are actually charismatic and can talk.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> All guys who are very good in ring workers (including Reigns, according to some) who have received much bigger pushes than Ambrose, and yet still cannot outdraw him.
> 
> Maybe it's time to put less emphasis on guys who can work and focus more on the guys who are actually charismatic and can talk.


AJ hasn't received a bigger push than Ambrose he even lost his feud with Jericho in 2016 and Rollins can talk perfectly fine I would even say better than what Ambrose has been doing recently.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> AJ hasn't received a bigger push than Ambrose he even lost his feud with Jericho in 2016 and *Rollins can talk perfectly fine I would even say better than what Ambrose has been doing recently*.


You'd be wrong.

Also, AJ received an extended title feud and is now feuding with Cena on PPV. Far more relevant than anything Ambrose has ever done in his career.

There's a reason Ambrose is more over than these guys despite being booked considerably worse. In ring marks need to come to terms with it.


----------



## LPPrince

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THREE AIN'T ENOUGH said:


> LOL what? I mean, I wouldn't have been surprised if Reigns' house shows drew a bit more than Ambrose's. Reigns is bound to gain a couple more casual fans than that comedy geek after years of getting booked like a megastar. It only makes sense that he would. But identical numbers? lol. Makes you wonder where his position on the card would be right now if he looked like CM Punk or Daniel Bryan. :serious:


If Roman looked like CM Punk or Daniel Bryan he wouldn't have his job.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> AJ hasn't received a bigger push than Ambrose he even lost his feud with Jericho in 2016 and Rollins can talk perfectly fine I would even say better than what Ambrose has been doing recently.


Yeah, Rollins has been killing it verbally since he came back. Just don't give him any cringe-worthy material or 20 minutes to talk and he's good and easily one of the better ones on this roster.


----------



## Chief of the Lynch Mob

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Some of these numbers :lol

I'll always remember when people, including Reigns fans, said that Rollins was killing the ratings as champion... Now look at this shit. 

And now the indy guys are getting the blame because they're reasonably focused on in the midcard. :lmao


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I see I should keep an eye on the campus gym hall across the street from my apartment, maybe WWE will host a live event there soon.

Featuring Roman Reigns, biggest WM draw of all time.
If even one person still argues that guy had an ounce to do with drawing the WM 32 crowd, I personally award him the golden end of the food chain.


----------



## Not Lying

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> You'd be wrong.
> 
> Also, AJ received an extended title feud and is now feuding with Cena on PPV. Far more relevant than anything Ambrose has ever done in his career.
> 
> There's a reason Ambrose is more over than these guys despite being booked considerably worse. In ring marks need to come to terms with it.


Lol are you a fucking moron? AJ being 1-4 on PPVs and losing clean to Jericho and Owens, both guys that Ambrose made his bitches.. and yet you dare say AJ has better booking?


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



etrbaby said:


> Lol are you a fucking moron? AJ being 1-4 on PPVs and losing clean to Jericho and Owens, both guys that Ambrose made his bitches.. and yet you dare say AJ has better booking?


Pay attention, little guy. I didn't say anything about "better booking." I said he's being booked as a more relevant talent and being given more high profile feuds since WM.

Is that simple enough for you to comprehend? If not, I can always draw you a diagram.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Pay attention, little guy. I didn't say anything about "better booking." I said he's being booked as a more relevant talent and being given more high profile feuds since WM.
> 
> Is that simple enough for you to comprehend? If not, I can always draw you a diagram.


 A diagram of how looking and fighting like a geek draws North Americans in 2016?

Shilling that crap isn't going to suddenly make it true, I hope for your sake Ambrose does win the title soon. I want to see the myth of the guy being a main event talent being busted once and for all.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> A diagram of how looking and fighting like a geek draws North Americans in 2016?


The last time RAW consistently drew above 4 million was when Ambrose was feuding over the world title last year.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> The last time RAW consistently drew above 4 million was when Ambrose was feuding over the world title last year.


 In the same way, the last time the show drew over 4m was when Rollins was champ :draper2


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> In the same way, the last time the show drew over 4m was when Rollins was champ :draper2


The numbers declined after that feud, and rarely went over 4 million.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> The numbers declined after that feud, and rarely went over 4 million.


 So why isn't Dean drawing now? Somehow you expect AJ to draw despite not winning a single feud in his first 6 months in the WWE, but are relaxed about Dean drawing shits in the main event after being in the WWE for 4 years?


----------



## Not Lying

Phenomenal One said:


> So why isn't Dean drawing now? Somehow you expect AJ to draw despite not winning a single feud in his first 6 months in the WWE, but are relaxed about Dean drawing shits in the main event after being in the WWE for 4 years?


People are still in denial that exceptional in ring work can keep fans interest and draw these days.
They still jerk off to Hogan's 2 moves or Nash walking and tearing a quad and think thats what draws. 
Let's forget people loved Bryan not just hecause he was the ultimate underdog, but because he was the best wrestler in world being treated less than shitty wrestlers. Let's forget that. it was the ring work of the NXT Divas that made them Main attractions at WM , not their tits and asses.

AJ has been a draw everywhere he went, because he's always been booked like a star for his amazing one of a kind wrestling skills.. someone with that much skills and winning = draw , someone with that much skills but losing to everyone and needing two guys and chair and still can't beat 1 guy = not much of draw, what are people supposed to think, the guy has skills but can't win, what's the point?


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

lol at people arguing how X person drew X million viewers for the show.

If you want to compare draw power, you should compare how many people viewed the segment a person was involved in compared to the average of the segments (excluding the segment person was involved in) for the entire show.

the average viewers for the entire show depends on everyone, not just one person. 

for example, last year may have averaged 4 million viewers, say for the sake of argument the average per quarter hour (proxy for each segment) was 1 million viewers.
this year is only averaging 3.2 million or so. say the average is 3.2M/4= 800k per quarter hour.

If Ambrose's segment was 1.1M= 10% above average for 2015, while AJ's segment was 960K=20% above average, then AJ would be a bigger draw even though he averaged less absolute number of viewers because, once again, the average # of viewers for the entire show depends on everyone not just one person.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/13 WWE Raw Quarter-Hour TV Ratings – Shield wins, did Cena-Styles save Raw from sub-2.0 rating?*

The quarter-hour TV Ratings for WWE Raw on Monday, June 13 indicate that The Shield Reunion promoting Money in the Bank at the top of the second hour was the most-watched segment of the show.

Raw fell way off for the remainder of the second hour against the NBA Finals. Then, if not for a bump at the top of the third hour for the John Cena-A.J. Styles contract signing, it’s likely Raw would have fallen below a 2.0 overall TV rating.

This is especially true looking at last week’s show, where WWE put a cold match at the top of the third hour and the segment only produced a 2.9 percent bump from the end of the second hour. This week, Cena-Styles produced a 19 percent bump from Q8 to bolster an otherwise dreadful third hour.

The combination of a soft first hour, dreadful Q6-Q8 after The Shield, and dreadful Q10-Q12 after Cena-Styles put Raw in position for an all-time low TV rating.

*June 13 Raw’s Top-Rated Segments – Males 18-49 demo*

– Q5 (1.56): Shield Reunion. Dean Ambrose hosting Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins at the top of the second hour produced a 30 percent jump from Q4. However, the segment did not cross the 1.0 million viewers mark. No segment did this week in m18-49.

– Q3 (1.26): Randomville. There were two peaks in the third quarter-hour – the end of the four-team opening Tag match and backstage segments after a commercial.

– Q1 (1.25): WWE Tag Title opening segment. The audience to start the show set the tone for the rest of the night. The quarter-hour was down 21 percent from Q1 last week. And, the overall show was down 21 percent from last week.

– Q9 (1.22): Cena-Styles contract signing. The segment jumped 19 percent from Q8 at the top of the third hour to salvage the second-half of the show.

*June 13 Raw Audience Flow – Males 18-49 Demo*

From PWTorch’s quarter-hour & minute-by-minute report…

*OVERALL SHOW:* 1.17 m18-49 rating / 737,000 average viewers per minute (down 21 percent from last week)

– Q1: 1.25 rating / 788,000 viewers

– Q2: 1.15 rating / 723,000 viewers (-8.2%)

– Q3: 1.26 rating / 793,000 viewers (+9.7%)

The conclusion of the four-team Tag match and post-commercial backstage skits produced two separate peaks to bolster the audience.

– Q4: 1.20 rating / 757,000 viewers

FIRST HOUR: 1.22 avg. rating / 765,250 avg. viewers

– Q5: 1.56 rating / 985,000 viewers (+30.1%)

The Shield Reunion was the only segment of the show where any minute topped 1.0 million m18-49 viewers.
9:08 p.m. – 1.011 million viewers
9:09 p.m. – 993,000 viewers
9:10 p.m. – 1.002 million viewers
9:11 p.m. – 1.000 million viewers
9:12 p.m. – 1.015 million viewers
9:13 p.m. – 1.054 million viewers
*9:14 p.m. – 1.057 million viewers*

– Q6: 1.19 rating / 747,000 viewers (-24.2%)

– Q7: 1.16 rating / 733,000 viewers (-1.9%)

– Q8: 1.03 rating / 648,000 viewers (-11.6% / -34.2% from Q5)

SECOND HOUR: 1.24 avg. rating / 778,250 avg. viewers (+1.7% from 1H)

– Q9: 1.22 rating / 771,000 viewers (+19.0)

The Cena-Styles contract signing produced a bump mid-way through the quarter-hour.
10:04 p.m. – 723,000 viewers
10:05 p.m. – 791,000 viewers
10:06 p.m. – 800,000 viewers
10:07 p.m. – 809,000 viewers
*10:08 p.m. – 851,000 viewers*
10:09 p.m. – 815,000 viewers
10:10 p.m. – 817,000 viewers
10:11 p.m. – 833,000 viewers
*10:12 p.m. – 863,000 viewers*
10:13 p.m. – 860,000 viewers

– Q10: 1.00 rating / 631,000 viewers (-18.2%)

– Q11: 1.08 rating / 681,000 viewers (+7.9%)

– Q12: 0.95 rating / 600,000 viewers (-11.9% / -22.2% from Q9)

THIRD HOUR: 1.06 avg. rating / 670,750 avg. viewers (-13.8% from 2H)

– Over-run: 1.13 rating / 714,000 viewers (+19.0%)

The main event of Dean Ambrose vs. Chris Jericho produced a slight bump from Q12, but the segment’s fate was already sealed with dreadful quarter-hours in Q10-Q12.

*OVERALL SHOW:* 1.17 m18-49 rating / 737,000 average viewers per minute










http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...-wins-night-cena-styles-saves-sub-2-0-rating/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I wonder if the Shield segment was unopposed by the NBA? The game didn't start exactly at six. Even if the game had started, it was a good time to run that segment. I imagine everything will be higher next week.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> I wonder if the Shield segment was unopposed by the NBA? The game didn't start exactly at six. Even if the game had started, it was a good time to run that segment. I imagine everything will be higher next week.


The Shield segment started just when the NBA game did. They were still doing the anthem around this time. By the time I switched to the game, I had missed the first couple of shots.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(6/23) Vs last week(6/16) 

2.145M Vs 2.073M
(+0.072M/+3.47%)*


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE SmackDown Viewership For The Final Show Before Money In The Bank?*


Source: Showbuzz Daily

Last night's WWE SmackDown, with the final hype for WWE Money In the Bank, drew 2.073 million viewers. This is up from last week's show, which drew 1.996 million viewers.

SmackDown was #4 for the night in viewership, behind soccer, The Kelly File and The O'Reilly Factor.

SmackDown was #2 for the night in the 18-49 demographic, behind soccer on FOX Sports.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...n-viewership-for-the-final-show-before-money/


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

NBA Finals has all my attention right now. Hell I think i'd rather watch the OJ 30 for 30 reruns right now :maury


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

SD unaffected by NBA. Perhaps it's effect on RAW is overstated?


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> SD unaffected by NBA. Perhaps it's effect on RAW is overstated?


The theory I've heard from some about NBA, and it seems to make sense is because there is a big game going on, more people are in front of their TV's and might think at some point "Oh, Wrestling is on, I'll check it out for a second", and it actually improves viewership to some degree.

Obviously it goes both ways, and NBA takes out a chunk of viewers, but for a lot of people, Wrestling isn't MUST see TV(but they still enjoy it to some extent), and NBA is, but at some point people will flip channels, at least for a little bit to see what's going on.

The 9:00 segment is usually the biggest, and the fact that it was a Shield reunion this week that was advertised, it makes sense it was the biggest of the night.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown is unaffected because only hardcores that watch anything could tolerate that shit.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lol people here still arguing about who is a draw and who isn't. :lmao

Nobody is a draw, the fucking show is gonna get a rating under 2.00 for the first time since the 90s in the next few months and it's going to be so sweet. 

Everything sucks about WWE right now. No point arguing about who is a draw and who isn't when the show as a whole is declining at a fast pace. 

Fuck all three Shield Members.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The product sucks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Without the Shield, I don't even know where WWE would be now.

And who do they need to thank for that?

:shockedpunk


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well, things are going to be more interesting in here for the foreseeable future. I can see the rather brittle assertions of "no one's a draw" that some people here so "amicably" agreed upon being shattered in a matter of...weeks? No, I think days would be more accurate. Oh well. In times like these, all you can do is grab a lawnchair, sit back, and watch the fireworks.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Without the Shield, I don't even know where WWE would be now.
> 
> And who do they need to thank for that?
> 
> :shockedpunk


CM Punk


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings will still be trash. Ambrose will be a weak ass champion. He's lost all of his major matches and suddenly is supposed to be a main eventer? 

Ambrose has never beat a main eventer on PPV clean. Not ONE!


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cant wait for posters here to blame Ambrose for the piss poor ratings.
In fact, i would wager that's the reason they put the title on him, people backstage want a convenient scapegoat.

Should be at least amusing to watch.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm sure some dorks are going to start acting like Ambrose has even been 1/5th as protected as Reigns leading up to his title run. He's a lame ass Mysterio style champion.


----------



## God Movement

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> Cant wait for posters here to blame Ambrose for the piss poor ratings.
> In fact, i would wager that's the reason they put the title on him, people backstage want a convenient scapegoat.
> 
> Should be at least amusing to watch.


They blamed Reigns for it. What's wrong with them blaming Ambrose for the same thing?


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Because its dumb?


----------



## God Movement

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> Because its dumb?


I'd prefer them to be consistent across the board.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's actually a brilliant idea by Vince to put the title on Ambrose after killing off his crowd support and credibility, so he can be an easy scapegoat for the eventual sub 2.0 ratings. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ratings are going to be crazy tonight. :ambrose4


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Only thing that sucks about Ambrose being champ, is when ratings do go down, obviously he'll take the blame.

Oh well, it's a small price to pay.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm expecting a nice bump tonight, mainly because of it being a post-ppv Raw, but I'm not expecting ratings to skyrocket now that Ambrose is champion. It's going to take time and a lot of consecutive good shows in order for ratings to start going up again.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



God Movement said:


> They blamed Reigns for it. What's wrong with them blaming Ambrose for the same thing?


Yeah...no. Most people who regularly post here acknowledge that no one is a draw.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Can't wait for Roman fans to come out in droves every Tuesday evenings, when the ratings come out. There reactions when the inevitable >2.0 rating comes during Dean's title reign.

I'll enjoy it while it lasts. :ambrose


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> Yeah...no. Most people who regularly post here acknowledge that no one is a draw.


Yeah, this. Most people who blame Reigns are just trolling or saying it for the lols. Ratings suck because the product sucks. Changing champions isn't likely to improve ratings unless WWE takes the time to fix the whole show.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> "Last month the ‘B’ shows with Dean Ambrose, that were often in smaller markets, were drawing just as well as the ‘A’ shows with Roman Reigns. Roman Reigns is drawing really bad. Before he wasn’t, but now he is, so now it’s an issue. Does that mean that it led to this [title change], or is this just another way to get Roman Reigns more over, because that’s been the goal for the last however long? Time will tell."


Meltzer talking about the house shows again on WOR


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> Can't wait for Roman fans to come out in droves every Tuesday evenings, when the ratings come out. There reactions when the inevitable >2.0 rating comes during Dean's title reign.
> 
> I'll enjoy it while it lasts. :ambrose


I can't speak for others but this Roman fan is always here. I've tried not to blame any individual talent for the ratings slide. I won't start that with Dean. Although, I do know there are those who expect a boom because "Anyone But Roman" because he's believed to be the reason for the erosion.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's also going to be very telling if WWE actually goes with Ambrose as a legit champion, or if he's booked like Rey Mysterio or CM Punk in 2008. I'm going with the ladder, because they've never actually went all the way when booking an indy guy as world champion. Punk in 2012 was the closest, and that consisted him being a mid carder for most of the reign.



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I can't speak for others but this Roman fan is always here. I've tried not to blame any individual talent for the ratings slide. I won't start that with Dean. Although, I do know there are those who expect a boom because "Anyone But Roman" because he's believed to be the reason for the erosion.


The morons say shit like that, 80% of us are at least intelligent enough to acknowledge what the real problem is. For whatever reason we always focus on that 20% group of idiots that just blame one guy. It goes both ways tho, people blamed Reigns, but there will definitely be people that blame Ambrose(or give him all the credit if ratings go up).


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> *It's also going to be very telling if WWE actually goes with Ambrose as a legit champion, or if he's booked like Rey Mysterio or CM Punk in 2008. I'm going with the ladder, because they've never actually went all the way when booking an indy guy as world champion. Punk in 2012 was the closest, and that consisted him being a mid carder for most of the reign.*
> 
> 
> 
> The morons say shit like that, 80% of us are at least intelligent enough to acknowledge what the real problem is. For whatever reason we always focus on that 20% group of idiots that just blame one guy. It goes both ways tho, people blamed Reigns, but there will definitely be people that blame Ambrose(or give him all the credit if ratings go up).


I hope he has a legit run too. Although, I can't shake the feeling that an audible was called last after the Cavs won. Either way, Dean is now the champ. I hope there is a good faith effort to book him as a credible one.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If we don't get by NOW that none of these guys are draws under these circumstances and it's all on Vince, I don't think those people will ever get it.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE MITB - Twitter Note*

- WWE Money In the Bank did not rank in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings last night. The top 5 Series & Specials list was made up of Game of Thrones, Keeping Up with the Kardashians, Penny Dreadful, The Real Housewives of Dallas and The Last Ship.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0620/612844/goldust-responds-to-fan-criticism/


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *WWE MITB - Twitter Note*
> 
> - WWE Money In the Bank did not rank in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings last night. The top 5 Series & Specials list was made up of Game of Thrones, Keeping Up with the Kardashians, Penny Dreadful, The Real Housewives of Dallas and The Last Ship.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0620/612844/goldust-responds-to-fan-criticism/


Do the WWE PPV events even get counted as "TV" for twitter ratings now?


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I hope he has a legit run too. Although, I can't shake the feeling that an audible was called last after the Cavs won. Either way, Dean is now the champ. I hope there is a good faith effort to book him as a credible one.


Was told the PPV ended so late. Have a feeling they were just waiting to see who won to decide whether he'd cash in or not. Wouldn't surprise me though.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Was told the PPV ended so late. Have a feeling they were just waiting to see who won to decide whether he'd cash in or not. Wouldn't surprise me though.


The PPV went on forever. I had it on my laptop while watching Game 7. It was like 10:30 and Rusev came out for his match. fpalm 

I'm not a fan of these PPV's going on longer than 3 hours. That should only be reserved for WM, Summerslam and Royal Rumble.



A-C-P said:


> Do the WWE PPV events even get counted as "TV" for twitter ratings now?


Yes, they do. Mania did some good numbers. Extreme Rules fell in social media activity. I am curious if there was enough buzz fro last night to get their Twitter activity up this week. It's been down the past few weeks.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> The PPV went on forever. I had it on my laptop while watching Game 7. It was like 10:30 and Rusev came out for his match. fpalm
> 
> I'm not a fan of these PPV's going on longer than 3 hours. That should only be reserved for WM, Summerslam and Royal Rumble.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, they do. Mania did some good numbers. Extreme Rules fell in social media activity. I am curious if there was enough buzz fro last night to get their Twitter activity up this week. It's been down the past few weeks.


Guess I figured since they were their own Network now for the PPVs not sure if they fell into the "TV" category anymore. But them not being in the top doesn't really surprise me last night, all kinds of highly anticipated other stuff going on.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Raw on Syfy Replay Viewership – First Five Weeks average, plus replay viewers for 6/13 Raw*

The first five weeks of WWE Raw replays have averaged 430,000 viewers Friday nights on Syfy. That translates to about 13 percent of the live Monday night airings on USA Network this year.

The most-recent replay did not get much of a bump to make up for year-low viewership for the June 13 Raw.

The June 17 replay drew 413,000 viewers after the original airing on June 13 drew 2.970 million viewers.

The median age viewer for the replay was 49.8 years-old with a split of 62 percent males 18-49 and 38 percent females 18-49.

WWE will need a big DVR bump from Monday’s broadcast to get to their desired 4.0 million mark of total viewership for each episode.

Through the first four weeks of the Syfy replays, Raw’s total audience (original live+same day, DVR, and Friday replay) added up to slightly more than 4.0 million viewers.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...ve-weeks-average-plus-replay-viewers-613-raw/


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Rating should be better for this show


----------



## TakerFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> *WWE MITB - Twitter Note*
> 
> - WWE Money In the Bank did not rank in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings last night. The top 5 Series & Specials list was made up of Game of Thrones, *Keeping Up with the Kardashians*, Penny Dreadful, The Real Housewives of Dallas and The Last Ship.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0620/612844/goldust-responds-to-fan-criticism/



:trips7 This generation...


----------



## hartownsyou

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Will be up a little, around 2.3 i guess, usually that happens after ppv.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Will there be a new era for ratings, now that there's a new sheriff in town? :ambrose4 It'll be up this week, but how much can they retain in subsequent weeks?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I love Ambrose.

But I want this company to die the TV death.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

RAW as not really that fresh this week but I hope the ratings do well because of Ambrose.


----------



## Kabraxal

I tried to give the show a chance... Still awful. Could not finish watching. Sorry Ambrose, but I hope it keeps tanking.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Unlikely the viewership will be higher than 3.3M imo.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE Streaming Service Still Flying Off the Top Ropes*

WWE reiterates second-quarter guidance for the number of subscribers on its streaming network.

World Wrestling Entertainment's (WWE) streaming network continues to show it has legs. 

During an investor presentation Tuesday, WWE officials reiterated the company expects 1.5 million paid subscribers to its WWE Network in the second quarter. The number would represent a 25% increase from the first quarter. Shares fell slightly Tuesday to $18.79. 

The WWE Network launched in the U.S. in February 2014 and internationally that August. It has since become available internationally in over 180 countries. As TheStreet reported recently, WWE is fresh off introducing its first Chinese wrestling star, unveiling a streaming media deal with Chinese video website PPTV and announcing its first live event in Shanghai in more than three years. International customers accounted for 362,000 of WWE Network's total 1.357 million total subscribers at the end of the first quarter.

Pacific Crest Securities expects total subscribers to the online network to hit roughly 3.3 million by 2025, with 2.4 million in the U.S. and 900,000 internationally.

Subscription revenue for WWE Network rose 39% to $159.4 million in 2015, representing about 24% of the company's overall business. The company has also worked to introduce more unique programming to keep viewers shelling out $9.99 a month. 

https://www.thestreet.com/story/13614695/1/wwe-streaming-service-still-flying-off-the-top-ropes.html


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This should be a good bump. No big competition, a fresh new champ and hot babyface. Something new should bring back some people who heard about Roman losing the title and Dean finally getting the big one.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Becky With The Good Hair said:


> I can't speak for others but this Roman fan is always here. I've tried not to blame any individual talent for the ratings slide. I won't start that with Dean. *Although, I do know there are those who expect a boom because "Anyone But Roman" because he's believed to be the reason for the erosion*.


I don't think anyone expects a boom. Reigns got shit on the same reason Sheamus, Orton, Punk and Seth did. It also didn't help that you had Reigns fans who acted like Roman was some kind of big draw because ESPN, YouTube and Facebook. That he would draw the casuals :lmao


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Will there be a new era for ratings, now that there's a new sheriff in town? :ambrose4 It'll be up this week, but how much can they retain in subsequent weeks?


Yup, the weeks after are the most telling. Remember when Roman got that good post tlc bump? Then things went back to normal. If fans don't have hope something will consistently be awesome, they lose interest just as fast as they gained it.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@Iron Man

I got a notification you quoted me but the post isn't showing up for me. I don't know what the issue is. I can't view the last few replies, including my own.

EDIT:

The posts returned. I'm not sure what that was all about.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Yup, the weeks after are the most telling. Remember when Roman got that good post tlc bump? Then things went back to normal. If fans don't have hope something will consistently be awesome, they lose interest just as fast as they gained it.


To their credit, WWE booked Ambrose well last night so it'll be interesting to see what next week's numbers are after seeing today's.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> To their credit, WWE booked Ambrose well last night so it'll be interesting to see what next week's numbers are after seeing today's.


I was pleasantly surprised by Dean's booking. I don't know whether to be hopeful or guarded that things are changing creatively or if it's just another good week before it's back to the status quo.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> To their credit, WWE booked Ambrose well last night so it'll be interesting to see what next week's numbers are after seeing today's.


That's true. But it also depends how many people find this storyline interesting. Can the Shield Triple threat bring back a good amount of viewers? A good champ and good storylines gotta go hand and hand.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.420M
H2-3.562M
H3-3.420M
3H-3.467M*


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No sharp drops. They maintained their audience. Has to be a positive.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.420M
> H2-3.562M
> H3-3.420M
> 3H-3.467M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+4.15%/+0.142M)
H3 Vs H2 (-3.99%/-0.142M)
H3 Vs H1 (+0.00%/+0.00M)
6/20/16 Vs 6/13/16 (+16.73%/+0.497M)*


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No drop at the 3rd hour?
Its a miracle you guys!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nice gain from last weeks' disaster. Still in the mid 3's, but that might be their new 'home' from now on...until NFL season starts of course.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Dat Dean Ambrose tho...

(No I'm not saying it's all because of him before you guys look to bicker at me)


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*DEAN DRAWS DYNAMIC DEMOS!!!!* :ambrose4 The New Era starts today. It's morning in WWE!


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not anything great but they can't complain with those numbers.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*After the disaster the ratings have been for the last few months, this is good news for WWE.*


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nice bump. Let's see if they can maintain it now.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ambrose Da Draw :ambrose4


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

When was he last time viewership was higher?

Anyway, show was pretty consistent throughout. Had a good start with the fallout from Ambrose winning the title, and maintained the audience. The Cena/Styles stuff held things afloat and the main event which had something actually at stake, kept the 3rd hour looking good.

Still not so good numbers in general.


----------



## sarcasma

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A show centered around Ambrose was a success....lets keep it rolling.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> *DEAN DRAWS DYNAMIC DEMOS!!!!* :ambrose4 The New Era starts today. It's morning in WWE!


Yours truly with that 2nd hour gain. People Power > Roman Empire.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last years' numbers for this week:

Hour one: 3.59 million
Hour two: 3.60 million
Hour three: 3.81 million

They were still higher last year at this time. But this is still a nice bump from the past few months and all of 2016, really. They scared a chunk of their audience away and are going to have to win them back, and keep them.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Empire has fallen.* LONG LIVE THE DEAN!!!* :ambrose5


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Last years' numbers for this week:
> 
> Hour one: 3.59 million
> Hour two: 3.60 million
> Hour three: 3.81 million
> 
> They were still higher last year at this time. But this is still a nice bump from the past few months and all of 2016, really. They scared a chunk of their audience away and are going to have to win them back, and keep them.


Helps that they made Ambrose look good last night. Rollins looked good too, held his own with Reigns and looked like an equal. It'll be interesting to see where this feud goes with Reigns suspension. I'm hoping they just make it Ambrose/Rollins for Battleground and save the triple threat for Summerslam. Maybe have Reigns come back at Battleground and just beat the living shit out of Ambrose and Rollins, cementing his heel turn.


----------



## sarcasma

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Helps that they made Ambrose look good last night. Rollins looked good too, held his own with Reigns and looked like an equal. It'll be interesting to see where this feud goes with Reigns suspension. I'm hoping they just make it Ambrose/Rollins for Battleground and save the triple threat for Summerslam. Maybe have Reigns come back at Battleground and just beat the living shit out of Ambrose and Rollins, cementing his heel turn.


I actually think thats going to happen.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ambrose bump. Not going to last.

People are interested, then it's booked to oblivion, as usual.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Helps that they made Ambrose look good last night. Rollins looked good too, held his own with Reigns and looked like an equal. It'll be interesting to see where this feud goes with Reigns suspension. I'm hoping they just make it Ambrose/Rollins for Battleground and save the triple threat for Summerslam. Maybe have Reigns come back at Battleground and just beat the living shit out of Ambrose and Rollins, cementing his heel turn.


It is nice to see Ambrose and Rollins look good for the first time in awhile, isn't it? I'm happy for Ambrose, too that he's the Champ. As far as the ratings go, this is a nice bump, for sure. Whether or not they retain is hard to believe though because everytime they've had a bump in the past, it's gone back down because WWE gonna WWE. But as long as the booking is good and the story-telling is good, I'm cool, and wouldn't even care about the ratings. But the odds of them (WWE) telling us a good story? Meh. Who knows.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This is as good as it will get, sadly.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

"The Dude" as Champ = ratings. Let's keep this up. He was refreshing as Champ last night.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










The Dude abides.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm surprised that hour 1 and 3 have virtually the same rating. Excellent job of retaining your audience. :mark:


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Dean the titty drawing magnet :ambrose4


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ratings is ALL because of DEAN AMBROSE!!

It had absolutely nothing to do with the return of Sasha Banks on screen, the return of the Wyatts, the continued feud of Cena and Wyatt, and Boreman Reigns vs Seth "Chicken Shit" Rollins in the main event


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

James Caldwell @jctorch

*Raw - 2.44 rating.*

https://twitter.com/jctorch/status/745356689231142915


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Nice gain from last weeks' disaster. Still in the mid 3's, but that might be their new 'home' from now on...until NFL season starts of course.


Well, I'm sure Dean's title win gained a bit of interest. Or at least how they'd set up things for the future. I mean, its obviously too early to call Dean a draw, but this is a decent start. The Almighty himself must have done something because the third hour evenly matching the first hour is a god damn miracle.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> The ratings is ALL because of DEAN AMBROSE!!
> 
> It had absolutely nothing to do with the return of Sasha Banks on screen, the return of the Wyatts, the continued feud of Cena and Styles, and Boreman Reigns vs Seth "Chicken Shit" Rollins in the main event


Nobody knew the Wyatt's and Sasha were going to return, LOL. Much as I would love to give Bray Wyatt credit and say he bumped the rating, which we would if he was pushed at the top where he should be, but no. Ambrose won the title and people love Ambrose. The chants prove it.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The thing is this really isn't anything new. Whenever Ambrose has been positioned at the top of the card and given something meaningful to do, he's drawn. It's why his B-tour house show numbers that he headlines and tours in smaller towns draws similarly to A-tour house shows headlined by the WWE World champion at the time, Reigns. It's why he's very steady on the merchandise sellers, usually top-3 or 5 iirc. When he's given something meaningful, the fans are all in with him. He appeals to every demographic.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

AMBROSE = RATINGS


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



KO Bossy said:


> Well, I'm sure Dean's title win gained a bit of interest. Or at least how they'd set up things for the future. I mean, its obviously too early to call Dean a draw, but this is a decent start. The Almighty himself must have done something because the third hour evenly matching the first hour is a god damn miracle.


I did say it was a nice gain from last week. But they have been stuck in the mid 3's all 2016 now. Still a good start because last week was horrendous. NFL still going to murder them, though. Austin can come back and win the title and NFL will still murder them this Fall.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Nobody knew the Wyatt's and Sasha were going to return, LOL. Much as I would love to give Bray Wyatt credit and say he bumped the rating, which we would if he was pushed at the top where he should be, but no. Ambrose won the title and people love Ambrose. The chants prove it.


This statement makes me think you don't know how ratings work...


----------



## skolpo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It seems like the people with the narrowest perspectives are always the loudest when it comes to ratings.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not that we needed anymore LOLReigns proof...but wow.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/20 Raw TV Ratings Report – big rebound post-MITB PPV*

WWE Raw got an expected TV Ratings bump the night after Money in the Bank with new WWE World champion Dean Ambrose.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

June 20: Monday’s Raw scored a 2.44 TV rating the night after Money in the Bank, rebounding 20 percent from last week’s historical low-point 2.03 rating.

Raw scored its highest rating since the second episode after WrestleMania when the April 11 Raw scored a 2.50 rating.

The big rebound can be seen in the key demographic, which improved to the highest ratings since the night after WrestleMania. Compared to last week’s dismal, year-low demos, Monday’s Raw improved by the following…

Adults 18-49 increased by 31%
Males 18-34 increased by 43%
Males 18-49 increased by 40%

WWE was losing the younger m18-34 demo in recent weeks, drawing three straight weeks of year-lows, including a sub-1.0 rating last week.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.467 million viewers, up 17 percent (about 500,000 viewers) from last week’s show.

The show was steady throughout with strong interest for immediate MITB fall-out, even more second hour viewers, and only a minimal drop-off in the third hour.

First Hour: 3.420 million viewers (most since post-Payback)
Second Hour: 3.562 million viewers (most since April 11)
Third Hour: 3.420 million viewers (most since April 11)

WWE placed the #1 contender match between Seth Rollins and Roman Reigns in the main event of the third hour, creating a strong hook to avoid the huge drop-off in the final hour that has been happening routinely lately. To then actually draw the same number of viewers in the third hour as the first hour is a success.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/21/620-raw-tv-ratings-report-big-rebound-post-mitb-ppv/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ratings going up at this time is quite funny, tbh.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/20 Raw Social Media – interesting Twitter reaction to post-MITB Raw*

In an interesting social media development, Monday’s WWE Raw did not produce an increase in the number of people tweeting about the show despite the big WWE Title change at Money in the Bank the night before.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

June 20: WWE Raw fell to the #2 spot among series & specials on Monday night, trailing “The Bachelorette” on ABC. Raw was #1 the previous three weeks.

In Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings, Raw generated the same number of people tweeting about the show as last week.

The number of unique authors was 31,000, the same as last week.

However, the total number of tweets about Raw was 151,000, up from a near-year-low 125k last week.

The conclusion is the same number of people were talking about this week’s Raw on Twitter compared to last week despite the big title change, but they were more engaged in the show, producing more tweets.

Last week’s show generated a year-low 4.0 tweets per person, while this week’s show produced 4.9.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...a-interesting-twitter-reaction-post-mitb-raw/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The ratings going up at this time is quite funny, tbh.


I wouldn't read anything into it tbh.
Last week was killed by a game, this week is slightly up from the now usual 3.2-3.3 million because of a PPV and maybe Ambrose bump.

The big picture is still decline. Even Reigns drew the odd bump once or twice.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Roman not being on the show for 30 days will hurt. As much as people don't like it, he is the most promoted guy on the show, and comparatively to all of the other geeks on the roster, he does move the needle to a degree.

You can't expect Dean to be a draw after the damage they've done to his character over the last 2 years. He's repairable, but it'll take time and proper booking. Sunday and last night were steps in the right direction.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I wouldn't read anything into it tbh.
> Last week was killed by a game, this week is slightly up from the now usual 3.2-3.3 million because of a PPV and maybe Ambrose bump.
> 
> The big picture is still decline. Even Reigns drew the odd bump once or twice.


It's not a good look with the timing of losing the title, though. If Reigns had a history of being a draw, I would agree.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ambrose making the ratings rebound like his clothesline. :mark:


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How are ratings being attributed to Roman Reigns? If an increase proves anything, it's that fans are rejoicing he lost the title and the focus is now on Ambrose/Rollins.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Fans obviously tuning in to see the fallout from "The Man" beating Reigns clean as a whistle. :rollins

Seriously though, grats to Ambrose for spurring a big ratings bump. :ambrose


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Get the title off of Roman, and you get a ratings bump. Bout time Vince listened to the remaining fans he does have left.


----------



## TD Stinger

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ambrose with dem draws, lol.

Anyways, very enjoyable show that managed to keep you hooked with something the whole night and a lot of storylines developed.

And the biggest highlight is that the 3rd hour did not plummet like it usually does. The audience stayed around 3.4 to 3.5 million the whole show. Will it last? Who knows but that’s a good sign they kept the audience consistent throughout the show.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Could we please remember that this viewership would have been considered piss poor just 12 months ago?


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> How are ratings being attributed to Roman Reigns? If an increase proves anything, it's that fans are rejoicing he lost the title and the focus is now on Ambrose/Rollins.


He was in the main event of a third hour that didn't drop all that much, so it's reasonable to point to that. However, it was a main event of the previous night's PPV on free TV, which are usually historically ratings boosters.

Unabashedly, I'm a Dean fan, but I do think the overall dynamic of Dean being the champion with Roman being a bridesmaid is overall a better way to go. He was just already in one night a more interesting champion.

Plus, I think the overall story of the Shield guys feuding with each other has a lot of potential to keep people interested as a main event program. They did a lot right last night.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> He was in the main event of a third hour that didn't drop all that much, so it's reasonable to point to that. However, it was a main event of the previous night's PPV on free TV, which are usually historically ratings boosters.
> 
> Unabashedly, I'm a Dean fan, but I do think the overall dynamic of Dean being the champion with Roman being a bridesmaid is overall a better way to go. He was just already in one night a more interesting champion.
> 
> Plus, I think the overall story of the Shield guys feuding with each other has a lot of potential to keep people interested as a main event program. They did a lot right last night.


Rollins/Ambrose are BOTH more popular than Reigns. Rollins was in his first RAW match in how long, in the main event? Think that has nothing to do with it? 

Roman's main events tanked many times before this, hence why he's rarely been put in one this year.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Rollins/Ambrose are BOTH more popular than Reigns. Rollins was in his first RAW match in how long, in the main event? Think that has nothing to do with it?
> 
> Roman's main events tanked many times before this, hence why he's rarely been put in one this year.


I think that if you advertise a title match as the main event of a PPV that shakes things up in a positive way, and then do the rematch the next night on free TV, that match has a raised value (artificial or not) for that one night. It was also:

- Rollins' first Raw match since his return
- Dean was on commentary and is generally seen as a favorable world champion
- People wanting to see if they'd actually follow through on setting up a Shield Triple Threat for Battleground. There was intrigue.

Reigns is a part of that equation. He's a rather uninteresting character, but he does fit better when he isn't the focal point and someone more interesting is.


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Could we please remember that this viewership would have been considered piss poor just 12 months ago?



So what? They didn't lose all those viewers in one day and they're not coming back in one day. Given the circumstances this is a good number, no reason to shit on it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No reason to Rave about it either.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw's rating next week is likely going to be lower than this week.

And Roman will be off the show next week too.

"Coincidence?! I think not!" :vince5


----------



## Dark_Raiden

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Partially due to Reigns being in the ME (for Hour 3), partially for the MitB fallout (especially Reigns losing clean being a big deal on every forum), partially because of a title change, partially because of Sasha and the Wyatts, and in large part due to no NBA Finals to compete with. 

So a nice team effort I'd say. With some outside interference.


----------



## The Figure 4

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 6/20, a strong show, coming off the Dean Ambrose title win and with a main event to determine the next title shot did a 2.44 rating and 3,467,000 viewers (1.51 viewers per home), the highest total for the show since 4/11, eight days after WrestleMania.
> 
> The first hour wasn’t unusually high, but the show gained in the second hour, which is usually the case in the summer, and didn’t decline much in the third hour with the Seth Rollins vs. Roman Reigns main event. The first hour was 3,420,000 viewers, with the peak middle hour being 3,562,000 viewers and the third hour at 3,420,000 viewers. Raw was third for the night on cable.
> 
> With the first show in a long time that didn’t feature major sports competition, the audience bounced back strongly in the 18-49 demo in particular, particularly with men. The rating was up 20.2 percent and audience up 17.0 percent from last week’s show that went against game five of the NBA playoffs and the lowest rated Raw show since 1997, and fourth lowest in its regular time slot for non-major holidays in the nearly 24 year history of the show.
> 
> The show did a 0.94 in 12-17 (up 13.3 percent from last week’s low mark), 1.08 in 18-34 (up 30.1 percent), 1.48 in 35-49 (up 31.0 percent) and 1.28 in 50+ (up 6.7 percent).
> 
> The audience was 64.1% male in 18-49 and 63.9% male in 12-17. The 6/17 Bellator show headlined by Eduardo Dantas’ winning of the bantamweight title from Marcos Galvao did 482,000 viewers (plus 56,000 more watching via DVR as of 6/20). That’s about 170,000 down from what that type of show averages. Part of the decline would be that there were three MMA shows, plus the Raw replay, all at the same time. NBC Sports’ World Series of Fighting show headlined by Blagoi Ivanov retaining his heavyweight title over Josh Copeland did 126,000 viewers, and WSOF usually does in the 200,000 range. AXS also had live fights, but AXS doesn’t subscribe to Nielsen so their ratings aren’t available, but they usually do more than 200,000 viewers as New Japan does in the 200,000 range and the AXS Fights are higher rated than New Japan.
> 
> The 6/17 Raw replay on Syfy did 413,000 viewers. The average viewer of the replay is 50 years old, much older than the Monday night average.
> 
> Smackdown on 6/16 did a 1.56 rating and 2,073,000 viewers (1.41 viewers per home), which was actually up from the week before, even going against game six of the NBA playoffs that did 20,702,000 viewers.
> 
> The show was sixth for the night on cable, trailing mostly news shows on Fox News Network. Smackdown may have been hurt going against “American Grit” since John Cena fans would theoretically siphon from the Smackdown number and the show has been way down ever since that show started airing, and increased this week even against strong competition. It was the second lowest number to date on USA, but given the NBA game, it’s just what you have to accept.
> 
> The show did a 0.40 in 12-17 (down 5.0 percent), 0.44 in 18-34 (up 10.0 percent), 0.76 in 35-49 (up 2.7 percent) and 0.98 in 50+ (down 1.0 percent).
> 
> The audience was 55.8 percent male in 18-49 and 69.8 percent male in 12-17.
> 
> For 6/6, Raw did 90.4% live viewership, Smackdown on 6/9 did 90.1% live viewership, Impact on 6/7 did 85.3% live and Lucha Underground on 6/8 did 80.2% live. The 5/30 Raw, which was the Cena comeback on Memorial Day that went head-to-head with the first game of the NBA playoffs did 88.5% live viewership, so the DVR viewership was well above usual levels.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings are due to a good quality show. You can have big stars on those good quality shows who get linked to the brand and its popularity, making them themselves a draw. Obviously these guys need to have the talent to carry a brand. This is why older stars such as Rock and Cena (who had the talent to carry the brand and the show was much better quality than it was now, *overall *) can draw numbers by themselves. Compare that to the clusterfuck of a show we have now. Nobody would call it "good quality" consistently. If nobody cares or is passionate about the show, would they be passionate enough for the main guy of the show to tune in every week? No. And to be clear, I'm talking about the more casual fans in this case.

The ratings pop in this week is obviously attributed to something new, that the fans wanted : a different champion, and Ambrose is a guy they seem to care about, he now has a chance to prove himself to WWE that he can carry the brand. But let's be real, he is never going to be a draw if we get the same kind of show we have seen for the past year. And I am 100% certain it will not change. I think he is a much better choice than Reigns and may do better, but overall numbers/show quality are still likely to be terrible in my mind.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Roman not being on the show for 30 days will hurt. As much as people don't like it, he is the most promoted guy on the show, and comparatively to all of the other geeks on the roster, he does move the needle to a degree..



The same way ratings were hurt once he was written off after Fastlane, right? For giggles,



*Weekly Raw Ratings with Reigns as WWE Champion *


4/4 - 2.93 (night after WM)

4/11 - 2.50 

4/18 - 2.32 

4/25 - 2.2 

5/2 - 2.35 

5/9 - 2.26 

5/16 - 2.27 

5/23 - 2.29 

5/30 - 2.19 

6/6 - 2.28 

6/13 - 2.03



Claims such as this will be called out. There is zero proof that Roman "moves the needle" in any way outside of WF and YouTube. *Zero*. Ratings were sinking and Ambrose was out drawing him on the B tour during house shows. They jumped to their highest point in over two months once the belt came off of him. Am I claiming Dean is a draw? Absolutely not as he doesn't have anywhere near the time as champ needed to be put in for that to be assessed, but claiming Roman "moves the needle" is false. 


It's no different than those who claim he had kids by proxy of him being Cena's successor because he was _supposed_ to capture that crowd. He never had Johns fanbase just like he wasn't the #2 merchandise mover last year despite that being another "by proxy" claim. The #2 guy was hilariously Daniel Bryan. Reigns isn't chopped liver but claims of him moving anything other than tshirts and YouTube hits should be called out every time it's erroneously stated.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

In relation to his push, Reigns is probably the worst drawing champion ever. Worse than Nash, Bret, Shawn, all of them. Since that was a transitional era where RAW was an hour long, WCW was coming up, WWE wasn't an established brand with 100% of the wrestling market yet. Reigns doesn't have any of these excuses. Everything was gift wrapped for him and he's so bad that he drove viewers away...like...LOTS of viewers. He's the opposite of a draw. The crowd he IS supposed to sell to, doesn't even like him all that much, and they like John Cena five times as much as him.


----------



## TakerFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lets see how Dean does as champ.


----------



## sarcasma

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TakerFreak said:


> Lets see how Dean does as champ.


Everything has gone right for Dean so far, hes bringing his A game for sure.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/23 WWE Smackdown Ratings for this week’s show*

This week’s Smackdown remained stuck in neutral nearing the Live Smackdown Era.

WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

June 23: Thursday’s Smackdown scored a 1.58 TV rating, up slightly from a 1.56 rating last week.

The show drew 2.145 million viewers, up 3.5 percent from 2.073 million viewers last week.

Smackdown has been stuck in the 2.1-million viewers range or below for the past five weeks.

With one week to go in the Second Quarter, Smackdown has averaged 2.228 million live viewers, down from 2.481 million in the First Quarter.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: The positive for this week’s Smackdown ratings is an increase in the key demos.

Adults 18-49, males 18-34, and males 18-49 all improved by about one-tenth of a rating to four-week highs.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/24/623-wwe-smackdown-ratings/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(6/23) Vs last week(6/16) 

2.145M Vs 2.073M
(+0.072M/+3.47%)*


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *How Was WWE SmackDown Viewership For The Final Show Before Money In The Bank?*
> 
> 
> Source: Showbuzz Daily
> 
> Last night's WWE SmackDown, with the final hype for WWE Money In the Bank, drew 2.073 million viewers. This is up from last week's show, which drew 1.996 million viewers.
> 
> SmackDown was #4 for the night in viewership, behind soccer, The Kelly File and The O'Reilly Factor.
> 
> SmackDown was #2 for the night in the 18-49 demographic, behind soccer on FOX Sports.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...n-viewership-for-the-final-show-before-money/


Empress, showbuzzdaily says its 2.145M. Is the ratings report wrong?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Empress, looks like I was here later than usual and there is some confusion in the timeline of the posts.


I was waiting for you. You usually have the chart first. We seem to have posted only a few minutes apart.

What are your early predictions for Monday's RAW rating? Do you predict the same rating, increase or a dip?

EDIT:

I think the posts may be messing up for you. I had a similar issue earlier in the week. 

Here is the 6/16 Ratings report  for Smackdown. It was a 1.56.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I was waiting for you. You usually have the chart first. We seem to have posted only a few minutes apart.
> 
> What are your early predictions for Monday's RAW rating? Do you predict the same rating, increase or a dip?
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> I think the posts may be messing up for you. I had a similar issue earlier in the week.





Empress said:


> *6/23 WWE Smackdown Ratings for this week’s show*
> 
> This week’s Smackdown remained stuck in neutral nearing the Live Smackdown Era.
> 
> WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking
> 
> June 23: Thursday’s Smackdown scored a 1.58 TV rating, up slightly from a 1.56 rating last week.
> 
> The show drew 2.145 million viewers, up 3.5 percent from 2.073 million viewers last week.
> 
> Smackdown has been stuck in the 2.1-million viewers range or below for the past five weeks.
> 
> With one week to go in the Second Quarter, Smackdown has averaged 2.228 million live viewers, down from 2.481 million in the First Quarter.
> 
> – DEMOGRAPHICS: The positive for this week’s Smackdown ratings is an increase in the key demos.
> 
> Adults 18-49, males 18-34, and males 18-49 all improved by about one-tenth of a rating to four-week highs.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/24/623-wwe-smackdown-ratings/


That post of yours vanished and then reappeared for no reason even after I refreshed it. This site has been having a lot of hiccups lately. Anyway for the first time my chart follows your ratings report. I guess I was typing it around the same time you were posting yours. :grin2:



Empress said:


> I was waiting for you. You usually have the chart first. We seem to have posted only a few minutes apart.
> 
> What are your early predictions for Monday's RAW rating? Do you predict the same rating, increase or a dip?
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> I think the posts may be messing up for you. I had a similar issue earlier in the week.
> 
> Here is the 6/16 Ratings report  for Smackdown. It was a 1.56.


This is a redux of the Seth Dean feud from fall 2014 where again Roman was out of the picture suddenly albeit due to an injury that time. But Dean is the one on top this time. 

I cant put a number on it unless I watch the show because there are certain segments involving lower card stars that can affect viewership/ratings for sure. But since word has gotten out that Vince made Roman drop the belt due to the wellness violation and not because Dean was chosen to win it, I can't say how Dean's booking is going to be as he has never been the champ before. And with that I cant say with any certainity how much the last hour is going to either pull the overall figure up or keep it stagnant.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

However Dean has the momentum of being a face champion who is quite over (not Daniel Bryan levels of being over though) with negligible cross polarization among demos where he is also drawing well (relatively speaking). Something which we haven't seen in years. 

Whereas in 2014, Seth was the next major heel prospect with the MITB momentum in addition to the continuation of the broken Shield Vs Authority storyline aiding his relevance in the scheme of things. Dean and Seth held fort in the absence of Roman then too as I earlier implied.

Different case scenarios. But now that WWE has unveiled the draft as the de facto summer angle this year, embellishing it with hype unseen since RAW 1000 for a non PPV/Network event, we have to see how Roman's suspension and Dean's unexpectedly unheralded reign (Roman pinned cleanly :surprise: ) continues through this 'New Era' of theirs.

Not to mention, Brock's performance at UFC 200 and it's repercussions for WWE's late summer plans.


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not only spoilers are messed up, now even ratings are :hogan

So desperate to create buzz with any means necessary, oh WWE :bosque


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings for SD up from last week. Good sign.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*DEAN DRAWS-DETRACTORS DERAILED!*:ambrose5


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That's a positive for Smackdown and for Dean's title reign. Next week's Raw rating will be interesting, especially because people will wanna see how WWE handles Roman's suspension.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/20 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – Cena-Styles wins, detailed break down of top segments, third hour minor victory*

The latest installment of the John Cena vs. A.J. Styles feud took home top TV rating honors from Monday’s Raw TV following up on the Money in the Bank PPV.

The segments involving Shield members Roman Reigns, Seth Rollins, and new WWE World Hvt. champion Dean Ambrose fared well, but were two stairsteps below the Cena-Styles follow-up to MITB.

Overall, this week’s three-hour Raw kept the males 18-49 audience engaged throughout. The show peaked in Q5 for Cena-Styles, dropped off slightly the rest of the hour, saw a slight bump at Q9, and did not fall off the table the rest of the third hour like a typical week. The early placement of the Reigns vs. Rollins main event helped the third hour tremendously.

*Top June 20 Raw Segments – Males 18-49 demo*

(1) Cena-Styles (Q5) – 1.221 million viewers / 1.94 m18-49 rating

(2) Cena-Karl Anderson (Q6) – 1.079 million viewers / 1.71 m18-49 rating

(3) Ending of Reigns-Rollins (Over-Run) – 1.079 million viewers / 1.71 m18-49 rating

(4) Top of the Third Hour (Q9) – Ending of Charlotte vs. Paige & Bray Wyatt return – 1.049 million viewers / 1.67 m18-49 rating

(5) Zack Ryder vs. Baron Corbin (Q7) – 1.049 million viewers / 1.67 m18-49 rating

(6) Opening of the show (Q1) – 1.026 million viewers / 1.63 m18-49 rating

The m18-49 audience was slow to tune into the show despite the big MITB developments.

*June 20 Raw Quarter-hours – Males 18-49 Demos*

– OVERALL SHOW M18-49 AVERAGE: 1.030 million viewers / 1.64 m18-49 rating.

– Q1: 1.026 million viewers / 1.63 rating

The opening segment picked up steam as the quarter-hour unfolded, peaking at 8:16 p.m. EST rolling into the second quarter-hour. However, the slow start brought down the overall average.

– Q2: 980,000 viewers / 1.56 rating (-4.5%)

The peak minute of the first hour was at 8:16 p.m. for the end of the opening segment, but the rest of the quarter-hour was down with two commercial breaks.

– Q3: 1.004 million viewers / 1.59 rating (+2.4%)

The segment rebounded for the finish of Sami Zayn vs. Kevin Owens and the post-match fight.

– Q4: 991,000 viewers / 1.57 rating (-1.3%)

Enzo Amore & Big Cass vs. The Vaudevillians was hurt by two commercial breaks during the fourth quarter-hour.

*FIRST HOUR AVG*.: 1.000 million viewers / 1.59 rating

– Q5: 1.221 million viewers / 1.94 rating (+23.2%)

Big pop for the Cena-Styles confrontation following up on Cena’s victory at Money in the Bank. Included were the peak minutes of the show at the end of the segment.

9:00 p.m. – 1.163 million viewers
9:01 p.m. – 1.221 million viewers
9:02 p.m. – 1.224 million viewers
9:03 p.m. – 1.197 million viewers
9:04 p.m. – 1.218 million viewers
9:05 p.m. – 1.230 million viewers
9:06 p.m. – 1.228 million viewers
9:07 p.m. – 1.220 million viewers
9:08 p.m. – 1.255 million viewers
9:09 p.m. – 1.275 million viewers
9:10 p.m. – 1.276 million viewers
9:11 p.m. – 1.278 million viewers
*9:12 p.m. – 1.295 million viewers*
9:13 p.m. – 1.266 million viewers
9:14 p.m. – 986,000 viewers when Raw cut to break

– Q6: 1.079 million viewers / 1.71 rating (-11.6%)

The audience held up for the most part for John Cena’s first Raw TV match since returning from injury against Karl Anderson.

– Q7: 1.049 million viewers / 1.67 rating (-2.8%)

This was Zack Ryder vs. Baron Corbin and various video packages.

– Q8: 991,000 viewers / 1.57 rating (-5.5%)

There were two commercial breaks wrapped around the start of the Women’s Title match between Charlotte and Paige.

*SECOND HOUR AVG.*: 1.085 million viewers / 1.72 rating (+8.5%)

– Q9: 1.049 million viewers / 1.67 rating (+5.9%)

The end of the Women’s Title segment, one commercial, and Bray Wyatt’s return produced a decent top-of-the-hour bump. The end of the Women’s segment outdrew the Wyatt segment…

10:00 p.m. – 1.140 million viewers
10:01 p.m. – 1.145 million viewers
*10:02 p.m. – 1.159 million viewers*
10:03 p.m. – 1.102 million viewers
10:04 p.m. – 1.098 million viewers
10:05 p.m. – 938,000 viewers when Raw cut to break…
10:09 p.m. – 1.038 million viewers
10:10 p.m. – 1.040 million viewers
10:11 p.m. – 1.083 million viewers
10:12 p.m. – 1.083 million viewers
*10:13 p.m. – 1.097 million viewers*
10:14 p.m. – 1.075 million viewers

– Q10: 976,000 viewers / 1.55 rating (-7.0%)

This was the least-watched segment of the show, but it was not followed by the usual third-hour nosedive…

– Q11: 981,000 viewers / 1.56 rating (0.5%)

The segment included various non-wrestling bits before the very beginning of the WWE Title #1 contender match between Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins.

– Q12: 1.008 million viewers / 1.60 rating (+2.8%)

WWE put the Reigns-Rollins match on early-enough in the third hour to avoid the Q12 free-fall, actually growing from Q11 for one of the few times this year.

*THIRD HOUR AVG.:* 1.003 million viewers / 1.60 rating (-7.5% / actually up 0.3% from the First Hour).

– Over-run: 1.079 million viewers / 1.71 rating (+7.0%)

There were only three minutes in the over-run, producing a brief bump from Q11 and Q12 for the finish of the main event…

Q11: 1.56 m18-49 rating
Q12: 1.60 m18-49 rating
OR: 1.71 m18-49 rating

*– OVERALL SHOW M18-49 AVERAGE:* 1.030 million viewers / 1.64 m18-49 rating.

First Hour: 1.000 million viewers / 1.59 rating
Second Hour: 1.085 million viewers / 1.72 rating
Third Hour: 1.003 million viewers / 1.60 rating

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/24/620-raw-tv-quarter-hour-ratings/


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

6th...










:rollins :reigns2 
@ShowStopper once again, The Man and The Guy number 2 behind Cena in breakdowns.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I had expected a stronger number for the opening segment since it featured Dean as heavyweight champion. It's not surprising that Cena/Styles are still a draw with their program but I did think Dean would be #2 , not 6th.

Love or hate Cena, but he's still the guy that runs the place. His segments are usually the highest rated or near it. 

Roman and Rollins had a good match. I'm happy their segment held up.

Since Sasha is back from parts unknown, maybe the WWE can capitalize on the interest around her. There has to be something there if the Women's match outdrew Bray's return. Charlotte and Paige helped of course. 

Overall, I thought RAW was a good show. I hope the ratings hold steady in the weeks to come.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's good to see these shows doing decent (by todays' standards, of course, not overall and compared to past eras). It's amazing what can happen when the show is built around more than just ONE person week in and week out and others get a legitimate chance to shine. I hope this continues, both; others getting chances and the ratings staying somewhat consistent, but my hopes aren't high only because of WWE's recent struggles with maintaining momentum from a quality of product standpoint and ratings anytime they grab a hold of it for a week. I would love to be dead wrong about this though, because for the first time in awhile Raw and SD entertained me decently this entire week. I actually forgot what that feeling feels like. :lol


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nobody gonna dance around that opening segment being out drawn by ZACK FUCKING RYDER and Baron Corbin, right? 6th place when we got a new champion and everyone should be clamoring for that opener











But again :rollins :reigns2

"The early placement of the Reigns vs. Rollins main event helped the third hour tremendously."

Oh word?


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince gonna see that and be like "Time to push Corbin!!" :vince5


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Nobody gonna dance around that opening segment being out drawn by ZACK FUCKING RYDER and Baron Corbin, right? 6th place when we got a new champion and everyone should be clamoring for that opener
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But again :rollins :reigns2
> 
> "The early placement of the Reigns vs. Rollins main event helped the third hour tremendously."
> 
> Oh word?


:lol

It's definitely surprising. I thought it would do better, for sure. But I've never really been a big QH hour guy. I'm more about the overall rating. And I'm not a big Dean fan, so it's not about protecting him for me. And this overall rating was pretty good in comparison to the rest of this year. The ratings were sunk these past 6 months to levels not previously known before. I mean, if people want to go in, they can. But I don't think any of us are really in any position to talk shit. :lol

For the first time in ages, we at least got a pretty good show and that was with the show having a completely different dynamic than it has over the past 6 months. Ditto for Smackdown. It was refreshing. The rating was meh, but it was probably one of the better ratings of the entire year and it had nothing to do with WM.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If The Dude performs well, he'll win over the m18-49 audience in no time.

Corbin segment is definitely surprising, though. How have his segments been doing in general since his debut?


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Ratings the last week BEFORE the NBA playoffs: 2.5
Ratings the first week DURING the NBA playoffs: 2.2
Ratings the first week AFTER the NBA playoffs: 2.5
*

https://www.reddit.com/r/SquaredCircle/comments/4p6quq/wwe_raw_ratings_up_by_500000/

So, it went back to normal once NBA stopped handing their asses to them :lol So the rating aint even't all that special

Let me spam this one more time since once again, these two guys were second to Cena.

:rollins :reigns2










I know, I ain't shit :shrug


----------



## The Bloodline

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn, surprised more didn't care about Ambrose first appearence as champ though:faint: .#6 with that competiton just seems so weird.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's not great at all. But it's in the upper echelon of the entire year. And it's not like Dean has been built up with the machine behind him for months and months. Considering that, it is pretty decent.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> If The Dude performs well, he'll win over the m18-49 audience in no time.
> 
> Corbin segment is definitely surprising, though. How have his segments been doing in general since his debut?



That I don't know. Honestly, has a Corbin segment ever made the top drawn segment list? :lol

@ShowStopper now you know I had to be messy after the celebration that was thrown in here  

At least Seth is part of the winning team :rollins 

Plus, considering everyone has been telling us Dean is far more popular than Roman and has every demographic on his side and the celebration in here was like Jesus descended to Earth....


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> That I don't know. Honestly, has a Corbin segment ever made the top drawn segment list? :lol
> 
> @ShowStopper now you know I had to be messy after the celebration that was thrown in here
> 
> At least Seth is part of the winning team :rollins


Hey, as long as they keep drawing in the mid 3's and don't go back below 3 million again, they're in decent shape. But that is a far from a guarantee, too. I wouldn't be surprised if it happened again. WWE is niche at best these days and none of these guys are true draws.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> If The Dude performs well, he'll win over the m18-49 audience in no time.
> 
> Corbin segment is definitely surprising, though. How have his segments been doing in general since his debut?


I just looked at breakdowns from recent weeks. I don't see Corbin at all in the highest rated segments. Maybe it's Ryder. He was #4 on the 5/30 episode.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Maybe Vince should put Ryder on Raw more these days. That is so freaking random. :lmao Good for Corbin too, I guess. It's hard to make sense of any thing related to WWE these days and I don't expect the product to maintain this momentum even from a quality standpoint, but it sure would be nice.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I just looked at breakdowns from recent weeks. I don't see Corbin at all in the highest rated segments. Maybe it's Ryder. He was #4 on the 5/30 episode.


Ryder drawing in his segments???


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I just looked at breakdowns from recent weeks. I don't see Corbin at all in the highest rated segments. Maybe it's Ryder. He was #4 on the 5/30 episode.


Corbin/Ryder immediately followed the Cena/Anderson match. Might have something to do with it. While we're at it, we might have to consider giving Anderson a push as well. :lol


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> Corbin/Ryder immediately followed the Cena/Anderson match. Might have something to do with it. While we're at it, we might have to consider giving Anderson a push as well. :lol


DO WE HAVE A HATA IN HERE?!

:enzo










#WooWooWooImADraw


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> Corbin/Ryder immediately followed the Cena/Anderson match. Might have something to do with it. While we're at it, we might have to consider giving Anderson a push as well. :lol


I never figured you for a Dana Brooks fan. The Women's segment did well in this week's breakdown. I'm happy about that. Creative needs to get serious about the division again.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> DO WE HAVE A HATA IN HERE?!
> 
> :enzo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #WooWooWooImADraw


Clearly. >:T



Empress said:


> I never figured you for a Dana Brooks fan. The Women's segment did well in this week's breakdown. I'm happy about that. Creative needs to get serious about the division again.


I like her character work but she's clueless in the ring. Embarrassingly clueless. I have no idea what she's doing on the main roster.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> Overall, this week’s three-hour Raw kept the males 18-49 audience engaged throughout.


This is also huge. They've been losing that demo (which is their most important by MILES) hand over fist all year. If they can get that demo back, they'd be extremely happy.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> I like her character work but she's clueless in the ring. Embarrassingly clueless. I have no idea what she's doing on the main roster.


Yeah, how do you botch putting someone's foot on a rope lol?


----------



## THANOS

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ZeroFear0 said:


> Damn, surprised more didn't care about Ambrose first appearence as champ though:faint: .#6 with that competiton just seems so weird.


People are tired of the former SHIELD members feuding with one another in whatever combination, I know I sure am.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow, I'm shocked the Cena/Styles segment drew more than the main event segments.

Expected it to be behind both segments after that BS ending for the match and the hot finish for the title match.

Say what you like, but this just proves none of the Shield boys have stepped up to the ME level. 

Cena is still drawing far better than them even though they had the cash in and Shield triple threat tease.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Wow, I'm shocked the Cena/Styles segment drew more than the main event segments.
> 
> Expected it to be behind both segments after that BS ending for the match and the hot finish for the title match.
> 
> Say what you like, but this just proves none of the Shield boys have stepped up to the ME level.
> 
> Cena is still drawing far better than them even though they had the cash in and Shield triple threat tease.


They're definitely main eventers. Just not on Cena's level, which is no surprise. It's Cena then everyone else. No one else has 10 years of the machine backing them like Cena does.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Even if Dean's segment was the 5th highest viewed segment among m18-49 in "context," it's still pretty disappointing. 

One might say, "what do you expect? Ambrose's cheers are mostly by children and women." I would agree with that in the sense that he definitely doesn't get the type of reaction by the male audience like Rollins, Styles, and Owens do.

I mean he's a well-liked and the live audience does shower him with love, but he needs to win over the m18-49 audience. They like him, but not as much as other guys on the roster. He probably did better with the other demos, but this is the demo WWE need to get back, and I'm not sure if WWE will book him to be appealing to that audience.

They need to give Seth the ball after Dean's title reign. He's the only one who's truly over with that audience ("new" full timers) and wouldn't look like a joke to the casual audience. 

I'm not going to give up on Dean. It's only been a week, but that segment breakdown definitely leaves something to be pondered.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Im not saying Dean will crash and burn. I'm just being petty as fuck right now :lmao 

Dean might pull a better rating next week where he is second after Cena. Then yall could rub it in next week. This thread is made for us petty souls 
@THANOS 

While I get what you mean, I disagree a bit with the reasoning pertaining to Dean specifically. Especially since Rollins and Reigns managed to pull their weight and be second after Cena(consistently I may add) . So you can't blame Shield overexposure completely on that really low drawn opening segment with a fresh new champion that has been always stated to be way more over than the previous champ. 

There is no excuse for Zack Ryder to out draw any main eventer lol

But, Shield feuding with each other has been overdone, beaten to death, dead horse skinned, cooked, eaten and thrown up at this point :lol Shield fatigue gonna hit soon for a lot of fans if they don't chill out.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Story of this Raw is that people actually STUCK with the show, that's why Rollins and Reigns did a good rating(and good for them), the final segment always gains viewers, and the show on Monday was consistently growing and didn't turn viewers off from the show which is usually the case.

One thing to note about Cena/Styles is that the segment went to show that Cena isn't the only star in that program. The promotion of the 9:00 segment was all built around Styles, and then when Cena did have his match with Anderson, he LOST viewers. Cena is the big draw, but I think AJ is helping too.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Im not saying Dean will crash and burn. I'm just being petty as fuck right now :lmao
> 
> Dean might pull a better rating next week where he is second after Cena. Then yall could rub it in next week. This thread is made for us petty souls
> @THANOS
> 
> While I get what you mean, I disagree a bit with the reasoning pertaining to Dean specifically. Especially since Rollins and Reigns managed to pull their weight and be second after Cena(consistently I may add) . So you can't blame Shield overexposure completely on that really low drawn opening segment with a fresh new champion that has been always stated to be way more over than the previous champ.
> 
> There is no excuse for Zack Ryder to out draw any main eventer lol
> 
> But, Shield feuding with each other has been overdone, beaten to death, dead horse skinned, cooked, eaten and thrown up at this point :lol Shield fatigue gonna hit soon for a lot of fans if they don't chill out.


 I bet we'll see another Shield triple threat at Mania, in the main event of course.... 

Punk couldn't main event one Mania... but we'll likely see these flops main eventing 9 of the next 10... fpalm


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> I bet we'll see another Shield triple threat at Mania, in the main event of course....
> 
> Punk couldn't main event one Mania... but we'll likely see these flops main eventing 9 of the next 10... fpalm


Damn, hit the Shield with the "flop" :lol 

But, I can't even act like that isn't a strong possibility. And it will probably be the FOURTH rematch by that time. 










These dudes gonna main event another 20 ppvs :lmao

Shield gonna be the Randy vs Cena of our generation


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Damn, hit the Shield with the "flop" :lol
> 
> But, I can't even act like that isn't a strong possibility. And it will probably be the FOURTH rematch by that time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These dudes gonna main event another 20 ppvs :lmao
> 
> Shield gonna be the Randy vs Cena of our generation


It's not a stretch to call them all a flop, having the pushes and protection they've had, they've failed miserably to establish themselves as top guys.

Roman is a proven flop.

Ambrose hasn't had much of a chance, but I doubt he'll do well.

Rollins run with the title was a flop, although a lot of that had to with his booking.

Just makes me think what shape the WWE would have been if they had given those pushes to KO, Cesaro, Rusev or Bray instead.

Once Cena, Lesnar, Taker and HHH go, they're going to be in a huge hole.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> It's not a stretch to call them all a flop, having the pushes and protection they've had, they've failed miserably to establish themselves as top guys.
> 
> Roman is a proven flop.
> 
> Ambrose hasn't had much of a chance, but I doubt he'll do well.
> 
> Rollins run with the title was a flop, although a lot of that had to with his booking.
> 
> Just makes me think what shape the WWE would have been if they had given those pushes to *KO, Cesaro, Rusev or Bray instead.*
> 
> Once Cena, Lesnar, Taker and HHH go, they're going to be in a huge hole.


They'd be "flops" too and then people would clamor for Reigns, Rollins, and Ambrose pushes.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> They'd be "flops" too and then people would clamor for Reigns, Rollins, and Ambrose pushes.


 KO and Rusev tick all the boxes except the look.

Bray is a great character and possess great charisma, his only really shortcomings are in the ring. IMO his character covers up his poor build.

Cesaro I had in there just for variety, an in ring guy who can get fans behind him and put on a show.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ideally, the company should have been built around more guys. When I say that, I mean more than banking your future on 3 guys who you don't know will succeed or fail. Imagine if they had booked at least 6 top guys who each could win the title at any time and carry the company. Right now, the only guys you can call on doing that from the new block are The Shield guys, the rest are a level or more below them and aren't seen as credible enough. I'm not including AJ in this as he's in the Cena/Orton/Punk/Bryan generation and is only going to do this for a few more years before hanging up the boots.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> KO and Rusev tick all the boxes except the look.
> 
> Bray is a great character and possess great charisma, his only really shortcomings are in the ring. IMO his character covers up his poor build.
> 
> Cesaro I had in there just for variety, an in ring guy who can get fans behind him and put on a show.


I'm not denying their talent but it's easy to see how underappreciated they are and project their freshness on the product, should they get pushed, and expect them to have been the answer the WWE should've looked into all along. In today's WWE, Shield or no Shield, they'd be "flops". No one is ready nor should be ready to take on the FOTC mantle. The company is the draw now, not one or two or three or four interchangable stars that most fans wouldn't have any problem adjusting away from if they disappeared off the face of the Earth.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Weird that people are labeling it "Dean's segment" when all three Shield members were prominently featured and Shane was in in it, too.

The main event of Raw was also the main event of MITB the previous night, so I would expect a free PPV ("WrestleMania caliber!" as the announcers would say) main event on Raw would draw well, because of the inflated value from the previous night.

No excuses for Dean, but it's great to see Cena/Styles draw well since that's one of the best feuds they have going right now. Still, Dean has yet to wrestle on TV as champion and was doing commentary during the main event, so let's not pick and choose what he gets credit for and who doesn't get credit for segments Dean also happens to be in.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> *KO and Rusev tick all the boxes except the look.*
> 
> Bray is a great character and possess great charisma, his only really shortcomings are in the ring. IMO his character covers up his poor build.
> 
> Cesaro I had in there just for variety, an in ring guy who can get fans behind him and put on a show.


KO I can understand, but how does Rusev not tick the look box? :aries2


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> KO I can understand, but how does Rusev not tick the look box? :aries2


 Brute bodies don't look good in 2016 imo, I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that. 

He definitely looks strong, but there are plenty who would consider him fat too. 

He doesn't really have the prettiest face either. The dude has done really well for himself getting a fiancee like Lana.


----------



## ste1592

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> I'm not denying their talent but it's easy to see how underappreciated they are and project their freshness on the product, should they get pushed, and expect them to have been the answer the WWE should've looked into all along. In today's WWE, Shield or no Shield, they'd be "flops". No one is ready nor should be ready to take on the FOTC mantle. The company is the draw now, not one or two or three or four interchangable stars that most fans wouldn't have any problem adjusting away from if they disappeared off the face of the Earth.


Sadly, this post is completely spot on. Not even Hogan, Austin and Rock in their prime working full time would succeed in bringing new viewers, mostly because the show is shit and booked with the sole purpose of not having one (or more) star growing bigger than the WWE brand itself.

They're willingly losing a shit ton of money to make sure their next top face is not doing a Rock on them, leaving them with zero star power in the process. In a smart company, they'd solve this problem by grooming more than one guy to be on top, boosting the star power of their own roster and maybe the quality overall, but this is WWE, so no chance in hell.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> That I don't know. Honestly, has a Corbin segment ever made the top drawn segment list? :lol
> 
> @ShowStopper now you know I had to be messy after the celebration that was thrown in here
> 
> At least Seth is part of the winning team :rollins
> 
> Plus, considering everyone has been telling us Dean is far more popular than Roman and has every demographic on his side and the celebration in here was like Jesus descended to Earth....



Let Ambrose headline a couple of WMs, beat a couple of top tier superstars, spend a couple of years not losing clean, hype him up on commentary as the best thing to happen to mankind since the discovery of fire, and I guarantee he'll outdraw Reigns in TV viewership, youtube, twitter, tumblr, IG, reddit and all that other crap. 


Seriously though, we're all looking like geeks arguing over numbers a bunch of losers are drawing, none of whom can touch Cena lol.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Meltzer was asked about the Ambrose number on Twitter, and he said the first segment during daylight savings will rarely be top, unless the show sucks bad.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> *It's not a stretch to call them all a flop*, having the pushes and protection they've had, they've failed miserably to establish themselves as top guys.
> 
> Roman is a proven flop.
> 
> *Ambrose hasn't had much of a chance, but I doubt he'll do well.*
> *
> Rollins run with the title was a flop, although a lot of that had to with his booking*.
> 
> Just makes me think what shape the WWE would have been if they had given those pushes to KO, Cesaro, Rusev or Bray instead.
> 
> Once Cena, Lesnar, Taker and HHH go, they're going to be in a huge hole.


So wait, you're saying that the entirety of The Shield is a flop, but in the same post you admit to the fact that both Ambrose and Rollins have been booked like complete shit since they broke up.

No offense, but I don't think that's really fair.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If people want to give guys like KO, Cesaro, and Bray a chance, I have no problem with that. But I do think, in the end, they are going to wind up very disappointed with the results, from a drawing standpoint. None of these guys are huge superstars that have that 'it' factor, tbh. I actually think without the Shield, the ratings would be even worse than they've been.

This all based on a rating that actually did quite well by today's standard and stayed CONSISTENT from start to finish. 3.4, 3.5, 3.4. Consistency, folks, with 2/3 of the Shield main eventing. fpalm People acting like they went below a million or something. :lol The fact that Cena has been the top face for 11 years and pushed like God and can only manage these ratings isn't saying much for him, either, ya' know.


----------



## God Movement

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm at the point where I don't think anyone can draw. The product is absolute dog shit and wrestling is not mainstream. Until there's a shift in the direction of the product ratings will remain at a constant LOW.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> So wait, you're saying that the entirety of The Shield is a flop, but in the same post you admit to the fact that both Ambrose and Rollins have been booked like complete shit since they broke up.
> 
> No offense, but I don't think that's really fair.


 I doubt Ambrose will do well because his gimmick is so cringeworthy that it will push casuals from 18-49 demo away. 

Rollins had 200 days at the top and couldn't do jack shit. Punk despite being an afterthought often in his 434 days still found a way for it to work. Guys who are good enough find a way to make it work, even when the machine isn't fully behind him. The WWE were behind Rollins regardless of how bad the booking was, just compare the number of main events and time on television Rollins had to Punk.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> I doubt Ambrose will do well because his gimmick is so cringeworthy that it will push casuals from 18-49 demo away.
> 
> Rollins had 200 days at the top and couldn't do jack shit. Punk despite being an afterthought often in his 434 days still found a way for it to work. Guys who are good enough find a way to make it work, even when the machine isn't fully behind him. The WWE were behind Rollins regardless of how bad the booking was, just compare the number of main events and time on television Rollins had to Punk.


It seems as though your prediction on how Ambrose will do is based solely on the fact that you personally don't like him or his gimmick, so I won't address it any further.

Punk, despite having limited exposure as champion, was never booked nearly as poorly as Rollins was. Let's not forget that the majority of his title reign was as a babyface, so it's not really comparable anyways. Rather than making a long winded post, I'll put this as short and bluntly as I can....

Thinking that booking someone as a weaselly, heel champion that can't win a match on their own, over-exposing this person, and playing them to their weaknesses rather than their strengths is a way to properly gauge their marketability is absolutely *asinine*, regardless of whether or not this person has "the machine behind them."

If you think that Styles, Rusev, Wyatt, or Cesaro would have done any better in the situation Rollins was put in, you're fooling yourself.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> It seems as though your prediction on how Ambrose will do is based solely on the fact that you personally don't like him or his gimmick, so I won't address it any further.
> 
> Punk, despite having limited exposure as champion, was never booked nearly as poorly as Rollins was. Let's not forget that the majority of his title reign was as a babyface, so it's not really comparable anyways. Rather than making a long winded post, I'll put this as short and bluntly as I can....
> 
> Thinking that booking someone as a weaselly, heel champion that can't win a match on their own, over-exposing this person, and playing them to their weaknesses rather than their strengths is a way to properly gauge their marketability is absolutely *asinine*, regardless of whether or not this person has "the machine behind them."
> 
> If you think that Styles, Rusev, Wyatt, or Cesaro would have done any better in the situation Rollins was put in, you're fooling yourself.


 You can twist it however you like, the WWE gave Rollins the ball and he took it nowhere. Give Punk the same position and booking and he would have knocked it out of the park (either in the ring or on the mic) because he is an elite talent.

As for the dislike for Dean, it's clear as day the guy is not a good look. He looks terrible in the ring and has a terrible hobo look which for some reason a lot of girls like.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> You can twist it however you like, the WWE gave Rollins the ball and he took it nowhere. Give Punk the same position and booking and he would have knocked it out of the park (either in the ring or on the mic) because he is an elite talent.
> 
> As for the dislike for Dean, it's clear as day the guy is not a good look. He looks terrible in the ring and has a terrible hobo look which for some reason a lot of girls like.


There's no "twisting" of anything. Rollins was booked into the ground during his reign, and it's as simple as that. I said it in my previous post, but I will reiterate- Thinking that booking someone the way Rollins was booked during his title reign is a proper way to gauge their marketability is fucking idiotic. Every person on this board with a decent head on their shoulders seems to realize this.

As for Ambrose, you kind of just confirmed my point. Your prediction of him failing is based solely on the fact that you don't like him.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> You can twist it however you like, the WWE gave Rollins the ball and he took it nowhere. Give Punk the same position and booking and he would have knocked it out of the park (either in the ring or on the mic) because he is an elite talent.
> 
> As for the dislike for Dean, it's clear as day the guy is not a good look. He looks terrible in the ring and has a terrible hobo look which for some reason a lot of girls like.


Most people in this thread have the common sense to realize the simple fact that ratings are not going to suddenly go up if you push certain people, which includes all the people you're pretending to be upset about not being in the main event as well.

And if you've become one of those 'LOOK' marks (or pretending to, to justify your dislike of certain wrestlers), You should have no complaints about a guy like Reigns being in the main event.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THREE AIN'T ENOUGH said:


> Most people in this thread have the common sense to realize the simple fact that ratings are not going to suddenly go up if you push certain people, which includes all the people you're pretending to be upset about not being in the main event as well.
> 
> And if you've become one of those 'LOOK' marks (or pretending to, to justify your dislike of certain wrestlers), You should have no complaints about a guy like Reigns being in the main event.


 Reigns has a great look, the issue with him is connecting with the fans. The look is useless if you can't connect with fans. To be at the top of the company, you need both.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> Reigns has a great look, the issue with him is connecting with the fans. The look is useless if you can't connect with fans. To be at the top of the company, you need both.


I agree with you partially, in the sense that having the look is a good attribute that might make it easier for a wrestler to connect with the fans, but useless if it doesn't help you achieve that. You don't necessarily need a megastar look to be at the top of the company, just a look that works for the performer, or helps him connect with the audience. Look at Hogan, he wasn't the most handsome guy in the world, yet he almost singlehandedly made wrestling mainstream.

Just like the look, having a high level wrestling ability is also a nice bonus to have, but not something you necessarily need to connect with an audience. Hogan can be used as an example here once again.

There's nobody on the roster that ticks all the boxes. Some wrestlers on the roster have charisma, but might not be world class wrestlers. While others may be fantastic wrestlers, but might not have charisma/look/talking ability. So if I use your methodology to try and discredit every performer I don't like based on the one attribute they might not have, then nobody deserves to be at the top of the company.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> There's no "twisting" of anything. Rollins was booked into the ground during his reign, and it's as simple as that. I said it in my previous post, but I will reiterate- Thinking that booking someone the way Rollins was booked during his title reign is a proper way to gauge their marketability is fucking idiotic. Every person on this board with a decent head on their shoulders seems to realize this.
> 
> As for Ambrose, you kind of just confirmed my point. Your prediction of him failing is based solely on the fact that you don't like him.


Actually, you could easily argue that Rollins did make 2015 work. Ratings and attendance during his reign were comfortably higher than they have been ALL of this year.

I doubt you'll see certain folks bring that up, though.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Actually, you could easily argue that Rollins did make 2015 work. Ratings and attendance during his reign were comfortably higher than they have been ALL of this year.
> 
> I doubt you'll see certain folks bring that up, though.


Ratings aside, I think that Rollins did as well or better than anyone else could have possibly done, given the circumstances. 

I salivate at the idea of a face Rollins getting a decent title run in 2017. He doesn't need the title right now, as he's doing fantastic work without it (WWE seems to book him a lot better without the title for whatever reason), and he has a massive story arc with Triple H waiting for him after he's done with Ambrose and Reigns. 2017 though? Absolutely. There's huge money in a babyface Rollins holding the gold.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> Ratings aside, I think that Rollins did as well or better than anyone else could have possibly done, given the circumstances.
> 
> I salivate at the idea of a face Rollins getting a decent title run in 2017. He doesn't need the title right now, as he's doing fantastic work without it (WWE seems to book him a lot better without the title for whatever reason), and he has a massive story arc with Triple H waiting for him after he's done with Ambrose and Reigns. 2017 though? Absolutely. There's huge money in a babyface Rollins holding the gold.


Also, it was done to make people happy when he lost the title, so they would be happy when someone took the title off of him. And, that obviously basckfired on them BIG time. So yeah, Rollins did better than he should've with that. Probably better than WWE wanted him to do. The fact that he's as over as he is today is beautiful. Karma..


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Also, it was done to make people happy when he lost the title, so they would be happy when someone took the title off of him. And, that obviously basckfired on them BIG time. So yeah, Rollins did better than he should've with that. *Probably better than WWE wanted him to do.*


Considering that he's been getting huge babyface pops since his return, despite the fact that he's still a heel, and that half the fans are clamoring for him to get a run as the top babyface in the company, I'd say that's a pretty safe assumption (although I'm sure Trips is pretty thrilled about it behind closed doors  )


----------



## Swissblade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The whole "it" thing is so lame, but how the fuck doesn't Bray have "it"?


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It still amazes me that Cena is able to have what is essentially the exact same feud every 2 years and somehow people still eat it up. 

2016 - Styles
2013 - Bryan
2011 - Punk

You could even argue that in 2015 it was Owens/Rollins, 2014 it was Wyatt, 2012 it was Ryback. Very similar promos and almost identical purpose for the feud even happening. Yet here we are with Styles/Cena and it still has people tuning in, albeit a lot less than in previous years but that's not totally Cena's fault.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> It still amazes me that Cena is able to have what is essentially the exact same feud every 2 years and somehow people still eat it up.
> 
> 2016 - Styles
> 2013 - Bryan
> 2011 - Punk
> 
> You could even argue that in 2015 it was Owens/Rollins, 2014 it was Wyatt, 2012 it was Ryback. Very similar promos and almost identical purpose for the feud even happening. Yet here we are with Styles/Cena and it still has people tuning in, albeit a lot less than in previous years but that's not totally Cena's fault.


You're right. It is the same feud repeating itself. Next year, it'll probably be Reigns/Cena. 

I do like Cena/Styles though, even though it's repetitive. I think Styles has done a good job so far with his heel turn (even though he should still be a face IMO).


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> You're right. It is the same feud repeating itself. Next year, it'll probably be Reigns/Cena.
> 
> I do like Cena/Styles though, even though it's repetitive. I think Styles has done a good job so far with his heel turn (even though he should still be a face IMO).


 Why would Reigns have that feud?

Its the "Indie Guy management didn't want" vs "Mr WWE" feud

If they still want to push hum hard, Balor will be next.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BehindYou said:


> Why would Reigns have that feud?
> 
> Its the "Indie Guy management didn't want" vs "Mr WWE" feud
> 
> If they still want to push hum hard, Balor will be next.


I think WWE will use Roman's time in FCW and stretch it to make it seem like he started from the bottom and now wants to replace Cena. I don't think it makes sense but it's the WWE Logic thing to do IMO. 

I wouldn't mind Balor/Cena.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> You're right. It is the same feud repeating itself. Next year, it'll probably be Reigns/Cena.
> 
> I do like Cena/Styles though, even though it's repetitive. I think Styles has done a good job so far with his heel turn (even though he should still be a face IMO).


It is the same feud. And when they let Cena go in on these guys on the mic, none of them can really hold their own or fire back. Even Punk got absolutely demolished in that promo where Cena called him irrelevant. They all go the same in the matches too. Cena loses the first match and then goes on to beat the guy twice afterwards. Same story, same format, same outcome. I'm a Cena fan but it is what it is. 



BehindYou said:


> Why would Reigns have that feud?
> 
> Its the "Indie Guy management didn't want" vs "Mr WWE" feud
> 
> If they still want to push hum hard, Balor will be next.


When Cena and Reigns feud I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Cena assume the role of 'The WWE Universe may hate me but they still respect me. Nobody respects you' type of thing. The face that runs the place, right? He's going to fucking bury Roman so badly on the mic because I doubt he'll be restricted. It grated on my nerves that HHH was forced to go out and cut the same fucking promo about Roman every week, talking about how good he is, because he'd tear him apart if allowed to cut a real promo. But Cena doesn't do that in his programs. Guaranteed they'll have a face to face, Roman will get one good line in and Cena will likely annihilate him right after. I'd almost bet money on it.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> It is the same feud. And when they let Cena go in on these guys on the mic, none of them can really hold their own or fire back. Even Punk got absolutely demolished in that promo where Cena called him irrelevant. They all go the same in the matches too. Cena loses the first match and then goes on to beat the guy twice afterwards. Same story, same format, same outcome. I'm a Cena fan but it is what it is.
> 
> 
> 
> *When Cena and Reigns feud I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Cena assume the role of 'The WWE Universe may hate me but they still respect me. Nobody respects you' type of thing. *The face that runs the place, right? He's going to fucking bury Roman so badly on the mic because I doubt he'll be restricted. It grated on my nerves that HHH was forced to go out and cut the same fucking promo about Roman every week, talking about how good he is, because he'd tear him apart if allowed to cut a real promo. But Cena doesn't do that in his programs. Guaranteed they'll have a face to face, Roman will get one good line in and Cena will likely annihilate him right after. I'd almost bet money on it.


That's a great angle and true for the most part. 

Cena is going to kill Roman on the mic; for the obvious reasons and the ones you stated. Your prediction is most likely what's going to happen. Cena has a bit more freedom than most on the roster. The Rock is the only other exception.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Everyone calling it "Deans segment" would have been front and center labeling it "The Shield" segment if it'd performed higher. The passive aggressive Reigns fans are absolutely hilarious. It's bizarre how clearly threatened Ambrose makes some feel. I don't think one person will swing the tide but ratings jumping to their highest point in 9 weeks after Roman finally dropped it and Ambrose won says a lot more than any breakdown and you know it does, which is why you're crossing your fingers and hoping silently that he fails.


Throw the machine behind the guy for two years. Let him stand shoulder to shoulder with John for every breast cancer awareness segment. Let him sit with the likes of Sting, Flair and Shawn Michaels at WM Access and sign autographs. Put his face on 90% of your adverts and then give him two consecutive WM main events and then we can have a candid discussion about numbers. It's almost akin to a track race with first runner to complete 4 laps being declared the winner. Runner A gets the whistle 90 seconds before Runner B and as Runner A begins his fourth and final lap, Runner B -- who was forced into a late start -- is on his second. Meanwhile, those on the sidelines remark about it proving Runner A is a faster sprinter than Runner B. :lol Its disingenuous.


That said, the ratings tonight will say a lot. As far as demos goes, they were losing the 18 - 49 males at a rapid pace, so it's a good sign that they seem to be growing interested again.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Blaming Roman is the easy way out.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Actually, you could easily argue that Rollins did make 2015 work. Ratings and attendance during his reign were comfortably higher than they have been ALL of this year.
> 
> I doubt you'll see certain folks bring that up, though.


:rollins4 
Crazy that he was getting killed for those numbers last year. This years numbers have been a lot worse and it just seems more quiet and when it isn't it's people trying to put the blame on guys like Zayn and Owens lel.

Tomorrow will be interesting for sure. Agree with @Lothario about the passive agressive fans. I can see every excuse in the book if the numbers are actually good tomorrow. Some barely post in here when he wasn't proved to draw in the casuals so we'll see.


----------



## Chloe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LELRATINGS. :kobelol


----------



## LilOlMe

I would still like to know if quarter hours have always only been released for males 18-49. Someone answer, please.

Also, it's entertaining that Wade started asking for these after Cena came back. He's always defended Cena business-wise, so I wonder if it's him trying to prove a point?


----------



## LilOlMe

Love & Hip Hop was the number rated show (18-49 demo), and it was on at 8 pm, btw.

_That's_ one of the reasons Raw did better later on. Less competition. Things shouldn't be viewed in a vacuum.

Having said that, this show lost 700,000 viewers from last year's post-MITB show. There's not much to crow about from any corner. Lots of goodwill has been lost over the past few years.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> Meltzer was asked about the Ambrose number on Twitter, and he said the first segment during daylight savings will rarely be top, unless the show sucks bad.


I think this post was glossed over and with breakdowns looking to be more at the ready nowadays, they should be acknowledged more often.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Are we still discussing everything about the ratings except the fact that Wrestling is dying?


----------



## sarcasma

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well, we will see if Ambrose still draws...he was in the dreaded 3rd hour.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



sarcasma said:


> Well, we will see if Ambrose still draws...he was in the dreaded 3rd hour.


Not to mention, we have to see what type of viewers decide to stick around after arguably WOTY ( worst of the year) segment of Miz/Kane .


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Are we still discussing everything about the ratings except the fact that Wrestling is dying?


I almost agree -- except wrestling isn't just dying, WWE is killing it. And not in the good way.


----------



## MillionDollarChamp

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

when do the ratings normally come out?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

When it's dark enough to not feel ashamed.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Are we still discussing everything about the ratings except the fact that Wrestling is dying?


*Hey now, wrestling isn't dying. 

ROH is doing great, ICW is about to break last year's record of highest attendance for a UK promotion in 30+ years, NJPW has been selling out shows recently (except for Dominion, which only did 1,200 less than last year), not to mention promotions like Progress, Dragon Gate, & RevPro getting more and more attention, etc.

Wrestling is gonna be fine.*


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



MillionDollarChamp said:


> when do the ratings normally come out?


Usually around 4 eastern time.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Usually around 4 eastern time.


I see @JonnyAceLaryngitis online. So, any minute now.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I see @JonnyAceLaryngitis online. So, any minute now.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People in the ratings thread like 










I expect similar results for the most part. There is zero competition. So there is every little reason to have any notable drop offs.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Don't let me down.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> There is zero competition. So there is every little reason to have any notable drop offs.


*Challenge accepted!* :vince5


----------



## #PushBrayOffACliff

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> People in the ratings thread like


More like this.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I expect a noticeable drop for next week's RAW since it falls on July 4.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm expecting that this week will be pretty similar to last, with the small possibility of a tiny bump. No more NBA & NHL playoffs to complete with and the fall/spring TV lineup has been done for a few months now.


----------



## MillionDollarChamp

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Excuses piling up


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I expect a drop because the lacking post PPV increase.


----------



## MillionDollarChamp

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I seen on twitter that ratings are delayed until Wednesday morning


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Uh oh, hysterics are now postponed to tomorrow









:lol Many buttholes were clenching in anticipation i bet.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.096M
H2-3.173M
H3-3.011M
3H-3.093M*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Excuses piling up


This thread has been rejuvinated, somewhat, since Dean won the title. Before that, it was practically dead. Odd.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

@JonnyAceLaryngitis comes in with the ratings!


----------



## #PushBrayOffACliff

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw remained above three million, the jump of the post ppv disappeared but remained above the three million


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Half a million drop off with no competition. Goddammit!
With a proper Game on, that would most likely be 2.X million for all three hours.

:wtf


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

too high


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.096M
> H2-3.173M
> H3-3.011M
> 3H-3.093M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+2.49%/+0.077M)
H3 Vs H2 (-5.11%/-0.162M)
H3 Vs H1 (-2.75%/-0.085M)
6/27/16 Vs 6/20/16 (-10.79%/-0.374M)*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hour 1 not good for the 2nd week in a row. Kind of surprised Hour 3 didn't slip below 3 million. Hour 3 was BAD up until the main event. They did maintain their audience, though, all night.


----------



## #PushBrayOffACliff

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Next week will be July 4 :trips7


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The first hour drew 3.420 million viewers
-The second hour drew 3.562 million viewers
-The third hour drew 3.420 million viewers

That's last week


Omg nearly a half a million drop off? :enzo

I didn't expect that at all.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How is this good in any, note _any_, sense of the word?

They did a marginally worse number two weeks ago with tough competition. They do marginally better now with NO competition.

ALL three hours BARELY remained above 3 million. There is not even a bump of any kind for any Hour anymore.
If a steady viewership through all three hours means those are hardcores that watch no matter what, then a decline through all three hours means more fans quit watching.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Good. Me likey.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Two hours nearly went below 3 mill. :damn

Like people in here have said, it doesn't matter who's champion. And to think next week is the 4th of July show. I can't wait to see the rating for that.*


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn, those are some shitty ratings lol. Guess it doesn't matter who they put the belt on, they've pissed away too much of their audience at this stage.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw has actually been quite decent the past two weeks, too. Smackdown was good last week, too. The main event angle is the best it's been in quite sometime. The quality of the show has increased in the past 2 weeks.

Perhaps they should've given Dean a SUPER push before he won the title. Nah. Just would've been another super failure, anyway. They ran away their audience.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE RAW Viewership With Dean Ambrose Vs. AJ Styles In The Main Event?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's WWE RAW, featuring AJ Styles vs. WWE World Heavyweight Champion Dean Ambrose in the main event, drew 3.093 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.467 million viewers for the post-Money In the Bank episode.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.096 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.173 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.011 million viewers.
RAW was #3 on cable for the night in viewership, behind Rizolli & Isles and Major Crimes, and #3 in the 18-49 demographic, behind Love & Hip-Hop and Black Ink Crew.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ership-with-dean-ambrose-vs-aj-styles-in-the/


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> This thread has been rejuvinated, somewhat, since Dean won the title. Before that, it was practically dead. Odd.


New marks to defend the current champ and old marks who stopped posting here when their champ failed :bjpenn


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Only #3 ? :lol

Welp, can't say that they didn't deserve this shit.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No :rollins vs :reigns2 to save them










:lol nah, that's a god awful drop off. Nearly 500,000 with zero competition? How the fuck?

@Iron Man. Why are you here every week when you shit on people for even posting in this thread :lol 

Shield can't draw shit :lmao it keeps getting worse and worse. NFL season gonna slaughter them


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Gonna get nasty in the fall when they'll only have half the roster available and with the NFL breathing down their necks. They're probably going to panic and put the belt back on Brock.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> The first hour drew 3.420 million viewers
> -The second hour drew 3.562 million viewers
> -The third hour drew 3.420 million viewers
> 
> That's last week
> 
> 
> Omg nearly a half a million drop off? :enzo
> 
> I didn't expect that at all.


*Told ya!* :vince5


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *Two hours nearly went below 3 mill. :damn
> 
> Like people in here have said, it doesn't matter who's champion. And to think next week is the 4th of July show. I can't wait to see the rating for that.*


Gotta be a new record with everybody's favourite all-american rooting for those cheap pops.

:hogan 

Nope, sorry ...

:cena5

Record low that is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

TBH, as long as the main event keeps being pretty good, I'm okay with it. This is the best everyone in the main event has been booked in quite some time. They just waited wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy too long to do it. This is how everyone should've been booked from the START. But Vince with his hard-ons for people..

And to think people thought 2014 and then 2015 were the bottom of the barrel. Welcome to the DISASTER of 2016. Worst year in company history with shit people DON'T want to see all year long.

:ha


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No one man is going to be able to fix years worth of a downward spiral due to poor writing and just general shit. lol

Jericho's debut promo, which is funny seeing as they were at their peak then, is exactly the situation they are in now.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Raw has actually been quite decent the past two weeks, too. Smackdown was good last week, too. The main event angle is the best it's been in quite sometime. The quality of the show has increased in the past 2 weeks.
> 
> Perhaps they should've given Dean a SUPER push before he won the title. Nah. Just would've been another super failure, anyway. They ran away their audience.


I don't know. Aren't Dean, AJ and Seth apparently MUCH more popular than Roman according to everyone. And AJ and Dean would easily out draw him? 

They have every demographic loving them! 

It's ok, you can say Romans name you know? He's not the boogeyman. He won't appear in your room if you write his name 3 times :lol 

Obviously the main event storyline ain't that hot or shows ain't that good enough if you drop by over 400,000 lol


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> This thread has been rejuvinated, somewhat, since Dean won the title. *Before that, it was practically dead. Odd.*



Is it really? Lol. A lot of recent activity is due to an influx of Reigns fans. It's not really a mystery as to why they were absent since WM but are now interested in the same thread they avoided for nine weeks. :lol


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Gonna get nasty in the fall when they'll only have half the roster available and with the NFL breathing down their necks. They're probably going to panic and put the belt back on Brock.


Goodell could kill the wwe if he booked Brady's 1st game back to be a Monday night game :brady3

Regardless, NFL is gonna squash Raw whether it's with crap teams like Chicago or great teams like the Packers or Pats.


----------



## Born of Osiris

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A shit product produces shit ratings.

Holy fucking shit what a revelation :wow


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's going to take a while to dig themselves out of the hole that Reigns put them in. They'll probably see spikes here and there depending on how stupid/not stupid their booking is, until they find a legit top guy again. I think their goal for now should be preventing the perpetual SLIDE they were on under Roman Reigns. They don't have to increase viewers yet, just stop losing them by the mass numbers he was losing them at.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> I don't know. Aren't Dean, AJ and Seth apparently MUCH more popular than Roman according to everyone. And AJ and Dean would easily out draw him?
> 
> They have every demographic loving them!
> 
> It's ok, you can say Romans name you know? He's not the boogeyman. He won't appear in your room if you write his name 3 times :lol
> 
> Obviously the main event storyline ain't that hot or shows ain't that good enough if you drop by over 400,000 lol


Too late now. They pushed him down everyone's throats all year long, and now a sudden title change from out of nowhere? Too little, too late. 2016 has been the biggest disaster in company history and it corresponded with a HUGE push that chased all the casuals away. This is why people are on here week in and week out, not to troll, but to say that every passing week Vince was pissing it away even further than it already been pissed away. Where were you all of these months? It's their/his mess. Now he/they have to deal with it.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> It's going to take a while to dig themselves out of the hole that Reigns put them in. They'll probably see spikes here and there depending on how stupid/not stupid their booking is, *until they find a legit top guy again.* I think their goal for now should be preventing the perpetual SLIDE they were on under Roman Reigns. They don't have to increase viewers yet, just stop losing them by the mass numbers he was losing them at.


It probably won't matter since they pissed away the opportunity to make Bryan and Punk into megastars despite both of them transcending the WWE bubble. We don't have anyone on the roster with that ability right now.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last week's rating was roughly 500,000 viewers up from what they'd been doing, so this isn't so much a drop as it was that last week was a spike.

This rating was more status quo from what they'd be doing and is probably more evidence that the NBA playoffs/finals didn't effect things nearly as much as people thought.

Last week, they gave away a PPV main event for free on TV and shook things up (and it was also a very good Raw) so of course the rating was going to be up.

This week, they spun their wheels and didn't do anything relevant or interesting. The rating is no surprise. 

Reigns as champion, though, was taking them to sub 3.0 viewership levels regularly, and we haven't hit that since he dropped the belt (but will next week due to the holiday), so it isn't all bad yet.


----------



## Born of Osiris

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Too late now. They pushed him down everyone's throats all year long, and now a sudden title change from out of nowhere? Too little, too late. 2016 has been the biggest disaster in company history and it corresponded with a HUGE push that chased all the casuals away. This is why people are on here week in and week out, not to troll, but to say that every passing week Vince was pissing it away even further than it already been pissed away. Where were you all of these months? It's their/his mess. Now he/they have to deal with it.


Reigns fans love to duck away like cowards whenever it suits them.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> I don't know. Aren't Dean, AJ and Seth apparently MUCH more popular than Roman according to everyone. And AJ and Dean would easily out draw him?
> 
> They have every demographic loving them!
> 
> It's ok, you can say Romans name you know? He's not the boogeyman. He won't appear in your room if you write his name 3 times :lol
> 
> Obviously the main event storyline ain't that hot or shows ain't that good enough if you drop by over 400,000 lol


+1

To add to this hot take, no one is really a draw. Not, X, Y or Z. Putting Dean in the main event didn't help. It's not just Roman Reigns scaring eyeballs away. 

Personally, I thought RAW was overall filler saved by only a few segments.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Isnt half the roster going to be away in Japan during the 4th of July show?
Either way WWE are going to raise the white flag during that and put even less effort than they already do.

Cant emphasize how much I want NFL season to start already, this thread is going to be like Disneyland.:sk


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> It's going to take a while to dig themselves out of the hole that Reigns put them in. They'll probably see spikes here and there depending on how stupid/not stupid their booking is, until they find a legit top guy again. I think their goal for now should be preventing the perpetual SLIDE they were on under Roman Reigns. They don't have to increase viewers yet, just stop losing them by the mass numbers he was losing them at.


They're almost under 3 million with a brand new champ everyone says is way more over than Roman and has every demographic on his side. 

This 3.5 million knows Dean is champ and over 400,000 of them still left the next week. Let's pretend like no one knows Dean is champ now and Roman is suspended :lol 

@Lothario

And the influx of Roman fans? You mean Empress and I? The rest of you are cheering on Dean as a draw and shitting on Roman lol Where are the dozen Roman fans amongst the 30+ lurking the thread?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I remember when people were saying Cena would draw when he came back.

:ha

How'd that work out?


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well they didn't really lose viewers through out the show :quimby


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

NFL Season is gonna be a slaughter.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Hit said:


> Reigns fans love to duck away like cowards whenever it suits them.


Your salt levels since yesterday is too damn high! :lol 

Go breathe somewhere. Take a walk. Enjoy the fresh air. You've been ODn lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Lothario said:


> Is it really? Lol. A lot of recent activity is due to an influx of Reigns fans. It's not really a mystery as to why they were absent since WM but are now interested in the same thread they avoided for nine weeks. :lol


Literally the very same week that Roman fucks up and Dean wins the title it starts up again :lmao I don't even have a dog in this fight, but it's funny.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I remember when people were saying Cena would draw when he came back.
> 
> :ha
> 
> How'd that work out?


He's the only draw, just not as much as he used to be. 

The second hour was the highest and it featured Cena/Rollins. I'm sure the breakdowns will show this was most likely the peak viewing moment of RAW.

Overall, Cena isn't at peak powers and things will have to change. Maybe the brand split will get some creativity flowing backstage.

*EDIT:* 

Why are Roman fans being specifically called out? I've been here. Also, a lot of of his detractors did a happy dance last week when RAW had a bump. You celebrated when ratings fell under Reigns as champion. Now it's happening to Dean. I'm not going to blame Dean for bad ratings but he's not the savior some of you thought he was going to be.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's not the record breaking 800k drop they got with Sheamus and Reigns in December. Either way, they're on the right track. Seth is finally standing on his own two and Dean is actually bring booked as a credible champion. Seth & Ambrose pull better numbers despite not being the men that headlined two consecutive Wrestlemanias, so the future is bright for the pair if the company continues to back them with the book.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> He's the only draw, just not as much as he used to be.
> 
> The second hour was the highest and it featured Cena/Rollins. I'm sure the breakdowns will show this was most likely the peak viewing moment of RAW.
> 
> Overall, Cena isn't at peak powers and things will have to change. Maybe the brand split will get some creativity flowing backstage.


If he was a draw, they'd be averaging alot more than they have since he's been back. He's only been back for like a month now, too. His TV drawing days have decreased big time. Barely anything there these days.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I thin its safe to say that the "dean Ambrose bump" was realy just your normal post PPV bump.
No one is a draw, not Rollins, not Ambrose and certainly not Reign, not even Cena or AJ are a draw.
Maybe Brock will be a draw again after his match, but that's thanks to UFC not WWE lol

No one will be a draw as long as WWE are creatively Bankrupt.
Stone cold wouldn't be able to be a draw without being allowed to express himself and taking part in hot feuds like with VKM.


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last weeks Raw was always going to go up as it was post PPV, now we are just back to normal.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They literally destroyed the entire roster to make Reigns and Brock look really strong. 

To their credit, they did have Seth pin Reigns clean at Money in the Bank, but it's still a wasteland when you feed two big monsters (not to mention Stephanie McMahon too) and leave us with nothing when they're absent. Cena has done nothing but lose since returning except the Karl Anderson match last week, so he's off the hook with me for now.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Only guy who can really spike ratings at this point is The Rock.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They killed everyone for 2 guys, and now these two guys aren't even draws, either. It's on Vince.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> If he was a draw, they'd be averaging alot more than they have since he's been back. He's only been back for like a month now, too. His TV drawing days have decreased big time. Barely anything there these days.


I've already conceded that Cena isn't the draw he used to be. But I do think he helps keep RAW afloat. His segments are usually the highest rated on the show.


----------



## Born of Osiris

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Only guy who can really spike ratings at this point is The Rock.


Indeed. Brock can't even do anything because he's become "just another guy".


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I've already conceded that Cena isn't the draw he used to be. But I do think he helps keep RAW afloat. His segments are usually the highest rated on the show.


Are they even afloat, though? I'll give them that they didn't slip below 3 million in Hour 3 like they did countless times earlier this year, but look at these numbers. They're pretty atrocious.


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Losing 400,000 is normal now? We'd kill Seth and Roman over such a drop lol Post PPV bumps don't die out in such large numbers the next week. 

Do you know how little fucks people have to give after last week's Raw to leave in such large quantity?

Again, you can't say Dean is way more popular and then his popularity not show up for him when he's champ. That makes zero sense. Theres NO competition. This is a number you pull during playoffs. NBA and NFL whooping your ass type shit. 

Shiiiiiiiet, put the belt back on Seth. At least he was still in respectable numbers :lol


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Gonna get nasty in the fall when they'll only have half the roster available and with the NFL breathing down their necks. They're probably going to panic and put the belt back on Brock.


 If Brock wins his UFC math convincingly and him than being champion doesn't move the needle, than nothing will.

But the win atleast is a big if.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Are they even afloat, though? I'll give them that they didn't slip below 3 million in Hour 3 like they did countless times earlier this year, but look at these numbers. They're pretty atrocious.


The numbers are bad. I just think they'd be worse without John Cena.


----------



## Trivette

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Mediocre numbers for a mediocre show. Last night's booking was entirely by the numbers and formulaic. Turned it off after Stephanie set up the matches as I knew exactly how they would end. And I was correct. No twists, no dynamics, no character development, and yet they wonder why people tune out. Last night proved that creative have no idea what to do without Reigns in the mix right now and it's pathetic.


----------



## sarcasma

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

As an Ambrose mark, these numbers hurt. I was really expecting better.


----------



## Born of Osiris

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Here comes the self-victim playing :lmao

"B-but if it was Roman!"


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> Losing 400,000 is normal now? We'd kill Seth and Roman over such a drop lol Post PPV bumps don't die out in such large numbers the next week.
> 
> Do you know how little fucks people have to give after last week's Raw to leave in such large quantity?
> 
> Again, you can't say Dean is way more popular and then his popularity not show up for him when he's champ. That makes zero sense. Theres NO competition. This is a number you pull during playoffs. NBA and NFL whooping your ass type shit.
> 
> Shiiiiiiiet, put the belt back on Seth. At least he was still in respectable numbers :lol


I don't think any of these guys are anymore popular than the other. The only two people booked strong are Cena and Reigns. Rollins was killed off last year. Dean has been a midcard geek up until recently. They've all been killed off. They're trying to rebuild them now, but it's going to take alot of time. Too much damage done. They've had even lower ratings than this and bigger drops. At least hour 3 stayed above 3 million which isn't something that's always been the case. Even if they put the belt back on Seth, he wont' draw like he did last year. They get lower and lower every year no matter who holds the title. Sad, but true.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I still don't understand why people insist on trying to pin ratings spikes and dips on an individual or individuals. The whole product is shit. The ratings are just a reflection of varying degrees of shit. 

Should be the new Monday night moniker -- RAW is Shit. And Tuesday, Shitstain. 

Can anybody tell I'm just a little down on WWE lately?


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Hit said:


> Reigns fans love to duck away like cowards whenever it suits them.


:Bayley


ShowStopper said:


> I remember when people were saying Cena would draw when he came back.
> 
> :ha
> 
> How'd that work out?


I always knew Cena drawing was a myth. While everyone bashed Punk for shitty ratings it was Cena who was the man. The guy who headlined just about everything. Wrestling is just about dead, there are no draws anymore. Taker, Brock and def not Dean Ambrose lel. Warned people not to start bigging up Dean because it was new champ, PPV bump and no LeGoat in the NBA Finals. WWE will have to do a lot to turn around these numbers.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Literally the very same week that Roman fucks up and Dean wins the title it starts up again :lmao I don't even have a dog in this fight, but it's funny.


It's just cowardly. Rollins was drug through the mud last year and I recall his fan base being there for the highs _and_ lows. Ratings fell off the face of the earth after Roman was crowned last November and by late Decemner, his entire fan base sans Empress had vacated the building like it was literally on fire. They hid out like Anne Frank in Nazi Germany while ratings *AND* live attendance plummeted(by 30%) and then want to show up and beat their chest after two weeks of a new champion. :lol 




I still maintain Ambrose has a higher ceiling and there's no chance his 9 weeks (if it goes that long) will approach the abysmal numbers the show saw under Romans tutelage. They did a lot of harm by forcing Roman despite the evident resistance from their fan base (as evidenced by the sharp drops in December) and it didn't help that they treated the rest of the card outside of the main event as an afterthought. They're on the right track and won't pull themselves out of the hole they dug over night, but the top of the card has a lot more life to it currently and it'll pay off if they continue building multiple performers in the same way they wasted two calendar years building one.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Since I'm a fair man and I did it to Roman:

"Holy shit, look at Dean 'no buys' Ambrose, the fucker couldn't draw at a flea market, its his fault the ratings are in the toilet, its his first reign and nobody cares at all, he's tanking this company."


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> *I always knew Cena drawing was a myth. While everyone bashed Punk for shitty ratings it was Cena who was the man. The guy who headlined just about everything*. Wrestling is just about dead, there are no draws anymore. Taker, Brock and def not Dean Ambrose lel. Warned people not to start bigging up Dean because it was new champ, PPV bump and no LeGoat in the NBA Finals. WWE will have to do a lot to turn around these numbers.


Preach!
:tucky


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/27 Raw Social Media – mixed bag result two episodes removed from MITB PPV*

Monday’s Raw was a mixed bag in terms of Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings for the second episode after Money in the Bank.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

June 27: Raw ranked #1 among series & specials on Monday night, edging ABC’s “The Bachelorette” as the head-to-head summer battle continues.

Raw generated 146,000 tweets, down slightly from last week’s post-PPV Twitter volume of 151,000. It was good enough to top ABC’s show with 141,000 tweets.

However, the number of unique authors increased to 35,000 from 31,000 last week.

It was the most uniques tweeting about Raw since Memorial Day on May 30.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #2 behind England vs. Iceland in the UEFA tournament.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06...xed-bag-result-two-episodes-removed-mitb-ppv/


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> They're almost under 3 million with a brand new champ everyone says is way more over than Roman and has every demographic on his side.
> 
> This 3.5 million knows Dean is champ and over 400,000 of them still left the next week. Let's pretend like no one knows Dean is champ now and Roman is suspended :lol
> 
> @Lothario
> 
> And the influx of Roman fans? You mean Empress and I? The rest of you are cheering on Dean as a draw and shitting on Roman lol Where are the dozen Roman fans amongst the 30+ lurking the thread?


- I'm pretty sure "everyone" (who is this everyone? I'd like to meet them) is simply commenting on how Ambrose being a midcard jobber is STILL more over than Roman Reigns, who's been god-booked for the last two years. It's not so much a compliment to Ambrose as it is a reality check to Reigns, that you could put literally any guy from the roster in his spot and they'd do at the very worst, as bad as Reigns. Ambrose had his overness cut in half this past year, yet still remains more popular than Reigns. 

- You're attempting to cite two weeks of numbers to Dean Ambrose when we have two YEARS of Roman Reign's push where the numbers are a matter of record now, and he is the worst drawing top guy in history. Stop trying to antagonize Dean Ambrose fans as if they should feel bad about enjoying him or something, over him not causing a 3 point increase in two weeks. 

- You should recognize that WWE programming is scorched Earth dumpster fire right now. It got that way because of Roman Reigns push. Did you see the recent rumors in the Gen WWE section? SD is getting its own ring ropes, refs, title, roster, new opening, etc, and so is RAW. You know what THAT means? That means WWE's product has lost so much customer credibility that they are now in the process of rebranding it entirely. A reboot. WWE's version of "We're sorry we pushed Roman Reigns, please forget we ever did that." You can't SERIOUSLY expect numbers to start moving again until we are past the Roman Reigns debacle, and this company successfully re-brands and starts moving in different areas away from Roman Reigns. 

- Dean Ambrose probably isn't a big draw. None of the Shield guys are. WWE, under the Shield's singles push(es) the last few years have seen nothing but drops in not just viewers but QUALITY. These guys have massively underperformed. But at least the other two have valid excuses for it. There is no excuse for Roman Reign's complete and total failure, other than he's not a good pro wrestler.


----------



## RapShepard

Deadman's Hand said:


> *Two hours nearly went below 3 mill. :damn
> 
> Like people in here have said, it doesn't matter who's champion. And to think next week is the 4th of July show. I can't wait to see the rating for that.*


Put the belt on Vince Dammit lol


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

As last week showed, people tune into RAW late because they assume nothing relevant is going to happen at the beginning. Afterall, they are probably accustomed to seeing Shane or Stephanie come out and say something stupid about the "New Era" and what not. That's why last week started slow but gained steam.

So the same probably happened this week, even though the opening segment was awesome.

Moreover, I bet the Cena vs Rollins qtr hour had incredibly high ratings compared to the rest of the show. But once Cena lost because of the Club interference I bet a lot of people tuned out.

I did, because I knew Styles was gonna lose to Ambrose, so I chose to go out instead since I knew the outcome. If they actually went the 5 way championship match route, I bet the ratings would have been way higher.

Lastly, the dead crowd also kills ratings. If the crowd just went bonkers for anything, ratings would increase because that would cause casuals to tune in. Like it seriously matters. Even the Miz vs Kane would have good ratings if the crowd just went crazy for them for whatever reason.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> Lastly, the dead crowd also kills ratings. If the crowd just went bonkers for anything, ratings would increase because that would cause casuals to tune in. Like it seriously matters. Even the Miz vs Kane would have good ratings if the crowd just went crazy for them for whatever reason.


I actually agree that this makes a big difference. They have like...one hot crowd every two months. Ever since this Reigns era began, crowds have become deader and deader. It makes a huge difference on audiences when they have someone/something that they know ahead of time they're supposed to cheer for and have fun with. Look at the huge difference Enzo has made on WWE audiences. That's how simple it is.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I remember when people were saying Cena would draw when he came back.
> 
> :ha
> 
> How'd that work out?


When it comes to television numbers, John Cena hasn't been a draw for about 3-4 years now. Obviously he still sells big merch and draws house show numbers, but he doesn't boost TV numbers like he used to.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



RapShepard said:


> Put the belt on Vince Dammit lol


*Didn't Vince come back to TV last time ratings were tanking? It wouldn't surprise me if he gave himself another run with the belt.*


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *Didn't Vince come back to TV last time ratings were tanking? It wouldn't surprise me if he gave himself another run with the belt.*


" There's been a lot of talk recently about who the fans want to see and cheer for as champ. And after months of research I've finally discovered IT WAS ME UNIVERSE! IT WAS ME YOU WANTED ALL ALONG

Sent from my Z828 using Tapatalk


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So taking the belt off of Roman and creating that buzz lasted all of 1 week. Wow...Those 1st 2 hour numbers are awful. 

At this point, you expect the 3rd hour to close to dropping below the 3 mils. But the first 2 are pathetic.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> The numbers are bad. I just think they'd be worse without John Cena.


:uwut


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Holy Fook! Ratings were amazingly consistent,especially in the demo, consistently poor. Looks like "Doomsday" Dean :ambrose4has torn apart what the Supermen built. :supercena









Seriously, I don't see the brand split staunching the hemorrhaging ratings.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/27 Raw TV Ratings – big decline for second Raw after MITB*

Monday’s WWE Raw see-sawed back to the mid-2.0 TV ratings after drawing a relatively big audience last week following Money in the Bank.
*
WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking*

*June 27*: Monday’s Raw scored a 2.21 TV rating, down 10 percent from a 2.44 rating last week.

Looking inside the rating, the demographics fell by double-digit percentages after spiking last week.

Most concerning is males 18-34 falling 19 percent from last week to return to the pre-MITB levels when Raw was stuck in the doldrums.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.093 million viewers, down 11 percent from last week.

All three hours were stuck at about the same level down 400,000 viewers from last week’s individual hours.

First Hour: 3.096 million viewers
Second Hour: 3.173 million viewers
Third Hour: 3.011 million viewers (-5.1% from 2H)

It marks 15 consecutive weeks that the third hour has declined from the second hour, although it was not nearly as bad as pre-MITB declines.
*
Caldwell’s Analysis:* There’s a few different ways of looking at the big drop in viewership for the second episode after MITB. (1) WWE has signaled to the audience that Dean Ambrose is a temporary champion until Roman Reigns returns from suspension, hurting some of the hope the audience had for a major shift on top. (2) It doesn’t seem like anything significant will happen between now and Battleground since the main event is set. (3) It’s summer time and Raw feels skippable or in a holding pattern until the Draft and brand split. (4) Raw is just too long.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/06/28/627-raw-tv-ratings-big-decline-second-raw-mitb/


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> :uwut


My comment was about Cena having the most watched segments. The ratings are bad overall, but his breakdowns usually perform better than others. RAW would probably be worse off if it weren't for him and the recent numbers back up my argument.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE is stale crap. The whole show needs a makeover, it's getting desperate now—the overall presentation, gimmicks and booking are fucking trash beyond measure. 

This company is at 1995 levels of complete shit right now _without_ WCW and a talent at the level of Steve Austin to give them a much-needed kick up the ass. They are utterly fucked beyond belief without either of those things; history repeats itself minus two of the most important elements. 

With TV ratings and attendance down for live events, how long before RAW is getting the tarp treatment in the stands and we're watching them perform out of high school gymnasiums again, like we were 20 years ago? That is a real possibility because it has happened before. Nothing is a certainty in the world of wrestling. 

The whole company could be up shit creek without a paddle before you have time to blink.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At least they maintained viewers. That's pretty impressive, 3 million people didn't get tired of 3 hours. 

I was thinking that Kane stuff would have lost a lot of viewers.. that's where they lost me.


----------



## U can't b serious

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Monday Night Rawful


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cena's quarter hours aren't even that impressive. He's simply the best of a bad bunch, but his are by no means impressive, either. The guy returned a few weeks back and never once provided some huge bump that thought some might happen. He's not a TV draw anymore. There's plenty of evidence to back this up, this recent return helping aid in said evidence.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Shedding 10-11% in viewers is amazing and depressing at the same time. Raw actually held my interest this week, but I'm not a Nielsen member.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Shedding 10-11% in viewers is amazing and depressing at the same time. Raw actually held my interest this week, but I'm not a Nielsen member.


Same here. Show has been decent, not great, but decent the past 2 weeks. Even Cena is letting others get that shine. He is not a TV draw anymore (his most recent return backs that up), but he's been completely tolerable since his comeback. Kudos to him and those who book him on that. Booking, in general, has been solid recently.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Same here. Show has been decent, not great, but decent the past 2 weeks. Even Cena is letting others get that shine. He is not a TV draw anymore (his most recent return backs that up), but he's been completely tolerable since his comeback. Kudos to him and those who book him on that. Booking, in general, has been solid recently.


Gonna take a lot more decent Raws to start increasing ratings long-term. Most people who left probably realize the show will turn to shit any moment and opted not to stick around. That probably explains this week's drop more than anything imo.


----------



## The Bloodline

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope Smackdown doesn't feel like another version of Raw. I hope they take this opportunity to test out a new format. I would love if i felt like I was watching a different company. Otherwise besides it being shorter I don't see why their ratings would be any better.

The loyal bunch seems to be 3 million. Last year the loyal bunch seemed to be closer to 3.5 million. I wonder what the viewership will be in 6 months at this rate. WWE is too boring to get through unless you have pretty strong ties to it. Those will watch regardless, or at least try to force themselves to. I can't see them attracting new fans with this product thouvh. They basically are just holding on to their current built in fanbase. Any spike in viewers are just curious eyes that were watching and quit. Last week some came back and realized it's not worth it and didn't come back again.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Last Marauder said:


> They're almost under 3 million with a brand new champ everyone says is way more over than Roman and has every demographic on his side.
> 
> This 3.5 million knows Dean is champ and over 400,000 of them still left the next week. Let's pretend like no one knows Dean is champ now and Roman is suspended :lol
> 
> @Lothario
> 
> And the influx of Roman fans? You mean Empress and I? The rest of you are cheering on Dean as a draw and shitting on Roman lol Where are the dozen Roman fans amongst the 30+ lurking the thread?


The ratings are falling because the entire show is stale garbage, doesn't matter who the champion is. Put the belt Cena, Brock it won't fucking matter. It's the overall product that's the problem not who the champion is.

From top to bottom the show is almost unwatchable. Bland boring characters having matches for no reason or for worthless titles, the look and production of the show is essentially the same as it was in 1997.
I could probably write a short book on everything that's wrong with the product but back to the original point who the champion is is largely irrelevant especially in this day and age when the WWE has so much television time to fill that even if they had a marquee name as champion he wouldn't be on the screen for more than 20 minutes a week, what happens on the other 2 hours and 50 minutes of RAW ??


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The main event was a draw, because they maintained their rating throughout the 3 hours. People who watched from the beginning stayed around to watch the main event. Which is a good sign for Dean Ambrose and AJ Styles.

However.... The fact that only 3 million tuned in to begin with is not a good sign. People just didn't feel like watching RAW apparently, and that does reflect somewhat badly on Dean Ambrose since he is "The Guy" now and is meant to be a draw now that Roman is out of the picture for a while. Although its definitely not his fault alone. The whole show feels kind of stale, so people rightly assume they aren't really missing much.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The only people watching Raw were the ones saying see you next week to all the people who said they were done watching crap. It's still amazing that 3 million is all they can get now, the past mania and their decisions really killed their fanbase.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah, this pretty much confirms what I've been saying for a few years now (as well as some others), no one on the full time roster is a draw.

Also, I know everytime Rock is on Raw, there is a significant increase in ratings. But I am willing to bet anyone that if Rock was on Raw every single week like the rest of these guys, that eventually ratings would go back down to where they are now. And that's not even an insult to The Rock. Just a reflection on how everyone in WWE gets stale so quickly because the WWE product is so over-exposed these days and the booking is terrible, for the most part.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ZeroFear0 said:


> I hope Smackdown doesn't feel like another version of Raw. I hope they take this opportunity to test out a new format. I would love if i felt like I was watching a different company. Otherwise besides it being shorter I don't see why their ratings would be any better.
> 
> The loyal bunch seems to be 3 million. Last year the loyal bunch seemed to be closer to 3.5 million. I wonder what the viewership will be in 6 months at this rate. WWE is too boring to get through unless you have pretty strong ties to it. Those will watch regardless, or at least try to force themselves to. I can't see them attracting new fans with this product thouvh. They basically are just holding on to their current built in fanbase. Any spike in viewers are just curious eyes that were watching and quit. Last week some came back and realized it's not worth it and didn't come back again.


I hope that they also keep in mind that they might lose some more viewers once they do the brand split too. The whole concept is a massive change and shakeup, and considering their fanbase that is heavy on older folks, a selection of them will probably feel alienated with the change. 

They need to keep in mind that it's going to take a good amount of time and many solid months of programming to start growing any new fanbase whatsoever.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> The only people watching Raw were the ones saying see you next week to all the people who said they were done watching crap. It's still amazing that 3 million is all they can get now, the past mania and their decisions really killed their fanbase.


Yeah, it's no wonder why I don't see people use that lame joke anymore, it's because it's not applicable nowadays. :lol


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Cleaner said:


> I still don't understand why people insist on trying to pin ratings spikes and dips on an individual or individuals. The whole product is shit. The ratings are just a reflection of varying degrees of shit.
> 
> Should be the new Monday night moniker -- RAW is Shit. And Tuesday, Shitstain.
> 
> Can anybody tell I'm just a little down on WWE lately?


well someone has to take the blame, logically it should be Vince, but between the wrestlers, who better than the FOTC of the past 2 years, who's booking has been upsetting fans for fans, to the point of having him leave WM getting booed by 100T+ fans AS THE GOOD GUY. 

Was it so hard to push someone the crowd liked and wanted to see? 

People blaming Dean for not drawing when he's been booked like a star for only a couple of month, is ridiculous, are you the same people that shit on Zayn for not getting big pops in his first 2 weeks on RAW? Give it some time, and it's a freaking miracle the maintained viewership for the 3rd hour, considering AJ/Dean result was given away when Rollins pinned Cena, and the WOAT Miz/Kane segment happened in the 3rd hour.


----------



## TD_DDT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Doesn't matter who is champ. Product still generally sucks. Maybe 60 minutes of good content these days if you're lucky.


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I never understand when people blame 1 guy for the ratings. 1 guy isn't going to bring up ratings, 1 Good show won't bring up ratings, Raw as a whole just sucks. WWE just as to be good all together. 

WWE the last couple years were in the 4 ratings. The way WWE is right now that 4 isn't coming back.


----------



## Arkham258

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Fair warning, this whole post will probably sound like the thoughts of a crazy person.

I think one of WWE's problems is that so much of their roster has already been damaged beyond repair. It honestly wouldn't be a terrible idea to just future endeavor EVERYONE on the main roster. Build up an entirely new roster featuring NXT call ups and whoever you can pluck from the indies. There's a shit ton of amazing talent throughout the world that could EASILY replace EVERYONE on their main roster

The most exciting thing WWE could do now is just fucking start over, clean slate, with a bunch of talent you can make a good first impression with, then keep the momentum going for them through good booking and creative. WWE needs a reset....badly.

I'm sorry, but even guys like Ambrose, Rollins, Lynch, Wyatt, Charlotte, Cesaro, etc, etc, etc. have too much of the WWE stink on them at this point, not to mention has beens like Cena, Orton, Big Show, Kane, The Authority, etc, etc, etc. 

WWE is like moldy bread at this point. Build a fresh, new roster. Build new stars, give people some fresh faces that haven't already been ruined by 50/50 booking, garbage story lines, over exposure, and being emasculated by Stephanie McMahon. 

Then fucking FIRE EVERYONE IN CREATIVE. Remove Steph from creative control and fucking put Paul Heyman and Triple H in charge. Get Vince out of creative 100%. He no longer has any say in ANYTHING because he's a fucking delusional, out of touch, old geyser who is past his prime and irrelevant. 

Then advertise a Monday Night Raw like it's the first Raw ever, with a brand new roster comprised of new hires and NXT call ups and make it a fucking epic show, and make it FUCKING TWO HOURS. Cause that three hour bullshit needs to stop. Scrap Smackdown entirely. You only need 2 hours a week to push your stars without over exposing them. And drop NXT, since all of them will be on your main roster now. 

WWE needs a fucking make over, a fucking new wardrobe, and it needs to drop about 50 fucking pounds. Then let all of the fans who have stopped watching look at your product like an old ex girlfriend who is looking hotter now than she ever did before. She stopped drinking and she fucking has her shit together again.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That is crazy tbh.

I don't believe anyone is beyond help, beyond being salvaged. With good booking, time and patience it can be done. Obviously it won't happen with the current management at the WWE but with the right people it could be done.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:shane *: We need a solution to the ratings problem dad*

:HHH2 *: Yes dad, come September we're going to get raped by the NFL*

:vince *: Did someone say rape?*

:HHH *: Focus Vince!*

:vince4 *: Right, sorry. Ok. We need a plan to increase ratings...*

:HHH2 *: What about if we start to build some stories...*

:vince5 *: I have it!*

:shane2 *: What?*

:vince3 *: We should split the rosters so Raw has even less star power and then keep Roman as champion until Wrestlemania 33!*

:trips10 *: .............*

:vince3 *: And Shane! We'll pretend you beat The Undertaker and let you run Raw anyway!*

:trips7 :trips7 :trips7


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Phenomenal One said:


> AJ and Rollins were excellent in the ending.
> 
> AJ calling the magic killer and kneeling over Cena was a brilliantly heelish.
> 
> Then Rollins not being one want be upstaged hitting Dean with another pedigree and then placing his boot over Dean's head :done


Wrong thread dude. The AJ fan club is that way >>>>


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Are they really planning on tanking next weeks Raw?

I hear a number of stars will be over in Japan as well.... Seems like a dead certain record low rating incoming.

This suspension might have been the best thing that ever happened to Roman, he's going to be avoiding this Raw and won't have the tag of being the champion for the lowest rating Raw of all time.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If Lesnar beats Hunt, he'll probably come back and immediately win the title from Dean.

"I beat you at WrestleMania, give me a title shot."


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> If Lesnar beats Hunt, he'll probably come back and immediately win the title from Dean.
> 
> "I beat you at WrestleMania, give me a title shot."


 If he loses, who does he take on? Orton?


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ratings drop definitely ain't surprising just look at the brand split, they haven't even done a storyline for it or why in the hell is it even happening in the first place. Not to mention they've barely brought it up we don't know how anything works not even who are running the shows.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheGeneticFreak said:


> The ratings drop definitely ain't surprising just look at the brand split, they haven't even done a storyline for it or why in the hell is it even happening in the first place. Not to mention they've barely brought it up we don't know how anything works not even who are running the shows.


I think the first one to bring it up in kayfabe was Summer Rae on Main Event.

:LOL


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If you aren't a hardcore wrestling fan, then why would you bother watching RAW when there are so many other better shows you could be watching? They need to realize that the shit they put on every week is stale and simply can't keep up with all the good TV shows of today. I'm not only talking about TV either but even on streaming services as well. They have fallen so far behind it's not funny, and if you want somebody to blame then it all comes back to one out of touch 70 year old man who simply doesn't know how to run a show according to today's standards.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Definition of Technician said:


> well someone has to take the blame, logically it should be Vince, but between the wrestlers, who better than the FOTC of the past 2 years, who's booking has been upsetting fans for fans, to the point of having him leave WM getting booed by 100T+ fans AS THE GOOD GUY.
> 
> Was it so hard to push someone the crowd liked and wanted to see?
> 
> People blaming Dean for not drawing when he's been booked like a star for only a couple of month, is ridiculous, are you the same people that shit on Zayn for not getting big pops in his first 2 weeks on RAW? Give it some time, and it's a freaking miracle the maintained viewership for the 3rd hour, considering AJ/Dean result was given away when Rollins pinned Cena, and the WOAT Miz/Kane segment happened in the 3rd hour.


Because the ratings have been mostly dropping for years, regardless of who the FOTC is this week. Yeah there have been a few spikes here and there, but it's been a downward trend no matter who's champion or whatever. No one has been able to sustain even a leveling off, never mind an upward trend. I don't even think it's who they decide to push -- it's how the whole shitpile is presented. 

I've also come to the conclusion that they've lost all touch with how to build a feud. In the good old days, they'd build guys up separately, giving them some other kind of interaction to build up heat other than a match, so that fans would be chomping at the bit for the two guys to finally get in the ring and have at it. All they do now is repeat the same goddamn match over and over, and call that a feud. Not to beat a dead horse, but again it's another example of dead-ass lazy booking. fans are sick of it, and while they won't all jump ship at once, they're still slowly and consistently jumping ship.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*EVEN WITH WEAK TV COMPETITION, RAW RATINGS DROP TO 3.09 MILLION VIEWERS*

After last week's current day strong RAW number following the surprising Dean Ambrose WWE title win, ratings came down for the Monday, June 27th edition of the show on a night without strong television competition.

Raw did 3.09 million viewers, the lowest number on a night without major team sports competition since 1997 . That's the second lowest numbers outside of football season or major holidays, beating only the 2.96 million viewers drawn two weeks ago against game five of the NBA playoffs.

The ratings pattern showed that people were at a low level of interest going in with a unusually weak first hour. There was some second hour growth, and a small third hour decline. However, it wasn't the usual big third hour drop so the fans who were there stuck through the show for the most part. 

Raw was third for the night on cable, trailing TNT's Rizzoli & Isles (4.36 million viewers) and TNT's Major Crimes (3.99 million viewers), barely beating Fox News Channel's The O'Reilly Factor (3.05 million viewers).

Viewership dropped 11 percent from last week, showing the big gain caused by the post-Money in the Bank buzz didn't sustain.

The Olympic swimming trials on NBC did 5.17 million viewers, so one can argue there was some sports competition, but that was only against the first hour of the show.

The three hours were:

8 p.m. 3.10 million viewers
9 p.m. 3.17 million viewers
10 p.m. 3.01 million viewers

http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/e...n-raw-ratings-drop-309-million-viewers-215421


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Fringe said:


> Mediocre numbers for a mediocre show. Last night's booking was entirely by the numbers and formulaic. Turned it off after Stephanie set up the matches as I knew exactly how they would end. And I was correct. No twists, no dynamics, no character development, and yet they wonder why people tune out.* Last night proved that creative have no idea what to do without Reigns in the mix right now and it's pathetic.*


Its not like they had any idea what they were doing with Reigns in the mix either :bosque

But I do agree with this post in general. The show was not bad, but the booking was very formulaic and by the numbers, and the outcomes of the BIG matches set-up were very predictable, and the ME was even more so after what happened in Rollins/Cena. Now "by the numbers booking" and outxomes being predictable are not in themselves a bad thing on their own, the fact the WWE has spent the last # of years killing the interest of alot of their fanbase, mixed with how shows are being booked is the issues. IF the WWE put on a consistently good product that was booked decent/good all the time, last nights show would have been fine, but you mix a completely jaded fanbase with a show that everyone feels they know how its going down you get the #s the WWE got for Raw.

I really hope the WWE has some plans to REALLY CHANGE THINGS UP after the split, b/c if they just plan on going as is but just making SD live and splitting the roster up, things are going to get worse.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> I really hope the *WWE has some plans to REALLY CHANGE THINGS UP after the split*, b/c if they just plan on going as is but just making SD live and splitting the roster up, things are going to get worse.


You should know better by now :cudi


----------



## TheClub

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LOL I tuned out after surprise challenge for The Miz was Kane. It wasnt a that much of a bad show till this. After that I could only say it was a "not bad but not good either". XD

Sent from my Moto G using Tapatalk


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Cleaner said:


> Because the ratings have been mostly dropping for years, regardless of who the FOTC is this week. Yeah there have been a few spikes here and there, but it's been a downward trend no matter who's champion or whatever. No one has been able to sustain even a leveling off, never mind an upward trend. I don't even think it's who they decide to push -- it's how the whole shitpile is presented.
> 
> I've also come to the conclusion that they've lost all touch with how to build a feud. In the good old days, they'd build guys up separately, giving them some other kind of interaction to build up heat other than a match, so that fans would be chomping at the bit for the two guys to finally get in the ring and have at it. All they do now is repeat the same goddamn match over and over, and call that a feud. Not to beat a dead horse, but again it's another example of dead-ass lazy booking. fans are sick of it, and while they won't all jump ship at once, they're still slowly and consistently jumping ship.


I agree with many things you said, but I don't know about this "whole FOTC thing, whoever it is, won't draw" .. I mean, if WWE had decided to run with Bryan and Punk, make them legitimate stars, let them take Cena's top spot, have a FOTC LOVED by casual and hardcore fans, Idk who else has that potential now, I see Ambrose one of them, but I think it needs some time, he's not yet a " star " , The only real " stars " are Cena, Lesnar, and Reigns ( booked as stars).


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE RAW Rating Down*
*
- As noted, Monday's WWE RAW from Miami drew 3.093 million viewers, down from last week's 3.467 million viewers. The final rating for the show was a 2.21, down from last week's 2.44.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0629/613147/scott-hall-first-look-trailer/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2.2 isn't anywhere near as bad as I thought they would be. Earlier in the year, they were at 2.0 and 2.1's. They've been in the 2.2 range all year.

i don't know how they formulate the viewership to the actual rating, but it seems odd. I thought it would be way worse. :hmm: Kinda depressing to now know that no one on the full time roster is a draw right now. Oh well.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They are gonna beat the 1996 1.8 rating with flying colours come fall.

Patience, young padawan.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> They are gonna beat the 1996 1.8 rating with flying colours come fall.
> 
> Patience, young padawan.


:grin2: By November 2017 they'll be barley hovering above 1.2


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*What a surprise, Ambrose being champion has changed absolutely nothing. We still have record low ratings WITH NO SPORTS COMPETITION and the show is STILL boring. Maybe his deluded fans can finally cut the bullshit about him single handedly "saving" the company.*


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Why do people only talk about the Main Event? The Main Event isn't just the only thing that matters. I don't care if it was SCSA vs Vince McMahon 1998. The WWE would still suck. 

The Women Divison sucks. Oh look a woman who hasn't been on T.V. in Months!

Tag Team Divison sucks, Gallows and Anderson are boring without AJ Styles, Usos boring, Enzo and Cass hasn't had 1 feud, Dudleys boring, Lucha Dragons boring, The vauedvillans jobbers. 

Most of the Midcard feuds suck. WWE doesn't bother to build the Midcard feuds.

Everything sucks not just the Main Event.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *What a surprise, Ambrose being champion has changed absolutely nothing. We still have record low ratings WITH NO SPORTS COMPETITION and the show is STILL boring. Maybe his deluded fans can finally cut the bullshit about him single handedly "saving" the company.*


I just wonder who the next wrestler "who will save the company" is. People keep making this claim to usually hate on Roman yet the ratings just keep dropping no matter who is on top...


----------



## squarebox

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Fearless Maryse said:


> I just wonder who the next wrestler "who will save the company" is. People keep making this claim to usually hate on Roman yet the ratings just keep dropping no matter who is on top...


AJ Styles trololol


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *What a surprise, Ambrose being champion has changed absolutely nothing. We still have record low ratings WITH NO SPORTS COMPETITION and the show is STILL boring. Maybe his deluded fans can finally cut the bullshit about him single handedly "saving" the company.*


Just a question, How did you find the past RAW Boring? Just because the crowd was dead, doesn't mean it was really boring.

No seriously, Opening 5-way segment, AJ/Ambrose, Cena/Rollins, Becky's attack on Nattie, the Y2J/Zayn/KO Segment, Russev vs Titus intensified, funny New Day segment and THE RETURN OF LOCAL JOBBERS :mark:

Too bad this RAW was wasted on a dead crowd, Miz/Kane WAOT segment didn't help too. 

Also, Ambrose is drawing similar numbers to Reigns by being given 1/4 of the push of what Reign has been given. He's been booked solidly since post-WM, can we give the man some time and some star-like/WWE Champion material booking, before we see if tanks or spikes interest? The booking has been pretty for him recently, I'll give it a month or 2 before you can start label him a failure, not a week.


----------



## God Movement

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope it drops further. Maybe then alarm bells will start ringing.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Fearless Maryse said:


> I just wonder who the next wrestler "who will save the company" is. People keep making this claim to usually hate on Roman yet the ratings just keep dropping no matter who is on top...


Last years' flavor of "who will save the company" was Reigns... :shrug

Some of us have been blaming it on Vince and Creative for years now. We told you guys that Vince and Creative was more at fault than any of the wrestlers, but never wanted to believe us.

People have said it about just about everybody on the roster at one point or another. At this point though, it looks like all hope might be lost, no matter who it is. So, we finally all on the same page that the only one person that can save all of this is Vince himself? Would be nice if we were..


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

People still thinking that Reigns just being on the same level as a draw as "the rest of the roster" is somehow acceptable given the push, promotion, and exposure he has gotten over the last 2 years compared to everyone else on the roster not named John Cena :bosque


And no, Reigns himself is not the sole problem either, EVERYTHING is the problem with the sinking ratings, but still the point I make above is still very valid, IMO of course.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Reigns push is what drove millions of fans away, no matter how you cut it. He's the only guy they put on the same level as Cena, and he's lost fans from the Cena era. That's an epic failure of a top guy. Has Dean Ambrose lost fans from the Roman Reigns "era"? In his super-long reign so far, no, he hasn't. 

And a better way to go about it would be shutting the fuck up until there's a baseline to properly judge Ambrose on, rather than trying to be a dopey troll since you're butthurt that Roman Reigns is the biggest failure of a top guy in wrestling history, and now suspended. I seriously doubt anyone said Ambrose would be the guy who turns the company around, if that post exists I've never seen it. He's a better top guy than Reigns though, that was evident two years ago and even more evident now as he's brought more life to the show in two weeks than Reigns did in two years. 

They're rebooting RAW/SD in a month....that's about as telling as you can be that they're fully aware Roman killed their credibility in the fans eyes and now they're trying to re-brand and move on.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> People still thinking that Reigns just being on the same level as a draw as "the rest of the roster" is somehow acceptable given the push, promotion, and exposure he has gotten over the last 2 years compared to everyone else on the roster not named John Cena :bosque
> 
> 
> And no, Reigns himself is not the sole problem either, EVERYTHING is the problem with the sinking ratings, but still the point I make above is still very valid, IMO of course.





Godway said:


> Reigns push is what drove millions of fans away, no matter how you cut it. He's the only guy they put on the same level as Cena, and he's lost fans from the Cena era. That's an epic failure of a top guy. Has Dean Ambrose lost fans from the Roman Reigns "era"? In his super-long reign so far, no, he hasn't.
> 
> And a better way to go about it would be shutting the fuck up until there's a baseline to properly judge Ambrose on, rather than trying to be a dopey troll since you're butthurt that Roman Reigns is the biggest failure of a top guy in wrestling history, and now suspended. I seriously doubt anyone said Ambrose would be the guy who turns the company around, if that post exists I've never seen it. He's a better top guy than Reigns though, that was evident two years ago and even more evident now as he's brought more life to the show in two weeks than Reigns did in two years.
> 
> They're rebooting RAW/SD in a month....that's about as telling as you can be that they're fully aware Roman killed their credibility in the fans eyes and now they're trying to re-brand and move on.


you guys nailed it.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ah so this is the new "this guy will save WWE", just blame it all on Roman even more, not very creative. The ratings have been steadily dropping save a peak here or there for years now.



ShowStopper said:


> Last years' flavor of "who will save the company" was Reigns... :shrug
> 
> Some of us have been blaming it on Vince and Creative for years now. We told you guys that Vince and Creative was more at fault than any of the wrestlers, but never wanted to believe us.
> 
> People have said it about just about everybody on the roster at one point or another. At this point though, it looks like all hope might be lost, no matter who it is. So, we finally all on the same page that the only one person that can save all of this is Vince himself? Would be nice if we were..


I've never said "this guy will save WWE" doesn't matter if Stone Cold 2.0 came along, one guy cant make up for everything wrong with WWE thesedays.


----------



## FITZ

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At this point they're just treading water for a few weeks until they split the brands again. I watched about 45 minutes of the show. Got home at around 9:30 and fell asleep on the coach by 10:15


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Definition of Technician said:


> Just a question, How did you find the past RAW Boring? Just because the crowd was dead, doesn't mean it was really boring.
> 
> No seriously, Opening 5-way segment, AJ/Ambrose, Cena/Rollins, Becky's attack on Nattie, the Y2J/Zayn/KO Segment, Russev vs Titus intensified, funny New Day segment and THE RETURN OF LOCAL JOBBERS :mark:
> 
> Too bad this RAW was wasted on a dead crowd, Miz/Kane WAOT segment didn't help too.
> 
> Also, Ambrose is drawing similar numbers to Reigns by being given 1/4 of the push of what Reign has been given. He's been booked solidly since post-WM, can we give the man some time and some star-like/WWE Champion material booking, before we see if tanks or spikes interest? The booking has been pretty for him recently, I'll give it a month or 2 before you can start label him a failure, not a week.


I thought the crowd was fine until Kane came out, and I'm usually 1 of the harsher critics about crowds on here. Seemed like they never recovered after being subjected to watch him wrestle in 2016. :Jordan2


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



squarebox said:


> AJ Styles trololol


 Nah, unlike most of the Dean Wahbrose fan club, most of his fans know he isn't a draw. It's not like he's been there for 4 years and been in or around the main event.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Where did @Chrome post go?

If I remember correctly, Kane/Miz did kill the crowd. But the ending of Cena/Rollins also told viewers how predictable the main event would be.

In ratings related news, RAW and Smackdown will now be able to stream (legally) live. I wonder what impact this could have on numbers and if it'll be bundled with Live +7.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Where did @Chrome post go?
> 
> If I remember correctly, Kane/Miz did kill the crowd. But the ending of Cena/Rollins also told viewers how predictable the main event would be.
> 
> In ratings related news, RAW and Smackdown will now be able to stream (legally) live. I wonder what impact this could have on numbers and if it'll be bundled with Live +7.


Yeah, I think some posts got deleted or something. Noticed the same thing in the Kemba thread in Rants. I quoted Sol and that post just disappeared into thin air. These fucking servers lol.


----------



## Arkham258

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> Reigns push is what drove millions of fans away, no matter how you cut it. He's the only guy they put on the same level as Cena, and he's lost fans from the Cena era. That's an epic failure of a top guy.


So Reigns drove MORE fans away...considering how many Cena already drove away himself. 

Can't wait to see the next god awful "face of the company" they use to drive away what little fans they have left.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Sling TV about to slay WWE's ratings. I honestly don't understand why anybody still has cable these days tbh. You can get literally every single channel through a subscription service and pick and choose what you want. 

Sling TV (Raw/SD/Lucha) is $25 + WWE Network $9.99 = $34.99

Add on Netflix/Prime/HBO and that's all the wrestling and real TV anybody will ever need for less than cable.

I know some people here don't think cord cutting means anything but I honest to God believe that in 10 years time, TV a la carte is going to be the way people watch television. There are kids today who probably don't know anything other than Netflix or Hulu. It makes me feel really old...


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Fearless Maryse said:


> Ah so this is the new "this guy will save WWE", just blame it all on Roman even more, not very creative. The ratings have been steadily dropping save a peak here or there for years now.



Your "protect Roman" crusade while simultaneously pretending you're not attempting to is old, as are the outright lies about the rate ratings have fallen and disingenuous comparison to his peers who have NEVER been booked half as strong kr important as he has. Ratings didn't just fucking fall at "a steady rate" under Roman; they fell off a fucking cliff.




> Yes. If they continue to drop at their current year-over-year rate of decline, they will easily drop below a 2.0 by September. The company - in terms of its television audience - is in real trouble. *The erosion of their audience over the last year far outstrips previous year over year declines. And it's more than twice the decline in overall tv viewership (11% per http://screenmediadaily.com/tv-viewe...-to-accenture/)*
> 
> *Between 2012 and 2014, the Monday Night Raw episode at this time of the year averaged 4.2M viewers. This year it was just 2.97M, a whopping 27.8% year over year drop. The 2.03 rating itself represents a 28% drop from last year.*
> 
> Put another way, if the June 12, 2017 episode shows a similar rate of decline, that RAW will enjoy a 1.45 rating, with 2.14M viewers. Extend that to the June 11, 2018 episode, and RAW will draw a 1.04 rating with just 1.55M viewers.



It was a free fall under Roman and it doesn't matter how much you and your ilk desire to keep playing the tired "anti-IWC" gimmick, NO ONE on this roster past or present, lost more viewers. I'm not pussyfooting around it. *He was cancerous *and the proof runs deeper than ratings, it's substantiated by his meager live attendance #'s in which under his tuleage, live attendance plummeted *30% *with him headlining in comparison to last year. You won't discuss that though, because there's no way it can be spun to rationalize why the "indy darling" geek whom was headlining the B tour was drawing more than the cool, corporate jock on the A tour. 


"B- b - bu- hypocrisy..."












Shut up. :lol


Roman is the only guy on the roster that was booked on par with Cena. He's actually been booked stronger than anyone not named Cena or Lesnar for two years (three if you're counting mid 2013 when The Shield became 'Roman & Friends') If some of you are going to have the sack to attribute a decline to his peers while ignoring his astronomical drop off as if each and every one of them (most of all being Dean) haven't laid down clean for him multiple times over a two year period which saw Reigns headline two consecutive WM's and go on to draw worse numbers than any champion in the last 15 years, then it's warranted that fire is fought with fire.

I'm not going to skirt around it lIke some who are admirably attempting to remain cordial in the face of outright wifull ignorance and disingenuous half truths. Reigns lost an absurd amount of fans, and it goes far beyond terrible booking of the entire show. As much grief as some of you gave Seth, Punk and Bryan (and you in particular don't have to verify that you were in that group because your entire gimmick and posting career hinges on you having B+ "indy darlings" to brood about) none of them lost anywhere _near_ the numbers casual draw whom was pushed as Cena's successor did. This company and other talent will be working overtime to undo the damage the cancer they propelled and forced for over two years has done.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Sling TV about to slay WWE's ratings. I honestly don't understand why anybody still has cable these days tbh. You can get literally every single channel through a subscription service and pick and choose what you want.
> 
> Sling TV (Raw/SD/Lucha) is $25 + WWE Network $9.99 = $34.99
> 
> Add on Netflix/Prime/HBO and that's all the wrestling and real TV anybody will ever need for less than cable.
> 
> I know some people here don't think cord cutting means anything but I honest to God believe that in 10 years time, TV a la carte is going to be the way people watch television. There are kids today who probably don't know anything other than Netflix or Hulu. It makes me feel really old...


People still like channel surfing and having a multitude of channels to pick from at their fingertips is my guess.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Arkham258 said:


> So Reigns drove MORE fans away...considering how many Cena already drove away himself.
> 
> Can't wait to see the next god awful "face of the company" they use to drive away what little fans they have left.


It would be like if in the 90s, WCW ignored how stale/awful Hogan was and just continued forcing him down the fans throats until they went out of business against WWE. That's what WWE does now because they can, because there's no competition. 

Numbers averaged good for three champions in the last 5 years: CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, and the Rock. I think one of ADR's reigns weren't bad either, but that was when Cena, Punk, Rock, etc were dominating the show if I remember correctly. The ratings tanked/sunk/fell any time they put the belt on the likes of Cena/Orton/HHH/Reigns. With Reigns...they fucking PLUMMETED. 

What is this telling you? Fans are fucking sick of the WWE "prototype". They had it with Cena before Reigns, and WWE's so fucking ARROGANT because of their monopoly, that they think they can just push a discount Cena as their new mascot and repeat the same bullshit for the next 10 years. Well...guess again. Fans want new and different...not the same old shit.


----------



## SithEvans

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



A-C-P said:


> People still thinking that Reigns just being on the same level as a draw as "the rest of the roster" is somehow acceptable given the push, promotion, and exposure he has gotten over the last 2 years compared to everyone else on the roster not named John Cena :bosque
> 
> 
> And no, Reigns himself is not the sole problem either, EVERYTHING is the problem with the sinking ratings, but still the point I make above is still very valid, IMO of course.


Reigns not being a remarkable draw other than in merch sales is just proof of how mediocre is WWE booking and how poor they are at creating stars.

You would give Roman push to any one else and it would be the same, exposure and strong booking are useless in this era because the quality of the show and the characters are not drawing.

WWE will never create a big star again as long as they stay in this shitty PG era.


----------



## NearFall

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

For people talking about Reigns push being a success/failure. He's already won a RR, had two WrestleMania main-events, broken records left right and centre (Survivor Series, RR etc), beating tons of the roster cleanly, and match wise just booking super strongly. He has not dented the ratings. They have continued to fall as the show just gets more of the same shit, different RAW. His push was a complete failure, and not all of that is on him, but to think it anything except a failure (fan reaction alone is very telling) is madness. 

My main concern is going forward. If they pick their guys and push them like they have with Reigns, we may never have another guy to the level of John Cena/The Rock for a long long time.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(6/30) Vs last week(6/23) 

2.080M Vs 2.145M
(-0.065M/-3.03%)*


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I wonder what 4TH of July ratings will look like.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Shark Week munching on SD in the demo. Sub 2 million is def. on the horizon.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



THE SHIV said:


> Shark Week munching on SD in the demo. Sub 2 million is def. on the horizon.


Smackdown going live should help a lot to be fair. If it doesn't, ooh boy lol.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Smackdown going live should help a lot to be fair. If it doesn't, ooh boy lol.


You would think Tuesday is a better night, but five hours on consecutive nights might take a toll on SD. If,after a brief initial increase, the bottom falls out, panic is going to ensue.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Smackdown going live should help a lot to be fair. If it doesn't, ooh boy lol.


Live Smackdowns have never done well though? Tuesday would have to be big for them I think.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*6/30 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – Thursday’s show down to near year-low*

WWE Smackdown fell to a near year-low Thursday night on USA Network.

WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

June 30: WWE Smackdown scored a 1.52 rating, down from a 1.58 last week.

It was nearly the lowest TV rating of the year, staying just above a 1.51 rating on June 9.

Smackdown did not score above a 1.6 the entire month of June. The last rating at 1.6 or above was on May 19.

– Smackdown drew 2.080 million viewers, down three percent (about 65,000 viewers) from last week.

It was the third-fewest viewers of the year.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Smackdown dipped slightly from last week in adults 18-49 and males 18-34.

The show fell more in males 18-49 to about the same m18-49 rating as before the Money in the Bank PPV.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07...tv-ratings-thursdays-show-dips-near-year-low/


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> Live Smackdowns have never done well though? Tuesday would have to be big for them I think.


To my knowledge, those didn't do well mainly because people forgot they were on Tuesday lol. They've been hyping live Smackdowns for about a month, so people KNOW that the show is on Tuesdays now. So no excuses if the ratings continue to tank. I imagine the 1st live Smackdown will do well because of the draft.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Woof. Glad Rollins wasn't on SD, not that it would've mattered, but still. One Reigns' "Redemption" storyline coming right up!

:heyman6


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nice sig Showstopper :Cocky
@Chrome the 1st live smackdown should do great. Was actually genius of them having the draft that night rather than Raw. I imagine they'll be really disappointed if that show doesn't perform as well as they hoped. I'd say that would be the biggest smackdown in a long time.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well now it's Ambrose's turn to take the heat for teh shitty ratez. :lol


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE SmackDown Does Bad Number*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

WWE SmackDown this past Thursday averaged 2.08 million viewers, according to Showbuzz Daily. It was down 3% from last week's 2.145 million viewers. It was up slightly from the June 16th episode, which averaged 2.073 million viewers, however that show was up against the final game of the NBA Finals. It is the third least viewed episode since the show began airing on the USA Network in January.

SmackDown was #3 for the night in the 18-49 demo, behind Nuclear Sharks and Jungle Sharks on the Discovery Channel. In total viewers, SmackDown was #6 for the night behind several shows on FOX News, Flip Or Flop (Home And Garden TV) and Teen Titans Go (The Cartoon Network).

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0701/613211/wwe-smackdown-does-bad-number/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Thanks @Iron Man

@CJ is the man.


----------



## NJPW316

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That Smackdown was pathetic, and most of the top guys weren't even on on the show. It should be no surprise the ratings weren't that good. If Smackdown Live is the same boring show as Smackdown has been, it's ratings aren't going to be appreciably better.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

can we stop pretending deans been booked badly please 
in the last year hes lost clean against 

roman 
lesner
cena
rollins 
hhh

hes only lost to the top top stars and now hes got the belt 

hes been shown as being completely better than kevin owens having beaten him every time theyve fought


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> Well now it's Ambrose's turn to take the heat for teh shitty ratez. :lol


:kobelol such is life.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BigDaveBatista said:


> can we stop pretending deans been booked badly please
> in the last year hes lost clean against
> 
> roman
> lesner
> cena
> rollins
> hhh
> 
> hes only lost to the top top stars and now hes got the belt
> 
> hes been shown as being completely better than kevin owens having beaten him every time theyve fought


He was booked good as an upper midcarder.
As a main eventer he was booked like shit.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This is why the brand split is a good thing: it will create competition and brand loyalty with the fans. Look in this thread how Roman haters take pride in the ratings failing, but now Roman fans taking pride with this week's lousy numbers. And of course Seth fans have been jumping for joy for the last several months!

Let's hope they don't put all three on the same show. Ideally I like to see Reigns on one show and Seth/Dean on the other for obvious reasons.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How this wasn't the lowest rated SD of 2016 paints quite a picture. It paints the picture that this company is in deep shit and 2016 was a massive failure. I'm even out of ideas. I think even if the product was good that no one would care because they've run so many fans away and the general public (casuals and past casuals) just don't give a shit about wrestling anymore. It seems like a passe form of entertainment to the general public, tbh.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ratings were great in 2014. Even after Bryan vacated the title the ratings were solid. The ratings even went up hour by hour after he vacated the title. Two things happened and the ratings started to fall:

1. Stephanie McMahon and Brie Bella got two main event segments just before Summerslam 2014

2. Brock Lesnar won the title at Summerslam 2014 and then they had a part time champion

The ratings have been on a steady decline ever since.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> The ratings were great in 2014. Even after Bryan vacated the title the ratings were solid. The ratings even went up hour by hour after he vacated the title. Two things happened and the ratings started to fall:
> 
> 1. Stephanie McMahon and Brie Bella got two main event segments just before Summerslam 2014
> 
> 2. Brock Lesnar won the title at Summerslam 2014 and then they had a part time champion
> 
> The ratings have been on a steady decline ever since.


Bullshit.
Bryan drew worse ratings as soon as WWE made clear he wasn't going to get Big feuds, but Kane instead, who people don't want to see at all.
The ratings, aside from Four or five shows spread in between, remained below 3.0 when Bryan vacated the title. THAT's what they still haven't recovered from, not some shitty Steph segment, that people don't Even care enough about to get upset.

Pretending the decline started in 2014 is idiotic. At best.
It began with Cena's reign of terror, nothing Else, and sped up with Roman 2:03.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

From Meltzer's latest newsletter about the upcoming July 4th show's ratings:


> Next week’s Raw, on 7/4 from Columbus, OH, due to the holiday, is expected to be the lowest rated Raw in the history of the show. The record low is a 1.8 rating. Shane McMahon is expected to be back and they are locally advertising Cena & Ambrose vs. Rollins & Styles as the main event. Rusev vs. O’Neil in a U.S. title match is scheduled. The last two times July 4th came on a Monday were in 2005 and 2011. In 2005, Raw fell from a 4.4 rating on 6/27 to a 2.6, a 41 percent drop. In 2011, Raw fell from a 3.1 rating to a 2.4, a 23 percent drop. So we’re starting at a 2.21. Given that we’re down to a far more hardcore audience, the drop may be only 20 percent which would be a record low 1.77 rating. It easily could be the first episode in history to hit a 1.7. A 23 percent drop would be 1.70, so unless today’s audience is die-hards that don’t leave the house on July 4th, that’s the probable range because there are no Cena returns like on Memorial Day to pull out. No matter what the number is, it’s not all that significant in the sense you’d worry about it. Really this week’s number was more significant more because it’s at this level without sports competition so where will it fall to against the NFL.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

All I read is


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Expecting the lowest ratings of all time.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It'll truly be interesting to see how many hardcores they have. 
But Even hardcores from this forum may miss Raw.

Can't freaking wait for the slaughter.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Lowest rated RAW of all time to happen during Deano's title reign. :mj2


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> Lowest rated RAW of all time to happen during Deano's title reign. :mj2


 Roman fans should have been thrilled when lost the title. He avoids the tag of being champ for the lowest rating Raw ever.


----------



## SonOfAnarchy91

*4th Of July RAW predicted to have lowest rating since 1996*



> Sports statistician Danny Tuccitto has forecasted this Monday's RAW television rating will be 1.58. That would fall just short of the all-time low of 1.5, recorded on December 23, 1996. For what it's worth, that episode was taped, not live. The lowest-rated live episode of RAW was the very next week, December 30, 1996, which got a 1.6.


http://whatculture.com/wwe/mondays-wwe-raw-predicted-to-break-record-for-lowest-audience-ever

http://wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0703/613237/will-monday-raw-be-the-lowest-rated-ever-here-are-some/
_____

Good god do I hope this happens, WWE severely need a big kick in the ass right now, sure they could use the holiday as an excuse but that doesn't change the fact that their ratings are still continuing to steadily drop. How much longer can they go before it actually matters to them? Or better yet for USA Network to give the the kick in the ass they deserve right now?


----------



## Lavidavi35

Peerless said:


> Lowest rated RAW of all time to happen during Deano's title reign. :mj2


I never blame the guy that has the belt for the ratings ordeal. However, I know that a lot of people do and with today being a National Holiday that comes to a head during the night hours with fireworks and such, can you people really blame the champ?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm wondering if this report by Tuccito is a way to make excuses for tonight's rating. Do you think he would have done this if Reigns was still champion?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> I'm wondering if this report by Tuccito is a way to make excuses for tonight's rating. Do you think he would have done this if Reigns was still champion?


Possibly. But I think most will be understanding that this is a holiday and won't hold the potentially low rating against Dean too much. 

In a related matter, PW Torch did not post the quarterly breakdowns for last week's RAW. I hope they're not going to stop being reported simply because Dean Ambrose is champion and the site doesn't want to potentially embarrass him. We all know the numbers aren't the best but I liked the detailed info. I just wish they wouldn't pick and choose when they are posted. I'd like to think there was a delay or something and not bias taking place.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Possibly. But I think most will be understanding that this is a holiday and won't hold the potentially low rating against Dean too much.
> 
> In a related matter, PW Torch did not post the quarterly breakdowns for last week's RAW. I hope they're not going to stop being reported simply because Dean Ambrose is champion and the site doesn't want to potentially embarrass him. We all know the numbers aren't the best but I liked the detailed info. I just wish they wouldn't pick and choose when they are posted. *I'd like to think there was a delay or something and not bias taking place.*


Don't count on it. How were the numbers whenever they reported on Reigns? I do know Reigns always had great numbers for his segments that were uploaded on Youtube.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> Don't count on it. How were the numbers whenever they reported on Reigns? I do know Reigns always had great numbers for his segments that were uploaded on Youtube.


Wrestling Inc and Cageside Seats generally posted the figures for the Youtube segments. Reigns was regularly near the top.

PW Torch started to post the breakdowns in May, following John Cena's return. Again, I'm willing to offer the benefit of doubt. Stuff happens. Maybe the person who reports it got sick, there's a delay or something else. I just hope the site returns to posting the numbers as they normally do. Otherwise, it just seems like they are trying to hold back because it may reflect poorly on a performer they like. 

6/20 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – Cena-Styles wins, detailed break down of top segments, third hour minor victory

6/13 WWE Raw Quarter-Hour TV Ratings – Shield wins, did Cena-Styles save Raw from sub-2.0 rating?

6/6 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – Cena-Styles huge audience, what happened in the third hour?

5/30 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings Report – Cena-Styles saves the show & third hour, Minute-by-Minute on key segments, surprises

5/23 Raw TV Quarter-Hour Ratings – which segments were the most-watched following Extreme Rules?


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Looking forward to this weeks numbers.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't think they'll be as low as most are anticipating.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE RAW Ratings Notes*

- As a reminder, the ratings for last night's Independence Day RAW will be delayed until Wednesday due to the holiday. Some are expecting last night's show to be the lowest-rated of all-time. Next week's RAW also faces competition as the MLB Home Run Derby takes place.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0705/613276/wwe-raw-ratings-notes/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *WWE RAW Ratings Notes*
> 
> - As a reminder, the ratings for last night's Independence Day RAW will be delayed until Wednesday due to the holiday. Some are expecting last night's show to be the lowest-rated of all-time. Next week's RAW also faces competition as the MLB Home Run Derby takes place.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0705/613276/wwe-raw-ratings-notes/


I forgot the ratings will be delayed. :cuss: I was so ready for the unveiling too. I skipped RAW last night, and it sounds like many did. This thread will certainly be interesting if RAW goes sub 2.0


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Monday's WWE RAW ranked #1 among series & specials for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings. RAW had 160,000 tweets with 51,000 unique authors. This is up from last week's show, which had 146,000 tweets with 35,000 unique authors.


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Honestly, what is there to be excited about right now? I mentally checked out of Raw after the food fight


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I quit watching once Ambrose/Miz started. Had zero interest in that.

I've just..never felt THIS disengaged from wrestling before. There is NOTHING that I get excited about. Can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm looking forward to TNA more tonight than I have anything WWE related in years.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Cipher said:


> I quit watching once Ambrose/Miz started. Had zero interest in that.
> 
> *I've just..never felt THIS disengaged from wrestling before. There is NOTHING that I get excited about. Can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm looking forward to TNA more tonight than I have anything WWE related in years.*


I'm looking forward to this as well. :mark:

Matt Hardy is easily more entertaining than anything that's happening in the WWE at the moment. I never thought I'd say that. It seems like the WWE is using Final Deletion for their storyline too with the Wyatts/New Day.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> Monday's WWE RAW ranked #1 among series & specials for the night in Nielsen's Twitter TV ratings. RAW had 160,000 tweets with 51,000 unique authors. This is up from last week's show, which had 146,000 tweets with 35,000 unique authors.


Are we still pretending twitter ratings mean anything? I mean wow..35k unique authors.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> Are we still pretending twitter ratings mean anything? I mean wow..35k unique authors.


Isn't there usually a correlation between twitter ratings and tv ratings? You'd expect it to be worse considering the 4th of July, but it actually did better than last week. Maybe, ratings won't be the lowest ever?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> Isn't there usually a correlation between twitter ratings and tv ratings? You'd expect it to be worse considering the 4th of July, but it actually did better than last week. Maybe, ratings won't be the lowest ever?


There is. An increase is a good sign. 

Thank you for posting the Twitter ratings. I didn't get around to it earlier.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I predict they'll do a 1.80. The dropoff won't be as much as prior years, because in prior years they still had the casuals who would watch fireworks instead of wrestling. The casuals are gone, and all that remain are the diehards. And I think the diehards will watch WWE over fireworks. 

That's why you are seeing a very limited dropoff in the 3rd hour recently. All that remains is the hard core wrestling audience.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Can't wait for WWE's press release: *MONDAY NIGHT RAW DELIVERS RECORD RATINGS ON AN EXPLOSIVE 4TH OF JULY EPISODE!!!* :vince5


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm not sure why wrestlinginc stopped posting youtube breakdowns, but I feel like this is as good a time as any to debunk the argument that youtube views prove X or Y is a draw.

This is partly in response to those posters that tried to argue Reigns is a big youtube draw because his segments would usually get the highest views. I never responded to these posts even though I knew for quite some time that this argument is pretty weak, mainly because whoever is the champion and/or involved in the top storyline usually have the most viewed segments. Seth Rollins proved this last year when for 7 months his segments consistently got the most views out of anybody's (for some reason I never see Rollins marks never bring this up) with a few exceptions like that huge Lesnar/Taker brawl which got the highest views that particular week. This is being proved yet again by Ambrose, whose segments have been getting the highest views (even outdrawing Cena's on a regular basis) nearly every week since he's gotten involved in the title scene. I mention Cena because the first two weeks he was back, his segments were getting the most views. That is, till Ambrose started getting involved in the top storyline.

*June 13th edition of Raw*

at #1 Ambrose Asylum with Reigns and Rollins






#2 Cena/Styles segment







*June 20th*

#1 Reigns vs Rollins #1 contendership match with Ambrose on commentary






#2 Ambrose celebrating his World title win






#3 Cena vs Karl Anderson






#4 Cena/Styles segment where Bullet Club apologizes






*
June 27th*

#1 Ambrose vs Styles






#2 Cena vs Rollins






#3

Rollins and Ambrose address Roman's suspension






As you can see, the Ambrose vs Styles match outdrew Cena's match with Rollins last week, and this is pretty much what you can expect from here on out as long as the championship doesn't change hands. If I go by the logic of some of those desperate posters here that were trying to argue Reigns is some sort of a big YT draw, then that would mean Ambrose has also managed to become a big global youtube draw after winning the belt, a bigger one than Cena at that. And I don't need to point out how silly that notion that is.

What this does prove is that YT is a flawed metric just like TV ratings or network sub count, and is not reliable enough to decisively judge a wrestler's drawing ability with because like I already said, being involved in top storylines or holding the world title is highly likely to have an influence on the amount of views their segments get. So I hope this puts an end to people making posts like "look! X's segment outdrew all the other segments this week! what a draw!" Unless, people want to come off looking silly.

Do let me know If I made any errors in my post though. :cozy


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm like a child on Christmas Eve, awaiting in fervid anticipation for the ratings to come. Visions of sub 2.0 ratings are dancing in my head. Please come soon! :mark:


----------



## Ironman Match

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

In *2011* raw was live the 4th of july, and drew a 2.4 rating with 3,717,000 viewers... just to have something to compare with


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They don't draw that without competition these days 

:ha


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2016, the biggest failure in WWE history to continue today.

:drose


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Everybody seems super excited about what are likely to be close to record low ratings. I don't want to be "that guy", but you do know how Vince (as well as a few WF members) is going to try and explain away the poor ratings, right?

_"It's because Roman isn't there! See? He is a draw, damnit!!!"_ :vince5


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

How in line is twitter with actual ratings?

With far more tweets and unique tweeters this week, you'd assume more people watched the show.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BehindYou said:


> How in line is twitter with actual ratings?
> 
> With far more tweets and unique tweeters this week, you'd assume more people watched the show.


Viewership will be down at least 30% regardless of the twitter. Sometimes people are talking about WWE but not actually watching..e.g Monday 'when you started watching WWE' was trending number one for hours before raw but that had nothing to do with raw

That 2011 raw was week after punks pipebomb and usa was in about 10 million more homes then and still viewership fell by 30%. SD two years ago fell by 32% on July 4th


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> Everybody seems super excited about what are likely to be close to record low ratings. I don't want to be "that guy", but you do know how Vince (as well as a few WF members) is going to try and explain away the poor ratings, right?
> 
> _"It's because Roman isn't there! See? He is a draw, damnit!!!"_ :vince5


Good, I want him to use that excuse.
that will make him make more mistakes.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> Everybody seems super excited about what are likely to be close to record low ratings. I don't want to be "that guy", but you do know how Vince (as well as a few WF members) is going to try and explain away the poor ratings, right?
> 
> _"It's because Roman isn't there! See? He is a draw, damnit!!!"_ :vince5


Ratings were all time low this year when he was here, anyway. At least this weeks' numbers were on a national holiday. I'm just laughing at the entire year and what huge, gigantic failure it's been.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Nobody pays attention to numbers on July 4th but its funny people bringing up what WWE and usa will do if viewership keeps falling

Most likely WWE will put title back on cena (which I am sure people will be happy with ). What USA would do if they get involved is get Vince on tv in top role. If you watched tna when spike had a hand in running show and Hogan was all over tv in every segment you really don't want usa involved


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Ironman Match said:


> In *2011* raw was live the 4th of july, and drew a 2.4 rating with 3,717,000 viewers... just to have something to compare with


And the week prior was a 3.13 so taking that into account, plus how much raw has fallen on a normal week compared to 2011...and well this week's rating is gonna be bad.

Additionally the July 4th 2005 episode did a 2.6 rating while the prior weeks episode drew a 3.7.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> Nobody pays attention to numbers on July 4th but its funny people bringing up what WWE and usa will do if viewership keeps falling
> 
> Most likely WWE will put title back on cena (which I am sure people will be happy with ). What USA would do if they get involved is get Vince on tv in top role. If you watched tna when spike had a hand in running show and Hogan was all over tv in every segment you really don't want usa involved


It's not just any July 4th episode Rating.
Number one, it's almost certain to be the lowest number EVER. 
And number two, it's a way to gauge how high the percentage of loyal hardcores still is of the existing 2.8-3.4 viewers.
If it's as low as a 1.6 or 1.5, then that is a realistic average Rating within the next 18 months, if things remain this awful.
The 2.4 for July 4th 2011 was the regular average just a few short years later. And the decline is ever speeding up.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Even if this weeks isn't sub 2.0, they are inevitably heading that way during fall.

When you consider that the first *Smackdown* rating of 2016 was a 1.93, you can see how far Raw has fallen in the eyes of the public.


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Daemon_Rising said:


> Even if this weeks isn't sub 2.0, they are inevitably heading that way during fall.
> 
> When you consider that the first *Smackdown* rating of 2016 was a 1.93, you can see how far Raw has fallen in the eyes of the public.


Yeah the NFL is going to eat them alive this year. They scheduled some potentially big games for Monday this year compared to loading up Sunday night football like they have for the last decade.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

When does the rating get released?


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Hulk Hogan said:


> When does the rating get released?



4:00 Eastern Time


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










Holy shit :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-2.663M
H2-2.668M
H3-2.643M
3H-2.658M*


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At least they didn't lose viewers throughout :draper2

And they were #1 for the night so maybe THE MAN and THE DUDE should change their names to THE DRAWS :rollins :ambrose5


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I thought they would be bad, but man.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:ha

Just sitting back







as 2016 continues to crumble.

I thought it would be worse since Raw fell on July 4th, though. And the fact that they finished 1st for the night kinda sucks, too. I guess no one watched TV that night. Must. Be. Lower. Just wait until football season starts.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.663M
> H2-2.668M
> H3-2.643M
> 3H-2.658M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+0.002%/+0.005M)
H3 Vs H2 (-0.009%/-0.025M)
H3 Vs H1 (-0.008%/-0.020M)
7/4/16 Vs 6/27/16 (-14.06%/-0.435M)*


----------



## LilOlMe

That shows you what WWE's loyal fan base is right now. The fact that all three hours had virtually the same amount of viewers, shows that that's the hardcores who will watch literally anything.

Probably only about 20-22% of viewers are casuals at this point. Keep pissing off that lifeline of hardcore viewers, though, Vince...

Those hardcores will keep dwindling too, as they have been.


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Really not that bad. For 4th of July where a lot of people go to watch Fireworks and spend time with family, they only lost 350,000 viewers which isn't really bad.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*WWE RAW Viewership Drops Under 3 Million For The 4th Of July Holiday*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's WWE RAW, which was expected to be the lowest-rated of all-time due to the 4th of July holiday, drew 2.658 million viewers. This is down from last week's 3.093 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 2.663 million viewers, the second hour drew 2.668 million viewers and the final hour drew 2.643 million viewers.
RAW was #1 on cable for the night in viewership and #1 in the 18-49 demographic.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ip-drops-under-3-million-for-the-4th-of-july/


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I had a feeling they weren't going to be as bad as people anticipated. It remained steady for the most part and H2 looks like they gained. It's a miracle it's even as high as it is with it being a July 4th episode tbh. This episode was clearly carried by the hardcore audience. Still, they're hanging on by a thread. I can't imagine how bad it will get when the NFL season arrives soon. For their sake, they better be rebooting the entire product come the split. They won't return overnight but change needs to be dramatic if they want to lure back in the eyes they've lost over the last year or two. I'm talking Vince giving an Attitude Era type of announcement before the show even begins. 



Something dramatic has to change or they won't make it.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Those 2.6 million fuckers, get something better to do so we can have a better product.... :lol


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller
Drum roll...... Raw rating on Fourth of July.... 1.87. Oh boy. Bruce Mitchell's reaction: "There it is, The rubicon has been crossed."

https://twitter.com/thewadekeller/status/750792447735820288


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The rubicon has been crossed :trips5


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller
> Drum roll...... Raw rating on Fourth of July.... 1.87. Oh boy. Bruce Mitchell's reaction: "There it is, The rubicon has been crossed."
> 
> https://twitter.com/thewadekeller/status/750792447735820288


*Lowest RAW ratings (below 2.0R) since 9/4/95/Monday Night Wars Era*

*December 23, 1996
1.5R

December 30, 1996
1.6R

October 14, 1996
1.8R

July 4, 2016
1.87R (4th lowest since 9/4/95 or nearly 21 years) 

March 3, 1997
1.9R

September 25, 1995
1.9R*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At least those numbers in the 90's, they had head to head wrestling competition. I know this week was a holiday. But even the numbers for all of 2016 have been PITIFUL. 2016 was tanked back in January and has followed suit ever since. This is where bad decisions get your product. Zero sympathy. Bring them down even lower.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:Rollins:rusevyes:reneelel:bryanlol:Brock:vincecry


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










Vince's awful decisions of 2016 are coming back to haunt him.

:mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So the 3rd worst rated RAW of all time.

Only last year they probably thought a sub 2.0 was impossible. We have now hit sub 1.9 and we are not even in NFL season yet.

I cannot see how USA will keep sitting on their hands. Something has to give.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> *Vince's awful decisions of 2016* are coming back to haunt him.
> 
> :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark:


The awful decisions pretty much started back in 2011 if not before, they just kept getting worse since then :bosque


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Vince's awful decisions of 2016 are coming back to haunt him.
> 
> :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark:


And after Mania 32, I hope he fucken killed his biggest brand too. Mania season is no longer a draw or a string of hot shows. The show has turned out to be an unmitigated booking disaster with a nasty corporate event cherry on top.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Keep them low ratings coming!

:yes :yes :yes :yes :yes


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Lowest RAW ratings (below 2.0R) since 9/4/95/Monday Night Wars Era*
> 
> *December 23, 1996
> 1.5R
> 
> December 30, 1996
> 1.6R
> 
> October 14, 1996
> 1.8R
> 
> July 4, 2016
> 1.87R (4th lowest since 9/4/95 or nearly 21 years)
> 
> March 3, 1997
> 1.9R
> 
> September 25, 1995
> 1.9R*


*These are the ratings of SD just 5-6 months ago for comparison.

Jan.7
1.93R

Jan.14
1.68R

Jan.21
1.87R

Jan.28
1.87R

Feb.4
1.86R

WM31 RAW's rating was 3.68R and now its 1.87R, a 49.18% drop in 15 months. 
The viewership itself is down 50.44% from 5.363M then to 2.658M now.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Ambrose 1:87* says I just killed the ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The irony of the 1.87 rating. Vince and his 2016 ideas have been MURDERED.

:heyman6


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Holy shit that's low.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

"SEE YOU NEXT WEEK", THOUGH, THEY SAID.

:kobelol :heyman6

That line is :buried


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I know what draws in North America @SilvasBrokenLeg


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

What were the numbers the last time RAW (or Smackdown) were on 4th July?


----------



## Trivette

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Another mediocre RAW, on a holiday no less. What can you expect? Once I saw Ambrose was facing Miz in the first hour or so, I watched that match and turned the rest off. The entire show has become so difficult to sit through now. Like many of my friends who still hold hope, I simply pull up the most acclaimed segments on YouTube. Life is too precious to waste on a sub par product. I'd rather spend my Monday night after busting ass at work all day, either watching Netflix, listening to records, or playing video games. Simply put, there is too much competition for consumers' attention nowadays to continue an obstinate war of attrition against the fans. By the numbers, looks like the fans are winning, but not really. Most of us just want a high quality and consistent wrestling program, but the last two years have shown repeatedly that we are waiting in vain.


----------



## samizayn

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



DoubtGin said:


> What were the numbers the last time RAW (or Smackdown) were on 4th July?


Would also like to see number comparison. I know that they always anticipate ratings dips in the holiday season, for example. Wondering if this is comparable.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Still interesting it was the highest watched show on cable. It beat FOX's program h2h and only four other shows on cable beat 1.5 million viewers. The 4th July influence cannot be neglected here. Thus, I think the rating will be about the same as last week (which still sucks in the grand scheme of things).


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I know Raw was on 7/4 in 2005. The very same Raw that HBK turned on Hogan and superkicked him.

Compare that one happening to ALL of Raw this past Monday. And then see the difference in quality in 11 years. Raw is not Raw anymore. It's dogshit.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



DoubtGin said:


> What were the numbers the last time RAW (or Smackdown) were on 4th July?





Ironman Match said:


> In *2011* raw was live the 4th of july, and drew a 2.4 rating with 3,717,000 viewers... just to have something to compare with





samizayn said:


> Would also like to see number comparison. I know that they always anticipate ratings dips in the holiday season, for example. Wondering if this is comparable.


*7/4/05
3.717M and 2.4R*


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

New Day should come out next week and do this promo-


Kofi: Remember all those viewers we used to have just a couple of years ago?!

Xavier: Yeah! Where they at doe?! Where they at doe?!

Big E: Where they at doe?!


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So the myth that some Ambose marks have been pushing has been busted. Ambrose winning the title isn't magically going to turn the ratings around, he's even less of a draw than Roman.

Broke a record last week and has achieved one of the all time low rankings this week. Oh, there's also his segments which are being outdrawn by Apollo Crews and Zack Ryder.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Demo sub 1.0, every hour below 3m, and a 1.87 rating. Stop the spin. This is an unmitigated disaster. Attitude Era ratings are back! :sodone


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hilarious number. Almost poetic the rating is the same number as code for homicide. Vince should be in jail for murdering a wrestling company.









IIRC, Russo said in an interview once that a 1.9 rating is what made Vince realize big changes were needed. Let's see if getting a sub 2.0 rating wakes him up. Unlikely though, as I'm sure he'll just blame the holiday for the bad ratings.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*7/4 Raw TV Ratings – Raw falls below 2.0 for first time in two decades*


WWE Raw fell below a 2.o TV rating by a significant margin for the “Fourth of July” edition of WWE Raw, establishing an historical low-point for Raw.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

July 4: WWE Raw scored a 1.87 TV rating, down 15.4 percent from last week’s 2.21 rating.

After 1,200+ episodes, this week’s Raw ranks in the Bottom 3 lowest ratings in the history of the show, just above a few episodes in the mid-1990s that scored at 1.8.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 2.658 million viewers, down 14.1 percent (about 450,000 viewers) from last week.

All three hours hovered around the same figure throughout the show.

First Hour: 2.663 million viewers (down 433,000 from last week)
Second Hour: 2.668 million viewers (down 505,000 from last week)
Third Hour: 2.643 million viewers (down 368,000 from last week)

To add insult to injury, the third hour declined – even by one percent – for the 16th consecutive week.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Two out of three key demos fell below the June 13 episode’s historical low point (the episode that scored a 2.03 TV rating).

Only males 18-34 showed signs of life this week, topping the June 13 airing. Meanwhile, adults 18-49 was down two-tenths of a rating and males 18-49 was down nearly three-tenths (19 percent).

– Historically, the Fourth of July Raw has not been kind to Raw.

On July 4, 2011, Raw’s TV rating fell 24 percent and the viewing audience fell 25 percent from the previous week’s show. That was a rare taped show when WWE taped both the June 27, 2011 and July 4 Raw episodes on the same night.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/06/74-raw-tv-ratings-raw-falls-2-0-first-time-two-decades/


----------



## ShadowSucks92

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Man I can't wait for the Football season to start :mark::mark::mark::mark:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Remember 2014 and people on here thought the ratings couldn't get any worse. Then they thought that last year, too. And now here we are 2016, and the entire year has been the lowest rated year in company history. The ratings just keep going down every year no matter who is at top and no matter what type of storylines they have going at the time. WWE's standing on TV is getting worse and worse every year..


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I know Raw was on 7/4 in 2005. The very same Raw that HBK turned on Hogan and superkicked him.
> 
> Compare that one happening to ALL of Raw this past Monday. And then see the difference in quality in 11 years. Raw is not Raw anymore. It's dogshit.


Yea, it sucks that really nothing big happens anymore. I'd say the last time something remotely out of the ordinary happened was when Bryan "occupied" RAW with the Yes Movement. Prior to that, also including Bryan, was when he turned on Bray and when the crowd crapped on Orton vs Cena and chanted for Bryan instead. However, I'm sure WWE did not expect either moments to be as big. The Rollins turn comes close, but in hindsight, the segment itself is not that memorable besides the actual turn.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If TNA weren't in such a mess, they could have been decent competition for the WWE.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> So the myth that some Ambose marks have been pushing has been busted. Ambrose winning the title isn't magically going to turn the ratings around, he's even less of a draw than Roman.
> 
> Broke a record last week and has achieved one of the all time low rankings this week. Oh, there's also his segments which are being outdrawn by Apollo Crews and Zack Ryder.


The cycle will continue it seems. Certain people talked shit about Rollins when he was champ then were quiet when Reigns was even worse. You going after Ambrose now, hope you don't vanish when and if AJ becomes champ and whatever show he is on tanks. 

Not surprised the ratings have gotten this bad. The product has been for a while. Yes there are good parts but it's a terrible show overall. They'll have to rely on all that YouTube money now because I can't see them getting a great new tv deal when it's time for it. 

I'm just imaging Vince and co waking up in the middle of the night from nightmares involving the NFL. Nightmares like Brady, Rodgers and other players just squashing all their talent :booklel


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iron Man said:


> The cycle will continue it seems. Certain people talked shit about Rollins when he was champ then were quiet when Reigns was even worse. You going after Ambrose now, hope you don't vanish when and if AJ becomes champ and whatever show he is on tanks.
> 
> Not surprised the ratings have gotten this bad. The product has been for a while. Yes there are good parts but it's a terrible show overall. They'll have to rely on all that YouTube money now because I can't see them getting a great new tv deal when it's time for it.
> 
> I'm just imaging Vince and co waking up in the middle of the night from nightmares involving the NFL. Nightmares like Brady, Rodgers and other players just squashing all their talent :booklel


 AJ has been with the company for 7 months, of course he isn't a draw. I can admit that. About time some other marks said the same for their favorite (@SilvasBrokenLeg) instead of talking down to others and spewing rubbish about knowing what draws in North America.

Ambrose has been with the company for 4 years and hasn't connected with the viewers to a level he can be considered anywhere near a draw or world title material.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It also doesn't help that there are no big time charismatic people on the roster. There are talented folks on the roster. There are those with some charisma. But certainly no one that reaches through the TV and grabs your attention and DEMANDS you watch and tune in every Monday night. Those guys are gone. Those days are gone. There are no standouts on the full time roster anymore. Not even Cena, let alone anyone else.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hey, it didn't drop as much as expected.

The bad news is WWE better hope this doesn't start a new trend. WWE's extreme downward spiral in the ratings over the past 12-18 months started after a holiday edition of Raw where there was no big shifts or movement from hour-to-hour, just less viewership in general (like this week's) but those chunk that missed out on that holiday edition never ended up coming back.


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Back to blaming 1 for the terrible Ratings. That never gets old.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

1995 nash) and 1996 hbk1) continuing to shit on 2016 WWE in the ratings. And back in 1995 (from September) and 1996, they actually had Nitro and the nWo (May '96, when Hall debuted) to contend with.

:ha

Failure of a year from top to bottom.

:buried


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



troyag93 said:


> Back to blaming 1 for the terrible Ratings. That never gets old.


 You can bang on about booking all you like, but if you're charismatic enough, you can overcome bad booking and still draw a decent number. Ambrose's segments have been outdrawn by Apollo and Zack Ryder with his title crowning segment finishing 6th.

This whole don't blame one guy excuse has come in to cover TS failure to draw. All 3 have failed miserably to keep fans interested in the product. None of them are charismatic enough to draw people in, nor do they have the larger than life feel to breakthrough to mainstream and casuals.


----------



## PlKACHU

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'd rather it was lower than that, but I'll take it.










Hopefully, some of those 500k viewers that didn't watch decide not to come back.


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> You can bang on about booking all you like, but if you're charismatic enough, you can overcome bad booking and still draw a decent number. Ambrose's segments have been outdrawn by Apollo and Zack Ryder with his title crowning segment finishing 6th.
> 
> This whole don't blame one guy excuse has come in to cover TS failure to draw. All 3 have failed miserably to keep fans interested in the product. None of them are charismatic enough to draw people in, nor do they have the larger than life feel to breakthrough to mainstream and casuals.


You can be the best wrestler and be the most charismatic guy of all time, but if WWE puts you in a monkey suit your fucked.


----------



## Restomaniac

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> It also doesn't help that there are no big time charismatic people on the roster. There are talented folks on the roster. There are those with some charisma. But certainly no one that reaches through the TV and grabs your attention and DEMANDS you watch and tune in every Monday night. Those guys are gone. Those days are gone. There are no standouts on the full time roster anymore. Not even Cena, let alone anyone else.


Although I agree generally I will say that a lack of freedom on the mic and of character doesn't help. Take RR as an example.
It's clear he is a first rate wanker, yet there he is as a babyface. Any mic and character freedom would see him end up where he needed to be.
Look at DA as another. In the Indies when he had freedom he was SO much better. 

Under these conditions even SCSA and the Rock would struggle. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying anyone is on that level but by god they at least would have a chance to shine. 
Whilst they are being micro managed by Vince and his spivs they have no chance.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> *Ambrose 1:87* says I just killed the ratings. :ambrose4












For those unaware, 187 is police slang for a murder taking place. Guess its good that it wasn't Ambrose 1:86.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

TNA is miles better than the WWE.

I can sit through 2 hours of it and enjoy the show, I can't do that for the WWE.

The WWE is so predictable and boring, it always follows the same formula and you get the impression they're just killing time.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The ratings, much like Ambrose's clothesline , will obviously rebound next week. If it doesn't regain all that was lost this week, I'll be a little disappointed.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> TNA is miles better than the WWE.
> 
> I can sit through 2 hours of it and enjoy the show, I can't do that for the WWE.
> 
> The WWE is so predictable and boring, it always follows the same formula and you get the impression they're just killing time.


I honestly enjoyed last night's Impact more than I did any recent RAW/Smackdown. Matt Hardy is an evil genius but the entire show didn't feel like a chore to get through. I'm not a regular viewer. So, I don't know if the show is consistently good but I liked what I saw. 

Since the WWE is obviously copying ideas from TNA (Final Deletion with the Wyatts), they need to give their wrestlers more creative freedom.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A 1.87 will be a normal rating by next year.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Randy Lahey said:


> A 1.87 will be a normal rating by next year.


 Lets hope so.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Restomaniac said:


> So the 3rd worst rated RAW of all time.
> 
> Only last year they probably thought a sub 2.0 was impossible. We have now hit sub 1.9 and we are not even in NFL season yet.
> 
> I cannot see how USA will keep sitting on their hands. Something has to give.


Reduce to two Hours, cut TV money, build a new product without any pre-2006 Star.


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Theyre just killing time until the brand split. 

Theyre just killing time until monday night football is over. Theyre never gonna do well against the nfl anyways. 

Theyre just killing time until the wrestlemania season. Thats when people are really watching. 

Theyre just killing time until the last week of mania. Mania season has plenty of time. 

Theyre just killing time until summer is over. This is their off season.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_Jiz said:


> Theyre just killing time until the brand split.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until monday night football is over. Theyre never gonna do well against the nfl anyways.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until the wrestlemania season. Thats when people are really watching.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until the last week of mania. Mania season has plenty of time.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until summer is over. This is their off season.


So true. And once the ratings right before and after WM this year were so bad, that was a big hint that this was going to be a disasterous year for them. And, it is..


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> If TNA weren't in such a mess, they could have been decent competition for the WWE.


Yup all they needed to do was keep doing the same things they were doing from 2002 - 2009 and then just wait it out. 

They would still probably have Styles, Joe, etc and the rest on their roster. 

Hogan and Bischoff screwed TNA.


Are people still arguing about who is a draw and who isn't? 


If the whole fucking show sucks then even if you have Austin, Rock, Taker, Hogan on the show the ratings will still suck. 

Idiots the some of you who are blaming it on the talent when it's the booking that makes or breaks a show.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The_Jiz said:


> Theyre just killing time until the brand split.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until monday night football is over. Theyre never gonna do well against the nfl anyways.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until the wrestlemania season. Thats when people are really watching.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until the last week of mania. Mania season has plenty of time.
> 
> Theyre just killing time until summer is over. This is their off season.


Yeah, because Roman 2.4 says Ratings were Aces during Wrestlemania season.

If your season consists of three months out of 12, file chapter 11.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well things didn't fall completely off a cliff. They'll likely rebound next week too. But come September, this is definitely going to be dangerous territory that I suspect they will be hovering _incredibly_ close to on a number of occasions. Bring it.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:LOL So it finally did it. It finally hit below a 2.0. Awesome.

I'm sure people will use the holiday excuse but this has been a long time coming. WWE has all this social media pull, public image, and revenue options and yet there is NO buzz or interest to watch this shit every week for three hours. The only reason why they haven't done anything to fix it is because they are consumed by the revenue and public image they have but we're about two months away from NFL season. Shit is about to get real if it hasn't already.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think they'll beat this rating later in the year.

They're splitting the roster in half and will be competing with the NFL.


----------



## NotGuilty

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings were a lot higher when Cena had the belt. :CENA


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



NotGuilty said:


> Ratings were a lot higher when Cena had the belt. :CENA


Cena's done as a big draw on TV, too.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

you guys are making yourself like completely foolish taking the RAW ratings on 4th of July as a consideration to drawing. what's next? How bad of a draw the champion is when RAW airs December 24th?

let's forget that just a couple of weeks ago Ambrose was drawing people to house shows the same number as Reigns, and very close to his merch sales, with 1/10th of his push, ignoring Ambrose's great reactions on a weekly basis and his terrible loss record after The Shield broke up. Reigns fans, you don't get the right to complain about booking, because he was being booked heads and shoulders above anyone else. He just completely failed as a face in-front on the hardcore audience and many casuals. Ambrose is yet to be booked like a star and is drawing the same as Reigns ( look at Reigns kick out of 3 F5 at WM and Ambrose losing in one), so stop acting pathetic. Ambrose isn't even in my top 20 guys to watch today, but the guy remained over despite being made Rollins and Bray's bitch, and Reign's lackey. He's got good mic skills, extreme over and the crowd seems to love him no matter what.

Sure, some guys could do better in his position, but Reigns isn't one of them, why not give Ambrose a chance? let him have star-like booking for change and let's see how well he draws, with the internet reacting to him, HE COULD BE THE NEXT CENA with 50/50 chants, instead of a FOTC booed by 90% of the crowd.

Judging someone a couple of weeks into his first title reign, or judging some NXT guy or girl on the crowd reaction in their first couple of weeks, is something this forum does a lot..GIVE THE GUYS A CHANCE TO PROVE THEMSELVES. If Ambrose keeps getting this good booking and in 2 months time still delivers the same number as Reigns or worse, then shit all you want.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Finally we're in the 1s. Well earned WWE. Would LOL if they don't reach 2.0 next week. 



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Lowest RAW ratings (below 2.0R) since 9/4/95/Monday Night Wars Era*
> 
> *December 23, 1996
> 1.5R
> 
> December 30, 1996
> 1.6R
> 
> October 14, 1996
> 1.8R
> 
> July 4, 2016
> 1.87R (4th lowest since 9/4/95 or nearly 21 years)
> 
> March 3, 1997
> 1.9R
> 
> September 25, 1995
> 1.9R*


The top 2 were also holidays and the top 3 were against Nitro. They had an excuse back then. Now not so much. And they wanna do a brand split? With 2 PG shows? And a 3 hour Raw?


----------



## ka4life1

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I always find this awkward,
Because i want WWE to do well because i love what they can do,
but The last couple of months in particular in my opinion have been dreadful.

I am really not sure where to start.


I' don't fully understand the whole its a holiday so lets put on a below par show attitude they have.
Watching the NFL over Thanksgiving weekend is a mainstay for many people.
Sitcoms put on great Halloween and Christmas specials over the holidays, If anything TV in general is better over holiday seasons, So i just do not understand WWE's stance.

Cena is stale, I respect Cena, i know a lot of people enjoy his matches, But its the same old formula just a different opponent....
Win Lose or Draw this feud is going to mean nothing. A.J could beat Cena 10 times clean, if creative don't actually create something for A.J afterwards his just going to stay where he is.

People want to cheer the heel's 
A.J, Seth, Owens, People want to cheer these people, So why don't WWE give them an actual reason to instead of just making them try and get cheap heat by insulting the local sports teams , Which makes them receive boo's for all of 5 seconds and all the people at home are thinking yea i actually agree with them, that team does suck.... Where is the logic ??? 

Cena Gets a reaction,
So would Mark Henry taking a dump in the middle of the ring, That does not mean i want to see it....

also

Why hasn't Ambrose beat the snot out of JBL by now ???
He is supposed to be this unpredictable, tough as nails, no nonsense champion yet he gets roasted and undermined by a member of the commentary team week after week.

I love Goldust and R truth, but its 2016 and yes its a family show but no one in my family ranging from 6 to 72 wants to see those 2 in the ring dancing around like clowns...
that is not entertaining, Its stupid and pointless plain and simple.

The other day on these forums i was discussing how i don't think it matters how good or bad creative is these days, I just don't think society likes Pro Wrestling/Sports entertainment anymore...

When you look at things like the food fight, the social outcasts dressing up, Cena running around like a grown up version of Tommy from the rugrats but dressed like Doug
(slightly dated 90s nick reference)

Its no wonder people are not watching....

Legion of Doom, Big Bossman, Ultimate Warrior, even Doink the freakin clown... all wore outlandish costumes, all where liked/loved by the fans, but they never pandered to the fans, When that bell rang it was game on... 
The Wrestling was taken seriously they wanted to win at all costs.
You just don't get that sense from hardly any Wrestlers these days..

Ziggler, Is all about stealing the show.
Cena, Is all about finding someone who can beat him.
(yea because that makes sporting sense)
Wyatt's, Haven't won a feud in ages but yet are now feuding with one of the most established tag teams in years ??

Nothing makes any sense and is counter productive, so is it any wonder why Ratings are dropping and no new viewers are tuning in.


I ask myself this question often.
if i was a child now would i want to watch WWE ? and the answer is no.

Everything is too predictable, 
feuds are stretched out across to many PPV's. 
1 match does not seem to end a feud now, It has to be 3 or 4 in a row at successive shows,
so we don't actually get a conclusion because everyone beats one another.

Becky Lynch VS Natalya for example, I think they are building this up really well... Yet once Battleground is done with you just know they will probably then have a rematch on Raw or Smackdown then maybe Main Event then probably the Kick off Show at Summerslam.. 
It becomes far to convoluted, 
So when/If Becky does win the Women's title, people wont be able to look at her Match with Nattie at Battleground as the thing that really springboarded her into the main event, Because it will just be one big list of matches... in which people wont remember who won which match and where.

I want to finish this rant/post on a positive, Because i hate being negative all the time....
(believe it or not) 


The brand split to me is really going to be the deciding factor for as to where WWE is heading and if they at all understand why Ratings and the show in general is poor at the moment.

Looking forward to a new set, a new title, different colour ring ropes, just to freshen it all up, 2 creative teams in competition both with new ideas can only be a positive even if Vince is steal going to be the filter for both shows.

The talent on the main Roster and NXT is there, They have the founding fathers of NXT the godfathers of when TNA was really being considered as something quite special, They have the most compelling group of Female talent ever in my opinion. They have a network where they have unlimited time to tell stories properly and to introduce new stars to the audience. 

They have guys with Charisma like Owens,Seth,A.J who fans want to cheer and love to watch perform, They even have great Traditional WWE guys like Cena,Reigns,Orton, who all are capable of being relevant still if handled correctly, Taker Lesnar,, part timers who the fans love.
The ingredients are their to make Ratings go up and to draw in new fans and old fans alike...

They just need to think about what they did during the mid to late 90s that really helped them build a fanbase again, 
They let Austin be himself.... Let Reigns be himself... They gave guys like Mick Foley with a strange character a chance, Give Bray a chance.... They created a platform for guys like Edge and Christian, The Hardy,s and even the Dudley's to break out from... Let Big E, Let Cass, Let Kalisto, Let Neville, have a crazy 4 way tlc match or something, 
so they can try and break the mould and properly get themselves over as future stars like Edge,Christian and Jeff did.

The current formula isn't working because the current formula has been around for too long.
Just try new stuff, if it works great, if it doesn't who cares at least you tried.

I think we all agree that even if WWE just tried something new, whether it be a points systems, a tv title, hardcore title, 3 man tag title, intergender matches, put Lillian Garcia as head of creative, let William Regal Mauro and Corey do commentary, We would all support it because at least its something NEW!.
The industry needs something New....

Presentation wise, Creative wise, title wise,

I am just hoping this Brand split will do that,

Otherwise i fear for the whole industry
Much like when WCW turned the lights off for the last time, Those remaining fans didn't star watching WWE they just turned off for good.

and i fear those fans turning off now are not going to TNA or ROH or New Japan
or even buying tickets to local indie shows, They are just stopping watching and i think WWE as the leading force in Pro Wrestling/Sports entertainment has a duty to lead the way in which way the industry as whole should head towards. Because without WWE love them or hate them, The industry would be in a pretty dark place without them, not only for us the fans but for the wrestlers/bookers as well...

televised British Wrestling suffered exactly what WWE are going through right now, So the worst can happen, 

Lets just hope it wont and that the brand split will be the beginning of not a 'new era' not a 'reality era' not an 'attitude2.0 era' but of a rebuilding era, 
Where a Strong televised Raw and Smackdown can start bringing new eyes to an industry which is not at its strongest right now, Because when WWE is doing well i think Pro Wrestling in general does well.
Because they are the shop front for what we love.
Without WWE i would never have known my local theatre has an Indie show visit it 3 times a year, I would never have seen ECW, I wouldn't have a clue that New Japan existed. Lets hope this Era can rebuild that fanbase and inspire new fans, So that in 100 years time when i am long gone, Some neckbeard like me, can still spend his evenings after work with a cup of tea posting on forums like these.. 

So lets hope things get better guys, and sorry for the long post....


Have a good evening.


----------



## Dell

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A 1.87 rating? :lmao Wow, how low before they finally realise it's a problem and change things? The draft could be make or break for them.

It doesn't surprise me, I haven't really enjoyed an episode of RAW since Seth's reign so last november.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*








*+*







*=* :Cocky


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> 1995 nash) and 1996 hbk1) continuing to shit on 2016 WWE in the ratings. And back in 1995 (from September) and 1996, they actually had Nitro and the nWo (May '96, when Hall debuted) to contend with.
> 
> :ha
> 
> Failure of a year from top to bottom.
> 
> :buried


If WCW had everybody they had in the 1990s magically get twenty or thirty years younger and it came back that way next week, there would be no way in HELL that 2016 WWE would be beating 1996 WCW in the ratings. 1996 WCW would be shitting all over 2016 WWE, the WWE ratings would be chopped in half.

They've been floating at a 2 rating for a year.


----------



## Mister Sinister

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They deserve this TV rating. They have pissed into the wind for the last 6 months. They forced Reigns upon the fans as the top face (right up until it came out he failed a drug test), they turned AJ Styles heel despite his being the most over face in the company with live crowds, they went against the audience with Seth returning as a heel, put the belt on Ambrose (whom no one actually believes is anything but a transitional champion), and presented Days of Our Shield as the leading program going into the brand split.

-The audience is exhausted with everything Shield
-Ambrose clearly has caved the viewership as champion


----------



## Rated-R-Peepz

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> TNA is miles better than the WWE.
> 
> I can sit through 2 hours of it and enjoy the show, I can't do that for the WWE.
> 
> The WWE is so predictable and boring, it always follows the same formula and you get the impression they're just killing time.


I agree with you on all of it. And your last paragraph is 100% on the money.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They turn fan favs heel.

They have hated babyfaces.

They force what they want, not what the fans want.

Dumb ass, corny PG dogshit. Food fights still? Really?

Fight with your fanbase + produce the lamest entertainment you can = no fucking shit your ratings are down.


----------



## Monterossa

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

At least watching TNA will make you laugh when they do some stupid shit like Fat Hardy Wyatt.


----------



## The Dazzler

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn that's low, even for a holiday. :surprise:


----------



## Draykorinee

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Its fully deserved frankly. I want WWE to excel, but they have basically shat over the fans so fuck em, they need to learn that the 3 hours of drivel on raw needs to stop.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I mean, everybody expected this kind of rating. You can even tell that the audience that was live for this Raw KNEW it was going to be a complete filler show and present nothing remotely important to the current storylines, and with the exception of a couple decent to good promos, that exactly what happened. It's like WWE decided to throw in the towel knowing that they would get shitty ratings for the show, which is fine, but don't insult the audience who came out to actually watch this show.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Dazzler said:


> Damn that's low, even for a holiday. :surprise:


Time for a new news article in the bottom left of your sig, Dazzler. :yes


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Daemon_Rising said:


> Time for a new news article in the bottom left of your sig, Dazzler. :yes


:lol

At least this one was on a national holiday. What's the excuse for the other one currently in his sig?

:heyman6


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> :lol
> 
> At least this one was on a national holiday. What's the excuse for the other one currently in his sig?
> 
> :heyman6


Wasn't the other one the 2.16? Not sure. Anway, @The Dazzler is going to be a busy man because pretty soon he will need to change his sig practically every single week to reflect all the new records being broken.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Daemon_Rising said:


> Wasn't the other one the 2.16? Not sure. Anway, @The Dazzler is going to be a busy man because pretty soon he will need to change his sig practically every single week to reflect all the new records being broken.


I think it was. But it was on a non-holiday Monday, and didn't even go up against football, either. This one at least fell on a national holiday.

Once football is here..

:banderas


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

A Holiday is a real excuse for the ratings to be down. So the this weeks low Ratings I understand.

The Homerun Derby this coming Monday isn't an excuse. I'm betting those 350,000 people will be watching Raw again. (I hope not)


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



troyag93 said:


> A Holiday is a real excuse for the ratings to be down. So the this weeks low Ratings I understand.


I'm not going to argue heavily against the holiday being "the reason" it's so low.. but the main reason is still quite simple: It's a shit television programme.

When you look at the ratings trends of the last 20 years, the fall period is always 10-15% lower ratings than the July holiday episode anyway. A rough guess would therefore indicate average ratings of around 1.7 for November.

That being said, we have never seen WWE so creatively vapid. Ima come back to this post to see how wrong this prediction is.. but I think November will be sub 1.75 consistently for four weeks. Also in December if WWE panic and start getting really bad with their ideas we might see an isolated 1.5 something rating.....

2017 and 2018 things are only going to get worse (WWE are stubborn, and want to "win back" the fans in their own, delusional way). We have seen 10% drop offs of the hardcores consistently year upon year. Apply a 10% drop off in 2017 and 2018...and soon you are basically looking at 1.87 being a top-end Raw rating in two or three years. Probably post-Mania Raw and post-Rumble Raw will be the only Raws to break 2.0. 

This is the future, so....


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Monterossa said:


> At least watching TNA will make you laugh when they do some stupid shit like Fat Hardy Wyatt.


 Fat Hardy Wyatt's feud with Jeff is more entertaining than anything Bray has ever done. He has the wrestling world talking about him, Bray has never ever done that before.


----------



## Seafort

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Daemon_Rising said:


> I'm not going to argue heavily against the holiday being "the reason" it's so low.. but the main reason is still quite simple: It's a shit television programme.
> 
> When you look at the ratings trends of the last 20 years, the fall period is always 10-15% lower ratings than the July holiday episode anyway. A rough guess would therefore indicate average ratings of around 1.7 for November.
> 
> That being said, we have never seen WWE so creatively vapid. Ima come back to this post to see how wrong this prediction is.. but I think November will be sub 1.75 consistently for four weeks. Also in December if WWE panic and start getting really bad with their ideas we might see an isolated 1.5 something rating.....
> 
> 2017 and 2018 things are only going to get worse (WWE are stubborn, and want to "win back" the fans in their own, delusional way). We have seen 10% drop offs of the hardcores consistently year upon year. Apply a 10% drop off in 2017 and 2018...and soon you are basically looking at 1.87 being a top-end Raw rating in two or three years. Probably post-Mania Raw and post-Rumble Raw will be the ony Raws to break 2.0.
> 
> This is the future, so....


Just a month ago I posted this as to when RAW might drop below a 2.0:

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/1997129-will-wwe-drop-under-2-0-rating-3.html#post60629513


If they continue to drop at their current year-over-year rate of decline, they will easily drop below a 2.0 by September. The company - in terms of its television audience - is in real trouble. The erosion of their audience over the last year far outstrips previous year over year declines. And it's more than twice the decline in overall tv viewership (11% per http://screenmediadaily.com/tv-viewe...-to-accenture/)

Between 2012 and 2014, the Monday Night Raw episode at this time of the year averaged 4.2M viewers. This year it was just 2.97M, a whopping 27.8% year over year drop. The 2.03 rating itself represents a 28% drop from last year.

Put another way, if the June 12, 2017 episode shows a similar rate of decline, that RAW will enjoy a 1.45 rating, with 2.14M viewers. Extend that to the June 11, 2018 episode, and RAW will draw a 1.04 rating with just 1.55M viewers. 

That said, the question is why? Is it just general erosion in television viewership? I think that the numbers show otherwise, and that this accelerated decline which began last year is beating the pace of general declines in tradition television versus steaming service. And why? Very simple...cliched storytelling, a lack of more than a handful of compelling characters, incremental or no plot movement, and a full year of unpopular champions. The latter is key.

Seth Rollins: Holds the belt from WM 31 to Nov 2015. Is generally portrayed as a very weak, Honkytonk Man like champion who usually needs constant interference to retain
Sheamus: A largely rejected, bland heel character following his return, Sheamus has a brief, uninspiring reign
HHH: Another heel, HHH never wrestles and is the crown jewel of a multi-year Authority angle
Roman Reigns: Obstensibly the face, Reigns is largely rejected post-WM 32 and has been involved in no real big angles since winning the title

If they cannot reverse the trend, the company is in trouble. Their TV deal will eventually come up for renewal, and a RAW that is well ahead of the curve of TV viewership declines will not earn WWE a huge renewal fee. And without that huge renewal fee, their profitability will take a substantial hit.


RAW TV Ratings, Viewers, and Changes from Previous Year
6/13/16: 2.03 (2.97M viewers) -27.4% from previous year
6/15/15: 2.83 (4.11M viewers) -00.5% from previous year
6/16/14: n/a (4.13M viewers) +3.5% from previous year
6/10/13: 3.04 (3.990 viewers) -13.6% from previous year
6/09/12: 3.20 (4.62M viewers)
6/13/11: 3.30 
6/14/10: 3.40
6/15/09: 3.70
6/16/08: 3.70
6/11/07: 3.80


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No segment by segment breakdown this week either?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> No segment by segment breakdown this week either?


They didn't give a breakdown last week. I hope it comes back this Friday. Otherwise, they are just being blatant with bias. They shouldn't pick and choose when they report them.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> They didn't give a breakdown last week. I hope it comes back this Friday. Otherwise, they are just being blatant with bias. They shouldn't pick and choose when they report them.


 Isn't that obvious? The excuse they gave of being a transitional champion for one his piss poor weeks was downright embarrassing.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Dazzler said:


> Damn that's low, even for a holiday. :surprise:


It's not even a good excuse. The last time they had ratings this low it was against WCW Nitro when they were working the NWO angle on Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve.

If you take 200,000 viewers away once Monday Night Football comes back, the reality is RAW will be sub 2 rating/2.75 million viewers. 

I'm just remembering a few years ago when Punk was getting crucified for 2.7 whatever and close to 4 million viewers. Miss me, yet?

unk4:


----------



## Vårmakos

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Shield are major flops. Time to move on from them.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> No segment by segment breakdown this week either?


Who would like to be shown outdrawn by a pie?


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This lack of segment ratings breakdown ever since Ambrose did badly in his first week as champion is absolutely embarrassing. They think if they hide it they will hide his shame, but its only making it seem even worse. Its pathetic if they are purposefully hiding it so the fans don't give Ambrose shit. Who cares about the fans, at the end of the day Vince is the one who is gonna make him drop the title because he has been a flop. And try as they might, these sites aint gonna be able to hide shit from the people who really matter, and thats Vince and his crew.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> This lack of segment ratings breakdown ever since Ambrose did badly in his first week as champion is absolutely embarrassing. They think if they hide it they will hide his shame, but its only making it seem even worse. Its pathetic if they are purposefully hiding it so the fans don't give Ambrose shit. Who cares about the fans, at the end of the day Vince is the one who is gonna make him drop the title because he has been a flop. And try as they might, these sites aint gonna be able to hide shit from the people who really matter, and thats Vince and his crew.


#WWELogic dictates they hide them because they do better than Reigns.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE SmackDown Viewership With Sami Zayn Vs. Chris Jericho, Brock Lesnar Announcement?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Last night's WWE SmackDown, with Chris Jericho vs. Sami Zayn in the main event and the Brock Lesnar vs. Randy Orton WWE SummerSlam announcement advertised, drew 2.241 million viewers. This is up 8% from last week's show, which drew 2.080 million viewers.

SmackDown was #15 for the night in viewership, due to the various mainstream news programs covering the shootings in Dallas, Baton Rouge and Minnesota.

SmackDown tied at #3 for the night in the 18-49 demographic with European Championship Football on ESPN and two airings of CNN Tonight.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...n-viewership-with-sami-zayn-vs-chris-jericho/


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> #WWELogic dictates they hide them because they do better than Reigns.


Nah, Im pretty sure they are way worse than Reigns.

These websites need to be more unbiased, its pretty unprofessional how they are acting. If you are news source, just report it how it is. When the site writers get butthurt that Ambrose isn't drawing well and stop releasing the segment by segment breakdown, then its just embarrassing.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> Fat Hardy Wyatt's feud with Jeff is more entertaining than anything Bray has ever done. He has the wrestling world talking about him, Bray has never ever done that before.


Brays and the wyatts had a sold out arena chanting 'this is awesome' before they even locked up against the shield. he was in a big profile match with cena at mania 30 (probably peak of his popularity). I was at mania 30 with 60,000 people clapping him to the ring.

Wrestling is all about opinion and all and the hardy stuff created some buzz but the whole wrestling world isn't talking about matt hardy or even close when you examine the metrics. Impact had 5,000 unique authors talking about the show on tuesday night according to the Nielsen twitter ratings, sd had 15,000 unique authors last night by comparison for a pretty uneventful show, raw had 51,000 for a show on July 4th when a large portion of the fanbase decided to celebrate their national holiday 

Matt or Jeff didn't rank in top 20 google searches for the day either so less than 50,000 (Meltzer said it was less than 20,000) even searched for info on the final deletion segment


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Daemon_Rising said:


> When you look at the ratings trends of the last 20 years, the fall period is always 10-15% lower ratings than the July holiday episode anyway. A rough guess would therefore indicate average ratings of around 1.7 for November.


Raw has only ever broadcast twice on July 4th, in 2011 and 2005 so there really isn't anything to compare it to. The July 4 2011 show was the lowest rated of the year. It would be December 24th 2012 before the show scored a lower rating actually.


> 2017 and 2018 things are only going to get worse (WWE are stubborn, and want to "win back" the fans in their own, delusional way). We have seen 10% drop offs of the hardcores consistently year upon year. Apply a 10% drop off in 2017 and 2018...and soon you are basically looking at 1.87 being a top-end Raw rating in two or three years. Probably post-Mania Raw and post-Rumble Raw will be the only Raws to break 2.0.


I mean its entirely possible and all and its amazing to look back at cable numbers across the board 5-6 years ago when shows on nick or mtv were doing huge numbers and today Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays are quiet cable nights. 3 years from now 2.7 million viewers might be considered good and win the night consistently

I will say it hasn't been a 10% drop off year on year though. 

If we just take live tv ratings into account the drop is as follows
2011.. just over 2% from 2010
2012.. 6.5% drop from 2011
2013..tiny rise
2014..2% drop from 2013
2015..just over 10% drop from 2014


The recent big drop started in December 2014, that's when I first noticed a downward trend from previous years ( yes numbers were lower in late August-September 2014 than previous 2-3 years but not significantly so. The slammy show in 2014 did far less that year than expected as that's usually one if the bigger raws of the 3rd quarter


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> Nah, Im pretty sure they are way worse than Reigns.
> 
> These websites need to be more unbiased, its pretty unprofessional how they are acting. If you are news source, just report it how it is. When the site writers get butthurt that Ambrose isn't drawing well and stop releasing the segment by segment breakdown, then its just embarrassing.


Nah, he is right.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> Raw has only ever broadcast twice on July 4th, in 2011 and 2005 so there really isn't anything to compare it to. The July 4 2011 show was the lowest rated of the year. It would be December 24th 2012 before the show scored a lower rating actually.


Yes, correct. Whenever the Raw has fallen on, say, a 5th or 6th or 7th of July, there's still a little dip (Holiday hangover???). Always a slight dip around this time, and on a couple occasions, they didn't even announce the rating (IIRC?). Anyway it's a rather moot point (from me). My only original point being that: If you think the July holiday period rating is a bad one... just wait until fall.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I just read that Vince McMahon is rumored for RAW. I'm not sure how much of a bump that will give the show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince being on the show makes some sense, I suppose. I mean, there is a brand split in the next week or two, so it makes sense that the owner would make an appearance. As for the bump, it provides, I'm done making rating predictions, especially coming off of a Holiday Raw. I just hope they get this brand split right.


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't think Vince being on Raw has anything to do with the Ratings. With only 2 Raws left before the Draft, Vince should be on Raw. Lets go with this GM stuff. If Vince is going to announce Shane and Stephaine as the GM's that would be disappointing.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> *Brays and the wyatts had a sold out arena chanting 'this is awesome' before they even locked up against the shield.* he was in a big profile match with cena at mania 30 (probably peak of his popularity). I was at mania 30 with 60,000 people clapping him to the ring.
> 
> Wrestling is all about opinion and all and the hardy stuff created some buzz but the whole wrestling world isn't talking about matt hardy or even close when you examine the metrics. Impact had 5,000 unique authors talking about the show on tuesday night according to the Nielsen twitter ratings, sd had 15,000 unique authors last night by comparison for a pretty uneventful show, raw had 51,000 for a show on July 4th when a large portion of the fanbase decided to celebrate their national holiday
> 
> Matt or Jeff didn't rank in top 20 google searches for the day either so less than 50,000 (Meltzer said it was less than 20,000) even searched for info on the final deletion segment


 You get Full Sail crowds doing the same for any half decent match. The 'this is awesome' chant has been killed by WWE fans, using it as a point to counter Bray has done nothing compared to Hardys recent stuff is laughable. Check out any wrestling site, forum or wrestling reddit pages, they're are all talking about the Hardy's. Hell even WWE stars are talking about it. This feud has gotten the whole wrestling world talking about the Hardy's. That has never been the case for Bray and probably never will.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE’s love affair with the Shield is not only past its honeymoon phase, it’s starting to get a little dark.

With arthouse wrestling favorite Dean Ambrose currently reigning as the people’s champion, Raw’s rating for Monday’s Fourth of July broadcast was Monday Nitro low. Not only did viewership drop below two million for the first time in two decades, but Monday’s episode ranked in the bottom-three among over 1,200 episodes of the venerable franchise.

With so many ways to consume WWE content, historically low television ratings are not as alarming as they were in the 90′s. This is a caveat wrestling dirtsheets blatantly ignored while Roman Reigns was world champion, but were quick to bring up once viewers tuned out in droves during Arthouse Ambrose’s current title run.

Still, there is certainly an unfavorable pattern developing with members of the Shield on top.

At some point during the world title reigns of Seth Rollins , Roman Reigns and Dean Ambrose, Raw has logged a historical low rating.

WWE took its time with the Shield to make it a dominant stable with no clearly defined leader. This was shrewdly done so fans could treat all three as equals, making it easier to take each seriously as a top star. Two years after their split, WWE continues to use the Shield narrative as a backstory for each former member. It’s almost impossible to get past an Ambrose/Reigns/Rollins segment without some Shield trivia from Michael Cole.

At least one of these three young stars has been in every televised WWE Championship match since the 2015 Royal Rumble. At Money in the Bank, all three former members held the WWE Championship at some point in the show.

WWE is clearly dedicated to pushing these three fresh faces as the future of the promotion, but viewers don’t seem to be buying it. So what happened? Is Shield fatigue kicking in? Does WWE need to get more creative in booking these talents as individuals? Are they just better off as a midcard stable?

WWE has a big problem on its hands if Reigns, Ambrose and Rollins prove to be ratings duds long-term. No other up-and-coming WWE Superstars have received as much of an investment as these three, and the ones who do seem poised for breakout world championship runs are aging veterans masquerading as rookies.

It’s encouraging that WWE is showing so much commitment to unproven talents in the New Era, but is it possible that they picked the wrong horses to pull the wagon?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alfredko.../#62f7bb797c03


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Can't wait for Vince to give his usual shit when ratings are shit.

"Time to shake things up! How about another New Era?" :vince3

"Fuck the old 2016 New Era from a few weeks ago! This is a new one! Of course we won't change anything, Roman will still be my babyface! PG garbage comedy stays!" :vince3 

"Please watch!" :vince7


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*7/7 WWE Smackdown TV Ratings – did Brock’s Summerslam announcement help?*

The announcement of Brock Lesnar’s Summerslam gave Smackdown a slight bump in TV Ratings. However, the show remained well below previous levels.

WWE Smackdown TV Ratings Tracking

*July 7:* WWE Smackdown scored a 1.62 TV rating, up from a near-year-low 1.52 rating last week.

Smackdown tied with May 19 for the highest rating in two months.

To put the rating in perspective, Smackdown was well below the First Quarter average of a 1.77 TV rating and was essentially even with the Second Quarter average of a 1.61 rating.

– Smackdown drew 2.241 million viewers, up seven percent from last week’s basement-level 2.080 million viewers.

It was also the most viewers since May 19.

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Smackdown got a pop among males 18-49, drawing the highest m18-49 rating since June.

Adults 18-49 was slightly up from last week and males 18-34 was also up from last week. M18-34 had been down for a while, so the increase pushed the demo to the highest rating in two months going back to May 12.
*
Caldwell’s Analysis:* A decent rating considering Smackdown has been stuck at sub-1.6 ratings for two months. However, it’s not a big number when looking at earlier this year.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07...-ratings-brocks-summerslam-announcement-help/


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And LOL at anyone that thinks the ratings are down because of the SHIELD.

It's down because of who they DON'T have, not who they have.

They have no bad ass, larger than life stars.

To add to that, the McMahons are the primary reason people don't watch. They are the ones forcing shit that people don't want and are hardheaded when fans tell them what they want.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheLooseCanon said:


> And LOL at anyone that thinks the ratings are down because of the SHIELD.
> 
> It's down because of who they DON'T have, not who they have.
> 
> They have no bad ass, larger than life stars.
> 
> To add to that, the McMahons are the primary reason people don't watch. They are the ones forcing shit that people don't want and are hardheaded when fans tell them what they want.


 Part of the reason they're down is because of the show revolving around 1 or 2 guys who aren't charismatic enough to carry a show. The show needs to have more stars and more variety. At the moment, neither of TS are seen as individual top guys, they're still living in the shadow of TS.


----------



## Arkham258

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

While bad creative and booking certainly play a role, I honestly am starting to believe that no one cares about wrestling right now, no matter how good or bad it is. The Final Deletion proved that the only things that boost ratings now are publicity stunts, and that's great for one night, but fickle wrestling fans are not likely to come back the next week.

I hear people saying TNA has been good for months, and yet it seems it's only when they hyped up this Hardy publicity stunt did people actually tune in. That's all wrestling fans care about right now, something with shock value. Then they're gone again next week. If Lucha Underground advertised a major character dying next week I guarantee the numbers would surge, then drop like 40% the following week

Wrestling fans just aren't supporting the products anymore. They don't care.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm not really big on this "the show is bad" excuse for the Shield tanking. These just aren't superstar pro wrestlers. Dean/Seth could maybe be good 1B/1C guys to the 1A guy(s) like Edge or Angle were, but Roman's a midcard wrestler. Or a tag team wrestler. 

I just look at it like this. TNA, the fucking worst show ever, running a farce feud between the Hardys, saw a bump of a couple hundred k viewers because fans are enjoying their over the top retardation. So you're telling me a fucking show on POP TV, a network nobody knows or cares about, can get a couple hundred thousand people to switch over to them for the Hardys yet the WWE, a million dollar company on USA Network can't ever get a bump that significant anymore (100,000 viewers on fucking PopTV is like a million compared to a real network)? They just DROP. This is telling you that if you actually have hot performers or angles, fans WILL find your show, considering they can find TNA on Pop TV :lol 

The "hot angle" for the past year in WWE has been the Shield taking over the main event, though it isn't as if Stephanie/Hunter aren't at fault in this too. The show has never been worse than during this timeframe. Nobody is over. Crowds are fucking dead. Numbers are dropping. Fans might LIKE the Shield...but they sure as fuck don't LOVE them. You know what fans DID love recently? Watching the Hardys make assholes out of themselves. You know why? Because it was what it was. There was no Stephanie McMahon pandering about feminism or bullying or whatever the fuck. There was no Make-A-Wish lets suck our own dicks bullshit. There was no ROMAN REIGNS. It was just two fuck-ups having a dopey spoof of a wrestling match/feud. And fans enjoyed it because it isn't taking itself as seriously as WWE and its shitty performers do.


----------



## OwenSES

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Shield trio as talent are not responsible for the ratings being down, but I do feel WWE have shot them self in the foot with their Shield obsession as they pretty much made the entire roster look inferior to them from 2012-2016.


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Do you honestly fucking think a guy who looks like Kevin Owens is going to bring viewers in? AJ Styles cred has taken a big hit, and he'll be in the midcard after the Cena burial. There is no one other than the Shield guys. Cesaro and Sami don't have personality. I literally can't think of anybody else. Cena and Orton have dominated the main event for the last decade. 

When the 2 biggest badasses in the last decade's brawl could only muster up 3.7M views (that was considered bad last year), it clearly shows it has less to do with the guys themselves and more to do with the ACTUAL formatting of the show.


----------



## .MCH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Year long title reigns, start and stop pushes, the focus on pure wrestling, long matches, terrible promos, and pointless feuds. Of course viewers are tuning out. I stopped watching a couple of months ago and for good reason.

PPVs are meaningless now, there are no good characters, the people they push are fucking awful, and the rise of NXT has been the worst thing to happen to the company. NXT has always sucked and now it's becoming apart of the main show. 

It's the new generation era all over again. But I don't even think an attempt at a new attitude era would help. Either way they need to find better stars who have CHARISMA and an ability to draw people in.

The Shield members as champions? :lol What a joke. And to think, people want Styles and Kevin Owens as champion.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> *Vince being on the show makes some sense, I suppose.* I mean, there is a brand split in the next week or two, so it makes sense that the owner would make an appearance. As for the bump, it provides, I'm done making rating predictions, especially coming off of a Holiday Raw. I just hope they get this brand split right.


That quote right there shows how desillusioned fans have become with the whole product.

"Ah, the brand split is happening in two weeks, so I suppose it makes Sense for Vince to appear". 
Hell yes it makes Sense!
Vince, Steph, Shane, Hunter (shit, where is Hunter?) should ALL rip each other's hearts out by now! Summerslam is soon.

Where the FUCK is the Brand Split story?


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> Do you honestly fucking think a guy who looks like Kevin Owens is going to bring viewers in? AJ Styles cred has taken a big hit, and he'll be in the midcard after the Cena burial. There is no one other than the Shield guys. Cesaro and Sami don't have personality. I literally can't think of anybody else. Cena and Orton have dominated the main event for the last decade.
> 
> When the 2 biggest badasses in the last decade's brawl could only muster up 3.7M views (that was considered bad last year), it clearly shows it has less to do with the guys themselves and more to do with the ACTUAL formatting of the show.


I think some of these guys would be perfectly capable of being upper tier guys IF there was that top guy presence to make them more interesting. It's like having a roster of HHH's. All guys who need to work with THE guy to be interesting. And they don't have THE guy. The guy that they're trying to push as "the guy" needs to have everyone hold his hand and do everything for him because he fucking sucks. So it basically turns the entire roster into enhancement talents. THEY should be better for working with HIM, not the other way around.


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



OwenSES said:


> The Shield trio as talent are not responsible for the ratings being down, but I do feel WWE have shot them self in the foot with their Shield obsession as they pretty much made the entire roster look inferior to them from 2012-2016.


Not really? Tell me, how has WWE made everybody look inferior to Dean??? He's had terrible booking up till 2016. He didn't get a PPV win after The Shield split for almost a year afterwards, and even then it was over Luke Harper, somebody booked even worse than him.

And also, Seth might have been champion last year but he lost to practically everybody, even J&J Security got a win over him at one point, lol.

Like I said in that closed thread, it's really unfair to blame low ratings solely on The Shield guys. That July 4 Raw was always going to rate badly, cos people were out celebrating, not sitting at home watching Raw.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Give the title to Cena, so WWE can die properly with its mediocre face of the company and the principal reason of why the ratings are on the toilet and have been since 2008.


----------



## RLStern

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Ambrose Girl said:


> Not really? Tell me, how has WWE made everybody look inferior to Dean??? He's had terrible booking up till 2016. He didn't get a PPV win after The Shield split for almost a year afterwards, and even then it was over Luke Harper, somebody booked even worse than him.
> 
> And also, Seth might have been champion last year but he lost to practically everybody, even J&J Security got a win over him at one point, lol.
> 
> Like I said in that closed thread, it's really unfair to blame low ratings solely on The Shield guys. That July 4 Raw was always going to rate badly, cos people were out celebrating, not sitting at home watching Raw.


*
If you think wins/losses is the reason why then you don't have the mind for the business, Rock lost so many times yet was the top draw since late 1998 and drew the biggest ratings, Mankind most of the time lost, Daniel Bryan most of the time lost yet all huge draws.

Drawing and Ratings have nothing to do with wins and losses, but with characters and storylines, the roster and the writing just don't work for whatever the reason may be.*


----------



## Peerless

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> I think some of these guys would be perfectly capable of being upper tier guys IF there was that top guy presence to make them more interesting. It's like having a roster of HHH's. All guys who need to work with THE guy to be interesting. And they don't have THE guy. The guy that they're trying to push as "the guy" needs to have everyone hold his hand and do everything for him because he fucking sucks. So it basically turns the entire roster into enhancement talents. THEY should be better for working with HIM, not the other way around.


I don't know, man. How many times are we going to see the rehashed indy darling vs corporate pick storyline? It was cool when it was Punk vs Cena, but now it's played out and awful. It's the exact reason why I hate the Styles-Cena feud, I've seen it a million times already. 

"JAHN YOU CAN'T WRASTLE"

"THEY OVERLOOKED ME BECAUSE I DON'T LOOK GOOD ON A BILLBOARD"

"YOU'RE A CORPORATE STOOGE"

You know, the other day the hashtag #growingupwatchingwwe was trending on twitter, and it really dawned on me what the product missed. There are no distinguishable and distinct characters anymore. Everybody is the fucking same. 

Someone needs to tell me what is the difference between Zayn, Neville, Cesaro, Crews, Balor, Rollins, Styles, Kalisto, and Ziggler. NONE, of those guys, have any personality. They don't have identifiable gimmicks, and they all do the same shtick. Guys who are happy to be here, and are mad that the machine is against them.

Honestly, from that list, only 2 have a legit excuse. Styles' is on a legends run, and Rollins' confidence is so high that his lack of personality has been overlooked.

However, maybe some of those guys do have personality, and it's the booking that's the only problem. I mean, if someone told me Kofi Kingston had a personality back in 2010, I would have laughed at him. But look at Kofi now, he's arguably the funniest guy in the New Day. 

Bad booking aside, who from the current roster actually has a charming personality, that translates on TV? From the top of my head they are:

Cena, Enzo, Bray, Ambrose, Owens, New Day, and Jericho. Then I guess you have guys like Bubba and Miz depending on who you ask. Even then, those guys have some problems that prevent them from becoming major stars.

Cena is the FOTC.

Enzo is a comedy character.

Bray is fantastic, but they've ruined him beyond belief.

Ambrose's look is awful. Sure, it has its appeal, but he doesn't look like a star. I mean, he has the rugged look of a wrestler, but at the same time, he looks like a guy off the streets.

Don't even get me started on Owens' look.

New Day are a comedy gimmick.

Jericho is one of the GOAT and is on the verge of retirement.

And that brings me to my second point. A lot of guys on the roster, don't look like stars. They look like fans. There are no more interesting characters, and if there are, they book them so bad that they either turn into comedy characters, or the crowd doesn't care about them anymore. I mean when Xavier Woods was trying to sell the Wyatt family as a serious threat, I just rolled my eyes. WWE ruined them so badly, that I couldn't even take that seriously.

This brings me to my final point, they need to give individual characters their OWN storylines. That way you could at least make some vanilla wrestlers interesting. If they have faith in a guy like Apollo Crews to lead the company in the future, give him his own storyline. Arya in GOT has a hit list of people she wants to kill, give Crews a list of people who he wants to beat. That way he has direction, and if he gets over in beating his list of names he looks credible enough for a title run. If he loses, you can create a redemption storyline. 

Now of course with guys who aren't interesting like Crews, it's hard to get the crowd invested, but it could work. My point is, giving individual wrestlers, direction, isn't difficult. If you give them direction, you can use a plot device like a cliffhanger, which will make the audience want to see the next episode. There is no reason to watch the next episode of RAW because rarely is the storyline that was in the previous episode, interesting enough to carry over interest. 

TL;DR: hire wrestlers with personality, give them an interesting look and gimmick, give them direction = ratings


----------



## RLStern

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



.MCH said:


> *Year long title reigns, start and stop pushes, the focus on pure wrestling, long matches, terrible promos, and pointless feuds*. Of course viewers are tuning out. I stopped watching a couple of months ago and for good reason.


:applause *Amen, that's why the business is going downhill, we were getting better and finally had good stuff with Rock's return run and Daniel Bryan vs The Authority, but now since last year WWE had dropped the ball.

Storyline makes the matches people, Rock/Cena match was incredible because of the storyline, Daniel Bryan vs The Authority was incredible because of the story
*


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Peerless said:


> I don't know, man. How many times are we going to see the rehashed indy darling vs corporate pick storyline? It was cool when it was Punk vs Cena, but now it's played out and awful. It's the exact reason why I hate the Styles-Cena feud, I've seen it a million times already.
> 
> "JAHN YOU CAN'T WRESTLE"
> 
> "THEY OVERLOOKED ME BECAUSE I DON'T LOOK GOOD ON A BILLBOARD"
> 
> "YOU'RE A CORPORATE STOOGE"
> 
> You know, the other day the hashtag #growingupwatchingwwe was trending on twitter, and it really dawned on me what the product missed. There are no distinguishable and distinct characters anymore. Everybody is the fucking same.
> 
> Someone needs to tell me what is the difference between Zayn, Neville, Cesaro, Crews, Balor, Rollins, Styles, Kalisto, and Ziggler. NONE, of those guys, have any personality. They don't have identifiable gimmicks, and they all do the same shtick. Guys who are happy to be here, and are mad that the machine is against them.
> 
> Honestly, from that list, only 2 have a legit excuse. Styles' is on a legends run, and Rollins' confidence is so high that his lack of personality has been overlooked.
> 
> However, maybe some of those guys do have personality, and it's the booking that's the only problem. I mean, if someone told me Kofi Kingston had a personality back in 2010, I would have laughed at him. But look at Kofi now, he's arguably the funniest guy in the New Day.
> 
> Bad booking aside, who from the current roster actually has a charming personality? From the top of my head they are:
> 
> Cena, Enzo, Bray, Ambrose, Owens, New Day, and Jericho. Then I guess you have guys like Bubba and Miz depending on who you ask.
> 
> Cena is the FOTC.
> 
> Enzo is a comedy character.
> 
> Bray is fantastic, but they've ruined him beyond belief.
> 
> Ambrose's look is awful. Sure, it has its appeal, but he doesn't look like a star. I mean, he has the rugged look of a wrestler, but at the same time, he looks like a guy off the streets.
> 
> Don't even get me started on Owens' look.
> 
> New Day are a comedy gimmick.
> 
> Jericho is one of the GOAT and is on the verge of retirement.
> 
> And that brings me to my second point. A lot of guys on the roster, don't look like stars. They look like fans. There are no more interesting characters, and if there are, they book them so bad that they either turn into comedy characters, or the crowd doesn't care about them anymore. I mean when Xavier Woods was trying to sell the Wyatt family as a serious threat, I just rolled my eyes. WWE ruined them so badly, that I couldn't even take that seriously.
> 
> This brings me to my final point, they need to give individual characters their OWN storylines. That way you could at least make some vanilla wrestlers interesting. If they have faith in a guy like Apollo Crews to lead the company in the future, give him his own storyline. Arya in GOT has a hit list of people she wants to kill, give Crews a list of people who he wants to beat. That way he has direction, and if he gets over in beating his list of names he looks credible enough for a title run. If he loses, you can create a redemption storyline.
> 
> Now of course with guys who aren't interesting like Crews, it's hard to get the crowd invested, but it could work. My point is, giving individual wrestlers, direction, isn't difficult. If you give them direction, you can use a plot device like a cliffhanger, which will make the audience want to see the next episode. There is no reason to watch the next episode of RAW because rarely is the storyline that was in the previous episode, interesting enough to carry over interest.
> 
> TL;DR: hire wrestlers with personality, give them an interesting look and gimmick, give them direction = ratings


I don't disagree. As I've said a hundred times, JR as the talent relations guy hired people to be wrestling superstars. HHH is hiring people to be indie gods, because they think that's what the business is about now. Everyone's gimmick is "I'm a better wrestler than you...so lets trade wins for the next month". 

It's like Scott Hudson said a while back when he compared this WWE roster to when they brought up the Natural Born Thrillers in WCW. Like here's a bunch of guys with good looks, great ring skills, etc, yet none of them have an ounce of personality or talking ability. That's WWE's entire roster right now. 

But at the same time, I feel like if they had a true superstar on the roster, it would make all of them better. The problem is the 'top guy spot' is now the official WWE mascot. The top guy USED to be the focal point of the company, and the guy who reflected the state of the company and its fanbase. Now it's just a mascot saying "Please order WWE merchandise or Network. You can boo me or cheer me, I don't mind, I respect and love the fans! Please like me!" That's why it was so important to give Punk the ball and run with him, instead of burying him and turning him into a generic heel. 

It's like they just now realized, years later, that the direction Punk was taking them in was the right one. They refused to do the evil Corporate WWE vs. blue collar underdog "B+ player guy" storyline back then, but nowadays it's all they do. Only without CM Punk.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



.MCH said:


> Year long title reigns, start and stop pushes, the focus on pure wrestling, long matches, terrible promos, and pointless feuds. Of course viewers are tuning out. I stopped watching a couple of months ago and for good reason.
> 
> PPVs are meaningless now, there are no good characters, the people they push are fucking awful, and the rise of NXT has been the worst thing to happen to the company. NXT has always sucked and now it's becoming apart of the main show.
> 
> It's the new generation era all over again. But I don't even think an attempt at a new attitude era would help. Either way they need to find better stars who have CHARISMA and an ability to draw people in.
> 
> The Shield members as champions? :lol What a joke. And to think, people want Styles and Kevin Owens as champion.


Year long title reigns certainly are not a reason. On the contrary, titles changing like a pack of cigarettes hurts them. A lot.
And pure Wrestling is not the problem either. The problem is that they put on PPV matches every few days, when Long matches should be Reserved for PPV.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Another reason for Styles and the Club to beat up John Cena


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Year long title reigns certainly are not a reason. On the contrary, titles changing like a pack of cigarettes hurts them. A lot.
> And pure Wrestling is not the problem either. The problem is that they put on PPV matches every few days, when Long matches should be Reserved for PPV.


The title were treated like props during the Attitude era. It didn't hurt them because every guy who held the title was universally loved by the fans. Kane's one day title reign didn't hurt him at all because he was fucking Kane and still a monster that could destroy whomever he wanted.

The wrestler themselves matters, titles are just props/fake accomplishments.

That's why Sheamus, Del Rio, and Miz will never be stars despite holding multiple titles and accomplishments. The fans have never cared about them and never will.


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

We will probably have a new champion soon after this weeks ratings!


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CAMVP said:


> We will probably have a new champion soon after this weeks ratings!


 Now if only we had a MITB briefcase to get a NEW champion.

Ambrose wasted that briefcase, he could been in the triple threat with Roman and Rollins at Summerslam. After the match, you could of had KO cash in after months of teasing. That's how you book a MITB briefcase. You don't waste it within hours on a guy who doesn't need it to get a title shot or run.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



CAMVP said:


> We will probably have a new champion soon after this weeks ratings!


:reigns2


----------



## OwenSES

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Ambrose Girl said:


> Not really? Tell me, how has WWE made everybody look inferior to Dean??? He's had terrible booking up till 2016. He didn't get a PPV win after The Shield split for almost a year afterwards, and even then it was over Luke Harper, somebody booked even worse than him.
> 
> And also, Seth might have been champion last year but he lost to practically everybody, even J&J Security got a win over him at one point, lol.
> 
> Like I said in that closed thread, it's really unfair to blame low ratings solely on The Shield guys. That July 4 Raw was always going to rate badly, cos people were out celebrating, not sitting at home watching Raw.


See I have to disagree with this. Ambrose has always been able to beat 95% of the roster since he debuted. He has always been superior to the likes of The Miz, Ziggler, Barrett, Jericho ect ect. I mean just look at the feud with Kevin Owens. Ambrose got 3 decisive victories over him! 

The unfortunate thing for Ambrose is he has been 3rd choice out of The Shield members and there is not enough room for all 3 at the top so he has always been booked weaker than the other 2. The only people that Ambrose doesn't beat are the main event guys the likes of HHH, Orton, Lesnar, Cena and even Bray Wyatt and that is a consequence of being in the shadow of Rollins and Reigns.

The main point is, it was a never a question of "Will Dean Ambrose ever be WWE Champion?" It was always "When will Dean Ambrose be WWE Champion" It was inevitable, it was going to happen one of these days. He has been pushed pretty strong in 2016 and it was just about the timing and with Rollins getting injured and Reigns dropping the ball, Dean was finally able to rise above his Shield oppressors and win the title. 

Just a final point, I don't believe 1 person should be held responsible for any ratings disaster and especially not Ambrose as this is his first real run as a main eventer, but I just wanted to make the point that The Shield have basically dominated the WWE during the period where the ratings have dropped, so it's natural people would connect the two.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last night's edition of WWE SmackDown, featuring Chris Jericho vs. Sami Zayn in the main event and the Brock Lesnar vs. Randy Orton WWE SummerSlam announcement advertised, drew 2.241 million viewers. This is up from last week's show which drew 2.080 million viewers. 

SmackDown was #15 for the night in viewership, likely due to the various mainstream news programs covering the shootings in Dallas, Baton Rouge and Minnesota. 

SmackDown tied at #3 for the night in the 18-49 demographic with European Championship Football on ESPN and two airings of CNN Tonight.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Man, I'm glad I stopped watching wrestling from like 2007 until last year. Otherwise I'd probably be constantly bitching and moaning about how everything is the same. Then again probably not as I'm nowhere near as pessimistic as the average person on this board.

But let's get real if you expect a show that's been going on for over 20+ years to constantly have new ideas, new themes, etc, you're crazy. That's like expecting the Simpsons to be just as good as when it started.

Second if you think that declining ratings means the end of WWE, you are stupid. TV ratings in general have been declining across the board. Compound that with the fact that streaming is the easiest it has ever been. Moreover, streaming applies more to WWE than other shows like Modern Family due to the nature of the show and because probably a huge chunk of the audience streams it instead of watches on cable. These people are still seeing the stupid ads beeing shown by the USA network during Raw, but are not being officially counted in the TV ratings. But USA and WWE both know this so they probably have ways to account for this, and thus the real TV rating of RAW is higher than you guys think.

Lastly, if you really want to use one metric as a gauge of how well a company is doing, you should be commenting on the stock price of the WWE, not the TV ratings.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown was as probably as close to RAW in ratings as it has been in God knows how long. Just a guess on my part.


----------



## Bazinga

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Indy guys don't pull in ratings. A one-week spike after they've won the title doesn't count.

This has been a downward spiral since Punk main-evented and continued with Bryan and then Rollins. Ambrose is next.

There's a reason they panic and put the title on Cena/Orton/HHH/Brock/Rock and that's because they have name value.

All talented guys, but the proof is in the pudding.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bazinga said:


> Indy guys don't pull in ratings. A one-week spike after they've won the title doesn't count.
> 
> This has been a downward spiral since Punk main-evented and continued with Bryan and then Rollins. Ambrose is next.
> 
> There's a reason they panic and put the title on Cena/Orton/HHH/Brock/Rock and that's because they have name value.
> 
> All talented guys, but the proof is in the pudding.


I feel sorry for people like you ^ 

1- No one draws besides Rock
2- as it stands it looks like more hardcore > casual fans, so driving them away by not pushing the talented indy guys, is going to backfire.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bazinga said:


> Indy guys don't pull in ratings. A one-week spike after they've won the title doesn't count.
> 
> This has been a downward spiral since Punk main-evented and continued with Bryan and then Rollins. Ambrose is next.
> 
> There's a reason they panic and put the title on Cena/Orton/HHH/Brock/Rock and that's because they have name value.
> 
> All talented guys, but the proof is in the pudding.


Everyone knows the Indy guys didn't draw. But neither have the 'non-Indy' guys, either. Especially not over the past 10 years.

None of Cena, Orton, HHH, Brock did shit in the ratings. The slow, steady decline in the ratings that started 10 years ago actually started with Cena. Just some food for thought.

:cena


----------



## Arkham258

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The hell?

Bryan was a proven draw

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_77624.shtml#.V4GX1_krKM8


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_76982.shtml#.V4GYtvkrKM9

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_76825.shtml#.V4GYuPkrKM9

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_77409.shtml#.V4GYw_krKM9

http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_77624.shtml#.V4GYx_krKM9


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_78252.shtml#.V4GYOPkrKM8


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bazinga said:


> Indy guys don't pull in ratings. A one-week spike after they've won the title doesn't count.
> 
> This has been a downward spiral since Punk main-evented and continued with Bryan and then Rollins. Ambrose is next.
> 
> There's a reason they panic and put the title on Cena/Orton/HHH/Brock/Rock and that's because they have name value.
> 
> All talented guys, but the proof is in the pudding.


:eyeroll

Yeah Cena sure pulled in those ratings when he came back

Cant wait for the MASSIVE ratings spike when Orton comes back too:heyman6


----------



## VitoCorleoneX

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bazinga said:


> Indy guys don't pull in ratings. A one-week spike after they've won the title doesn't count.
> 
> This has been a downward spiral since Punk main-evented and continued with Bryan and then Rollins. Ambrose is next.
> 
> There's a reason they panic and put the title on Cena/Orton/HHH/Brock/Rock and that's because they have name value.
> 
> All talented guys, but the proof is in the pudding.


Thats why Cena,Orton an recently Reigns did great in the past with ratings.
Bullshit. do your research.


----------



## Lothario

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bazinga said:


> Indy guys don't pull in ratings. A one-week spike after they've won the title doesn't count.
> 
> *This has been a downward spiral since Punk main-evented and continued with Bryan and then Rollins. Ambrose is next.
> *
> There's a reason they panic and put the title on Cena/Orton/HHH/Brock/Rock and that's because they have name value.
> 
> All talented guys, but the proof is in the pudding.




I just love how Roman is omitted here despite ratings plummeting at a record rate since last November and most recently, post WM with him as champ. Bryan and Punk especially pulled Stone Cold in '99 numbers in comparison to what Roman did as champion. Everytime you guys continue to attempt to bury the independent guys, this harsh truth needs to be hammered home.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Everyone knows the Indy guys didn't draw. But neither have the 'non-Indy' guys, either. Especially not over the past 10 years.
> 
> None of Cena, Orton, HHH, Brock did shit in the ratings. The slow, steady decline in the ratings that started 10 years ago actually started with Cena. Just some food for thought.
> 
> :cena


Ratings decline from peak started 15 years ago in 2001 post WrestleMania 17 so it started before cena even debuted


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Vince doesn't know what to do without any competition. He ruined the business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Arkham258

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well it's obvious what WWE needs to do. Broken Cain vs Brother Abel...the final Burial. A buried alive match between Kane and Taker taking place at the Wyatt compound where Kane will have to fight his way through the entire Wyatt family, and Bo Dallas who seems to be there for no apparent reason, then get past hologram Paul Bearer to face "Brother Abel" in the ring.

If fucking TNA can get a ratings spike WWE sure as hell can


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Maybe Owens should just challenge Zayn to Final Deletion match or something.


----------



## PlKACHU

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



validreasoning said:


> Ratings decline from peak started 15 years ago in 2001 post WrestleMania 17 so it started before cena even debuted


It actually started in September 2000 when they moved to TNN.

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2000-ratings/


----------



## Marv95

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

All 3 Shield guys have flopped. All broke an almost 2-decade low at one point.

Serious question: If Batista won the belt at Mania 30 instead of Bryan do you think they'd be getting 1s right now?


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Marv95 said:


> All 3 Shield guys have flopped. All broke an almost 2-decade low at one point.
> 
> Serious question: If Batista won the belt at Mania 30 instead of Bryan do you think they'd be getting 1s right now?


no i dont believe they would, the wwe really missed out on the potential cross over appeal of batista being champion whilst he was promoting guardians 

theyd have needed better booking regardless though should have kept the shield together longer so they wouldn't feel as over exposed as singles now


----------



## Bazinga

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

But you're forgetting the ratings decline 10-15 years ago still meant pulling in good ratings. These ratings now are 1995-1996 bad and it's coincided with pushing these TALENTED (remember I have said this and it's true) yet unheard of wrestlers from the Indy's.

There's no need to get upset, the facts are there.

I never said Cena/Orton/HHH etc. pulled in huge ratings, but they do at least remain steady. Did they with Rollins as champ? With Punk as champ? With Bryan as (short lived) champ? They did drop with Roman, I'm not denying that but he's not considered an 'Indy darling' like the rest.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Of course the ratings were higher when they declined under the Cena's and Orton's. That's because right before they were Champs, guys like Austin and Rock were, which is when they were at their peak. This is literally 10-15 years after. Big difference. And obviously Reigns is not an Indy Darling, and that's what proves your point wrong. Because it shows that no matter what kind of talent they put the title on, the ratings don't improve. Indy has nothing to do with it. A good deal of fans out there don't even know what that means and the longer these guys have been in WWE, the more and more their Indy label fades away anyway, because they've been all "WWE'd up." The logic is frightening..

Funny how so few mention a 10 year decline that just kept getting worse and worse year after year with Cena on top, a non-Indy guy..

And to the other guy, the only time they've gotten a 1 was this week, and it was a national holiday, and it was much closer to a 2..


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings are naturally going to be down because cable ratings literally everywhere have gone done because less people have it than they do 10 years ago. This is a fact. 

The first ratings crash happened around 2002. The death and subsequent burial of WCW and Austin's heel turn were the literal worst decisions they ever made. It was the catalyst for what we see today. Many WCW fans left and never came back. InVasion is their 6th (I believe, I know it is in the to 10) highest PPV buyrate of *all time*. WCW had loyal fans to the very end that WWE alienated. 

Business was bad from 2002-2004 and that's why they hotshotted so many things that year (the nWo, Hogan, Lesnar etc)

When Batista/Cena where on top as equals, they were the first and only guys to get the ratings/attendance back up. These two, as equals (keyword) broke the WWE all time PPV buyrate twice. (WM 21 and WM 23). Cena and Rock is still the all time highest, however. 

They were the only guys post AE to bring the ratings back up. Every other time has just been a slow decline. Around 2007-2008, they *what's that word where you can't gain anymore and just stalemate? Whatever that is* again and have continued since. I've said it before, but Batista was more popular in the adult male demographic, but they seemingly pushed Cena over him due to Batista being 36 at the time. Also, when he got injured he got stuck on SD.

Whether you like Batista/Cena or not, you cannot deny they are the last two Superstars to come from WWE. Like...not just guys who have the belt and are called "The Guy", guys who actually put asses in seats and made WWE a shit ton of money. 

However, the last 3-4 years is when WWE's ratings took a nosedive. You can't use the all ratings going down excuse there as DVR and Netflix has been around long before that.

Here's some facts for ya'll. Took these from random RAW's in March, all around the same date:

In March 2013: 4,813,000 viewers 
In March 2014: 4,075,333 viewers
In March 2015: 3,858,667 viewers
In March 2016: 3.399 million viewers. 

Now on July 4th 2016

Hour one: 2.66 million
Hour two: 2.67 million
Hour three: 2.64 million

...................com/tags/raw-rating/


All found with this website. Edit: It's not letting me post it for some reason. Well, the site is Wrestling News World. They've lost 2 million viewers in 3 years. 

You can go back to 2011 and compare it to 2013.

http://www.cagesideseats.com/2011/8...g-8-2011-show-average-4-54-million-viewers-on

And see they had remained consistent until about 2013. 2013 was the beginning of the decline we now see.

Edit:
Let's go back even further.

WWE Raw Ratings Last Five Years

2007 - 3.63 rating

2008 - 3.28 rating

2009 - 3.59 rating

2010 - 3.28 rating

2011 - 3.21 rating

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...reakdown-for-raw-smackdown-and-impact-in-2011

As you can see, they remained relatively consistent throughout the years. Don't take this as me being biased or anything, I'm just showing you guys the facts. They don't lie or have bias. Well..truthfully I have bias for Batista because he's been my guy, but still.

Dave Meltzer said the adult male viewership is at *an all time low*. The same thing that almost killed the WWF. This is...interesting to say the least.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BigDaveBatista said:


> no i dont believe they would, the wwe really missed out on the potential cross over appeal of batista being champion whilst he was promoting guardians


Rock was champion during WrestleMania season the year before and he had two movies out (fast 6 and gi Joe) and he went around and brought the WWE title to the premieres and while viewership rose it didn't jump massively, in fact it was only 200,000 viewers higher on average than when Bryan was champion and rocks a much bigger star in Hollywood than Batista. So no Batista winning wouldn't have made a single bit of difference. Lesnar winning title saw viewership drop almost instantly. Hhh winning title didn't see a rise in viewers


Bazinga said:


> But you're forgetting the ratings decline 10-15 years ago still meant pulling in good ratings. These ratings now are 1995-1996 bad and it's coincided with pushing these TALENTED (remember I have said this and it's true) yet unheard of wrestlers from the Indy's.


That statement makes no sense. If they were working for WWE people have heard of them. They didn't sign punk, Bryan, rollins and two days later put the title on them. Punk was a regular on wwe tv for 5 years, Bryan for 3.5 years and rollins 2.5 years when they got first WWE title run.

Pretty much everyone is unheard of when they debut ie cena, Orton, Batista 99.99% of fans didn't know who they were in 2002. I didn't see many undertaker = mean mark posters in 1990. People did know mankind was cactus as it was a much smarkier crowd by then (and they chanted cactus during his debut) but I doubt they knew who Dwayne Johnson was prior to late 1996. Hhh was a prelim guy in wcw, Austin a midcard guy yet became huge stars in WWE.



> I never said Cena/Orton/HHH etc. pulled in huge ratings, but they do at least remain steady. Did they with Rollins as champ? With Punk as champ? With Bryan as (short lived) champ? They did drop with Roman, I'm not denying that but he's not considered an 'Indy darling' like the rest.


Steady compared to what? Different points of year determine ratings e.g January to April numbers ( WrestleMania season) will be higher than September to December (when raw has head to head competition with the nfl)

Raw averaged about 4.4 million viewers live when Bryan was champion (6-7 weeks before he announced he needed surgery). Raw averaged similar between november-January 2012-13 with punk as champion as it did with Orton as champion exactly same period a year later



Cipher said:


> The first ratings crash happened around 2002. The death and subsequent burial of WCW and Austin's heel turn were the literal worst decisions they ever made. It was the catalyst for what we see today. Many WCW fans left and never came back. InVasion is their 6th (I believe, I know it is in the to 10) highest PPV buyrate of *all time*. WCW had loyal fans to the very end that WWE alienated.


Wcw had about 2 million viewers watching weekly at the end (3 million watched final nitro) yet raw never saw a boost post the final nitro. Wcw had a loyal fanbase so loyal they switched off forever after march 2001. The majority of those 2-3 million wcw loyals would never have watched a wwf/wcw regardless what they did. If you picked wcw in 2000-01 to watch over wwf raw at its peak in 2000-march 2001 why would you suddenly watch wwf in may-November 2001 when quality fell greatly just because wwf was pushing a bastardised version of wcw?




> All found with this website. Edit: It's not letting me post it for some reason. Well, the site is Wrestling News World. They've lost 2 million viewers in 3 years.


You pick random dates in march and compared them to July 4th. Wouldn't it have been smarter to compare viewership on July 4th 2011 and this year. I mean comparing a WrestleMania season raw where rock is champion and all over the show isn't exactly the same as a show on Americas national holiday with big show and Zach Ryder emerging victorious in main event 

There would also be numerous other things to look at between those dates e.g channels average demo them and now, number of homes then and now, how strong was wwes youtube channel then and now in terms of subs/views/segments uploaded


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



BigDaveBatista said:


> no i dont believe they would, the wwe really missed out on the potential cross over appeal of batista being champion whilst he was promoting guardians
> 
> theyd have needed better booking regardless though should have kept the shield together longer so they wouldn't feel as over exposed as singles now


Jesus, what?

You think when The Rock, who is a Hollywood Superstar, can't capture that elusive "crossover appeal", then Fucking Batista can?

Why not go all the way then and call up David Arquette again?

Fuck, a Batista win at WM 30 would have pissed away more fans than that motherfucker could ever draw in 2014.



Cipher said:


> Ratings are naturally going to be down because cable ratings literally everywhere have gone done because less people have it than they do 10 years ago. This is a fact.
> 
> The first ratings crash happened around 2002. The death and subsequent burial of WCW and Austin's heel turn were the literal worst decisions they ever made. It was the catalyst for what we see today. Many WCW fans left and never came back. InVasion is their 6th (I believe, I know it is in the to 10) highest PPV buyrate of *all time*. WCW had loyal fans to the very end that WWE alienated.
> 
> Business was bad from 2002-2004 and that's why they hotshotted so many things that year (the nWo, Hogan, Lesnar etc)
> 
> When Batista/Cena where on top as equals, they were the first and only guys to get the ratings/attendance back up. These two, as equals (keyword) broke the WWE all time PPV buyrate twice. (WM 21 and WM 23). Cena and Rock is still the all time highest, however.
> 
> They were the only guys post AE to bring the ratings back up. Every other time has just been a slow decline. Around 2007-2008, they *what's that word where you can't gain anymore and just stalemate? Whatever that is* again and have continued since. I've said it before, but Batista was more popular in the adult male demographic, but they seemingly pushed Cena over him due to Batista being 36 at the time. Also, when he got injured he got stuck on SD.
> 
> Whether you like Batista/Cena or not, you cannot deny they are the last two Superstars to come from WWE. Like...not just guys who have the belt and are called "The Guy", guys who actually put asses in seats and made WWE a shit ton of money.
> 
> However, the last 3-4 years is when WWE's ratings took a nosedive. You can't use the all ratings going down excuse there as DVR and Netflix has been around long before that.
> 
> Here's some facts for ya'll. Took these from random RAW's in March, all around the same date:
> 
> In March 2013: 4,813,000 viewers
> In March 2014: 4,075,333 viewers
> In March 2015: 3,858,667 viewers
> In March 2016: 3.399 million viewers.
> 
> Now on July 4th 2016
> 
> Hour one: 2.66 million
> Hour two: 2.67 million
> Hour three: 2.64 million
> 
> ...................com/tags/raw-rating/
> 
> 
> All found with this website. Edit: It's not letting me post it for some reason. Well, the site is Wrestling News World. They've lost 2 million viewers in 3 years.
> 
> You can go back to 2011 and compare it to 2013.
> 
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/2011/8...g-8-2011-show-average-4-54-million-viewers-on
> 
> And see they had remained consistent until about 2013. 2013 was the beginning of the decline we now see.
> 
> Edit:
> Let's go back even further.
> 
> WWE Raw Ratings Last Five Years
> 
> 2007 - 3.63 rating
> 
> 2008 - 3.28 rating
> 
> 2009 - 3.59 rating
> 
> 2010 - 3.28 rating
> 
> 2011 - 3.21 rating
> 
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...reakdown-for-raw-smackdown-and-impact-in-2011
> 
> As you can see, they remained relatively consistent throughout the years. Don't take this as me being biased or anything, I'm just showing you guys the facts. They don't lie or have bias. Well..truthfully I have bias for Batista because he's been my guy, but still.
> 
> Dave Meltzer said the adult male viewership is at *an all time low*. The same thing that almost killed the WWF. This is...interesting to say the least.


And you know what happened in 2013? One too many Cena reigns. A chart was posted here some time ago with all the champ average ratings until 10 years back. Ratings hit a hard nosedive as soon as Cena beat Rock at Wrestlemania 29. From 3.x straight to 2.x. It recovered a little, but I genuinely believe that that was the last straw for some people, who realized, shit, this will never change.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/752575886059184128
Obviously WWE need to upload more youtube vids.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The reason Rock, Brock, Batista, whoever, don't move numbers anymore is partly because WWE has no idea how to present them, and partly because the audience KNOWS these guys don't work for WWE and will be gone in a week. And partly because the guys they're going up against are fucking dopes in comparison. They pretty much killed the "part timer" gimmick already. The part timers only have ONE money match in the WWE, and it's John Cena. After that it's like who gives a fuck?


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I believe fans gave up and left. 2007-2010 is when WWE started to get really bad. Look at the Roster in 2009 and 2009 was one of the worst years entertainment wise. 2011-2014 is when fans had hope that CHANGE was coming. So fans stayed around. The last 2 years is when fans gave up.

Look at some of the Forums from 5-7 years ago. They were saying the same things then that we are saying now. WWE is Stale,The Future will be better, These Wrestlers will save it.

I had hope, but I gave up at this point and just take WWE for what it is. A few good moments here and there, but mostly crap.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Reotor said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/752575886059184128
> Obviously WWE need to upload more youtube vids.


So, profit-wise, WWE is to UFC what New Japan is to WWE.

That'll please the anti-indy-smarks.

:ha


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Edit: Sorry, thought this was the RAW thread.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

UFC isn't competition they say lmao.

They have taken a large chunk of WWE's fan base.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*7/11 Raw Social Media – Twitter TV Ratings not impressive*

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

July 11: Monday’s Raw fell to the #3 ranking among series & specials on Monday night for the first time in three months.

Raw trailed a VH1 special, “VH1 Hip Hop Honors: All Hail the Queens,” and an episode of “Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta” on VH1.

If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #2 behind the annual MLB Home Run Derby on ESPN.

– The numbers are Raw generated 144,000 tweets from 32,000 unique authors.

Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings were skewed last week, with an unusual spike in uniques, so there is not an accurate comparison to the Fourth of July social media activity.

Looking back to two weeks ago, the numbers are very similar to the June 27 episode.

June 27: 146,000 tweets and 35,000 uniques
July 11: 144,000 tweets and 32,000 uniques

Despite the return of Vince McMahon to WWE TV, there was not a surge in social media activity.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/12/711-raw-social-media-twitter-tv-ratings-not-impressive/


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Always love how ratings are shit and Vince comes the next week. People who think Cena is still some kinda huge draw probably think the same of Vince. Numbers will go up because last week was a special case. He'll give himself credit though :vince

Didn't watch Raw as usual but checked the Final Deletion ripoff. Was disappointed but that's nothing new.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> *7/11 Raw Social Media – Twitter TV Ratings not impressive*
> 
> WWE Raw Social Media Tracking
> 
> July 11: Monday’s Raw fell to the #3 ranking among series & specials on Monday night for the first time in three months.
> 
> Raw trailed a VH1 special, “VH1 Hip Hop Honors: All Hail the Queens,” and an episode of “Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta” on VH1.
> 
> If compared to one-off sports programming, Raw would have ranked #2 behind the annual MLB Home Run Derby on ESPN.
> 
> – The numbers are Raw generated 144,000 tweets from 32,000 unique authors.
> 
> Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings were skewed last week, with an unusual spike in uniques, so there is not an accurate comparison to the Fourth of July social media activity.
> 
> Looking back to two weeks ago, the numbers are very similar to the June 27 episode.
> 
> June 27: 146,000 tweets and 35,000 uniques
> July 11: 144,000 tweets and 32,000 uniques
> 
> Despite the return of Vince McMahon to WWE TV, there was not a surge in social media activity.
> 
> http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/12/711-raw-social-media-twitter-tv-ratings-not-impressive/


Surprising. I would have thought the return of Mr. Grapefruits,coupled with the Draft hype, would have spiked social media interest. If this week's rating isn't higher than two weeks ago, then lol.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> Surprising. I would have thought the return of Mr. Grapefruits,coupled with the Draft hype, would have spiked social media interest. If this week's rating isn't higher than two weeks ago, then lol.


They were all too busy posting on the Raw thread last night. For the first time in 2016, the Raw thread was super active and got 1900 posts. 

:drose


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.042M
H2-3.239M
H3-3.231M
3H-3.171M*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Big increase from the Holiday last week, but still where they were all of 2016. Growth from Hour 1 to 2, as well. Odd. Maintained their audience. Last night was a good Raw.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If that“s the best they can do, it'll be a cruel summer. Very weak in the demo for them.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.042M
> H2-3.239M
> H3-3.231M
> 3H-3.171M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+6.48%/+0.197M)
H3 Vs H2 (-0.0025%/-0.008M)
H3 Vs H1 (+6.21%/+0.189M)
7/11/16 Vs 7/4/16 (+19.3%/+0.513M)*


----------



## The Power that Be

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hour 3 had more viewers than hour 1

Vinnie Mac is whats best for business :vince2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

There's been past Holiday Raws where they never got their viewers back, but they got them all back for this holiday (last week). That's a good sign for them. But once football is here, and they have half of a roster due to the brand split, they will be below 3 million every week until Football is done. Too much damage done in 2016.

We tried to warn them.

:cena


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Did Vince McMahon's Big Announcement Help This Week's WWE RAW Viewership?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's WWE RAW, featuring Vince McMahon's big announcement on the RAW and SmackDown Commissioners in the main event slot, drew 3.170 million viewers. This is up from last week's 2.658 million viewers for the Independence Day holiday episode and the last original episode, which drew 3.093 million viewers on June 27th.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.239 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.231 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.042 million viewers.
RAW was #5 on cable for the night in viewership, behind the MLB Home Run Derby, The O'Reilly Factor, Major Crimes and Rizzoli & Isles, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the Derby, Love & Hip-Hop and VH1's Hip-Hop Honors special.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ahon-big-announcement-help-this-week-wwe-raw/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.042M
> H2-3.239M
> H3-3.231M
> 3H-3.171M*


It was this two weeks ago:

*H1-3.096M
H2-3.173M
H3-3.011M
3H-3.093M*


Not much of a bump considering Vince, draft, and Brock interest.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow. They actually went up from two weeks ago. Definitely good. But when the brand split is here, that momentum will be irrelevant because it becomes a whole new ball game with the brand split. Typical of WWE. Anytime they take 1 step forward, they take 2 back. Bad timing with the brand split. And you know the brand split is most likely going to be a failure, unless they have something amazing up their sleeve, which we all know they most likely do not.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> It was this two weeks ago:
> 
> *H1-3.096M
> H2-3.173M
> H3-3.011M
> 3H-3.093M*
> 
> 
> Not much of a bump considering Vince, draft, and Brock interest.


Speaking of which, am wondering if any casuals or fans who quit watching RAW or transferred to UFC, decided to try RAW this week due to the UFC 200 fallout concerning Lesnar Vs Hunt.



Empress said:


> *Did Vince McMahon's Big Announcement Help This Week's WWE RAW Viewership?*
> 
> *For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.239 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.231 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.042 million viewers.*
> RAW was #5 on cable for the night in viewership, behind the MLB Home Run Derby, The O'Reilly Factor, Major Crimes and Rizzoli & Isles, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the Derby, Love & Hip-Hop and VH1's Hip-Hop Honors special.
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...ahon-big-announcement-help-this-week-wwe-raw/


Did wrestlinginc or showbuzzdaily get the numbers mixed up again?


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Still pretty average numbers, but they do not give any reason to watch the show anyways. I have not watched it, but TNA had gained over 100k viewers (pretty good increase for their standards) because of the Hardy-Hardy match; it was an interesting storyline that was hyped quite a bit.

We got the "return of Vince McMahon" for this week's RAW, that's not really something people care too much about nowadays, especially because he would not reveal anything important.

RAW might have been good, but it really does not matter if it's just your average storyline progression.


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm gonna say this is around a 2.3 something, right?

At this rate we are easily heading for multiple weeks of sub 2.0's in a row come the fall.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Hour 1 almost went under 3m again


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bubba Chuck said:


> Hour 1 almost went under 3m again


Makes sense this week. Opening up with that Jobber Battle Royal...which Darren Young won. They did very little in Hour 1. It was brutal. They also went to commercial 6 minutes into the show, which has to be a new record.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They are actually fractionally lower in the 18-49 demo than 2 weeks ago. Looks like Vince's grapefruits have lost their ratings potency. They better hope this isn't their high water mark.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bubba Chuck said:


> Hour 1 almost went under 3m again


RAW opened with a random royal. So, I'm not surprised. Did they even advertise it? 
@JonnyAceLaryngitis

Yes, I believe they mixed up the numbers.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If Darren Young is opening up RAW's with a full roster, I fear for the ratings after the brand split.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Makes sense this week. Opening up with that Jobber Battle Royal...which Darren Young won. They did very little in Hour 1. It was brutal. They also went to commercial 6 minutes into the show, which has to be a new record.


Maybe the Homerun Derby hurt it as well. I think it aired mostly in the first hour.


----------



## Trivette

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No question about it, this was a lackluster RAW. Tbh, I haven't watched a full RAW in ages, but I went over a mates flat last night and we thought we'd watch and have a few brews for old times' sake. RAW sucked of course, but we had a good time nonetheless. If last night is any indicator, this "brand split" is bound to crash and burn. No shock to see that the numbers are nothing special for such a mediocre and predictable episode.


----------



## PlKACHU

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I thought it would be higher with all the Brock hype and McMahon's return. Good to know people weren't fooled.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> RAW opened with a random royal. So, I'm not surprised. Did they even advertise it?
> 
> @JonnyAceLaryngitis
> 
> Yes, I believe they mixed up the numbers.


I don't think so. I knew opening up the show with the Battle Royal would hurt them. A lot of wrestlers that no one really cares about. In this particular case, I think Vince should have open up the show to increase the numbers.

Next week I believe the numbers will be high because of the draft, but after that who knows how well the brand split will do.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

If this is their new ceiling :bosque


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> Maybe the Homerun Derby hurt it as well. I think it aired mostly in the first hour.


No doubt, I'm sure it did. And how sad is that? HomeRun Derby has never been a problem for Raw in the past. But in 2016 it is. Same for the NBA Playoffs. Never used to crush Raw so bad. But in 2016 they did. NFL is going to murder them this year, especially with half of a roster. We warned them in this very thread that what they've been doing this year was going to prove to be tragic. And we were right.

This was actually a good Raw, too. I honestly don't think it matters how good the show is. Wrestling is dead as far as being some big cultural phenomenon like it once was; whether Raw is good or bad. But as long as Raw is like it was last night, I'm good.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Bubba Chuck said:


> I don't think so. I knew opening up the show with the Battle Royal would hurt them. A lot of wrestlers that no one really cares about. In this particular case, I think Vince should have open up the show to increase the numbers.
> 
> Next week I believe the numbers will be high because of the draft, but after that who knows how well the brand split will do.


I think RAW will have two weeks of "decent" ratings, however one chooses to define that in today's climate. There's the draft and a post BG bump.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I think RAW will have two weeks of "decent" ratings, however one chooses to define that in today's climate. There's the draft and a post BG bump.


They basically have the next 2 Mondays to show people that things are really going to be different on Raw after the brand split and not just the same shit with only half the guys.

I know its just a kayfabe thing, but that announcement at the end of Raw that Stephanie gets control of Raw, I think, will be interpretted by alot of the audience as a message from Vince that nothing is changing on Raw. I do not think that was a good idea on the WWE's part.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> No doubt, I'm sure it did. And how sad is that? HomeRun Derby has never been a problem for Raw in the past. But in 2016 it is. Same for the NBA Playoffs. Never used to crush Raw so bad. But in 2016 they did. NFL is going to murder them this year, especially with half of a roster. We warned them in this very thread that what they've been doing this year was going to prove to be tragic. And we were right.
> 
> This was actually a good Raw, too. I honestly don't think it matters how good the show is. Wrestling is dead as far as being some big cultural phenomenon like it once was; whether Raw is good or bad. But as long as Raw is like it was last night, I'm good.


I too am finding myself liking two of the last three RAWS, but seeing that they drew nothing special. This is the new normal for WWE and the NFL leviathan is lurking on the horizon. We'll find out then what is WWE's base rating.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I didn't get to watch RAW last night, but from the YouTube videos it looked liked it sucked.

The segments with Ambrose and Rollins in it were ok.
I don't know how good the Battle Royal was. That really would depend on how good the wrestling in the ring was since there were no big names in the contest.

The Wyatt/New Day segment was lame in my opinion. I do think they need to do some more story telling but the actual execution of the video was not good. Needed better action.

John Cena only appeared for like 30 seconds. He threw AJ out of the ring, looked around confused, and that was it. Considering this feud is the main reason people are watching WWE, they need to step it up. But maybe they are saving the intense story lines and action for SummerSlam, which would be acceptable.

To top it off, the Vince announcement was lame. This should have been done way back, but once we found out that it doesn't matter who runs the show, since Shane was still a puppet to the creative team, not only is the timing bad (way overdue) but meaningless as well. The GM announcement for next will be critical to the success of the WWE. If they choose to make as lame of announcement as this week, that would spell downward direction for me.

Oh and most importantly Brock Lesnar wasn't there. If Brock showed up for one segment to just come out and annihilate literally anyone in the ring, that would have been amazing and made up for a pretty shitty raw. And this is coming from someone who thought the last few RAWs weren't that bad.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> There's been past Holiday Raws where they never got their viewers back, but they got them all back for this holiday (last week). That's a good sign for them. But once football is here, and they have half of a roster due to the brand split, they will be below 3 million every week until Football is done. Too much damage done in 2016.
> 
> We tried to warn them.
> 
> :cena


Compared to post MitB, they didn't get their viewers back. Putting July 4th in brackets, Raw is doing consistently poorer as the weeks go by. That viewership for a regular Raw is topped only by the one some weeks ago, where they barely kept 3 million for every hour.
Vince had literally no increase, hour 3 was the same as hour 2.
Around this time last year, hour 1 was consistently the highest. That completely fell away with Reigns-a-Mania.
Regaining an average of 400.000 viewers compared to a major holiday show is just piss. Dinosaur piss. Dinosaur piss that was left standing for a million years.

Other holidays are also not comparable to July 4th because it's a singular holiday. Other holidays are connected to an entire holiday season. Christmas, Easter etc, so people are on vacation, and are generally much more likely to not be glued to the TV in the evening. Not comparable at all.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Compared to post MitB, they didn't get their viewers back. Putting July 4th in brackets, Raw is doing consistently poorer as the weeks go by. That viewership for a regular Raw is topped only by the one some weeks ago, where they barely kept 3 million for every hour.
> Vince had literally no increase, hour 3 was the same as hour 2.
> Around this time last year, hour 1 was consistently the highest. That completely fell away with Reigns-a-Mania.
> Regaining an average of 400.000 viewers compared to a major holiday show is just piss. Dinosaur piss. Dinosaur piss that was left standing for a million years.
> 
> Other holidays are also not comparable to July 4th because it's a singular holiday. Other holidays are connected to an entire holiday season. Christmas, Easter etc, so people are on vacation, and are generally much more likely to not be glued to the TV in the evening. Not comparable at all.


Someone posted the numbers they got for the Raw before MITB, and they actually got a higher number this week than they did the week before MITB. Of course they didn't get as high as the post PPV bump with a World Title change. I never said they did. But they did increase from the go home show to MITB.

As far as last year, yep. Last year was just a much better year for ratings for Raw than this year. It's not even close. Every week of last year has beaten every week of this year by a very comfortable margin. And people thought last year was the bottom of the barrel. :lol


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not much of an improvement tbh, numbers only went up from last week because it wasn't a holiday this week lol. They'll have absolutely no competition next week, so it'll be interesting to see what the numbers look like. It's a go-home show too.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It will be interesting to see where they put the WWE Championship match next week. You would think in the main event but you never know. I would like them to build to the match throughout the night — showing highlights between the two and their history. Let them go on last and give them the time to perform. Maybe about 15 minutes or so. The opening segment should be the reveal of the two new GMs. Let Cena/AJ go on at the end of hour 2.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Someone posted the numbers they got for the Raw before MITB, and they actually got a higher number this week than they did the week before MITB. Of course they didn't get as high as the post PPV bump with a World Title change. I never said they did. But they did increase from the go home show to MITB.
> 
> As far as last year, yep. Last year was just a much better year for ratings for Raw than this year. It's not even close. Every week of last year has beaten every week of this year by a very comfortable margin. And people thought last year was the bottom of the barrel. :lol


Yes, but the Point is, this is indeed their new ceiling. There used to be pre- and post-PPV bumps. Now, they are lucky to get a decent post PPV bump of maybe 200.000 to 400.000 people, which is absurd.
Smackdown is almost in Russo-Impact territory.

At this Point, I just can't take it serious anymore when someone says something positive about those viewership numbers. They can split brands all they want, they are going down.
And honestly, wouldn't you think that if the brand split was drawing any significant interest, that interest would show in numbers already? Especially this week?
No, WWE has promoted itself as a brand, where nothing matters except the brand. Therefor, nobody gives a fuck what goes on inside of that Brand specifically.
If you don't like Coke, would you like, or even consider buying, Cherry Coke? Would you even go looking for Cherry Coke? Why would you, if the Coke people targeted their marketing only at the people who already like and buy Coke?
That's WWE.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Yes, but the Point is, this is indeed their new ceiling. There used to be pre- and post-PPV bumps. Now, they are lucky to get a decent post PPV bump of maybe 200.000 to 400.000 people, which is absurd.
> Smackdown is almost in Russo-Impact territory.
> 
> At this Point, I just can't take it serious anymore when someone says something positive about those viewership numbers. They can split brands all they want, they are going down.
> And honestly, wouldn't you think that if the brand split was drawing any significant interest, that interest would show in numbers already? Especially this week?
> No, WWE has promoted itself as a brand, where nothing matters except the brand. Therefor, nobody gives a fuck what goes on inside of that Brand specifically.
> If you don't like Coke, would you like, or even consider buying, Cherry Coke?


They've been in this territory for awhile now, where they barely even get PPV bumps. It's nothing all that new, it is just continuing.

The brand split is just their way of showing USA Network that they are trying to improve SD's ratings (since USA is most upset about that shows' ratings). But it's just grasping at straws. It isn't going to help. By definition of brand split, you are dividing up the roster right down the middle. I don't see how that is supposed to increase ratings. If anything, it makes more sense that the numbers would decrease, if not stay stagnant, at best.

They are lost, and have been for quite some time now. I think the worst things they've done since having Cena be the only go to look strong for such a long time was:

1) Punk leaving
2) Bryan having to retire
3) Starting up the Authority Storyline in 2014
4) Continuing the Authority Storyline for as long as they did


Those things pretty much crushed them. Then booking Rollins weak just to make fans want to cheer Reigns when he won it off of Rollins (which backfired completely), continued to hurt them. They literally run their company ass-backwards these days. Although, I will say the first two things I listed, Punk leaving and Bryan retiring are two things they didn't see coming.


----------



## RatedR10

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Weird that the first hour was the lowest.

At least the people came back after the holiday episode rather than just leaving for good. I'm afraid to see what these numbers will look like when the rosters are split and Raw is even harder to sit through.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Is there going to be a breakdown this week?


----------



## Liger!Liger!

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I wonder what are TNA's numbers like.Are they any close to Main Event or Superstars?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> Is there going to be a breakdown this week?


In Stamford maybe.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> Is there going to be a breakdown this week?


No, it seems. They've stopped which is utter bullshit. Just report the numbers, even if they reflect badly on a performer the site (PW Torch) may like. I wish there were other outlets that were able to get access to the breakdowns and share them.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Its an awful rating and I think the 1st hour is disastrous. I believe that the reason for the 3rd hours have not been dropping off much lately is because the kids are out of school and the parents stay up later to watch the show with them. Once school starts back in the fall, you'll start seeing bigger drop offs in the 3rd hour.

This fall is going to be a bloodbath. Sub 2.0 will be the norm.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> No, it seems. They've stopped which is utter bullshit. Just report the numbers, even if they reflect badly on a performer the site (PW Torch) may like. I wish there were other outlets that were able to get access to the breakdowns and share them.


Isn't it possible they just don't have access to breakdowns anymore? I highly doubt it's because of a performer. Breakdowns would drive more traffic which at the end of the day is all they care about.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Inbred Goatman said:


> Isn't it possible they just don't have access to breakdowns anymore? I highly doubt it's because of a performer. Breakdowns would drive more traffic which at the end of the day is all they care about.


That is a possibility but the reports have come and returned at random points over the past few years (which leads me to believe it is more out of choice than access). The reports shouldn't be dependent on who is champion. Either release them or not if they're available. If they do come out and say that they are no longer able to get the breakdowns for whatever reason, I can accept that. But as of this moment, it looks suspicious.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*7/11 WWE Raw TV Ratings initial details – viewership for Monday’s show*

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

July 11: The Raw TV rating will be delayed this week. We will update this report when we receive it.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.170 million viewers, according to TVBytheNumbers.com.

First Hour: 3.042 million viewers (soft start)
Second Hour: 3.239 million viewers
Third Hour: 3.231 million viewers (down from 2H, but up from 1H)

Despite WWE saving the big McMahon Family Decision for the third hour, Raw could not break the streak of 17 consecutive weeks where third hour viewership declined from the second hour.

The last time Raw did not have a third hour decline was on March 14 when WWE loaded up the show all of the WrestleMania part-timers.

– Raw’s average viewership of 3.170 million viewers represented a net gain of about 78,000 viewers. Last week’s Fourth of July Raw lost about 435,000 viewers and this week’s Raw increased by about 513,000 viewers.

So, Raw was up slightly from the June 27 Raw before the holiday show, but below the range from Payback to Money in the Bank.

From May 2 to June 6, Raw ranged between 3.190 million viewers and 3.254 million viewers.

Raw took a big hit against the NBA Finals on June 13, jumped on June 20 the night after Money in the Bank, tumbled on June 27, and hit an historical low point on July 4.

This week’s Raw got the show back above the Mendoza Line, but not by much compared to the May 2-June 6 range.

*Caldwell’s Analysis:* Even the return of Vince McMahon doesn’t seem to have much juice these days, following diminishing returns for Brock Lesnar, The Undertaker, and other part-timers over the past year. WWE did not help themselves by waiting until after last week’s Raw to advertise McMahon for this week’s Raw, not giving casual/irregular viewers advanced notice. At least this week they set up a WWE Title match between Dean Ambrose and Seth Rollins for next week’s show.

The other consideration is Raw was up against the Home Run Derby on ESPN, which annually takes a chunk out of Raw viewership. Obviously, Raw was going to rebound from the basement-level holiday audience last week, but perhaps this week’s rebound was softened by Derby competition.

Head-to-head, the Derby outdrew Raw with 5.524 million viewers. Raw was also topped by two “Love & Hip Hop” related programs on VH1 in the adults 18-49 demographic, similar to social media activity.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07...ings-initial-details-viewership-mondays-show/


*7/4 WWE Raw Final TV Ratings – was there a DVR bump to make up for historically-low viewership?*
WWE Raw TV Ratings Report
July 4, 2016

The Fourth of July Raw drew a total audience of 3.029 million viewers counting DVR viewership.

Capturing how low the figure is for last Monday’s holiday episode, the total audience was smaller than every other Raw episode’s live audience only this year.

Raw got a slightly above-average DVR bump, which trimmed a 14 percent live decline down to a 12 percent total decline from the June 27 Raw.

But, DVR viewership was not at the level of past Raws where live viewership was down significantly. It points to a significant portion of viewers treating the holiday episode like a skippable show.

– TV Rating: 1.87 (Bottom 3 all-time for Raw)

– Live Viewers: 2,658,000 million average per hour

– DVR Viewers: 371,333 average per hour

– Total Viewers: 3,029,333 million average per hour

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07...gs-dvr-bump-make-historically-low-viewership/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

2016 becoming the biggest failure in WWE history with each passing week. :drose

Just hope the quality of Raw stays where it's been the past few weeks (minus 4th of July). Show has actually been alright, with this week's show being good.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Really weird that the first hour was the lowest. When was the last time that happened?


----------



## Daemon_Rising

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



RatedR10 said:


> Weird that the first hour was the lowest.
> 
> At least the people came back after the holiday episode rather than just leaving for good. I'm afraid to see what these numbers will look like *when the rosters are split and Raw is even harder to sit through.*


:trips3 "Pops, you know these numbers for 2016 are pretty bad. Have you thought about making a drastic shift in the presentation of our product?"

:vince5 "You're right son. We need to take half of the roster away from Raw, and put them all on Smackdown! That'll increase viewing figures for both shows. This has never been done before, I'm going to call it.... a 'brand split'."

:trips7



Cipher said:


> Really weird that the first hour was the lowest. When was the last time that happened?


When Raw was one hour long?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Yeah, the company who broadcasts and produces the show does not have access to quarterly breakdowns.

:LOL


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

The Espy's dropped from a 2.2 last year to a 1.6 in the demo this year. Cena, you better keep your day job.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*“ESPYs” TV audience down from last year*

The 2016 ESPYs hosted by John Cena fell 29 percent in overnight TV viewership compared to last year’s broadcast on ABC.

The three-hour prime time broadcast drew 5.48 million viewers in overnight metrics reported by TVByTheNumbers.com, down from 7.7 million viewers last year.

Also, this year’s show drew a 1.6 adults 18-49 overnight rating, down six-tenths from a 2.2 last year.

Cena as the host was unable to sustain last year’s broad audience. Last summer, ABC set up the ESPYs by airing a TV interview with legacy sports star Bruce Jenner changing to Kaitlyn Jenner, then followed up with Jenner as a featured award recipient at the awards show, which was credited for drawing in a large audience.

On Wednesday night, ABC ranked #3 on broadcast TV during the 8:00 p.m. EST timeslot, topped by NBC’s “America’s Got Talent” and CBS’s “Big Brother.” In the 10:00 p.m. hour, “The Night Shift” on NBC topped the ESPYs.

Overall in prime time for the night, ABC ranked #2. The ESPYs was topped by NBC, which got a big lead with “America’s Got Talent,” but ABC ranked ahead of CBS, which aired re-runs after Big Brother.

*Caldwell’s Analysis:* Cena and TV executives who book Cena for mainstream shows are going to keep finding out that taking Cena out of the wrestling bubble, which shrank after the Monday Night Wars, and putting him in mainstream settings as the lead star is not going to work right away. Fox found that out earlier this year with the poor performance of “American Grit.” There also wasn’t as big of a hook for this year’s ESPYs awards show, other than Cleveland sports fans finally getting their time in the sun after 52 years and some sentimental moments.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/14/espys-tv-audience-last-year/


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Cena the mega draw!!! :mark::mark::mark::mark::mark:


----------



## domotime2

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

i look at the ratings this week and i think it tells me a different story.... i think it shows me how great of a job they did promoting the final hour for once. If you follow the ratings, you've seen how the third hour drop off has been as consistent as anything else. No matter what they put as a main event, the 3rd hour ratings would always plummet. 

BUT...look at the ratings this week....they actually ALMOST STAYED THE SAME AS HOUR 2. That tells me a few things
1) People like storylines. People were glued to find out who the GM's were and they cared
2) McMahon drama isn't a ratings eater as many think it is
3) Storylines > Wrestling matches, all day...every day

I really liked raw this week and i think the ratings show a positive more than a negative


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So no breakdown this week either. 

Okay.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Obviously Cena should've gotten a sex change before hosting the ESPY's.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*John Cena ESPY Viewership Is Second Best In Its History*

- We noted this morning that this past Wednesday's ESPY Awards, hosted by John Cena, averaged 5.6 million viewers, a 27% drop from the 7.7 million viewers that the show averaged last year. However, last year's event received a huge bump due to Caitlyn Jenner receiving the Arthur Ashe Courage Award. Sports Media Watch reports that ratings and viewership for this past Wednesday's special were the second-highest in the show's history, dating back to 1993. However, it should be noted that the show only started airing on ABC last year, and was broadcast on ESPN before that.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...spy-viewership-is-second-best-in-its-history/


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*










Final taped SmackDown, even though number one, almost fell under 2 milions again :bosque


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Live episodes couldn't come soon enough it seems. Also, I like how now we'll have back-to-back days waiting for ratings to come out. Should be fun.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown vs Raw ratings war coming :mark:

The brand split along with SD going live is going to make this thread more alive and fun than its ever been since its inception. Can't wait! :mark::mark::mark:


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



domotime2 said:


> i look at the ratings this week and i think it tells me a different story.... i think it shows me how great of a job they did promoting the final hour for once. If you follow the ratings, you've seen how the third hour drop off has been as consistent as anything else. No matter what they put as a main event, the 3rd hour ratings would always plummet.
> 
> BUT...look at the ratings this week....they actually ALMOST STAYED THE SAME AS HOUR 2. That tells me a few things
> 1) People like storylines. People were glued to find out who the GM's were and they cared
> 2) McMahon drama isn't a ratings eater as many think it is
> 3) Storylines > Wrestling matches, all day...every day
> 
> I really liked raw this week and i think the ratings show a positive more than a negative


 I honestly expected the lack of a main event to be a killer for the last hour but looks like you are right bout storylines.

Ambrose vs Rollins is a kayfabe huge main event next week, I'll be interested to see how it does by comparison.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Warms my heart to see that the McMahon's themselves aren't draws anymore, either.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Blows my mind they think this brand split is a good idea.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Final Taped WWE SmackDown On Thursdays Draws Second Lowest Audience Since Moving To USA Network*

This past Thursday's episode of WWE SmackDown, the last taped show airing on Thursday nights, averaged 2.068 million viewers, according to ShowBuzz Daily. It was down 8% from last week's show, which averaged 2.241 million viewers.

SmackDown was the top rated show for the night in the 18-49 demo. However, it was the second lowest audience for the show since moving to the USA Network this past January. It was down 25% from the premiere on USA, which averaged 2.757 million viewers.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...e-smackdown-on-thursdays-draws-second-lowest/


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I want sub 2.0 million for next week.

Hehe ...


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Damn, both shows are in the tank, ratings wise. Bound to increase next week.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Will be interesting to see if tonight's main event managed to keep the audience or even draw more.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.204M
H2-3.236M
H3-2.960M
3H-3.133M*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I really expected higher. The new normal for WWE is quite sobering.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.204M
> H2-3.236M
> H3-2.960M
> 3H-3.133M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+1.00%/+0.032M)
H3 Vs H2 (-8.53%/-0.276M)
H3 Vs H1 (-7.62%/-0.244M)
7/18/16 Vs 7/11/16 (-1.20%/-0.038M)*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Wow, it actually dropped. This product is severely lacking in momentum.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Title match wasn't a draw it seems. Pity, because it was a good match despite the fuckery finish.


----------



## BadmanThickness

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Did somebody say that ratings don't matter? Really?


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Thank God the Loud House is beating SpongeBob. Maybe they'll finally kill it off because the newer episodes have destroyed it's reputation.


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

And that is with a WWE championship match announced last week as the main event with no competition.

That is a bad sign.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I cant wait for live SD and the draft. Im thinking SD! could be beating RAW in ratings by fall.

RAW imo biggest problem is being 3 hours long and such a big commitment, to much filler, and commercials out the butt. We all know this already. 

So I cant wait to see how this new SD 2 hours compares to RAWs 3.


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last year's go home PPV show (July 13, 2016):


> *Indeed, this week's show drew 3.53 million viewers for all three hours*, down from last week's 3.64 million. Considering this was the go home show to the Battleground pay-per-view this weekend, this will surely cause further head shaking in Stamford.
> 
> The good news, at least, is the hourly breakdown showed growth all throughout the evening:
> 
> Hour one: 3.43 million
> Hour two: 3.51 million
> Hour three: 3.64 million
> 
> It's been a month now since Raw drew over 4 million viewers for a single show and it's only happened twice since the night after WrestleMania 31. Put simply, fans just aren't as interested in the product.


http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe-ra...15-viewers-down-for-battleground-go-home-show

They've lost about 12% since then, and even last year it looked bad.

In fairness, there was no Republican convention, but WWE just can't seem to get hot.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Really surprised the rating fell for hour 3 considering WWE did a good job hyping the Rollins/Ambrose match.


----------



## Len Hughes Presents

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Maybe it was perceived as a lame duck show with the WWE Draft being held the following night? I don't know. You'd think the general manager announcements and the WWE Championship being defended in the main event would draw higher.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This is the new norm. Too much damage done the past few years and especially this year.

I also believe that if WWE were to put on a years worth of good shows that the ratings increase they would see would be very small. It's not the same anymore. People have been fed up with this company for years with it coming to a head earlier this year. They gave up, and I don't blame them. If WWE or USA thinks the ratings are going to see home huge increase because of a brand split; they are sorely mistaken.

Also, I think it's obvious that the ratings depending on who the Champion is, is clearly passe. That doesn't matter anymore, either.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Smackdown about to become the A Show :mark:


----------



## ShadowSucks92

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Last night I watched RAW for the first time in God knows how long, and it was crap apart from the first segment and the main event it was nothing but filler and a bunch of pointless matches and it seems they've been on this downward spiral for a while now but it has been more noticeable since 2014, I don't know what it is but there just doesn't seem to be anything to really get the crowd amped up anymore


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I dunno, I fell asleep after Bryan came out. Read the results and saw I didn't miss anything.

Think my days of watching RAW are coming to an end. SD is shorter and on a less shitty day anyway.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think what ultimately happens is that Raw slips further and Smackdown goes up a little, resulting in essentially the same average ratings they've been giving USA for the last year.

And, unless they create some new breakout stars (easier said than done, I know), their television audience is only in the position to die off gradually in the years to come.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This draft/brand split is going to fail because the factors that made it work the first time (at least for that period) wont work now. It's glaring obvious and this is just smokescreen to cover the fact that it's another fucking MCMAHON/AUTHORITY storyline.

Give them three to five months, this shit wont matter to them or us anymore and ratings will suffer WORSE.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They need a crowd chant of *Let's go Smackdown!, RAW sucks!* Def. going to be a SD guy with Bryan there.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That third hour ...

:ha

:LOL

Literally no increase for brand split for literally no storytelling.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So hour 3 did 2.96 million viewers with Ambrose/Rollins in the main event, a match hyped all week. Roman Reigns vs. Sheamus back in December did 3.82 million viewers in hour 3, a match announced at the beginning of RAW (and during NFL season).


----------



## Papadoc81

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

These ratings are gonna get even uglier come NFL season. May the decline continue.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> So hour 3 did 2.96 million viewers with Ambrose/Rollins in the main event, a match hyped all week. Roman Reigns vs. Sheamus back in December did 3.82 million viewers in hour 3, a match announced at the beginning of RAW (and during NFL season).


2015 has destroyed 2016 in the ratings..


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's going to get even worse for Raw when they devote three hours every Monday night trying (in vain) to get Reigns over week after week after week.

And with less talent (Cena) to draw interest, no less. That's just ghastly to think about. I wish those loyal Raw viewers luck.



ShowStopper said:


> And what happened after that week? Oh yeah, they went down and started the lowest ratings in Raw history; a hole that they are still in to this day..


He still thinks Daniel Bryan's six week title run is the reason why the ratings are so low in 2016. There's a reason why I only have two people on my ignore list and he's one of them.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

ShowStopper said:


> The Boy Wonder said:
> 
> 
> 
> So hour 3 did 2.96 million viewers with Ambrose/Rollins in the main event, a match hyped all week. Roman Reigns vs. Sheamus back in December did 3.82 million viewers in hour 3, a match announced at the beginning of RAW (and during NFL season).
> 
> 
> 
> And what happened after that week? Oh yeah, they went down and started the lowest ratings in Raw history; a hole that they are still in to this day..
Click to expand...

Hey don't get so defensive. I was just comparing the last two RAW's that had WWE Championship matches. I know many of you were hoping the numbers would have gone up without Reigns but that's not the case.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

LMAO they failed to get over 3m for the third hr with a title match and no competition? That is a huge fail after advertising the WWE title match between Dean and Rollins the whole week and consistently during the show. The two have straight up failed big time to draw, they are no bigger than any other midcarder or upcard talent. Seriously, what a horrendous number. No excuses either as it ran for half of the last hour too. And now they're seriously going to build Smackdown around Dean :lol


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw before they Draft and they were still around 3.2

What rating does Smackdown get on Thurdays? If tonight the rating doesn't go up the WWE is done and I will love it.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> Hey don't get so defensive. I was just comparing the last two RAW's that had WWE Championship matches. I know many of you were hoping the numbers would have gone up without Reigns but that's not the case.


 Reigns v Sheamus wasn't billed for a week in advance like this either IIRC.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Boy Wonder said:


> Hey don't get so defensive. I was just comparing the last two RAW's that had WWE Championship matches. I know many of you were hoping the numbers would have gone up without Reigns but that's not the case.


They've stayed the same since they were tanked earlier this year with Reigns. :shrug Nothing has changed. No one said they would go up now. Too much damage done. Too much shoving down the throat. They left.

2015 with Rollins as the Champ has destroyed ALL of 2016.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> The third hour lost almost 300,000 viewers.
> 
> LMAO they failed to get over 3m for the third hr? That is a huge fail after advertising the WWE title match between Dean and Rollins the whole week and consistently during the show. The two have straight up failed big time. Seriously, what a horrendous number. No excuses either as it ran for half of the last hour too. And now they're seriously going to build around Dean :lol


I love me some Ambrose, but he was never built up to be champion. They just put the title on him after treating him like a jobber to the stars for years. They jobbed him to Brock at Mania. He doesn't have a very high level of credibility.

Roman was/is a poor choice as babyface champion, but at least he was protected and built up and given a chance to draw (he failed miserably, BTW).

Like Rollins before him, Dean was doomed to fail from the very start. He even has to work against the perception that he's a champion _pro tempore_.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Soul Man Danny B said:


> It's going to get even worse for Raw when they devote three hours every Monday night trying (in vain) to get Reigns over week after week after week.
> 
> And with less talent (Cena) to draw interest, no less. That's just ghastly to think about. I wish those loyal Raw viewers luck.
> 
> He still thinks Daniel Bryan's six week title run is the reason why the ratings are so low in 2016. *There's a reason why I only have two people on my ignore list and he's one of them.*


I've never even heard of you before.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> Reigns v Sheamus wasn't billed for a week in advance like this either IIRC.


When Reigns vs Sheamus was announced a week in advance, it was with Vince as the guest ref and its third hour did 3.5 million viewers, but was still a drop from Hour 1's 3.7 million. (This was the January 4th RAW)

Regardless, as the trend has gone downward, it's unfair to hold Raws from last year up against this year as the audience has shrunk since last year. Unless things change for the better, they're going to do even worse this football season.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Going to love the excuses from Rollins and Ambrose marks.

You have NO excuses, this is a pathetic number that you cannot possibly defend.

WWE title match, another chapter in a so called 'big rivalry', billed in a week advance and constantly shelled throughout the show and zero competition (no NBA, no NFL, no MLB derby) = Less than 3m viewers.

Honestly, you could have pulled the same number of viewers with a random ass filler tag match.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:JLC2
:takerlel
:maisielol2
:rileylel
:denirolol
:evans
:maury
:david
:tysonlol
:heston

:wut

:maisielol
:jaydance5




















And that's all I got to say about that.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> *When Reigns vs Sheamus was announced a week in advance*, it was with Vince as the guest ref and its third hour did 3.5 million viewers, but was still a drop from Hour 1's 3.7 million. (This was the January 4th RAW)
> 
> Regardless, as the trend has gone downward, it's unfair to hold Raws from last year up against this year as the audience has shrunk since last year. Unless things change for the better, they're going to do even worse this football season.


 Didn't Vince announce it on Raw in the opening segment?


----------



## imthegame19

Straw Hat said:


> LMAO they failed to get over 3m for the third hr with a title match and no competition? That is a huge fail after advertising the WWE title match between Dean and Rollins the whole week and consistently during the show. The two have straight up failed big time to draw, they are no bigger than any other midcarder or upcard talent. Seriously, what a horrendous number. No excuses either as it ran for half of the last hour too. And now they're seriously going to build around Dean :lol


Rollins is just as much to blame for the rating as Ambrose. So if there going to build around Rollins. Why would they let this stop them from building around Ambrose?. The rating also has something to do. With the fact that nobody actually believed the title would actually change hands 6 days before the ppv. So the match having some nonsense finish was expected.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> Didn't Vince announce it on Raw in the opening segment?


There's two Reigns vs Sheamus title matches that happened on Raw. One was in December and was announced that night, the night after TLC '15. The other was in January and had a week's worth of hype, which is a better comparison to this week's title match, which was also announced a week in advance.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> They've stayed the same since they were tanked earlier this year with Reigns. :shrug Nothing has changed. No one said they would go up now. Too much damage done. Too much shoving down the throat. They left.
> 
> 2015 with Rollins as the Champ has destroyed ALL of 2016.


Tell that to all the Reigns fans who were blaming Seth for ratings going down in late 2015 despite Reigns getting much better booking, end of the day RAW just sucks


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> They've stayed the same since they were tanked earlier this year with Reigns. :shrug Nothing has changed. No one said they would go up now. Too much damage done. Too much shoving down the throat. They left.
> 
> 2015 with Rollins as the Champ has destroyed ALL of 2016.


Because Rollins kept the fans that Reigns drove away with his super-push, but try to convince that to the marks.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> There's two Reigns vs Sheamus title matches that happened on Raw. One was in December and was announced that night, the night after TLC '15. The other was in January and had a week's worth of hype, which is a better comparison to this week's title match, which was also announced a week in advance.


 Fair enough, only was aware of the one.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Definition of Technician said:


> Because Rollins kept the fans that Reigns drove away with his super-push, but try to convince that to the marks.


 No one kept anyone around. 

Other than Lesnar and Cena (to an extent), there is no one that can move the needle.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> No one kept anyone around. No one the roster, other than Lesnar and Cena to an extent, can move the needle.


Lesnar and Cena don't move any needle anymore and haven't in quite sometime. Brock doesn't pop the rating anymore when he comes back, either. And he has less excuse of anyone else considering he's barely around and when he is he's booked stronger than anyone.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Straw Hat said:


> The Definition of Technician said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Rollins kept the fans that Reigns drove away with his super-push, but try to convince that to the marks.
> 
> 
> 
> No one kept anyone around.
> 
> Other than Lesnar and Cena to an extent, there is no one that can move the needle.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Rollins did great in 2015, but they still had Cena defending the US Title on a weekly basis. Plus they brought Brock in for July and August. The ratings tanked after Summerslam. The main program was Seth Rollins pulling double duty vs Sting and Cena. 

Reigns had a great number after winning the title in December. WWE made a mistake by involving Stephanie into it. They should have just built the feud around Vince and Reigns. Stephanie was the reason why the ratings fell in the Summer of 2014 -- when she had two main event segments with Brie on the road to Summerslam.


----------



## imthegame19

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Considering WWE is having a rematch tonight of Rollins/Ambrose. Shows they either aren't going put much blame on them for that ending.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

imthegame19 said:


> Considering WWE is having a rematch tonight of Rollins/Ambrose. Shows they either aren't going put much blame on them for that ending.


They shouldn't blame them at all. As far as ratings go the one thing we can all agree about is that Stephanie is killing the show. They should have kept her off TV after WM 30. But they did that God awful Steph/Brie feud which ended the hour-by-hour gain trend.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



imthegame19 said:


> Considering WWE is having a rematch tonight of Rollins/Ambrose. Shows they either aren't going put much blame on them for that ending.


 What a waste, we learn't today they they could pull a similar number with a filler tag match.


----------



## Not Lying

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> No one kept anyone around.
> 
> Other than Lesnar and Cena (to an extent), there is no one that can move the needle.


So what's the main reason ratings have declined for the past 6 months consistently? We can blame the ME, as well as blame WM 32, the biggest fuck you to all wrestling fans, of all times.

if there's no more casuals, which looks to be the case, might as well run with the guys people like and pop for.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



The Definition of Technician said:


> So what's the main reason ratings have declined for the past 6 months consistently? We can blame the ME, as well as blame WM 32, the biggest fuck you to all wrestling fans, of all times.


 ME scene, crappy Mania and crappy writing.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No point in even talking Brock. Guy is fucked:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/755512738860806144


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

It's time to hit the panic button when a WWE title match can't get over 3m.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Old champs be like,


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> Old champs be like,


Takes some balls to post that considering earlier this year...


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> No point in even talking Brock. Guy is fucked:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/755512738860806144


 His name has been dragged through the mud. He won't be seen the same again.


----------



## PlKACHU

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I don't get the fascination with Reigns, Ambrose or Rollins. I just see three guys who would have been mid carders in any other era. :shrug


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Takes some balls to post that considering earlier this year...


And one more!


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

No stars.

Weak roster.

Shit storylines.

Promos about Pokemon.

No casual audience.

PG. PG. PG.

Garbage commentary.

Fights with it's own audience.

The McMahon show.

Nobody wants to watch this shit.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> And one more!


 Rollins deserves blame for that weak ass number too.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Iapetus said:


> And one more!


This is the first time Rollins has been in a 3rd hour that fell below 3 million (aside from 4th of July); a trend that started when he was out with injury.

Great job.

I appreciate the sentiment with the gif, but it doesn't matter. They're all fucked. I just get a kick out of certain people acting like this is the first time they've had this number when they've been in this range most of the year. Not like it's a new number or something. And I think it's safe to say since the NBA Playoffs, a small percentage of their viewers haven't come back since.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> Vince deserves blame for that weak ass number.


Fixed.


----------



## Iapetus

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> Rollins deserves blame for that weak ass number too.


I don't wanna...:sad:


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



PlKACHU said:


> I don't get the fascination with Reigns, Ambrose or Rollins. I just see three guys who would have been mid carders in any other era. :shrug


As much as I like Rollins, you're right.

Dean would so be a Hardcore title division wrestler, like a Crash Holly type.

Roman would be the silent bodyguard that won't wrestle for a mid card act.

Rollins would be where Edge was in the late 90s.


Nobody on the current roster would have been top stars in the late 90s, but I think the ones that could have advanced the most is either gimmick (Bray), attitude and promo (Owens), or likability (Styles, like a Hardy Boyz type fan support).

Punk would have survived, due to having that 'me against the world' outlook on earning your spot, but guys like Bryan and Zayn would be dog food.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheLooseCanon said:


> Nobody on the current roster would have been top stars in the late 90s, but I think the ones that could have advanced the most is either gimmick (Bray), attitude and promo (Owens), or likability (Styles, like a Hardy Boyz type fan support).
> 
> Punk would have survived, due to having that 'me against the world' outlook on earning your spot, but guys like Bryan and Zayn would be dog food.


Yeah, people thought the same thing about the Ringmaster and Rocky Maivia once, too. Also, before Foley's success, no one saw him even getting anywhere near the level he got to.

The job of a wrestling promoter is to promote matches, create stars, and attractions people want to see. There's plenty of things Vince could do with the current roster that he used to be so good at and just plain isn't anymore.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Roman Reigns hasn't been around for almost a month. Some of you could at least wait until he returns to programming to make him your default scapegoat for the low ratings. "Anyone but Roman" clearly hasn't made any damn bit of difference. But I blame creative. RAW is an absolute bore to sit through. There's not one hot angle IMO. Cena/Styles has cooled off while they stretch it out until Summerslam, Ambrose/Rollins feels like a midcard feud and the divas division is better not talked about. I hope the Draft injects some excitement back into the WWE. I've been more entertained by the antics of Kanye, Taylor and Kim than anything in the WWE the past week. I did enjoy seeing Daniel Bryan again last night. Still the most over guys by miles. He needs to have a real role and not just be there as a symbol.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where anyone gives a shit about the Shield's feud. 

The crowd, much like I'm assuming the TV audience as well, pretty much stopped caring after Daniel Bryan's return then the Cena/Enzo/New Day/Wyatts/AJ match. They put every guy the audience cares about in one match, the crowd went fucking nuts for it, and the show was pointless from there on.

Ambrose's presentation as champion has been abysmal. WWE's cred is still 100% in the toilet from Roman's push, and the way their booking department keeps putting on these pointless matches like Ambrose/Rollins. The audience probably figured "Okay, this will end in bullshit so why watch?" and what did WWE do? That's right, ended the match in complete and total bullshit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Roman Reigns hasn't been around for almost a month. Some of you could at least wait until he returns to programming to make him your default scapegoat for the low ratings. "Anyone but Roman" clearly hasn't made any damn bit of difference. But I blame creative. RAW is an absolute bore to sit through. There's not one hot angle IMO. Cena/Styles has cooled off while they stretch it out until Summerslam, Ambrose/Rollins feels like a midcard feud and the divas division is better not talked about. I hope the Draft injects some excitement back into the WWE. I've been more entertained by the antics of Kanye, Taylor and Kim than anything in the WWE the past week. I did enjoy seeing Daniel Bryan again last night. Still the most over guys by miles. He needs to have a real role and not just be there as a symbol.


I don't know if you're referring to me, but I have no problem responding. Only reason Reigns name came up was because Naomi'sButtisLife included him on some list of past Champions laughing at last night's rating when the 3rd hour of Raw falling below 3 million started when his big pushed started December 2015/January 2016. That's all that was. Kind of hilarious to include someone whose push directly correlated to the 3rd hour of Raw falling below 3 million viewers in 2016.

Rollins/Ambrose is much better than it would be if it was just one guy standing tall every single week, like most Raw's of this disasterous year have been.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> This draft/brand split is going to fail because the factors that made it work the first time (at least for that period) wont work now. It's glaring obvious and this is just smokescreen to cover the fact that it's another fucking MCMAHON/AUTHORITY storyline.
> 
> *Give them three to five months*, this shit wont matter to them or us anymore and ratings will suffer WORSE.


Three to five weeks (at most) more like. Once the initial buzz wears off and people realize that all the same issues ruining the product are still there the unstoppable bleed will continue.
As long Vince, Stephanie and Kevin Dunn are in charge of creative and production the company is screwed and those three morons would rather see the company burn to the ground than admit that their vision of sports entertainment is not what the fans want.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I predict Smackdown does about 2,350,000 viewers. Then it'll normalize to lower than 2mils over the next couple months. During NFL season, Raw will be under 3mils. Smackdown under 2 mils Raw around a 2.00 and Smackdown a 1.4


----------



## LordKain

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> The job of a wrestling promoter is to promote matches, create stars, and attractions people want to see. There's plenty of things Vince could do with the current roster *that he used to be so good at* and just plain isn't anymore.


Correction.

The people who Vince had working for him back then were good at that not him.


----------



## troyag93

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

My favorite part every Tuesday when the Ratings come out is when same people blame 1 or 2 guys for the bad ratings.

That 25 min intro last night between Stephaine,Shane,Bryan,and Foley you see that was Dean Ambrose's fault.

That 12 man cluster fuck Tag Team match last night was also Ambrose's fault.

The Women being bad is also Ambrose's fault.

The Tag Team Division, Ambrose is to blame.

Rusev vs Ryder, Ambrose Fault.

You see Ambrose is to blame. Lets not blame the Writing. It's a 3 Hour show and the WWE Champion is only on T.V for 30 mins and the other 2 and a half hours is shit, but it's Ambrose fault.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> Roman Reigns hasn't been around for almost a month. Some of you could at least wait until he returns to programming to make him your default scapegoat for the low ratings. "Anyone but Roman" clearly hasn't made any damn bit of difference. But I blame creative. RAW is an absolute bore to sit through. There's not one hot angle IMO. Cena/Styles has cooled off while they stretch it out until Summerslam, Ambrose/Rollins feels like a midcard feud and the divas division is better not talked about.


The issue for me is that they basically killed everyone else on the roster to make Roman Reigns the alpha star, and he didn't turn out to be that big of a deal, so with or without Reigns, you're left with a bunch of cold acts who weren't really allowed to make a difference and can't be expected to now. 

They put all their eggs in one basket and they all got smashed. It's ultimately Vince's fault for not having a Plan B or not adapting when Reigns didn't work out, and "pulling the trigger" on someone like Ambrose after he lost to Wyatt/Rollins/Lesnar/Reigns and was already established as inferior to all of them. But, I'd also argue that giving Ambrose the belt after all of that isn't really "pulling the trigger."


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Surprised to see the title match did so poorly. I mean we don't have quarter hours to know for sure but if it did well chances are it would have pulled the rest of the hour up with it. Funny watching the excuses come in though. Reigns/Sheamus as a title match completely smoked it with 3 hours build never mind a week. 

WWE has A LOT of work to do in rebuilding these brands. After Summerslam they are completely fucked. 150% fucked in both holes, one for each show.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I'm sure if AJ, Cena, Reigns, Wyatt, Owens, or whoever else were fighting for the championship in the main event the ratings for the have been much higher.

:eyeroll

Nobody is a fucking draw. It's stupid to put the blame on one or two people, when in reality it drop in viewership is due to the fact the writing has been stagnant and awful for a long time now.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I don't know if you're referring to me, but I have no problem responding. Only reason Reigns name came up was because Naomi'sButtisLife included him on some list of past Champions laughing at last night's rating when the 3rd hour of Raw falling below 3 million started when his big pushed started December 2015/January 2016. That's all that was. Kind of hilarious to include someone whose push directly correlated to the 3rd hour of Raw falling below 3 million viewers in 2016.
> 
> Rollins/Ambrose is much better than it would be if it was just one guy standing tall every single week, like most Raw's of this disasterous year have been.


My comment was meant to include yours and a few others. I generalized for the sake of expediency. I believe The Technician (my apologies if I am getting the poster's name wrong) blamed Reigns for the ratings decline. He hasn't been around. If everyone else is so much better than Roman, the ratings would've gone up in his absence. Obviously, the issue is more on the creative side. I don't think any of the talents are inferior. None may be in the mold of Austin or Rock, but they could do better if they were booked right. The show seems dry to me overall. WWE doesn't have one hot angle IMO.



Mifune Jackson said:


> The issue for me is that they basically killed everyone else on the roster to make Roman Reigns the alpha star, and he didn't turn out to be that big of a deal, so with or without Reigns, you're left with a bunch of cold acts who weren't really allowed to make a difference and can't be expected to now.
> 
> They put all their eggs in one basket and they all got smashed. It's ultimately Vince's fault for not having a Plan B or not adapting when Reigns didn't work out, and "pulling the trigger" on someone like Ambrose after he lost to Wyatt/Rollins/Lesnar/Reigns and was already established as inferior to all of them. But, I'd also argue that giving Ambrose the belt after all of that isn't really "pulling the trigger."


I don't disagree that the WWE put most of their eggs into the Reigns basket. But it's not as if he had the best booking. They got it right post Mania though and then it went to hell all over again.

Still, Reigns has not appeared on TV in almost a month. It's a stretch for him to be blamed for a main event and show that he was not even a part of.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Steve Black Man said:


> I'm sure if AJ, Cena, Reigns, Wyatt, Owens, or whoever else were fighting for the championship in the main event the ratings for the have been much higher.
> 
> :eyeroll
> 
> Nobody is a fucking draw. It's stupid to put the blame on one or two people, when in reality it drop in viewership is due to the fact the writing has been stagnant and awful for a long time now.


 That number was garbage, you could have put any filler tag match in the main event and you would have gotten the same number, if not better.

Didn't the unadvertised number 1 contender match between Rollins and Reigns do better with competition? IIRC AJ-KO even managed to keep the third hr numbers steady and above 3m for their MITB qualifier as well.

It's not hard to think either one of the other guys could do better, because this was scrapping at the bottom of the barrel numbers even with the WWE promoting the match over the week and throughout the night. 

It would be an understatement to say it was a ratings flop, it was a non event that didn't even register. You don't want rare events such as televised WWE title matches being that, especially ones which have been hyped up throughout the week.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I've blamed Roman many times for the ratings decline, because he deserves to be blamed. No one else has been remotely pushed as hard as he has been in the last two years. The WWE has no credibility in the audiences eyes because of Reigns push. The audience just figures every booking road they take is another way around to putting the belt back on Roman, and they're probably right, too.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> My comment was meant to include yours and a few others. I generalized for the sake of expediency. I believe The Technician (my apologies if I am getting the poster's name wrong) blamed Reigns for the ratings decline. He hasn't been around. If everyone else is so much better than Roman, the ratings would've gone up in his absence. Obviously, the issue is more on the creative side. I don't think any of the talents are inferior. None may be in the mold of Austin or Rock, but they could do better if they were booked right. The show seems dry to me overall. WWE doesn't have one hot angle IMO.


The issue with Reigns is the fact that they sabotaged so many others to put him in that spot in the face of MAJOR protest from a lot of fans and yet he isn't remotely close to being a difference maker. He's missing and nothing has changed. He'll come back and nothing will change. They cut the legs off a lot of other people to put him there, they had legend after legend come out and cut embarrassing promos about how good he is, they gave him just about every accolade there is to have and the man is completely replaceable. That's the main issue with Reigns. Nobody on that roster is a draw but the fact that they destroyed so many others along the way to making a lame duck 'top guy' is why people shit on him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> My comment was meant to include yours and a few others. I generalized for the sake of expediency. I believe The Technician (my apologies if I am getting the poster's name wrong) blamed Reigns for the ratings decline. He hasn't been around. If everyone else is so much better than Roman, the ratings would've gone up in his absence. Obviously, the issue is more on the creative side. I don't think any of the talents are inferior. None may be in the mold of Austin or Rock, but they could do better if they were booked right. The show seems dry to me overall. WWE doesn't have one hot angle IMO.


Even *if* WWE is on the right road again (which I doubt), ratings aren't gonna get better in a matter of weeks. Just like it took them a year or 2 to finally catch up to WCW, and that's when they were consistently writing good shows. It's going to take a long time, even when they do finally get on the right road, which I don't believe they are on anyway. Viewers don't just come back and stay in a matter of a month, especially today, apparently.

They didn't bother to make anyone else when Cena was on top for as long as he was, and then they killed everyone's credibility for Reigns' push, even making Rollins entire 2015 reign bad just to make fans cheer and be happy when Reigns was supposed to take it off of him at Survivor Series. That is literally sacrificing part of people's careers for one person. Do you realize how disgusting that is? And what happened? It didn't work anyway and ratings fell even more. So, NBiL posting that gif really made me laugh. Like...wow.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So for everyone blaming Ambrose and Rollins, let's say that the 3rd hour did indeed draw. Would you give them credit or say that the prospect of a world title match did the trick?


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I watched a random RAW from '97, as I often do, a couple of days ago. The current shit couldn't even hold a fucking candle to the show I saw. It wasn't even a specific episode, I just came across it randomly. 

A random-ass episode of RAW from nearly 20 years beat the garbage of today. I mean, 1997 was a great year for the company on the whole anyway, but the point stands.

WWE just isn't fun to watch now.


----------



## OwenSES

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Just put the title on Orton.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> So for everyone blaming Ambrose and Rollins, *let's say that the 3rd hour did indeed draw.* Would you give them credit or say that the prospect of a world title match did the trick?


 The fact is, it didn't. It was a terrible number. I'm not exaggerating when I say that a filler tag match could have done the same, if not better. That should give you an idea of just how bad it was.


----------



## The True Believer

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> The fact is, it didn't. It was a terrible number. I'm not exaggerating when I say that a filler tag match could have done the same, if not better. That should give you an idea of just how bad it was.


So is that a "yes" then?


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> The issue with Reigns is the fact that they sabotaged so many others to put him in that spot in the face of MAJOR protest from a lot of fans and yet he isn't remotely close to being a difference maker. He's missing and nothing has changed. He'll come back and nothing will change. They cut the legs off a lot of other people to put him there, they had legend after legend come out and cut embarrassing promos about how good he is, they gave him just about every accolade there is to have and the man is completely replaceable. That's the main issue with Reigns. Nobody on that roster is a draw but the fact that they destroyed so many others along the way to making a lame duck 'top guy' is why people shit on him.


I'm not arguing that Reigns hasn't been pushed head and shoulders above the rest of the roster. He has a better win record, but not much else. I think he's better suited as a heel. He was perfect the night after WM 32 and it just went nowhere. 

Still, he lost the title. He hasn't been on television in a month and some have always claimed that "Anyone But Roman" would fill the vacuum. That hasn't happened even though other performers have gotten more screen time. The ratings have still fallen even with those who apparently more popular. The problem is bigger than him and the ratings shouldn't solely be blamed on him. Especially when he's not even on screen.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> So for everyone blaming Ambrose and Rollins, let's say that the 3rd hour did indeed draw. Would you give them credit or say that the prospect of a world title match did the trick?


Ratings trends are what matters, and you're not going to have a real trend until 3 months from now. Not only that, the trend seems to be Ambrose/Rollins doing the same numbers as Reigns. The way this works is - You're supposed to do the same or better numbers than the guy before you. Reigns did significantly WORSE than the guy before him. And the two guys who are filling in for him (since that's all they are, is two place holders) are doing the same numbers as him despite being booked as afterthoughts and jobbers. This is just saying that Roman Reigns worth is that of guys who are booked consistently under him.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Spidey said:


> So is that a "yes" then?


 If it drew better than other televised title matches, you'd have to give them credit. Bottom line is it didn't, it was a number which you'd see for a below par last hour.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I blame the McMahon family.

WCW for life motherfuckers!


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheLooseCanon said:


> I blame the McMahon family.
> 
> WCW for life motherfuckers!


I wish Stephanie and Shane would disappear from TV. I used to badly wish for Shane's return but he is so low energy. And he sweats so damn much. Yeah, that has nothing to do with the ratings but it's very distracting. 

I have a feeling Shane is turning heel though. I don't see two "faces" lasting long on Smackdown.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This also shows that the importance/prestige of the title is practically at zero these days. Between booking recent World Champions like after-thoughts AND playing hot potato with the damn thing; this should be no surprise.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*7/18 WWE Raw TV Ratings – Raw falls despite pre-Draft hype*

By James Caldwell, PWTorch assistant editor

WWE Raw got a strong social media bump on Monday night. But, the TV rating was down and viewership was flat compared to last week.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

July 18: The final WWE Raw before the Draft scored a 2.22 TV rating, down three percent from a 2.28 rating last week.

The overall rating was down, but key demographic ratings improved slightly from last week.

Included was males 18-34 rebounding to a five-week high point.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.133 million viewers, down one percent (about 37,000 viewers) from last week’s audience of 3.170 million viewers.

Raw started stronger than last week, matched last week’s second hour viewership, but fell off in the third hour. This was despite a WWE Title match, but Raw’s third hour was opposed by the peak of the Republican National Convention coverage, which drew more than 22 million viewers across all TV outlets.

First Hour: 3.204 million viewers
Second Hour: 3.236 million viewers
Third Hour: 2.960 million viewers (-8.5%)

This continued Raw’s streak of 19 consecutive weeks where the third hour declined from the second hour.
*
Caldwell’s Analysis:* Disappointing rating for a show with the GMs revealed, final Raw before the Draft, and WWE Title match in the main event. The effect of three-hour Raws continues to hurt the overall show now four years into the experiment. Will things change after the Draft? We’ll see. But, there does not appear to be ratings momentum heading into next week. WWE does benefit from having a PPV on Sunday leading into next Monday’s Raw to perhaps boost interest again, like the night after Money in the Bank when Dean Ambrose won the WWE Title.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/19/718-wwe-raw-tv-rating-raw-flat-despite-pre-draft-hype/


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Empress said:


> I'm not arguing that Reigns hasn't been pushed head and shoulders above the rest of the roster. He has a better win record, but not much else. I think he's better suited as a heel. He was perfect the night after WM 32 and it just went nowhere.
> 
> Still, he lost the title. He hasn't been on television in a month and some have always claimed that "Anyone But Roman" would fill the vacuum. That hasn't happened even though other performers have gotten more screen time. The ratings have still fallen even with those who apparently more popular. The problem is bigger than him and the ratings shouldn't solely be blamed on him. Especially when he's not even on screen.


The problem is definitely bigger than him but his booking has contributed majorly to said problem. And honestly it just kind of stings to see him literally gifted the world and not be the slightest bit bigger of a star than those they crushed during his ascension. What was the fucking point of the last 2 years of WWE tv? And then he goes and gets himself suspended making things 100x times worse. WWE put everything on hold for him for 2 years and it has got them absolutely nowhere as a company.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Straw Hat said:


> That number was garbage, you could have put any filler tag match in the main event and you would have gotten the same number, if not better.
> 
> Didn't the unadvertised number 1 contender match between Rollins and Reigns do better with competition? IIRC AJ-KO even managed to keep the third hr numbers steady and above 3m for their MITB qualifier as well.
> 
> It's not hard to think either one of the other guys could do better, because this was scrapping at the bottom of the barrel numbers even with the WWE promoting the match over the week and throughout the night.
> 
> It would be an understatement to say it was a ratings flop, it was a non event that didn't even register. You don't want rare events such as televised WWE title matches being that, especially ones which have been hyped up throughout the week.


There are many reasons that a main event might not pull great ratings, just like there are a lot of reasons that one may put up a batter rating. 

You bring up the Reigns/Rollins number one contenders match, but completely fail to mention that that particular Raw was the night after a rather significant (and relatively well received) MITB PPV. Of course ratings are going to be higher.

To infer that a random tag match between, let's say New Day and The Club, would have pulled higher ratings than a WWE Title match between Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose is just silly.

That isn't to say that Ambrose (nor Rollins) are big draws that happened to be victims of circumstance last night, because that's not the case. Like I said before, nobody is a draw, and I severely doubt that anybody one person on the roster would have bumped that number up.

In fact, let's go a little deeper.

Let's just go ahead and replace "The Shield guys" (as you call them) at the top of the card. Let's put....say.....Owens, Rusev, and Cesaro in their place. And I'm not just talking about sticking these 3 upper midcard guys into a main event slot. I mean really build around them and make them legit main eventers. What makes you think that they would fare any better than "The Shield guys"? 

They wouldn't.

They would be subjected to the same shitty booking, idiotic storytelling, and micromanagement that has plagued the main event scene for the last several years. 

Long and short of it is that pro wrestling has no mainstream appeal any more. WWE need to start taking some significant creative risks, and they need to start allowing the performers to get over on their own without micromanaging every aspect of their characters. That's the only way to right the ship. And it's not going to change overnight, either. It would be a process that would likely take years to implement properly.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*So apparently, Meltzer was on MLW Radio last week, and here are some key points from that appearance:*



> -WWE needs to get ratings UP on Raw and Smackdown just to *maintain* the current TV rights deal they have with NBC Universal
> 
> -The only other serious source of revenue WWE can make is Network subscriptions
> 
> -If WWE doesn't substantially increase Network subscriptions by end of 2016, the 4th financial quarter, then the Brand Split was officially a failure
> 
> -WWE is spending more money to produce Smackdown Live but is not getting more money from USA to produce it
> 
> -WWE's social media numbers are worthless otherwise they would have translated to an increase in live show attendance
> 
> -Roman hasn't helped the box office, but neither has Dean or Seth. Cena did a bit. No one helps the box office except the usual Wrestlemania band aids
> 
> -Meltz could see Vince thinking the rub of beating Brock should go to Big Cass because he's tall, blond and good looking
> 
> -Vince has lost his sense for the art of the finish. Most of the 50/50 booking is done because they need to fill so much time. Then when guys aren't over because they're not protected, its a self fulfilling prophecy in the eyes of management why a guy is not over
> 
> - The casual fans abandoned the product because WWE kept inundating them with product - especially during the Brand Split which had Raw, SD and Two PPVs a month. Now WWE will have 8 hours of TV on Sunday thru Tuesday every two weeks and most casual fans are not going to choose all of that over following other sports and having other interests.
> 
> -Vince's booking was good at playing to the casual fans but they're not around anymore. The only people who are still following the show are the most diehard WWE fans who want the product to cater to them. Vince and the fans are at odds over what the direction of the show should be


*So basically, this brand split needs to succeed both ratings-wise, and network subscriptions, or WWE is fucked.*


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

But I thought Cena was transcending the business. :eva


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> The problem is definitely bigger than him but his booking has contributed majorly to said problem. And honestly it just kind of stings to see him literally gifted and not be the slightest bit bigger of a star than those they crushed during his ascension. What was the fucking point of the last 2 years of WWE tv? And then he goes and gets himself suspended making things 100x times worse. WWE put everything on hold for him for 2 years and it has got them absolutely nowhere as a company.


You'll get no argument from me there. I do wish Reigns would move the needle in more consistent ways instead of random spikes, good social media and consistent sales. He doesn't need to be at Cena's level but there should be more space between him and Ambrose, etc given his push. I'd like for all the talents to be utilized to their full potential. The roster is very talented. All three Shield members should've been superstars by now. That hasn't happened. I hope there's a change in creative. Probably not going to happen though.


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

USA not giving the funds for the brand split shows they have little faith in the decision.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> The issue with Reigns is the fact that they sabotaged so many others to put him in that spot in the face of MAJOR protest from a lot of fans and yet he isn't remotely close to being a difference maker. He's missing and nothing has changed. He'll come back and nothing will change. They cut the legs off a lot of other people to put him there, they had legend after legend come out and cut embarrassing promos about how good he is, they gave him just about every accolade there is to have and the man is completely replaceable. That's the main issue with Reigns. Nobody on that roster is a draw but the fact that they destroyed so many others along the way to making a lame duck 'top guy' is why people shit on him.


I think another reason why the fans rejected Reigns is that they could see that the long term plan for him was to be Cena 2.0. 
Cena's 10 year superman reign of doom drove so many fans either away completely or tested their loyalty to the WWE to the limit. They had 10 years of Cena as FOTC the last thing the fans wanted was another invincible, superhero dominating the company and so they rebelled either by booing Reigns or just tuning out.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*I remember when people said Reigns only got ratings because of his title match that was announced the night of, but Ambrose and Rollins LOST viewers with their title match that was advertised for a week. What's the excuse now? *


----------



## Cipher

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



TheLooseCanon said:


> I blame the McMahon family.
> 
> *WCW for life motherfuckers!*


me after I saw the ratings for last night's RAW, during which they took yet another shot at WCW


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



> - If WWE doesn't substantially increase Network subscriptions by end of 2016, the 4th financial quarter, then the Brand Split was officially a failure.
> 
> - WWE's social media numbers are worthless otherwise they would have translated to an increase in live show attendance.
> 
> - Meltz could see Vince thinking the rub of beating Brock should go to Big Cass because he's tall, blond and good looking.


I disagree with these 3 statements. Ratings have been on a downward spiral for several years. Expecting them to turn that around in 5 months is fucking ridiculous and I don't care who says it. It's going to take a very long time to see substantial and meaningful change. I don't know how Meltzer can say that with a straight face tbh. WWE's social media numbers are not worthless and I don't know where he's drawing a parallel with live show attendance. Where is the connection between social media and live show attendance? Of course there's a link, just like there's a link between social media and every other facet of WWE's business, but why is he ranking social media and live show attendance as the strongest link? And finally, Metlzer's statements on Big Cass are nothing than his opinion, actually, they're what he thinks another persons opinion is, and he should know better than to go spouting shit like that given how impressionable his readers are. Does he want everybody to turn on Big Cass over something that might not even be a remote possibility? The rest is pretty solid though, if not obvious.


----------



## The_Jiz

Legit BOSS said:


> *I remember when people said Reigns only got ratings because of his title match that was announced the night of, but Ambrose and Rollins LOST viewers with their title match that was advertised for a week. What's the excuse now? *


Really?! You don't want to play this game.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*John Cena Is A House Show Draw, But Does A Lighter Schedule For Him Badly Hurt WWE?*

John Cena is a bona fide house show draw. In an era where it's often said "the brand is the draw" for WWE, Cena is an exception. Still, even a theoretical complete absence of Cena from house shows going forward, I estimate would cost WWE $4.2 million annually, which is only 0.6 percent of the total revenue the company reported in 2015.

Cena's appearances meant an average of a 27 percent positive difference in attendance to house shows in the United States and Canada, from 2011 through June 2016. Should Cena stop appearing on house shows, attendance for those non-televised events would likely suffer, but overall attendance, live event revenue and revenue from merchandise sold at events, would probably not be hurt badly. This is according to a study I did originally for an article on Seeking Alpha.










As Cena's mainstream media appearances seem to be ramping up, his house show schedule seems to be winding down. He worked house shows in New York City and Glen Falls, New York, this past weekend. Those were the first non-televised events in the U.S. or Canada he appeared on since returning from his shoulder injury that kept him out of action from the beginning of January to May 30 (barring an unadvertised appearance at WrestleMania). Cena also appeared at two house shows in Tokyo, Japan, earlier this month; is scheduled for a four-show tour of New Zealand and Australia in August; and for one show in Shanghai, China, on September 10. Those are the only house shows he's advertised for currently. He's still advertised to appear on television tapings and pay-per-view events. He's even not currently advertised for the entire European tour in November, nor is he advertised for either the RAW or SmackDown tapings in Glasgow, Scotland, that are a part of that tour.

Based on the market-to-market analysis in the aforementioned article, Cena does not make a difference to international house shows like he does for those in the U.S. and Canada. The spreadsheet for said analysis is [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aL41Cy_OEaOV6lssfWctIz_Z0hLosMwt6SM3IeOQLX8/edit?usp=sharing"]here[/URL]. Chris Harrington originally compiled much of the attendance data from the Wrestling Observer Newsletter. Some data is also sourced from Cagematch.net.

If Cena stopped working house shows completely, it would likely cause a three-percent loss in attendance. That's a difference that would still allow WWE to report a rounded average attendance per event for shows in North America of 6,000: the same annual average they've reported four of the last five years, and each of the last three. This means there wouldn't be any difference in the [URL="http://corporate.wwe.com/~/media/Files/W/WWE/documents/events/revised-kpi-measures-final.pdf"]Key Performance Indicators page[/URL] on attendance that WWE updates quarterly.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/24YGn6S.png

More importantly, the maximum gross revenue cost of Cena no longer working any house shows (my guess is he will still work a few here and there) would be about $3.5 million annually, just 0.5 percent of the $658.8 million in overall revenue WWE reported for 2015. This doesn't take into account that house show ticket prices are lower than prices for television tapings and pay-per-views, so the amount of lost revenue could be even smaller.

The Venue Merchandise segment of WWE's business, a $22.4 revenue stream in 2015, would also likely be affected if fewer attendees went to WWE events. If Venue Merchandise revenue falls by three percent like Live Event attendance and revenue theoretically would, then an additional $658,300 could be lost annually, bringing the total cost of Cena being off house shows to $4.2 million, or 0.6 percent of WWE's revenue in 2015; still a relatively small amount of money to the company's overall business.

Of course, Live Events and Venue Merchandise, not to mention other business segments, could suffer more if Cena's star power is diminished for whatever reason.

On July 9, Cena posted the following to Twitter. He seemed to acknowledge a change to his schedule, but affirmed his commitment to WWE:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/751839245971578881
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0719/614704/john-cena-is-a-house-show-draw/


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *I remember when people said Reigns only got ratings because of his title match that was announced the night of, but Ambrose and Rollins LOST viewers with their title match that was advertised for a week. What's the excuse now? *


14-Dec-2015	4.04	3.78	3.82 Reigns vs Sheamus - TITLE CHANGE
4-Jan-2016 3.707	3.516	3.503 Reigns vs Sheamus, Vince as Ref
18-Jul-2016 3.204	3.236	2.96 Dean vs Rollins title match, Bryan/Foley GM Announcement

All three matches share third hour drops of roughly over 200,000 viewers from hour 1. They all lost viewers.

The audience keeps eroding and it's ultimately the result of bad storytelling centered around characters WWE can't get people to care about.


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *So basically, this brand split needs to succeed both ratings-wise, and network subscriptions, or WWE is fucked.*


They're fucked. It's done. They're finished. The WWE in it's current form isn't going to survive much longer I would guess. The only real question for me is who is going to buy the company off the McMahon's

And here are the three people who deserve the most blame for what is going to happen.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

HO. LY. SHIT. It's even worse than I thought. I knew NBCUniversal were going to be breathing down their necks but the fact that WWE is spending more on this draft than what they are receiving from USA is VERY telling. 

So by the end of the year, we are going to find out a LOT of things. If this brand split fails, they are indeed fucked and in ways people won't see coming until it's too late.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> 14-Dec-2015	4.04	3.78	3.82 Reigns vs Sheamus - TITLE CHANGE
> 4-Jan-2016 3.707	3.516	3.503 Reigns vs Sheamus, Vince as Ref
> 18-Jul-2016 3.204	3.236	2.96 Dean vs Rollins title match, Bryan/Foley GM Announcement
> 
> All three matches share third hour drops of roughly over 200,000 viewers from hour 1. They all lost viewers.


*
I'll take 3.8 and 3.5 over 2.96 any day, especially with no important sports games on television. You're failing to mention that 4.04 is the greatest increase since The Rock's return. Vince was given all of the credit for that boost, yet Reigns was given all the blame for the subsequent decreases in the following weeks WITH Vince on the show. You can't have it both ways.*



> The audience keeps eroding and it's ultimately the result of bad storytelling centered around characters WWE can't get people to care about.


*This, I can agree with. I don't agree with the selective blame game. It can't be Roman's fault when he's here and WWE's fault when he's gone. Rollins and Ambrose marks who spent the whole year blaming him and only him need to be consistent.*


----------



## LilOlMe

@Starbuck , Meltzer didn't say ratings, he said network subscriptions. He's referring to the fact that WWE will now be running two PPVs a month. Clearly the intention is to get more subscriptions, and they're spending a lot more now to do this.

Regarding one of his later points, social media money is a very small part of their revenue in comparison to their tv & network revenue. Yet WWE tries to play this up substantially to give the impression that things are going swell.

The fact that house show attendance hasn't picked up (in addition to free-falling ratings) is a testament to the fact that WWE's social media presence is superficial. It's not translating to over all money-making popularity.

The problem is, bullet points don't allow for you to hear someone's full thoughts.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LilOlMe said:


> @Starbuck , Meltzer didn't say ratings, he said network subscriptions. He's referring to the fact that WWE will now be running two PPVs a month. Clearly the intention is to get more subscriptions, and they're spending a lot more now to do this.
> 
> Regarding one of his later points, social media money is a very small part of their revenue in comparison to their tv & network revenue. Yet WWE tries to play this up substantially to give the impression that things are going swell.
> 
> The fact that house show attendance hasn't picked up (in addition to free-falling ratings) is a testament to the fact that WWE's social media presence is superficial. It's not translating to over all money-making popularity.
> 
> The problem is, bullet points don't allow for you to hear someone's full thoughts.


How can Network subs go up when ratings are going down? If people aren't even willing to watch the product for free what makes you think they'll be willing to pay to watch it. WWE isn't going to significantly increase subs when the television product is cold as ice. It's the same point. 

Social media (and digital media for that fact) is the future which is why WWE have invested so heavily in it and they aren't the only company trying to monetize their social media efforts. With a product like theirs social media is never going to be the bread and butter revenue stream but to disregard it the way too many people do is naive. This is the way people watch TV now and 10 years down the line its only going to be even more prevalent. I see no reason why WWE shouldn't play up their social media success because it's something they do extremely well. 

Again, I see no direct correlation between social media and live events. If anything you should be arguing a link between social media and TV because like I said, people watch TV and tweet about it at the same time, they don't go to a live show and spend the whole time on their phone. I personally don't see a causal link here. If you have one, please put it forward because I really don't see how this makes that much sense. And this goes back to my first point too, how can any reasonable person expect WWE to turn things around in 5 months with ratings and live attendance in free fall? It's a ridiculous target to set. It's not realistic. 

There is no problem really. I know you're one of these 'Meltzer says' people but not everything out of his mouth is gospel.


----------



## LilOlMe

I'm just saying he addressed what you're saying, which wasn't in the post. It wasn't a dig so no need to be defensive.

You're arguing that him saying that network #'s should rise isn't valid, but of course it is, IMO. Otherwise they wouldn't be spending & promoting double PPVs. _Of course_ that is their objective. What is there to even argue with? If it's foolhardy to expect so, then it's foolhardy for them to even be doing it, which is his point if it doesn't happen.

Don't care about the social media shit. Get back to me when the monetinzation actually matches the hoopla. With the network it made sense, you knew it would happen. He's saying it's not as important CURRENTLY as it's made out to be as far as popularity that matters.

Not gospel, but opinions that are probably valid if actual context is heard, rather than arguing with points that aren't even being made. 

You don't see how social media popularity vs. actual $$$ paying new fans (i.e. it is not translating into new fan gains) is relevant, but it makes perfect sense and others will.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> I'll take 3.8 and 3.5 over 2.96 any day, especially with no important sports games on television. You're failing to mention that 4.04 is the greatest increase since The Rock's return. Vince was given all of the credit for that boost, yet Reigns was given all the blame for the subsequent decreases in the following weeks WITH Vince on the show. You can't have it both ways.*


You don't get to pick the days. It's July 2016 and Raw's audience has eroded to the point where a WWE Title match isn't going to have the amount of viewers now that it did 6 months ago. In fact, it's eroded largely because of the things they were doing 6 months ago. 

My point was that, of the three WWE Title matches that have been on Raw, they all lost viewers in hour 3. All of them.

You can't do 3.8 million people right now, because Vince has killed his audience and all we're left is the scar tissue that needs to heal before they can rebuild it.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LilOlMe said:


> I'm just saying he addressed what you're saying, which wasn't in the post. It wasn't a dig so no need to be defensive.
> 
> *You're arguing that him saying that network #'s should rise isn't valid*, but of course it is, IMO. Otherwise they wouldn't be spending & promoting double PPVs. _Of course_ that is their objective. What is there to even argue with? If it's foolhardy to expect so, then it's foolhardy for them to even be doing it, which is his point if it doesn't happen.
> 
> Don't care about the social media shit. Get back to me when the monetinzation actually matches the hoopla. With the network it made sense, you knew it would happen. He's saying it's not as important CURRENTLY as it's made out to be as far as popularity that matters.
> 
> Not gospel, but opinions that are probably valid if actual context is heard, rather than arguing with points that aren't even being made.
> 
> You don't see how social media popularity vs. actual $$$ paying new fans (i.e. it is not translating into new fan gains) is relevant, but it makes perfect sense and others will.


That's actually not what I'm arguing at all. My point of contention is his 5 months timeline because it's not realistic and he should know that because he knows that both ratings and live attendance are falling. So if he knows live attendance and ratings are falling how can he then expect a magical turnaround in 5 months time? I never said anything about an increase in network subs not being expected or the main objective here. I'm saying that expecting it to happen in 5 months is completely unrealisitic. That was my point the first time I posted about this and still is my point now.

What hoopla? The hoopla of WWE saying they have a large social media following? I really don't see why this would bother anyone. WWE aren't claiming that social media > ratings or TV rights fees. And you do understand that monetizing social media is an industry wide issue that not only WWE struggles with, right? Marketing right now is pretty much solely about monetizing your social media efforts. Everybody is trying to do it and do it effectively. And _again_, I don't think anybody is expecting social media to overtake TV as an income source so there's absolutely no need to write it off as being meaningless. 

Either you're not bothering to read anything I am saying here or you're just willfully ignoring all of it. Can you please point out where I have said that social media popularity is more important than, well, anything? Because it's not even close to what we've been discussing yet you keep bringing it up for some reason. 

Somebody is arguing with points that aren't even being made. It isn't me.


----------



## LilOlMe

Starbuck said:


> .Either you're not bothering to read anything I am saying here or you're just willfully ignoring all of it. Can you please point out where I have said that social media popularity is more important than, well, anything? Because it's not even close to what we've been discussing yet you keep bringing it up for some reason.
> 
> Somebody is arguing with points that aren't even being made. It isn't me.


Because that's what HE was discussing. That was my point about not hearing things in full context. 

As for your paragraph above, it was about WWE trying to lead with that. I don't blame them, PR is important, it just doesn't hold the weight that some, including the WWE, try to give it. This was brought up at the press conference.

To the first paragraph: it's because q1 will have the run up to WM included in it, including the free trial presumably, so it'll be hard to parse the double PPVs as the reason for that success. However, q4 of 2016 will be a more clear indication of that. The end of the year is plenty to see if something is starting to work or not in this context. What would make the brand split more successful a year from now other than them suddenly having better booking/signees then? And if they'd have better booking then, there's no reason they can't do that now. 

Regardless, the WM thing is why he chose this year. It will always rise year to year due to WM, unless things really start slipping.

I don't think that this is even a topic that either one of us cares that much about, so eh.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I can't speak for all Rollins fans obviously, but I myself have stated about a TRILLION times in these ratings threads, and some other threads across the forum, that he is not a draw. I have no problem admitting it. I don't really see other people willing to admit that their favorite(s) aren't a draw either. And yes, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that all of the guys who have main evented over the past few years haven't drawn. :shrug


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LilOlMe said:


> The problem is, bullet points don't allow for you to hear someone's full thoughts.


*Yeah, sorry about that. Should've posted a link. Here you go:*

https://mlwradio.libsyn.com/episode-234-dave-meltzer


----------



## LilOlMe

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Deadman's Hand said:


> *Yeah, sorry about that. Should've posted a link. Here you go:*
> 
> https://mlwradio.libsyn.com/episode-234-dave-meltzer


Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to have a go at you at all. Bullet points are immensely helpful when someone doesn't want to or can't hear something. Bullet points certainly help the discussion on this board. I just meant that sometimes things make fuller sense in a more full context, but thank you for bringing it up in the first place.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LilOlMe said:


> Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to have a go at you at all. Bullet points are immensely helpful when someone doesn't want to or can't hear something. Bullet points certainly help the discussion on this board. I just meant that sometimes things make fuller sense in a more full context, but thank you for bringing it up in the first place.


*Oh don't worry, dude. I know you wasn't having a go at me. It's just that I forgot to put the link to the podcast in my original post. 

No problem, mate. (Y)*


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

WWE has killed their own PPV business for the sake of the wwe network but yet they are gonna do 2 PPVS NOW for the PRICE OF $9.99 PER MONTH???! :lmao

I absolutely think the ratings and buyrates have taken a hit simultaneously because of the wwe network. Its just too coincidental to not have. But in doing so they have prodded the USA network and the brand split is WWE's solution for the fix. 

USA is breathing down their necks now and the WWE network has not met expectation. :lmao


----------



## Lebyonics

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Legit BOSS said:


> *I remember when people said Reigns only got ratings because of his title match that was announced the night of, but Ambrose and Rollins LOST viewers with their title match that was advertised for a week. What's the excuse now? *


Its plain and simple....the Shield doesnt draw


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Starbuck said:


> How can Network subs go up when ratings are going down? If people aren't even willing to watch the product for free what makes you think they'll be willing to pay to watch it. WWE isn't going to significantly increase subs when the television product is cold as ice. It's the same point.
> 
> Social media (and digital media for that fact) is the future which is why WWE have invested so heavily in it and they aren't the only company trying to monetize their social media efforts. With a product like theirs social media is never going to be the bread and butter revenue stream but to disregard it the way too many people do is naive. This is the way people watch TV now and 10 years down the line its only going to be even more prevalent. I see no reason why WWE shouldn't play up their social media success because it's something they do extremely well.
> 
> Again, I see no direct correlation between social media and live events. If anything you should be arguing a link between social media and TV because like I said, people watch TV and tweet about it at the same time, they don't go to a live show and spend the whole time on their phone. I personally don't see a causal link here. If you have one, please put it forward because I really don't see how this makes that much sense. And this goes back to my first point too, how can any reasonable person expect WWE to turn things around in 5 months with ratings and live attendance in free fall? It's a ridiculous target to set. It's not realistic.
> 
> There is no problem really. I know you're one of these 'Meltzer says' people but not everything out of his mouth is gospel.


Sorry, but I assume you can read numbers?
Network has around 1 million subscribers in the US.
Raw has around 3 million viewers in the US.
Even with steadily falling ratings, there are TWO MILLION viewers, in all likeness fans, who have not subscribed.

If your BIG plan, brand split, more PPVs, doesn't lure a big part of your FANS who watch monday night into subscribing, your plan is a FAILURE. 
Ratings have fuck all to do with it.
A conversion of 3+ million regular viewers into 1 million subscribers for a measly 10 bucks a month is just dog shit.


----------



## Sweggeh

*RAW ratings are going to sink badly*

Things might start off good, but in the coming weeks and months after the glow of the brand split has faded, RAW rating are going to fall off a cliff.

They literally have 2 established main eventers in Reigns and Rollins (Lesnar doesn't count since he is part time).

The Shield already proved it wasn't drawing, and now you take away the guys who were bring in the highest rated segments on the show (Cena, Styles) and another two of the top stars in the WWE (Orton and Ambrose).

Add the fact that the 3 hours will be a huge headache to book as there will be even more filler matches 
than usual, and I can see things getting way, way worse. 

WWE are really relying on Finn Balor to become a main event star straight away the way AJ Styles did when he showed up. Guys like Sami Zayn and Kevin Owens are also going to have to step up and be main event stars right out of the gate, which Im not sure they are ready for both with their booking and with their ability to draw viewers.

Things could get real bad, real soon.

I think Cena gets brought back to RAW within a year.


----------



## McGee

Then we'll get the RAW Supershow where Smackdown guys show up. It'll be crazy!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: RAW ratings are going to sink badly*

This is the beginning of the Final Deletion of RAW.







:fuckyeah


----------



## Optikk is All Elite

*Re: RAW ratings are going to sink badly*

Cena will move back before the end of the year. He's just on Smackdown to finish the beef with AJ, and to give SD the initial high ratings before Vince forgets about SD again.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: RAW ratings are going to sink badly*

Both shows are going to sink. Not like Cena and Orton have drawn on TV in recent years, either. Two most stale guys on the roster and are on the smaller show. fpalm


----------



## PlKACHU

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Sweggeh said:


> Things might start off good, but in the coming weeks and months after the glow of the brand split has faded, RAW rating are going to fall off a cliff.
> 
> They literally have 2 established main eventers in Reigns and Rollins (Lesnar doesn't count since he is part time).
> 
> The Shield already proved it wasn't drawing, and now you take away the guys who were bring in the highest rated segments on the show (Cena, Styles) and another two of the top stars in the WWE (Orton and Ambrose).
> 
> Add the fact that the 3 hours will be a huge headache to book as there will be even more filler matches
> than usual, and I can see things getting way, way worse.
> 
> WWE are really relying on Finn Balor to become a main event star straight away the way AJ Styles did when he showed up. Guys like Sami Zayn and Kevin Owens are also going to have to step up and be main event stars right out of the gate, which Im not sure they are ready for both with their booking and with their ability to draw viewers.
> 
> Things could get real bad, real soon.
> 
> I think Cena gets brought back to RAW within a year.


RAW will also have Stephanie opening the show every week.

All this draft has done is given people more reasons to stop watching RAW.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Anybody else think WWE is gonna move away from USA soon? Assuming the ratings continue their free fall, there ain't no way they offer to pay WWE the amount they would want or need at the next negotiations. I can see WWE broaching offers to other, more desperate networks while they work on shifting their TV revenue streams online somehow.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*SmackDown viewership 
this week(7/21) Vs last week(7/14) 

3.170M Vs 2.068M
(+1.002M/+53.29%)

Note: Special Draft episode and Live debut on Tuesday Nights on USA.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *SmackDown viewership
> this week(7/21) Vs last week(7/14)
> 
> 3.170M Vs 2.068M
> (+1.002M/+53.29%)
> 
> Note: Special Draft episode and Live debut on Tuesday Nights on USA.*


Thanks for posting. They made a Smackdown ratings thread for this, though.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

SD 1 RAW 0 Scoreboard, Steph.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> SD 1 RAW 0 Scoreboard, Steph.


Steph and the Raw guys were on the show, too. And it was the Draft episode. Scary bad number.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Steph and the Raw guys were on the show, too. And it was the Draft episode. Scary bad number.


Just think. That just might be their ceiling. Their floor remains to be seen.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Steph and the Raw guys were on the show, too. And it was the Draft episode. Scary bad number.


The people who watch Raw, who usually can't be arsed by Smackdown, tuned in yesterday for the draft. What will stick remains to be seen.
It was always unlikely that the draft show would have more viewers than Raw. Raw audience is their absolute top ceiling, and if that show didn't do well, why would a randomly important Smackdown be?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> Just think. That just might be their ceiling. Their floor remains to be seen.


Instead of fixing Creative and having well-thought out storylines with interesting characters, they took a shortcut (draft) and it still might not even work. Heck, it probably will not.


----------



## Obese Turtle

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I expected at least 4 million. Damn


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



LilOlMe said:


> Because that's what HE was discussing. That was my point about not hearing things in full context.
> 
> As for your paragraph above, it was about WWE trying to lead with that. I don't blame them, PR is important, it just doesn't hold the weight that some, including the WWE, try to give it. This was brought up at the press conference.
> 
> To the first paragraph: it's because q1 will have the run up to WM included in it, including the free trial presumably, so it'll be hard to parse the double PPVs as the reason for that success. However, q4 of 2016 will be a more clear indication of that. The end of the year is plenty to see if something is starting to work or not in this context. *What would make the brand split more successful a year from now other than them suddenly having better booking/signees then?* And if they'd have better booking then, there's no reason they can't do that now.
> 
> Regardless, the WM thing is why he chose this year. It will always rise year to year due to WM, unless things really start slipping.
> 
> I don't think that this is even a topic that either one of us cares that much about, so eh.


The ONLY thing that is going to pull WWE out of this hole is better booking. What we're seeing now is the result of years of WWE pissing off its fans to the point that there's hardly anybody left. Do you honestly think it's going to be that easy to get them back in 5 months? The thing that will make it more successful in a years time is the fact that it will have a years more trust and good will behind it and even then it's a stretch. It's going to take a very long time for WWE to see sustainable long term growth. They basically have to rebuild their entire programming. I don't care what Meltzer says, something like that is simply not achievable within a 5 month timeline, especially when MNF comes back and less people will likely be watching Raw than ever before. It's not realistic in the slightest. 



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Sorry, but I assume you can read numbers?
> Network has around 1 million subscribers in the US.
> Raw has around 3 million viewers in the US.
> Even with steadily falling ratings, there are TWO MILLION viewers, in all likeness fans, who have not subscribed.
> 
> If your BIG plan, brand split, more PPVs, doesn't lure a big part of your FANS who watch monday night into subscribing, your plan is a FAILURE.
> Ratings have fuck all to do with it.
> A conversion of 3+ million regular viewers into 1 million subscribers for a measly 10 bucks a month is just dog shit.


I have no idea what the fuck you are saying.


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



obesebiscuit said:


> I expected at least 4 million. Damn


What fucken planet have you been living on the last year? Lol


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

That's a nice bump for them. If that audience stays with SD, LOLOLOLOL RAW. They'd be so fucked. Since it's outright saying they want to watch a two hour show with stars, not a three hour show with guys who suck.


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I feel like the argument about whether individuals still draw will be answered by next weeks ratings ie does Cena move the needle.

Because ultimately, that's the only _major_ thing that they have done to try and get casuals (kids, international fans, soccer mums) to watch Smackdown.

Edit > Bryan too I guess as he is still hella over.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

So, if Smackdown does better, it's Cena?

F off.

WWE seriously needs to shut up about the Attitude Era. It was 20 fucking years ago! When did a new era EVER get off by comparing itself to a long gone past? Did DX say "Hey dudes, this reminds me of when Hogan told people to pray"?
Did Nash and Hall say "Ey fellas, this feels so much like the times Flair feuded Harley Race"?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Roman returns and RAW will beat Smackdown in the ratings. Coincidence? :reigns2


----------



## Wildcat410

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> So, if Smackdown does better, it's Cena?
> 
> F off.
> 
> *WWE seriously needs to shut up about the Attitude Era. It was 20 fucking years ago! When did a new era EVER get off by comparing itself to a long gone past? Did DX say "Hey dudes, this reminds me of when Hogan told people to pray"?
> Did Nash and Hall say "Ey fellas, this feels so much like the times Flair feuded Harley Race"?*


All true, but I think it is getting close to not mattering anymore.

Simply put they don't have much in the way of larger than life talent. The roster in general tends to lack speaking ability as well as innate charisma. Plus the booking is terrible, Vince has lost his touch, and they have no idea how to create new stars anymore. If anything, they seem to delight in ruining people. 

They milk the past because the present is boring and future looks bleak.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

.


----------



## SonOfAnarchy91

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

.


----------



## razzathereaver

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Sasha got the jobber entrance. Uh-oh.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope the ratings reflect the quality of that product. We'll get more of it if that's the case.


----------



## Bret Hart

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

This Raw deserves a good rating.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

SD to be putting RAW over in the ratings this week.


----------



## Even Flow

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope Raw gets a good rating this week, to reflect on the show tonight.


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> SD to be putting RAW over in the ratings this week.


Its almost as if the entire thing was rigged from the start.:vince2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Even Flow said:


> I hope Raw gets a good rating this week, to reflect on the show tonight.


RAWwill get some post ppv bump, plus there was a lot of hype for this episode. This episode does deserve a good rating.


----------



## PlKACHU

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Really, it was a good show? Scanning through the highlights on YouTube, I couldn't find anything of importance besides the new title announcement. To make matters worse, the main event featured a generic looking guy who a lot of people don't know/care about. I don't expect a good rating.


----------



## Ace

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw gets a pass this week even if the ratings are bad.

The show was great and probably the best of the year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



EL SHIV said:


> RAWwill get some post ppv bump, plus there was a lot of hype for this episode. This episode does deserve a good rating.


If Wrestlemania post show does a 2.9, this will not get a big bump.


----------



## Reaper

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Well, if Raw ratings improve, that in and of itself will have an impact on SD ratings. It's obviously intertwined.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Expecting a good number for Raw as the direct fallout from Battleground, not to mention the four way matches and main event to see who faces Rollins at Summerslam being sprinkled throughout the show. Oh, and the Womens Title match as well, on top of it being a quality show throughout. Actually, 3rd hour should perform well this week since it had both Sasha/Charlotte and Balor/Reigns. 

Guess we'll see in a few hours how it turns out. Hopefully it is good because if only one Raw this year deserves a high number, it was this week's.


----------



## imthegame19

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I have a feeling this rating isn't going to be good. You take Cena,Ambrose and AJ off the show(who all had major roles at Battleground). Then center it around Reigns who people don't like and Balor who nobody knows. While Charlotte/Sasha match was really good, but nobody knew about that match going in.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



imthegame19 said:


> I have a feeling this rating isn't going to be good. You take Cena,Ambrose and AJ off the show(who all had major roles at Battleground). Then center it around Reigns who people don't like and Balor who nobody knows. While Charlotte/Sasha match was really good, but nobody knew about that match going in.


Cena wasn't drawing on Raw, anyways, let alone Ambrose and AJ. Don't even care anyway as long as Raw was as great as it was last night.


----------



## Erik.

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope it's a steady number. They won't get a good number based on one good show because people would have just been expecting the same shit.

Raw was very very solid but how many times have we heard "new era" or "big night" and WWE pull it out of the bag that week and then go back to the status quo the following week or within the next few weeks. They need consistency with this. I thought bringing back jobbers was a great touch as it allows some monster superstars to get over without harming some of the main roster players. I thought the superstars brought it within their matches too. They presented the show like a wrestling show, as if professional wrestling was a sport and that's what has been missing. Getting rid of JBL and installing Graves as commentator was a big help I feel too.

They do deserve a good number but I'm not going to be shocked if they don't get one.


----------



## imthegame19

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Cena wasn't drawing on Raw, anyways, let alone Ambrose and AJ. Don't even care anyway as long as Raw was as great as it was last night.




I think those three guys were a big reason why Raw got a boost rating following MITB. I'm not sure you get that post PPV boost rating here. With no Cena, World Champion Ambrose, AJ, or Orton/Brock on the show. So I can see it doing slightly less then last weeks Raw. That doesn't mean the quality wasn't good though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



imthegame19 said:


> I think those three guys were a big reason why Raw got a boost rating following MITB. I'm not sure you get that post PPV boost rating here. With no Cena, World Champion Ambrose, AJ, or Orton/Brock on the show. So I can see it doing slightly less then last weeks Raw. That doesn't mean the quality wasn't good though.


It was also the night after the PPV. And then the very next week, they went right back down and stayed down. Post PPV bump.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I just hope if this one show has a low rating the WWE doesn't over react to it. They actually did try some new things last night, but that alone is not going to change the ratings much over night.


----------



## imthegame19

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> It was also the night after the PPV. And then the very next week, they went right back down and stayed down. Post PPV bump.



And this show will likely continue that trend. With the stars from the PPV not on the show to give it post PPV boost is what I'm saying. I just don't see a show doing well with Cena, Ambrose, AJ, Orton, Brock not on the show at all, with Rollins barely on it. That centered around Roman Reigns and a guy most WWE fans don't know yet in Finn Balor.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

One thing is for sure. No one can blame







for RAW's rating anymore.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



imthegame19 said:


> And this show will likely continue that trend. With the stars from the PPV not on the show to give it post PPV boost is what I'm saying. I just don't see a show doing well with Cena, Ambrose, AJ, Orton, Brock not on the show at all, with Rollins barely on it. That centered around Roman Reigns and a guy most WWE fans don't know yet in Finn Balor.


I think it will get the usual rating, the post PPV bump rating. It was still the night after a PPV AND the first show of the brand split. That is the draw.

Those guys you mentioned have all been on the lowest rated Raws of all time in recent years, too, including this year. No one as an individual is a draw these days. It's kind of been proven many times over at this point. The WWE brand is the draw. And right now they're at the start of the brand split. That is a bigger deal than any of those guys you mentioned who haven't drawn shit on Monday nights (Cena not in awhile, and the other two, ever).


----------



## imthegame19

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> I think it will get the usual rating, the post PPV bump rating. It was still the night after a PPV AND the first show of the brand split. That is the draw.
> 
> Those guys you mentioned have all been on the lowest rated Raws of all time in recent years, too, including this year. No one as an individual is a draw these days. It's kind of been proven many times over at this point. The WWE brand is the draw. And right now they're at the start of the brand split. That is a bigger deal than any of those guys you mentioned who haven't drawn shit on Monday nights (Cena not in awhile, and the other two, ever).




I agree with you about WWE being a brand and no one guy being a ratings draw. But I do think the combo of not having all those guys on the show combined(along with no WWE Title) will hurt the brand a bit. So with the show already getting bad ratings, I can see this one up their with one of the bad rated shows. I could be wrong, but it's just a feeling I got. Ratings can be tough to predict sometimes. Unlike how I told you exactly what would happen with Ambrose booking a week and half ago.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



imthegame19 said:


> I agree with you about WWE being a brand and no one guy being a ratings draw. But I do think the combo of not having all those guys on the show combined(along with no WWE Title) will hurt the brand a bit. So with the show already getting bad ratings, I can see this one up their with one of the bad rated shows.


Those guys weren't helping Raw pre-brand split. Couple that with it being the first show after the draft and night after a PPV, I don't think people were lamenting missing anyone. If Raw was drawing big, or even just decently, pre-draft, I would agree. But they weren't. I think people are already looking forward to the new title more because it is brand new and could actually be a good looking belt unlike the WWE Title. They were probably also interested to see what Raw would do with the Title situation, too. Lord knows, if they keep booking like last night, it will be a very popular title. I think they'll get their standard rating.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope RAW gets a good rating. The WWE actually tried and did put on a solid show.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings thread has turned face!!!!


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Whilst I agree that I don't expect the ratings to bump off a very good show, it'll interesting to see if they stay steady across the 3 hours.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Very interested to see what this show gets. With all the hype leading into this episode, the fact that this show actually delivered could mean an even bigger number next week.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*7/25 Raw Social Media – Raw slips in rankings, but hits year-high Twitter stat*

Monday’s WWE Raw generated similar social media activity as the Battleground PPV on Sunday – about the same number of people tweeting about the show, but a huge jump in tweets, pointing to stronger engagement.

WWE Raw Social Media Tracking

– July 25: The first Raw of a “new era” ranked #3 in Nielsen’s Twitter TV Ratings on Monday night, trailing the one-off Democratic National Convention and ABC’s “The Bachelorette.”

Raw drew 47,000 unique authors tweeting about the show, slightly more than 45,000 uniques last week.

However, total tweets was 266,000, up 51 percent from last week’s volume of 176,000.

That averages to 5.7 tweets per person, which lands right at the 2016 high-point of 5.6 for the post-WrestleMania Raw on April 4.

The Twitter engagement looks impressive compared to last week’s show, which generated a year-low of only 3.9.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/26/725-raw-social-media/


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*H1-3.412M
H2-3.350M
H3-3.254M
3H-3.339M
*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Same numbers as pre-draft, low to mid 3's. Exactly what I expected.


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Eh, there not bad i guess about what you expect these days.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.412M
> H2-3.350M
> H3-3.254M
> 3H-3.339M
> *


*H2 Vs H1 (-1.82%/-0.062M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-2.87%/-0.096M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-4.63%/-0.158M) 
7/25/16 Vs 7/18/16 (+6.58%/+0.206M)*


----------



## Kabraxal

Decent hold through the show. Now to see if they give us good wrestling shows every week and that draws people back to the show.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Roman's status as jobber to the stars approved with a ratings bump.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Not even a radical company restructuring draws more than 200.000 additional fans.

This was a put all effort into it show, good luck with building a rep for more viewers :eagle 

May god have mercy on their souls.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Same numbers as pre-draft, low to mid 3's. Exactly what I expected.


Same.

If I had to guess, i'd expect Smackdown will be in the 2.5-2.7 range. Anything higher than that has to be considered a home run.

Three hours of wrestling on Sunday *and* Monday and then asking your fans to watch another two hours on Tuesday is really testing your audience.


----------



## DoubtGin

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

decent bump, nothing too extraordinary (it was a post-PPV RAW but I think its impact is overrated) but ok nevertheless

if they keep up the good quality, I'm sure more ppl will tune in sooner or later


----------



## Trivette

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

One good show isn't going to move the needle right away. WWE have a long way to go to make amends for the ill will they've sowed over the last few years.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think I pointed this out last week, so sorry if I sound like a broken record, but WWE killed its audience in the first half of this year. This is a good rating considering how many people stopped watching the show. If they want to get back to the 4 million viewer mark (or even 3.5 million), they need to keep this up, maybe bring Rock in for a week, and stop bumming people out with bad television.


----------



## Kabraxal

Fringe said:


> One good show isn't going to move the needle right away. WWE have a long way to go to make amends for the ill will they've sowed over the last few years.


And that can take months. 97 WWE was great for months before the numbers really started to swell.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Shit, forgot that this is post PPV.

So there is a chance this bump isn't even because of the post-Brand Split Raw.

Holy fuck.


----------



## imthegame19

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Ratings are up, shows how much I know about ratings lol.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

:bjpenn


----------



## Wynter

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Solid, I guess. Gonna probably take months of mostly great Raws to gain any sliver of good will with the fans. 

:shrug if WWE puts on solid to great raws for a while and they STILL don't increase worth noting? They're fucked as far as how much they turned fans away. 

Not really bad when you consider majority of the main event is on Smackdown. Those who came at least maintained. Third hour didn't suffer a massive drop. 

Not excellent, but possibly can be built on.


----------



## anirioc

*Monday's New and Improved WWE Raw Draws Viewership Increased.*

Finn Balor is good for business after all.

http://www.wrestlingnewssource.com/...-Improved-WWE-Raw-Draws-Viewership-Increased/


"Monday's WWE Raw, featuring Battleground fallout, the new roster and Finn Balor's debut, drew 3.338 million viewers which was up on the 3.133 million viewers last week.

The first hour drew 3.412 million viewers, second hour 3.350 million viewers and the third and final hour drew 3.254 million viewers."


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I think is a bit concerning that the third hour was he lowest, despite having the two matches that were hyped up throughout the show, a women's title match and a #1 contenders match of sorts. Nevermind this was just a standard PPV, nothing more.

Oh well, let's see if they can maintain this audience next week and build from there.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Decent numbers I would of still expected a bit more considering they restructured everything, as well as being post-ppv.

Expecting 2.9 for smackdown.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Decent numbers I guess. Word of mouth traveling would indicate next week's show would get a higher rating due to last night being good. Key is to keep having quality Raws, and slowly, the audience will come back.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

All three hours and the average were the highest since June 20th (night after Money in the Bank).


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*How Was WWE RAW Viewership With Finn Balor's Debut, Fallout From Battleground And The New Roster?*

Source: Showbuzz Daily

Monday's WWE RAW, featuring Battleground fallout, Finn Balor's debut and the first show since the WWE Draft, drew 3.338 million viewers. This is up 6.5% from last week's pre-Draft show, which drew 3.133 million viewers.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.412 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.350 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.254 million viewers.
RAW was #12 on cable for the night in viewership in the 18-49 demo, behind various shows covering the Democratic National Convention, and #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind Love & Hip-Hop and two showings of the DNC coverage on CNN.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...was-wwe-raw-viewership-with-finn-balor-debut/


----------



## Kabraxal

D.M.N. said:


> All three hours and the average were the highest since June 20th (night after Money in the Bank).


And the show seemed to shed far less viewers from hour 1 to hour 3 than many episodes the past year or so.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I hope this isn't the ceiling. We'll see if word of mouth starts to increase viewer interest.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Chrome said:


> Decent numbers I guess. Word of mouth traveling would indicate next week's show would get a higher rating due to last night being good. Key is to keep having quality Raws, and slowly, the audience will come back.





Chrome said:


> Decent numbers I guess. Word of mouth traveling would indicate next week's show would get a higher rating due to last night being good. Key is to keep having quality Raws, and slowly, the audience will come back.


The audience that they are targeting to come back is the full hardcore base. That number is probably around 3.5M. But by doing this they are giving up on getting back a casual viewer base. Still it's better to do this than to have their hardcore base dwindle away.

As someone who considers himself more of a casual viewer, I can see how the show wouldn't be that appealing to casual viewers. Here are a couple of big reasons that come to mind.

1. Like me, most casuals probably don't give a shit about the women's division. I mean if another Chyna comes along then yes that would be interesting, but otherwise who cares? Oh right, the IWC, but not casuals.

2. Casuals find someone like Roman Reigns more entertaining than indy guys. I definitely find him more entertaining than most the roster. Power moves just have more of an appeal than technical wrestling. Plus, Roman looks like he could break someone like Finn Balor in half. Like seriously who would you put your money on in a real fight? I had a friend who doesn't watch wrestling watch with me once and the first thing she commented on was Roman's massive size.

If Roman was booked right (i.e. a monster heel) he would unquestionably be a legit main eventer. But do to his crappy booking and unnatural, shove-him-down-your-throat push, he's become (as even the WWE admitted) an ire to the fans.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> 2. Casuals find someone like Roman Reigns more entertaining than indy guys.


I've never seen any definitive proof of this, certainly not in the numbers. The ratings impact of Reigns is negligible, the house shows with Reigns defending the title drew as well as the ones with Ambrose and no title, the TV audience (casual/hardcore) was ropping while Reigns had the belt, and on television he seems to get booed no matter where they are.

Roman Reigns has never been a "Casual vs Hardcore" fight. It's been a "Vince vs All of His Audience" fight.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

_'Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller
2.36 for #WWERaw rating, up from last week's 2.22 and prior week's 2.28. Smackdown did a 2.2 last week. Game on!'_

https://twitter.com/thewadekeller/status/758048746869587969

*Y-Y viewership and rating:
7/25/16 Vs 7/20/15

3.339M Vs 3.804M
(-0.465M/-12.22%)

2.36R Vs 2.79R
(-18.22%)

Note:
Both post Battleground RAWs.

Demo comparison:
7/25/16 Vs 7/18/16

H1- 1.24D Vs 1.18D
H2- 1.24D Vs 1.16D
H3- 1.21D Vs 1.05D
3H- 1.23D Vs 1.13D

Note:
RAW Vs the Democratic National Convention.*


----------



## RLStern

*Re: Monday's New and Improved WWE Raw Draws Viewership Increased.*

*Post PPV Raw, Argument dismissed, how can Balor draw the Mainstream WWE fans(Not the casual NXT audience) when the Mainstream didn't even know him before tonight, as he never worked a mainstream show before.
*


----------



## ChiTownExtreme

*Re: Monday's New and Improved WWE Raw Draws Viewership Increased.*

i'm pretty sure that has to do with the simple fact they have been advertising this brand split and 'new era' crap everywhere they could, so it caught interest. only a true mark would link it to balor


----------



## Buster Baxter

*Re: Monday's New and Improved WWE Raw Draws Viewership Increased.*

Roman Reigns drew those ratings, not Finn Balor. Reigns is the main reason people are tuning in and buying tickets.


----------



## PlKACHU

*Re: Monday's New and Improved WWE Raw Draws Viewership Increased.*

Just an average RAW rating (for 2016). Helped by the fact that it was a post PPV show and the first RAW since the draft. Next week numbers will probably go down.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Mifune Jackson said:


> I've never seen any definitive proof of this, certainly not in the numbers. The ratings impact of Reigns is negligible, the house shows with Reigns defending the title drew as well as the ones with Ambrose and no title, the TV audience (casual/hardcore) was ropping while Reigns had the belt, and on television he seems to get booed no matter where they are.
> 
> Roman Reigns has never been a "Casual vs Hardcore" fight. It's been a "Vince vs All of His Audience" fight.


All the metrics you are talking about mostly apply to hardcore fans as the casual base is pretty much dead. If you want to talk about metrics regarding the current audience:

1. A lot of women watch wrestling because of good looking guys like Roman Reigns. Don't even try to argue that they watch it because of the actual wrestling.
2. The ratings were worse when Roman was suspended.

As for non-metrics being booed because of shitty booking is irrelevant to the discussion of what casuals find more appealing. As already mentioned, the audience is mostly hardcore now, and probably even a greater % hardcore for live audiences.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> *All the metrics you are talking about mostly apply to hardcore fans* as the casual base is pretty much dead


Casuals don't buy merch? Don't tell Cena, who makes millions a year on t-shirts alone.

Casuals don't go to house shows? Frak. *Only* casuals go to main roster house shows.

Reigns isn't Cena. He's not a pushed act because he moves business. He's a pushed act because Vince can't admit he's woefully out of touch.



wwf said:


> 1. A lot of women watch wrestling because of good looking guys like Roman Reigns. Don't even try to argue that they watch it because of the actual wrestling.


They've lost a disturbing number of their male viewers. The number of female viewers haven't increased at all.

Females are just a larger _percentage_ of their audience because so many men have stopped watching.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> All the metrics you are talking about mostly apply to hardcore fans as the casual base is pretty much dead. If you want to talk about metrics regarding the current audience:
> 
> 1. A lot of women watch wrestling because of good looking guys like Roman Reigns. Don't even try to argue that they watch it because of the actual wrestling.
> 2. The ratings were worse when Roman was suspended.
> 
> As for non-metrics being booed because of shitty booking is irrelevant to the discussion of what casuals find more appealing. As already mentioned, the audience is mostly hardcore now, and probably even a greater % hardcore for live audiences.


The ratings weren't worse when Reigns was gone. They stayed the same.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> All the metrics you are talking about mostly apply to hardcore fans as the casual base is pretty much dead.


The metrics apply to the entire audience that is watching now versus the ones who were watching months ago. They aren't necessarily hardcores or casuals. They're lapsed Raw viewers. Some are "casuals," some are "hardcores." There's no actual demographic breakdown that defines them as either.

The ratings were going down while Reigns was champion, and they went down further while Dean was champion and there's no denying that. They've been going down steadily for over a year regardless of who's champion. There's no real evidence to suggest that Reigns would be a better champion than anyone else, or Dean, or Balor, or Rollins.

What we do know is that numbers have dwindled while Reigns was champion, there wasn't much of a WrestleMania bump this year, and that one of the Raws in July fell on the 4th of July and was expected to do terribly no matter what.

Raw last night shook things up, did good (not great), and maybe they'll bring some of those fans back. Maybe not.


----------



## Empress

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*7/25 WWE Raw TV Ratings – Week 1 of a New Era for Raw*

By James Caldwell, PWTorch assistant editor

The first Raw of a new era increased to the highest rating since last month’s post-PPV episode.

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

July 25: Monday’s Raw to kick off a new era scored a 2.36 TV rating, up from a 2.22 pre-Draft rating last week.

This was also a post-PPV Raw following the Battleground PPV. Last month’s post-MITB Raw scored a 2.44 rating for the first night of Dean Ambrose as WWE champion.

The post-MITB and post-Battleground shows have scored the highest TV ratings since April.

– Raw’s three hours averaged 3.338 million viewers, up six percent (about 200,000 viewers) from last week’s Raw.

However, the third hour viewership decline continued again this week, marking 19 consecutive weeks where the audience has fallen from the second to third hour…

First Hour: 3.412 million viewers (+200,000 vs. last week)
Second Hour: 3.350 million viewers (+100,000 vs. last week)
Third Hour: 3.254 million viewers (down 2.9 percent from 2H) (+300,000 vs. last week)

– DEMOGRAPHICS: Raw upticked one-tenth of a rating across the board.

Adults 18-49, males 18-34, and males 18-49 all increased to the highest points since the post-MITB Raw on June 20.

In the hourly break down, there was not a big drop-off among adult males 18-49 in the third hour. Adult women and teenagers were also solid throughout the show.

It boils down to Raw lost viewers outside of the 18-49 demo window in the third hour.

*Caldwell’s Analysis: *With this being the new water level, a solid start for Raw in the new era. It’s going to take a very consistent, week-to-week, disciplined approach to build back to a 3.0 rating. It’s just not going to happen overnight after damage done from the previous four years of Three-Hour Raws.

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/26/725-wwe-raw-tv-ratings-week-1-new-era-raw/


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> The ratings weren't worse when Reigns was gone. They stayed the same.


Factually incorrect. Even excluding 4th of July, the month prior to the suspension averaged 100k more viewers.



Mifune Jackson said:


> The metrics apply to the entire audience that is watching now versus the ones who were watching months ago. They aren't necessarily hardcores or casuals. They're lapsed Raw viewers. Some are "casuals," some are "hardcores." There's no actual demographic breakdown that defines them as either.
> 
> The ratings were going down while Reigns was champion, and they went down further while Dean was champion and there's no denying that. They've been going down steadily for over a year regardless of who's champion. There's no real evidence to suggest that Reigns would be a better champion than anyone else, or Dean, or Balor, or Rollins.
> 
> What we do know is that numbers have dwindled while Reigns was champion, there wasn't much of a WrestleMania bump this year, and that one of the Raws in July fell on the 4th of July and was expected to do terribly no matter what.
> 
> Raw last night shook things up, did good (not great), and maybe they'll bring some of those fans back. Maybe not.


Yeah I was going to respond to another quote, but you raised the point that I was thinking in my head the entire time: What is a casual fan? And the answer is that there is no objective answer to that.

Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure if we were to take a large sample of people who don't watch wrestling and ask them who they found more entertaining in a match, the answer would be Roman.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> Factually incorrect. Even excluding 4th of July, the month prior to the suspension averaged 100k more viewers.
> 
> 
> Yeah I was going to respond to another quote, but you raised the point that I was thinking in my head the entire time: What is a casual fan? And the answer is that there is no objective answer to that.
> 
> Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure if we were to take a large sample of people who don't watch wrestling and ask them who they found more entertaining in a match, the answer would be Roman.


They've been in the low 3 millions for quite awhile now, with all of 2016 being a hell of alot lower than 2015 was rated.

I like how you just assume a bunch of people would prefer one wrestler over another...just because. You guys sure are grasping at straws these days. If fans preferred Reigns so damn much, they had all of 2016 to show it, and they didn't. To the point where his house show numbers were the same as Deans' when Dean wasn't even Champion.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Post PPV Raw ratings are slightly up. Not surprising. It has NOTHING to do with the quality of the show or who was on it.

The key is to continue producing good shows, and not simply going for quick-fix solutions. It'll be interesting to see how Raw follows up this weeks show.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> They've been in the low 3 millions for quite awhile now, with all of 2016 being a hell of alot lower than 2015 was rated.


Yes, lets start stating random facts because you were wrong the first time.



ShowStopper said:


> I like how you just assume a bunch of people would prefer one wrestler over another...just because. You guys sure are grasping at straws these days. If fans preferred Reigns so damn much, they had all of 2016 to show it, and they didn't. To the point where his house show numbers were the same as Deans' when Dean wasn't even Champion.


I like how you are too lazy to read the reasons I said fans would prefer Roman and claim I said "just because". I also like how you can't separate bad bookings from a wrestler's physical capabilities.

But go ahead keep grasping at them straws since it must make you feel better


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> Yes, lets start stating random facts because you were wrong the first time.
> 
> 
> I like how you are too lazy to read the reasons I said fans would prefer Roman and claim I said "just because". I also like how you can't separate bad bookings from a wrestler's physical capabilities.
> 
> But go ahead keep grasping at them straws since it must make you feel better


Actually, I was right. Raw crashed down to record low ratings in early to mid 2016, and they've stayed there the entire year. Nothing has changed in that regard.

And obviously your reasons are dead wrong. If they preferred Reigns (or anyone for that matter) so much over everyone else, the ratings and attendance would've increased when he was Champ, not decrease to record lows with no NFL competition.

Nice try, though.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



ShowStopper said:


> Actually, I was right. Raw crashed down to record low ratings in early to mid 2016, and they've stayed there the entire year. Nothing has changed in that regard.
> 
> And obviously your reasons are dead wrong. If they preferred Reigns (or anyone for that matter) so much over everyone else, the ratings and attendance would've increased when he was Champ, not decrease to record lows with no NFL competition.
> 
> Nice try, though.


We were talking about the ratings during Reign's suspension and before it, NOT the ratings of the year 2015 vs 2016. You claimed they were the same. I literally quantified how you were wrong. End of story.

And this is just going in circles. So I'll just leave it at this: booking does not equal physical abilities.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> We were talking about the ratings during Reign's suspension and before it, NOT the ratings of the year 2015 vs 2016. You claimed they were the same. I literally quantified how you were wrong. End of story.
> 
> And this is just going in circles. So I'll just leave it at this: booking does not equal physical abilities.


And outside of the 4th of July show, they were on the same level. In one months' time, hour 3 went below 3 million only once, and even that time it was a 2.9. Whereas before that Raw's Hour 2 has gone below that on a semi-regular basis. Not bad for a show missing it's strongest pushed guy and pushing a triple threat main event title match at the next PPV without one of the participants.


----------



## T0M

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Dear me, even pushing the reset button on the whole product did nothing to move the needle on the viewership. I would have expected at least a very temporary upward swing toward 4 million.

Just goes to show how far they fucked this product since Raw 1000.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Give it a month or two to see how much the ratings change. Wait until the Raw after SS. Word of people willl get people to watch or not watch again. Raw was amazing this week and SD sucked. So lets see if Raws and SDs ratings respond next week.

Next weeks ratings are the better barometer for quality of this weeks raw. If the ratings do go up even more next week, cant wait to hear the excuses from the naysayers.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

*Raw on YouTube - July 25th, 2016*
1.92 million - Roman Reigns vs. Finn Bálor
.....
1.50 million - Sasha Banks vs. Charlotte - WWE Women's Championship Match
1.49 million - Stephanie McMahon and Mick Foley announce the WWE Universal Championship
.....
1.00 million - Roman Reigns vs. Sami Zayn vs. Sheamus vs. Chris Jericho
.....
778,000 - The New Day celebrate cereal, history and The New Era
764,000 - Braun Strowman vs. a local competitor
610,000 - Neville vs. "Mr. Irrelevant" Curtis Axel
588,000 - Raw's New Era officially kicks off with a new theme song
588,000 - Cesaro vs. Finn Bálor vs. Rusev vs. Kevin Owens - Fatal 4-Way Match
566,000 - Enzo Amore & Big Cass vs. The Shining Stars
521,000 - Nia Jax vs. a local competitor
.....
245,000 - Bob Backlund gets an impromptu Pokémon Go tutorial

Impressive numbers for Banks vs Charlotte and Balor vs Reigns. Note though that one of the two Fatal 4-Way matches have double the other number, although the first match was better from a wrestling stand point, the second had bigger names (Reigns and Jericho), hence the higher number.


----------



## AJrama

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Do you all think Raw will have its lowest average yearly ratings ever next year? Or possibly by the end of this year?


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

They're definitely on par to go below 1995. We're not that far away from the return of Monday Night Football either. It's very, very likely.


----------



## wwf

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



T0M said:


> Dear me, even pushing the reset button on the whole product did nothing to move the needle on the viewership. I would have expected at least a very temporary upward swing toward 4 million.
> 
> Just goes to show how far they fucked this product since Raw 1000.


If that's what you expected, then you must suck at math.


----------



## T0M

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



wwf said:


> If that's what you expected, then you must suck at math.


Expecting higher ratings suggests poor mathematics skills? I don't see how the two are connected.


----------



## Muskoka Redneck

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

I was wondering if someone on here could start a poll thread each week "WF Ratings - RAW vs. SmackDown Live" asking which show was better. I'd be curious to see which show the WF universe likes better each week. I don't have enough posts yet to start a thread ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Reotor

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Muskoka ******* said:


> I was wondering if someone on here could start a poll thread each week "WF Ratings - RAW vs. SmackDown Live" asking which show was better. I'd be curious to see which show the WF universe likes better each week. I don't have enough posts yet to start a thread ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Good idea.
Although judging by the first week this is going to be a very one sided thread:lol


----------



## LaMelo

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Raw would probably win every week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wwetna1

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Youtube Views - Raw (7/25/16) vs SD(7/26/16) as of 7/31/16 (end of week)

*Raw*
Reigns v Balor - 2,610,381
Sasha v Charlotte - 1,919,520
Steph and Foley Open Raw - 1,900,925
Reigns v Zayn v Sheamus v Y2J - 1,242,075
Strowman Squash - 897,709
New Day Celebrate - 884,181
Opening Video - 688,365
Neville vs Axel - 672,148
Cesaro v Balor v KO v Rusev - 652,857
Enzo/Cass vs Primo/Epico - 629,750
Nia Jax Debut - 576,612
Backland, Young, Golden Truth - 268,025
CW Division promo - 220,961

*SD*
Shane and Bryan Open SD - 1,879,669
6 Man Match - 1,875,670
Battle Royale - 1,487,198
Rhyno Returns - 1,359,976 
Orton v Miz - 1,237,837
Womens Promo - 1,215,388
Miz TV - 1,070,953
Shelton Benjamin video - 831,130
New Opening - 401,240
Becky v Natalya - 369,776
American Alpha Debut Video - 267,798

They really should throw Superstars and Main Event on Youtube with ads looking at the view count they get. Gets some people decent exposure, make some money, and you can peg it as the brands competing in the social media world


----------



## The Tempest

*Re: **All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*

Sasha/Charlotte being more watched (rightfully so) than any SD video :bosque


----------



## fabi1982

funny that SD had 7 segments in the million views where RAW only had 4...


----------



## dougfisher_05

I still don't understand why you guys want to use YouTube as a ratings metric or a drawing power metric. 

Television ratings are important because they highlight who was watching what WHEN IT ORIGINALLY AIRED. Whereas a YouTube view count is a cumulative number that grows over days, weeks and years. 

A YouTube view count is something that shouldnt be used in a weekly discussion because it really proves nothing other than wwe videos can generate over a million views over the course of a week. 

If we were to look at YouTube views as a meaningful metric we should look at the views during the first 24 hours of a video being posted, otherwise I dont see the point of comparing week old YouTube views of segments against one another and trying to draw conclusions from them.


----------



## OwenSES

I only want to talk about Youtube views because Randy Orton's RKO on Lesnar is killing anything else that happened on Raw with views.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I wonder how much the ratings drop will be?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

3.0 - 3.1 million, like the trend indicates.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.463M
H2-3.399M
H3-3.081M
3H-3.314M*


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.463 million
* highest since April 18th, 2016
Hour 2 - 3.399 million
* highest since June 20th, 2016
Hour 3 - 3.081 million
Average = 3.31 million

A drop of 24,000 week on week. Hour 3 isn't great, but its about baby steps and the hour 1 number is encouraging.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.463M
> H2-3.399M
> H3-3.081M
> 3H-3.314M*


*H2 Vs H1 (-1.85%/-0.064M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-9.36%/-0.318M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-11.03%/-0.382M) 
8/1/16 Vs 7/25/16 (-0.75%/-0.025M)*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

So far, RAW is doing relatively well. They better hope they gain traction,as the NFL draws ever closer.


----------



## 2Pieced

Well it's steady, that's good right.

Going to take a long time to ever get back to 4 million no matter how good the shows are so steady is good for now.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.463M
> H2-3.399M
> H3-3.081M
> 3H-3.314M*


*Demo:
8/1/16 Vs 7/25/16

H1- 1.27D Vs 1.24D
H2- 1.26D Vs 1.24D
H3- 1.19D Vs 1.21D
3H- 1.24D Vs 1.23D*










*Y-Y viewership:
8/1/16 Vs 8/3/15

H1-3.463M vs 3.739M
H2-3.399M Vs 3.695M
H3-3.081M Vs 3.671M
3H-3.314M Vs 3.702M (-10.48% / -0.388M)

Y-Y demo:
8/1/16 Vs 8/3/15

H1- 1.27D Vs 1.23D
H2- 1.26D Vs 1.26D
H3- 1.19D Vs 1.29D
3H- 1.24D Vs 1.26D*


----------



## A-C-P

MNF starts in a little over a month :bosque


----------



## The Boy Wonder

So they lost viewers from last week? Probably not a good idea to job Reigns out the way they did. If Balor really impressed the ratings would have been higher this week. 

Hour 3 is NOT a good sign since they hyped Brock up for the entire show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Higher than I thought, but obviously nothing great and obviously going to get housed by the NFL.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

First hour shows there is at least some interest left from the draft. The decline shows people don't think it's worthwhile.
Another couple of those horrible first hours, and we're back to pre-draft.


----------



## Dolorian

The Boy Wonder said:


> Hour 3 is NOT a good sign since they hyped Brock up for the entire show.


Not just for the entire show they were promoting his return to RAW for almost a week. I was thinking that we would see a significant bump in the ratings due to Brock but nope.


----------



## Ace

Wow, thought Brock would do much better than that...

Those are very good 1st hour and 2nd hour numbers.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

WWE has to really examine the value of Brock Lesnar when it comes to how they book his match versus Orton. A clean and convincing win is not the way to go. The best thing to do is to have Bray Wyatt appear. Have him hit his finish on Orton. Then let Brock F5 Orton for the win.


----------



## The_Jiz

They have a downward trend for the past decade. Their decline has been so steep the past year it was free falling. 

A good trend was always to slow the freefall until they plateau. 

So its a good sign. 

3rd hour always has a drop off.


----------



## Piper's Pit

The Boy Wonder said:


> WWE has to really examine the value of Brock Lesnar when it comes to how they book his match versus Orton. A clean and convincing win is not the way to go. The best thing to do is to have Bray Wyatt appear. Have him hit his finish on Orton. Then let Brock F5 Orton for the win.


The best way to use Brock and Orton is for both of them to be jobbing cleanly on a regular basis to guys like Bray, Ambrose, Rollins, Reigns and Balor. Both Brock and Orton are the past it's time to start creating new stars.


----------



## Ichigo87

The Boy Wonder said:


> WWE has to really examine the value of Brock Lesnar when it comes to how they book his match versus Orton. A clean and convincing win is not the way to go. The best thing to do is to have Bray Wyatt appear. Have him hit his finish on Orton. Then let Brock F5 Orton for the win.


Why is it that Brock MUST get the win? What point is there to him never losing. This keep him strong so someone can beat him thing isn't necessarily going to get someone over. Once they beat Lesnar, what's next for them? They've built no one as a threat to Lesnar. Way to treat your main roster for a guy that's never there. Just beating someone isn't what gets a new star over. Being the total package does that. Mic skills, ring presence, charisma, etc. This untouchable Lesnar shtick does nothing but devalue the rest of the roster.


----------



## Ichigo87

Straw Hat said:


> Wow, thought Brock would do much better than that...
> 
> Those are very good 1st hour and 2nd hour numbers.


So much for Lesnar being a "Draw". Would Brock marks please sit down with that garbage now? No reason for Lesnar to go over the roster the way he has. He's not there enough to make a difference, his merch sales aren't special, he doesn't draw. Have him put someone over already. This idea that he should be invincible just because he was in UFC is a joke when you have wrestlers like Kalisto beating Ryback clean.


----------



## wwetna1

YouTube Views - Raw (8/1/16)

Young vs Titus - 510,030
Golden Truth vs Primo/Epico - 535,171
New Day vs Club - 552,791
Zayn vs Rollins - 791,513
2MB segment - 805,808
Henry vs Rusev - 911,262
Enzo/Sasha v Jericho/Charlotte - 920,614
Enzo/Sasha/Jericho/Charlotte promo - 1,280,908
Balor and Seth promo - 1,366,807
Orton attacks Brock - 2,560,792


----------



## OwenSES

Maybe give Orton the win. He's probably the bigger draw at this point and sticks around longer to actually use that rub to help the likes of Dean Ambrose, AJ Styles, Sami Zayn and Kevin Owens. Those guys may never get the chance to face Lesnar and certainly will never beat him.


----------



## Blade Runner

So Brock Lesnar was promoted to appear, first appearance since Wrestemania and fresh off UFC 200, and STILL can't move the needle. Hmm. I think it's safe to assume that his supposed "massive star power" is a myth at this point. His own wife was arguably a bigger draw for the WWF/E at one point in time


----------



## Steve Black Man

Straw Hat said:


> Wow, thought Brock would do much better than that...
> 
> Those are very good 1st hour and 2nd hour numbers.


His last handful of appearances have proven that he's not near the draw that people seem to give him credit for.

It begs the question: Is the investment is Lesnar really worth it at this point?


----------



## Ace

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> So Brock Lesnar was promoted to appear, first appearance since Wrestemania and fresh off UFC 200, and STILL can't move the needle. Hmm. I think it's safe to assume that his supposed "massive star power" is a myth at this point. His own wife was arguably a bigger draw for the WWF/E at one point in time


 So The Rock is the only draw left in wrestling?


----------



## Kinjx11

they need to replace Brock with Samoa Joe


----------



## AoEC_

Interesting to note that the match between two extremely able ring performers in Zayn-Rollins is lagging way behind in Youtube views to a promo segment between two of the relatively less convincing mic workers in Balor-Rollins. I think it just goes to reinforce the point that a relevant build up segment to a PPV match would always be of greater importance to an irrelevant TV match irrespective of the prowess of the competitors in the match. Interesting numbers.


----------



## wwetna1

YouTube Views - Raw 8/1/16 (one day later) ---> (as of 8/4/16)

CW Promo - 121,079 ----> 174,216
Nia Jax - 298,962 ---> 373,390
Strowman - 485,637 ---> 567,640 
Young vs Titus - 510,030 ---> 560,997
Golden Truth vs Primo/Epico - 535,171 --- > 593,591
New Day vs Club - 552,791 --- 604,692
Zayn vs Rollins - 791,513 ---- > 882,048
2MB segment - 805,808---> 941,864
Henry vs Rusev - 911,262 ---> 1,083,097
Enzo/Sasha v Jericho/Charlotte - 920,614 ---> 1,088,070
Enzo/Sasha/Jericho/Charlotte promo - 1,280,908 ---> 1,642,026
Balor and Seth promo - 1,366,807 ----> 1,669,176
Orton attacks Brock - 2,560,792 ---> 3,586,629


Youtube Views SD 8/2/16 (one day later) ---> (as of 8/4/16)

Brock - 1,296,394 ----> 1,655,831
Dolph v Bray - 1,026,384 ---> 1,184,678
AJ/Cena - 799,959 ---> 1,028,161
Wyatt attacks Dolph - 709,285 ---> 818,064
Triple Threat - 594,593 ---> 680,533
Eva Marie - 568,030 ----> 686,443
AAlpha debuts - 529,705 ---> 599,178
Rhyno/Slater - 371,832 ---> 421,800

Notes 
- Alpha's backstage interview is at 125,336 
- Eva on the trainers table is at 487,763
- Crews promo on Miz is at 103,493 
- Club talking about New Day is at 135,202 
- Mahal's return interview is at 270,272
- Charlotte talking about Sasha is at 164,039
** Alexa and Carmella have 6 figure view videos from last week that was shot just for youtube 

NXT 
- Ember Moon - 97,259
- Itami retun match - 193,548
- Roodes debut - 187,080 
- Asuka killing Alliyah - 150,976 

CWC 
- Gargano v Ciampa - 121,210
- Dar vs Bollywood Boy - 63,750
- Swann vs Lee - 53,743
- Gallagher vs Fabian - 66,936


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Curious to see how much the Olympics adversely affects RAW this week.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

I personally think the third hour will be higher than usual. Thats about it. I'm sure second hour lost viewership. Won't be a good rating.


----------



## TD_DDT

RAW was HORRIBLE last night - and I fell asleep before 10:30. An awful intro, awful Neville tag team match, awful wedding segment. Horrible - hope the ratings are trash.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.950M
H2-2.974M
H3-2.809M
3H-2.911M*


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.950M
> H2-2.974M
> H3-2.809M
> 3H-2.911M*


*H2 Vs H1 (+0.008%/-0.024M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-5.55%/-0.165M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-4.78%/-0.141M) 
8/8/16 Vs 8/1/16 (-12.16%/-0.403M)*


----------



## The Renegade

Sizable drop off in viewership but they hold strong as the number 1 cable program of the night. Olympics obviously had an effect, but all things told, not bad. Not bad at all.


----------



## A-C-P

Are those the real #s ? :bryanlol


----------



## 2Pieced

That show deserved those shitty ratings, it was shit from start to finish.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Olympics >RAW :fact. On the bright side, they got their same tepid ratings with a much smaller roster than before the split.


----------



## Reotor

Under 3mil from start to finish :nice


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.950M
> H2-2.974M
> H3-2.809M
> 3H-2.911M*
> 
> *H2 Vs H1 (+0.008%/-0.024M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-5.55%/-0.165M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-4.78%/-0.141M)
> 8/8/16 Vs 8/1/16 (-12.16%/-0.403M)*












*Demo:
8/8/16 Vs 8/1/16

H1- 0.97D Vs 1.27D
H2- 0.99D Vs 1.26D
H3- 0.97D Vs 1.19D
3H- 0.977D Vs 1.24D
*









*Y-Y viewership:
8/8/16 Vs 8/10/15

H1-2.950M Vs 3.791M
H2-2.974M Vs 3.947M
H3-2.809M Vs 3.775M
3H-2.911M Vs 3.838M (-24.15% / -0.927M)

Y-Y demo:
8/8/16 Vs 8/10/15

H1- 0.97D Vs 1.26D
H2- 0.99D Vs 1.30D
H3- 0.97D Vs 1.29D
3H- 0.977D Vs 1.283D
*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The demo is horrendous. All three had to be rounded to 1.0 The future is so bleak, I don't have to wear shades.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Every week there seems to be a new excuse as to why the viewership is horrible, RAW is just an average/bad show and it really is hard to watch 3 hours of it every week, RAW sucks and has done for a long time


----------



## McGee

I'd have been more entertained by staring at the wall sniffing my own farts for 3 hours.


----------



## Reotor

ShadowSucks92 said:


> Every week there seems to be a new excuse as to why the viewership is horrible, RAW is just an average/bad show and it really is hard to watch 3 hours of it every week, RAW sucks and has done for a long time


Its as if there were no Olympic games in past years, nor NBA games or NFL, also no 4th of July or any holidays for that matter
Those things only started this year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

So Steph just happens to miss a RAW guaranteed to fail against the Olympic juggernaut? Coincidence? Can't blame her for the show tanking. :vince5


----------



## McGee

Can't wait till RAW gets a 0 in the ratings. We should all not watch one week. That means you :villa and you :chrisholly and you :loveit and you :goool2 and you :redcard and you :ayoade and you :sundin2 and you :grapes and you :sherman and you :haa and you :benson


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*I had to do a double take when I saw those numbers. Holy shit, that is abysmal. :lmao

And man just think, it's gonna get worse come Football season. They are so fucked. :lol*


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*'Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller
Raw = 2.05, big dropoff from last 2 wks (2.30, 2.36). Full details coming at http://PWTorch.com including past years Raw vs. Olympics.'*

https://twitter.com/thewadekeller/status/763114553383071744

*The 10 Lowest WWE RAW ratings since 9/4/95.

12/23/96-----1.5R
12/30/96-----1.6R
10/14/96-----1.8R
7/4/16-----1.87R
9/25/95-----1.9R
10/28/96-----2.0R
9/23/96-----2.0R
8/12/96-----2.0R
6/13/16-----2.03R
8/8/16-----2.05R*


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Raw better get use to being below 3 million cause when football starts back thats where they going to be until January.


----------



## Bret Hart

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Y-Y viewership:
> 8/8/16 Vs 8/10/15
> 
> H1-2.950M Vs 3.791M
> H2-2.974M Vs 3.947M
> H3-2.809M Vs 3.775M
> 3H-2.911M Vs 3.838M (-24.15% / -0.927M)
> 
> Y-Y demo:
> 8/8/16 Vs 8/10/15
> 
> H1- 0.97D Vs 1.26D
> H2- 0.99D Vs 1.30D
> H3- 0.97D Vs 1.29D
> 3H- 0.977D Vs 1.283D
> *


Lol those year vs year numbers. :lmao

Hahaha, fuck you Vince. You can change the look of the show, have a brand split but your show will never get more viewers if you don't book to perfection.

They lost a million viewers within a year, fucking idiots.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Just read this on WrestlingInc:

'As a comparison, the episode of RAW against the first Monday night of the Olympics in 2012 averaged 4.495 million viewers.'


----------



## DoubtGin

bad numbers, didn't expect them to drop like this since the brand split

not that this week's RAW was any good, anyways


----------



## EvilDead

*RAW RATINGS PLUMMET AGAINST OLYMPICS COVERAGE*

By Dave Meltzer; courtesy of Wrestling Observer. 


As it turned out, Raw got killed last night by the Olympics.

The show did 2.90 million viewers, which, with the exception of holiday shows, broke the 19-year record low of 2.95 million viewers set on November 23, 2015.

There was no doubt the Olympics were the culprit, doing 28.86 million viewers on NBC, with secondary coverage on NBC Sports Network doing another 1.56 million viewers. Raw was not hurt nearly as bad in 2012 by the Olympics. The only real difference, since overall Olympic numbers are down.

Four years ago on the first Monday of the Olympics, Raw did 4.50 million viewers and the Olympics did 31.58 million viewers. The big difference is the Olympics draws heavily with women, and with WWE losing so much of the male audience and women not dropping at nearly as high a level, a strong women's appealing show hurt a lot worse now than four years ago.

The show dropped 12 percent from last week. However, Raw was the most watched show on cable beating The O'Reilly Factor that did 2.66 million viewers. It also beat several prime time show including beating ABC's The Mistresses in the third hour and FOX's So You Think You Can Dance head-to-head.

It was a pretty hardcore audience with minimal movement throughout the show, so there was no pattern of people tuning out any more than usual. The real difference in this week's show opened with 2.95 million viewers and last week's show opened with 3.46 million viewers.

The three hours were:

8 p.m. 2.95 million viewers
9 p.m. 2.97 million viewers
10 p.m. 2.81 million viewers


----------



## ErickRowan_Fan

*Re: RAW RATINGS PLUMMET AGAINST OLYMPICS COVERAGE*

WWE is finished. They have turned their backs against the reliable wrestling audiences.


----------



## CretinHop138

This direction that WWE are going in is not drawing, nobody cares about the "I'm a better wrestler than you" feuds or the stupid attempts at trying to be as credible as UFC i.e pre match build up interviews etc or the whole Tapout thing a company which WWE bought.

Everyone characters today is they wrestled all over the world or they're happy to be there. Boring. Nobody cares. Where is the depth? Sort of like what Austin was telling Ambrose last night.


----------



## LilOlMe

EL SHIV said:


> Curious to see how much the Olympics adversely affects RAW this week.


Don't know if this has been posted, but the Olympics are down from last time (at least the opening ceremony was). Also, IIRC, the Olympics never effected RAW as badly as you might suspect.

This RAW was terrible so the bad rating doesn't surprise me THAT much. However, you'd think it would have opened stronger because people have been raving about the past few weeks.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Horrible number. Though, looking back, it should've been a warning when the first Raw post-draft, also the night after a freaking PPV, only did low 3 millions. That was a bad sign. Brand split ain't doing shit to liven things up thus far, at least as far as ratings go. I think WWE is screwed no matter what, brand split or no brand split.


----------



## CretinHop138

George Barrios - "We don't expect any impact"


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/763119696291831808


----------



## Bubba Chuck

@ Those numbers

So how many times has Raw been under 3m this year? This is like the third time right?


----------



## CretinHop138

Yeah this is the third time. They have 1 million viewers less than this very episode 12 months ago as they were well into the 3's.


----------



## The Nuke

Just imagine what Football season will bring. Even the NFL can book matches better than WWE.


----------



## CretinHop138

The Nuke said:


> Just imagine what Football season will bring. Even the NFL can book matches better than WWE.


Dude, McGregor worked pro wrestlers better than pro wrestlers.


----------



## The Nuke

I wonder what goes through Vince's mind or anybody's mind high up in the company when it comes to these TV shows.

As a Wrestling show compared to all Wrestling shows in history, it is shit. As a TV show it is shit. I still say that short term successes of the Attitude Era lead to the big time mistakes that lead us to where we are now.

The importance of the In Ring Product and the Importance of having Stars sell that in ring product was lost in favor of heavily scripted Soap Opera.


----------



## Phaedra

well I knew it big night in the swimming last night that american giblet the russian drug cheat who convinced the IOC to let her compete. twas glorious. They're not going to win ratings against the swimming and they sure as holy hell are not going to beat out the athletics next monday.


----------



## The_Jiz

I loled


----------



## RatedR10

I knew Barrios was full of shit when he said they didn't expect any impact on the ratings due to the Olympics. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Raw will be cancelled or non-renewed (whatever semantics you want to allow for) within 2 years. 

Under 3 mils every hour and not even going against football? Only a few weeks from the 2nd biggest PPV of the year in Summer Slam?

This company is dead. We are witnessing the end of a near 25 year era of prime time WWE programming. And it won't come back when it's done.


----------



## V-Trigger

Terrible ratings for a terrible RAW. Expected.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The Renegade said:


> Sizable drop off in viewership but they hold strong as the number 1 cable program of the night. Olympics obviously had an effect, but all things told, not bad. Not bad at all.


LOL

Yeah, no.
That is shit numbers.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw will be cancelled or non-renewed (whatever semantics you want to allow for) within 2 years.
> 
> Under 3 mils every hour and not even going against football? Only a few weeks from the 2nd biggest PPV of the year in Summer Slam?
> 
> This company is dead. We are witnessing the end of a near 25 year era of prime time WWE programming. And it won't come back when it's done.


While 2 years is too soon of a prediction, people will look at this and act like this isn't a possibility. I have been thinking for a while that USA has some original series and content that they would rather have on Monday nights than RAW. Like I feel like Mr. Robot would be placed there if RAW wasn't a factor.

Anyways, shit ratings for a shit show and a shit company but I have been beating that drum for almost two years. It's just taking people NOW to catch up. As predicted, the brand split hasn't and won't do shit to save these ratings. We're less than a month away from football season towards the most underwhelming Summerslam in recent memory (Brock/Orton is main eventing? :heston)


----------



## Chrome

Those are some TERRIBLE ratings lol. Can't wait in a month or 2 when they announce that Smackdown superstars can now appear on Raw. :francis


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

:booklel Them ratings are horrible only 3 shows into the draft split, the show defiantly deserved it though a horrible 3 hours at least when Smackdown was bad the first week it was only 2 hours and even when Raw does have the rare decent week I sometimes still get bored 3 hours is just way to long.


----------



## McGee

Cancel the damn show and put Superstars back on Saturday Mornings like the old days. There's too much damn rasslin through the week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Can't pretend the rating wasn't merited. There were a few bright spots in an otherwise dull as dishwater RAW.


----------



## Godway

The people who pointed out what a fluke the first episode of RAW post-draft was, with Balor's debut and upset win(s) were correct. RAW was never going to be able to keep that momentum going. The past two shows have been dreadful and it's only going to get worse with how bad that roster is.


----------



## Even Flow

I'm sure Vince has had a phone call already from USA, saying they're not happy with the rating.

Should be interesting now to see if SD does better tonight.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw will be cancelled or non-renewed (whatever semantics you want to allow for) within 2 years.
> 
> Under 3 mils every hour and not even going against football? Only a few weeks from the 2nd biggest PPV of the year in Summer Slam?
> 
> This company is dead. We are witnessing the end of a near 25 year era of prime time WWE programming. And it won't come back when it's done.


Nobody really dares saying that, but that is likely, even though the timeframe is maybe too small. I give it four years, though history teaches that if the downward trend Starts, it can accelerate very fast, and it may be only small things in a chain of neverending annoying things that starts the fall.

I have been saying this for months, that this Brand Split is IMO the poorest, worst executed, worst planned angle of all time in WWE. Even the Invasion had its moments. But this is just pure, unadultered, nonsensical, panic driven, irrelevant garbage.
Nobody knows why the Split even exists, how it came to be, the GMs don't do shit, and they're already planning an interpromotional feud.
Nobody in their right mind can watch this underbooked, boring trash TV for several consecutive weeks. We finally know what the polar opposite to Russo's crash TV is. WWE Bland Split 2016.


----------



## Piper's Pit

I wonder if the Brand Split was the USA Network's idea to improve ratings or if they asked the WWE what could be done to shake things up and stop the bleed and after endless brainstorming the best the WWE could come up with was to bring back a concept which didn't work the first time - The Brand Split.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

I don't recall the Olympics ever being _that_ much of a problem for the WWE, football has always been the main concern for as long as I've been a fan, which is... fucking longer than I care to admit.

I don't think the Olympics is responsible, dudes, that rating is just a reflection of how shit this fucking company is now.


----------



## The Renegade

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> LOL
> 
> Yeah, no.
> That is shit numbers.


Yeah, because a ratings drop up against a highly popular event that occurs once every 4 years is a reason to panic. </sarcasm>. 

WWE isn't doing old school numbers. They would of likely seen a drop off of that size regardless of era, making the results here completely reasonable.


----------



## Steve Black Man

Glad Raw pulled in shit numbers, Absolutely horrible show from top to bottom. 

WWE deserves to be dying the slow, painful death that they are. Think I'm gonna take a break from it as well. Give zero shits about Orton/Lesnar or Reigns/Rusev, which are obviously the two storylines WWE are most focused on right now.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

LOL at this company. Ratings are at all time lows. No stars. Hey, let's split the roster in 2! :vince$

What can get ratings? Put guys who half the audience don't know and Dolph Ziggler in title matches.

Put your only 2 credible stars in Cena and Orton on a show no one wants to watch.

Build your flagship show around a guy who everyone hates and a guy who tanked ratings when champ.

Push Owens!


----------



## Dylanlip

The Renegade said:


> Yeah, because a ratings drop up against a highly popular event that occurs once every 4 years is a reason to panic. </sarcasm>.
> 
> WWE isn't doing old school numbers. They would of likely seen a drop off of that size regardless of era, making the results here completely reasonable.


Except this was the same excuse given with the horrid numbers against the NBA Finals, which never used to affect ratings, along with 4th of July, Copa America (somewhat) and Euro. Now its the Olympics. Why do you think SummerSlam changed its start time? _The Closing Ceremony is the same night._ SmackDown was moved to Tuesday to avoid being decimated by football.

These drops used to only ever happen against football, and now they're happening year-round against every single "special event". Don't you get it? _Wrestling is not "hip" to watch casually year-round anymore._ It doesn't just mean those events are responsible, even if they partially are, wrestling itself has fallen out of public conscience. That smattering left is all that remains of the core audience. Any small boosts will really only happen between Rumble and Mania now, and even those boosts aren't what they used to be. 

Lets face it, the slide has begun. Less than 1.00 demo and 3mill for all 3 hours? Just wait for the Smackdown rating vs Phelps big night. And of course, we're all waiting for football season to finish the job.


----------



## The Renegade

Dylanlip said:


> Except this was the same excuse given with the horrid numbers against the NBA Finals, which never used to affect ratings, along with 4th of July, Copa America (somewhat) and Euro. Now its the Olympics. Why do you think SummerSlam changed its start time? _The Closing Ceremony is the same night._ SmackDown was moved to Tuesday to avoid being decimated by football.
> 
> These drops used to only ever happen against football, and now they're happening year-round against every single "special event". Don't you get it? _Wrestling is not "hip" to watch casually year-round anymore._ It doesn't just mean those events are responsible, even if they partially are, wrestling itself has fallen out of public conscience. That smattering left is all that remains of the core audience. Any small boosts will really only happen between Rumble and Mania now, and even those boosts aren't what they used to be.
> 
> Lets face it, the slide has begun. Less than 1.00 demo and 3mill for all 3 hours? Just wait for the Smackdown rating vs Phelps big night. And of course, we're all waiting for football season to finish the job.


The overall drop off is obvious, and quite frankly, not worth mentioning. The WWE is an old Kobe Bryant. If he at 37 years of age averages 18 a night on full rest do you overact when he drops 15-16 on a night after a back to back? No, because it's the new normal and you have to evaluate numbers within their current context, and within that context these numbers aren't terrible. 

Unless I read that list wrong, they were still the number 1 cable show. And keep it real, nobody cares what the numbers are unless they disliked the show. If it's a bad show to them, they use the numbers as an indication of the quality. 

The number drop off wasn't due to quality, it was due to the Olympics. Let me repeat, even if you thought the show was terrible the numbers aren't due to that, it's because there is a national event going on. They don't have the momentum to fend off other big events anymore but we knew that before last night.


----------



## Bret Hart

Losing a million viewers, which would be the equivalent of losing million fans if Raw was Kobe, within a year is not normal...


----------



## The Renegade

Bret Hart said:


> Losing a million viewers, which would be the equivalent of losing million fans if Raw was Kobe, within a year is not normal...


If it's not normal than why were there no other cable shows last night that beat Raw?

In the absence of an objective baseline, good and bad are determined in comparison with the rest of the data points. In this sample, Raw outperformed all other cable programs. That's the good. Losing a million viewers? Not good, but understandable.


----------



## Bret Hart

The Renegade said:


> If it's not normal than why were there no other cable shows last night that beat Raw?
> 
> In the absence of an objective baseline, good and bad are determined in comparison with the rest of the data points. In this sample, Raw outperformed all other cable programs. That's the good. Losing a million viewers? Not good, but understandable.


Because Raw has always gotten a decent amount of viewers but they don't beat other cable shows *every single week*. I would agree with you if they were beating every cable show every single week but just because they beat the other shows for a single week doesn't mean WWE shouldn't be concerned.

Get ready for TNA territory once NFL starts. :mark:


----------



## The Renegade

Bret Hart said:


> Because Raw has always gotten a decent amount of viewers but they don't beat other cable shows *every single week*. I would agree with you if they were beating every cable show every single week but just because they beat the other shows for a single week doesn't mean WWE shouldn't be concerned.
> 
> Get ready for TNA territory once NFL starts. :mark:


I'm not saying they shouldn't be concerned based off of overall trends. I'm saying that the total viewer drop off for this week (against the Olympics) isn't bad at all when you consider that they outperformed all other cable offerings. That's a small win in my book.


----------



## Bret Hart

The Renegade said:


> I'm not saying they shouldn't be concerned based off of overall trends. I'm saying that the total viewer drop off for this week (against the Olympics) isn't bad at all when you consider that they outperformed all other cable offerings. That's a small win in my book.


I guess if you put it that way then it is some sort of a positive for WWE.


----------



## A-C-P

The Renegade said:


> I'm not saying they shouldn't be concerned based off of overall trends. I'm saying that the total viewer drop off for this week (against the Olympics) isn't bad at all when you consider that they outperformed all other cable offerings. That's a small win in my book.


You can argue it is a small win, and I am not saying you are completely wrong, b/c it is a small positive for the WWE. But the thing with WWE (and other pro-wrestling programs) is that they NEED to be much better from a ratings standpoint in comparison to other programs b/c of the way advertisers view the audience of sports entertainment/pro-wrestling. Advertisers do not feel the audience watching the WWE is the the best audience to be advertising to, so for them to see value the WWE's ratings #s NEEDS to be higher than everything else (by a good margin) for USA to get full value from the advertising time they sell.

This is one of the reasons Raw seemingly has so many more commercials than it used to. One reason is yes they are now trying to fill 3 hours, but another reason is USA is not making as much on a one minute commercial spot as they used to for WWE programming (due to declining viewership) so the netowrk is making up the difference in volume of ads.


----------



## Mra22

Ah, it warms my heart to see this. That's what they get for being boring, bland and dull for the past couple of years. Put out a crappy product, get crappy results, also RAW's roster is trash, nobody wants to watch two roid heads in Reigns and Lesnar and nobody wants to watch Balor who is just plain out terrible when it comes to promos and personality....The best thing RAW has is Enzo, Cass, Jericho and Owens..


----------



## The_It_Factor

Mra22 said:


> Ah, it warms my heart to see this. That's what they get for being boring, bland and dull for the past couple of years. Put out a crappy product, get crappy results, also RAW's roster is trash, nobody wants to watch *two roid heads in Reigns* and Lesnar and nobody wants to watch Balor who is just plain out terrible when it comes to promos and personality....The best thing RAW has is Enzo, Cass, Jericho and Owens..


Didn't Reigns fail his test for Adderall? I guess that makes him a "roid head" now? 


But seriously, the fact that 100% of this forum couldn't see this coming a mile away is just sad. In fact, there were people who actually thought the brand split was going to BOOST ratings from here on out. You all should have your smark cards revoked. 

The vast majority of people don't want to watch 5 hours worth of WRESTLING (not even professional wrestling programming, let alone 20 actual wrestling MATCHES) each week. Hopefully the numbers dip into the 1.0's and they either get dropped from USA, or are forced to drop Smackdown all together and cut Raw to 2 hours each week. 

I think the overall roster is garbage, but overexposure has been what has ruined wrestling. They're constantly being forced to think of new ideas, so we end up seeing stuff like New Day fighting at the Wyatt compound like a Quentin Tarentino movie, guys like ADR jumping into random matches against Orton, and the same exact promo's over and over and over.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

TheLooseCanon said:


> LOL at this company. Ratings are at all time lows. No stars. Hey, let's split the roster in 2! :vince$
> 
> What can get ratings? Put guys who half the audience don't know and Dolph Ziggler in title matches.
> 
> Put your only 2 credible stars in Cena and Orton on a show no one wants to watch.
> 
> Build your flagship show around a guy who everyone hates and a guy who tanked ratings when champ.
> 
> Push Owens!


everyone huh...that's why when he gets cheered the people who hate him have to boo harder right... and owens wont solve anything


----------



## ecclesiastes10

Code:







Mra22 said:


> Ah, it warms my heart to see this. That's what they get for being boring, bland and dull for the past couple of years. Put out a crappy product, get crappy results, also RAW's roster is trash, nobody wants to watch two roid heads in Reigns and Lesnar and nobody wants to watch Balor who is just plain out terrible when it comes to promos and personality....The best thing RAW has is Enzo, Cass, Jericho and Owens..


Enzo doesn't look like a wrestler, cant take him seriously as a fighter/don't believe him as a performer, he should be a manger. cass does the same thing in every match, Jericho is cool, owens I don't get why people think he's so special.


----------



## Dell

Eva currently the best thing about Smackdown according to dem YT views.

Dolph Ziggler superkicks Dean Ambrose during Bray Wyatt altercation* 605,089 views*
Eva Marie has a wardrobe malfunction before her match vs. Becky Lynch* 793,710 views*
American Alpha vs. local competitors* 366,066 views*
Becky Lynch vs. Alexa Bliss* 368,528 views*
Heath Slater tells off Shane McMahon and Daniel Bryan *265,595 views*
Randy Orton vs. Alberto Del Rio* 588,899 views*
Rhyno vs. Heath Slater - If Heath Slater wins, he receives a contract *418,806 views*
The Miz insults Scooby-Doo *132,825 views*
Take an inside look at Apollo Crews *100,730 views*
Baron Corbin unleashes a backstage assault on Kalisto *248,533 view*s
Relive the heated rivalry between John Cena and AJ Styles* 289,255 views*
Carmella vs. Natalya *267,489 views*
Dean Ambrose & Dolph Ziggler vs. Bray Wyatt & Erick Rowan* 501,704 views*

:eva2


----------



## RubberbandGoat

why did they do the Brand Split before the Olympics? they had to have known the Olympics would hurt them a bit. If it were me, I would have done it after the Olympics and then had it go with the premiere of the NFL and just hype it up like crazy, could have been an interesting competition.


----------



## Dolorian

RubberbandGoat said:


> why did they do the Brand Split before the Olympics? they had to have known the Olympics would hurt them a bit. If it were me, I would have done it after the Olympics and then had it go with the premiere of the NFL and just hype it up like crazy, could have been an interesting competition.


They were under pressure by the USA network due to SmackDown's low ratings. They probably couldn't wait that long.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SD just got smacked hard in the ratings last night. Mid to low two's already. (2.4 million).


----------



## ElTerrible

ShadowSucks92 said:


> Just read this on WrestlingInc:
> 
> 'As a comparison, the episode of RAW against the first Monday night of the Olympics in 2012 averaged 4.495 million viewers.'


Cause the competitions in London were finished at the time Raw started due to the timezones. :bayley2


----------



## RubberbandGoat

@ShowStopper SD is still having a 20% increase in viewership since the brand split which is a positive and its been number one in the 18-49 demo on cable two weeks in a row now. SD has been in the top 2 on cable on Tuesday nights consistently now and Raw can barely maintain number 4. For the love of all that is holy, Love and Hip Hop always is number one, thats pretty sad. SD has the higher ceiling and will be more successful.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RubberbandGoat said:


> @ShowStopper SD is still having a 20% increase in viewership since the brand split which is a positive and its been number one in the 18-49 demo on cable two weeks in a row now. SD has been in the top 2 on cable on Tuesday nights consistently now and Raw can barely maintain number 4. For the love of all that is holy, Love and Hip Hop always is number one, thats pretty sad. SD has the higher ceiling and will be more successful.


They've had a 20% increase since the brand split because before the brand split, the show hadn't mattered for years. If these are the numbers less than a month after said brand split, that is a pretty low ceiling. And this is without an extra hour like Raw has. Generally speaking, there's also alot more competition on Cable TV on Monday nights. SD will never be more successful because WWE makes $32 million dollars from USA Network on the 3rd hour of Raw alone. Doesn't even take into account hours 1 and 2 and the ad revenue for a 3 hour show. SD definitely has had a nice increase from pre-brand split, though. I'll never take that away from them.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

Didn't Wade Keller or someone tweet last month that the WWE is strongly considering adding a third hour to SDL? I saw that headline but didn't click on it. I read it someplace. If that's true, then I guess they really will be on equal footing.


----------



## Randy Lahey

For those of you that don't think Raw's ratings are bad, how low would they have to drop for you to acknowledge they were awful? We are at near 20 year lows for the show, and that's before the NFL season even gets here. They've lost over 1 million viewers (30% of their audience) in the last year alone. If that is not a reason to panic, then what is?


----------



## RubberbandGoat

And its not like the Network subs are growing that much. People are just signing up for the free months, and they can then spin it that they have all those subs, but in reality, they just cancel right after that month is done, and the numbers go down. I don't know how they are even still around. The WWE barely makes profit compared to all these other successful companies. You hear about record profits for these other companies, yet WWE never has record profits. Its all due to stupid booking decisions.


----------



## dougfisher_05

Randy Lahey said:


> For those of you that don't think Raw's ratings are bad, how low would they have to drop for you to acknowledge they were awful? We are at near 20 year lows for the show, and that's before the NFL season even gets here. They've lost over 1 million viewers (30% of their audience) in the last year alone. If that is not a reason to panic, then what is?


You must be late to the party. Go back like twenty pages and everyone was a whole lot less positive then they are now. 

Basically the ratings thread turned baby face! 

I think everyone is just in a wait and see mode now with the brand split,which has led to a more positive vibe in the thread. 

Come football season the thread will have flipped back to being heel and everyone will be back to cheering the further decline of television ratings in 2016...and God help them because the NFL plucked some games that would normally air on Sunday night and has scheduled them for Mondays.


----------



## Blade Runner

Olympics obviously have a bit to do with it, but the consistent lack of quality in the product is reflecting in these numbers too. Even the audiences are starting to show exhaustion. The California crowd died a slow death during Seth's promo and weren't much more vocal for the rest of the show outside of Bryan's entrance. The shows aren't being built around much at all which doesn't really help it. The top babyface right now is a guy with (lets be honest) mediocre-at-best promo abilty and was thrown in a title match when half their audience likely didn't have a clue who he was or given any reason to care, while the guy they WERE promoting as the top babyface is suddenly in the midcard having lowbrow comedy segments the likes of which made him unappealing to the audience in the first place...

There's nothing on the show that I give a sh*t about anymore, and I'm sure I ain't the only one


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> They've had a 20% increase since the brand split because before the brand split, the show hadn't mattered for years. If these are the numbers less than a month after said brand split, that is a pretty low ceiling. And this is without an extra hour like Raw has. Generally speaking, there's also alot more competition on Cable TV on Monday nights. SD will never be more successful because WWE makes $32 million dollars from USA Network on the 3rd hour of Raw alone. Doesn't even take into account hours 1 and 2 and the ad revenue for a 3 hour show. SD definitely has had a nice increase from pre-brand split, though. I'll never take that away from them.


. Raw had a huge drop without any big final and all the stars available. 

SD were up against a Phelps Final and were missing Cena and AJ yet didn't drop off as much as Raw. Sure the numbers for SD weren't great either but you can give them that as they were missing a few of their stars and were up against a gold medal Phelps event.


----------



## God Movement

:lawler

Horrible. What are the Youtube numbers for RAW/Smackdown


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Straw Hat said:


> . Raw had a huge drop without any big final and all the stars available.
> 
> SD were up against a Phelps Final and were missing Cena and AJ yet didn't drop off as much as Raw. Sure the numbers for SD weren't great either but you can give them that as they were missing a few of their stars and were up against a gold medal Phelps event.


Raw went up against the Olympics, as well.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> Raw went up against the Olympics, as well.


and all 3 hours where below 3 million so you need to get off your high horse about sd ratings cause Raw ratings sucks just as bad and will get worse as we get closer to football season.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> and all 3 hours where below 3 million so you need to get off your high horse about sd ratings cause Raw ratings sucks just as bad and will get worse as we get closer to football season.


That's my point. With a 3 hour show and also going up against the Olympics, they were still a half million viewers higher. NFL season dragging them down; no shame in that. If you're going to bash one show for losing viewers, you have to bash the other, as well.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> That's my point. With a 3 hour show and also going up against the Olympics, they were still a half million viewers higher. NFL season dragging them down; no shame in that. If you're going to bash one show for losing viewers, you have to bash the other, as well.


Raw will always draw more viewers than smackdown so its not really worth fighting over it


----------



## The Renegade

A-C-P said:


> You can argue it is a small win, and I am not saying you are completely wrong, b/c it is a small positive for the WWE. But the thing with WWE (and other pro-wrestling programs) is that they NEED to be much better from a ratings standpoint in comparison to other programs b/c of the way advertisers view the audience of sports entertainment/pro-wrestling. Advertisers do not feel the audience watching the WWE is the the best audience to be advertising to, so for them to see value the WWE's ratings #s NEEDS to be higher than everything else (by a good margin) for USA to get full value from the advertising time they sell.
> 
> This is one of the reasons Raw seemingly has so many more commercials than it used to. One reason is yes they are now trying to fill 3 hours, but another reason is USA is not making as much on a one minute commercial spot as they used to for WWE programming (due to declining viewership) so the netowrk is making up the difference in volume of ads.


Can't argue with that. As i've said in other threads, I think this lull for Raw is only temporary. I thought Pre-Draft that SD would have a better format due to the length and amount of high end performers on the roster. I see that divide closing as soon as Raw receives its CW division. That way they'll be able to pace their show in a similar manner as SD, and add the CW performers to fill the gaps that are currently being populated by bloat.


----------



## Reotor

Eva Marie Wardrobe malfunction already has over 2 million hits on youtube :trips7

We are going back to bra and panties matches aren't we :batista3

Edit: wrong thread wanted to post that on Smackdown one but its still applies, sort of.


----------



## venkyrenga

*Top draws of WWE*

Who are the top draws of WWE? Does Roman deserve a spot in it? 

My list is

1. The Rock
2. Brock Lesnar
3. John Cena
4. The undertaker
5. Triple H
6. Roman Reigns
7. Randy Orton

I think Roman is one of the draws. Even in his midcard feud with Rusev he is receiving a lot of attention especially from casuals. It is clearly evident from the YouTube views and everything. His segment with Rusev has more views than anything on Raw. You can say it because of his past booking or whatever but it is what it is.

I am including Rock in the list because we know he might come back anytime as a PT. Some people say now a days WWE and WM is the draw and not the wrestlers. But I don't think WWE can sell close to 100K tickets without big names like Brock, HHH, Taker, Roman, etc. 

what is your list?


----------



## Darren Criss

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

Bo Dallas
Rosa Mendes
Heath Slater
Summer Rae
Titus O'Neil
Alicia Fox
Curtis Axel


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

I think your list is spot on, not sure about the order though.


----------



## venkyrenga

*Re: Top draws of WWE*



Darren Criss said:


> Bo Dallas
> Rosa Mendes
> Heath Slater
> Summer Rae
> Titus O'Neil
> Alicia Fox
> Curtis Axel


very funny


----------



## Chief of the Lynch Mob

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

You're probably about right overall. Rollins and Ambrose are probably just behind that pack somewhere at this point.

It's really hard to judge who's a draw these days though, the ratings are generally poor regardless of who's on top.


----------



## Darren Criss

venkyrenga said:


> very funny


What's funny?


----------



## ellthom

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

I don't think Reigns has really proven himself as a draw yet considering WWE lowest rating were with him as champion, although I see that as a reflection on the entire company and not really just Reigns,, otherwise your list is pretty tight OP 

Cena is still pretty much their biggest draw when it comes to full time talent.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

According the ratings, its more like.

1. The Rock
-
-
Who?
-
The rest


----------



## anirioc

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

Brock Lesnar´s not a draw he´s never been a big draw.


----------



## SpikeDudley

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

Lesnar and Cena are the ONLY draws

After that the WWE itself is the draw


----------



## Godway

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

John Cena. The Rock. Brock Lesnar. That is all.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

THE WWE BRAND
The Rock

Lesnar


John Cena



























How ever you want to order the rest of the current roster


----------



## OwenSES

*Re: Top draws of WWE*

Randy would still be ahead of Reigns.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

Except for Brock and Cena, Ambrose defiantly seems to be the next biggest draw though still very far off from them two.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Roman Reigns continues to be the highlight of the show. His segment is at 3.3 million views on Youtube. Eva Marie's tits are the closest thing this week at 3.1 million.










Meanwhile, Smackdown's main event is still over 1 million views behind with two combined segments:









I was told for the longest that main event segments guarantee the most views and no credit should be attributed to Roman. What happened here then?*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Everything considered, drawing wise it would be:

1) Rock
2) Lesnar
3) Cena
4) Undertaker
5) Triple H
Then everyone else - although #2-5 don't make a lick of difference in today's wrestling and tbh, they can be very interchangeable. And Rock is just an unknown quantity at this point on a weekly basis. He'll pop a big rating when he returns, but beyond that, who knows? Ambrose might be a very distant 4th, but even then without proper quarter breakdowns every week since the beginning of the year, you could make the case for just about anybody that's been given a halfway decent push to be in that 4th spot.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

Legit BOSS said:


> *Roman Reigns continues to be the highlight of the show. His segment is at 3.3 million views on Youtube. Eva Marie's tits are the closest thing this week at 3.1 million.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, Smackdown's main event is still over 1 million views behind with two combined segments:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was told for the longest that main event segments guarantee the most views and no credit should be attributed to Roman. What happened here then?*


A couple of flaws I see here. First being comparing Raw segments to SD segments. Post brand split Raw segments on average have been drawing a lot more views than SD segments, as evidenced by not only Cena struggling to draw more than some midcard segments from Raw when pre Brand split his segments used to draw a lot more views, but also the Lesnar-Orton on Raw drawing almost twice as much as their segment on SD. This shows they have a lot of work to do not only building up SD's and tag and woman's division but rebuilding the SD brand itself, but thats another discussion for another time. If Eva Marie's wardrobe malfunction clip was a Raw segment
it would've drawn twice as much by now, because segments of that nature draw huge. Proof? The Ziggler-Lana segments from last that drew 20m views, bigger than anything Reigns was ever involved in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyNdlcLlCN0


Also, the segments that are featured on WWE Youtube channel's main page (which the Reigns-Rusev segment was this week) often draw the highest views. Last week the Orton-Lesnar segment was featured and it drew the most views, while Roman's segment was nowhere near the most watched, it was the only the 5th most viewed actually.

Also, when Reigns was champion, the midcard segment with Ambrose and Jericho where they introduced the Asylum match was featured on WWE YT's main page and ended up being the highest viewed segment of that week.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWczGsP0e2I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk876gLrbvs

Another example would be when the Reigns-Wyatt brawl from last year was featured on their main YT page, and drew the highest views that particular week during Seth's title reign, when Seth's segments almost always drew the most views during his reign as the champion.

So there you go.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

THREE AIN'T ENOUGH said:


> A couple of flaws I see here. First being comparing Raw segments to SD segments. Post brand split Raw segments on average have been drawing a lot more views than SD segments, as evidenced by not only Cena struggling to draw more than some midcard segments from Raw when pre Brand split his segments used to draw a lot more views, but also the Lesnar-Orton on Raw drawing almost twice as much as their segment on SD.


*There was just a Youtube breakdown posted in this very thread two weeks ago showing Smackdown hitting 1 mil+ views on 7 segments vs. RAW's 4: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/1...-war-part-v-lol-ratings-267.html#post61612506

The brand is irrelevant. If people want to watch; they'll watch.*



> This shows they have a lot of work to do not only building up SD's and tag and woman's division but rebuilding the SD brand itself, but thats another discussion for another time. If Eva Marie's wardrobe malfunction clip was a Raw segment
> it would've drawn twice as much by now, because segments of that nature draw huge. Proof? The Ziggler-Lana segments from last that drew 20m views, bigger than anything Reigns was ever involved in.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyNdlcLlCN0


*This would be a good argument if the most watched Youtube video wasn't a Battle Royal with 51 million views on Smackdown vs. RAW's 39 million for the Undertaker/Lesnar confrontation:*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3PswaGIZt4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIqv_DR6ij0




> Also, the segments that are featured on WWE Youtube channel's main page (which the Reigns-Rusev segment was this week) often draw the highest views. Last week the Orton-Lesnar segment was featured and it drew the most views, while Roman's segment was nowhere near the most watched, it was the only the 5th most viewed actually.
> 
> 
> Also, when Reigns was champion, the midcard segment with Ambrose and Jericho where they introduced the Asylum match was featured on WWE YT's main page and ended up being the highest viewed segment of that week.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWczGsP0e2I
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk876gLrbvs



*WWE changes their featured video upwards of multiple times a day. This was just uploaded and it's already the featured video:*











> Another example would be when the Reigns-Wyatt brawl from last year was featured on their main YT page, and drew the highest views that particular week during Seth's title reign, when Seth's segments almost always drew the most views during his reign as the champion.


*Roman's top 4 videos by views:*








*
Seth's top 4 videos by views:*









*Dean's top 4 videos by views:*









*As you can see, Seth and Dean aren't even the primary focus of most of their most viewed videos, but Roman is. Seth was NOT consistently the most viewed person during his title reign.*


----------



## Blade Runner

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Everything considered, drawing wise it would be:
> 
> 1) Rock
> 2) Lesnar
> 3) Cena
> 4) Undertaker
> 5) Triple H
> Then everyone else - although [URL=http://www.wrestlingforum.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=2]#2 -5[/URL] don't make a lick of difference in today's wrestling and tbh, they can be very interchangeable. And Rock is just an unknown quantity at this point on a weekly basis. He'll pop a big rating when he returns, but beyond that, who knows? Ambrose might be a very distant 4th, but even then without proper quarter breakdowns every week since the beginning of the year, you could make the case for just about anybody that's been given a halfway decent push to be in that 4th spot.


What's the metric you're using to measure drawability? The Rock I agree at #1 , but Lesnar at #2 ? I don't recall many instances where he spiked ratings/increased buys on cards/events that he was the focus of. Hell, on this week's RAW he failed to move the needle despite it being his first appearance since WM and UFC 200, and despite being heavily promoted for the show. I think there's a lot of myth around his supposed starpower in wrestling. UFC draw? Sure. WWE draw? Numbers don't prove this whatsoever


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I see the new era still includes the valiant counters of YouTube views.

Why do people not get it? Shrinking numbers of people watch this crap. Raw viewers they had forever spill over a bit to Smackdown. WWE is becoming irrelevant. Do you understand? A company banning the word "nuts" in 2016 cannot be anything but irrelevant. I.R.R.E.L.E.V.A.N.T.
On YouTube, they already are irrelevant. Why do people rave about those views? 3 million views? Those aren't different people than the barely 3 million on mondays. Which aren't different people than the 2-odd million on tuesdays.
YouTube is fast food. It's catch-up. It's not Must watch TV. It's not huge income. It doesn't even take into account accidental views or views after which the viewer turns away in disgust.
WWE on YouTube is not any different from any other Youtuber out there. It's fun for a minute. It doesn't add to your life. It doesn't detract from it. It's irrelevant. It's irrelevant to draw in casuals, it's irrelevant money for WWE's survival, and it's irrelevant for fans who already watch.
Especially with the Network existing, it is IRRELEVANT.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

what I find fascinating about the earlier post, is that Ambrose nearly outdrew Cena in Boston...that's huge! that's Cena's home area lol crazy!


----------



## TaterTots

Legit BOSS said:


> *As you can see, Seth and Dean aren't even the primary focus of most of their most viewed videos, but Roman is. Seth was NOT consistently the most viewed person during his title reign.*


You say that Seth and Dean aren't the primary focus of most of their most viewed videos but then claim that Roman is when in the very list of Roman's most viewed videos we have:

1. Triple H in one video
2. John Cena in another
3. And Vince himself in another as a guess referee

If Seth and Dean aren't the primary focus of most of their most viewed videos you listed then neither is Roman.


----------



## Godway

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I see the new era still includes the valiant counters of YouTube views.
> 
> Why do people not get it? Shrinking numbers of people watch this crap. Raw viewers they had forever spill over a bit to Smackdown. WWE is becoming irrelevant. Do you understand? A company banning the word "nuts" in 2016 cannot be anything but irrelevant. I.R.R.E.L.E.V.A.N.T.
> On YouTube, they already are irrelevant. Why do people rave about those views? 3 million views? Those aren't different people than the barely 3 million on mondays. Which aren't different people than the 2-odd million on tuesdays.
> YouTube is fast food. It's catch-up. It's not Must watch TV. It's not huge income. It doesn't even take into account accidental views or views after which the viewer turns away in disgust.
> WWE on YouTube is not any different from any other Youtuber out there. It's fun for a minute. It doesn't add to your life. It doesn't detract from it. It's irrelevant. It's irrelevant to draw in casuals, it's irrelevant money for WWE's survival, and it's irrelevant for fans who already watch.
> Especially with the Network existing, it is IRRELEVANT.


Basically, the Reigns fangirls have run out of material to make excuses for him or claim he's actually been a huge success this whole time, but nobody knows it! So we have the YouTube views "argument". Which isn't even an argument, as it's one of the most absurdly idiotic claims anyone can make. But it's still there.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

seems like the WWE was proud of last weeks' rating. They might have gotten under 3 million in all three hours but they were gloating how they were number one. So I guess they were proud of it .


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It was on against the Olympics again, but against lesser drawing events. We'll see how RAW fares tomorrow.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Dean Ambrose has been pushed as a top act for 1 month while Roman was pushed as a top act for nearly 3 years. Give Ambrose some time, they both have areas where metrically they are superior than the opposing, but it doesn't make a large different in terms of WWE Revenue.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

I can't figure out what's main eventing Summerslam, is it the US title match?


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

RubberbandGoat said:


> seems like the WWE was proud of last weeks' rating. They might have gotten under 3 million in all three hours but they were gloating how they were number one. So I guess they were proud of it .


*Meltzer:* "So,RAW put a graphic that,in fact it was, RAW was the nr1 [show] on Cable. Problem was, every major show on Cable threw the towel because nobody wants to compete with the Olympics.
So, every show that usually beat RAW took the week off but...you can see the insecurity of, the week they have the real bad ratings, they go out there and say 'oh, our ratings are really great!' which, you know..."
*Alvarez:* "...they're not."


----------



## RubberbandGoat

they haven't been number one in a year I believe, so they were proud of it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RubberbandGoat said:


> I can't figure out what's main eventing Summerslam, is it the US title match?


It does feel like they are almost positioning the US title over the Universal title. Still Brock/Orton is the true main event.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

so the order in Summerslam will go Ziggler/Ambrose fourth from the top, followed by Balor/Rollins third from the top, followed by Reigns/Rusev as the second to last match and the main being Lesnar/Orton? wow! if that does become the order, they are making the championship matches irrelevant compared to Reigns lol


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.879M
H2-3.083M
H3-2.784M
3H-2.915M*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I stopped watching after the Balor/Rollins segment. What was the main event? Because Hour 3 sank.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

A little better than last week but not by much.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Wouldn't be surprised if Ziggler and Ambrose jerked the curtain. The SD Title was always that.

Ziggler VS Ambrose
AJ VS Cena
Reigns VS Rusev
Brock VS Orton
Rollins VS Balor

Steph and Vince's ego can't take the Raw title below Brock. Brock was low on the card at WM already, and they need a title match and a great wrestling match in the middle to sustain interest in this godforsaken four hour show.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

Rusev/Reigns was the main event.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.879M
> H2-3.083M
> H3-2.784M
> 3H-2.915M*


*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (+7.1%/+0.204M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-9.7%/-0.299M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-3.3%/-0.095M) 

8/15/16 Vs 8/8/16
(+0.0014%/+0.004M*)

*Demo:
8/15/16 Vs 8/8/16

H1- 1.010D Vs 0.970D
H2- 1.080D Vs 0.990D
H3- 0.940D Vs 0.970D
3H- 1.010D Vs 0.977D*


----------



## RubberbandGoat

Its holding its own against the Olympics. So I'm sure they'll take it but Football season is coming and thats where SD takes over.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RubberbandGoat said:


> Its holding its own against the Olympics. So I'm sure they'll take it but Football season is coming and thats where SD takes over.


That's why they moved SD away from Thursday nights. NFL would destroy SD even moreso.


----------



## Godway

BUT HOW MANY YOUTUBE VIEWS DID ROMAN VS. RUSEV GET???


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.879M
> H2-3.083M
> H3-2.784M
> 3H-2.915M*


*Y-Y viewership:
8/15/16 Vs 8/17/15

H1-2.879M Vs 3.649M
H2-3.083M Vs 3.953M
H3-2.784M Vs 3.728M
3H-2.915M Vs 3.777M (-22.82% / -0.862M)

Y-Y demo:
8/15/16 Vs 8/17/15

H1- 1.010D Vs 1.230D
H2- 1.080D Vs 1.340D
H3- 0.940D Vs 1.320D
3H- 1.010D Vs 1.290D*


----------



## Mifune Jackson

ShowStopper said:


> That's why they moved SD away from Thursday nights. NFL would destroy SD even moreso.


It's probably a combination of things, but I think Tuesdays had to be the day regardless due to touring schedules. They can't give the SD/TV crew just Tuesday and Wednesday off. They have to do Tuesday if it's live because people go home during the week.

Also, while the Olympics is valid competition (even though WWE said it wouldn't be), Raw doesn't have a lot of compelling stars on it and they're not doing much with Balor/Rollins. Plus, making Reigns/Rusev the "main event" program is an incredibly bad mistake. Keep the US Title stuff in the midcard. If Reigns is to work his way back up to the main event then they need to adhere to that.

Raw is just a bad show.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW was slightly higher tin the demo, but the go home show was a swing and a miss. The attraction didn't draw. :bryanlol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mifune Jackson said:


> It's probably a combination of things, but I think Tuesdays had to be the day regardless due to touring schedules. They can't give the SD/TV crew just Tuesday and Wednesday off. They have to do Tuesday if it's live because people go home during the week.
> 
> Also, while the Olympics is valid competition (even though WWE said it wouldn't be), Raw doesn't have a lot of compelling stars on it and they're not doing much with Balor/Rollins. Plus, making Reigns/Rusev the "main event" program is an incredibly bad mistake. Keep the US Title stuff in the midcard. If Reigns is to work his way back up to the main event then they need to adhere to that.
> 
> Raw is just a bad show.


It probably is a combo of things, but the football thing is one of the bigger factors. They didn't want BOTH of their shows to be going up against the NFL. So, they took the smaller of the two shows away from the NFL. Smart move. I think Raw has more compelling characters than SD by miles, but they just don't utilize them correctly. I also think Raw is better than it was pre-draft. My opinion. 

What's happening is WWE, whether it's a good product or a bad product, simply doesn't draw anymore and they've tried EVERYONE on the roster that they like, outside of Balor. It's becoming more and more of a niche. I'm fine with it. Vince deserves it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I think 2.5 for Football Season is likely.

I forgot, Summerslam Go Home.

:eagle


----------



## RubberbandGoat

If they want to do well against Football they need to take Reigns off TV...big mistake going back to him again.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW will beat SD in the ratings this week, but SDL has the brighter future. This should serve as RAW's theme thoughout the NFL season:


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

So they give away basically the main Raw match for Summerslam on Raw and still get a massive drop off hour 3 :bryanlol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Damn. Lesnar in hour 2 only just barely managed to get above 3 million. Hour 3 had the two title feuds (Rollins/Balor and Rusev/Reigns) and tanked badly. Especially for the Summerslam go-home show.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

So this is RAW now? Atrocious ratings, barely any draws, Rollins/Balor as a World title feud, Reigns back on top, filler as fuck matches/feuds etc.

LMAO holy fuck, this is the new reality. :duck


----------



## Lothario

RubberbandGoat said:


> I can't figure out what's main eventing Summerslam, is it the US title match?


Not sure if it'll main event but considering Reigns has main evented RAW more than Finn and Seth combined since Battleground, I don't see why the US Title wouldn't go on after the Universal Title. They've made it abundantly clear that it's more important and that RAW is still the Roman Reigns showcase, so I'm not sure why they'd pussy out Sunday unless Vince's grapefruits are no where near as large as they used to be.

Say what you will about Dolph and Dean, but the WWE title has closed SD every week since the split went official. I can't fathom Eddie and Jericho closing RAW two weeks in a row in 2000 with the IC Title over Rock and HHH with the WWF Title. WWE is making it abundantly clear what (and who) is most important heading into Sunday.


----------



## AlternateDemise

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Wouldn't be surprised if Ziggler and Ambrose jerked the curtain. The SD Title was always that.
> 
> Ziggler VS Ambrose
> AJ VS Cena
> Reigns VS Rusev
> Brock VS Orton
> Rollins VS Balor
> 
> Steph and Vince's ego can't take the Raw title below Brock. Brock was low on the card at WM already, and they need a title match and a great wrestling match in the middle to sustain interest in this godforsaken four hour show.


Summerslam's going to be a four hour show?



Mifune Jackson said:


> It's probably a combination of things, but I think Tuesdays had to be the day regardless due to touring schedules. They can't give the SD/TV crew just Tuesday and Wednesday off. They have to do Tuesday if it's live because people go home during the week.
> 
> Also, while the Olympics is valid competition (even though WWE said it wouldn't be), Raw doesn't have a lot of compelling stars on it and they're not doing much with Balor/Rollins. Plus, making Reigns/Rusev the "main event" program is an incredibly bad mistake. Keep the US Title stuff in the midcard. If Reigns is to work his way back up to the main event then they need to adhere to that.
> 
> Raw is just a bad show.


There's nothing wrong at all with having a match based on the US title feud in the main event of Raw. The problem is the fact that it's the exact match that's supposed to take place in six nights at Summerslam and it didn't really amount to anything other than Reigns beating Rusev clean.


----------



## DoubtGin

Did Demon Balor show up in the 2nd hour? If yes, it seems that revelation actually drew in a few viwers.

Horrible numbers overall, looks like no one cared abour Reigns vs Rusev.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

EL SHIV said:


> RAW will beat SD in the ratings this week, but SDL has the brighter future. This should serve as RAW's theme thoughout the NFL season:


SD should be beating Raw if it's so much better AND is only 2 hours long. If they can't beat Raw going up against the NFL, or even if they do and the numbers are still comparable, that would be really, really sad on their part.


----------



## DoubtGin

AlternateDemise said:


> Summerslam's going to be a four hour show?


Yup, plus two hours for the pre-show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765627827718807552
Looks like that push for the youngin's is really working quite well. 

:heyman6

Also the second time in 3 weeks Brock has received a week long advertised appearance and he didn't pop the rating. Interesting. Can't believe Raw's average viewer is 41 and SD is 46. Damn. Clearly, the kids are not into WWE these days, by and large.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> SD should be beating Raw if it's so much better AND is only 2 hours long. If they can't beat Raw going up against the NFL, or even if they do and the numbers are still comparable, that would be really, really sad on their part.


RAW is McDonald's to Smackdown's Burger King. It has an audience trained to tune in on Monday nights for twenty three years now. I expect it will always beat Smackdown for that reason and its perception of being "the flagship show" even though its quality may belie that notion.


----------



## Lothario

ShowStopper said:


> SD should be beating Raw if it's so much better AND is only 2 hours long. If they can't beat Raw going up against the NFL, or even if they do and the numbers are still comparable, that would be really, really sad on their part.



I know your guy is on RAW and so you have a personal stake and this is as good as guerilla warfare for you, but you're a better poster than this.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Lothario said:


> I know your guy is on RAW and so you have a personal stake and this is as good as guerilla warfare for you, but you're a better poster than this.


Kind of ironic you say that. I don't post in SD threads shitting on the show every week like some of you guys do. Nor do I post in the Raw thread talking about SD the entire time like you guys do, as well. As a matter of fact, I've barely spoken about SD. Whereas it's the complete opposite with you guys who have turned this into a legitimate mark war from day one, just like Vince wants you to. He wins...again. Great job.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765627827718807552
> Looks like that push for the youngin's is really working quite well.
> 
> :heyman6
> 
> Also the second time in 3 weeks Brock has received a week long advertised appearance and he didn't pop the rating. Interesting. Can't believe Raw's average viewer is 41 and SD is 46. Damn. Clearly, the kids are not into WWE these days, by and large.



That's pretty bleak news for the future. An aging fanbase that overwhelms whatever young fans there are. Is pro wrestling doomed to wither on the vine?


----------



## LilOlMe

> *Raw ratings remain low against Olympics coverage*
> By Dave Meltzer | @davemeltzerWON | Aug 16, 2016 1:29 pm
> 
> 
> WWE should be very happy the Olympics are ending this week.
> 
> Raw was up very slightly, from 2.90 million viewers last week to 2.91 million viewers this week going against the Olympics. They would be the two lowest non-holiday numbers since 1997.
> 
> The bad news is Raw stayed virtually identical while the Olympics number fell from 28.76 million last Monday to 24.27 million last night.
> 
> Raw ended up fourth for the night on cable, trailing Rizzoli & Isles and Major Crimes on TNT, and The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News.
> 
> The number should rebound strongly next week, coming the day after SummerSlam.
> 
> The show did the usual pattern of the late arriving and early leaving audience that peaks in the middle, which will likely change when Daylight Savings time ends.
> 
> In the key 18-49 demo, 13 percent of the second hour viewers tuned out for the third hour.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 2.88 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.08 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.78 million viewers


There have been five summer Olympics since then, and it's never been this bad.

Brock's hour was the highest rated, though I don't know if it was a product of Brock. Finn's Demon character debuted in the 3rd hour, btw, not the second. I do think creatively that was the best thing on the show, though. 

This was such a skippable RAW otherwise, which is a shame because it's the go home show to their second biggest PPV.

This thread is still awful all around.

The sheer desperation four pages ago....

As for older viewers, I wonder if they're parents of Cena loving kids types.


----------



## DoubtGin

For all the money and hype Brock gets, you'd expect him to move the ratings even a bit.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

I'm okay with Brock getting all the money and hype when he actually puts effort in he is better than pretty much anyone on the roster, his segment was far superior than anything else on the show last night.

Not to mention he is still a small draw in a place full of nobody who draws.


----------



## Old School Icons

Ratings wise, it may not improve for a while


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765627827718807552
> Looks like that push for the youngin's is really working quite well.
> 
> :heyman6
> 
> Also the second time in 3 weeks Brock has received a week long advertised appearance and he didn't pop the rating. Interesting. Can't believe Raw's average viewer is 41 and SD is 46. Damn. Clearly, the kids are not into WWE these days, by and large.


Nitro average was 32.
SD average is 46.
A 14 years difference.
Nitro died 15 years ago.

I wonder if it's the same people, holding on to their hobby ...?

Forget it, nobody in WWE will draw the conclusion.


----------



## TaterTots

Those poor third hour numbers prove once again that Seth Rollins and Roman Reigns are ratings killers and can't draw to save their lives.

RAW is doomed with those two at the top.


----------



## Chrome

Pitiful rating, only 1 hour above 3 million. And yeah, the Olympics are over, but guess what's right around the corner?


----------



## Lothario

ShowStopper said:


> Kind of ironic you say that. I don't post in SD threads shitting on the show every week like some of you guys do. Nor do I post in the Raw thread talking about SD the entire time like you guys do, as well. As a matter of fact, I've barely spoken about SD. Whereas it's the complete opposite with you guys who have turned this into a legitimate mark war from day one, just like Vince wants you to. He wins...again. Great job.



So someone who views both shows is a mark for grading them on a week by week basis and you're the unbiased good guy because you willingly choose to not watch one brand or comment on it?

Uh yeah, no.


It doesn't make you above any of it when your agenda through it all is to still passive aggressively drag the other brand like you so expertly attempted in the aforementioned posts. There are guys and girls on both rosters that I enjoy (which I'm sure is the case for the other millions who watch both shows) and I thoroughly dogged SD post BG in favor of RAW because I found RAW more enjoyable that week. No one that has anything negative to say about RAW should walk on eggshells to placate you because you are too personally invested in the shows success or failure. The same applies to SD. 

Your logic is akin to a guy who is a fan of The Pistons getting angry at a Laker fan who simply enjoys the game of basketball for critiquing his Pistons team.


"I don't watch or comment on the Lakers so why are you dogging my point guard?"

I mean, wtf? Newsflash, Mcfly; opinions contrary to yours exist and plenty of wrestling fans watch both programs because they enjoy wrestling. Earth shattering, I know!


----------



## StylesP1

Lothario said:


> So someone who views both shows is a mark for grading them on a week by week basis and you're the unbiased good guy because you willingly choose to not watch one brand or comment on it?
> 
> Uh yeah, no.
> 
> 
> It doesn't make you above any of it when your agenda through it all is to still passive aggressively drag the other brand like you so expertly attempted in the aforementioned posts. There are guys and girls on both rosters that I enjoy (which I'm sure is the case for the other millions who watch both shows) and I thoroughly dogged SD post BG in favor of RAW because I found RAW more enjoyable that week. No one that has anything negative to say about RAW should walk on eggshells to placate you because you are too personally invested in the shows success or failure. The same applies to SD.
> 
> Your logic is akin to a guy who is a fan of The Pistons getting angry at a Laker fan who simply enjoys the game of basketball for critiquing his Pistons team.
> 
> 
> "I don't watch or comment on the Lakers so why are you dogging my point guard?"
> 
> I mean, wtf? Newsflash, Mcfly; opinions contrary to yours exist and plenty of wrestling fans watch both programs because they enjoy wrestling. Earth shattering, I know!


I watch both, but find Smackdown to be the vastly superior show. I watch in hopes that both will be awesome. 3 hours really kills Raw for me.


----------



## Frost99

Chrome said:


> Pitiful rating, only 1 hour above 3 million. And yeah, the Olympics are over, but guess what's right around the corner?


Couldn't have posted it better myself #RatingsDOA #MNF


----------



## Marv95

Aren't the Olympics at or near an all time low for viewership? How is that an excuse?


----------



## CretinHop138

My god that third hour.

They're going to get killed when NFL starts up. Wrestling its not "cool" anymore sadly though, they've declined big time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Lothario said:


> So someone who views both shows is a mark for grading them on a week by week basis and you're the unbiased good guy because you willingly choose to not watch one brand or comment on it?
> 
> Uh yeah, no.
> 
> 
> It doesn't make you above any of it when your agenda through it all is to still passive aggressively drag the other brand like you so expertly attempted in the aforementioned posts. There are guys and girls on both rosters that I enjoy (which I'm sure is the case for the other millions who watch both shows) and I thoroughly dogged SD post BG in favor of RAW because I found RAW more enjoyable that week. No one that has anything negative to say about RAW should walk on eggshells to placate you because you are too personally invested in the shows success or failure. The same applies to SD.
> 
> Your logic is akin to a guy who is a fan of The Pistons getting angry at a Laker fan who simply enjoys the game of basketball for critiquing his Pistons team.
> 
> 
> "I don't watch or comment on the Lakers so why are you dogging my point guard?"
> 
> I mean, wtf? Newsflash, Mcfly; opinions contrary to yours exist and plenty of wrestling fans watch both programs because they enjoy wrestling. Earth shattering, I know!


So, wait, you quote my post about me somehow making Raw/SD "guerilla warfare" because I don't 

1) Watch SD
2) Comment on it

But I'm somehow the guy that is making Raw/SD some crazy war?

:lol

Yeah, it doesn't work that way, chief. Maybe if half of my posts in the Raw thread were about SD every week or if I posted in the SD thread every week crapping on it all of the time, then sure. But since I don't do either of those things, yeah, I'm not the one taking it seriously, bro. I simply don't watch SD because there is no one on the roster that makes me want to watch, otherwise I would simply watch. I can't help it that it doesn't interest me.


----------



## The Power that Be

Legit BOSS said:


> Roman Reigns continues to be the highlight of the show. His segment is at 3.3 million views on Youtube. Eva Marie's tits are the closest thing this week at 3.1 million.


Some rapper named Bobby Smurder who i never heard of until earlier this year has hundreds of millions of youtube views , that idiot named pewpie something has billions of youtube views.

Youtube views don't mean jack sh*t


----------



## Bret Hart

Lmao Eva is a fucking draw on YouTube, rightly so. That goddess is money :homer


----------



## V-Trigger

Lmao that third hour.

Roman Reigns the DRAW.


----------



## Ace

TaterTots said:


> Those poor third hour numbers prove once again that Seth Rollins and Roman Reigns are ratings killers and can't draw to save their lives.
> 
> RAW is doomed with those two at the top.


 Demon Balor was in the third hour with Roman and Rollins buddy.


----------



## SUPA HOT FIRE.

I adored the entire Slater-Heyman-Lesnar part regarding RAW. 

Not only because it felt so random, out of place, unusual, fresh etc but also how it highlighted and really showed just how wrestler X (in this case Slater) can get elevated if WWE allows wrestler X to do so. I laughed the moment Slater's theme song came on but I definitely stopped laughing the moment he brought up his kids. The realness/non-kayfabe sensation of it all was an amazing experience to witness.

Brilliant stuff.

I cannot care about ratings when good shit like ^this is on my screen, tbh.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*8/15 Raw TV Ratings are in – Week 2 vs. Olympics improves, third hour drags down show
BY JAMES CALDWELL, PWTORCH ASSISTANT EDITOR
August 17, 2016

WWE Raw TV Ratings Tracking

August 15: WWE Raw scored a 2.12 TV rating on Monday, improving on a big drop to a 2.05 rating last week. Raw is still down from the 2.3-range of the first two weeks of the brand split. The second Raw against the Olympics also improved by about the same margin in the key demographic ratings. The overall rating, males 18-34, adults 18-49, and males 18-49 were still down significantly from where Raw was at the beginning of the brand split, though. There is a likely rebound coming for post-Summerslam Raw next Monday. – Raw’s three hours drew nearly the exact same audience as last week’s show against Week 1 of the Olympics. Raw averaged 2.915 million viewers, essentially even with 2.911 million viewers last week. It’s the first time in Raw’s modern-era that back-to-back shows drew fewer than 3.0 million viewers.

First Hour: 2.879 million viewers (down 71,000 vs. last week)
Second Hour: 3.083 million viewers (up 109,000 vs. last week)
Third Hour: 2.784 million viewers (down 25,000 vs. last week)

The second hour kept Raw at/slightly above last week’s audience. But, the third hour really hurt the show this week. The third hour declined 9.7 percent from the second hour, which was the biggest drop in two months going back to Raw against the NBA Finals. Overall, it marks 22 consecutive weeks that Raw’s third hour viewership has declined from the second hour.*

*Source:* http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/08/17/815-raw-tv-viewership-raw-nearly-identical-last-week-vs-olympics-third-hour-drags-show/


----------



## jim courier

The ratings are shameful but it's what they deserve. Raw is one of the worst shows on television it really is.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

it goes to show you that the people like Styles, Cena, Orton, and Bryan.....neither of whom are on Raw..Roman and Rollins aren't cutting it.


----------



## glenwo2

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *
> 
> First Hour: 2.879 million viewers (down 71,000 vs. last week)
> Second Hour: 3.083 million viewers (up 109,000 vs. last week)
> Third Hour: 2.784 million viewers (down 25,000 vs. last week)
> 
> *


*

I wonder why the 2nd hour scored the highest? :brock*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw beats SD by a comfortable margin again, even with the 3rd hour dragging down the overall number.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

the demo is all that matters to advertisers, not number of viewers..dont' look at the viewer count, just the demo. SD has been number one in the demo that counts the last two weeks..its beating Raw.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> Raw beats SD by a comfortable margin again, even with the 3rd hour dragging down the overall number.


Smackdown is still the better show and has been since the Draft.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> Smackdown is still the better show and has been since the Draft.


That's your opinion and has nothing to do with the ratings, which Raw has crushed it in since the draft.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> That's your opinion and has nothing to do with the ratings, which Raw has crushed it in since the draft.


you really can't be this dense can you? Cause its no shock to me Raw's ratings are higher cause its known as the flagship show and has been since 1993.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RubberbandGoat said:


> the demo is all that matters to advertisers, not number of viewers..dont' look at the viewer count, just the demo. SD has been number one in the demo that counts the last two weeks..its beating Raw.


I prefer SDL to RAW, but your assertion is incorrect. While it's true that the 18-49 demo is all the advertisers care about, SD had a .82 in the demo this week. RAW usually averages over 1.0 each week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> you really can't be this dense can you? Cause its no shock to me Raw's ratings are higher cause its known as the flagship show and has been since 1993.


Not as dense as some of the folks who said SD would beat Raw out of the shoot. Also, SD does have the advantage of not having a 3rd hour to drag it down. Just saying. But insulting someone is always the sure-fire way to show that your argument is off. So, thank you for that at least. Have a good one. (Y)


----------



## StylesP1

ShowStopper said:


> Not as dense as some of the folks who said SD would beat Raw out of the shoot. Also, SD does have the advantage of not having a 3rd hour to drag it down. Just saying. But insulting someone is always the sure-fire way to show that your argument is off. So, thank you for that at least. Have a good one. (Y)


I said give it 3 months. It needs time for people to come around to the product being Live, being on Tuesday's and being its own show. Hell, there are people on these forums that enter the Live thread and say "shit I forgot it was on, what have I missed?" If people on forums are doing that, what about the general public? 

Hell, just check the polls. Last week was a landslide for SDL, and this week was even worse. Something like 110-7 in favor of Smackdown being the better show. That is a huge gap. I fully expect SDL to continue being the much better show, and climb in ratings as time goes by. I expect Raw to continue dropping in ratings, especially when football kicks into full gear.

That said, I want both to be good. Right now, I only have SDL entertaining as Raw has been complete and utter shit.


----------



## squarebox

ShowStopper said:


> Raw beats SD by a comfortable margin again, even with the 3rd hour dragging down the overall number.


The comparison is hardly fair, the only thing they've done to SD since the split is make it live and change it to Tuesdays, apart from the roster split and a few tweaks here & there, everything else is exactly the same. It still gets treated as their second rate show while RAW is still put over as their flagship show. So with that said, no shit RAW is still beating SD in the ratings. Until both shows get treated as equal then that isn't going to change.



StylesP1 said:


> I watch both, but find Smackdown to be the vastly superior show. I watch in hopes that both will be awesome. 3 hours really kills Raw for me.


That's exactly it for me as well and has been for a long time. 3 hours for me is too much and the obvious filler segments just kill it for me. With SD I find the show just flows better and there's less time for them to add useless filler into the show. The problem is rebuilding SD's viewership since people have been accustomed to thinking that SD is their second rate show for over 10 years now. Whether it's live or not, people aren't just magically going to flock back to it, unless it gets treated as equal, which will never happen since RAW being the 3 hour show vs SD 2 hours says it all really.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

StylesP1 said:


> I said give it 3 months. It needs time for people to come around to the product being Live, being on Tuesday's and being its own show. Hell, there are people on these forums that enter the Live thread and say "shit I forgot it was on, what have I missed?" If people on forums are doing that, what about the general public?
> 
> Hell, just check the polls. Last week was a landslide for SDL, and this week was even worse. Something like 110-7 in favor of Smackdown being the better show. That is a huge gap. I fully expect SDL to continue being the much better show, and climb in ratings as time goes by. I expect Raw to continue dropping in ratings, especially when football kicks into full gear.
> 
> That said, I want both to be good. Right now, I only have SDL entertaining as Raw has been complete and utter shit.


I was stating a fact. If anything, the comparison is fair since Raw has an extra hour and SD doesn't. Makes beating SD even worse for SD, tbh. Aren't you the guy who told me that JDFromNY bashed Raw all the time? I watched his SD reviews. He bashes SD just as bad. Fact of the matter is, everywhere except this site bashes the shit out of SD just as bad. This place is just mark war central, that's all it is. Make Raw 2 hours and it'd be easily just as good.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

Once again, SDL is BEATING Raw in the ratings. Advertisers do NOT care about number of viewers. That's all Raw is beating SDL in is number of viewers. They care if you're number one in the demo and for the last two weeks SDL has been number one in the demo! That's all that matters, so that's a success! Number of viewers does not matter.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

StylesP1 said:


> I said give it 3 months. It needs time for people to come around to the product being Live, being on Tuesday's and being its own show. Hell, there are people on these forums that enter the Live thread and say "shit I forgot it was on, what have I missed?" If people on forums are doing that, what about the general public?
> 
> Hell, just check the polls. Last week was a landslide for SDL, and this week was even worse. Something like 110-7 in favor of Smackdown being the better show. That is a huge gap. I fully expect SDL to continue being the much better show, and climb in ratings as time goes by. I expect Raw to continue dropping in ratings, especially when football kicks into full gear.
> 
> That said, I want both to be good. Right now, I only have SDL entertaining as Raw has been complete and utter shit.


What about the general public? 
The general public doesn't give a shit about WWE.


----------



## CretinHop138

People don't care about WWE or pro wrestling its shown in horrible ratings like this and they will get killed when NFL starts, the viewers of the 80/90s boom have moved on to UFC and MMA and more people were talking about Conor than NXT last night. "Yay we're trending on twitter" great that give you shit, and doesn't take away the fact UFC probably made a lot more money last night.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.462M
H2-3.370M
H3-3.113M
3H-3.315M*










*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (-2.66%/-0.092M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.63%/-0.257M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-10.08%/-0.349M) 

8/22/16 Vs 8/15/16
(+12.07%/+0.400M)*

*Demo:
8/22/16 Vs 8/15/16

H1- 1.290D Vs 1.010D
H2- 1.270D Vs 1.080D
H3- 1.180D Vs 0.940D
3H- 1.247D Vs 1.010D*

*Note: RAW is #1 by demo and #4 by viewership.*


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Hour 3 fatigue sets in again...

Decent rating for the Summerslam bump, they will be getting murdered by mid September tho.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.462M
> H2-3.370M
> H3-3.113M
> 3H-3.315M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (-2.66%/-0.092M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-7.63%/-0.257M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-10.08%/-0.349M)
> 
> 8/22/16 Vs 8/15/16
> (+12.07%/+0.400M)*
> 
> *Demo:
> 8/22/16 Vs 8/15/16
> 
> H1- 1.290D Vs 1.010D
> H2- 1.270D Vs 1.080D
> H3- 1.180D Vs 0.940D
> 3H- 1.247D Vs 1.010D*


*Y-Y viewership:
8/22/16 Vs 8/24/15

H1- 3.462M Vs 3.606M
H2- 3.370M Vs 3.794M
H3- 3.113M Vs 3.764M
3H- 3.315M Vs 3.721M (-10.91% / -0.406M)

Y-Y demo:
8/22/16 Vs 8/24/15

H1- 1.290D Vs 1.200D
H2- 1.270D Vs 1.290D
H3- 1.180D Vs 1.420D
3H- 1.247D Vs 1.303D*


----------



## KO Bossy

Dudleys retirement draws, I guess?


----------



## and 6 others liked

Blandy Boreton is a flop. There is a reason they took so long to have him face Lesnar, who himself is losing appeal. 

Nobody gives a shit about vanilla midgets such as Rollins and Balor. Disastrous viewers for the 2nd biggest PPV of the year, the WM of the summer.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Good number. Rollins in the highest hour, good enough for me.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The closer Roman gets to the title, the more the ratings rebound. :reigns2


----------



## DoubtGin

Good bump, good number for the current state of WWE, bad number in general.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

How do these numbers compare to the normal post-PPV viewership? Seems pretty average to me.


----------



## and 6 others liked

#BadNewsSanta said:


> How do these numbers compare to the normal post-PPV viewership? Seems pretty average to me.


Well its a 2.34 rating when Battleground did a 2.36

Summerslam is meant to be the bigger PPV so its poor.


----------



## A-C-P

Glad they got their little Summerslam post show bump prior to Labor Day and the NFL seasons starting :bosque


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Good bump that will mean nothing by next month.

Yay?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Subtract SS bump, and they're where they were before.
Amazing that they can't Even hold viewers' attention beyond Hour 1.


----------



## Reotor

Really need NFL to come already to give WWE a swift kick in the nuts.


----------



## Godway

"Where's Brock?" Said everyone who tuned in but normally doesn't, and will be gone by next week. 

Badass ending to PPV by the greatest monster in history, RAW the next night is back to lolRomanWins push while Brock is nowhere in sight.


----------



## V-Trigger

lolRomanwins in full force with that third hour.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

Yeah looks like the ending of Summer slam give them a decent bump but considering they barely focused on it I doubt any of them that tuned in cause of that will be here next week.


----------



## jim courier

Man the ratings are going to be utterly atrocious during the fall lol.


----------



## dougfisher_05

Reotor said:


> Really need NFL to come already to give WWE a swift kick in the nuts.


And it's going to be a painful one. The audience is bleeding without football... They are going to get crushed this year, especially in that demo rating.


----------



## JTB33b

fans tuning in to see what they would do about the championship. plus the rumored debut of bayley.


----------



## Lothario

Lothario said:


> Not sure if it'll main event but considering Reigns has main evented RAW more than Finn and Seth combined since Battleground, I don't see why the US Title wouldn't go on after the Universal Title. .




I'm still in awe that this actually happened.


----------



## Randy Lahey

The problem with Raw is they are about 500,000 fans less than last year at this time, and last year's rating were terrible. So until they stop the bleed, none of these ratings are good. A 2.34 after the 2nd biggest PPV of the year is a horrible number. Last year in August, Raw averaged about a 2.72, then when football started they fell to 2.43 in September (11% decline) , and 2.33 (4% decline) in October.

If they do that this year, the September shows will average about 1.95. And the October shows will average 1.87.

If they starting average less than 2.0 on Raw, I don't see how Raw can continue to exist in this format. It costs too much to produce to get those type of low ratings.


----------



## LilOlMe

Doing nothing with Brock was such a lost opportunity. The end of Summerslam created a buzz, and they did absolutely nothing to capitalize on it. Despite a tournament for the World Title, RAW felt uneventful. It should never feel like that after Summerslam.

Why on Earth would Brock not be in the tournament after disseminating one of Smackdown's top guys? Why no explanation for that?

As for football season, I always tend to be too optimistic when it comes to RAW ratings, but I don't see them falling that far down. I think we're at the point where it's almost entirely hardcores watching. When that's the case, there isn't much farther down to go. I don't feel whoever's left will abandon ship just because football is on. The days of drastic drops are over, I think.

I don't see them averaging less than 2.9 million viewers. I think that there's a certain base level that will always watch, and we're pretty close to approaching that already, IMO, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.


----------



## JordanRose

LilOlMe said:


> Doing nothing with Brock was such a lost opportunity. The end of Summerslam created a buzz, and they did absolutely nothing to capitalize on it. Despite a tournament for the World Title, RAW felt uneventful. It should never feel like that after Summerslam.
> 
> Why on Earth would Brock not be in the tournament after disseminating one of Smackdown's top guys? Why no explanation for that?


Because Ryan ward, the guy who wrote NXT for the past few years, is writing SD and Vince has left that alone after the first week since the draft so SD has consistency and common sense whereas Raw has Vince all over it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This week's Raw had a 340,000 viewer gain from last week's Raw.


----------



## AJ_Styles_P1

LilOlMe said:


> Doing nothing with Brock was such a lost opportunity. The end of Summerslam created a buzz, and they did absolutely nothing to capitalize on it. Despite a tournament for the World Title, RAW felt uneventful. It should never feel like that after Summerslam.
> 
> *Why on Earth would Brock not be in the tournament after disseminating one of Smackdown's top guys? Why no explanation for that?.*


*

What do you expect them to do?

Him destroying Orton & Shane to end Summerslam was perfect, you don't need anything more. Brock looked like a badass. What more is there for him? Going after people & titles isn't him, and its not his character either.

And the reason is because he's paid on a certain amount of dates, why waste them on a pointless Smackdown, Brock is an attraction when he comes back, his matches make the product more interesting for weekly viewers and he draws outside interest aswell, he doesn't need to be out there every week, that would actually make the whole Brock thing worse.

I don't really get your way of looking at it, but it is subjective entertainment, so (not trying to be a dick) did you have anything in mind? Like what more do you want them to do with him?*


----------



## Bret Hart

AJ_Styles_P1 said:


> What do you expect them to do?
> 
> Him destroying Orton & Shane to end Summerslam was perfect, you don't need anything more. Brock looked like a badass. What more is there for him? Going after people & titles isn't him, and its not his character either.
> 
> And the reason is because he's paid on a certain amount of dates, why waste them on a pointless Smackdown, Brock is an attraction when he comes back, his matches make the product more interesting for weekly viewers and he draws outside interest aswell, he doesn't need to be out there every week, that would actually make the whole Brock thing worse.
> 
> I don't really get your way of looking at it, but it is subjective entertainment, so (not trying to be a dick) did you have anything in mind? Like what more do you want them to do with him?


That "Brock is an attraction" notion is so bullshit and is why Brock Lesnar can go to MMA hell. 


I wonder how WWF would have been had Rock/Austin been "attractions" in 2000/2001. unk2


----------



## Arkham258

The way they've built up Brock, they might as well just bring back The Streak and have him kill someone at each year's Wrestlemania


----------



## Godway

Arkham258 said:


> The way they've built up Brock, they might as well just bring back The Streak and have him kill someone at each year's Wrestlemania


Can't, since they jobbed him at Mania to pro MMA Fighter HHH, in a lame rehash of the Cena/Brock Extreme Rules match, with none of the violence.


----------



## AJ_Styles_P1

Bret Hart said:


> That "Brock is an attraction" notion is so bullshit and is why Brock Lesnar can go to MMA hell.
> 
> 
> I wonder how WWF would have been had Rock/Austin been "attractions" in 2000/2001. unk2


Its not even remotely the same. Lol

Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense. Because it does, how can you be mad at Brock yet be happy with the Undertaker?


----------



## Godway

AJ_Styles_P1 said:


> Its not even remotely the same. Lol
> 
> Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense. Because it does, how can you be mad at Brock yet be happy with the Undertaker?


Undertaker, HBK, HHH invented the part timer gimmick. It's always been deemed "okay" for them, but for some reason Brock or Rock or Batista get nothing but shit for it. Makes no sense.


----------



## The True Believer

Godway said:


> Undertaker, HBK, HHH invented the part timer gimmick. It's always been deemed "okay" for them, but for some reason Brock or Rock or Batista get nothing but shit for it. Makes no sense.


I think there's more to it than "for some reason". No one expects anyone like a Reigns, Ambrose, Styles, or Rollins to be a big draw, right? Well, HHH, HBK, and Taker are guys that are seen as WWE lifers, guys that fans don't get to see get involved with the product all the time and are somewhat of a big deal but it's likely nothing that will break outside of the WWE bubble, with the exception of Undertaker's freak breaking.

Brock, Rock, and Batista, on the other hand, ARE bigger than the WWE and are pretty much people with outside ventures that can sustain them longer and better than the best of WWE's paycheck could and that comes down to how significant they are in the mainstream. You've got Batista with his movies, Rock even more so in the movie department, and of course, there's Brock Lesnar, one of the biggest draws in MMA history. Essentially, the onus of THEM drawing big numbers for the WWE is bigger because of how much they transcend the company that they're doing favors for. When they fail to do so, there has to be some speculation on wherever the investment was worth anyone's time or not.


----------



## Bret Hart

AJ_Styles_P1 said:


> Its not even remotely the same. Lol
> 
> Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense. Because it does, how can you be mad at Brock yet be happy with the Undertaker?


Just because it makes sense to you doesn't mean it makes sense to everyone else.

Undertaker can fuck off too.



Godway said:


> Undertaker, HBK, HHH invented the part timer gimmick. It's always been deemed "okay" for them, but for some reason Brock or Rock or Batista get nothing but shit for it. Makes no sense.


At least with HBK he showed up on every Raw and PPV.. Couldn't give two shits for house shows. 

I see HHH as a Vince McMahon of this era where he steps into the ring when he has to. Doesn't mean he should be holding the title though....

Rock, Taker, HBK, Brock need to fuck off. 

Batista was probably the only part timer that actually wrestled on Raw, have nothing against him....Hell even Sting wrestled Big Show on Raw.


----------



## AlternateDemise

Godway said:


> Undertaker, HBK, HHH invented the part timer gimmick. It's always been deemed "okay" for them, but for some reason Brock or Rock or Batista get nothing but shit for it. Makes no sense.


HBK was full time before he retired from the ring and Batista was appearing and competing on a weekly basis with his schedule, so I wouldn't consider him part time (although it makes sense given him not being active in other aspects). Regardless, Taker and HHH are at the point where they can't handle being full time performers anymore, either due to injuries or having responsibilities outside of the ring. Brock, Batista and Rock came back entirely for money, and despite the business benefiting greatly from their returns, and even though they could handle the luxury of a full time schedule, they simply don't because they aren't as dedicated to the craft as everyone else, not to mention you get half assed performances out of them most of the time when they're back. So I can understand why people would get pissed about that.


----------



## Godway

AlternateDemise said:


> HBK was full time before he retired from the ring and Batista was appearing and competing on a weekly basis with his schedule, so I wouldn't consider him part time (although it makes sense given him not being active in other aspects). Regardless, Taker and HHH are at the point where they can't handle being full time performers anymore, either due to injuries or having responsibilities outside of the ring. Brock, Batista and Rock came back entirely for money, and despite the business benefiting greatly from their returns, and even though they could handle the luxury of a full time schedule, they simply don't because they aren't as dedicated to the craft as everyone else, not to mention you get half assed performances out of them most of the time when they're back. So I can understand why people would get pissed about that.


Dedication has nothing to do with anything. If any other guy on the roster brought in the money that the part timers do/did, and Vince let them work a part-time schedule, they'd be all over it. Even those super-dedicated ones. Mr. WWE, John Cena is working part-time because he has other obligations, for instance. I think it's fucking stupid for fans to bag on Rock, Batista, Brock, for not being dedicated, when they all have outside shit going on, and in Brock's case he outright says "I hate the WWE lifestyle. I'm here because they pay me." and there's nothing wrong with that as long as he's a dedicated employee, which by all accounts he is. UFC 200 is why his match with Ambrose was "half assed" for instance. Rock/Sting both suffered bad injuries performing in part time roles, no half assing there, but that goes to show how easy it is to get hurt if you're a part timer. Brock is thinking I'm about to headline UFC 200, why in the fuck would I be in there taking barbwire baseball shots from Dean Ambrose a few months before? 

Taker's the only guy I've ever seen work a Mania match without showing up a single fucking day before Mania. Yet that's considered okay. Just like it's okay that HHH or HBK when he was there, got to handpick what opponents/feuds/PPVs they wanted, to coincide with who was the hot act and what was the biggest PPV payday. That's real dedication there. And I'm not damning any of these guys for doing that, because that's fine. Get paid where you can. I'm just saying people want to hate on certain others for it, when Taker does it, HHH does it, HBK did it. Anyone on the roster would do it if they had the opportunity to. Ultimately these guys are there to make money, not because they're "dedicated to the fans". That's a WWE commercial, it isn't how guys really feel. Look at the amount of people who have openly walked away from the company the last few years because of money/creative issues (creative can affect your pay).


----------



## Reotor

Godway said:


> Dedication has nothing to do with anything. If any other guy on the roster brought in the money that the part timers do/did, and Vince let them work a part-time schedule, they'd be all over it. Even those super-dedicated ones. Mr. WWE, John Cena is working part-time because he has other obligations, for instance. I think it's fucking stupid for fans to bag on Rock, Batista, Brock, for not being dedicated, when they all have outside shit going on, and in Brock's case he outright says "I hate the WWE lifestyle. I'm here because they pay me." and there's nothing wrong with that as long as he's a dedicated employee, which by all accounts he is. UFC 200 is why his match with Ambrose was "half assed" for instance. Rock/Sting both suffered bad injuries performing in part time roles, no half assing there, but that goes to show how easy it is to get hurt if you're a part timer. Brock is thinking I'm about to headline UFC 200, why in the fuck would I be in there taking barbwire baseball shots from Dean Ambrose a few months before?


Yeah, very very dedicated.

Edit: you make an appearance fucking 4 times a year, and get paid WAAAAAY above your actual market value, the least you can do when you actually show up is bring your A game, you lazy fuck.
Sorry that's my inner Vince thinking.


----------



## Godway

Reotor said:


> Yeah, very very dedicated.
> 
> Edit: you make an appearance fucking 4 times a year, and get paid WAAAAAY above your actual market value, the least you can do when you actually show up is bring your A game, you lazy fuck.
> Sorry that's my inner Vince thinking.


And he probably could have said "Fuck you, I have a fight coming up" and not worked the show at all.


----------



## AlternateDemise

Godway said:


> Dedication has nothing to do with anything. If any other guy on the roster brought in the money that the part timers do/did, and Vince let them work a part-time schedule, they'd be all over it. Even those super-dedicated ones. Mr. WWE, John Cena is working part-time because he has other obligations, for instance. I think it's fucking stupid for fans to bag on Rock, Batista, Brock, for not being dedicated, when they all have outside shit going on, and in Brock's case he outright says "I hate the WWE lifestyle. I'm here because they pay me." and there's nothing wrong with that as long as he's a dedicated employee, which by all accounts he is. UFC 200 is why his match with Ambrose was "half assed" for instance. Rock/Sting both suffered bad injuries performing in part time roles, no half assing there, but that goes to show how easy it is to get hurt if you're a part timer. Brock is thinking I'm about to headline UFC 200, why in the fuck would I be in there taking barbwire baseball shots from Dean Ambrose a few months before?
> 
> Taker's the only guy I've ever seen work a Mania match without showing up a single fucking day before Mania. Yet that's considered okay. Just like it's okay that HHH or HBK when he was there, got to handpick what opponents/feuds/PPVs they wanted, to coincide with who was the hot act and what was the biggest PPV payday. That's real dedication there. And I'm not damning any of these guys for doing that, because that's fine. Get paid where you can. I'm just saying people want to hate on certain others for it, when Taker does it, HHH does it, HBK did it. Anyone on the roster would do it if they had the opportunity to. Ultimately these guys are there to make money, not because they're "dedicated to the fans". That's a WWE commercial, it isn't how guys really feel. Look at the amount of people who have openly walked away from the company the last few years because of money/creative issues (creative can affect your pay).


Fair enough. FYI, Rock is the only guy I really give any kind of shit in regards to this. Batista and Brock not so much.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Hard to say out loud, but since the streak ended, Undertaker is basically worthless.


----------



## Godway

AlternateDemise said:


> Fair enough. FYI, Rock is the only guy I really give any kind of shit in regards to this. Batista and Brock not so much.


I got nothing but respect for the Rock. He's the highest grossing star in Hollywood, which is an incredible feat for having the "pro wrestler" stigma. Cena/Rock was an awesome feud in my opinion, and that's as far as it should have went. The Cena/Rock II, Rock's title reign, yeah that was pushing it and really fucked over CM Punk. 

But I get it. Rock is legitimately like 10 times the star of ANYONE in the WWE. If he'll take time out of his very busy schedule to work a few shows for a couple million, I think you have to make that deal, business-wise. He brought in tons of money during his back-to-back-to-back Mania runs. I'm sure a lot of people ordered the show this year, because of him, even. 

I think a lot of people bought into Punk/Cena's promo fodder about Rock and part timers and what not, and that's why they are viewed in such a negative light. Even though Rock cut that taped promo on Cena, legitimately one of the best promos of the last 15 years, to bite back at them.


----------



## Reotor

Godway said:


> And he probably could have said "Fuck you, I have a fight coming up" and not worked the show at all.


That would be an improvement.


----------



## jim courier

The Rock is the least selfish top guy of all time he did jobs to loads of midcard geeks when he was breaking every record in the book 1999-2000. Anyone who thinks of him as selfish just get their head out of the NXT/ROH's spot monkeys ass and get a clue.

Despite being a far far bigger star the Rock did way more jobs than Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Triple H, John Cena and The Undertaker.


----------



## Bret Hart

Godway said:


> Even though Rock cut that taped promo on Cena, legitimately one of the best promos of the last 15 years, to bite back at them.


Of course since he doesn't have to follow a terrible script....

Cena calling out Rock having bullet points was pretty funny, never seen Rocky so vulnerable.


----------



## Godway

Bret Hart said:


> Of course since he doesn't have to follow a terrible script....
> 
> Cena calling out Rock having bullet points was pretty funny, never seen Rocky so vulnerable.


No one HAS to follow a terrible script. I'm pretty sure writers don't script Bray Wyatt or Miz. You're usually heavy-scripted because you're terrible on the mic, like Roman Reigns. Or you haven't yet proved you can cut a promo, see Becky Lynch a year ago compared to Becky Lynch now, while she used to be heavily scripted and now it's obvious she kind of does her own thing.


----------



## Blade Runner

Godway said:


> No one HAS to follow a terrible script. I'm pretty sure writers don't script Bray Wyatt or Miz. You're usually heavy-scripted because you're terrible on the mic, like Roman Reigns. Or you haven't yet proved you can cut a promo, see Becky Lynch a year ago compared to Becky Lynch now, while she used to be heavily scripted and now it's obvious she kind of does her own thing.


Not necessarily. Goldust was scripted word for word in 1996 and no sane person will argue that he was shit at promos. Sometimes wrestlers are great at delivery but not necesarily creative enough to constantly come up with fresh material on their own. This is especially the case when someone isn't portraying an extension of themselves. The problem with the WWE is that creative seems to be anything BUT creative so the guys that must depend on scripts are usually dead in the water


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.392M
H2-3.438M
H3-3.409M
3H-3.413M
*









*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (+1.36%/-0.046M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-0.084%/-0.029M) 
H3 Vs H1 (+0.050%/+0.017M) 

8/29/16 Vs 8/22/16
(+2.96%/+0.098M)

Demo:
8/29/16 Vs 8/22/16

H1- 1.140D Vs 1.290D
H2- 1.170D Vs 1.270D
H3- 1.210D Vs 1.180D
3H- 1.173D Vs 1.247D

Note: RAW is #4, #2 & #1 by demo and #5, #3 & #4 by viewership.*


----------



## D.M.N.

Interesting trend:

08/08/16 - 2.911 million
15/08/16 - 2.915 million (up 4,000)
22/08/16 - 3.315 million (up 400,000)
29/08/16 - 3.413 million (up 80,000)

The last time Raw increased its number in three consecutive weeks was March 2015.

The last time Raw increased its number in three consecutive weeks outside of WrestleMania season (January to the 'Mania), then you have to go back to June 2012, before the three-hour era started.

Whilst next week's number could drop back to 3 million and reverse the trend, its an interesting stat and perhaps a sign that the casual fans are enjoying 'post Draft' Raw more than 'pre Draft' Raw.


----------



## KO Bossy

Owens keeping people tuned into that third hour?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.392M
> H2-3.438M
> H3-3.409M
> 3H-3.413M
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (+1.36%/-0.046M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-0.084%/-0.029M)
> H3 Vs H1 (+0.050%/+0.017M)
> 
> 8/29/16 Vs 8/22/16
> (+2.96%/+0.098M)
> 
> Demo:
> 8/29/16 Vs 8/22/16
> 
> H1- 1.140D Vs 1.290D
> H2- 1.170D Vs 1.270D
> H3- 1.210D Vs 1.180D
> 3H- 1.173D Vs 1.247D
> 
> Note: RAW is #4, #2 & #1 by demo and #5, #3 & #4 by viewership.*


*Y-Y viewership:
8/29/16 Vs 8/31/15

H1- 3.392M Vs 3.865M
H2- 3.438M Vs 3.987M
H3- 3.409M Vs 3.831M
3H- 3.413M Vs 3.894M (-12.35% / -0.481M)

Y-Y demo:
8/29/16 Vs 8/31/15

H1- 1.140D Vs 1.320D
H2- 1.170D Vs 1.420D
H3- 1.210D Vs 1.460D
3H- 1.173D Vs 1.400D*


----------



## Kabraxal

The main event kept people watching... Hopefully it translates to more people watching next week (and Raw trying to be good overall).


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The demo decreased and that's the bottom line to advertisers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Very good numbers. Stayed consistent throughout the show, too. Good job by everyone on the show.


----------



## Sweggeh

It was very obvious they would retain viewers. That was a PPV main event quality match and most people tuned in just to see it. They also did a good job growing interest for the main event even further with that opening segment.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

:bjpenn Good numbers throughout the show.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Screw Reigns every week, and people might start enjoying Raw.

Vanilla midgets and Indy Darlings ftw, bitches.


----------



## The Renegade

Nice numbers. I have a hard time believing that these numbers won't increase even further next week. That was a hell of a cliff hanger to leave us on.


----------



## ChicagoFit

The fact that the overrun rating is so low, you know when WWE crowned the new champion, speaks volumes about how little RAW viewers give a care about the WWE.

When hour 1 and hour 2 attain a larger audience than the show's big to-do, is evidence that the WWE's failure to present compelling content to hold an audience is epic.


----------



## ChicagoFit

Kabraxal said:


> The main event kept people watching... Hopefully it translates to more people watching next week (and Raw trying to be good overall).


No it didn't. The audience still dropped compared to hours one and two. And the overall audience size is not good by any standard.


----------



## Kabraxal

ChicagoFit said:


> No it didn't. The audience still dropped compared to hours one and two. And the overall audience size is not good by any standard.


m... hour 3 is higher than hour 1. And maintaining this level is better than a drop. Look, I get that hatred is a powerful thing, but clearly people were interested in that main event no matter how much you are probably going to start screaming about the attitude era.


----------



## ChicagoFit

Kabraxal said:


> m... hour 3 is higher than hour 1. And maintaining this level is better than a drop. Look, I get that hatred is a powerful thing, but clearly people were interested in that main event no matter how much you are probably going to start screaming about the attitude era.


Sweetie, it dropped off at the crescendo of the show. Meaning: Viewers didn't care enough about the outcome and bailed on the show. With such an important main event, that's not good.


----------



## Kabraxal

ChicagoFit said:


> Sweetie, it dropped off at the crescendo of the show. Meaning: Viewers didn't care enough about the outcome and bailed on the show. With such an important main event, that's not good.


So you have no clue what you are talking about, got it. 

Clearly you hadn't watched the trend over the past year to understand why the ratings last night painted the main event in a good light. Time to do some research before posting and proving you don't understand anything.


----------



## ChicagoFit

Kabraxal said:


> So you have no clue what you are talking about, got it.
> 
> Clearly you hadn't watched the trend over the past year to understand why the ratings last night painted the main event in a good light. Time to do some research before posting and proving you don't understand anything.


You literally said nothing; stupid.


----------



## FROSTY

*Kevin Owens = Raw Ratings














*


----------



## DoubtGin

Pretty good considering the current state of WWE. Looks like people were interested in the title match. Wonder what made people watch in hour 2, though. That was pure shit.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

im a big owens fan, but to say he keep people for the 3rd hour is little more than a lie


----------



## Reotor

I love Kevin Owens but why people give him the credit for RAW? hello? it was a title match for a vacant title so naturally people wanted to see who's the new champion.

And it had 4 guys in this match, not just Owens.


----------



## Fissiks

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Screw Reigns every week, and people might start enjoying Raw.
> 
> Vanilla midgets and Indy Darlings ftw, bitches.


or they could just give away PPV matches every week...honestly i can see them doing that during football season. Hell in a Cell is Raw.


----------



## THANOS

The key will be the ratings spike in hour 1 next week. I hope to God it's massive so Owens can sit pretty with the belt for a long time.


----------



## Mister Sinister

I predict the rating will drop next week. Owens isn't the mainstream character. Cass is the one that was over last night. The energy of the match I felt left the arena like air out of a balloon when they put under Cass (that big Hulk Hogan looking (but bigger) motherfucker).

I guess now they will do a chase with Cass and Owens from here to RR. Then Cass might go into WM as champion.


----------



## FROSTY

*Kevin Owens the savior of Raw's plummeting ratings














*


----------



## The Bloodline

Hour 1 deserves a increase next week. New Champ plus swerve fuckery closed the show. Theres a reason to tune in next week for a change. Otherwise idk what they have to do to get people interested, maybe just good buzz for more than 1 week I suppose.


----------



## amhlilhaus

I hope theres quarter hour breakdowns to show how hard the ratings tanked after the old day skit.

I bet hour 3 loses half a million from hour 2 this week.

They give us that, with football starting next week.

Lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

No ratings?


----------



## A-C-P

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> No ratings?


I'm sure they are delayed b/c of Monday being a holiday


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Bummer, WWE's most entertaining part of the week.


----------



## Erik.

There is absolutely no way this shows ratings are going to be good - I refuse to believe it. 

Hour 1 should be the best rated part of the show, it had the best part about it and you just knew it was going to go all down hill from there.


----------



## Gimme More

No one will ever watch Raw again all because of "Old Day"


----------



## xio8ups

Monday night football starts this coming monday. Lets all hope raw goes under 2.0


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I think that's a given.
This Raw was the best way to tell people "don't bother staying on during football because we ain't gonna put the effort in".


----------



## The_It_Factor

I've never understood the "holiday delay." Why does a holiday delay the release of the numbers? I always assumed they were just computer generated and could be released the next business day? Though, I have absolutely no clue how it works, so.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.350M
H2-3.066M
H3-2.792M
3H-3.069M*










*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (-8.48%/-0.284M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-8.94%/-0.274M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-16.66%/-0.558M) 

9/5/16 Vs 8/29/16
(-10.08%/-0.344M)

Demo:
9/5/16 Vs 8/29/16

H1- 1.180D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.050D Vs 1.170D
H3- 0.980D Vs 1.210D
3H- 1.070D Vs 1.173D

Note: RAW is #3, #5 & #6 by demo and #3, #5 & #6 by viewership.*


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

Darn.


----------



## 2Pieced

The show deserved those ratings.

Monday night football next week :hutz


----------



## Kabraxal

Started relatively strong for a Labour Day Raw.... then thankfully tanked when it was the same old shit. Still, shocked at the steep drop in the third hour. Ouch.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Higher than I thought considering it was a national holiday in the States and going up against a good College Football game. Big hour 3 decline. Can only see the same match (Owens/Zayn) so many times, though. Much better than expected overall.


----------



## The Renegade

ShowStopper said:


> Higher than I thought considering it was a national holiday in the States and going up against a good College Football game. Big hour 3 decline. Can only see the same match (Owens/Zayn) so many times, though. Much better than expected overall.


I'll give them a pass on this third hour though. FSU made a pretty stunning come back there. Its clear where the heat was on Monday.


----------



## Godway

That was legitimately one of the worst RAWs of the year. Between the Old Day, Darren/Titus, Sasha Banks, another Cesaro/Sheamus match, another Owens/Zayn match, Just a hideous fucking show. Listening to Meltzer/Alvarez review this episode of RAW was 10 times more entertaining than the actual show.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.350M
> H2-3.066M
> H3-2.792M
> 3H-3.069M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (-8.48%/-0.284M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-8.94%/-0.274M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-16.66%/-0.558M)
> 
> 9/5/16 Vs 8/29/16
> (-10.08%/-0.344M)
> 
> Demo:
> 9/5/16 Vs 8/29/16
> 
> H1- 1.180D Vs 1.140D
> H2- 1.050D Vs 1.170D
> H3- 0.980D Vs 1.210D
> 3H- 1.070D Vs 1.173D
> 
> Note: RAW is #3, #5 & #6 by demo and #3, #5 & #6 by viewership.*


*Y-Y viewership:
9/5/16 Vs 9/7/15

H1- 3.350M Vs 3.570M
H2- 3.066M Vs 3.564M
H3- 2.791M Vs 3.021M
3H- 3.069M Vs 3.385M (-9.34% / -0.316M)

Y-Y demo:
9/5/16 Vs 9/7/15

H1- 1.180D Vs 1.300D
H2- 1.050D Vs 1.340D
H3- 0.980D Vs 1.200D
3H- 1.070D Vs 1.400D*


----------



## Erik.

Opening hour was always going to get the best numbers. Outstanding opening segment.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

That third hour drop. Football returns next Monday with a doubleheader :sip


----------



## Chrome

Shit rating for a shit show. More of the same will happen next week with the NFL coming back. They'll probably just mail it in until January like they always do. Gonna be even worse with the brand split now.


----------



## Dolorian

Not surprised at the third hour drop, the string of segments during that hour of Old Day, Titus/Darren, Sasha/Dana, Braun and I think Nia was also there too, was just brutal. I feel bad for Owens and Sami because those segments preceding their match practically killed the show.


----------



## Randy Lahey

That's a terrible rating. If they can barely pull over 3 mils with no NFL game, then they are done starting next week. This will probably be Raw's last rating with an audience over 3 mils till January (if then). 

Huge hour 3 drop off because kid's are back in school now.

Not good at all for Raw. That downward descent continues. Will be in the 1.85 - 2.05 ratings window for most of the Fall I'd suspect.


----------



## The RainMaker

The college football game was lit. FSU is a HUGE draw. Figured it would be about like that.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Looks like they're getting closer to having RAW and SmackDown being equal (in TV ratings at least)


----------



## chronoxiong

Brutal third hour drop. :damn

Good luck next week with the return of MNF!


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Awful rating. Expected from 2016 WWE.

The NFL is BACK on Monday. Get the *fuck* ready.


----------



## RatedR10

Next week's NFL doubleheader... ohhhh shit lol.

Third hour is fucking brutal...


----------



## JDP2016

I guess after Bayley beat Charlotte everyone decided they'd seen everything. :bayley :bayley2 :bayley3


----------



## T0M

#5 for the night on cable. Fully deserved considering it was a dreadful show.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well it's official. They beat Owens/Zayn into the ground.


----------



## sarcasma

Maybe Owens just isnt going to draw........<<<<<Shitstorm incoming.


----------



## Cipher

sarcasma said:


> Maybe Owens just isnt going to draw........<<<<<Shitstorm incoming.


Duh. He was midcard over with no direction and is all of a sudden expected to win a "big" title and carry the show? 

Of course, I don't think it'd be any better off with Balor as Champion because he was put on the main roster and immediately pushed despite a large amount of their audience barely knowing who he is.

Ratings are going to crash and burn hard coming up.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Owens will kill the ratings, dude has 0 casual appeal.


----------



## dougfisher_05

Well it's been fun and its been real... but it hasn't been real fun. 

Catch y'all in January for Mania season. Are you ready for some football?! May the odds ever be in your favor McMahon.






Someone tell McMahon and company that if the bleed continues for another football season, well...


----------



## Bret Hart

Hahahah, couldn't have been happier with that drop.

:maury

Fuck you WWE


----------



## Asmodeus

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Well it's official. They beat Owens/Zayn into the ground.


For sure, who's going to switch back to RAW for an Owens/Zayn matchup they've seen twenty times, when any sane WWE fan would have bet their house that Zayn was not getting that title last night.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

I think this raw coming up God willing will be more storyline heavy, with triple h making appearance to keep viewers. I never understood the mentality of putting belt on someone to attract viewers, everyone knows wrestling is fake making the belt inherently worthless , the belt is only a prop to advance storylines...if the stories were good than the people would stay and watch . plus no offense to owens and other like him, the main feature of raw has to be someone like Roman, Big cass, brock(if he was here more) shemaus, rusev aka someone who looks credible in viewers eyes,.


----------



## reamstyles

ecclesiastes10 said:


> *I think this raw coming up God willing will be more storyline heavy, with triple h making appearance to keep viewers. I never understood the mentality of putting belt on someone to attract viewers, everyone knows wrestling is fake making the belt inherently worthless , the belt is only a prop to advance storylines.*..if the stories were good than the people would stay and watch . plus no offense to owens and other like him, the main feature of raw has to be someone like Roman, Big cass, brock(if he was here more) shemaus, rusev aka someone who looks credible in viewers eyes,.


touche, you need to built a base story for Owens if he was an authority tool or HHH top nxt guy that will get the smark into the storyline as we go along, this should be the "flagship" storyline in the first place..

But with Balor injured you need to give the title to him as he is fresh and you can still put a storyline angle for him


----------



## Reotor

I wish NFL a VERY strong season


----------



## CretinHop138

NFL kicks off, great stuff.


----------



## Mra22

Awesome to see and it couldn't happen to a better company  maybe if you stopped with the childish bull crap like the New Day and Bayley you might stand a chance. I hope it continues to drop


----------



## Starbuck

Next week this show is going to die a miserable death. Somebody check the NFL schedule to see when the first shitty game is set to take place. That'll be when they actually try something interesting lol.


----------



## Algernon

In fairness, the Rams vs 49ers is the equivalent of watching a Titus O'Neill vs Darren Young match. But it is week 1 and its the beginning of many slaughters. I still think Sept 26 RAW could be an all time low going up against the 1st presidential debate and MNF.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Now I know why they put the belt on Owens. They want him associated with Bad ratings so he's branded for good.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

So what is the final rating?


----------



## The_It_Factor

... it must be Reigns' fault :lol :lol


----------



## Lothario

Terrible ratings and deserved. My 5 year old quit after The Old Day segment and I tapped out after hearing Strowman's roar followed by production cutting backstage to show Sin Cara on the mic. It's almost as if they intentionally attempted to kill the show. How do you approve that string of segments with the 15 minute Old Day debacle, Titus/Young, Jax/Foxx, and a Strowman squash? Unless Dwayne Johnson walks through that door and wins the title next Monday, they're done ratings wise.


They will be absolutely massacred this fall during NFL season (and the NBA are running games Mondays starting this season iirc.) Far be it from me to sound cliché, but while I don't think an "Attitude Era" would suffice in today's climate, they're toast if they don't shake something up in a major way. There's no way around it.


----------



## amhlilhaus

Algernon said:


> In fairness, the Rams vs 49ers is the equivalent of watching a Titus O'Neill vs Darren Young match. But it is week 1 and its the beginning of many slaughters. I still think Sept 26 RAW could be an all time low going up against the 1st presidential debate and MNF.


Im going to that raw, lol

Have to go, taking my kid

Note to self, do not take anything i can gouge my eyes out with


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.833M
H2-2.717M
H3-2.520M
3H-2.690M
*









*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (-4.09%/-0.116M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.25%/-0.197M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-10.05%/-0.313M) 

9/12/16 Vs 9/5/16
(-12.35%/-0.379M)

Demo:
9/12/16 Vs 9/5/16

H1- 0.950D Vs 1.180D
H2- 0.930D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.860D Vs 0.980D
3H- 0.913D Vs 1.070D

Note:

RAW this week was;

#5, #6 & #7 by demo.
#6, #7 & #12 by viewership.*


----------



## D.M.N.

What a surprise, last week's awful Raw pissed away the audience they built up in the few weeks before that.


----------



## JBLoser

Oh my lord. SO MUCH BLOOD.

It's only going to get uglier from here.


----------



## The Renegade

Whheeeeeew shit. The only saving grace is that I don't expect MNF's ratings to get higher from here on. Its week 1 so interest is at its peak. Still, wheeeew shit.


----------



## RatedR10

holy shit lol

pretty sure that's even lower viewership than the middle of football season or the ending from last year. :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

That Hour 3. 

Poor KO.

That main event.

:lmao

NFL committed murder last night.


----------



## wwe9391

Sign of things to come. Just happy Reigns is not in the title picture anymore. 

Next week is gonna be worse with the debate


----------



## The True Believer

This is a fucking crime scene. Someone get the police tape. Holy shit.
:lol :lol :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Reigns/Owens couldn't at least keep the third hour afloat at least. This is just the beginning too... 

Smackdown actually has a legit shot at beating Raw this week.


----------



## sarcasma

Kevin Owens is not a draw....who is a draw on RAW though, no one. This brand split is a disaster, and will continue. Who on RAW is going to bring in ratings? 

RAW is terrible. For the first time in years, I didnt even watch it. 

Hopefully Smack-down beats it tonight. Im legit interested t see how Ambrose/Styles/Cena is going to play out. 

All 3 hours of RAW under 3.0....when has that happened?


----------



## Reotor

This is fantastic :lol:lmao


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.833M
> H2-2.717M
> H3-2.520M
> 3H-2.690M
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (-4.09%/-0.116M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-7.25%/-0.197M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-10.05%/-0.313M)
> 
> 9/12/16 Vs 9/5/16
> (-12.35%/-0.379M)
> 
> Demo:
> 9/12/16 Vs 9/5/16
> 
> H1- 0.950D Vs 1.180D
> H2- 0.930D Vs 1.050D
> H3- 0.860D Vs 0.980D
> 3H- 0.913D Vs 1.070D
> 
> Note: RAW is #5, #6 & #7 by demo.*


*Y-Y viewership:
9/12/16 Vs 9/14/15

H1- 2.833M Vs 3.290M
H2- 2.717M Vs 3.539M
H3- 2.520M Vs 3.363M
3H- 2.690M Vs 3.397M (-20.81% / -0.707M)

Y-Y demo:
9/12/16 Vs 9/14/15

H1- 0.950D Vs 1.060D
H2- 0.930D Vs 1.180D
H3- 0.860D Vs 1.150D
3H- 0.913D Vs 1.130D*

*Note:

RAW this week last year was; 

#4, #5 & #6 by demo.
#3, #4 & #5 by viewership.*


----------



## Starbuck

It's finally happening. 

If SD doesn't manage to beat Raw at least once between now and Christmas there's no hope for either show.

For all the complaining about SD getting raped in the draft, it got the guys with the most credibility at the top of the card. And the top of the card is really the only thing that anybody cares about. I'm still a bit shocked that WWE willingly moved Cena, Orton, Styles, Ambrose and Wyatt all to Smackdown knowing full well that Raw had 3 hours to fill AND would be competing with MNF. Either they have completely misguided faith in Reigns/Rollins or they simply didn't give a shit. Even with a full roster Raw couldn't compete with MNF. Now they have to do it with a roster full of guys who we've already seen fight each other a million times and most of them can't even fucking talk either. 

This won't be the lowest number we see before the year is through imo.


----------



## Kabraxal

SD could very well win this week.... Holy shit.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Steeler game started an hour before RAW and laid the proverbial smackdown on it, quintupling RAW in the demo. The 49ers game began during Hour 3 and managed to quintuple RAW as well. Brutal. Even Sportscenter outdrew RAW. The flagship is sinking Vince. Can it get any worse? Stay tuned (the few of you still watching this dreck, that is.) :bryanlol


----------



## Swissblade

Fucking hell I still remember when anything under 4 million was considered bad. Now we're here. Awful.


----------



## jamesdeen1

and its only week 1 of football season... they are fucked

and you know who vince is gona blame...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And people thought last year was Rockbottom.

:mj4

A few months ago, someone even told me the NFL doesn't affect WWE's ratings.

:mj4


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

SDL has been averaging roughly 83% of RAW's total viewership. We'll see if that trend continues.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Roster split fail.

They're going to merge the two much sooner than expected.


----------



## Starbuck

EL SHIV said:


> SDL has been averaging roughly 83% of RAW's total viewership. We'll see if that trend continues.


This legit? If so then it actually doesn't really bode that well for SD or WWE in general because it suggests to me that the exact same people are watching both RAW and SD - the only difference being that of those same people, some tune into MNF on Monday nights and on Tuesday nights they don't have that problem. WWE's aim with the brand split was to grow 2 distinct brands that would feed into 2 different fanbases. All they've done is manage to get less people watching Raw and get the people who never bothered to watch SD to tune in; but it's basically the same people. Nobody new. If all you're doing is pulling in the same group of viewers then what's the fucking point in splitting the roster? Take the people who pick MNF over Raw on the Monday and add them to SD on a Tuesday. That's it. Seems a bit pointless really.


----------



## Kabraxal

EL SHIV said:


> SDL has been averaging roughly 83% of RAW's total viewership. We'll see if that trend continues.


Don't see how given no real competition tonight, the PPV bump it should get naturally, and then the positive buzz from the PPV...... If anything, I would not be surprised if SD hits 2.8 again and does better than Raw this week and possibly every week here on out.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Kabraxal said:


> Don't see how given no real competition tonight, the PPV bump it should get naturally, and then the positive buzz from the PPV...... If anything, I would not be surprised if SD hits 2.8 again and does better than Raw this week and possibly every week here on out.


Probably, but just due to the NFL. Raw, even with a 3rd hour, has literally beaten SD every week since the split. If Raw loses anytime this Fall, it's due to the NFL. Nothing to be ashamed of, really, especially with a 3rd hour that SD doesn't have. Nothing really all that impressive for WWE..


----------



## SmarKiller

This is what happens when you appeal to smarks and push useless fat NXT turds like Kevin Owens


----------



## KO Bossy

What does this translate into? It has to be below 2.0.


----------



## Ace

Can't say it wasn't deserved, the last 2 shows have been super boring.


----------



## Kabraxal

ShowStopper said:


> Probably, but just due to the NFL. Raw, even with a 3rd hour, has literally beaten SD every week since the split. If Raw loses anytime this Fall, it's due to the NFL. Nothing to be ashamed of, really, especially with a 3rd hour that SD doesn't have. Nothing really all that impressive for WWE..


It is not just the NFL. Raw is putting out a shit show routinely while SD is actually putting out shows of decent quality consistently. Even if this split started in February and gave the longest NFL free time for Raw, Raw would dip below SD eventually. The NFL is only making that process all that much quicker. 

If SD continues with its consistent quality and Raw continues its downward spiral of shit, SD will dominate Raw. The NFL is simply making it far far easier for SD to get on top, prove it is better, and stay on top. If Raw was any good, the NFL would hardly make a dent in the viewership. Wrestling fans stick with a decent product. They will switch channels only when continually punched in the balls with absolute dog shit week after week.


----------



## izhack111

Please watch Smackdown today! I cant wait finally Smackdown will really beat the "A SHOW" Vince will be pissed :smile2:


----------



## Chrome

Pathetic numbers. Smackdown will probably get higher numbers this week. If not, then wow.


----------



## Ace

SmarKiller said:


> This is what happens when you appeal to smarks and push useless fat NXT turds like Kevin Owens


 Because keeping Reigns and Rollins in the main event picture is so much more entertaining fpalm


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Kabraxal said:


> It is not just the NFL. Raw is putting out a shit show routinely while SD is actually putting out shows of decent quality consistently. Even if this split started in February and gave the longest NFL free time for Raw, Raw would dip below SD eventually. The NFL is only making that process all that much quicker.
> 
> If SD continues with its consistent quality and Raw continues its downward spiral of shit, SD will dominate Raw. The NFL is simply making it far far easier for SD to get on top, prove it is better, and stay on top. If Raw was any good, the NFL would hardly make a dent in the viewership. Wrestling fans stick with a decent product. They will switch channels only when continually punched in the balls with absolute dog shit week after week.


It is entirely about the NFL. The past 2 months proves that. Even with a 3rd hour, Raw has beaten SD literally every week and by a comfortable margin. That's good evidence right there.

If SD stayed on Thursday night and was going against Thursday Night Football, SD would get hit just as hard, if not harder. Why do you think WWE removed SD from Thursday night?


----------



## A-C-P

:ha:heston:reneelel:bryanlol:tysonlolhillip2:duck:maisielol:LOL

Raw ratings getting rekt worse than Punk :rekt


----------



## HenryBowers

Ratings dont matter.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SmarKiller said:


> This is what happens when you appeal to smarks and push useless fat NXT turds like Kevin Owens


This is why I'm glad Rollins isn't the Champ right now. Poor KO is going to get destroyed and have this on his 'resume.'


----------



## Chrome

Where does this rank on the all-time lowest rating list? I've never seen the 3rd hour that fucking low, holy shit lol.


----------



## SmarKiller

Kevin Owens doesnt have IT
Reigns and Rollins not my fav guys, I'd still take them over Owens. 
Owens isnt cool. Casuals dont care about Owens. Kids dont pretend to be Owens when they play wrestling.
The only people he appeals to are fat neckbeards who look like he does.


----------



## Iapetus

SmarKiller said:


> This is what happens when you appeal to smarks and push useless fat NXT turds like Kevin Owens


Owens is neither useless nor a turd, and despite your trollish choice of words, you're not exactly wrong. Let's be honest, this is America, one of the most superficial countries in the world. There are just going to be some closed-minded people who see Owens is champ and will change the channel just because he doesn't have "the look", especially old/elderly wrestling fans.

This is all besides the fact that the majority of Raw is a shitshow.


----------



## ElTerrible

On the bright side a Raw backstage exclusive has 1.4 M views on YT.


----------



## Kabraxal

ShowStopper said:


> It is entirely about the NFL. The past 2 months proves that. Even with a 3rd hour, Raw has beaten SD literally every week and by a comfortable margin. That's good evidence right there.
> 
> If SD stayed on Thursday night and was going against Thursday Night Football, SD would get hit just as hard, if not harder. Why do you think WWE removed SD from Thursday night?


Ratings do not shift quickly enough for to try and make a statement after less than 2 months.... In 97 and 98 it took 6 months of absolute quality for the numbers to even get close for the WWE. The NFL has only sped up the process that would have happened over a longer stretch. And this is with the stink of SD being a third rate show for years. 

SD is BETTER than Raw. It is consistent, it makes sense, and it actually has fans excited week to week. That would have translated to better ratings over time as Raw is inconsistent, illogical, and bores fans every week. It would have been 4 or 5 months til we were at this tipping point when SD had a real chance at going over Raw. Raw has been spiralling downward with the NFL and without. It eventually would have hit these lows anyway.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Kabraxal said:


> Ratings do not shift quickly enough for to try and make a statement after less than 2 months.... In 97 and 98 it took 6 months of absolute quality for the numbers to even get close for the WWE. The NFL has only sped up the process that would have happened over a longer stretch. And this is with the stink of SD being a third rate show for years.
> 
> SD is BETTER than Raw. It is consistent, it makes sense, and it actually has fans excited week to week. That would have translated to better ratings over time as Raw is inconsistent, illogical, and bores fans every week. It would have been 4 or 5 months til we were at this tipping point when SD had a real chance at going over Raw. Raw has been spiralling downward with the NFL and without. It eventually would have hit these lows anyway.


I can't say I agree. If both shows were the same length, maybe. But not with Raw working from a handicap and still winning very easily. Vince was smart to take SD off Thursday nights.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Chrome said:


> Where does this rank on the all-time lowest rating list?


*Lowest RAW ratings (below 2.0R) since 9/4/95/Monday Night Wars Era

December 23, 1996
1.5R

December 30, 1996
1.6R

October 14, 1996
1.8R

July 4, 2016
1.87R

September 12, 1996
1.88R

March 3, 1997
1.9R

September 25, 1995
1.9R
*
*'Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller
1.88.'*-https://twitter.com/thewadekeller/status/775802204502368256


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

ShowStopper said:


> It is entirely about the NFL. The past 2 months proves that. Even with a 3rd hour, Raw has beaten SD literally every week and by a comfortable margin. That's good evidence right there.
> 
> If SD stayed on Thursday night and was going against Thursday Night Football, SD would get hit just as hard, if not harder. Why do you think WWE removed SD from Thursday night?


It's a combination of the NFL and RAW being shit. MNF has historically taken a bit of a bite out of RAW's ratings, but RAW has been on a steady decline over the last few years, so this just makes it that much worse. WWE has done nothing to attract new viewers or even hang onto those that are left. The brand split was at USA's request to benefit SD, but I'm not sure they foresaw the impact it would have on RAW. I'm not sure what this says about the remaining viewers -- either they're ultra-hard-core WWE fans, or just not into the NFL. Me, I'm neither -- I've had it with the NFL for two years now, but I still don't take refuge on USA on Mondays. 

And for fuck's sake, people, stop pinning it on the out-of-shape fat guy who just won the title. This shit would be happening no matter who's wearing the strap. The whole product is just shit with a few bright spots.


----------



## Ace

There was a reason to watch the 3rd hr this week too, only going to get worse next week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Although it is important to note last night (just like every NFL Week 1 Monday night) had 2 games on, one right after the other. From here on out, it's only 1 Monday night game. So, that should help.


----------



## TakerFreak

WWE has no idea what they are doing. KO as champ is a disaster. I like KO but he has no casual appeal and so hes fucked.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Could people please stop with this childisch, nonsensical, retarded "nobody draws", "this happens when you book for smarks" bullshit?
Really, everybody with half a brain knows that ratings were terrible before football, and now football makes them even more terrible.ä
That people now use this to make it an Argument for their twisted and delusional cause is laughable.

I laugh in your face!

This does show though that their audience is anything but hardcore anymore.


----------



## Sincere

EL SHIV said:


> The Steeler game started an hour before RAW and laid the proverbial smackdown on it, quintupling RAW in the demo. The 49ers game began during Hour 3 and managed to quintuple RAW as well. Brutal. Even Sportscenter outdrew RAW. The flagship is sinking Vince. Can it get any worse? Stay tuned (the few of you still watching this dreck, that is.) :bryanlol


"You're goddamn right it can get worse! I just tore my quad over juicing and trying to lift like a 30 year old. Now I'm on these crazy ass pain meds that have me floating on cloud nine. YOU AIN'T SEEN NOTHIN' YET!" :vince5


----------



## RDEvans

Not surprised tbh, RAW was pretty boring last night with a lot of pointless matches ( Jinder Mahal vs Jack Swagger, Bo Dallas vs Jobber, Anderson and Gallows vs New day which we've already got before and we're getting at the PPV). 

I hope the Cruiserweight division helps Raw out from dragging on, but knowing Vince he'll give up on it in a month and have them fed to Strowman.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

TakerFreak said:


> WWE has no idea what they are doing. KO as champ is a disaster. I like KO but he has no casual appeal and so hes fucked.


"No Casual appeal" 

No one has that people said Roman had that but the trend just continued for Raw when he was champ it doesn't matter who the champ is the show just sucks.


----------



## Chrome

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Lowest RAW ratings (below 2.0R) since 9/4/95/Monday Night Wars Era
> 
> December 23, 1996
> 1.5R
> 
> December 30, 1996
> 1.6R
> 
> October 14, 1996
> 1.8R
> 
> July 4, 2016
> 1.87R
> 
> September 12, 1996
> 1.88R
> 
> March 3, 1997
> 1.9R
> 
> September 25, 1995
> 1.9R
> *
> *'Wade Keller ‏@thewadekeller
> 1.88.'*-https://twitter.com/thewadekeller/status/775802204502368256


Thanks for that. And lol at the comments on that Wade Keller tweet.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> Although it is important to note last night (just like every NFL Week 1 Monday night) had 2 games on, one right after the other. From here on out, it's only 1 Monday night game. So, that should help.


quit trying to make excuses and accept the fact no one gives a shit about your boys seth rollins and kevin owens.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> quit trying to make excuses and accept the fact no one gives a shit about your boys seth rollins and kevin owens.


Rather be a "smark" than the alternative,......

and, YES, SIR!

:mj4


----------



## SmarKiller

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Could people please stop with this childisch, nonsensical, retarded "nobody draws", "this happens when you book for smarks" bullshit?
> Really, everybody with half a brain knows that ratings were terrible before football, and now football makes them even more terrible.ä
> That people now use this to make it an Argument for their twisted and delusional cause is laughable.
> 
> I laugh in your face!
> 
> This does show though that their audience is anything but hardcore anymore.


The ratings have been declining for years because they have been smark pandering for years.


----------



## ElTerrible

We have a trade to announce: USA Network has traded the rights to Monday Night Raw to the WWE network for the rights to NXT and Nitro 3rd hour reruns.


----------



## Cipher

1.88


----------



## Reotor

Nobody gives a shit about anybody on the show
The show just suck, period. Stars are not born, they are made and this show sux so much its impossible for any star to be made on it.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ignore this post


----------



## Cipher

I don't care about Kevin Owens, but of course he's not a draw. He was a directionless midcarder expected to carry the show.

Let's just hope they don't start booking him like they did Seth, or they'll get a 1.


----------



## Ace

1.88, damn.

No way Raw gets the same deal from USA.


----------



## KO Bossy

Who got wrecked worse...Punk or the ratings? That's honestly pretty tough to call...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Straw Hat said:


> 1.88, damn.
> 
> No way Raw gets the same deal from USA.


Agreed. But you mean, WWE.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> Agreed. But you mean, WWE.


 True, SD is a part of the same deal. Never really thought it that way as it's just been Raw that matters for so long.



KO Bossy said:


> Who got wrecked worse...Punk or the ratings? That's honestly pretty tough to call...


 Punk actually drew :quite


----------



## Kabraxal

These ratings aren't because of any wrestler.... They are because Vince's vision is at odds with what the audience wants and he continues to fight the audiences desires in almost every way. Part of this is born from his obsessive need to distance himself from professoinal wrestling and brand his shit with "sports entertainment" and part of it is being stuck in old traditional viewpoints that have long since gone out of style (size, look, face/heel dynamics). 

What this brand split is going to give us the opportunity to see, if SD can get far enough distance from the stink that is Raw in terms of public perception, is definitive proof that Raw's style of booking does not work and the more professional wrestling style of SD does. We already have proof with NXT and the explosion in popularity it has had. But we have not had that chance with a distinct wrestling show on any sizeable and known network that could directly challenge Raw. If by WM it is just an endless strings of losses by Raw in the ratings (added to its already continual losses in quality to SD) then it will be all the proof we need.


----------



## DoubtGin

Wow, those are some awful numbers.

But the show has been entirely skippable for quite a while now, the HHH turn on Rollins was the only relevant thing but for some reason they thought it'd be good for HHH to disappear completely afterwards without any reason.

NOTHING happens at the shows. Fatal-four ways or #1 contender matches won't get numbers if there is no legit storylines behind them. There are no big angles, only the same kind of beatdowns, interceptions and pointless squashes/longer matches without purpose. They have to build up storylines during the weekly show so that there is some excitement for what is about to come. Owens hasnt done anything worthwhile since becoming champ, for example. The shows are very conditioned and safe - completely serviceable - and the ratings reflect that.

This also applies to Smackdown btw (although I enjoy that more); there is a lack of interesting things going on.


----------



## Cipher

When is WWE's contract with USA coming up for negotiation?

I can't wait.


----------



## KC Armstrong

Stop blaming everything on the NFL. Last year they did a 2.42 rating against the MNF season premiere. MNF didn't do record numbers yesterday, especially that shitty Rams vs 49ers game which started during the 3rd hour of Raw. 

Vince, enough is enough! It's time for a change!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Cipher said:


> When is WWE's contract with USA coming up for negotiation?
> 
> I can't wait.


2018, I believe.


----------



## Vårmakos

KO Bossy said:


> Who got wrecked worse...Punk or the ratings? That's honestly pretty tough to call...


Well, Punk getting wrecked did 2x the buyrate than expected.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Vince can't sell Raw to USA as a show that gets sub 2.0 ratings. And that is what this is leading too. When you are bleeding viewers at a constant rate, eventually you have no product left to sell.

That was an awful rating last night, and going up against 2 rather mediocre NFL games. There'll be better matchups later in the season. 

0.9 demos all 3 hours...lol.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Kabraxal said:


> These ratings aren't because of any wrestler.... They are because Vince's vision is at odds with what the audience wants and he continues to fight the audiences desires in almost every way. Part of this is born from his obsessive need to distance himself from professoinal wrestling and brand his shit with "sports entertainment" and part of it is being stuck in old traditional viewpoints that have long since gone out of style (size, look, face/heel dynamics).
> 
> What this brand split is going to give us the opportunity to see, if SD can get far enough distance from the stink that is Raw in terms of public perception, is definitive proof that Raw's style of booking does not work and the more professional wrestling style of SD does. We already have proof with NXT and the explosion in popularity it has had. But we have not had that chance with a distinct wrestling show on any sizeable and known network that could directly challenge Raw. If by WM it is just an endless strings of losses by Raw in the ratings (added to its already continual losses in quality to SD) then it will be all the proof we need.


The 'style' of booking is also because one show is 2 hours (with no overrun) and another is 3 hours (with an overrun) every week. Raw by definition is going to have alot more filler. They can't give away important stuff in literally EVERY segment of a 3+ hour show every single week. There would be nothing left for the PPVs, or for later in the year, especially now with half of a roster. They are two completely different shows due to the length of each show. Make both shows the same length, and they would be of similar booking and quality. Only positive is Raw makes WWE a shit ton more money since that third hour of Raw gets WWE an extra $32 million per year.


----------



## Ace

Is it time for a complete overhaul? This really seems like the time to panic. Will USA even offer a deal in 2018?


----------



## God Movement

Horrible. Just horrible.

"I'm the better wrestler" storylines really don't draw for shit.


----------



## Cipher

Seriously, though. Go back and look at the ratings and buyrates from 2011/2012. They look like a boom period compared to now.

What's funny is people were talking about how they were going down then too.


----------



## Kabraxal

Randy Lahey said:


> Vince can't sell Raw to USA as a show that gets sub 2.0 ratings. And that is what this is leading too. When you are bleeding viewers at a constant rate, eventually you have no product left to sell.
> 
> That was an awful rating last night, and going up against 2 rather mediocre NFL games. There'll be better matchups later in the season.
> 
> 0.9 demos all 3 hours...lol.


One is already up next week... Two teams for cities that have traditionally been rather favourable hotbeds to wrestling in some form. Given that the numbers were nothing special for MNF (12 million is good, but nothing new from last year to explain Raw's drop), a Philly/Chicago game might actually be more damaging than this week.


----------



## KC Armstrong

WWE better hope Hillary isn't showing up to the first debate, because if Raw really has to go up against Monday Night Football AND Trump vs. Clinton on Sep 26, it would shatter every record in the book. Holy mother of fuck!


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Y-Y viewership:
> 9/12/16 Vs 9/14/15
> 
> H1- 2.833M Vs 3.290M
> H2- 2.717M Vs 3.539M
> H3- 2.520M Vs 3.363M
> 3H- 2.690M Vs 3.397M (-20.81% / -0.707M)
> 
> Y-Y demo:
> 9/12/16 Vs 9/14/15
> 
> H1- 0.950D Vs 1.060D
> H2- 0.930D Vs 1.180D
> H3- 0.860D Vs 1.150D
> 3H- 0.913D Vs 1.130D*
> 
> *Note:
> 
> RAW this week last year was;
> 
> #4, #5 & #6 by demo.
> #3, #4 & #5 by viewership.*


You lose 20% of your audience every year. You eventually get cancelled. Those are just the facts.


----------



## Ace

KC Armstrong said:


> WWE better hope Hillary isn't showing up to the first debate, because if Raw really has to go up against Monday Night Football AND Trump vs. Clinton, it would shatter every record in the book. Holy mother of fuck!


 No number 1 contender match to save the third hour too. Damn, it's going to get ugly.


----------



## KC Armstrong

Serious question: At what point does Vince realize they need radical changes? Does he just sit by and watch his baby die?


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/775806436534288384
Can't wait till they eventually beat the all time low :mark:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Cipher said:


> Seriously, though. Go back and look at the ratings and buyrates from 2011/2012. They look like a boom period compared to now.
> 
> What's funny is people were talking about how they were going down then too.


It's safe to say NO ONE on WWE's roster today is a draw, mainstream, a big name, or anything of that nature; whatever words you want to use. NO ONE. There is no argument to be had anymore between talents. It's a quality of show/booking/Vince/Creative issue period


----------



## God Movement

None of these fucking shows are memorable. And I hate to go down the cliche "Attitude Era" mark route, but honestly, the lack of soap opera type storylines has completely fucked the product. When I think back to memorable years in WWF/WWE things like Stone Cold Steve Austin getting run over come to mind, or Undertaker crucifying Austin... just to give some examples. No-one gives a fuck about wrestling on its own. It means nothing without proper storylines to build the matches... interesting shit (shock value or otherwise) is what draws. Nothing ever happens that makes anyone eager to tune in the following week. You can skip shows and not miss ANYTHING and it's been like that for years. The same goes for Smackdown too. It's the better booked wrestling show, but the storylines are also the fucking same.


----------



## Ace

KC Armstrong said:


> Serious question: At what point does Vince realize they need radical changes? Does he just sit by and watch his baby die?


 They need to say fuck all and run wild again. A new era, with compelling stories and violence. Attitude era 2.0 (not as good obviously) :mark:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheGeneticFreak said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/775806436534288384
> Can't wait till they eventually beat the all time low :mark:


2016 has been the biggest failure in WWE history. Look at that graph. Even 2015 destroyed 2016 in the ratings, and 2015 wasn't any good.

:mj4


----------



## Kabraxal

ShowStopper said:


> The 'style' of booking is also because one show is 2 hours (with no overrun) and another is 3 hours (with an overrun) every week. Raw by definition is going to have alot more filler. They can't give away important stuff in literally EVERY segment of a 3+ hour show every single week. There would be nothing left for the PPVs, or for later in the year, especially now with half of a roster. They are two completely different shows due to the length of each show. Make both shows the same length, and they would be of similar booking and quality. Only positive is Raw makes WWE a shit ton more money since that third hour of Raw gets WWE an extra $32 million per year.


I'm sorry but no. It isn't JUST the 3rd hour that is dropping Raw below SD in quality. The filler is a problem, but it is the overall booking where matches are thrown together with no reason for them to occur or, even worse, against reasoning that says they should not be happening at all. We have idiotic comedy segments, segments that existed on Raw long before it went three hours, that simply waste time because Vince is getting a kick out of it. The only time that the third hour actually has a bearing on the show is when segments are drawn out far too long... But then, most of the segments would be terrible at 2 minutes let alone the 10 some of them get. 

Just take last night... The only good segment was Owens/Rollins backstage and it was still too long. The rest were head scratching "why the hell is this happening now?" Or "um... Did they just double pin or is that going to be ignored or what?" Or simple senseless things like a jobber Jindal beating a randomly appearing Swagger for no reason. 

SD makes sense. Things build and progress. There are actual storylines for multiple angles across multiple division. A post show that continues to build the characters up and actually incorporates back into the stories. Simply put... It is a wrestling show. SD is beating Raw in quality because it is doing things Vince has refused to do for a decade.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Kabraxal said:


> I'm sorry but no. It isn't JUST the 3rd hour that is dropping Raw below SD in quality. The filler is a problem, but it is the overall booking where matches are thrown together with no reason for them to occur or, even worse, against reasoning that says they should not be happening at all. We have idiotic comedy segments, segments that existed on Raw long before it went three hours, that simply waste time because Vince is getting a kick out of it. The only time that the third hour actually has a bearing on the show is when segments are drawn out far too long... But then, most of the segments would be terrible at 2 minutes let alone the 10 some of them get.
> 
> Just take last night... The only good segment was Owens/Rollins backstage and it was still too long. The rest were head scratching "why the hell is this happening now?" Or "um... Did they just double pin or is that going to be ignored or what?" Or simple senseless things like a jobber Jindal beating a randomly appearing Swagger for no reason.
> 
> SD makes sense. Things build and progress. There are actual storylines for multiple angles across multiple division. A post show that continues to build the characters up and actually incorporates back into the stories. Simply put... It is a wrestling show. SD is beating Raw in quality because it is doing things Vince has refused to do for a decade.


And the reason alot of that filler even exists is because the length of the show..


----------



## Ace

Fans who like compelling stories, characters and violence have moved to UFC.

The WWE are stuck with hardcore fans, women and children.


----------



## Cipher

ShowStopper said:


> It's safe to say NO ONE on WWE's roster today is a draw, mainstream, a big name, or anything of that nature; whatever words you want to use. NO ONE. There is no argument to be had anymore between talents. It's a quality of show/booking/Vince/Creative issue period


Yes, it's obvious that Cena's drawing power is dwindling. Which is scary as shit because no one's on their way to beating him. They already blew their loads with Seth, Dean and Roman. They can't do any sort of "chase" story with them or give any of them any sort of big moment because all three have already had their moment.

I stand by that breaking up the Shield in 2014 was a huge mistake. They shouldn't have broken up for another year or two. But with Daniel Bryan being forced out, I guess they had no choice.

The last big thing they can do at this point is a Cena heel turn. That's it. Cena chasing his 16th title win might help, but who knows at this point.


----------



## The_Jiz

lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Cipher said:


> Yes, it's obvious that Cena's drawing power is dwindling. Which is scary as shit because no one's on their way to beating him. They already blew their loads with Seth, Dean and Roman. They can't do any sort of "chase" story with them or give any of them any sort of big moment because all three have already had their moment.
> 
> I stand by that breaking up the Shield in 2014 was a huge mistake. They shouldn't have broken up for another year or two. But with Daniel Bryan being forced out, I guess they had no choice.
> 
> The last big thing they can do at this point is a Cena heel turn. That's it. Cena chasing his 16th title win might help, but who knows at this point.


Yep, I've been saying it too that they broke the Shield up too soon. But the combo of Bryan getting hurt (as you mentioned) and Punk leaving, put them in a panic.


----------



## God Movement

Cena chasing is a short term solution. No one superstar can save them from the hole they have dug themselves in. It's impossible. The show itself is TRASH. Wrestling with no substance or underlying storyline besides the usual shit.


----------



## StylesP1

ShowStopper said:


> It is entirely about the NFL. The past 2 months proves that. Even with a 3rd hour, Raw has beaten SD literally every week and by a comfortable margin. That's good evidence right there.
> 
> If SD stayed on Thursday night and was going against Thursday Night Football, SD would get hit just as hard, if not harder. Why do you think WWE removed SD from Thursday night?


The difference is, Raw SHOULD beat Smackdown every week. Its the show that has been on for 25+ years on the same night. Its the flagship product. The problem is, Raw has been such shit, that Smackdown has been within striking distance every week. A measly 600,000 viewers shy of Raw last week. That says something about the booking for SD by Ward. To even be that close to a juggernaut like Raw the quality has to be there. Now, it will take the lead and not look back as long as Raw keeps Vince and his Chimps booking that show.


----------



## KC Armstrong

God Movement said:


> None of these fucking shows are memorable. And I hate to go down the cliche "Attitude Era" mark route, but honestly, the lack of soap opera type storylines has completely fucked the product. When I think back to memorable years in WWF/WWE things like Stone Cold Steve Austin getting run over come to mind, or Undertaker crucifying Austin... just to give some examples. No-one gives a fuck about wrestling on its own. It means nothing without proper storylines to build the matches... interesting shit (shock value or otherwise) is what draws. Nothing ever happens that makes anyone eager to tune in the following week. You can skip shows and not miss ANYTHING and it's been like that for years. The same goes for Smackdown too. It's the better booked wrestling show, but the storylines are also the fucking same.



On top of that, we apparently don't want to see hot chicks anymore, either. We want to find out who the best lady wrassler is, who is the best female athlete? Girls like Sasha can shit on that era and those girls all they want, but there is a reason why Sable was a much bigger star than Sasha, Charlotte, Bayley and Becky combined. People went crazy for her despite the fact that she never hit a reverse Frankensteiner off the top rope.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

StylesP1 said:


> The difference is, Raw SHOULD beat Smackdown every week. Its the show that has been on for 25+ years on the same night. Its the flagship product. The problem is, Raw has been such shit, that Smackdown has been within striking distance every week. A measly 600,000 viewers shy of Raw last week. That says something about the booking for SD by Ward. To even be that close to a juggernaut like Raw the quality has to be there. Now, it will take the lead and not look back as long as Raw keeps Vince and his Chimps booking that show.


600,000 is a good amount of viewers, tbh. It's even more when you take into consideration one show is an hour longer than the other. And now that Raw is going up against Football and SD isn't, it isn't like SD is straight up beating Raw in the ratings. Make both shows the same length and put both shows up against an NFL game, then we'd be talking..


----------



## Randy Lahey

KC Armstrong said:


> Serious question: At what point does Vince realize they need radical changes? Does he just sit by and watch his baby die?


I'm shocked he's not looking to sell the company. He has to see this downward trend of viewers over the last 10 years, which has really accelerated over the last 3 years and realize he's got a product that has just about run its course.


----------



## Kabraxal

ShowStopper said:


> And the reason alot of that filler even exists is because the length of the show..


It was this bad in 2009 and 2010 in terms of quality... And they were at 2 hours. The 3rd hour is a drag but the real quality issue is Vincent K. McMahon. Instead of 2 hours of shit, we get 3 now. That 3rd hour didn't turn Raw to shit however. It had been shit long before it got that 3rd hour.


----------



## FROSTY

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.833M
> H2-2.717M
> H3-2.520M
> 3H-2.690M
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (-4.09%/-0.116M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-7.25%/-0.197M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-10.05%/-0.313M)
> 
> 9/12/16 Vs 9/5/16
> (-12.35%/-0.379M)
> 
> Demo:
> 9/12/16 Vs 9/5/16
> 
> H1- 0.950D Vs 1.180D
> H2- 0.930D Vs 1.050D
> H3- 0.860D Vs 0.980D
> 3H- 0.913D Vs 1.070D
> 
> Note:
> 
> RAW this week was;
> 
> #5, #6 & #7 by demo.
> #6, #7 & #12 by viewership.*


:yes :bryanlol


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Cipher said:


> Yes, it's obvious that Cena's drawing power is dwindling. Which is scary as shit because no one's on their way to beating him. They already blew their loads with Seth, Dean and Roman. They can't do any sort of "chase" story with them or give any of them any sort of big moment because all three have already had their moment.


AJ just did beat him. Beating Cena isn't enough. It's not as simple as having established guys put over new guys, unfortunately.

I'd say Brock is overdue for someone to beat him, but you can't do that any earlier than WrestleMania, maybe even the Royal Rumble if they're really desperate. Either way, the meat grinder has gone on long enough to where I don't think that whoever beats Brock gets any real rub. The time to have Brock lose was WrestleMania 31, as planned, and they got cold feet.

They need to change their entire formula for what makes a TV show. They're experimenting on NXT and Smackdown, which is good, but they need to really figure out ways of pleasing their audience. If it isn't already too late.


----------



## The_Jiz

Vince McMahon is the perfect scape goat to bail out your fave wrestlers. History will tell you that. 

Why overhaul everything including SDL when the solution is right under the nose?

I don't get these lowkey Vincent M. marks.


----------



## God Movement

KC Armstrong said:


> On top of that, we apparently don't want to see hot chicks anymore, either. We want to find out who the best lady wrassler is, who is the best female athlete? Girls like Sasha can shit on that era and those girls all they want, but there is a reason why Sable was a much bigger star than Sasha, Charlotte, Bayley and Becky combined. People went crazy for her despite the fact that she never hit a reverse Frankensteiner off the top rope.


I mean, I agree to some extent. I personally love to see women wrestle personally, and they certainly deserve the respect and time and opportunity to perform. But the reality is, women wrestling probably wouldn't draw as much as the really, really hot girl who fans will tune in every week to see. That's just the reality of the situation.

I sometimes can't believe wrestling has come to this point. I get caught up in watching old shows and old skits and moments and it's like night and day. Something has to give. I'm not sure who convinced management that booking a purely wrestling based show would lead to success when the opposite is really what springboarded WWE right into the eye of the mainstream. They could certainly use some shock value right about now. Something which will actually reach beyond the confines of the hardcore fanbase.

But now it's getting to a point where even the hardcore fanbase themselves don't give a fuck.

This shit is a _disaster_.


----------



## Majmo_Mendez

Straw Hat said:


> Fans who like compelling stories, characters and violence have moved to UFC.
> 
> The WWE are stuck with hardcore fans, women and children.


Generally speaking, two bald tattooed guys who argue over who is tougher because they spend all day long in the gym hardly classifies as a compelling story or character.


----------



## Ace

Majmo_Mendez said:


> Generally speaking, two bald tattooed guys who argue over who is tougher because they spend all day long in the gym hardly classifies as a compelling story or character.


 Mcgregor-Diaz 2, Punk-Gall and Jones-DC is more interesting than anything the WWE has put out in years. The WWE have rarely come up with an interesting storyline in the last 5-10 years.


----------



## Blade Runner

Oh wow. I don't usually get dramatic about their ratings, but it's getting REALLY bad. We're approaching 1996 territories of bad.


----------



## DoubtGin

Bryan's rise to the top was the last thing that drew I guess.


----------



## God Movement

Majmo_Mendez said:


> Generally speaking, two bald tattooed guys who argue over who is tougher because they spend all day long in the gym hardly classifies as a compelling story or character.





Straw Hat said:


> Mcgregor-Diaz 2, Punk-Gall and Jones-DC is more interesting than anything the WWE has put out in years.


The thing is, UFC is REAL. Everyone knows that. So as long as you have two big enough stars and the fight is promoted correctly it WILL sell. You could book Cena v Brock IV, promote the shit out of it, put it on PPV and it still wouldn't sell shit. Certainly nowhere near as much as a big UFC fight. Because everyone knows the WWE is scripted. Now more than ever. And when the storylines start with and end with "I will prove I am the better wrestler" no-one gives a single fuck. So, to actually get fans committed and invested you need to have a compelling storyline, you need a bit of shock value, you need some over the top violence to get people invested. Because the fake fight *does not* sell itself.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

Mifune Jackson said:


> AJ just did beat him. Beating Cena isn't enough. It's not as simple as having established guys put over new guys, unfortunately.
> 
> I'd say Brock is overdue for someone to beat him, but you can't do that any earlier than WrestleMania, maybe even the Royal Rumble if they're really desperate. Either way, the meat grinder has gone on long enough to where I don't think that whoever beats Brock gets any real rub. The time to have Brock lose was WrestleMania 31, as planned, and they got cold feet.
> 
> They need to change their entire formula for what makes a TV show. They're experimenting on NXT and Smackdown, which is good, but* they need to really figure out ways of pleasing their audience*. If it isn't already too late.


They haven't figured it out by now, they never will, which makes no goddamn sense for all the fucking years they've been doing this shit. Every once in awhile they stumble on a great show, but I attribute that to the ol broken clock syndrome. I'm starting to think that's the best we'll ever get.


----------



## KC Armstrong

This pointless Sheamus vs Cesaro best of 7 series is the perfect example of everything that is wrong with WWE today. Let's just wrassle and find out who the better athlete is. That's all they've got at this point. Why even employ writers if that's what you're gonna give us?


----------



## Cipher

ShowStopper said:


> 600,000 is a good amount of viewers, tbh. It's even more when you take into consideration one show is an hour longer than the other. And now that Raw is going up against Football and SD isn't, it isn't like SD is straight up beating Raw in the ratings. Make both shows the same length and put both shows up against an NFL game, then we'd be talking..


For some reason I can't find the original post, but 600,000 viewers is the narrative WWE likes to push that killed WCW. You know, the Foley title win and Fingerpoke of Doom.

That's total bullshit by the way lol


----------



## God Movement

KC Armstrong said:


> This pointless Sheamus vs Cesaro best of 7 series is the perfect example of everything that is wrong with WWE today. Let's just wrassle and find out who the better athlete is. That's all they've got at this point. Why even employ writers if that's what you're gonna give us?


Complete and utter shite.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

God Movement said:


> The thing is, UFC is REAL. Everyone knows that. So as long as you have two big enough stars and the fight is promoted correctly it WILL sell. You could book Cena v Brock IV, promote the shit out of it, put it on PPV and it still wouldn't sell shit. Certainly nowhere near as much as a big UFC fight. Because everyone knows the WWE is scripted. Now more than ever. And when the storylines start with and end with "I will prove I am the better wrestler" no-one gives a single fuck. So, to actually get fans committed and invested you need to have a compelling storyline, you need a bit of shock value, you need some over the top violence to get people invested. Because the fake fight *does not* sell itself.


Ya know, this got me to thinking -- I wonder how much the rising success of MMA is eating into the former popularity of pro wrestling. If I'm not mistaken, the fallingbtrend of WWE's ratings pretty much coincides with the rising popularity of MMA. Yes, they don't compete directly night-for-night like during the Monday night wars; but my thinking is there's a segment of the overall fan base that's getting its fill from the legit(?) combat action of MMA and simply no longer enthralled by the scripted action of WWE. I'm not saying that's thev_only_ problem with WWE, but it sure could be a major contributing factor.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> 2018, I believe.


2019 according to Wade


----------



## God Movement

The Cleaner said:


> Ya know, this got me to thinking -- I wonder how much the rising success of MMA is eating into the former popularity of pro wrestling. If I'm not mistaken, the fallingbtrend of WWE's ratings pretty much coincides with the rising popularity of MMA. Yes, they don't compete directly night-for-night like during the Monday night wars; but my thinking is there's a segment of the overall fan base that's getting its fill from the legit(?) combat action of MMA and simply no longer enthralled by the scripted action of WWE. I'm not saying that's thev_only_ problem with WWE, but it sure could be a major contributing factor.


I can personally vouch from this based on people I know. People who were huge fans of the WWE growing up just don't care for it anymore. They're now MMA fans, that's where they get their dose of real action or they get their shock value storyline-fill from Netflix, or movies or what have you. I'm not saying they need to bring back "Mae Young hand" storylines, but they need to try something new and interesting which actually gets fans talking. Because "wrestling" as a standalone act is simply not doing it.


----------



## CretinHop138

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> Oh wow. I don't usually get dramatic about their ratings, but it's getting REALLY bad. We're approaching 1996 territories of bad.


We're well beyond that now.

20 years ago on September 9th 1996, Raw did a 2.4 rating. 

This is a 1.8 rating.

October 14th 1996 was the last time things got this bad ironically with the same 1.8 number.


----------



## .MCH

Wow. Both shows are basically NXT now and it turns out it doesn't draw, just like most people assumed.

How much longer until Vince purges this indie trash and brings back models and football players?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> 2019 according to Wade


Ah, my bad.
@.MCH 

They've tried that and it hasn't worked, either.


----------



## God Movement

The talent isn't the problem...


----------



## wwe9391

If USA is determined for Raw to be 3 hour, cant they just make the first out the pre show?? or something else ?


----------



## Blade Runner

CretinHop138 said:


> We're well beyond that now.
> 
> 20 years ago on September 9th 1996, Raw did a 2.4 rating.
> 
> This is a 1.8 rating.
> 
> October 14th 1996 was the last time things got this bad ironically with the same 1.8 number.


So wait, you're saying that this is the lowest rated RAW in HISTORY? That can't be right, can it? :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The Cleaner said:


> Ya know, this got me to thinking -- I wonder how much the rising success of MMA is eating into the former popularity of pro wrestling. If I'm not mistaken, the fallingbtrend of WWE's ratings pretty much coincides with the rising popularity of MMA. Yes, they don't compete directly night-for-night like during the Monday night wars; but my thinking is there's a segment of the overall fan base that's getting its fill from the legit(?) combat action of MMA and simply no longer enthralled by the scripted action of WWE. I'm not saying that's thev_only_ problem with WWE, but it sure could be a major contributing factor.


Wait, you are saying UFC is competition for WWE? Wow, that's completely new to me. I wonder if WWE figured this out already and wrote no compete clauses into their contracts. 

Oh wait, they already do.


----------



## KC Armstrong

The Cleaner said:


> Ya know, this got me to thinking -- I wonder how much the rising success of MMA is eating into the former popularity of pro wrestling. If I'm not mistaken, the fallingbtrend of WWE's ratings pretty much coincides with the rising popularity of MMA. Yes, they don't compete directly night-for-night like during the Monday night wars; but my thinking is there's a segment of the overall fan base that's getting its fill from the legit(?) combat action of MMA and simply no longer enthralled by the scripted action of WWE. I'm not saying that's thev_only_ problem with WWE, but it sure could be a major contributing factor.



The funny thing is, though, it doesn't have much to do with the "real fighting" aspect. What draws huge audiences is the show/entertainment aspect that someone like McGregor brings to the table. A week after Conor vs. Diaz 2, biggest PPV in MMA history, UFC had a card on FOX, main event with 2 great fighters, and the ratings were not impressive at all. A guy like Demian Maia is absolutely amazing, but he's a humble, soft spoken guy who never talks trash. He is not a draw. If it was all about who's the toughest SOB and the best fighter, he should be a big draw, but he isn't.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

they could have still been pushing decent numbers if they had the balls to hold off bryans mania moment for another year

batista promoting guardians with the title could have helped gain some cross over appeal especially given how surprisingly successful the film was,then he drops it at summerslam either to bryan or a dream match with lesner

bryan gets his mania moment the next year and rollins cashes in relatively soon after setting up what im sure is a smark dream feud between rollins and bryan whilst delaying the reigns push so roman has more time to toil in the midcard and get more over

i know hindsight is everything but wouldn't the company be in a better position today if that was the case


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Starbuck said:


> This legit? If so then it actually doesn't really bode that well for SD or WWE in general because it suggests to me that the exact same people are watching both RAW and SD - the only difference being that of those same people, some tune into MNF on Monday nights and on Tuesday nights they don't have that problem. WWE's aim with the brand split was to grow 2 distinct brands that would feed into 2 different fanbases. All they've done is manage to get less people watching Raw and get the people who never bothered to watch SD to tune in; but it's basically the same people. Nobody new. If all you're doing is pulling in the same group of viewers then what's the fucking point in splitting the roster? Take the people who pick MNF over Raw on the Monday and add them to SD on a Tuesday. That's it. Seems a bit pointless really.


I think the low mark of retention was 80%. I agree with you. This isn't a fight over two disparate viewing audiences. It seems to be the same audience and SDL is suffering from being the de facto RAW Hour 4 and 5, regardless of it being the better product overall since the split. With the Backlash "bounce", one would think SDL would increase. If it stays at the same retention rate, that would be a discouraging sign for WWE. I am curious to see how RAW performs during the NFL season and if the viewers stay, bail, or migrate to SDL.


----------



## CretinHop138

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> So wait, you're saying that this is the lowest rated RAW in HISTORY? That can't be right, can it? :lol


The outright all-time lowest rated Raw is 1.5 on 12/23/1996. So yeah with this rating we are in 1996 territory.


----------



## Kabraxal

.MCH said:


> Wow. Both shows are basically NXT now and it turns out it doesn't draw, just like most people assumed.
> 
> How much longer until Vince purges this indie trash and brings back models and football players?


If you think Raw is anything like NXT it is clear you don't watch NXT......


----------



## Asuka842

SDL isn't even like NXT TBH. That's just a strawman argument, nothing more.


----------



## Cipher

^ Yeah, NXT is somehow worse.

Specials are still good at least. I didn't like the last one, though.


----------



## Bink77

I am a lifelong fan and have been since 1983. I have rarely ever missed a show in that time and I was happy to miss last night, and I hate football. I can't wait to keep missing this shit. It's literally worse than wcw 2000. Not returning til Vince steps down. #unwatchablegarbage


----------



## DammitChrist

TheGeneticFreak said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/775806436534288384
> Can't wait till they eventually beat the all time low :mark:


Wow, the ratings difference between post-WM 31 Raw and post-WM 32 Raw is just haunting.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

:sip

And so it begins. They better hope that COC is a good ppv and gives them a bump. The night after COC the Falcons play against the Saints and that's a divisional game. 

I expect HHH to make his appearance on that night and to try to draw in some people to watch.


----------



## Seafort

*When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

I just read tonight on the PWTorch site that RAW fell to a 1.88 rating yesterday against the first episode of Monday Night Football. Last June (the 16th), I called that RAW would fall below a 2.0 in September. It's now done so twice (July 4th, and yesterday).

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/1997129-will-wwe-drop-under-2-0-rating-3.html

The company - in terms of its television audience - is in real trouble. The erosion of their audience over the last year far outstrips previous year over year declines. And it's more than twice the decline in overall tv viewership (11% per http://screenmediadaily.com/tv-viewership-sees-double-digit-decline-according-to-accenture/)

Between 2012 and 2014, the Monday Night Raw episode in mid-June averaged 4.2M viewers. This year it was just 2.97M, a whopping 27.8% year over year drop. The 2.03 rating itself represents a 28% drop from last year.

Put another way, if the June 12, 2017 episode shows a similar rate of decline, that RAW will enjoy a 1.45 rating, with 2.14M viewers. Extend that to the June 11, 2018 episode, and RAW will draw a 1.04 rating with just 1.55M viewers. 

That said, the question is why? Is it just general erosion in television viewership? I think that the numbers show otherwise, and that this accelerated decline which began last year is beating the pace of general declines in tradition television versus steaming service. And why? Very simple...cliched storytelling, a lack of more than a handful of compelling characters, incremental or no plot movement, and a full year of unpopular champions. The latter is key.

Seth Rollins: Holds the belt from WM 31 to Nov 2015. Is generally portrayed as a very weak, Honkytonk Man like champion who usually needs constant interference to retain
Sheamus: A largely rejected, bland heel character following his return, Sheamus has a brief, uninspiring reign
HHH: Another heel, HHH never wrestles and is the crown jewel of a multi-year Authority angle
Roman Reigns: Obstensibly the face, Reigns is largely rejected post-WM 32 and has been involved in no real big angles since winning the title
Dean Ambrose: Wins the belt, and then becomes Smackdown exclusive
Finn Balor: Popular underexposed babyface who wins the belt and immediately is injured
Kevin Owens: Wins the vacant title and assumes the quite stale role of a quasi-Authority supported heel champion

If they cannot reverse the trend, the company is in trouble. Their TV deal will eventually come up for renewal, and a RAW that is well ahead of the curve of TV viewership declines will not earn WWE a huge renewal fee. And without that huge renewal fee, their profitability will take a substantial hit.

RAW TV Ratings, Viewers, and Changes from Previous Year
6/13/16: 2.03 (2.97M viewers) -27.4% from previous year
6/15/15: 2.83 (4.11M viewers) -00.5% from previous year
6/16/14: n/a (4.13M viewers) +3.5% from previous year
6/10/13: 3.04 (3.990 viewers) -13.6% from previous year
6/09/12: 3.20 (4.62M viewers)
6/13/11: 3.30 
6/14/10: 3.40
6/15/09: 3.70
6/16/08: 3.70
6/11/07: 3.80

So if 1.88 is the current low water mark and football season has just begun...how low does it go. Does RAW hit a 1.5 by November? Or does the audience erode even more quickly?


----------



## The_Jiz

I'm still laughing 

:lmao


----------



## KC Armstrong

Bubba Chuck said:


> :sip
> 
> And so it begins. They better hope that COC is a good ppv and gives them a bump. The night after COC the Falcons play against the Saints and that's a divisional game.
> 
> I expect HHH to make his appearance on that night and to try to draw in some people to watch.



Again, if everything goes according to plan, that's the night of the first Clinton vs Trump debate so fucking nobody is gonna watch Raw no matter what they do.


----------



## Majmo_Mendez

The worst thing is that instead of actually improving the product, Vince will just continue bloating up the roster with more NXT call ups. Those guys will get Sami Zayn'd immediately - no character, no direction, nothing. Even cruiseweight is fucking doomed. They will probably just stitch together some throwaway feud to put the belt on Neville and after that it will be just spotfest extravaganza week after week.


----------



## The_Jiz

It would not surprise me if they blow their load and do Rollins/Owens next week.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

KC Armstrong said:


> Again, if everything goes according to plan, that's the night of the first Clinton vs Trump debate so fucking nobody is gonna watch Raw no matter what they do.


I'm not into politics but I'll watch that as well just for the fukkery :lmao


----------



## RomanMania

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

When Zayn, Nakamura or Balor are the champions. 
Guys who couldn't draw 100 people to shows they headlined, are gonna make this show feel even more like an indy fed


----------



## Godway

Keep putting Roman in main events.


----------



## FROSTY

ShowStopper said:


> Although it is important to note last night (just like every NFL Week 1 Monday night) had 2 games on, one right after the other. From here on out, it's only 1 Monday night game. So, that should help.


*Really? I don't watch football at all anymore, haven't in years. But where I work always has it on the TV and I could've swore MNF did double and even sometimes triple-headers somewhat routinely throughout the season.

*edit* Now that I think about it though, I might be confusing MNF with SNF.*


----------



## Dhyno

no way!


----------



## Thanks12

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

When Steph and HHH takes over.


----------



## .MCH

ShowStopper said:


> Ah, my bad.
> @.MCH
> 
> They've tried that and it hasn't worked, either.


That worked better than this is.


----------



## Dhyno

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

It's so sad to see...ugh I miss attitude era..


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

.MCH said:


> That worked better than this is.


Example?



Rambo Apocalypse said:


> *Really? I don't watch football at all anymore, haven't in years. But where I work always has it on the TV and I could've swore MNF did double and even sometimes triple-headers somewhat routinely throughout the season.
> 
> *edit* Now that I think about it though, I might be confusing MNF with SNF.*


No. One Sunday night game per week and one Monday Night game per week, outside of Week 1, of course


----------



## virus21

So Raw got a 1.8. Excuse me for a moment....


















HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*



RomanMania said:


> When Zayn, Nakamura or Balor are the champions.
> Guys who couldn't draw 100 people to shows they headlined, are gonna make this show feel even more like an indy fed


I don't think you noticed that the real erosion of viewership started to form into an avalanche since Vince started pushing his jacked up, pet project charisma vacuum at the expense of literally everybody else.


----------



## Believe That

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

Who Cares


----------



## KC Armstrong

Bubba Chuck said:


> I'm not into politics but I'll watch that as well just for the fukkery :lmao


My point exactly. So will millions... and millions of people. It might not do SuperBowl ratings, but I could see AFC/NFC Championship Game ratings, like 45-50 million.


----------



## Seafort

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I don't think you noticed that the real erosion of viewership started to form into an avalanche since Vince started pushing his jacked up, pet project charisma vacuum at the expense of literally everybody else.


It's just part of the problem. The ridiculously long period of Authority-heel dominance could have had its payoff if someone like an Austin, Rock, CM Punk, or Daniel Bryan had ended it. But instead it was someone with a 50/50 crowd split. Again, it's just part of the problem.

The sad thing is, it could be fixed so easily.


----------



## Cipher

People really started taking the "if you don't like it, don't watch" retort seriously huh


----------



## ChicagoFit

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

It should be noted that Monday Night Football ratings were down 7% for the early game and down 25% for the late game vs week one Monday Night Football in 2015. 

Meaning that the impact of NFL on RAW was less than in past years. No excuse for RAW to attain a historically low rating this week.

http://deadline.com/2016/09/monday-...-49ers-espn-nfl-steelers-redskins-1201818617/


----------



## CretinHop138

1996 level bad. This is what the product was like back then lol


----------



## Piper's Pit

SmarKiller said:


> The ratings have been declining for years because they have been smark pandering for years.


They've been declining steadily since 2001 because their product has been 90% dogshit since then. Only thing that stopped a mass exodus was lack of competition, the brand name, having first choice on signing talent and most importantly the long time fans who kept watching for almost 15 years in the hope that the product would get better (I know because I was once like that)


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Wait, you are saying UFC is competition for WWE? Wow, that's completely new to me. I wonder if WWE figured this out already and wrote no compete clauses into their contracts.
> 
> Oh wait, they already do.


Come on. People are talking about every other fucking thing causing the constant ratings decline -- who's wearing the strap, who's getting a push, the NFL, TNA, Stephanie, Bush, everything but MMA. In all the back-and-forth on why the ratings are dropping faster than the polar ice caps (supposedly), I haven't seen anyone mention a migration of fans from wrestling to MMA. If that is the case, and it certainly sounds plausible to me, then there isn't a fucking thing Vince or Dixie or anybody else can do except hope it bottoms out before all their fans are gone.


----------



## Seafort

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*



ChicagoFit said:


> It should be noted that Monday Night Football ratings were down 7% for the early game and down 25% for the late game vs week one Monday Night Football in 2015.
> 
> Meaning that the impact of NFL on RAW was less than in past years. No excuse for RAW to attain a historically low rating this week.
> 
> http://deadline.com/2016/09/monday-...-49ers-espn-nfl-steelers-redskins-1201818617/


Excellent data point. I guess the other thing is, outside of the main event it was truly an awful, awful show last night. Really phone in with WWE knowing going in that they would be hammered.


----------



## CretinHop138

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

The outright all time lowest rated Raw was 1.5 on December 23rd 1996. I'd be even more amazed if it got below 1.0

"Don't like, don't watch"

Welp thats exactly what people are doing.


----------



## Darren Criss

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

Why do you want to know?


----------



## CretinHop138

To put UFC into context, UFC 203 wasn't a monster show but its expected to do around 600,000-700,000 buys, that is a regular number for them for the "lesser shows" 

WWE only got that for Wrestlemania.


----------



## deadcool

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

I have a question. If the rating is 1.0, how many people are watching?


----------



## Piper's Pit

Kabraxal said:


> These ratings aren't because of any wrestler.... They are because Vince's vision is at odds with what the audience wants and he continues to fight the audiences desires in almost every way. Part of this is born from his obsessive need to distance himself from professoinal wrestling and brand his shit with "sports entertainment" and part of it is being stuck in old traditional viewpoints that have long since gone out of style (size, look, face/heel dynamics).
> 
> What this brand split is going to give us the opportunity to see, if SD can get far enough distance from the stink that is Raw in terms of public perception, is definitive proof that Raw's style of booking does not work and the more professional wrestling style of SD does. We already have proof with NXT and the explosion in popularity it has had. But we have not had that chance with a distinct wrestling show on any sizeable and known network that could directly challenge Raw. If by WM it is just an endless strings of losses by Raw in the ratings (added to its already continual losses in quality to SD) then it will be all the proof we need.


I don't think the heel/face dynamic is outdated at all, it isn't working right now because the WWE and the wrestling business in general have forgotten how to do it correctly. Choosing the right people to be face/heel would help as would bringing back heel managers for example Chael Sonnen would be a perfect manager.


----------



## FROSTY

Chrome said:


> Thanks for that. And lol at the comments on that Wade Keller tweet.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/775814642958565376
*Even Samoan Banderas can't make the casuals care, poor KO I'm beginning to think they put the title on him knowing full well they were gonna get slaughtered by MNF, and can use him as the scapegoat.*


----------



## .MCH

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

Unless they stop hiring worthless indy talent (who can't draw for shit outside of a wrestling forum) and go back to hiring bodybuilders, football players, and models (who can be turned into wrestlers), then it will continue to decline.

I say by this time next year, WWE is at TNA levels with literal TNA talent.


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

For every ratings milestone it should get its own thread. 

Lowest rating in 20 years is very newsworthy.


----------



## The Power that Be

You smarks wanted the strap on KO ...you got it..
You smarks wanted El Generico at the top of the card...you got it...
You smarks wanted Bayley on Monday night Raw...you got it...
You smarks wanted the Bullet Club in WWE. you got it
You smarks wanted Enzo and Cass pushed to the moon....you got it....


Whatever a smark soweth, that shall he also reap :ha


----------



## wwf

Anyone who assumes that a 1.8 now is the same as a 1.8 ten or more years ago is an idiot.

Now for my second thought, there really shouldn't have been a brand extension to begin with. They should have just showed Smackdown live as well (no need for the roster split up).

My guess on why they split up the roster is to test different creative teams to see the effect on the audience. I think everyone here will generally agree that Smackdown has the better creative team thus far. Now it's up to the fans to actually tune in on Tuesdays and make Smackdown ratings surpass Raw's. That way they will fire the old shitty creative team and potentially fix Raw.

An easy way to fix Raw's declining ratings would be to replace those pointless jobber matches with storylines. Maybe having a jobber match for Strowman/Jax was good for like two matches, but after then they become redundant and boring as fuck.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

No reason to watch 3 hours of shit with the brand split now.

Bo Dallas vs jobbers? Who the fuck thought that was a good idea good god. Nobody wants Bo Dallas to begin with.

Jinder vs swagger? FFS That belongs on main event.

Cesaro vs Sheamus in a best of seven nobody wants to see. Does the winner even get anything out of it? idk

The New Day has completely fizzled out and is stuck in a boring feud with the club. The New Day should have been bumped to main event status already with Kofi going for the title. THEY WERE SOOOO OVER.

The talent is fine for the most part just completely misused and placed in filler. At least Rusev is back in the mix doing something. Most of them are in pointless mini feuds until the next ppv and having the same matches over and over we all saw already.


----------



## Kabraxal

Piper's Pit said:


> I don't think the heel/face dynamic is outdated at all, it isn't working right now because the WWE and the wrestling business in general have forgotten how to do it correctly. Choosing the right people to be face/heel would help as would bringing back heel managers for example Chael Sonnen would be a perfect manager.


People start cheering for those that are interesting and entertaining... you are never going to get the clean cut face/heel dichotomy consistently enough to book on those outdated ideals. Worry about creating intriguing characters instead of creating a "face" or a "heel".


----------



## wwe9391

Godway said:


> Keep putting Roman in main events.


No keep putting Kevin Owens in the main event. If you want to go that route


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Power that Be said:


> You smarks wanted the strap on KO ...you got it..
> You smarks wanted El Generico at the top of the card...you got it...
> You smarks wanted Bayley on Monday night Raw...you got it...
> You smarks wanted the Bullet Club in WWE. you got it
> You smarks wanted Enzo and Cass pushed to the moon....you got it....
> 
> 
> Whatever a smark soweth, that shall he also reap :ha


They've done it with 'non smark' favorites as well, and the ratings also went down big time..


----------



## THANOS

They need to chop off hour 3 and condense the show. They clearly can't book 3 hours when clowns like Jinder Mahal and the Shining Stars get time slots.


----------



## Pojko

The Power that Be said:


> You smarks wanted the strap on KO ...you got it..
> You smarks wanted El Generico at the top of the card...you got it...
> You smarks wanted Bayley on Monday night Raw...you got it...
> You smarks wanted the Bullet Club in WWE. you got it
> You smarks wanted Enzo and Cass pushed to the moon....you got it....
> 
> 
> Whatever a smark soweth, that shall he also reap :ha


And despite all of this, despite Styles being the champion on Smackdown and Becky Lynch being their women's champion, smarks will still never be happy. They'll find something new to bitch about even when they've been given everything they want.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

Part of me thinks that what WWE did was take their current viewership before the brand split and split them up. You have some of those fans only watching SD, while some of them are only watching Raw. Let's look at it quick:

(Last day of taped SD) July 10-16
Smackdown: 2.07 million
Raw: 3.17 million
Total: 5.24 million

Week of September 4-10 
Smackdown: 2.45 million
Raw: 3.07 million
Total: 5.52 million

I mean, it isn't the demise that everybody is stating, but there is NO WAY they are ever going to get new people watching, or even people who stopped watching back with 5 hours of weekly tv, not including the 19 PPVs.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Straw Hat said:


> Is it time for a complete overhaul? This really seems like the time to panic. Will USA even offer a deal in 2018?





KC Armstrong said:


> Serious question: At what point does Vince realize they need radical changes? Does he just sit by and watch his baby die?


Forget about it. The only thing that can save them is scrapping all of the scripted, we are sports entertainment garbage and go back to the roots of professional wrestling and what made it great and that will never happen as long as either Vince or Stephanie is still in charge.

The WWE over the last 15 years have made it absolutely crystal clear that they are not a wrestling company, they are sports entertainment - a television show, an action based scripted soap opera.

There could be an attempt at an overhaul but ultimately it will still be sports entertainment and that is why they are doomed.


----------



## CretinHop138

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*

Ratings against MNF openers

2010: 3.02
2011: 2.72
2012: 2.89
2013: 2.90
2014: 2.87
2015: 2.42
2016: 1.88


----------



## etched Chaos

So, Sunday WWE takes the piss out of Punk during the Miz match, then Raw pulls a 1.88 and Punk's drawn 650-800k buys for UFC. Vince must be livid right now, he got petty and then Punk bitchslapped Raw's rating, L O fucking L!


----------



## The Power that Be

Pojko said:


> And despite all of this, despite Styles being the champion on Smackdown and Becky Lynch being their women's champion, smarks will still never be happy. They'll find something new to bitch about even when they've been given everything they want.


The ROH-CZW-NJPW-PWG crowd have infested the sport that I grew up on and love, and are are slowly killing and dismantling it brick by brick.


The man holding the Heavyweight/Universal championship and therefore the standard bearer and hood ornament of the biggest wrestling company in the entire world is this man right here on the right











Buddy Rodgers is somewhere turning in his grave.


----------



## Reotor

ignore


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The Power that Be said:


> You smarks wanted the strap on KO ...you got it..
> You smarks wanted El Generico at the top of the card...you got it...
> You smarks wanted Bayley on Monday night Raw...you got it...
> You smarks wanted the Bullet Club in WWE. you got it
> You smarks wanted Enzo and Cass pushed to the moon....you got it....
> 
> 
> Whatever a smark soweth, that shall he also reap :ha


We also wanted better writing. Or in some cases, any writing.

Nobody knows how the brand split came to be still.


----------



## JDP2016

.MCH said:


> Wow. Both shows are basically NXT now and it turns out it doesn't draw, just like most people assumed.
> 
> How much longer until Vince purges this indie trash and brings back models and football players?


Or he can get his creative team to get..... creative and come up with compelling storylines. I know it's easier for small minded people like yourself to blame the low ratings on the indie geeks and non-models. Ohh and some of the current WWE superstars are former football players so....... yeah you're just talking out your ass.


----------



## Marv95

LOL it's a combo of things: "PG", stale presentation, commentating, 3 hours and yes the talent. Sorry but normal looking wrasslers with normal names with no compelling stories/characters attached to them aren't helping to bring new folks in.


----------



## JTB33b

It might be even worse next week because not only is there MNF to compete with but also the world cup(Team North America vs Russia)and season premier's of some shows.


----------



## Y2Joe

This is the latent effect of WWE treating most of their talent like trash for years on end. This is what Vince gets for his lazy philosophy of promoting/pushing only a select few and basically telling the audience not to care about anything else.

It's also a cultural thing. You could watch wrestling for the athleticism, but you could also watch other sports ... "real" sports ... to get the same thing.

Overall, it's these two factors that caused what we are seeing now.


----------



## The RainMaker

The Power that Be said:


> The ROH-CZW-NJPW-PWG crowd have infested the sport that I grew up on and love, and are are slowly killing and dismantling it brick by brick.
> 
> 
> The man holding the Heavyweight/Universal championship and therefore the standard bearer and hood ornament of the biggest wrestling company in the entire world is this man right here on the right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buddy Rodgers is somewhere turning in his grave.


Doesn't matter what the champ looks like dude. Roman Reigns would have pulled a 1.8 Seth would have pulled a 1.8. Wrestling is dead. People like us who care enough to waste our time on message boards posting about it are what is keeping it alive.


----------



## RomanMania

That's what happens when a neckbeard from the crowd is the Champion and headliner of the company


















No one wants to see this. It's embarrassing for a TV product. 
Put the title on Roman and the ratings will be back to normal


----------



## JDP2016

You people are retards if you think a bunch of former football players, which WWE already has, and some big breasted models are gonna boost ratings when RAW would still lack storylines, logical writing and logical booking.


----------



## RomanMania

The Power that Be said:


> The ROH-CZW-NJPW-PWG crowd have infested the sport that I grew up on and love, and are are slowly killing and dismantling it brick by brick.
> 
> 
> The man holding the Heavyweight/Universal championship and therefore the standard bearer and hood ornament of the biggest wrestling company in the entire world is this man right here on the right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buddy Rodgers is somewhere turning in his grave.


Amen brother. The business is dead. Guy on the right looks like a random neckbeard who won a smark podcast competition to share a night with the indy fed guy on the left, and brought his replica belt to be signed.


----------



## The Power that Be

RomanMania said:


> That's what happens when a neckbeard from the crowd is the Champion and headliner of the company
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one wants to see this. It's embarrassing for a TV product.
> Put the title on Roman and the ratings will be back to normal



Owens as the Champion is the equivalent of WCW putting the strap on Mongo McMichael :ha


----------



## TheFackingCrow

:lmao :lmao :lmao

PUT THE BELT ON OWENS, IT WILL MAKE RAW GREAT AGAIN!

DE OWENS ERA HAS BEGUN!!

RAW IS OWENS!

:LMAO


----------



## RomanMania

The Power that Be said:


> Owens as the Champion is the equivalent of WCW putting the strap on Mongo McMichael :ha


It's even worse. At least Mongo looked the part and was legit, had an NFL background and a character other than 'good worker from Canada'











Even Owens was a fan back in the day ^


----------



## The RainMaker

RomanMania said:


> It's even worse. At least Mongo looked the part and was legit, had an NFL background and a character other than 'good worker from Canada'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even Owens was a fan back in the day ^


These aren't bad trolls. I'll give credit where credit is due.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

If you have a predetermined recipe, you can put any chef in the world there and have the same result. 

Who is on TV and not, who is champ or not, doesn't matter a flying fuck.



The Power that Be said:


> Owens as the Champion is the equivalent of WCW putting the strap on Mongo McMichael :ha


The equivalent of Mongo in WWE is Roman Reigns.


----------



## JDP2016

RomanMania said:


> It's even worse. At least Mongo looked the part and was legit, *had an NFL background* and a character other than 'good worker from Canada'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even Owens was a fan back in the day ^


An NFL background? Who gives a shit if a guy played in the NFL?


----------



## The RainMaker

Why is every single thread being closed? wtf?


----------



## JDP2016

The K3vin Ow3ns Show said:


> Why is every single thread being closed? wtf?


I don't have a problem with it. Some of these debates are old and tired.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Cipher said:


> People really started taking the "if you don't like it, don't watch" retort seriously huh


"If you don't like it, don't wa-- hey, where are you going!?"


----------



## Godway

The K3vin Ow3ns Show said:


> Doesn't matter what the champ looks like dude. Roman Reigns would have pulled a 1.8 Seth would have pulled a 1.8. Wrestling is dead. People like us who care enough to waste our time on message boards posting about it are what is keeping it alive.


Roman Reigns DID pull this number. The selling point of the show at the conclusion of last weeks RAW was Roman's new quest for gold again. And the fans responded exactly how you'd expect them to respond to the idea of yet another Roman Reigns push. By tuning right the fuck out.


----------



## The RainMaker

Godway said:


> Roman Reigns DID pull this number. The selling point of the show at the conclusion of last weeks RAW was Roman's new quest for gold again. And the fans responded exactly how you'd expect them to respond to the idea of yet another Roman Reigns push. By tuning right the fuck out.


Honesty never thought of it like that. I just fear Vince will see these numbers and panic flip the title off Owens at COC.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Indy era = Indy ratings :shrug:


----------



## JDP2016

The_It_Factor said:


> Indy era = Indy ratings :shrug:


No storylines = low ratings


God you fuckers are amazing. sleep:sleep


----------



## The_It_Factor

JDP2016 said:


> No storylines = low ratings
> 
> 
> God you fuckers are amazing. sleep:sleep


That's literally what I've said for over a year. The response I got, "it doesn't matter, the blame goes on the champion. The champion gets the credit or the heat. No one wants to see Cena/Reigns."

I guess that's not the story any longer.


----------



## Godway

The K3vin Ow3ns Show said:


> Honesty never thought of it like that. I just fear Vince will see these numbers and panic flip the title off Owens at COC.


I'm not giving KO a pass, he's a very risky proposition as champ. But he still won the title because HHH handed it to him, not because he had any real momentum or defining moments. What makes him a must-see heel champ? Hence why WWE immediately booked Roman against him to go against football, because Roman is "the draw" according to brainless people. 

If you're going to try blaming KO for that rating, you better realize it was Roman who was supposed to be the selling point of the match. But as usual, they won't, because they're imbecilic trolls or entitled Reigns marks who blame the whole world but Roman. It must just be coincidence that historically terrible numbers keep happening around Roman Reigns. Clearly has nothing to do with him.


----------



## JDP2016

KO's last two PPV matches are a Battleground lost to Sami Zayn and a Summerslam tag team win with Jericho over Enzo&Cass who can't even beat the Shining Stars. He wins the title after HHH takes out Roman and Rollins and people are expecting this guy to be taken seriously as a top guy champ and boost ratings? Does anyone think around here or are we just a bunch of lazy fucks who look at the ratings, see who is the champ and draw our conclusions based just off of that?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The_It_Factor said:


> Indy era = Indy ratings :shrug:


Yeah, let's pretend football is not on.

I concur, people like this on message boards, with the brainpower of Eugene, are the drizzling annoying shit.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

I can't wait for WWE to pull Owens vs Zain as the title picture.

Who will those smarka/NXT fanboys blame when the show pulls an 1.5?


----------



## .MCH

Piper's Pit said:


> Forget about it. The only thing that can save them is scrapping all of the scripted, we are sports entertainment garbage and go back to the roots of professional wrestling and what made it great and that will never happen as long as either Vince or Stephanie is still in charge.
> 
> The WWE over the last 15 years have made it absolutely crystal clear that they are not a wrestling company, they are sports entertainment - a television show, an action based scripted soap opera.
> 
> There could be an attempt at an overhaul but ultimately it will still be sports entertainment and that is why they are doomed.


lmao, the wrestling isn't a draw. At what point do you smarks realize that? All we've been getting are boring wrestling matches.



TheFackingCrow said:


> I can't wait for WWE to pull Owens vs Zain as the title picture.
> 
> Who will those smarka/NXT fanboys blame when the show pulls an 1.5?


IT'S BECAUSE THE SHOW IS THREE HOURS. TOO MANY JOBBERS ARE FEATURED! NOT ENOUGH BAYLEY!!!~~~

The show is basically NXT now, smarks have basically gotten what they want and the show is tanking. They'll never fucking learn.


----------



## Mra22

I'm so happy this crappy company is getting horrible ratings  in all honesty SD is way better and also UFC and the NFL are more exciting than crsppy RAW


----------



## Godway

JDP2016 said:


> KO's last two PPV matches are a Battleground lost to Sami Zayn and a Summerslam tag team win with Jericho over Enzo&Cass who can't even beat the Shining Stars. He wins the title after HHH takes out Roman and Rollins and people are expecting this guy to be taken seriously as a top guy champ and boost ratings? Does anyone think around here or are we just a bunch of lazy fucks who look at the ratings, see who is the champ and draw our conclusions based just off of that?


You can't put belts on people in name only, and then say OMG THEY'RE NOT DRAWING. Why the fuck should they? Look at the difference it made for the Miz (and ratings for SD that week) to cut a scathing promo, then get booked over Crews, Ziggler, etc even though they were dirty wins. As a character and heel, he feels fresh as hell and like his matches actually have meaning. That's how you book a heel right there, you make him relevant. 

Owens title win was TERRIBLE. I said it at the time, and I stand by that now. Alvarez/Meltz were right on the money over the absurdity of that match. And it's even MORE absurd that HHH simply vanishes from TV, despite building up this new McMahon storyline. He basically hung his boy Owens out to dry. 

I won't deny that the idiot trolls are in fact, right about this whole "indie/wrestling" era shit, though. Owens/Zayn will never draw a dime, at least in this capacity as guy A wrestling guy B. Same goes for everyone on the roster. They MUST start building characters and meaning behind matches and feuds. Get HHH to pull his head out of his ass and stop thinking he can put all of the NXT geeks out there and RAW becomes NXT because of it. It's simply not going to happen.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Yeah, let's pretend football is not on.
> 
> I concur, people like this on message boards, with the brainpower of Eugene, are the drizzling annoying shit.


Football was on last year and ratings didn't hit 1.0's..... In fact, I don't believe ratings have dipped below 2.0 this century.

I'm just trying to be consistent like everyone here supposedly was and blame the champ, regardless of booking, length, competition, etc.


----------



## RomanMania

JDP2016 said:


> An NFL background? Who gives a shit if a guy played in the NFL?


The Rock, Austin, Goldberg, Lesnar. NFL/football background.
Name someone on their level who came from indies.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: When will RAW drop below a 1.0 rating?*



CretinHop138 said:


> Ratings against MNF openers
> 
> 2010: 3.02
> 2011: 2.72
> 2012: 2.89
> 2013: 2.90
> 2014: 2.87
> 2015: 2.42
> 2016: 1.88


If those numbers don't case a panic, then nothing will. Steady for 5 years, then whoooosh....


----------



## RomanMania

The indy experiment officially failed.
Put the title on Roman, Cena or Orton. Someone who looks, feels and carries themselves like a Champion instead of a lost crowd member.


----------



## Piper's Pit

.MCH said:


> lmao, the wrestling isn't a draw. At what point do you smarks realize that? All we've been getting are boring wrestling matches.


I know that. Real professional wrestling was rarely about the quality of the matches, it was about the personalities, feuds, vendettas and the battle between face and heel.


----------



## KO Bossy

CretinHop138 said:


> 1996 level bad. This is what the product was like back then lol


Let's also not forget that back in 1996, WWF was also getting the shit kicked out of them thanks to the nWo becoming an instant hit in WCW. So they were battling not only one of the hottest stories of all time, but also a major competitor. These days, there's no competition and no money making story to fight. They're on top of the world, so there's no excuse.



Godway said:


> Roman Reigns DID pull this number. The selling point of the show at the conclusion of last weeks RAW was Roman's new quest for gold again. And the fans responded exactly how you'd expect them to respond to the idea of yet another Roman Reigns push. By tuning right the fuck out.


I don't wanna dog pile on the guy, but it kind of is the job for the babyface to draw. Heels don't really draw, they're not in positions to. Babyfaces are the ones the fans are supposed to tune in to support. So that's a fair point.


----------



## Reotor

JDP2016 said:


> KO's last two PPV matches are a Battleground lost to Sami Zayn and a Summerslam tag team win with Jericho over Enzo&Cass who can't even beat the Shining Stars. He wins the title after HHH takes out Roman and Rollins and people are expecting this guy to be taken seriously as a top guy champ and boost ratings? Does anyone think around here or are we just a bunch of lazy fucks who look at the ratings, see who is the champ and draw our conclusions based just off of that?


Just let them have their fun.
No matter how it goes people will always lay blame on a single guy. Human nature I guess.
They don't understand, or don't want to understand, its the entire package that is rotten, not just the top spot.
They'll just go on and on while ratings continue to drop further, no matter who has the top belt.


----------



## virus21

KO Bossy said:


> They're on top of the world, so there's no excuse.


Sure there is....


----------



## Godway

KO Bossy said:


> I don't wanna dog pile on the guy, but it kind of is the job for the babyface to draw. Heels don't really draw, they're not in positions to. Babyfaces are the ones the fans are supposed to tune in to support. So that's a fair point.


Had this show miraculously done a solid number, what would the butthurts be doing right now? That's right, they would be in this thread, and creating other threads, spamming the entire forum with "ROMAN SAVES THE DAY! ROMAN IS THE DRAW!!" threads. But because it did a WOAT number, it's "Owens is the champ LOL OWENS FAILURE" and lets not pretend otherwise. 

Because the show did historically bad, they already had their excuses ready for Roman.


----------



## Bink77

2 straight years of making excuses for every low rating show.. holiday, Olympics, show finales, nfl, nba, world series, show debuts, etc.. in the past it didn't matter what they were facing for the night, they put their best foot forward. If you didn't watch that show, you missed some world changing stories. Nowadays, they prewarn you, we have stiff competition tonight so when we lose this is why. Look back at mid September of 97, 98, 99, 00, and 01.

It didn't matter that the nfl was starting up, that sopranos was starting back up, that wm was 6 months away, that the world series might go up against our ppv or raw, or any other lame excuse for the bad rating. They put their best possible show out there and the fans and casual still watched.

The last two years have come with nothing but excuses before and after the shows as to why they didn't work. Every excuse except "we fucked up, we didn't put on a show that anyone but the diehards wanted to sit through."

The fact that raw is 3 hours now is irrelevant. They know that everyone hates the 3rd hour from the casual to the smart, yet they do nothing to book that 3rd hour, or the whole show more entertaining. It's just boring. Even their better shows the last 2 years were still at best boring, save 2 or 3 shows. This product is pathetic.


----------



## KO Bossy

Godway said:


> Had this show miraculously done a solid number, what would the butthurts be doing right now? That's right, they would be in this thread, and creating other threads, spamming the entire forum with "ROMAN SAVES THE DAY! ROMAN IS THE DRAW!!" threads. But because it did a WOAT number, it's "Owens is the champ LOL OWENS FAILURE" and lets not pretend otherwise.
> 
> Because the show did historically bad, they already had their excuses ready for Roman.


Well, let me play devil's advocate. You know I don't particularly care about Roman either, but let's be fair. When Roman was the champion, whenever a show did badly, he was given the blame. So now, his marks feel its fair to give Owens the blame since he's now champion. I understand their logic, although its somewhat misguided. Owens hasn't won a Rumble, set a Rumble elimination record, been a 3 time WWE champion, main evented 2 Manias in a row, had feuds with all the top guys, etc. Roman has been given a hell of a lot more, so more is (and should be) expected of him. Owens has been champion for 2 weeks and won it in a shitty fashion, with all the real heat being put on Hunter. You can't build a draw in 2 weeks, its not happening, and certainly not under those circumstances. And again, Roman is a face and babyfaces have always been the top draws. Hogan, Austin, Rock, Cena, Goldberg, Sting, etc. A good heel enhances them (Andre, Vince, Triple H, Edge, Hogan, Flair, etc), but the faces themselves are the main draw. So right now, either Roman or Seth are the big Raw draws. Seth literally just turned, so Roman takes the larger portion since he's been a face for 2 years. He's the top face on Raw, and many don't seem to care about what he, or anyone else is doing. And its a larger failing on Reigns' part because he's been given so much and resulted in so little, drawing wise.

My 2 cents. This number is hilariously embarrassing and WWE outta be ashamed.


----------



## Bink77

Just think, twice raw got put on 12am to 2am back in the late 90s and still pulled over 4s for both.


----------



## Nicky Midss

1.88 LOL


----------



## ecclesiastes10

I see ppl going out their way to blame roman, how "Suprising"...
lets ignore the fact that raw lost almost 600k viewers last week from hour 1 to hour 3, while only losing half of that this week. both shows were shit but something kept the lost of viewers respectable this week compared to last weeks raw? hmmmm I wonder what or who it was...
also lets ignore that since the third hour of last week raw ended with 2.6 million or 2.7 million viewers ,it doesnt really set up this raw with a healty number (who only saw roman on for 2 mins if im not mistaken at the tail end of last week's raw). and im sure everyone has notice the increasing depature of compelling story from wwe raw programing to cheap story telling, and focus on wrestling which brings me to my next point, I wonder if cm punks beatdown led to a couple of viewers, who tuned in for fucksake before as a habit, questioning themselves watching a product that they can no longer uphold suspension of disbelief after watching a top wwe champ/main eventer get beat like an abused wife this past Saturday.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

A fucking 1.88 :heston

Yeah, what did Rollins say months back? Something like "wrestling is at its best right now and we're keeping it from dying"? If this is the best you all can do then you might as well stop now. Horrible number for a horrible product and this is when Vince is still in charge. I shudder to think when Steph and HHH take over.


----------



## Godway

KO Bossy said:


> Well, let me play devil's advocate. You know I don't particularly care about Roman either, but let's be fair. When Roman was the champion, whenever a show did badly, he was given the blame. So now, his marks feel its fair to give Owens the blame since he's now champion. I understand their logic, although its somewhat misguided. Owens hasn't won a Rumble, set a Rumble elimination record, been a 3 time WWE champion, main evented 2 Manias in a row, had feuds with all the top guys, etc. Roman has been given a hell of a lot more, so more is (and should be) expected of him. Owens has been champion for 2 weeks and won it in a shitty fashion, with all the real heat being put on Hunter. You can't build a draw in 2 weeks, its not happening, and certainly not under those circumstances. And again, Roman is a face and babyfaces have always been the top draws. Hogan, Austin, Rock, Cena, Goldberg, Sting, etc. A good heel enhances them (Andre, Vince, Triple H, Edge, Hogan, Flair, etc), but the faces themselves are the main draw. So right now, either Roman or Seth are the big Raw draws. Seth literally just turned, so Roman takes the larger portion since he's been a face for 2 years. He's the top face on Raw, and many don't seem to care about what he, or anyone else is doing. And its a larger failing on Reigns' part because he's been given so much and resulted in so little, drawing wise.
> 
> My 2 cents. This number is hilariously embarrassing and WWE outta be ashamed.


Roman got the blame because there's no one else to blame. You just pointed out the accolades, nobody else has had the entire fucking COMPANY built around them for two straight years, being handed moment after moment after moment after moment, all of which were met with embarrassingly terrible reactions. 

People already pointed out, before Owens was handed the title by HHH in a suit, what did he do? his last PPV matches were jobbing to Zayn and winning a tag match with Jericho against the guys who can't beat the Shining Stars of Puerto Rico.


----------



## Krokro

1.88 though. 

I know we're all thinking it, but I really do hope this means WWE will try and fix some shit. It's not Owens fault, it's not Zayn's, not even Rollins or Reigns. It's just the writing is atrocious, and it's THREE hours long. Most movies aren't THREE hours long. I get it, money talks but holy fuck. Why kill off a hobby/sport/facet of entertainment for a profit? You're already the #1, you don't need to over-saturate yourself and tarnish your name. Fuck.


----------



## MMM2909

They need better booking, better storylines and to have some OH SHIT moments that can go out into the mainstream and bring people back. The last truly great OH SHIT moment was the Punk pipe bomb, which was everywhere, and when he won at MITB and left it was a buzz WWE had not had in years. And they botched it so bad that now they are drawing a fcking 1.88. I am really scared that the WWE is going the route of TNA, which refused to change and is now dying, and i dont want to see that happen to WWE, because that would be the last nail in the coffin for pro wrestling.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

The WWE will never give up that third hour. It's just too much money to leave on the table.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

People need to stop putting blame on the Indy stars and saying how the smarks have won out and look at the bigger picture. Say we move focus away from the Indy level of talent. Who in the fuck do you push? Reigns? This guy is too polarising. Sheamus? Rusev? Big Cass? Who are these big dudes that the casuals will pay in droves to watch? There's no one. Right now the Indy talent are the best thing we got, problem is WWE's inept ability in pushing these talents. Most of the talent are just not clicking with the casual audience.

Also you need to remember that this the brand split era, the product isn't going to draw in viewers if you have a 3 hour show with a depleted roster. 

The main problem is that WWE has failed to create another popular face post-Bryan. They have tried to push Reigns, but they never let him rise organically, instead they took a talent that could have been huge and force fed him to us. The fans have responded with sour taste. Reigns is damaged goods, until he becomes heel. I guess WWE was seeking to push Balor as its new top face however he has gotten injured. The Raw brand is currently lacking a big time face that the fans can get behind. The champion is a heel, Reigns is a polarising face, Rollins is pseudo-heel/face, Rusev is a heel. There is no rising face right now. It would have been much better had they pushed Wyatt as the face in Raw, but again I don't think he would have lasted. 

There is no one in the roster who is organically getting over as a face and becoming a hit with the fans. Nakamura has insane charisma but I do not think he can appeal to a wider audience. WWE has to quickly find a new face to push and restart from there.


----------



## CretinHop138

Mitch who runs Showbuzz commented, Raw's demographic ratings were some of the worst he has ever seen in years.

Basically they've lost the general viewer, hardcores are still there no matter what bullshit they will throw at them. WWE/wrestling in general is now becoming just a niche product.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

The Power that Be said:


> The man holding the Heavyweight/Universal championship and therefore the standard bearer and hood ornament of the biggest wrestling company in the entire world is this man right here on the right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buddy Rodgers is somewhere turning in his grave.


Err why in the world would Buddy Rodgers be turning in his grave? The Universal Title isn't the title he wore. The WWE Championship is his title and the man currently holding it is AJ Styles, the motherfucking real deal. His the best wrestler in the world right now, performing as good as Shawn Michaels and his able to hold his own on the mic. Styles rejuvenated his career and is killing it in the WWE, it's just a shame he isn't on Raw.


----------



## HenryBowers

God Movement said:


> I mean, I agree to some extent. I personally love to see women wrestle personally, and they certainly deserve the respect and time and opportunity to perform. But the reality is, women wrestling probably wouldn't draw as much as the really, really hot girl who fans will tune in every week to see. That's just the reality of the situation.
> 
> I sometimes can't believe wrestling has come to this point. I get caught up in watching old shows and old skits and moments and it's like night and day. Something has to give. I'm not sure who convinced management that booking a purely wrestling based show would lead to success when the opposite is really what springboarded WWE right into the eye of the mainstream. They could certainly use some shock value right about now. Something which will actually reach beyond the confines of the hardcore fanbase.
> 
> But now it's getting to a point where even the hardcore fanbase themselves don't give a fuck.
> 
> This shit is a _disaster_.


Women will watch the show because it has a bunch of attractive men wearing nothing but underwear (minus KO obviously). They don't need to be catered for.


----------



## wwe9391

Godway said:


> Roman Reigns DID pull this number. The selling point of the show at the conclusion of last weeks RAW was Roman's new quest for gold again. And the fans responded exactly how you'd expect them to respond to the idea of yet another Roman Reigns push. By tuning right the fuck out.


So next week and the follow weeks after that when Reigns is not in the universal title picture and the ratings are just as bad maybe even lower you still gonna blame Reigns? Or you actually going to own up and finally admit that NO ONE is a draw in today's wwe? Probably the former since you do nothing on this site but shit on Reigns. It's your gimmick.



Soul Man Danny B said:


> The WWE will never give up that third hour. It's just too much money to leave on the table.


The funny thing is USA network wants that 3rd hour Just as much as wwe does


----------



## Cliffy

Wwe cancellation party :dance


----------



## Natecore

There are still too many people watching Raw.


----------



## Demolition119

Krokro said:


> 1.88 though.
> 
> I know we're all thinking it, but I really do hope this means WWE will try and fix some shit. It's not Owens fault, it's not Zayn's, not even Rollins or Reigns. It's just the writing is atrocious, and it's THREE hours long. Most movies aren't THREE hours long. I get it, money talks but holy fuck. Why kill off a hobby/sport/facet of entertainment for a profit? You're already the #1, you don't need to over-saturate yourself and tarnish your name. Fuck.


The problem is that they have straight up lost A large chunk of their casual viewing audience. WWE should have worked hard trying to fix their product A long time ago. When people decide enough is enough and the product is not worth their time, and they stop watching, it is very hard to get those people to come back. There is big difference between this episode sucks, I am not watching next week, and this product sucks, why am I wasting my time watching this shit week after week? That I will see you next week joke people used to make when people complained about the product isn't quite so funny anymore.


----------



## Frost99

The gif is a metaphor for ratings:ralph


----------



## Cliffy

Not enough big sexy muscles on Raw imo.


----------



## Reotor

Demolition119 said:


> The problem is that they have straight up lost A large chunk of their casual viewing audience. WWE should have worked hard trying to fix their product A long time ago. When people decide enough is enough and the product is not worth their time, and they stop watching, it is very hard to get those people to come back. There is big difference between this episode sucks, I am not watching next week, and this product sucks, why am I wasting my time watching this shit week after week? *That I will see you next week joke people used to make when people complained about the product isn't quite so funny anymore*.


Depends how you look at it, I for one find it even more hilarious :heyman6


----------



## BigDaveBatista

some blame the indie stars and theres some merit in that
others blame the shield push (more romans but the hate for dean and occasionally for seth is noticeable)
others blame the writing of raw and the booking in general
others blame the more smark orientated shows they now produce
others blame john cena 

is it not a combination of all of these factors? along with the horrendous crowds a wwe show draws today, whether it be a dead crowd or a smark filled crowd concerned only with getting themselves noticed and trying to dominate the performers


----------



## RomanMania

Ratings are in the toilet because people want to watch WWE Raw not ring of honour. 
They want storylines, entertainment, over the top characters, star power.
Not a bunch of indy guys having random matches and doing 'good work'.
Only Cena, Orton and Roman can fix the ratings. Move these indy guys back to the midcard or NXT.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

I laugh at the "indy v. muscle" arguments on here when WWE superstars in general just aren't good enough to the level of their predecessors to garner a respectable rating and create/keep interest and emotional investment.


----------



## xDD

RomanMania said:


> Ratings are in the toilet because people want to watch WWE Raw not ring of honour.
> They want storylines, entertainment, over the top characters, star power.
> Not a bunch of indy guys having random matches and doing 'good work'.
> *Only Cena, Orton and Roman can fix the ratings. *Move these indy guys back to the midcard or NXT.


Ahahahhahaha. No.


----------



## The Tempest

RomanMania said:


> Ratings are in the toilet because people want to watch WWE Raw not ring of honour.
> They want storylines, entertainment, over the top characters, star power.
> Not a bunch of indy guys having random matches and doing 'good work'.
> Only Cena, Orton and Roman can fix the ratings. Move these indy guys back to the midcard or NXT.


Pls go Brownian.


----------



## Takes2Two Fandango

IMO the main reason the ratings have gone down so much in the last four years is that kids have got older and stopped watching, the same thing happened in the AE when we were kids / teenagers at that time we all had friends who watched the show but as soon as guys like Austin, Rock went they stopped caring expect people like us who enjoy wrestling and the same thing is happening this era and who could blame them as there's nothing keeping them hooked they don't care about a wrestler enough to keep watching and story lines are beyond pathetic. At least after the AE we had guys we still cared about while creating guys like Lesnar,Cena & Orton with some good storylines as well


----------



## Flat Ronnie

- Too many wrestlers look like normal people

- Too much emphasis on women's wrestling

- Too much emphasis on in-ring work

- No storyline worth a damn

- No wrestlers that have the combination of looking larger than life and being able to talk people into the building.

- Too much emphasis on charity, bullying, etc.

- Too much emphasis on WWE network shows and E! shows

- Wellness policy is actually a detriment to the product (controversial I'm sure)


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I didn't think it was possible that people walk this earth who are dumb or ignorant enough to use the ratings on the opening night of MNF as an earnest argument why certain people don't draw.
It doesn't get dumber than that.
Or maybe it can, by claiming Reigns getting the belt now would magically shield them from people watching football. Reigns didn't draw without competition, and he sure as fuck won't draw a single mark now in football season.


----------



## Mr. Socko

Wrestling's dead. Can't see anything bringing it back unfortunately.


----------



## Hodan

I don't usually post here but reading some of these last few posts has me rolling my eyes and shaking my head. I thought at this point, we can all agree no one is the draw without a good storyline to back them up. People like good story telling. It is the creative team that is the rating killer. Not the stars. 
With the way things are, they can put the title on anyone and the rating will continue to increase and decrease. Mostly decrease.


----------



## wwe9391

Hodan said:


> I don't usually post here but reading some of these last few posts has me rolling my eyes and shaking my head. I thought at this point, we can all agree no one is the draw ]


We were all agreeing that no one is a draw until the usual anti reigns marks decided to take it upon themselves to blame Reigns for the ratings. They couldn't help themselves because their gimmick is to shit on Reigns 24-7


----------



## Cipher

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I didn't think it was possible that people walk this earth who are dumb or ignorant enough to use the ratings on the opening night of MNF as an earnest argument why certain people don't draw.
> It doesn't get dumber than that.
> Or maybe it can, by claiming Reigns getting the belt now would magically shield them from people watching football. Reigns didn't draw without competition, and he sure as fuck won't draw a single mark now in football season.












This isn't just about Reigns lmao. SOMETHING has to be the cause of these insane record lows and huge downward spiral.


----------



## Darkness is here

No one has been a big draw since 2013, so blaming anyone is really stupid.
A little better way would be to see YouTube views as most just prefer watching online at their convenience.


----------



## Restomaniac

RomanMania said:


> It's even worse. At least Mongo looked the part and was legit, had an NFL background and a character other than 'good worker from Canada'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even Owens was a fan back in the day ^


Mojo Rawley says hi.
Not comparing Mongo and Mojo on an NFL standpoint but using your example as I say Mojo says hi.


----------



## AVX

I never watch Raw or Smackdown, to me and probably many others the WWE network is plenty enough wrestling to live on. I just watch the PPVs and casually check out wrestling news online. I have no problem keeping up with storylines and never watch the TV product at all. I consider myself to be a wrestling fan, I could live without a lot of the Sports entertainment aspect of WWE.


----------



## Bret Hart

Hahahaha, :maury

Good, so fucking happy... You put on a shit product with shit storylines no fucking shit people are going to stop tuning in..... More people need to start tuning out.

WWE's notion of "they'll keep watching" (to those who complain about the product and still watch) is now biting them in the ass.... WWE when they said that line pretty much admitted they can put on a half-assed show and we'll still watch.

Good, fuck you Vince. 

1996>2016


----------



## TromaDogg

BigDaveBatista said:


> some blame the indie stars and theres some merit in that
> others blame the shield push (more romans but the hate for dean and occasionally for seth is noticeable)
> others blame the writing of raw and the booking in general
> others blame the more smark orientated shows they now produce
> *others blame john cena *
> 
> is it not a combination of all of these factors? along with the horrendous crowds a wwe show draws today, whether it be a dead crowd or *a smark filled crowd concerned only with getting themselves noticed and trying to dominate the performers*


Those 2 in bold go hand in hand. Cena has actively encouraged those types of crowds for years....'Hey, you paid your money! You can boo or cheer who you want, even me! And I'm OK with that!' instead of doing what he should have been doing (playing a proper fucking character either heel or face instead of the shit eating corporate shill he's positioned himself as) to the point where there's now only those kinds of crowds left, or kids.

Obviously Cena isn't the _only_ reason WWE is finally going down the shitter in terms of TV ratings, but he's a massive contributory factor to the feel and atmosphere that the shows now have, and it's not been for the better.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

TromaDogg said:


> Those 2 in bold go hand in hand. Cena has actively encouraged those types of crowds for years....'Hey, you paid your money! You can boo or cheer who you want, even me! And I'm OK with that!' instead of doing what he should have been doing (playing a proper fucking character either heel or face instead of the shit eating corporate shill he's positioned himself as) to the point where there's now only those kinds of crowds left, or kids.
> 
> Obviously Cena isn't the _only_ reason WWE is finally going down the shitter in terms of TV ratings, but he's a massive contributory factor to the feel and atmosphere that the shows now have, and it's not been for the better.


to play devils advocate, dont you think hed have turned heel if they wanted him too? 

ive always wondered whether their attitude towards cena was hes the most polarising star on the roster so half the people want him to win the other half to lose, why turn him when he can draw a crowd like that? 
i would have turned him at one night stand 06 and aligned him with edge that could have been utter magic as a heel unit


----------



## Goldusto

The only people watching or talking about wrestling now have Aspergers or are low IQ white trash, or indians. That is more or less it.


----------



## The RainMaker

Goldusto said:


> The only people watching or talking about wrestling now have Aspergers or are low IQ white trash, or indians. That is more or less it.


So...Which one are you?


----------



## wjd1989

Ratings are so much more insignificant these days than they used to be.

I think the WWE are right in taking a more overall view of the success of their brand.

That said, the last two week's of Raw have been AWFUL and I haven't watched Smackdown in a while. I did however enjoy Backlash.


----------



## God Movement

wjd1989 said:


> *Ratings are so much more insignificant these days than they used to be.
> *
> I think the WWE are right in taking a more overall view of the success of their brand.
> 
> That said, the last two week's of Raw have been AWFUL and I haven't watched Smackdown in a while. I did however enjoy Backlash.


Do you think Vince McMahon could go to a meeting with the USA Network and say that? You see, when you have good ratings you're in a pole position to negotiate the next deal. You are in the power seat and you can request what you want because they (the network) needs _you_. When the ratings are bad you have poor negotiation power and you aren't exactly in a position to ask for more money because you aren't bringing shit to the table. If it stays like this the USA Network are well within their right to tell Vince and HHH to kick rocks. This is a disaster. End of.


----------



## Demolition119

wjd1989 said:


> Ratings are so much more insignificant these days than they used to be.
> 
> I think the WWE are right in taking a more overall view of the success of their brand.
> 
> That said, the last two week's of Raw have been AWFUL and I haven't watched Smackdown in a while. I did however enjoy Backlash.


They are not as important, but they do correspond to the steadily dropping interest in the WWE as A whole, at least in the states.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

If The Cruiserweights gets an hour like its been rumored then the ratings are going to drop even worse.


----------



## Godway

The idea that ratings don't matter, or WWE can't help the slide is horse shit. Ratings for no other sports program in America have nosedived the way they have for WWE this past year. The "dwindling TV audience" excuse doesn't hold any weight. These are like historic drops, and the show itself has been horrendous. So clearly the audience was just waiting for NFL season to start so they could bail on this garbage. Not going to get them back or improve until you implement some real and actual change to your programming, such as PG needs to go. WWE: The most respectable brand in America ideology needs to go. Become a fucking wrestling company again.


----------



## RomanMania

Don't worry brothers, next week this guy will make his debut on Raw with a new title. That'll bring the ratings.











:vincecry


----------



## TheFackingCrow

I wonder how Vince feels about leting Punk go now.

-Never truly believed in him as a legit main eventer, never pushed him above Cena or part timers because he didn't think he could be a huge draw.

-Punk left, brought millions of dollars to UFC, while Raw is dying.

:vince3 :vince4


----------



## Godway

TheFackingCrow said:


> I wonder how Vince feels about leting Punk go now.
> 
> -Never truly believed in him as a legit main eventer, never pushed him above Cena or part timers because he didn't think he could be a huge draw.
> 
> -Punk left, brought millions of dollars to UFC, while Raw is dying.
> 
> :vince3 :vince4


It's not like they wanted to let him go, they paid him a lot of money to stay initially in 2011. They just took him for granted and figured he was a lifer so they could treat him like he was Mr Indie Guy for the rest of his career. On second thought, he'd probably of been fed to Roman a dozen times by now.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

TheFackingCrow said:


> I wonder how Vince feels about leting Punk go now.
> 
> -Never truly believed in him as a legit main eventer, never pushed him above Cena or part timers because he didn't think he could be a huge draw.
> 
> -Punk left, brought millions of dollars to UFC, while Raw is dying.
> 
> :vince3 :vince4


um u do know the reason y punk brought "millions" is because he worked for wwe ergo vince, he couldn't have done that by working for tna, roh, or any other promotions...ufc capitalized on his wwe work to sell this ppv to wrestling fans wanting to see him fight, and regular people who wanted to see how badly he got fucked up

2nd point, the guy was a broken mess, he proved he cant last like cena, so y should he be the face of company? his look isnt corporate/mainstream friendly for this incarnation of wwe.

3rd in my opinion vince is happy he was able to make as much as he can from this guy, he no longer has any value as a wrestler imo, as Ive said before who can believe this guy as a bad ass/ fighter after getting beat like that....I mean wwe sold a 30 min match between him and lesnar, they can never do something like that again cause everybody knows he prob wouldn't last 30 secs with lesnar for reals.


----------



## Halifax

What mainly created the wrestling boom in 96 and forward was the new fresh and cool Nitro format that WWE very much copied. I remember my interest for American wrestling years prior was not the best because the format was very stale and the few changes from the 80´s wasn´t that great. Nitro and later RAW put a new spin and even thou I enyoyed other promotions better both RAW and Nitro were great pop corn entertainment.

20 years later and nothing much have changed. Raw starts and some music and the visuals of a titan tron is still there. A small recap of last week before a long talking segment begins. Often time just like before there a person or more with power (usually a McMahon) and it all leads to a main event being announced. The comedy segments are less adult oriented but very similar since Vince taste in humour hasn´t changed much. There´s a few short matches and some interviews backstage.

WWE needs to drastically change the format of both Raw and Smackdown. Cut the third hour of Raw and give it a huge make over. Don´t be afraid to do a 30 minute documentary about a wrestler in the middle of the show once a month or so. Just something that is well done and new and fresh.


----------



## HenryBowers

Punk killed the ratings in 2012. 

The show just sucks.


----------



## Godway

Punk averaged the same/better numbers as Cena before and after him...so no. Ratings didn't really start their freefalling until they resorted to the same old shit of Cena/Orton, and then continued freefalling when Punk/Bryan left, since the next top guy is a poor man's Cena/Orton.


----------



## wwe9391

At the end of the day wwe is not going out of Business for a very long time and Raw is not going off the air for a very long time. Hell im willing to bet when the tv deal is up in 2019 that USA resigns wwe. You watch


----------



## Mr.S

I remember the ratings were horrible when Punk was champions, his segments tanked in the individual breakup such that they had to move him away from the main-event & put better people there. Only when he feuded with guys like Rock as a heel that he did okay numbers. 

I remember in this forum there was an argument about Punk being one of the worst draws to have a lengthy reign!


----------



## TheFackingCrow

HenryBowers said:


> Punk killed the ratings in 2012.
> 
> The show just sucks.


Punk was basically an upper midcarder in 2012, i still wonder how the fuck people blamed him for the ratings, in fact he was the reason the ratings didn't drop even more, with three hours to fill and he was basically the only watchable thing.

Dude always had a big fanbase willing to watch him, incredible charisma, mic skills and a rock star look, what a fucking waste of a mega star.


----------



## Rick_James

Halifax said:


> What mainly created the wrestling boom in 96 and forward was the new fresh and cool Nitro format that WWE very much copied. I remember my interest for American wrestling years prior was not the best because the format was very stale and the few changes from the 80´s wasn´t that great. Nitro and later RAW put a new spin and even thou I enyoyed other promotions better both RAW and Nitro were great pop corn entertainment.
> 
> 20 years later and nothing much have changed. Raw starts and some music and the visuals of a titan tron is still there. A small recap of last week before a long talking segment begins. Often time just like before there a person or more with power (usually a McMahon) and it all leads to a main event being announced. The comedy segments are less adult oriented but very similar since Vince taste in humour hasn´t changed much. There´s a few short matches and some interviews backstage.
> 
> WWE needs to drastically change the format of both Raw and Smackdown. Cut the third hour of Raw and give it a huge make over. Don´t be afraid to do a 30 minute documentary about a wrestler in the middle of the show once a month or so. Just something that is well done and new and fresh.


I agree here big time, IMO the WWE has copied some of the worst stuff and biggest mistakes that WCW did, mainly hot shotting their shows to the point where none of the main eventers feel like main eventers, and they need to bring part timers in to get that actual "main eventer" feel. I personally think it would be great for them to bring cliff hanger endings back. I'm not a fan of the show at all but having HHH help Owens win the title, and then not reveal much about the motivations was a smart move - people want to tune in to find out what's going on between the two. 

The comedy thing is hard.... I mean as long as the show is geared towards little kids, it's going to be painful to watch. Unless they make the show for more mature audiences, comedy in the WWE is going to be awful like 98% of the time. 

I think there needs to be more back stage action, in particular with fights. More drama too... I can understand why the WWE is big on shit like twitter, but the reality is that it kills any feel of a feud being heated when you see photos of guy's smiling with each other backstage or any of the other corny stuff they do. Kayfabe is dead, but a good wrestler can get people to believe..... even if for just a short amount of time. The WWE's ventures outside of their shows only damage that though.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Cipher said:


> This isn't just about Reigns lmao. SOMETHING has to be the cause of these insane record lows and huge downward spiral.


What should really concern WWE is Cena returning...DURING SUMMER...did literally NOTHING for ratings. Their biggest star returns, no competition, and the downslide continued.

WWE is a dead product. When you bleed 20% of your viewers each year, at some point you don't have enough eyeballs watching your show to warrant being on TV.


----------



## Randy Lahey

God Movement said:


> Do you think Vince McMahon could go to a meeting with the USA Network and say that? You see, when you have good ratings you're in a pole position to negotiate the next deal. You are in the power seat and you can request what you want because they (the network) needs _you_. When the ratings are bad you have poor negotiation power and you aren't exactly in a position to ask for more money because you aren't bringing shit to the table. If it stays like this the USA Network are well within their right to tell Vince and HHH to kick rocks. This is a disaster. End of.


Exactly. The convo will go like this:

*USA Execs* - "Uh Vince, you are pulling a sub 2.0 rating now. We can't afford to pay you what you got in your last contract. You either take something bare bones, or we're putting on a different show.

*Vince* - "Well, what could possibly replace LIVE entertainment?"

*USA Execs *- "Vince, did you know TBS can put on stale reruns of Big Bang Theory and pull about 2/3 of your rating? And did you know TBS pays about 1/20 of the cost to show Big Bang Theory than what we are paying you? We will be a more profitable company showing reruns of The Office, than paying you millions to pull in a 1.80 rating that delivers low rent ad revenue as it is".

*Vince* - "Ok dammit. I'm taking my show to WWE Network. You just lost viewers you'll never get back"

*USA Execs* - "Sorry Vince, did you just say we will regret losing viewers who are already tuning out from your show at a rate of 20% per year? The way we look at it, we are just getting out before everyone is gone".

*Vince* - "WWE NETWORK..9.99. You won't even last without WWE. You'll get dropped from DirecTV and Dish's basic package because nobody will want to watch USA without WWE on it"

*USA Execs*- "Vince, it's 2018. Nobody gives a shit about wrestling. It's over.".


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

HenryBowers said:


> Punk killed the ratings in 2012.
> 
> The show just sucks.


The blow the Ratings never recovered from was Cena's horrible reign in 2013, followed by Orton's horrible reign, followed by Bryan getting fucked over by yet another old part timer, followed by Punk leaving, followed by Bryan getting fucked over AGAIN, followed by Reigns' fumbling, flabbergasting reign of terror for two years.
No company in the world can fuck their fans over this hard this long, and keep them.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> The blow the Ratings never recovered from was Cena's horrible reign in 2013, followed by Orton's horrible reign, followed by Bryan getting fucked over by yet another old part timer, followed by Punk leaving, followed by Bryan getting fucked over AGAIN, followed by Reigns' fumbling, flabbergasting reign of terror for two years.
> No company in the world can fuck their fans over this hard this long, and keep them.


reign of terror for 2 years that hes had the belt for about 80 days? if anyone had a "reign of terror" in that period it was seth, though that was due to booking


----------



## wwe9391

BigDaveBatista said:


> reign of terror for 2 years that hes had the belt for about 80 days? if anyone had a "reign of terror" in that period it was seth, though that was due to booking


:lol exactly what 2 year reign of terror from Reigns? Oh Anti Reigns fan always crack me up.


----------



## HenryBowers

TheFackingCrow said:


> Punk was basically an upper midcarder in 2012, i still wonder how the fuck people blamed him for the ratings, in fact he was the reason the ratings didn't drop even more, with three hours to fill and he was basically the only watchable thing.
> 
> Dude always had a big fanbase willing to watch him, incredible charisma, mic skills and a rock star look, what a fucking waste of a mega star.


It was under Punk that ratings first start ducking below 3.0.


----------



## OwenSES

The ratings plunged after Lesnar won the belt. Having a part time champion was not a good idea.


----------



## RomanMania

1.8 LUL
How the mighty have fallen.
From 4.0's, to 3.0's, 2.0's. Now in the 1's.
How much lower can it possibly go.


----------



## HenryBowers

Both Inquisitor and Christian Post asking if WWE will get cancelled. 

The vultures are near.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

LOL at WWE getting cancelled. If even TN fucking A can crawl for three years under the threat of getting canceled. WWE can also. What is likely the case is that they would have to take an even lower pay from the USA than they get. Which either means they will, or they will take their show to another network. I am betting the latter. And they will continue. But their product is gonna become more and more niche. You can belee dat.


----------



## new red

The reason why rating are at an all time low is because WWE does not know how to build characters anymore let alone a decent storyline that lasts a month.

WWE in their warped minds think that by putting the belt on a finn balor or Kevin Owens it makes them "over". Well sorry to break it to you no it doesn't.

Look back in the day it took Austin nearly 2 years of being over from King of the Ring 96 to Mania in 98 to win the World Championship. Took The Rock nearly a year or so as well.

Goldberg went on an epic undefeated streak for around 8 months before he was made world champion. throwing a belt on wrestler xyz without buiding them up properly serves no purpose other than to show people that you are acting out of desperation like WCW in 2000


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> :lol exactly what 2 year reign of terror from Reigns? Oh Anti Reigns fan always crack me up.


Are you seriously thick?
The whole first half of 2015 was Reigns as super face. Then he was toned down for a Short time because of his massive failure until he main evented again throughout the fall, winter, until WM 32, after which he Headlined for months with Styles, then Rollins.
One CANNOT possibly stupid enough to not see every talent besides Rollins to some extent was compromised to not endanger Reigns' desired Spot.
It made a bad product even worse.


----------



## Bink77

Just because Reigns didn't have the title that complete 2 years doesn't mean he wasn't shoved down our throats. The Guy sucks ass.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Are you seriously thick?
> The whole first half of 2015 was Reigns as super face. Then he was toned down for a Short time because of his massive failure until he main evented again throughout the fall, winter, until WM 32, after which he Headlined for months with Styles, then Rollins.
> One CANNOT possibly stupid enough to not see every talent besides Rollins to some extent was compromised to not endanger Reigns' desired Spot.
> It made a bad product even worse.


Ehh I guess I didn't notice it. Maybe its because I like Reigns and I like what he is doing. Still this so called "mega push" is nothing compared to passed pushes. Reigns deserves to be where he is at.


----------



## The Dazzler

I didn't expect them to hit this low, this fast. I hope it doesn't mean they'll end the split.


----------



## Bink77

It's over Johnny.


----------



## Thanks12

Randy Lahey said:


> Exactly. The convo will go like this:
> 
> *USA Execs* - "Uh Vince, you are pulling a sub 2.0 rating now. We can't afford to pay you what you got in your last contract. You either take something bare bones, or we're putting on a different show.
> 
> *Vince* - "Well, what could possibly replace LIVE entertainment?"
> 
> *USA Execs *- "Vince, did you know TBS can put on stale reruns of Big Bang Theory and pull about 2/3 of your rating? And did you know TBS pays about 1/20 of the cost to show Big Bang Theory than what we are paying you? We will be a more profitable company showing reruns of The Office, than paying you millions to pull in a 1.80 rating that delivers low rent ad revenue as it is".
> 
> *Vince* - "Ok dammit. I'm taking my show to WWE Network. You just lost viewers you'll never get back"
> 
> *USA Execs* - "Sorry Vince, did you just say we will regret losing viewers who are already tuning out from your show at a rate of 20% per year? The way we look at it, we are just getting out before everyone is gone".
> 
> *Vince* - "WWE NETWORK..9.99. You won't even last without WWE. You'll get dropped from DirecTV and Dish's basic package because nobody will want to watch USA without WWE on it"
> 
> *USA Execs*- "Vince, it's 2018. Nobody gives a shit about wrestling. It's over.".


Haha I can actutally imagine this really happening.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Bink77 said:


> Just because Reigns didn't have the title that complete 2 years doesn't mean he wasn't shoved down our throats. The Guy sucks ass.


every single main eventer in wrestling history was at one point or another "shoved down peoples throats"


----------



## Bink77

BigDaveBatista said:


> every single main eventer in wrestling history was at one point or another "shoved down peoples throats"


Not before they were already organically over with the audience first.


----------



## HenryBowers

P.H. Hatecraft said:


> LOL at WWE getting cancelled. If even TN fucking A can crawl for three years under the threat of getting canceled. WWE can also. What is likely the case is that they would have to take an even lower pay from the USA than they get. Which either means they will, or they will take their show to another network. I am betting the latter. And they will continue. But their product is gonna become more and more niche. You can belee dat.


TNA doesn't have the huge expenses that WWE has. They cant really afford a lower deal. The third hr of RAW is keeping them in profit. 

Also USA Network was the only bidder for the rights back in 2014, which is why they got such a shockingly bad deal. They were expecting like double more.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I didn't think it was possible that people walk this earth who are dumb or ignorant enough to use the ratings on the opening night of MNF as an earnest argument why certain people don't draw.
> It doesn't get dumber than that.
> Or maybe it can, by claiming Reigns getting the belt now would magically shield them from people watching football. Reigns didn't draw without competition, and he sure as fuck won't draw a single mark now in football season.


*
I think it's more funny to watch people like you desperately try to blame Reigns for ratings drops, while ignoring that every indy darling with the title has failed just as hard to create interest. Ambrose dropped Smackdown ratings by 18% the week before Backlash and I didn't hear a peep from his deluded fans blaming Reigns for RAW.*


----------



## Demolition119

new red said:


> The reason why rating are at an all time low is because WWE does not know how to build characters anymore let alone a decent storyline that lasts a month.
> 
> WWE in their warped minds think that by putting the belt on a finn balor or Kevin Owens it makes them "over". Well sorry to break it to you no it doesn't.
> 
> Look back in the day it took Austin nearly 2 years of being over from King of the Ring 96 to Mania in 98 to win the World Championship. Took The Rock nearly a year or so as well.
> 
> Goldberg went on an epic undefeated streak for around 8 months before he was made world champion. throwing a belt on wrestler xyz without buiding them up properly serves no purpose other than to show people that you are acting out of desperation like WCW in 2000


WWE definitely blow their loads too early. AJ and Becky won their 1st championships on A B pay per view no one gave A fuck about. Fans of AJ are happy about him being champ but if you look back it was really stupid to have Styles win the belt then. Have Ambrose cheat do anything to hold onto the belt until Survivor Series and have Styles chase him, he was being booked as being desperate at that point and it would have made sense.That could have been A defining Survivor Series moment.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Bink77 said:


> Not before they were already organically over with the audience first.


im not getting drawn into this argument again


----------



## fightthepower24

TNA TNA TNA!


----------



## skarvika

Relevant video about the latest rating, makes some interesting points. One notable point is that in 1997, Raw's lowest rating was 1.9 while it was in direct competition with WCW who were kicking their ass at the time. We're in trouble folks.


----------



## Cipher

This got ignored in the WWE section, so I'll post it here


----------



## TheGreatBanana

The nature of TV in general is changing. Most of you guys fail to realise this and love to bicker a lot. Firstly cable in general is dropping, more people are choosing to pay for internet over cable. WWE maybe losing viewership in TV but it is gaining huge viewership in other platforms such as YouTube and Facebook. They are one of the most viewed YouTube channels right now and their subscriber count keeps growing. I remember a few years ago they had a million subscribers and now it just shot up. The channel has 11.2 billion views, that's crazy numbers there. Pewdiepie has around 13 billion and he is the most viewed channel. WWE is on track on becoming the most viewed YouTube channel and will become that in a year or so.


----------



## Restomaniac

TheGreatBanana said:


> The nature of TV in general is changing. Most of you guys fail to realise this and love to bicker a lot. Firstly cable in general is dropping, more people are choosing to pay for internet over cable. WWE maybe losing viewership in TV but it is gaining huge viewership in other platforms such as YouTube and Facebook. They are one of the most viewed YouTube channels right now and their subscriber count keeps growing. I remember a few years ago they had a million subscribers and now it just shot up. The channel has 11.2 billion views, that's crazy numbers there. Pewdiepie has around 13 billion and he is the most viewed channel. WWE is on track on becoming the most viewed YouTube channel and will become that in a year or so.


Oh joy another 'YouTube is great and the way forwards' post.
YouTube pays nowhere near what USA pays. The idea that a big TV network deal isn't needed by WWE because of YouTube numbers is a totally flawed idea.


----------



## Reotor

TheGreatBanana said:


> The nature of TV in general is changing. Most of you guys fail to realise this and love to bicker a lot. Firstly cable in general is dropping, more people are choosing to pay for internet over cable. WWE maybe losing viewership in TV but it is gaining huge viewership in other platforms such as YouTube and Facebook. They are one of the most viewed YouTube channels right now and their subscriber count keeps growing. I remember a few years ago they had a million subscribers and now it just shot up. *The channel has 11.2 billion views, that's crazy numbers there. Pewdiepie has around 13 billion and he is the most viewed channel*. WWE is on track on becoming the most viewed YouTube channel and will become that in a year or so.


Wow...11 billion! that's great!....if youre a fucking basement dweller looking for an easy get rich scheme!
We're talking about a multi million corporation here! the money they make from youtube is chump change.


----------



## Erik.

You could tell the WWE were probably slightly worried about the ratings and they thought they'd smash out a Cage match on Raw to see if that's going to be a ratings puller - I'm going to guess it probably isn't because we still got the same predictable bullshit.

1.5 please.


----------



## JTB33b

It will be interesting to see what the ratings will be like this week because not only did they have to compete with MNF but also the world cup of Hockey. Smackdown ratings will suffer this week also because of the Canada vs U.S game and the season premier of NCIS


----------



## HenryBowers

1.5 is cancellation territory. They will be basically getting half the rating that they signed the new deal in 2014.


----------



## skarvika

Reotor said:


> Wow...11 billion! that's great!....if youre a fucking basement dweller looking for an easy get rich scheme!
> We're talking about a multi million corporation here! the money they make from youtube is chump change.


Pretty much. That money is good for supporting Pewdiepie, but WWE has a payroll of hundreds of people and needs to rent arenas, cover travel costs, catering etc. Youtube revenue just isn't gonna cut it, and as time has shown, it's very unreliable. Remember guys like Ray William Johnson, Shane Dawson, Smosh? They're not making big bucks from their videos anymore. Nobody should look at youtube as a source of sustainable income. Might be good for some smash and grab, but it's not going to hold up in the long run.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Restomaniac said:


> Oh joy another 'YouTube is great and the way forwards' post.
> YouTube pays nowhere near what USA pays. The idea that a big TV network deal isn't needed by WWE because of YouTube numbers is a totally flawed idea.


It's not flawed, it's bullshit.
11 million SUBSCRIBERS, yet the weekly videos get a million views at most.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

Restomaniac said:


> Oh joy another 'YouTube is great and the way forwards' post.
> YouTube pays nowhere near what USA pays. The idea that a big TV network deal isn't needed by WWE because of YouTube numbers is a totally flawed idea.


YouTube might not be near what TV is paying, but the nature of the game is changing. People in media recognise this shift from TV to online and the bigger online streaming gets the bigger the shift advertisers go from TV. Advertisers will pay higher prices to be featured in videos that get a ton of views. TV will always be king, but question is for how long.



Reotor said:


> Wow...11 billion! that's great!....if youre a fucking basement dweller looking for an easy get rich scheme!
> We're talking about a multi million corporation here! the money they make from youtube is chump change.


What you fail to realise is that wrestling fans in general are not keeping up with the live product. They would much rather do something else and catch whatever they missed online. This is the current behaivour. I mean why sit through WWE if you could be watching NFL and then watch WWE later. It's difficult to catch a live game of NFL or NBA, but it's not so tough to keep up with WWE. With live sports you can't really miss it as you don't know what is going to happen and generally something special becomes water cooler talk. WWE can't be like that because it's scripted and people know it. It has also failed to create must see moments throughout the years. 

The way I see it, it's the 3rd hour that is hurting the product. It has made the show longer and reduced its quality. It has allowed more time to be invested longer matches/segments and you have a brand split as well. It has slowed down the pace of the product. Just think about the amount of Raws that would have been phenomenal without the 3rd hour. Wrestling is meant to be high octane action like a speeding Ferrari, but now it's watching Prius cover the same distance only longer.


----------



## HenryBowers

TheGreatBanana said:


> YouTube might not be near what TV is paying, but the nature of the game is changing. People in media recognise this shift from TV to online and the bigger online streaming gets the bigger the shift advertisers go from TV. Advertisers will pay higher prices to be featured in videos that get a ton of views. TV will always be king, but question is for how long.
> 
> 
> 
> What you fail to realise is that wrestling fans in general are not keeping up with the live product. They would much rather do something else and catch whatever they missed online. This is the current behaivour. I mean why sit through WWE if you could be watching NFL and then watch WWE later. It's difficult to catch a live game of NFL or NBA, but it's not so tough to keep up with WWE. With live sports you can't really miss it as you don't know what is going to happen and generally something special becomes water cooler talk. WWE can't be like that because it's scripted and people know it. It has also failed to create must see moments throughout the years.
> 
> The way I see it, it's the 3rd hour that is hurting the product. It has made the show longer and reduced its quality. It has allowed more time to be invested longer matches/segments and you have a brand split as well. It has slowed down the pace of the product. Just think about the amount of Raws that would have been phenomenal without the 3rd hour. Wrestling is meant to be high octane action like a speeding Ferrari, but now it's watching Prius cover the same distance only longer.


Moving to 3hrs didn't actually make much impact in 2012. Before the 1000 ep they were getting around the 3.0 mark with the occasional outlier of 3.5 after they did dip to around 2.7, yes, but that was more down to Punks godawful long title reign. Long reigns always tire the audience and Punk's took the cake. 

2013 even had a slight overall improvement of rating from 3.0 to 3.1 which doesnt make sense considering 2012 had only 3hr RAW for half the year. 

Yes, 3hr RAW is a problem and their maybe a delayed fatigue to it but the real problem is the product is just crap. You can break that down all you want: horrible commentary, lack of stars, bad booking etc. Its just crap.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Here we go again with the "Punk sunk ratings".
If you book the title like the US belt, well, then you should not expect big things. Punk didn't Even headline PPVs most of the time LOL


----------



## Cipher

Next week they're going up against the NFL and the first Hillary Clinton/Donald Trump debate









RIP


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Cipher said:


> Next week they're going up against the NFL and the first Hillary Clinton/Donald Trump debate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RIP


You're right. I wonder if they just do a throwaway show, given the stiffness of their opposition? Might be a new record low.


----------



## jim courier

These current rating are making the 2007-2013 era look like a boom period lmaooo.


----------



## Sincere

Cipher said:


> Next week they're going up against the NFL and the first Hillary Clinton/Donald Trump debate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RIP


That shit is gonna be brutal. I'll be surprised if the ratings don't get skullfucked into the dirt next week.


----------



## HenryBowers

What I would give to be a fly in USA Network boardroom.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.734M
H2-2.686M
H3-2.633M
3H-2.684M*










*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (-1.76%/-0.048M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-1.97%/-0.053M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-3.69%/-0.101M) 

9/19/16 Vs 9/12/16
(-0.0022%/-0.006M)

Demo:
9/19/16 Vs 9/12/16

H1- 0.930D Vs 0.950D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.930D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.860D
3H- 0.913D Vs 0.913D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by demo and 6th, 8th & 9th by viewership.*


----------



## KO Bossy

I see that its becoming a trend now...is this better or worse than last week?


2.0 now seems like a great achievement :ha


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Same as last week. 2.68 overall average. Going with the same main event two weeks in a row, which didn't even draw the first week.

:mj4


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

EDIT: Nevermind.

:LOL Horrible ratings once again. Fucking love this.


----------



## Godway

These Roman vs. Owens matches aren't working. Better go back to Roman vs. Sheamus.


----------



## KO Bossy

ShowStopper said:


> Same as last week. 2.68 overall average. Going with the same main event two weeks in a row, which didn't even draw the first week.
> 
> :mj4


But...but this one was a CAGE match! How could nobody care?


----------



## HenryBowers

Was hoping for lower as always but maybe they have temporarily bottomed out. Too many fanatics watching the show. 

I doubt USA Network is impressed though. Another 1.9 rating.


----------



## RDEvans

And the ratings keep getting lower. That's what happens when you book everyone like shit and ignore your fans for years.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.734M
> H2-2.686M
> H3-2.633M
> 3H-2.684M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (-1.76%/-0.048M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-1.97%/-0.053M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-3.69%/-0.101M)
> 
> 9/19/16 Vs 9/12/16
> (-0.0022%/-0.006M)
> 
> Demo:
> 9/19/16 Vs 9/12/16
> 
> H1- 0.930D Vs 0.950D
> H2- 0.900D Vs 0.930D
> H3- 0.910D Vs 0.860D
> 3H- 0.913D Vs 0.913D
> 
> Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by demo and 6th, 8th & 9th by viewership.*


*Y-Y viewership:
9/19/16 Vs 9/21/15

H1- 2.734M Vs 3.420M
H2- 2.686M Vs 3.368M
H3- 2.633M Vs 3.260M
3H- 2.684M Vs 3.349M (-19.86% / -0.665M)

Y-Y demo:
9/19/16 Vs 9/21/15

H1- 0.930D Vs 1.180D
H2- 0.900D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.910D Vs 1.150D
3H- 0.913D Vs 1.143D*

*Note: 
RAW this week last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by demo and 3rd, 5th & 4th by viewership.
RAW this week last year was the fallout RAW to Night of Champions.*


----------



## wwe9391

This is what's probably gonna be the normal through the football season. People did comeback for the Main event judging by the 3rd hour over lap. 

Next weeks gonna even worse with the debate. Tho every tv show is gonna be effected by that.

Has KO used his get out of jail free card yet?


----------



## Therapy

Came back for hour 3 to watch Foley not know wrestlers names and a poorly booked Main Event.. BBBBUT CAGE!


----------



## Sincere

There were a number of premieres last night for regular TV shows, too. Not sure how much those shows affect cable ratings.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

If they're this bad now, next week is gonna be absolutely hilarious, wonder what type of match Owens and Reigns will have that WWE thinks will help with ratings


----------



## CretinHop138

Next week could be the lowest rated Raw of all time (1.5 from December 1996 is the lowest) or at least equal it. MNF and Presidential debate.


----------



## zonetrooper5

Heres hoping for the ratings to keep on falling, its what you get for putting on a stale shitty product with no characters/gimmicks, decent storylines, writing and the same boring and bland 20 minute workrate matches.


----------



## Therapy

ShadowSucks92 said:


> If they're this bad now, next week is gonna be absolutely hilarious, wonder what type of match Owens and Reigns will have that WWE thinks will help with ratings


I know. We will have an Asylum match!! That will save ratings.. And it'll be KO Vs Roman!! :vince


----------



## TaterTots

Roman Reigns despite having the full machinery behind him for 2 years STILL doesn't moves the needle.


----------



## Cipher

Next week, Kevin Owens Roman Reigns in a Triple Threat Cage Match!


----------



## SirZep

I'm one show behind with Raw, so I gotta do a bit of catching up, but I don't understand something: Why does Seth Rollins get a 'rematch'?

He was put in the title picture at SummerSlam without earning his shot (while Finn Balor did) - he loses.
He was put in the title picture on Raw without earning his shot - he loses (because of Triple H but still...)
He is being put in the title picture at Clash of Champions (by the face GM mind you) without earning it - and meanwhile Roman would have had to beat Owens in a non-title match in order to get a shot.

I mean...this doesn't make any sense


----------



## HenryBowers

Next week a ladder in a cage in a hell in a cell match for the WWE title and master of the universe!


----------



## Reotor

You guys are thinking too small.
Cage match? pffft. The one thing that will save the ratings is an electric pool match!


----------



## Therapy

SirZep said:


> I mean...this doesn't make any sense


Nothing on the entire show makes any sense. Even Stromans stupid jobber matches are useless. Ok. He is big. We get it. Now what?


----------



## ShadowSucks92

SirZep said:


> I'm one show behind with Raw, so I gotta do a bit of catching up, but I don't understand something: Why does Seth Rollins get a 'rematch'?
> 
> He was put in the title picture at SummerSlam without earning his shot (while Finn Balor did) - he loses.
> He was put in the title picture on Raw without earning his shot - he loses (because of Triple H but still...)
> He is being put in the title picture at Clash of Champions (by the face GM mind you) without earning it - and meanwhile Roman would have had to beat Owens in a non-title match in order to get a shot.
> 
> I mean...this doesn't make any sense


I always find it's best to just not question what makes sense on RAW anymore and just accept that they don't know what the hell they're doing, I mean its been nearly a month and somehow Stephanie still can't give an explanation as to why HHH cost Rollins the belt


----------



## Chrome

That is all.


----------



## Blade Runner

What shocks me is that there's people that still sit through 3 full hours of this crap on a weekly basis. The only way that I can make sense of these Nelson trackings is 1.8m people falling asleep on their couch and forgetting to turn their TV off


----------



## TheGreatBanana

This is what happens when you split the brands and create two world titles. I mean who in the world gives a shit about who is wrestling for the Universal title, a title that has been shitted on by fans. Why should fans care about it more than the United States title which has a bigger history and lineage.


----------



## Therapy

I have a feeling WWE will resort to full desperation tactic to get the needle to move. And not good ones at that. 

Shitty guest host 
Appearance by someone from the AE
Battle royal
Shit gimmick match
Give a PPV quality match with title change away on live that makes no sense storyline wise


----------



## Chrome

The scary thing is the 1st hour went DOWN even though they were unopposed by MNF for much of that hour. Hour 2 went down too fwiw. And hour 3 went up, so maybe the cage match kinda worked? Maybe next week, they can do a flaming cage ladder match and get 2.9 million viewers! :mark:


----------



## Bink77

It's good for wwe that ratings don't matter anymore, nor do wins and losses, compelling storylines or coherent storytelling. The audience clearly just wants rematches of last week's show. And that new cruiserweight division, let's not show the audience the new champion that was advertised because that'll build tension for his first ppv title defense that was just announced happening in 6 days.


----------



## wwe1univeres

ShadowSucks92 said:


> SirZep said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm one show behind with Raw, so I gotta do a bit of catching up, but I don't understand something: Why does Seth Rollins get a 'rematch'?
> 
> He was put in the title picture at SummerSlam without earning his shot (while Finn Balor did) - he loses.
> He was put in the title picture on Raw without earning his shot - he loses (because of Triple H but still...)
> He is being put in the title picture at Clash of Champions (by the face GM mind you) without earning it - and meanwhile Roman would have had to beat Owens in a non-title match in order to get a shot.
> 
> I mean...this doesn't make any sense
> 
> 
> 
> I always find it's best to just not question what makes sense on RAW anymore and just accept that they don't know what the hell they're doing, I mean its been nearly a month and somehow Stephanie still can't give an explanation as to why HHH cost Rollins the belt
Click to expand...

Just pretend Hhh and Stephanie don't sleep in the same bed.


----------



## HenryBowers

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> What shocks me is that there's people that still sit through 3 full hours of this crap on a weekly basis. The only way that I can make sense of these Nelson trackings is 1.8m people falling asleep on their couch and forgetting to turn their TV off


I would be curious to know how many actually pay attention to the ads (or RAW itself), the advertisers probably wouldnt pay all that much if they knew that the audience is bored shitless on their iphone or making a sandwich in their kitchen whilst ads are playing.


----------



## Therapy

What is even sadder and think being forgotten about.

This was a go home show for the brands first PPV. This is the show that is supposed to sell subscriptions and PPVs.. This was supposed to be the needle mover.. And the needle didn't budge. And anyone watching. I don't think even realize a PPV is Sunday. On a show that loves to push ads at us. They barely pushed the PPV


----------



## HenryBowers

1.97 rating apparently.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Two straight weeks of sub 1.0 in the demo. Who knows, this might be the rock bottom rating. Next week will put that to the test.


----------



## LordKain

:HA

I'm surprised they aren't even lower.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HenryBowers said:


> 1.97 rating apparently.


Higher than last week and higher than I expected. Oh well.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

I would not be shocked if they put the title on Rollins this sunday in hope that a title change would get the ratings back up a little bit.


----------



## Reotor

That moment when you realize 1.97 is pretty damn high

:enzo


----------



## Therapy

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> I would not be shocked if they put the title on Rollins this sunday in hope that a title change would get the ratings back up a little bit.


Hasty title swaps really never worked out well before.. Definitely isn't going to do shit now... The entire roster, direction, and storylines are giant vacuum of suck right now.. Doesn't matter who has the title when everything sucks... It's just sucking on someone else now..Even casuals have been subjected to this so long now even they know where a story is going before it even happens anymore

Rollins gets it back... Blah blah blah.. Triple H... Steph.. Authority.. Same old shit.. It's 2016 and I can't believe WWE is STILL making the primary storyline during the show the "Us Vs Boss" shit... Austin/Vince started this shit in the 90s and they still have yet to think of a single new idea to drive storylines.


----------



## Randy Lahey

These ratings are horrible. And anyone saying "Not as bad as what I thought" must have the lowest expectations possible. I mean, 2 straight weeks under a 2.0. Next week will probably be a 1.75 or lower. WWE is on cable TV, every monday, is dying. We are seeing the death right here. Enjoy it.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Therapy said:


> Hasty title swaps really never worked out well before.. Definitely isn't going to do shit now... The entire roster, direction, and storylines are giant vacuum of suck right now.. Doesn't matter who has the title when everything sucks... It's just sucking on someone else now..Even casuals have been subjected to this so long now even they know where a story is going before it even happens anymore
> 
> Rollins gets it back... Blah blah blah.. Triple H... Steph.. Authority.. Same old shit.. It's 2016 and I can't believe WWE is STILL making the primary storyline during the show the "Us Vs Boss" shit... Austin/Vince started this shit in the 90s and they still have yet to think of a single new idea to drive storylines.


I know that but WWE tends do stuff like this when they panic and not only that I would also not be shocked if Rollins won the title but they also might do the Rollins/Triple H match at Survivor Series thinking Trips being back will keep the ratings up lol.


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> H1- 2.734M Vs 3.420M
> H2- 2.686M Vs 3.368M
> H3- 2.633M Vs 3.260M
> 3H- 2.684M Vs 3.349M (-19.86% / -0.665M)
> 
> Y-Y demo:
> 9/19/16 Vs 9/21/15
> 
> H1- 0.930D Vs 1.180D
> H2- 0.900D Vs 1.100D
> H3- 0.910D Vs 1.150D
> 3H- 0.913D Vs 1.143D[/B]


That's the most important stat. WWE is 20% lower this year, than last year. And Last year was horrible. When you bleed 20% of your audience each year, with no signs of stopping the bleeding in site...you are dying. And eventually , you're dead. 

There will be another kill shot next week. 2,500,000 viewers at best


----------



## iisuziei3i

i dont know why anyone goes on neilsen ratings they only measure families that own neilsen boxes and i never met anyone who owns one...so basically if you dont own a neilsens box your viewership doesnt matter...(for people who care about that ratings system)

its actually surprising in 2016 that there isnt some updated chip or technology that measures all viewership on ALL cable boxes..


----------



## The_Jiz

:lmao


----------



## Therapy

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> I know that but WWE tends do stuff like this when they panic and not only that I would also not be shocked if Rollins won the title but they also might do the Rollins/Triple H match at Survivor Series thinking Trips being back will keep the ratings up lol.


Without a doubt Triple H will be in a match very soon for that reason alone. Thing is.. All these knee jerk reactions used to work... Triple H in a match.. Bring Vince back... HBK appearance... The Rock.. Celebrity guest hosts.. But slowly and more than ever.. These cheap draw tricks don't fool people nearly as much as they used to.


----------



## Cipher

Wonder if they'll beg HBK to come back and work a final program. They don't really have many options left to stop the spiral.


----------



## The_Jiz

The bigger the downfall the more Vince panics. More panics further irrational booking. 

Its an entertaining cycle.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Cipher said:


> Wonder if they'll beg HBK to come back and work a final program. They don't really have many options left to stop the spiral.


Apparently without direct competition from another company, the WWE is content with a consistent bleed of their viewers.

I think the only thing that can save WWE is for UFC to put on a live show every monday. I don't know if they have enough fighters around the minor leagues to pull it off, and they may not want to oversaturate themselves within the market, but I think maybe UFC in direct competition might get WWE's creative juices flowing again. Or they'll roll over and just die. Probably the latter.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

Therapy said:


> Hasty title swaps really never worked out well before.. Definitely isn't going to do shit now... The entire roster, direction, and storylines are giant vacuum of suck right now.. Doesn't matter who has the title when everything sucks... It's just sucking on someone else now..Even casuals have been subjected to this so long now even they know where a story is going before it even happens anymore
> 
> Rollins gets it back... Blah blah blah.. Triple H... Steph.. Authority.. Same old shit.. It's 2016 and I can't believe WWE is STILL making the primary storyline during the show the "Us Vs Boss" shit... Austin/Vince started this shit in the 90s and they still have yet to think of a single new idea to drive storylines.


How long you figure before the first roster 'realignment'? :lol


----------



## Therapy

The Cleaner said:


> How long you figure before the first roster 'realignment'? :lol


Oh yeah.. We're gonna have a bunch of TNA moments inside WWE when they start _invading_ each others shows...

"IS THAT JOHN CENA IN THE RAW ZONE???? WHAT'S HE DOING HERE??"


----------



## RLStern

*"I'm happy to be here!" characters don't draw*

*It's one of the worst characters you could write, there's no conflict, nothing to relate to. you can't get much fans as they can't relate and they have nothing to root towards, there's no chase, the character is just happy to be there, giving us no material, no entertainment.

Same goes for a heel who's just there to just destroy, THAT's there ultimate goal?? No, you gotta give me a deep reason to hate you as a heel. Russo was right about these happy to be here gimmicks.

Put it like this, imagine if Rocky in Rocky 1 and 2 was happy to be in his situation, there would be no story(Story in him wanting to go the distance and not wanting to be a bum in Rocky 1, Story in him wanting to be the champion of the world in Rocky 2), it wouldn't make sense(why would Rocky be happy in his bad situation??)

No, instead the genius that Sly is, wrote Rocky as a depressed character who isn't happy with his situation, who wants to achieve a higher position in life, that gives us someone to root for,(making Rocky a beloved babyface), that gives us the chase(Training Scenes, hoping as an audience that he wins, in wrestling terms great matches and fans into the product), that us the ultimate goal(world champion in Rocky), that gives us that Wrestlemania moment(Rocky winning the title in Rocky 2), after the character achieves his goal(world title) then it's logical for the character to be "happy to be there"



People compare Daniel Bryan to Sami Zayn alot and I'm left confused, Daniel Bryan didn't start smiling alot and being happy to be there until he won the world championship at Wrestlemania, he sold the heels, he had mad, sad, depressive expressions at his treatments, against the Wyatt Family, Against The Authority, Against John Cena, Against everyone who he thought was keeping him down, he didn't smile unless it was to piss them off or insult them or rebuke their insults, he was mad, mad when The Authority screwed him, mad at The Wyatt's temptations, he only smiled when he won, when he occupied raw, when he won the world title.

He wasn't satisfied, he wasn't happy to just be there, he wanted to overcome The Authority and be the face of the WWE. Sami Zayn doesn't possess that story arch, so I don't understand where this comparison came from, just because they're both underdogs doesn't mean they'll be equally successful, Zach Gowen was an underdog too, but he wasn't drawing like Daniel Bryan, there's more to just being a heel or a babyface or an underdog or a powerhouse, etc

Basically you give fans no reason to get invested with a happy to be here gimmick, you need to have fans invested, cheering for you and relating to you.

*


----------



## Miguel De Juan

I don't blame Sami Zayn for this. It is the Hollywood writing team. Dave and Bryan on WOR talk about how bad the scripted promos are compared to the guys from the 1970s, 1980s, UFC guys, and other talkers from other promotions.


----------



## Piper's Pit

I actually thought it was a good show, it was 3 hours of mostly decent wrestling matches and very few talking segments.

The show doesn't deserve that rating IMO.


----------



## Mister Sinister

1. Kevin Owens is champion (no draw)
2. Reruns of Bo Dallas, Strowman, the worst of 7 series, and divas tag match with the same 4 ladies as every week
3. Rerun of Owens vs Reigns in the main event 
4. One so-so match from cruiserweights that were moving as slow as Sheamus and Cesaro
5. No AJ Styles or John Cena

Is there any surprise what has become of Raw's ratings? It's literally the same exact fucking matches every week. How do these writers/bookers have jobs? How!? I could write a more exciting show outline in 20 minutes.

The most _raw_, legit moments this week were a "let's go jobber" chant, The List of Jericho, and Foley pulling out his notes on live television.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Wrestling matches don't draw... ESPECIALLY not in the PG era


----------



## ToddsAutographs

next wk will be fine. wrestling fans dont care about politics..day too stoop it


----------



## IHaveTillFiveBitch

This is what happens when you listen to smarks, Kevin Owens is literally killing the company, come back Vince and save us from haitch who has no clue what mainstream appeal and star power is.


----------



## Miguel De Juan

RAW and WWE needs a new vision. Get rid of three hours. They have not produced exciting television in years (consistently throughout the year). 

I am so mad at TNA right not for failing to provide an alternative and a place to work if WWE's ratings dive cost them their television deal.

It seems like American wrestling is just failing.


----------



## V-Trigger

IHaveTillFiveBitch said:


> This is what happens when you listen to smarks, Kevin Owens is literally killing the company, come back Vince and save us from haitch who has no clue what mainstream appeal and star power is.


LOL. The samoan failure has been in the Main Event for three weeks from now.


----------



## RLStern

*The Brand Split didn't save jack, just diluted their flagship show with half the roster that lacks alot of talent or isn't displaying it with 3 hour tv air time, a world title with no prestige given to NXT/Indy/Triple H guys who aren't drawing, a lackluster womens division, a lackluster tag division that really has only one star brand(New Day), lackluster midcard, no viable big time babyface(Sami Zayn isn't a huge draw maybe he will be one day but right now he isn't, Seth Rollins was the biggest heel in the company it will take very long to get the same people on his side who were repulsed by his evil acts and booed him as a heel, Roman Reigns who was pushed incorrectly, Kevin Owens who wasn't even a heel main eventer got the title, Finn Balor who just debuted and didn't ever draw yet in the main roster gets the title.

I'd stick to Smackdown, and I can't believe I'm saying that...

Raw is heading for worse.*


----------



## KC Armstrong

IHaveTillFiveBitch said:


> Kevin Owens is literally killing the company



... because RAW just started losing viewers a few weeks ago when KO won the title...




> The Brand Split didn't save jack


It did nothing for Raw, but at least I now have one show I enjoy consistently. 

pre brand split: hated Raw, never watched SmackDown
post brand split: still hate Raw, really like SmackDown


----------



## CretinHop138

Miguel De Juan said:


> RAW and WWE needs a new vision. Get rid of three hours. They have not produced exciting television in years (consistently throughout the year).
> 
> *I am so mad at TNA right not for failing to provide an alternative and a place to work if WWE's ratings dive cost them their television deal.*
> 
> It seems like American wrestling is just failing.


Why the need to compete with WWE? TNA are still here.


----------



## DammitChrist

BrotherNero said:


> LOL. The samoan failure has been in the Main Event for three weeks from now.


He's also closed Raw 8 out of 9 times post-brand split.


----------



## T0M

Fully deserved.

The last 18 months have been horrific and people are turning off. Surprise surprise.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> What shocks me is that there's people that still sit through 3 full hours of this crap on a weekly basis. The only way that I can make sense of these Nelson trackings is 1.8m people falling asleep on their couch and forgetting to turn their TV off


that's not how Nielsen track tv views....the number they come up with is an educated guess at best..
https://www.thebalance.com/how-to-understand-nielsen-tv-ratings-2315476
http://splitsider.com/2011/01/why-nielsen-ratings-are-inaccurate-and-why-theyll-stay-that-way/
and this is not directed at u. but the unnecessary bringing up/ or tying roman reigns to lower ratings is stupid and corny. you guys are almost obsessed with him at this point, get some help...people conviently forget when ko and zayn main evented, the third hour lost almost 300k viewers from the second hour circa 600k from first ... but im sure you guys( ROMAN obsess haters) totally forgot that. or how dean and seth two guys I like drew a 1.87(for what that's worth) for a freaking title match...im not sure if u guys are just putting on the hatred, sheep that follow the it thing, jealous, or for some reason really anti a tv character who u don't know, but like I said before it comes of as a tired act to a distant observer like myself


----------



## Bret Hart

CretinHop138 said:


> Why the need to compete with WWE? TNA are still here.


But they suck. 

TNA was good until 2010ish... They should have just kept what they were doing and eventually WWE would have been in TNA territory in terms of ratings.... If TNA had their shit together, Joe, Styles, Aries, Roode... All of the TNA stars that WWE has would have still been in TNA... WWE would be screwed.

Smackdown is being led by the Face of TNA... Let that sink in... And is probably the only real star they have after Cena, Orton, Lesnar etc.


----------



## CretinHop138

Bret Hart said:


> But they suck.
> 
> TNA was good until 2010ish... They should have just kept what they were doing and eventually WWE would have been in TNA territory in terms of ratings.... If TNA had their shit together, Joe, Styles, Aries, Roode... All of the TNA stars that WWE has would have still been in TNA... WWE would be screwed.
> 
> Smackdown is being led by the Face of TNA... Let that sink in... And is probably the only real star they have after Cena, Orton, Lesnar etc.


Suggest you watch the show, they've moved on from those days with some new people under Corgan's character driven direction. WWE would never be screwed even in the old days TNA as they were never going to get to the 2.0 mark.


----------



## Bret Hart

CretinHop138 said:


> Suggest you watch the show, they've moved on from those days with some new people under Corgan's character driven direction. WWE would never be screwed even in the old days TNA as they were never going to get to the 2.0 mark.


Thanks, I'll give it a try. 

TNA wouldn't catch up to WWE but WWE would drop down to TNA levels and with the way things are going, WWE is probably going to be getting 1.6, 1.7, 1.8 type ratings regularly within a year.


----------



## JDP2016

KO Bossy said:


> But...but this one was a CAGE match! How could nobody care?


If they didn't care the week before, then putting them in a cage a week later isn't gonna make a difference. What will they do next week? Scaffold match? Ladder match? Inferno match?


----------



## Cipher

Cause since when have cage matches been good? They've turned into normal matches with a cage around them.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

DammitC said:


> He's also closed Raw 8 out of 9 times post-brand split.


Because he the guy with most star power they have out there, ratings probably would be even worse without him, how can you blame them?

Reigns can't save the ratings and he is not even the champion, but lets be honest, but do you think that things like Owens vs Zayn would do better? They are just throwing Reigns there expecting not to die faster.


----------



## CretinHop138

*With Raw predicted to do possibly its lowest ever rating next week - Predict the rating!*

The Donald vs The Hillary next week along with the Saints vs Falcons MNF, There is a realistic chance WWE could do its lowest ever rating next week (they REALLY need a hot angle out of COC)

The all time lowest rated Raw outright was December 23rd 1996 with a 1.5 where Shawn Michaels beat Steve Austin by DQ in the main event.

I think it'll be 1.6


----------



## Ace

*Re: With Raw predicted to do possibly its lowest ever rating next week - Predict the rating!*

The lower, the better. 

The shows need radical change and there is no better way to send that message with an all time low rating.


----------



## DammitChrist

TheFackingCrow said:


> Because he the guy with most star power they have out there, ratings probably would be even worse without him, how can you blame them?
> 
> Reigns can't save the ratings and he is not even the champion, but lets be honest, but do you think that things like Owens vs Zayn would do better? They are just throwing Reigns there expecting not to die faster.


He better have the most star power on Raw. No other full-timer on the red brand's roster has the privilege of breaking the Survivor Series/Royal Rumble record, winning a rumble match, main eventing the last 2 Wrestlemanias, and winning the world title 3 times within 5 months. How can you blame the rest of the Raw talents for not having as much star power as he does? Their credibility just pales in comparison. (Btw I wasn't blaming Roman on my previous post. I was just making an observation).

If it makes anyone feel any better, nobody can save the ratings. Roman isn't to blame for the ratings. Kevin isn't to blame for the ratings. Seth isn't to blame for the ratings. The talents shouldn't be blamed for the ratings. IMO I think the poor product is responsible for the decrease in viewership. Do I think Owens vs Zayn would draw better ratings? Nah, not with a shitty/stale/underwhelming product for Raw they won't


----------



## wwe9391

No one is too blame for the ratings falling. Us Reigns fans weren't blaming anyone on the roster until the usual anti Reigns marks opened their mouths as usual and blamed him for everything. 

You don't blame him and we won't blame your guys. Simple as that.


----------



## TheClub

*Re: With Raw predicted to do possibly its lowest ever rating next week - Predict the rating!*

Once it goes low to the point where WWE starts panicking I'm sure they'll want to do better. I mean hell they just lost a TV deal in Germany, that has to be a red alert for them

Sent from my Moto G using Tapatalk


----------



## KC Armstrong

*Re: With Raw predicted to do possibly its lowest ever rating next week - Predict the rating!*



> I mean hell they just lost a TV deal in Germany, that has to be a red alert for them


Not a ratings issue, though. One of the highest rated shows on that channel. They'll just move to a different platform, not the first time and probably not the last.

Monday is gonna be an absolute massacre, though. How is anyone gonna watch a boring ass 3 hour show when they're going up against one of the most epic duels in television history?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: With Raw predicted to do possibly its lowest ever rating next week - Predict the rating!*

In a shocker, the rating will not drop and might actually tick up slightly. Rise Above Ratings. :CENA


----------



## HenryBowers

Cant wait for Tuesday. 

Plz Plz Plz a 1.5


----------



## Bret Hart

Can't wait for the record low rating


----------



## CretinHop138

Tuesday at 5pm ET they come out.


----------



## DammitChrist

I'm sorry you're stuck with having the misfortune to close this Raw, Owens and Jericho


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Before the debate, they were projecting that it would do about 100 million viewers.

RIP RAW's rating.


----------



## Bink77

RIP RAW


----------



## God Movement

The show was pretty bad too. Record low incoming.


----------



## krai999

raw's gonna be under a 2 3 times in a row LOLZ


----------



## Erik.

It really was a terrible show - one of the worst Raws I've ever seen.


----------



## wwe9391

Just realized they put Roman on in the first hour when the debate wasn't on. :jericho2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Well, it's the guy everbody wants to see. No?


----------



## The True Believer

opcorn

Can't wait.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Boy is today going to be particularly fun. :WOO


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

I don't know how anyone could continue watching Raw after Reigns and Rusev had a 20 minute match leading to a fucking double count out.


----------



## Delsin Rowe

I see I'm actually in the majority of people who don't watch RAW. Not surprising, it was terrible enough for me to drop it like a bad habit and not even have the itch to watch again in several months. SDL & NXT are more than enough WWE for me in a week.


----------



## CretinHop138

Well last night's debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton drew a 46.2 overnight TV rating with a 63 share, up 17% from the Mitt Romney - Barack Obama debate in 2012.

Nothing from Raw was trending on twitter either.


----------



## ChicagoFit

CretinHop138 said:


> Well last night's debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton drew a 46.2 overnight TV rating with a 63 share, up 17% from the Mitt Romney - Barack Obama debate in 2012.
> 
> Nothing from Raw was trending on twitter either.


I'm gonna make a bold prediction:
RAW rating will be UP from last week's disaster; not by much, but still up.


----------



## Dolorian

If MNF was crushed by the debate, I can't imagine the ratings RAW got...

_"MNF was hit hard by the debate, which had been promoted like a big boxing match. The Falcons’ 45-32 win over the Saints drew a 5.7 overnight rating, a season low, down 31% from last week’s Eagles-Bears game and down 36% from Chiefs-Packers in Week 3 last year. It could be an all-time low for the MNF franchis."_

Source: Deadline


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

lol 

Below 1.5 please.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

CretinHop138 said:


> Well last night's debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton drew a 46.2 overnight TV rating with a 63 share, up 17% from the Mitt Romney - Barack Obama debate in 2012.
> 
> Nothing from Raw *was trending on twitter either*.


And we all know That's where the real money is.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw is going to have a shit rating but let's not act like all other tv programs are gonna have good ratings. They all are going to have shit ratings all of them. 

Smackdown is pretty much guaranteed to beat raw in the ratings this week by defult


----------



## squarebox

wwe9391 said:


> Just realized they put Roman on in the first hour when the debate wasn't on. :jericho2


:lmao:lmao :lmao haha yes, intentional without a doubt. The lengths they will go to.


----------



## Reotor

Did RAW ever had to go up against a presidential debate?


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Dolorian said:


> If MNF was crushed by the debate, I can't imagine the ratings RAW got...
> 
> _"MNF was hit hard by the debate, which had been promoted like a big boxing match. The Falcons’ 45-32 win over the Saints drew a 5.7 overnight rating, a season low, down 31% from last week’s Eagles-Bears game and down 36% from Chiefs-Packers in Week 3 last year. It could be an all-time low for the MNF franchis."_
> 
> Source: Deadline


NFL tv ratings have been on a decline this year as well. It's not just last night.

Roger Goodell is probably more hated among football fans than Vince is among wrestling fans at this point.


----------



## Pummy

My final prediction 1.2 :lmao


----------



## J-B

EDIT: wrong thread sorry


----------



## MMM2909

This is going to be so good...cant wait.


----------



## ToddsAutographs

.94 lmaoo rekt


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

IF Smackdown can't beat Raw this week, they never will. And yes, I know SD's rating last week was pre-brand split level numbers, which is pathetic in itself. But if MNF got destroyed last night, so did Raw. Glad Rollins was barely on this episode.

:drose


----------



## tmd02

jaym8675309 said:


> .94 lmaoo rekt


Source son?


----------



## ToddsAutographs

tmd02 said:


> Source son?


internet :eli3


----------



## Pummy

I wonder if somehow they manage to get above 1.5 do it consider success?


----------



## DammitChrist

Lol ok, I think I'm ready to grieve. How poorly did Raw do? 

Btw I'm glad Rollins didn't close this Raw nor did he receive much spotlight.


----------



## RatedR10

My body is ready. 10 more minutes lol.


----------



## ToddsAutographs




----------



## Shadowcran

We'll all know when Raw is in serious, serious jeopardy when their commercials are like:

Raw brought to you by Bobs Discount Fertilizer!! 
Raw brought to you by Lyke's Turkey Dogs!!!
Raw brought to you by Ramen Noodles!!
Raw brought to you by Rat Helper..Helps your rat make a great meal!


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.850M
H2-2.381M
H3-2.203M
3H-2.478M
*


----------



## ChicagoFit

Wow. Wow. Wow.

Do you think they're happy in Stamford?


----------



## RatedR10

Hour 1 - 2.85m
Hour 2 - 2.381m
Hour 3 - 2.203m

Average - 2.478m


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

That's not anywhere near as bad as I thought it would be. They actually beat Smackdown's viewership from last week easily.

:lmao


----------



## The Tempest

I'm done :sodone :sodone :sodone


----------



## Goldusto

Fuckballs how on earth did they stay above 2m ?


----------



## Bret Hart

Do those 2 million have nothing better to do with their lives?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Goldusto said:


> Fuckballs how on earth did they stay above 2m ?


Right? I thought they'd be in the high 1's, at best. They actually beat SD from last week.

:lmao


----------



## Ace

Sadly, that's not that bad.


----------



## DoubtGin

Shit numbers as a whole, but higher than expected. Looks like those are the ppl who will watch no matter what.


----------



## ChicagoFit

Bret Hart said:


> Do those 2 million have nothing better to do with their lives?


They're all Jill Stein supporters; she wasn't included in the debate, they watched RAW...


----------



## ecclesiastes10

not bad , not bad at all (relatively speaking of course)


----------



## Dolorian

The usual post PPV boost helped there.


----------



## Therapy

WWE would look at this as a success and continue dumping shit RAWs on us.. If there are no consequences to shit.. Then continue serving shit


----------



## wwe9391

Higher than I thought


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.850M
> H2-2.381M
> H3-2.203M
> 3H-2.478M
> *


*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (-16.46%/-0.469M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.48%/-0.178M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-22.70%/-0.647M) 

9/26/16 Vs 9/19/16
(-7.68%/-0.206M)

Demo:
9/26/16 Vs 9/19/16

H1- 0.970D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.740D Vs 0.910D
3H- 0.833D Vs 0.913D

Note: RAW is 11th, 14th & 15th by demo.*


----------



## Shadowcran

This sounds like ratings manipulation or something...


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (-16.46%/-0.469M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-7.48%/-0.178M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-22.70%/-0.647M)
> 
> 9/26/16 Vs 9/19/16
> (-7.68%/-0.206M)
> 
> Demo:
> 9/26/16 Vs 9/19/16
> 
> H1- 0.970D Vs 0.930D
> H2- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
> H3- 0.740D Vs 0.910D
> 3H- 0.833D Vs 0.913D
> 
> Note: RAW is 11th, 14th & 15th by demo.*


*Y-Y viewership:
9/26/16 Vs 9/28/15

H1- 2.850M Vs 3.476M
H2- 2.381M Vs 3.326M
H3- 2.203M Vs 3.188M
3H- 2.478M Vs 3.330M (-25.59% / -0.852M)

Y-Y demo:
9/26/16 Vs 9/28/15

H1- 0.970D Vs 1.220D
H2- 0.790D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.740D Vs 1.090D
3H- 0.833D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 6th & 7th by demo.*


----------



## ToddsAutographs

jaym8675309 said:


> next wk will be fine. wrestling fans dont care about politics..day too stoop it



..justsayin


----------



## A-C-P

What this tells me is that the group of people Vince always likes to taunt by saying they will keep watching no matter what is down to 2.2 million people in the US...:draper2


----------



## Kabraxal

Surprised at the numbers... guess there are enough masochists that enjoy being abused for three hours to keep it at 2 million. Well, or just kids that don't give a shit about the debate, football, or simply having actual fun of any sort.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Sorry, anyone saying these numbers aren't "that bad" is engaging in pure spin. These numbers are horrific. The demo is disastrous. Methinks the flagship is sinking. New Era? More like New Error. :bryanlol


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

If you're watching Raw on the same night as the debate, MNF and everything else, you're a fucking die hard in a way that would make Bruce Willis blush.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

To get anything above a 2 with a football game AND the presidential debate on is miraculous. This wasn't some regular Monday night with no real competition.


----------



## Vårmakos

From Wrestling INC:


> RAW was #15 on cable for the night in viewership, behind the NFL's Monday Night Football, the US Presidential debate with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, and the various programs that covered the debate. RAW was #11 in the 18-49 demographic.


18-49 doesn't exactly sound like children, but who knows how accurate these things are.

Rasslin' fans could give a shit about what is happening in the world.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

It's not really a miracle. A miracle would be an _increase_ in viewership.


----------



## Ace

EL SHIV said:


> Sorry, anyone saying these numbers aren't "that bad" is engaging in pure spin. These numbers are horrific. The demo is disastrous. Methinks the flagship is sinking. New Era? More like New Error. :bryanlol


 I was expecting a massacre :evilmatt


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's close to one considering the competition they had last night. That was real competition. Sorry.


----------



## Fissiks

i guess there is no more casuals. That is basically the core viewership. Anything above that is casuals looking in.


----------



## Ace

If anything, it tells me Raw has already hit rock bottom. 

This is the lowest their viewership is going to get. They don't have casuals watching, it's only the hardcore fans.


----------



## RatedR10

Bret Hart said:


> Do those 2 million have nothing better to do with their lives?


I'm convinced roughly 2-million viewers are the hardcore viewers who will stick no matter what. It's just a matter of time before that 2-million shrinks, though. We've seen mass exodus of hardcore viewers (I consider those to be the ones who keep the numbers afloat for holiday editions and packed competition Mondays) over the past few years and they've all been around this time of the year.

Last year, after the Labour Day edition of Raw which saw a huge dip, the fans who stopped watching just seemed to stay away and they didn't come back. WWE better hope that it doesn't happen next week and they come back.


----------



## Reotor

Bret Hart said:


> Do those 2 million have nothing better to do with their lives?


Nope. This is the bottom of the barrel, those are the most hardcore fans WWE got, the most loyal fans.
They are the reason WWE is still in business.


----------



## Cipher

So what's the . number?

Obviously a 1. something, no?


----------



## Reotor

Straw Hat said:


> If anything, it tells me Raw has already hit rock bottom.
> 
> This is the lowest their viewership is going to get. They don't have casuals watching, it's only the hardcore fans.


Don't worry, with enough hard work and dedication, WWE will run those fans off too.


----------



## ChicagoFit

RatedR10 said:


> I'm convinced roughly 2-million viewers are the hardcore viewers who will stick no matter what. It's just a matter of time before that 2-million shrinks, though. We've seen mass exodus of hardcore viewers (I consider those to be the ones who keep the numbers afloat for holiday editions and packed competition Mondays) over the past few years and they've all been around this time of the year.
> 
> Last year, after the Labour Day edition of Raw which saw a huge dip, the fans who stopped watching just seemed to stay away and they didn't come back. WWE better hope that it doesn't happen next week and they come back.


A lot of dog owners leave the TV on USA for their dog because it's well known that dogs are huge fans of Law & Order Special Victims Unit. I believe that this would account for about a million of the viewers...


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

Good for them getting that, I know I didn't watch a second of it. Pretty much tells you no matter what, they'll always have the absolute die hards


----------



## RatedR10

Cipher said:


> So what's the . number?
> 
> Obviously a 1. something, no?


Well 2.69m viewers got a 1.88 rating two weeks ago and they got 1.97 last week. This one will be lower than both of those.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite

has anyone considered the wwe network having an effect on the viewership? i'm sure it's not more than a few hundred thousand, but it does make a slight effect. might be why they don't actually care that much


----------



## StylesP1

So those are the fans that are there no matter what. The hardcore fans. Anything above that is casuals, obviously. Pretty bad for the flagship show that has been on for over 25 years on the same night and same station besides 2 years on TNN.


----------



## McNugget

optikk sucks said:


> has anyone considered the wwe network having an effect on the viewership? i'm sure it's not more than a few hundred thousand, but it does make a slight effect. might be why they don't actually care that much


RAW doesn't air on the Network, so that's sort of irrelevant.

Maybe some people have the Network now and just watch the PPVs, but those people almost surely would've quit watching without the Network anyway.

Wonder what it'll take for them to do something interesting for once?


----------



## Optikk is All Elite

McNugget said:


> RAW doesn't air on the Network, so that's sort of irrelevant.
> 
> Maybe some people have the Network now and just watch the PPVs, but those people almost surely would've quit watching without the Network anyway.
> 
> Wonder what it'll take for them to do something interesting for once?


ah, i did not know that raw isn't aired


----------



## Bret Hart

For those 2 million viewers Raw is Life.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

C'mon, Vince. Try harder. Deliver us some sub 2 million viewer RAWS, damn it!


----------



## Bret Hart

What is the 1. rating?


----------



## Y2Joe

1.8, according to James Caldwell at PWTORCH.


----------



## RatedR10

1.75 rating.


----------



## validreasoning

Bret Hart said:


> What is the 1. rating?


Roughly 1.2 million households


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Y2Joe said:


> 1.8, according to James Caldwell at PWTORCH.


He meant that 1.8 is the lowest rating in RAW history. Well, at least it was until last night.

Last night did a 1.75.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*All time 25 lowest RAW ratings:

1.50R-----23 December 1996
1.60R-----30 December 1996
1.75R-----26 September 2016
1.80R-----14 October 1996
1.87R-----4 July 2016
1.88R-----12 September 2016
1.90R-----3 March 1997
1.90R-----25 September 1995
1.97R-----19 September 2016
2.00R-----28 October 1996
2.00R----- 23 September 1996
2.00R-----12 August 1996
2.03R-----13 June 2016
2.05R-----8 August 2016
2.10R-----17 February 1997
2.10R-----6 January 1997
2.10R-----25 November 1996
2.10R-----7 October 1996
2.10R-----16 September 1996
2.10R-----29 July 1996
2.10R-----30 October 1995
2.11R-----5 September 2016
2.12R-----15 August 2016
2.15R-----7 December 2015
2.16R-----23 November 2015*


----------



## Taroostyles

What a terrible show and a terrible crowd to boot.

No one gets over the story lines are non existent and the talent isn't being showcased to their strengths whatsoever.

With TNA maybe on the way out and the WWE in this bad of a mess, things do not look good for the American pro wrestling landscape.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/780876302991491072


Fixed.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wow, what is up with Monday Night Football ratings? They're more down than WWE's numbers. Crazy.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

ShowStopper said:


> Wow, what is up with Monday Night Football ratings? They're more down than WWE's numbers. Crazy.


NFL has had a huge decline in ratings since week 1.

The Roger Goodell effect. Worst commissioner of all time.


----------



## Lothario

It's dropping slowly but surely. They're not even getting the post PPV bumps anymore because the PPV finishes are so lackluster. I've given up entirely on RAW and from what people are saying, last night was simply a night of rehashes and rematches.


----------



## Wildcat410

ShowStopper said:


> Wow, what is up with Monday Night Football ratings? They're more down than WWE's numbers. Crazy.


It's probably due largely to the matchup.

Outside of the deep south, Falcons vs Saints is not exactly a must see. Neither team has the nationwide appeal of a Green Bay, Pittsburgh, or such to offset that either.


----------



## The RainMaker

I was honestly expecting worse.


----------



## HankHill_85

That's too bad. I knew that the circu....I mean the Presidential Debate and football would eat up most of the viewing audience, but damn.

That being said, I'd love to see Smackdown legit topple them in the numbers this week, even if it's all fake and all the same company, no REAL competition between the shows, blah blah blah blah.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Wildcat410 said:


> It's probably due largely to the matchup.
> 
> Outside of the deep south, Falcons vs Saints is not exactly a must see. Neither team has the nationwide appeal of a Green Bay, Pittsburgh, or such to offset that either.


Again, it's not just last night. The ratings have been much lower (compared to last year) throughout all 3 weeks so far.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

1.75? Coincidentally, I gave RAW 1 3/4 stars.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *All time 25 lowest RAW ratings:
> 
> 1.50R-----23 December 1996
> 1.60R-----30 December 1996
> 1.75R-----26 September 2016
> 1.80R-----14 October 1996
> 1.87R-----4 July 2016
> 1.88R-----12 September 2016
> 1.90R-----3 March 1997
> 1.90R-----25 September 1995
> 1.97R-----19 September 2016
> 2.00R-----28 October 1996
> 2.00R----- 23 September 1996
> 2.00R-----12 August 1996
> 2.03R-----13 June 2016
> 2.05R-----8 August 2016
> 2.10R-----17 February 1997
> 2.10R-----6 January 1997
> 2.10R-----25 November 1996
> 2.10R-----7 October 1996
> 2.10R-----16 September 1996
> 2.10R-----29 July 1996
> 2.10R-----30 October 1995
> 2.11R-----5 September 2016
> 2.12R-----15 August 2016
> 2.15R-----7 December 2015
> 2.16R-----23 November 2015*


*A rating of 2.2R or below seems to indicate its own kind of range now a days. Because it was a 2.2R that the X'mas RAW from 2012 scored. A rating hitherto unseen for 15 years before that. Which also went below a 2.4R for the taped July 4 RAW from 2011. 

In addition to the 25 above ratings mentioned, there are 10 other episodes which scored a 2.2R which are outside the list of the above 25.

2.20R-----23 October 1995
2.20R-----22 July 1996
2.20R-----20 January 1997
2.20R-----27 January 1997
2.20R-----7 April 1996
2.20R-----14 April 1996
2.20R-----9 June 1996
2.20R-----8 September 1996
2.20R-----24 December 2012
2.20R-----25 April 2016 

Another noteworthy rating not mentioned is a 2.19R for the 2016 Memorial Day RAW which featured John Cena's return and aired AJ Styles's heel turn.

Of the 25 ratings mentioned above, 10 ratings or 40% of the list consist of RAW ratings from the last 10 months since Survivor Series 2015.*


----------



## jim courier

The average joe who watches wrestling probably doesn't have a clue or care about politics so it's not surprising it wasn't affected that much.


----------



## Wildcat410

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Again, it's not just last night. The ratings have been much lower (compared to last year) throughout all 3 weeks so far.


Perhaps we are finally approaching the saturation point for how much televised coverage even the NFL can soak up?

Unless it is something of particular interest to me, games can often not feel as special as they once did. Everything hits an upper limit, eventually.


----------



## Arkham258

jim courier said:


> The average joe who watches wrestling probably doesn't have a clue or care about politics so it's not surprising it wasn't affected that much.


Guilty. I don't watch any of it and don't care, in my mind I imagine the Trump/Hilary election to basically be this


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

For what it's worth, the Trump/Hillary debate was actually more entertaining than anything I've seen in WWE in a long while.

Not that it's necessarily a good thing, since it was entertaining for all the wrong reasons, and it means that one of these two clowns will become President - but it was entertaining nonetheless.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

2.85 being a post-PPV bump for the unopposed hour is pretty bad. The standards just keep getting lower.

TV as a whole is taking a hit, but WWE's been taking a hit for multiple consecutive years now, so the TV decline is exacerbating a pre-existing problem for them.


----------



## Reotor

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> For what it's worth, the Trump/Hillary debate was actually more entertaining than anything I've seen in WWE in a long while.
> 
> Not that it's necessarily a good thing, since it was entertaining for all the wrong reasons, and it means that one of these two clowns will become President - but it was entertaining nonetheless.


Of course it was more entertaining
What would you rather watch? two sworn enemies in an epic battle for respect, prestige and power? or RAW?


----------



## Sincere

ShowStopper said:


> Wow, what is up with Monday Night Football ratings? They're more down than WWE's numbers. Crazy.


It's not too surprising. WWE ratings were already bottoming out prior to the debates, so they had less viewership to lose. The die-hards are probably making up the lion's share of the viewership they're holding on to right now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sincere said:


> It's not too surprising. WWE ratings were already bottoming out prior to the debates, so they had less viewership to lose. The die-hards are probably making up the lion's share of the viewership they're holding on to right now.


People keep saying that, but I think we all expected a much lower number than what we actually got last night considering the insane competition they had.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

NFL was down by about a third from the previous two weeks. And I'm doing a 










Yes, I hate the NFL now more than I hate RAW.


----------



## Godway

Meltz was talking about how RAW's attendance is falling too, since the split, in case you couldn't tell from how dead that crowd was last night. RAW's in bad shape overall and there's no end in sight, because there isn't a single draw on the roster. Charlotte is probably filling more arenas at this point than any of the men.


----------



## KO Bossy

Godway said:


> Meltz was talking about how RAW's attendance is falling too, since the split, in case you couldn't tell from how dead that crowd was last night. RAW's in bad shape overall and there's no end in sight, because there isn't a single draw on the roster. Charlotte is probably filling more arenas at this point than any of the men.


Got a link to a clip of WOR with him discussing that? Can't find one.


----------



## Chrome

Lowest numbers I've ever seen for a 3-hour Raw, but some people are calling it a success? Tee-hee


----------



## Reotor

Chrome said:


> Lowest numbers I've ever seen for a 3-hour Raw, but some people are calling it a success? Tee-hee


People simply assumed the fall will be MUCH MUCH harder.
They failed to take into account the vast majority of viewers who are left are the hardcore loyal fans, fans that would watch wrestling no matter what.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

DoubtGin said:


> Shit numbers as a whole, but higher than expected. Looks like those are the ppl who will watch no matter what.


Just wait until Wrestlemania 33, Reigns VS Cena, when those fans realize they will never get something else than this crap.


----------



## reamstyles

So they will always be have 2.5 million core casual fans..


----------



## Restomaniac

The problem is that Vince will keep spouting lines like 'It was the first night of MNF', 'It was a big match up on MNF' and 'It was the debate' as excuses now and whilst the money is coming in the investors won't give a fuck so Vince has no reason to change. 

I still hope to Christ that USA have bottom release clause numbers in their deal with WWE otherwise we have years more of this shite.


----------



## PlKACHU

Lowest audience ever and lowest non-holiday rating.

:heston


----------



## wwetna1

80mil people watched Trump - Hillary. I don't get it, to me this debate has dragged forever to the point I'm ready to vote and end it


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It was higher than expected. Some folks expected way lower. Hell, even I did. Don't know why this angers some people. The fact that this number is still higher than what SD got last week is pretty eye-opening, too. Perhaps that is what bothers some. Heh.


----------



## Cipher

Godway said:


> Meltz was talking about how RAW's attendance is falling too, since the split, in case you couldn't tell from how dead that crowd was last night. RAW's in bad shape overall and there's no end in sight, because there isn't a single draw on the roster. Charlotte is probably filling more arenas at this point than any of the men.


When? I listened to the latest WOR today and he didn't mention that.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Cipher said:


> When? I listened to the latest WOR today and he didn't mention that.


Yeah he did.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

People trying to do mental gymnastics on this rating :duck

It's an awful rating. WWE got FUCKED by Football, the Debate, and even Love and Hip Hop apparently. Third lowest RAW of all time. The trend will continue to spiral downward to where a year from now RAW will wish to have that rating.

This is BAD. Don't spin it because you'll just end up breaking your neck.


----------



## RatedR10

You can pinpoint the exact date where things went to ultra-hell the past two years in terms of ratings for WWE:










I have tables like this (for the Fall season and for RTWM) going back to 2012 and 2013 respectively to compare them on a year-to-year basis.

It's mostly hardcore fans now. People seem to wait for other stuff to return (football, TV shows) and leave Raw. Casuals don't care. It's always after the holiday episode in September.

WWE better hope fans come back next week and didn't leave for good after the debate and go on to watching other things that interest them.

I don't know how this company can look at their numbers over the past 4-5 years and do conference calls for stakeholders saying the ratings don't matter.


----------



## Godway

Cipher said:


> When? I listened to the latest WOR today and he didn't mention that.


Towards the beginning of the RAW report, after they go over the Rusev/Reigns shit, maybe like 20-30 minutes or there in between? I listened to it earlier today so I couldn't tell you exactly where.


----------



## Cipher

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Yeah he did.


Huh. My bad then. Guess I need to re-listen.

Woops! I had the one on from two days ago on instead. My mistake lol


----------



## wwe9391

lol at some people complaining that the rating is not low enough. I mean how low is enough for ya?


----------



## Cipher

wwe9391 said:


> lol at some people complaining that the rating is not low enough. I mean how low is enough for ya?


Until I get vengeance for WCW.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> lol at some people complaining that the rating is not low enough. I mean how low is enough for ya?


They wanted the number to be lower, but didn't get their way, not even with the stiffest competition that they could possibly face.


----------



## Godway

Cipher said:


> Huh. My bad then. Guess I need to re-listen.


tbf he didn't go into great detail on the matter. He just mentioned something like "they're not drawing well" in regards to RAW post-split, and insinuated that last night's PPV was having trouble selling tickets too. 

I actually found the WOR to be much more interesting today than usual, as they highlighted a number of things that RAW is doing to kill its audience, or point out reasons why Roman sucks, like not calling an audible and bashing Rusev with that chair when the crowd wanted it because he's such a dopey company stooge. And Alvarez's description of how/when HHH will return to TV had me rofl.


----------



## wwe9391

The crowd was hot for Romans match and the main event thats it. They were really dead during the light heavyweight match


----------



## The_Jiz

This guarantees we'll be seeing the lowest raw rating in its 23 year existence before the end of the year.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> They wanted the number to be lower, but didn't get their way, not even with the stiffest competition that they could possibly face.


Yep and I agree it was mostly a hardcore audience thats left. The same hardcore audience that will watch no matter what.


----------



## Erik.

The demographic is kids and women, is it not? Why would kids be giving a fuck about a presidential debate? - I don't know how big the demographic is in terms of women watching the NFL, but if the majority of that 2,200,000 are women and children then it's going to TAKE alot to lose that amount of fans. You only have to go on Twitter during live Raws to see how many women/girls enjoy the show. A lot of those women are fans of the likes of Reigns, Ambrose, Rollins etc. (Ambrose is obviously on Smackdown) so I wonder if Rollins is out injured and off TV will make any sort of difference. I think this could also be a reason as to why despite the wellness ban Reigns got, he has still been booked relatively strongly, they're probably worried that if he's losing and not looking a big deal, he could potentially lose the fans or his women followers would get frustrated and just turn off. 

Meh, I'm looking far too into this when I couldn't really give a fuck.


----------



## PlKACHU

wwe9391 said:


> lol at some people complaining that the rating is not low enough. I mean how low is enough for ya?


They deserve TNA ratings.


----------



## RatedR10

Erik. said:


> The demographic is kids and women, is it not? Why would kids be giving a fuck about a presidential debate? - I don't know how big the demographic is in terms of women watching the NFL, but if the majority of that 2,200,000 are women and children then it's going to TAKE alot to lose that amount of fans. You only have to go on Twitter during live Raws to see how many women/girls enjoy the show. A lot of those women are fans of the likes of Reigns, Ambrose, Rollins etc. (Ambrose is obviously on Smackdown) so I wonder if Rollins is out injured and off TV will make any sort of difference. I think this could also be a reason as to why despite the wellness ban Reigns got, he has still been booked relatively strongly, they're probably worried that if he's losing and not looking a big deal, he could potentially lose the fans or his women followers would get frustrated and just turn off.
> 
> Meh, I'm looking far too into this when I couldn't really give a fuck.


The majority of their audience is over 50-years-old according to a survey the company did themselves back in 2013. No idea what it'd be now, but I can't imagine kids or women being their largest demo. No way.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Yep and I agree it was mostly a hardcore audience thats left. The same hardcore audience that will watch no matter what.


Oh right, the same hardcore audience they keep pissing off and who tune out, even on this board. Yeah, they will be there forever.
Until they get dementia that is. Which leads to:



Erik. said:


> The demographic is kids and women, is it not? Why would kids be giving a fuck about a presidential debate? - I don't know how big the demographic is in terms of women watching the NFL, but if the majority of that 2,200,000 are women and children then it's going to TAKE alot to lose that amount of fans. You only have to go on Twitter during live Raws to see how many women/girls enjoy the show. A lot of those women are fans of the likes of Reigns, Ambrose, Rollins etc. (Ambrose is obviously on Smackdown) so I wonder if Rollins is out injured and off TV will make any sort of difference. I think this could also be a reason as to why despite the wellness ban Reigns got, he has still been booked relatively strongly, they're probably worried that if he's losing and not looking a big deal, he could potentially lose the fans or his women followers would get frustrated and just turn off.
> 
> Meh, I'm looking far too into this when I couldn't really give a fuck.


Women and children are their targets, but the average age of a Raw viewer is 40-50. In ten years max, when they are gone, at the latest, WWE is fucked.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Oh right, the same hardcore audience they keep pissing off and who tune out, even on this board. Yeah, they will be there forever.
> Until they get dementia that is. Which leads to:


Its either the causals are tuning out or the hardcore you cant have it both ways. And nobody on this board tunes out. Anyone who's says they don't watch is full of crap IMO

and once again WWE is not going anywhere for a very long time a VERY long time


----------



## RatedR10

wwe9391 said:


> Its either the causals are tuning out or the hardcore you cant have it both ways. And nobody on this board tunes out. Anyone who's says they don't watch is full of crap IMO
> 
> and once again WWE is not going anywhere for a very long time a VERY long time


Hardcore fans are absolutely tuning out. It's not being "full of crap" despite what you'd like to believe of people on this board. I haven't watched a full episode of Raw in God knows how long and I completely skipped last night's show (reading the results felt like a waste of time itself).


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Godway said:


> Meltz was talking about how RAW's attendance is falling too, since the split, in case you couldn't tell from how dead that crowd was last night. RAW's in bad shape overall and there's no end in sight, because there isn't a single draw on the roster. Charlotte is probably filling more arenas at this point than any of the men.


I heard that, too. It's very foreboding, because this is following the same pattern WCW did in the first half of 1999. First ratings, then house shows, soon mainstream TV attendance will fall and "WWE Raw" or "WWE Smackdown" won't have value as live event attractions. I think this is the beginning of that.

WWE, unlike WCW, did a great job building a mega-event like WrestleMania so they could still be okay on their big tentpole events, but those are next to fall if the pattern continues.


----------



## Godway

RatedR10 said:


> Hardcore fans are absolutely tuning out. It's not being "full of crap" despite what you'd like to believe of people on this board. I haven't watched a full episode of Raw in God knows how long and I completely skipped last night's show (reading the results felt like a waste of time itself).


The RAW viewership threads have been shrinking all year, and that was pointed out by I think @ShowStopper a while back. People on this forum are NOT watching RAW like they used to and that's an absolute FACT. This is some 12 year old n00b talking out of his ass with generalizations to try and troll people, he has no idea what people on this forum, or internet fans in general do. 



Mifune Jackson said:


> I heard that, too. It's very foreboding, because this is following the same pattern WCW did in the first half of 1999. First ratings, then house shows, soon mainstream TV attendance will fall and "WWE Raw" or "WWE Smackdown" won't have value as live event attractions. I think this is the beginning of that.
> 
> WWE, unlike WCW, did a great job building a mega-event like WrestleMania so they could still be okay on their big tentpole events, but those are next to fall if the pattern continues.


I know, it's an interesting time because WWE is FALLING right now. They might not be in danger, but they are approaching some dangerous waters. They're not in the PPV business anymore, which I don't know if that's a good thing or bad thing, I want to say good because their PPV numbers would be WCW-level bad by now if they were solely a PPV product, but nobody still knows enough about the Network to really say it's a "success". I know they promote it as a huge success to their investors, reporting all of the profits and shit, but frankly I think if you have the fanbase that WWE likes to claim they have, the numbers are very unimpressive for the Network. 

But aside from that, like you said, they're heading down the WCW path. Ratings are in the toilet. They're starting to struggle to fill houses. And things like this aren't getting any better under current circumstances. They have no stars or draws. The only way they're getting out of this is abandoning their PG/LOLCena business model and realizing it's time for a more current product. It honestly could be too late for that, though. They've driven away soooooooooooo many fans in the past few years. 

Three hours alone is a root cause, though. Much like WCW.


----------



## Gimme More

I previously made the argument that WWE is for children and women but this woman right here is so angry and upset over WWE and last night's pos raw I just can't watch their product for awhile. I don't even think they wanna watch this crap anymore. I was wrong lol.


----------



## PlKACHU

wwe9391 said:


> Its either the causals are tuning out or the hardcore you cant have it both ways. And nobody on this board tunes out. Anyone who's says they don't watch is full of crap IMO


I basically haven't watched anything WWE related in about a month, so there goes that theory.



> and once again WWE is not going anywhere for a very long time a VERY long time


Probably. Doesn't mean we can't laugh at their slow demise.


----------



## Godway

If you watched the UFC 205 presser, then you'll see exactly where WWE fans are today, and why WWE is having the issues that they are :lol Compare the reactions of RAW, Roman Reigns, Kevin Owens, the promos, etc, to what you just saw at UFC 205 Presser. It's like motherfucking night and day. 

The promos alone, dear god. UFC is so far ahead of them and WWE invented this shit, it's just embarrassing.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

All casuals fans are left, seems like this 1.7-1.8 is their lowest point and it consist on pure hardcore fans.


----------



## wwe9391

Like I said those who say that don't watch it really do watch it IMO. Just an opinion


----------



## Dr. Middy

The number is still incredibly bad overall, and they're setting near record lows with every show now. That being said, I really did think it would be worse, and that 1.75 (is that right?) rating will probably be the lowest point for the rest of the year, given how they were against a HUGE Debate and a Monday Night Football game. Most likely they won't be pitted against other programs that big for the time being.

But yeah, there are so many things obviously wrong with the show that it's just a combination of stuff that is just making the show nothing more than a terrible television show with some decent wrestling on it. To even begin to go into it would be way too much effort for such an abysmal show.


----------



## Bink77

I'm as hardcore a fan you could ever find. Watching for over 30 years, and there was a lot of shit in between all that. This is the first time I've really thrown in the towel. It's no longer for fans like me. I don't really know for sure who it is for anymore, but it's definitely not me. Rip wwfe


----------



## Randy Lahey

EL SHIV said:


> Sorry, anyone saying these numbers aren't "that bad" is engaging in pure spin. These numbers are horrific. The demo is disastrous. Methinks the flagship is sinking. New Era? More like New Error. :bryanlol


Exactly. Anyone saying "not that bad" or "better than what I thought" is a clear mark for the wrestlers they are featuring on the show.

If one of the lowest ratings of all time is considered "not that bad" - then what would be? They just did 2.2 mils in the 3rd hour. 2.2 mils. Let that sink in.


----------



## DemBoy

To anyone who thinks Raw did bad in ratings, no fucking shit. It was debate night, no one is going to watch fucking wrestling over something that could affect our whole country's future.


----------



## Dylanlip

Randy Lahey said:


> Exactly. Anyone saying "not that bad" or "better than what I thought" is a clear mark for the wrestlers they are featuring on the show.
> 
> If one of the lowest ratings of all time is considered "not that bad" - then what would be? They just did 2.2 mils in the 3rd hour. 2.2 mils. Let that sink in.


It's "better than what we thought" because some of the people here didn't expect this many "mega-hardcores" [that will literally watch all 52 weeks no matter what Vince & Dunn do and no matter what competes] to still watch. We thought that last niche audience would at least be somewhat smaller. With or without context, I agree that the rating is utterly atrocious, but just because people are slightly surprised doesn't mean they're crazed marks.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Dylanlip said:


> It's "better than what we thought" because some of the people here didn't expect this many "mega-hardcores" [that will literally watch all 52 weeks no matter what Vince & Dunn do and no matter what competes] to still watch. We thought that last niche audience would at least be somewhat smaller. With or without context, I agree that the rating is utterly atrocious, but just because people are slightly surprised doesn't mean they're crazed marks.


The hardcores will continue to bleed away. If you look at the ratings over the last 3 years, it's been a steady consistent decline and I don't see that changing. Last year WWE went from 2.7s prior to football down to 2.3s and 2.2s against footbal. This year, prior to football they were doing 2.2s and now are in the 1.8s.

Once they get into the 1.5s consistently the show will be dropped by USA.


----------



## Godway

Randy Lahey said:


> The hardcores will continue to bleed away. If you look at the ratings over the last 3 years, it's been a steady consistent decline and I don't see that changing. Last year WWE went from 2.7s prior to football down to 2.3s and 2.2s against footbal. This year, prior to football they were doing 2.2s and now are in the 1.8s.
> 
> Once they get into the 1.5s consistently the show will be dropped by USA.


Agreed on the hardcores, but we already know that. Hence why I lmao at Road Dogg trying to troll IWC members on Twitter with YOU'LL WATCH ANYWAYS when ratings are dropping to new lows every week, and interest on this forum (which I believe is one of if not the most popular and active wrestling forums on the net) is reaching new lows too.

I still feel like no matter what happens, they'll be able to plead their case with USA. Like break it down for them hey, give us two hours and we'll get ratings back up. I at least hope so, switching back to two hours and abandoning the PG/Cena/Roman model is what needs to happen to bring viewers back to RAW above all.


----------



## T0M

Bink77 said:


> I'm as hardcore a fan you could ever find. Watching for over 30 years, and there was a lot of shit in between all that. This is the first time I've really thrown in the towel. It's no longer for fans like me. I don't really know for sure who it is for anymore, but it's definitely not me. Rip wwfe


I agree.

The realization for me has been the complete lack of any improvement in the face of some of the worst ratings in Raw history. But I honestly believe they are so deluded and self-absorbed that they still convince themselves it's every reason except the fact that they don't know how to write entertaining shows anymore.

This company is dying, basically. I realistically believe we're witnessing the Titanic heading towards the iceberg. We haven't hit yet but the captain is going full throttle into the night, none the wiser what lies ahead.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Just wait until Wrestlemania 33, Reigns VS Cena, when those fans realize they will never get something else than this crap.


*LOL @ you STILL trying to blame Reigns for this in spite of the ratings dropping AFTER his segment. Please stay desperate. It's VERY entertaining ositivity.*


----------



## wwe9391

Legit BOSS said:


> *LOL @ you STILL trying to blame Reigns for this. Please stay desperate. It's VERY entertaining ositivity.*


Of course its his gimmick 

Regins was in the highest rated hour of the show last night. Just saying :draper2


----------



## T0M

Legit BOSS said:


> *LOL @ you STILL trying to blame Reigns for this in spite of the ratings dropping AFTER his segment. Please stay desperate. It's VERY entertaining *


Do you see the crucial flaw in this argument?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Good thing WWE didn't put Reigns on in the main event again. 3rd hour would've done sub 2 million viewers probably.

Hell, first hour probably would've done over 3 million without him. 

But seriously, awful number, but Raw did have some stiff competition. Still, if the product was good, it wouldn't have gotten THAT low.


----------



## Kostic

Legit BOSS said:


> *LOL @ you STILL trying to blame Reigns for this in spite of the ratings dropping AFTER his segment. Please stay desperate. It's VERY entertaining ositivity.*


...I just can't


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

So, they lost 220,000 viewers from last week's Raw to this weeks. Maybe it's just me, but yeah, I thought they would lose WAY more than that due to the Debate and Football. Hell, they've had bigger drops than that from one hour to the next on the very same show.

2.68 million to 2.46 million. 

Yeah, I thought it would be way worse. :shrug

Still glad Rollins was barely on this show, though.


----------



## Godway

ShowStopper said:


> So, they lost 220,000 viewers from last week's Raw to this weeks. Maybe it's just me, but yeah, I thought they would lose WAY more than that due to the Debate and Football. Hell, they've had bigger drops than that from one hour to the next on the very same show.
> 
> 2.68 million to 2.46 million.
> 
> Yeah, I thought it would be way worse. :shrug
> 
> Still glad Rollins was barely on this show, though.


Seth has to rest up so he can properly sell the dozens of Pedigrees and Stephanie slaps in his future.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Godway said:


> Seth has to rest up so he can properly sell the dozens of Pedigrees and Stephanie slaps in his future.


As long as he wins at Mania, which he will, it will all be worth it.


----------



## ChicagoFit

When did WWE stop trying to retain and attract viewers by writing a show with surprises, great action and compelling storylines when competing against Monday Night Football, NBA Finals or World Series? 

Instead, for over a year, they not only phone it in when facing competition; they begin spinning why the ratings won't be good that week before the show begins. 

The bullcrap that they use to justify their awful ratings is laughable: 

"It's the premiere of Monday Night Football"

"It is the World Series" 

"Two Broke Girls only has one season premiere and it's tonight" 

"People don't really watch television the first Monday after daylight savings time" 

"The majority of the WWE Universe are very passionate about Arbor Day" 

"Well, we're up against the Phoenix Mercury vs Minnesota Lynx WNBA playoff game and the country has WNBA fever"

WWE pushes out their pathetic excuses and the clickbait wrestling "news" sites and shows push it out to the masses. 

It's embarrassing.


----------



## Bink77

The excuse era


----------



## Kostic

ChicagoFit said:


> When did WWE stop trying to retain and attract viewers by writing a show with surprises, great action and compelling storylines when competing against Monday Night Football, NBA Finals or World Series?
> 
> Instead, for over a year, they not only phone it in when facing competition; they begin spinning why the ratings won't be good that week before the show begins.
> 
> The bullcrap that they use to justify their awful ratings is laughable:
> 
> "It's the premiere of Monday Night Football"
> 
> "It is the World Series"
> 
> "Two Broke Girls only has one season premiere and it's tonight"
> 
> "People don't really watch television the first Monday after daylight savings time"
> 
> "The majority of the WWE Universe are very passionate about Arbor Day"
> 
> "Well, we're up against the Phoenix Mercury vs Minnesota Lynx WNBA playoff game and the country has WNBA fever"
> 
> WWE pushes out their pathetic excuses and the clickbait wrestling "news" sites and shows push it out to the masses.
> 
> It's embarrassing.


Maybe because it would be completely stupid to do your big angles on a show that you know in advance nobody will watch?


----------



## ChicagoFit

Kostic said:


> Maybe because it would be completely stupid to do your big angles on a show that you know in advance nobody will watch?


They always did in the late 1990's and early aughts; it was a quite successful strategy. 

These days the priority is to conjure up an excuse for poor viewership, push it out BEFORE the show airs and broadcast a show that's just going through the motions.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

I also think WWE has officially entered the WCW 1999 territory at this point, too. Not WCW 2000 where it was blatant the company didn't give a shit and was dying a death they knew was coming but they're in the WCW 1999 one in the sense that yeah their generating "solid or decent" money for their time and still have an audience that will be able to watch whatever they dish out but the quality of their shows/events are dropping vastly, their ratings and attendance were beginning to drop, there is no stars that can legitimate draw viewers at a consistent rate (yes WCW still had Hogan, Sting, Nash, Savage, Flair and all but their drawing power was starting to diminish quickly around this year), they had TOO many programming that diluted and watered down the product when the quality isn't even good, hot shot booking, by the minute writing for characters and feuds, pandering to mainstream media/sponsors/charities to gain some mainstream cred/buzz, etc.

People probably won't accept it until the inevitable is obvious but WWE 2016 is essentially WCW 1999 at this point. People can say "WWE will never die". Yeah, it may not die in our lifetime but that is not to say it won't. Every great empire doesn't last forever.


----------



## Lothario

WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> I also think WWE has officially entered the WCW 1999 territory at this point, too. Not WCW 2000 where it was blatant the company didn't give a shit and was dying a death they knew was coming but they're in the WCW 1999 one in the sense that yeah their generating "solid or decent" money for their time and still have an audience that will be able to watch whatever they dish out but the quality of their shows/events are dropping vastly, their ratings and attendance were beginning to drop, there is no stars that can legitimate draw viewers at a consistent rate (yes WCW still had Hogan, Sting, Nash, Savage, Flair and all but their drawing power was starting to diminish quickly around this year), they had TOO many programming that diluted and watered down the product when the quality isn't even good, hot shot booking, by the minute writing for characters and feuds, pandering to mainstream media/sponsors/charities to gain some mainstream cred/buzz, etc.
> 
> People probably won't accept it until the inevitable is obvious but WWE 2016 is essentially WCW 1999 at this point. People can say "WWE will never die". Yeah, it may not die in our lifetime but that is not to say it won't. Every great empire doesn't last forever.



Good post and all but who is that in your signature?


----------



## HenryBowers

Its actually not a bad number relative to what they were up to. The first hr is very good, too. I think they have for the moment bottomed out. They only have the ultra die hards left.


----------



## wwe9391

WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> I also think WWE has officially entered the WCW 1999 territory at this point, too. Not WCW 2000 where it was blatant the company didn't give a shit and was dying a death they knew was coming but they're in the WCW 1999 one in the sense that yeah their generating "solid or decent" money for their time and still have an audience that will be able to watch whatever they dish out but the quality of their shows/events are dropping vastly, their ratings and attendance were beginning to drop, there is no stars that can legitimate draw viewers at a consistent rate (yes WCW still had Hogan, Sting, Nash, Savage, Flair and all but their drawing power was starting to diminish quickly around this year), they had TOO many programming that diluted and watered down the product when the quality isn't even good, hot shot booking, by the minute writing for characters and feuds, pandering to mainstream media/sponsors/charities to gain some mainstream cred/buzz, etc.
> 
> People probably won't accept it until the inevitable is obvious but WWE 2016 is essentially WCW 1999 at this point. People can say "WWE will never die". Yeah, it may not die in our lifetime but that is not to say it won't. Every great empire doesn't last forever.


Difference is wwe wont be out of business in 2 years. They are not going anywhere for a very long time.


----------



## Bret Hart

Lol some people blaming the wrestlers.. :lmao

What's wrong with you people, they can't do shit if the booking committee doesn't give a fuck.


----------



## ToddsAutographs

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> NFL has had a huge decline in ratings since week 1.
> 
> The Roger Goodell effect. Worst commissioner of all time.


Where was this Goodell effect the last 5yrs?

Look at the wk 2 & wk3 MNF matchups--- trash. Oh and ESPNs debacle continues. They dumped CC n Key on the pregame, and axed Tirico from the play by play. Wtffff... Obviously both financial decisions(Keys was personal) but still.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Of course its his gimmick
> 
> Regins was in the highest rated hour of the show last night. Just saying :draper2


:ha :ha :ha :ha

I can't believe there are fans, not just people, actual fans, who still fall for the practice of putting a guy who you don't want associated with bad viewership into a time slot you know will do well. Just in case you really are that superficial, Raw's first hour had less competition than the other two.

And if we want to go with the theory that this is the number of fans who watch no matter what, you have to go with the number during max competition, and that is 2.2 million. Not 2.8.


----------



## Kostic

ChicagoFit said:


> They always did in the late 1990's and early aughts; it was a quite successful strategy.
> 
> These days the priority is to conjure up an excuse for poor viewership, push it out BEFORE the show airs and broadcast a show that's just going through the motions.


The difference between viewership then and now is night and day. Then, you could have logically expected that people will tune in from football if you tease a big angle, now it's different.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Godway said:


> I still feel like no matter what happens, they'll be able to plead their case with USA. Like break it down for them hey, give us two hours and we'll get ratings back up. I at least hope so, switching back to two hours and abandoning the PG/Cena/Roman model is what needs to happen to bring viewers back to RAW above all.


I don't think so. They are burning the audience out too quickly, and by the time a new contract is in order, it's way too late.
They will not switch their model either.
And if we are being honest here, if they put on shit like this still, nobody can sit through two hours of this either. I certainly can't. It's a waste of life.

It's not a matter of two or three hours anymore, the product sucks and stinks of horse shit. They couldn't even book an entertaining two hour show because they simply don't know how to book wrestling anymore. They don't want to be Wrestling. That's the Problem. Let that sink in for a minute. Vince McMahon doesn't know how to book wrestling anymore.


----------



## Loudness

I'm not from the US so no debate interest for me and I skipped most of the show just watching the preview images during the last part and realizing nothing interesting was going to happen anyway. I didn't even take a look at last weeks episode either and skipped COC too...and I feel like I haven't missed a single show at all.

RAW is a cookie-cutter by the numbers type of wrestling show, everything you see now you've seen 10-20 Years ago and WWE doesn't try anything new. It's ok for hardcore fans I guess who just want to see WWE no matter what, but for a non-hardcore fan you can tune in every 3 weeks or less and not miss much. The feuds are slow and sluggish and the entertaining parts by RAW standards are still not entertaining compared to what you can watch on Youtube or elsewhere. RAW isn't a very competitive product, hasn't been for Years either - it's not a new thing, been like this since what, 2008 or even before? 

Ratings are slowly falling since they don't even book the show the way they want to present it. It's not an action series with the pretense of wrestling like LU, they make it out to be sports-like but they cater to pushes, kayfabe breaking so much and a lot of the athletes look like they don't care about competition, how often do they need to mention popularity as a gateway to making it in the WWE? Why can't the charisma just let talk for itself and the wrestlers pretending to be legit competitors who just happen to be different than most other athletes. Oh wait, the show is full of bland characters that are more boring than tons of real athletes and they don't actually have any charisma for the most part - I guess that's why they gotta remind us all the time that this is what matters. They talk about things they lack.

If you watch old WWE and WCW shows the wrestlers didn't have to use memes or kayfabe comments to get over (except WCW when they were already falling apart ironically with "Goldberg breaking the script"), they also didn't talk about any other rudimentary stuff we hear today. Why are some athletes so geeky and not jobbers? There's a difference between Rock and Jericho beeing funny and badass at the same time and still beeing all about the competition vs New Day, Bailey and TJ Perkins not even acting like they care about wrestling at all but just beeing geeks until their opponents show up. 

Why not talk about winning feuds? About beating somebody, make money, gain prestige AND beeing funny? Honestly nowadays wrestlers are either completely bland, "happy to be there" and those who try to stand out still can't wrap their tiny brains around the idea that engaging characters are there to help sell feuds easier first and foremost and not be wannabe standup comedians. Can people actually start talking about beating somebody while bringing the lulz - like AJ fucking Styles for example, somebody who has been the Top Face of the then 2nd biggest company and actually knows the basics of what content a promo should have. He may not be an all-time GOAT but he is smart and knows that wrestling characters are supposed to sell feuds and not just bring the lulz for 2-3 minutes. Kevin Owens also knows this little thing. Orton and Wyatt also know what wrestling is about. Again this isn't a matter of mic skills but knowledge and basic intelligence. 

Beeing entertaining doesn't matter if nobody is going to watch your matches, why can't most wrestlers use their characters as a basis to sell feuds instead of trying to pick the limelight for themselves and have one heatless feud after another? There would be no wrestling promos if they weren't serving a bigger purpose, and that purpose is to sell feuds while telling people about yourself - not the other way round. Who the fuck even writes those scripts, and where did they graduate to be allowed to write for RAW when they literally don't even know the purpose of a promo anymore? "I guess it's a good way to waste time and err...talk and so I guess uh uh" - WWE Creative


----------



## HenryBowers

WWE have lost 25% of their audience since they signed that new USA deal. I dont know if they will cancel them.....probably not. However, they have to stop the bleed. TV is a access point for new fans. I dont buy all this "netflix, inernet DVR" bullshit. All of that existed in 2013. TV is still the best way to watch something that is live, its more reliable than a stream. If people are watching it online after its because its boring as fuck that nobody can tolerate the ads.


----------



## ChicagoFit

Kostic said:


> The difference between viewership then and now is night and day. Then, you could have logically expected that people will tune in from football if you tease a big angle, now it's different.


But it didn't have to be different. 

Where is the company that had the guts to take on the Super Bowl by offering an alternative to the halftime show?

Now their first instinct is to give up, create an excuse, put on a show that just goes through the motions.

What's most pathetic is their insistence that the ratings may suck but they're snacking on social media. Do they think people are so stupid not to know that WWE aggressively manipulates their social media numbers?


----------



## Kostic

ChicagoFit said:


> But it didn't have to be different.
> 
> Where is the company that had the guts to take on the Super Bowl by offering an alternative to the halftime show?
> 
> Now their first instinct is to give up, create an excuse, put on a show that just goes through the motions.
> 
> What's most pathetic is their insistence that the ratings may suck but they're snacking on social media. Do they think people are so stupid not to know that WWE aggressively manipulates their social media numbers?


Obviously you're not getting my point.

It's DIFFERENT. It's not the same. It's not comparable, then and now. Wrestling is nowhere near as popular as it once was. Not even close. In the AE and the RA Era, they knew that they could make people switch away from football and other things if they made a hot show. Now, they can't. It doesn't matter what they do. The rating will still be very low. It would be stupid to even try. And they know it. They could advertise next week that Finn Balor is coming back from injury and challenging The Undertaker, and the rating would pop, but most people would still watch football.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Kostic said:


> Obviously you're not getting my point.
> 
> It's DIFFERENT. It's not the same. It's not comparable, then and now. Wrestling is nowhere near as popular as it once was. Not even close. In the AE and the RA Era, they knew that they could make people switch away from football and other things if they made a hot show. Now, they can't. It doesn't matter what they do. The rating will still be very low. It would be stupid to even try. And they know it. They could advertise next week that Finn Balor is coming back from injury and challenging The Undertaker, and the rating would pop, but most people would still watch football.


That's not his point at all. His point is they give up and just accept it. Why not actually put on a great show on these days and teach people that by tuning out, they miss a lot? They don't have to win any casuals on those days, but as it is, they would be lucky to get the 3.0 millions back.

It's what got Nitro over, putting on killer matches and marquee names. This "ah, let's just screw it" mindset is killing them.
They give horrible shows to those fans who actually bother to watch still. They simply can't afford to piss off any more fans.
I said it before and will say it again: the real number of true no matter what fans is already out there, and it's not the Raw number. It's the Network subscriptions number. Because only hardcore fans would pay for this shite.
The 1.X million subscribers is the true bottom number for Raw. People have been saying for ages "it can't go any further down", and it did. Wrestling isn't nearly as hot as in the 90s or late 80s. Ergo, the number of hardcores is also lower, and can't be the number the lowest Raw drew in the mid 90s.

And the Network number is also the maximum number of hardcores because nobody knows how many people have it to watch classic content, and how many have it because they do want to watch the PPVs and newer Raws.


----------



## Kostic

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> That's not his point at all. His point is they give up and just accept it. Why not actually put on a great show on these days and teach people that by tuning out, they miss a lot? They don't have to win any casuals on those days, but as it is, they would be lucky to get the 3.0 millions back.
> 
> It's what got Nitro over, putting on killer matches and marquee names. This "ah, let's just screw it" mindset is killing them.
> They give horrible shows to those fans who actually bother to watch still. They simply can't afford to piss off any more fans.
> I said it before and will say it again: the real number of true no matter what fans is already out there, and it's not the Raw number. It's the Network subscriptions number. Because only hardcore fans would pay for this shite.
> The 1.X million subscribers is the true bottom number for Raw. People have been saying for ages "it can't go any further down", and it did. Wrestling isn't nearly as hot as in the 90s or late 80s. Ergo, the number of hardcores is also lower, and can't be the number the lowest Raw drew in the mid 90s.


Because no-one will watch that show, simple as that. Do you think people will care if they missed anything? Seriously? "Oh, you watched football instead of this FANTASTIC show, you missed all that!" Big whoop. I'll catch it on YouTube. Like I said, wrestling is not big anymore. People don't care if they miss anything. They'll care much more if they miss a football game than if they miss an episode of Raw, hot angle or no hot angle. What you call giving up, I call knowing which battles it's smart to fight and which it isn't.


----------



## NapperX

The presidential debate didn't help them, but if the numbers keep going down for them you know advertisers/sponsors will want discounts, anything lower than 1 could easily be in cancellation territory.


----------



## D.M.N.

With quarter three (July to September) now complete, here are how things are looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q3 2016):

- the previous quarter (Q2 2016)
- one year earlier (Q3 2015)
- two years earlier (Q3 2014)

Here are the quarter three percentage figures for recent years:

-0.7% = 2012
-2.7% = 2014
-8.1% = 2013
-8.6% = 2015
-9.9% = 2011
*-17.9% = 2016*

From a year perspective, the picture is bleaker than ever before for Raw's TV numbers:

Q3 2009 = 5.26 million
Q3 2010 = 4.60 million (down 12.5%)
Q3 2011 = 4.45 million (down 3.2%)
Q3 2012 = 4.47 million (up 0.5%)
Q3 2013 = 4.00 million (down 10.7%)
Q3 2014 = 4.11 million (up 2.9%)
Q3 2015 = 3.62 million (down 12.0%)
Q3 2016 = 3.00 million (down 17.0%)


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Wow. :cmj2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

D.M.N. said:


> With quarter three (July to September) now complete, here are how things are looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q3 2016):
> 
> - the previous quarter (Q2 2016)
> - one year earlier (Q3 2015)
> - two years earlier (Q3 2014)
> 
> Here are the quarter three percentage figures for recent years:
> 
> -0.7% = 2012
> -2.7% = 2014
> -8.1% = 2013
> -8.6% = 2015
> -9.9% = 2011
> *-17.9% = 2016*
> 
> From a year perspective, the picture is bleaker than ever before for Raw's TV numbers:
> 
> Q3 2009 = 5.26 million
> Q3 2010 = 4.60 million (down 12.5%)
> Q3 2011 = 4.45 million (down 3.2%)
> Q3 2012 = 4.47 million (up 0.5%)
> Q3 2013 = 4.00 million (down 10.7%)
> Q3 2014 = 4.11 million (up 2.9%)
> Q3 2015 = 3.62 million (down 12.0%)
> Q3 2016 = 3.00 million (down 17.0%)


They lost 1.1 million viewers since pushing the golden boy. In 1.5-2 years. They lost the same number between 09 and 14. That's insane viewer loss acceleration.

That's also 1.1 lower since Punk and Bryan left. But I thought they were just overhyped internet darling midgets. :shockedpunk


----------



## Cipher

Yeah, it's pretty insane comparing the ratings from 2015 onward to previous years. How fast they dropped compared to previous years that is.

Television contracts make up WWE's largest source of revenue...for WWE, ratings do matter. Should get interesting once their deal comes up specially since they lost so much of their audience since they signed in 2014.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Bet they would love to have 2014-2015 ratings now.

Anyway, somehow, some-way, Raw actually beat SD with going head to head with the Presidential Debate and Monday Night Football.

INSANE. And not a great sign for the Brand Split.


----------



## TKOW

I can't believe trying to put two and two together to make five by making assumptions like, "Since they started pushing Reigns the audience has shrank by x%" or "Since Punk left" etc.

THE PRODUCT SUCKS

Sure, the loss of top names, and the attempt to make new ones against the audience's wishes are factors, but don't act like they're the sole reason why viewership has dropped. Ratings, and wrestling in general, has/have been on a decline for a long time.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

TKOW said:


> I can't believe trying to put two and two together to make five by making assumptions like, "Since they started pushing Reigns the audience has shrank by x%" or "Since Punk left" etc.
> 
> THE PRODUCT SUCKS
> 
> Sure, the loss of top names, and the attempt to make new ones against the audience's wishes are factors, but don't act like they're the sole reason why viewership has dropped. Ratings, and wrestling in general, has/have been on a decline for a long time.


It's not assumption fpalm

But sure, let's just say that the immense accelaration of the downward spiral just happens to coincide with the departure of the two biggest fan favorites, and the time when Vince went full out "FUCK YOU" to the fanbase.


----------



## Cipher

I think Roman is part of the problem tbh, but they have absolutely forgotten how to make stars. That much is evident with the handling of the Seth and Dean as well.


----------



## Arkham258

Reotor said:


> People simply assumed the fall will be MUCH MUCH harder.
> They failed to take into account the vast majority of viewers who are left are the hardcore loyal fans, fans that would watch wrestling no matter what.


a.k.a. people who live life with low standards


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Oh, NOW people are saying "the brand split isn't producing the results it should be".

NO. FUCKING. SHIT. Everybody who saw this movie before knew doing a retarded brand split at this day and age was the wrong move and they did it anyway as a last minute knee jerk reactions to declining ratings and attendance which have gotten WORSE ever since. RAW is at its lowest points ever and SD is only getting the acclaim on the basis of "It's way better than RAW in comparison". Like that even means anything in 2016.


----------



## Cipher

So I've read the brand split was kinda forced upon them by USA in an attempt to boost ratings.

That's just rumors, though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Pretty much everyone was down on the brand split from the get go. This isn't some shock. Gotta love how some act like they think they're the only ones who knew it would fail when practically everything WWE has done in recent years has failed. Christ. Wasn't exactly like predicting some hugely unpredictable happening. :lol


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Attendance [for the 9/26 Raw] wasn’t good by Raw standards once again, being at just under 7,000 paid. It’s been down everywhere ever since Cena stopped being advertised on the shows and fans knew it was split branded shows.


----------



## HenryBowers

What is the average anyway?

Surprised people still pay to see Cena.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

HenryBowers said:


> What is the average anyway?
> 
> Surprised people still pay to see Cena.


The real question is: how do they know it's Cena? One can only make that statement if Smackdown attendance went up in comparison. Otherwise, it's more likely it's something else, like having a roster as thin as Hunter's hair.


----------



## wwe9391

The Figure 4 said:


> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


People wanted to watch te debate


----------



## Godway

Cipher said:


> I think Roman is part of the problem tbh, but they have absolutely forgotten how to make stars. That much is evident with the handling of the Seth and Dean as well.


Yeah, in the midst of two years of Roman Reigns failed pushes, it kind of goes under the radar of how badly they treated the other two Shield guys. If they actually moved at the right times and did the right things with Ambrose/Rollins, both could be in a lot better standing than they are right now. Rollins, hot off a return remains a dopey heel to Roman's dopey face. Then months later, gets turned face by not being the popular kid in HHH's clique, kind of like when he kicked Randy Orton out of Evolution (how did that work out for Randy?). Now he's a face by default because HHH has a new boy. That sure makes Seth seem cool and badass, doesn't it. 

And Ambrose, they just wasted his entire 2015 on being a main event jobber. Then half of his 2016 doing the same. He was REALLY over at one point and they managed to cut that overness in half. 

The stupid thing about both guys is, the WWE thinks they can then say "Alright, well we'll just put the title on him and the fans will now like him." or "Alright, we'll just turn him face and put him in main events and fans will now like him." forgetting the fact that you already assassinated them and let the fans know that these guys are geeks.


----------



## LilOlMe

I can't find the post now, but someone mentioned that RAW could still go lower because they figure the network numbers are the real hardcore numbers.

Well, I wanted to point out that the WWE network numbers are at 1.130 million domestically. However, you're not taking into account that that's households. Obviously there could be multiple people using it in the same house, therefore there may be many more RAW viewers in each network house.

This RAW did 1.9 million households (1.75 rating). So there's still almost 800,000 RAW watching households that don't have the network. 


A)That shows you there's still a pool of about 40% of the most hardcore fans (i.e. people who watched this instead of the debate or football) who don't subscribe to the network. 

B)Network numbers aren't necessarily an indication of how low RAW could go, because there seems to still be an audience out there that will watch every RAW, but won't subscribe to the network.

The more those people go away, the more worrisome it is for WWE, because then we really will be getting to the bottom of the most hardcore fans.

C)Ratings matter in every way, no matter how people spin it. It even affects network numbers, so when people tout that, they should stop and think about how many more network subscribers they'd probably have if more people were watching WWE programming. They've been averaging what, like 3.4 million viewers not long ago? That's a 33% domestic subscription rate. If they were averaging 4 million viewers like they used to, and maintained that 33% network rate, they'd be making $22.8 million more per year on network subscriptions than they do now. Forget tv contracts, WWE is detracting from themselves in other areas financially due to low viewership.


----------



## Jukka Penttinen

"With that one purchase the wwe in my opinion put a nail in the coffin of the wrestling industry by eliminating competition" - ed ferrara

And we are paying results of those events today.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Jukka Penttinen said:


> "With that one purchase the wwe in my opinion put a nail in the coffin of the wrestling industry by eliminating competition" - ed ferrara
> 
> And we are paying results of those events today.


Many people said that. It's not like that piece of shit Ed Ferrara is a genius or something.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Nothing funnier than watching these fucking dumb smarks trying to blame everything on Reigns when they indy darlings start to fail at draw. :ha


----------



## Darren Criss

TheFackingCrow said:


> Nothing funnier than watching these fucking dumb smarks trying to blame everything on Reigns when they indy darlings start to fail at draw. :ha


I'm laughing too.

Owens is usuless and they still want him as top guy :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheFackingCrow said:


> Nothing funnier than watching these fucking dumb smarks trying to blame everything on Reigns when they indy darlings start to fail at draw. :ha


No one WWE's roster is a draw. Not even the part timers/WWE Made guys. Deal with that. 

:ha


----------



## TheFackingCrow

ShowStopper said:


> *No one WWE's roster is a draw. Not even the part timers/WWE Made guys. * Deal with that.
> 
> :ha


You forgot to say that's Roman Reigns fault. :cena


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheFackingCrow said:


> You forgot to say that's Roman Reigns fault. :cena


I blame Vince and Creative more than anyone else. But you can put partial blame on anyone who's been pushed in the last 5 years or so and/or has been pushed to dominate the rest of the roster.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

ShowStopper said:


> I blame Vince and Creative more than anyone else. But you can put partial blame on anyone who's been pushed in the last 5 years or so and/or has been pushed to dominate the rest of the roster.


lol Yeah, make yourself think that if they would have gave Roman's push to someone else, the product would be any different right now.

If that makes you feel better.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheFackingCrow said:


> lol Yeah, make yourself think that if they would have gave Roman's push to someone else, the product would be any different right now.
> 
> If that makes you feel better.


I didn't even mention him. You're the only one doing that. Seems like someone feels insecure re: that topic for some strange reason. :shrug


----------



## Godway

It's fair to say nobody is going to draw on RAW because of Stephanie/Hunter. But that's besides the point in laughing at Reigns, since no other top guy in history has lost the viewers he has. You can make fun of all the indie guys you want, none of them have lost the amount of viewers that Reigns has in two years. He's the biggest failure in wrestling history. Roman got to squash Hunter and Stephanie, and still can't draw a dime. And not only can he not draw, he causes viewers to leave the show in mass numbers. It's really not an indie guy vs. mainstream guy debate. Roman Reigns just sucks. 

Plus it ain't like Rollins, Ambrose, Owens, whoever have been given the exposure of Reigns. Winning a title belt doesn't mean you've been given what Reigns has.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

ShowStopper said:


> I didn't even mention him. You're the only one doing that. Seems like someone feels insecure re: that topic for some strange reason. :shrug


"You can put partial blame on anyone who's been pushed in the last 5 years"

You don't have to mention him, because you're describing him and for the matters you're also describing guys like Rollins, Ambrose, Lesnar, etc.

And for instance, it doesn't matter who you chose to make this point, because you are wrong, you can't point anyone on the roster and blame him for the mediocrity of the WWE's product.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheFackingCrow said:


> "You can put partial blame on anyone who's been pushed in the last 5 years"
> 
> You don't have to mention him, because you're describing him and for the matters you're also describing guys like Rollins, Ambrose, Lesnar, etc.
> 
> And for instance, it doesn't matter who you chose to make this point, because you are wrong, you can't point anyone on the roster and blame him for the mediocrity of the WWE's product.


Yowza. That's what you got from my post. Moving on.


----------



## DammitChrist

NOBODY is a draw. Can we please stop blaming the talent for the low ratings?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

TheFackingCrow said:


> Nothing funnier than watching these fucking dumb smarks trying to blame everything on Reigns when they indy darlings start to fail at draw. :ha


Nothing funnier than watching guys like yourself claim nobody is a draw, but still want the guy nobody likes in the top spot, instead of the guy most people like, just because said guy is liked by "smarks", aka yourself, and we can't have that because reasons.


----------



## Darren Criss

Nobody is a draw but it is so much more easy to catch people's attention with a guy like Reigns than Owens. Simple like that. :aj3


----------



## HenryBowers

DammitC said:


> NOBODY is a draw. Can we please stop blaming the talent for the low ratings?


Yes, the wrestlers have nothing to do with the success or failures of a wrestling show.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Godway said:


> It's fair to say nobody is going to draw on RAW because of Stephanie/Hunter. But that's besides the point in laughing at Reigns, since no other top guy in history has lost the viewers he has. You can make fun of all the indie guys you want, none of them have lost the amount of viewers that Reigns has in two years. He's the biggest failure in wrestling history. Roman got to squash Hunter and Stephanie, and still can't draw a dime. And not only can he not draw, he causes viewers to leave the show in mass numbers. It's really not an indie guy vs. mainstream guy debate. Roman Reigns just sucks.
> 
> Plus it ain't like Rollins, Ambrose, Owens, whoever have been given the exposure of Reigns. Winning a title belt doesn't mean you've been given what Reigns has.


yes it does, rollins had far more exposure in 2015 than reigns and bombed
thats even with a fully roster at his disposal, no injuries to top stars etc

i get it your anti reigns but at least be consistent, rollins has received the same, if not more, coverage as reigns


----------



## Godway

BigDaveBatista said:


> yes it does, rollins had far more exposure in 2015 than reigns and bombed
> thats even with a fully roster at his disposal, no injuries to top stars etc
> 
> i get it your anti reigns but at least be consistent, rollins has received the same, if not more, coverage as reigns


Rollins character was that of a pussy who jobs clean on RAW every week, then wins on PPV by an endless supply of run ins or overbooked fuckery. So I ask you...

1. Where am I not consistent in blaming others on ratings? 

2. Why would you compare Seth Rollins run to Roman Reigns multiple, neverending runs? It be like comparing Undisputed Champ Jericho to Austin. One is booked like god, the other is booked like a joke.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Nobody fucking draws anymore because nobody is a star. Rollins in 2015 was a failure as champion. So was Sheamus. So was HHH. So was Reigns. It's looking to be the same song for Owens too.

People need to stop thinking about the talent that draw little to nothing and think about the brand in whole not drawing what they used to.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Godway said:


> Rollins character was that of a pussy who jobs clean on RAW every week, then wins on PPV by an endless supply of run ins or overbooked fuckery. So I ask you...
> 
> 1. Where am I not consistent in blaming others on ratings?
> 
> 2. Why would you compare Seth Rollins run to Roman Reigns multiple, neverending runs? It be like comparing Undisputed Champ Jericho to Austin. One is booked like god, the other is booked like a joke.


your blaming roman over a man who main evented raw every week, opened raw every week and had multiple small segments during the shows, all whilst being champion

multiple never ending runs of what exactly? yes he didnt lose in singles matches on free tv but he didnt have the belt, was in the midcard for near enough the entirety of rollins run with his feud with the wyatts, was about to have what i assume would be a long title programme with rollins with them trading wins 

rollins was booked like a chickenshit heel champion yes i agree at times it was over the top but thats the direction they went with

so yes there isnt any consistency in what you are saying


----------



## ste1592

BigDaveBatista said:


> rollins was booked like a chickenshit heel champion yes i agree at times it was over the top but thats the direction they went with


And that direction would have killed Stone Cold Steve Austin in his prime, for how it's stupid. As @Godway said, your comparison makes as much sense as comparing Chris Jericho to the aforementioned Austin; one was booked as joke, probably to spite him because he still had WCW stench over himself, the other one was the one who they (rightfully, don't get me wrong) gave the key to paradise. How can you even suggest that they're expected to produce the same numbers?


----------



## Godway

And one guy is a heel, the other is (supposed to be) a face. Presentation >>> titles, TV time, whatever. You can give a guy all the titles and RAW openings you want, if you're jobbing him on a weekly basis and going out of your way to show that he's a fucking loser compared to everyone else, then he's not going to draw money. Heels who draw are guys who antagonize fans AND avoid being pinned/submitted. 

And lets be honest, Rollins only got so much TV time to begin with, because Roman couldn't carry the ball and still can't to this day. He's the only guy I've ever seen WWE actively hide from its own audience, but want him to be a top guy at the same time.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

ste1592 said:


> And that direction would have killed Stone Cold Steve Austin in his prime, for how it's stupid. As @Godway said, your comparison makes as much sense as comparing Chris Jericho to the aforementioned Austin; one was booked as joke, probably to spite him because he still had WCW stench over himself, the other one was the one who they (rightfully, don't get me wrong) gave the key to paradise. How can you even suggest that they're expected to produce the same numbers?


so what your saying is midcard reigns from mania 31- survivors series 2015 is more to blame for the ratings than main event rollins who had double, at times triple, the exposure on a average raw? 

sames like one of us is bias here and that's not me



Godway said:


> And one guy is a heel, the other is (supposed to be) a face. Presentation >>> titles, TV time, whatever. You can give a guy all the titles and RAW openings you want, if you're jobbing him on a weekly basis and going out of your way to show that he's a fucking loser compared to everyone else, then he's not going to draw money. Heels who draw are guys who antagonize fans AND avoid being pinned/submitted.
> 
> And lets be honest, Rollins only got so much TV time to begin with, because Roman couldn't carry the ball and still can't to this day. He's the only guy I've ever seen WWE actively hide from its own audience, but want him to be a top guy at the same time.


it was decided by Meltzer and hardcore fans that Reigns couldnt be top dog before his run even started over fear of a new cena and whiney bryan fans

i agree presentation is vital, but how many of those tv loses for rollins were clean or void of interference?


----------



## ste1592

BigDaveBatista said:


> so what your saying is midcard reigns from mania 31- survivors series 2015 is more to blame for the ratings than main event rollins who had double, at times triple, the exposure on a average raw?
> 
> sames like one of us is bias here and that's not me



Not at all. I am suggesting that a pussy heel that was getting pinned clean on television is never going to be taken more seriously than an ass-kicking machine, no matter what their placement on the card is.


----------



## Godway

BigDaveBatista said:


> so what your saying is midcard reigns from mania 31- survivors series 2015 is more to blame for the ratings than main event rollins who had double, at times triple, the exposure on a average raw?
> 
> sames like one of us is bias here and that's not me
> 
> 
> 
> it was decided by Meltzer and hardcore fans that Reigns couldnt be top dog before his run even started over fear of a new cena and whiney bryan fans
> 
> i agree presentation is vital, but how many of those tv loses for rollins were clean or void of interference?


Irrelevant. Why is the WWE Champion losing that consistently on RAW in any capacity? 

Meltzer always gives Reigns a fair shake. But like lots of us, he's been watching wrestling for a very long time and when you watch Reigns there's gaping red flags about him, and you're just being blind to not acknowledge them. He's never at any point buried the guy, he just calls it as it is. 

It's like that in general on the internet. I don't have to bury Roman Reigns, all I have to do is not suck his dick off and that means I'm a "hater" because his fanbase is juvenile. From the time he was Mr Hot Tag, I wasn't super impressed with him but I thought okay, he's doing good enough at this, lets see how he develops. But he never really developed past midcard-ish abilities. And fans never took to him either. He's just a guy they push.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Godway said:


> Irrelevant. Why is the WWE Champion losing that consistently on RAW in any capacity?
> 
> Meltzer always gives Reigns a fair shake. But like lots of us, he's been watching wrestling for a very long time and when you watch Reigns there's gaping red flags about him, and you're just being blind to not acknowledge them. He's never at any point buried the guy, he just calls it as it is.
> 
> It's like that in general on the internet. I don't have to bury Roman Reigns, all I have to do is not suck his dick off and that means I'm a "hater" because his fanbase is juvenile. From the time he was Mr Hot Tag, I wasn't super impressed with him but I thought okay, he's doing good enough at this, lets see how he develops. But he never really developed past midcard-ish abilities. And fans never took to him either. He's just a guy they push.


ive noted romans deficiencies before and know where he needs to improve so it's not as if im a blind fan

theres a difference between not being a fan and mentioning roman in every single thread on the forum in a negative light like you do

notice how ive not once mocked rollins ability, or suggested that roman was a better drawing champion, just that to blame reigns for the ratings and not blame rollins as well is inconsistent and frankly wrong

I agree the champion shouldnt lose consistently on tv, but the occasional loss here and there to further a storyline i have no issue with 

i also have no issue with people not liking roman, it would be hypocritical of me to do so


----------



## Godway

BigDaveBatista said:


> ive noted romans deficiencies before and know where he needs to improve so it's not as if im a blind fan
> 
> theres a difference between not being a fan and mentioning roman in every single thread on the forum in a negative light like you do
> 
> notice how ive not once mocked rollins ability, or suggested that roman was a better drawing champion, just that to blame reigns for the ratings and not blame rollins as well is inconsistent and frankly wrong
> 
> I agree the champion shouldnt lose consistently on tv, but the occasional loss here and there to further a storyline i have no issue with
> 
> i also have no issue with people not liking roman, it would be hypocritical of me to do so


Reigns is put in a position to draw. Rollins isn't and never has been. I don't know how I can make that any simpler for you.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Godway said:


> Reigns is put in a position to draw. Rollins isn't and never has been. I don't know how I can make that any simpler for you.


i disagree so we might as well agree to disagree


----------



## Godway

BigDaveBatista said:


> i disagree so we might as well agree to disagree


The issue is that after Daniel Bryan, some people think that you can book guys like complete shit and if they're actually popular, they'll still be drawing and getting huge pops and whatever. This isn't the case and never in history has been the case. Daniel Bryan was a once in a lifetime scenario. People don't pay money to watch losers. People don't tune in for 3 hours to watch losers. 

Hence why I laugh at Reigns fans who immediately shit on guys like Ambrose, Rollins, Owens, whoever that get even the slightest notion of a push, if they don't move numbers in one week. What are fans supposed to be tuning into them for? Why are fans supposed to be reacting to them? What the fuck have they done? Have they gone over the whole roster multiple times, or main evented two Manias, or won a Rumble while having another Rumble entirely dedicated to them? Are they the single most marketed person in the company? 

You don't just put belts on people and say "Okay, they're supposed to draw money now."


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Godway said:


> The issue is that after Daniel Bryan, some people think that you can book guys like complete shit and if they're actually popular, they'll still be drawing and getting huge pops and whatever. This isn't the case and never in history has been the case. Daniel Bryan was a once in a lifetime scenario. People don't pay money to watch losers. People don't tune in for 3 hours to watch losers.
> 
> Hence why I laugh at Reigns fans who immediately shit on guys like Ambrose, Rollins, Owens, whoever that get even the slightest notion of a push, if they don't move numbers in one week. What are fans supposed to be tuning into them for? Why are fans supposed to be reacting to them? What the fuck have they done? Have they gone over the whole roster multiple times, or main evented two Manias, or won a Rumble while having another Rumble entirely dedicated to them? Are they the single most marketed person in the company?
> 
> You don't just put belts on people and say "Okay, they're supposed to draw money now."


okay, i haven't slated ambrose or owens nor did i suspect owens to move the ratings up by winning the belt he needs consistent booking and to look strong 
funny enough do you know the best way to show owens as strong? beat reigns clean, i mean hes already beat him semi clean the other week (rusev distracted reigns but didn't lay a hand on him and it only took 1 pop up powerbomb) 

please dont mention daniel bryan

the people you've mentioned are mentioned everyday by posters on this forum as "the most over on the roster" so why wouldn't they give them the belt and hope for them to draw

your banging on as if rollins, ambrose and the like have been booked like swagger or zack ryder 

to reiterate, we are never going to disagree on this so there isnt a point in continuing


----------



## Godway

BigDaveBatista said:


> okay, i haven't slated ambrose or owens nor did i suspect owens to move the ratings up by winning the belt he needs consistent booking and to look strong
> funny enough do you know the best way to show owens as strong? beat reigns clean, i mean hes already beat him semi clean the other week (rusev distracted reigns but didn't lay a hand on him and it only took 1 pop up powerbomb)
> 
> please dont mention daniel bryan
> 
> the people you've mentioned are mentioned everyday by posters on this forum as "the most over on the roster" so why wouldn't they give them the belt and hope for them to draw
> 
> your banging on as if rollins, ambrose and the like have been booked like swagger or zack ryder
> 
> to reiterate, we are never going to disagree on this so there isnt a point in continuing


Timing and context matter. Ambrose/Rollins were both more over than Reigns at various points of the last two years, and that's not even questionable. It's not their fault that WWE doesn't pull the trigger on anyone anymore and does after the fact booking. People have always exaggerated Kevin Owens overness, because he has many fanboys on this forum. He's never been main event over and still isn't now. A lot of the audience simply doesn't "get" him, as he's not a mainstream pro wrestler really. 

What's funny is, Rollins title run was only because Roman failed, and then Seth was supposed to have a lengthy reign so he can get fed to Roman and hopefully get him over as a face. But Seth got hurt, saving him from that fate. Then Ambrose only wins the title in a punishment to Reigns for failing a Wellness test. And receives a push because of it. 

See what I mean? Neither guy was actually designed to be champion. They just got their pushes as byproducts of WWE's real top guy in their minds, Roman Reigns.


----------



## wwe9391

Roman 100% developed past midcard-ish abilities. When I watch his matches they always feel like a big deal to me = main eventer. When his music hits and gets the loudest reaction on the roster = main eventer. When I watch him in the ring, backstage, making his entrance he just oozes with charisma = main eventer. The guy is a main eventer. It just amazes me some cant see it but we all have our opinions


----------



## Darren Criss

WWE needs storylines about sexism, homophobia and racism.

This is what people are talkin' about


----------



## Ace

Bryan Alvarez said that next Monday RAW on L.A. tickets sale are going pretty bad.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Godway said:


> Timing and context matter. Ambrose/Rollins were both more over than Reigns at various points of the last two years, and that's not even questionable. It's not their fault that WWE doesn't pull the trigger on anyone anymore and does after the fact booking. People have always exaggerated Kevin Owens overness, because he has many fanboys on this forum. He's never been main event over and still isn't now. A lot of the audience simply doesn't "get" him, as he's not a mainstream pro wrestler really.
> 
> What's funny is, Rollins title run was only because Roman failed, and then Seth was supposed to have a lengthy reign so he can get fed to Roman and hopefully get him over as a face. But Seth got hurt, saving him from that fate. Then Ambrose only wins the title in a punishment to Reigns for failing a Wellness test. And receives a push because of it.
> 
> See what I mean? Neither guy was actually designed to be champion. They just got their pushes as byproducts of WWE's real top guy in their minds, Roman Reigns.


again with the over generalisation 

rollins was the money in the bank holder and had been in prominent storylines since he won the case
money in the bank is 3 months after mania so its safe to say seth wins the belt in those 3 months regardless of how well, or otherwise, roman does with the belt if he wins it from brock


----------



## Sincere

wwe9391 said:


> Roman 100% developed past midcard-ish abilities. When I watch his matches they always feel like a big deal to me = main eventer. When his music hits and gets the loudest reaction on the roster = main eventer. When I watch him in the ring, backstage, making his entrance he just oozes with charisma = main eventer. The guy is a main eventer. It just amazes me some cant see it but we all have our opinions


:HA


----------



## Hawkke

ShowStopper said:


> I blame Vince and Creative more than anyone else. But you can put partial blame on anyone who's been pushed in the last 5 years or so and/or has been pushed to dominate the rest of the roster.


I simply can't wrap my head around why so many can't comprehend the simple fact that until WWE learns to make feuds matter, make PPV's feel important, hell, until they start remembering the fundamentals, the bloody basics of putting on a wrestling show nearly no one on the roster even matters. Each and every roster member can be "blamed" until we're all rotted corpses in coffins and none of that will matter one iota. If your show has lost it's grasp on the fundamentals there will never be anyone to blame but the leadership.


----------



## wwe9391

Sincere said:


> :HA


:HA its an opinion everyone has one


----------



## Sincere

wwe9391 said:


> :HA its an opinion everyone has one


And...?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

LA isn't a wrestling market so I don't see why anyone is surprised.


----------



## Cipher

Welp


----------



## Sincere

Cipher said:


> Welp


Needs context.


----------



## Cipher

Bryan Alvarez re-tweeted that. The guy claimed it was during RAW opposite of the camera.

https://twitter.com/InuJoshua/status/783143701572907009


----------



## Sincere

Cipher said:


> Bryan Alvarez re-tweeted that. The guy claimed it was during RAW opposite of the camera.
> 
> https://twitter.com/InuJoshua/status/783143701572907009


My question would be when during Raw. That's always an important element that is often missing with these kinds of pictures.


----------



## gl83

Sincere said:


> My question would be when during Raw. That's always an important element that is often missing with these kinds of pictures.



His tweet was posted at 8:44 Eastern time, so it was halfway through the first hour.


----------



## Chrome

That's pretty bad. I know LA ain't a wrestling town like Winning said, but it's still a big market and it's still your flagship show, so that's pretty embarrassing tbh.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> LA isn't a wrestling market so I don't see why anyone is surprised.


Because they sold out earlier this damn year.

This reminds me SO much of WCW, when attendance plummeted from records to not selling out within a year.


----------



## wwe9391

Your wish is not happening for a very long time


----------



## Goldusto

fans seemed to be pretty lively and into the show for the most part, bit of a lull in the middle but jericho was over, seth was over, womens match was over, start was over, even cruiserweights got a bit of a pop. the show wasnt horible either, bit throwaway but not the usual shit that we had in recent weeks.

so if low ratings its not a reflection on the show but as the product. ALSO NO JOHN CENA REALLY DRAGS IT DOWN, he is a semi draw, and without him the show is lesser for it


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

I stopped reading the live results around 10:00. That's gonna put a big dent in hour 3. :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Your wish is not happening for a very long time


It already is.

Dudes like yourself said it's impossible to fall where we are today.


----------



## Bret Hart

Rating should be funny


----------



## Dell

Cipher said:


> Welp


This has been happening for years though. 

If they really wanna fill arenas they could lower ticket prices which are high for what is a family show.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

Chrome said:


> That's pretty bad. I know LA ain't a wrestling town like Winning said, but it's still a big market and it's still your flagship show, so that's pretty embarrassing tbh.


to be fair...if u any of u guys are into sports u know that baseball, basketball, and even football have periods where there stadiums/ arenas aren't full, somethings almost empty, with tv cameras focus exclusively on field and if they show stands its only for a few seconds...so its not only wrestling.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.877M
H2-2.870M
H3-2.644M
3H-2.797M*










*Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (-0.0024%/-0.007M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-7.87%/-0.226M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-8.10%/-0.233M) 

10/3/16 Vs 9/26/16
(+12.87%/+0.319M)

Demo:
10/3/16 Vs 9/26/16

H1- 0.990D Vs 0.970D
H2- 1.010D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.950D Vs 0.740D
3H- 0.983D Vs 0.833D

Note: RAW is #5, #4 & #6 by demo and #4, #5 & #6 by viewership.*


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> It already is.
> 
> Dudes like yourself said it's impossible to fall where we are today.


Like I said your wish won't be happening for a very long time. WWE will still be here in 10 years


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1 and Hour 2 retained the audience. Hour 3 with a 226,000 drop, though.


----------



## Bret Hart

Pretty normal, nothing too surprising.


----------



## KO Bossy

What does this translate into, ratings wise?


----------



## DoubtGin

Well it's back to its horrible numbers from two weeks ago. Those who watched the debate last week are back.


----------



## Deadman's Hand

*All 3 hours are below 3 million. :lmao

Between this, & the shit attendance for RAW, it's easy to say the brand split is not helping this company.*


----------



## wwe9391

Hour 1 the highest not surprised there.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.877M
> H2-2.870M
> H3-2.644M
> 3H-2.797M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (-0.0024%/-0.007M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-7.87%/-0.226M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-8.10%/-0.233M)
> 
> 10/3/16 Vs 9/26/16
> (+12.87%/+0.319M)
> 
> Demo:
> 10/3/16 Vs 9/26/16
> 
> H1- 0.990D Vs 0.970D
> H2- 1.010D Vs 0.790D
> H3- 0.950D Vs 0.740D
> 3H- 0.983D Vs 0.833D
> 
> Note: RAW is #5, #4 & #6 by demo and #4, #5 & #6 by viewership.*


*Y-Y viewership:
10/3/16 Vs 10/5/15

H1- 2.877M Vs 3.473M
H2- 2.870M Vs 3.494M
H3- 2.644M Vs 3.167M
3H- 2.797M Vs 3.378M (-17.29% / -0.581M)

Y-Y demo:
10/3/16 Vs 10/5/15

H1- 0.990D Vs 1.120D
H2- 1.010D Vs 1.120D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.130D
3H- 0.983D Vs 1.123D*

*Note: RAW this time last year was #7, #6 & #5 by demo and #4, #3 & #5 by viewership.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Like I said your wish won't be happening for a very long time. WWE will still be here in 10 years


Taking the Place of PWG.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> Hour 1 the highest not surprised there.


Yep, it's always the highest, and the football game doesn't start until 8:30. No surprise at all.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Ashton Kutcher doesn't draw!!!!!! Damn neckbeard midget.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> Yep, it's always the highest, and the football game doesn't start until 8:30. No surprise at all.


I'm always a believer of the 3 hours is the killer. Wwe really should just do Raw from 8-10 and then have talking Raw live if USA really wants a 3rd hour on Mondays


----------



## ecclesiastes10

women wrestling sucks...they should have never main evented and/or be promoted as such, I bet if they had just appeared at the last hour people wouldn't have turn off. I know I left after 2 mins of them fighting


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> I'm always a believer of the 3 hours is the killer. Wwe really should just do Raw from 8-10 and then have talking Raw live if USA really wants a 3rd hour on Mondays


It would help the quality of the product for sure. But it would hurt WWE financially. They get paid $32 million for the third hour of Raw.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not much to get excited about here. I wonder if 3 million is out of the question this year?


----------



## Reotor

Next year 2.8 will be the standard, with or without NFL


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> It would help the quality of the product for sure. But it would hurt WWE financially. They get paid $32 million for the third hour of Raw.


Exactly if I was wwe I take the $32 million as well. You be dumb not too


----------



## A-C-P

WWE looking to top that 5-10% normal audience decrease again this year, those overachievers


----------



## ecclesiastes10

THE MAN said:


> Not much to get excited about here. I wonder if 3 million is out of the question this year?


sure if they hire me as main writer because, I can do all things through Christ which strengthen me.


----------



## Shadowcran

The Raw forum literally died around the hour and a half mark. There's only so much hardcore fans can take before they just change the channel.

Raw sucks. I'm not entertained but instead exposed to a cringeworthy filled mess. I said it after Reigns had to get his Stuporman Punch in last night...Raw creative has got to be the stupidest bastards on the face of the earth.

I honestly flipped to Simpsons reruns....NFL boycott.

Smackdown? They give their wrestlers storylines, not just one for the big names.


----------



## wwe1univeres

wwe9391 said:


> ShowStopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> It would help the quality of the product for sure. But it would hurt WWE financially. They get paid $32 million for the third hour of Raw.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly if I was wwe I take the $32 million as well. You be dumb not too
Click to expand...

But in doing so, wwe is hurting the quality of the product and incrementally driving viewers away. Tv deals, live attendance, etc will all suffer in the long run.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe1univeres said:


> But in doing so, wwe is hurting the quality of the product and incrementally driving viewers away. Tv deals, live attendance, etc will all suffer in the long run.


Completely agree. It is a problem. But by the time this contract with USA runs out, something tells USA isn't going to be offering WWE $32 million for just Hour 3 any longer. Guess we'll see, though.


----------



## The_Jiz

The 3 hours was the networks solution to combat the decade-long declining ratings because Vince isn't doing shit. 

All the blame still falls on Vince and co.


----------



## Randy Lahey

4 straight weeks under a 2.0 They may not go back above a 2.0 till January. 17% audience decline off of last year's numbers which were awful. 

WWE may not go completely out of business, but it'll most likely go off of mainstream cable outlets within the next few years. I would assume that all WWE content will eventually be on the WWE Network. So their audience will be about 1.5 mils people worldwide. We will see if they can live off that.


----------



## The_Jiz

Bottom line WWE spreads themselves too far thin. They have all this content like the network, social media, live shows, but their "flagship" show where all main storylines emanate from, where the entire empire is built around, is a complete hollow mess.


----------



## Cipher

Monday's WWE RAW, featuring Sasha Banks winning the RAW Women's Title from Charlotte in the main event, drew 2.797 million viewers. This is up 13% from last week's 2.478 million viewers, which was a new low going back to the 90s. Last week's show did face major competition from the first Donald Trump - Hillary Clinton debate and the NFL.

For this week's show, the first hour drew 2.877 million viewers, the second hour drew 2.870 million viewers and the final hour drew 2.644 million viewers.

RAW was #4 on cable for the night in viewership, behind the NFL's Monday Night Football, SportsCenter and The O'Reilly Factor. RAW was #4 in the 18-49 demographic, behind the NFL, SportsCenter and Love & Hip-Hop.

The NFL drew 13.1 million viewers on cable last night.

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...cable-originals-network-finals-10-3-2016.html
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...we-raw-viewership-with-the-women-title-match/


----------



## Bink77

Good thing for Vince that the ratings don't matter. Neither do wins or losses, attendance gates, or coherent storytelling.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

Eh, it seems like that's going to be their normal numbers until WM season comes around. That third hour is a killer though.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*All-Time 10 lowest WWE RAW ratings (All under 2.00R):

1.50R-----23 December 1996
1.60R-----30 December 1996
1.75R-----26 September 2016
1.80R-----14 October 1996
1.87R-----4 July 2016
1.88R-----12 September 2016
1.90R-----3 March 1997
1.90R-----25 September 1995
1.92R-----3 October 2016
1.97R-----19 September 2016*

*5 out of the 10 ratings above are from the past 3 months. 4 of them consecutively in the past 1 month making it the 1st time ever RAW has had 4 consecutive weeks of sub 2.00R ratings.*

*WWE Raw rating for the October 3 show

Monday’s WWE Raw scored a 1.92 rating, up from the 1.75 rating the show drew last week. Raw averaged 2.8 million viewers, up from the 2.478 million average from last week. Powell’s POV: Last week’s number was down due to the U.S. Presidential Debate. This week’s show was opposed by an NFL game that delivered 13.167 million viewers for ESPN (Skol, Vikings!). The October 5, 2015 edition of Raw delivered a 2.35 rating with 3.378 million viewers.*

http://prowrestling.net/site/2016/10/04/wwe-raw-rating-for-the-october-3-show/


----------



## The Power that Be

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Ashton Kutcher doesn't draw!!!!!! Damn neckbeard midget.


:ha

Ashton Kutcher hasn't been relevant in over 10 years , the only thing i know him for is he that was married to Demi Moore and that he was in MTV Punked like 12 years ago, WWE is about a decade too late


----------



## Kabraxal

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *All-Time 10 lowest WWE RAW ratings (All under 2.00R):
> 
> 1.50R-----23 December 1996
> 1.60R-----30 December 1996
> 1.75R-----26 September 2016
> 1.80R-----14 October 1996
> 1.87R-----4 July 2016
> 1.88R-----12 September 2016
> 1.90R-----3 March 1997
> 1.90R-----25 September 1995
> 1.92R-----3 October 2016
> 1.97R-----19 September 2016*
> 
> *5 out of the 10 ratings above are from the past 3 months. 4 of them consecutively in the past 1 month making it the 1st time ever RAW has had 4 consecutive weeks of sub 2.00R ratings.*
> 
> *WWE Raw rating for the October 3 show
> 
> Monday’s WWE Raw scored a 1.92 rating, up from the 1.75 rating the show drew last week. Raw averaged 2.8 million viewers, up from the 2.478 million average from last week. Powell’s POV: Last week’s number was down due to the U.S. Presidential Debate. This week’s show was opposed by an NFL game that delivered 13.167 million viewers for ESPN (Skol, Vikings!). The October 5, 2015 edition of Raw delivered a 2.35 rating with 3.378 million viewers.*
> 
> http://prowrestling.net/site/2016/10/04/wwe-raw-rating-for-the-october-3-show/


That is much worse than I thought... didn't realise this year was dominating the worst ever list in terms of ratings. Knew it was getting bad, but not that god awfully horrible.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

I cannot wait for the TV contract renewal negociations. No doubt USA will offer much lower than $32 million and WWE can either accept, move to another network, or take a huge gamble and move all their content to the WWE Network.

Either way, they're going to decline ever harder next year. WWE 2016/17 is WCW 1999. Period.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Bink77 said:


> Good thing for Vince that the ratings don't matter. Neither do wins or losses, attendance gates, or coherent storytelling.


YouTube ftw.


----------



## Chrome

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *All-Time 10 lowest WWE RAW ratings (All under 2.00R):
> 
> 1.50R-----23 December 1996
> 1.60R-----30 December 1996
> 1.75R-----26 September 2016
> 1.80R-----14 October 1996
> 1.87R-----4 July 2016
> 1.88R-----12 September 2016
> 1.90R-----3 March 1997
> 1.90R-----25 September 1995
> 1.92R-----3 October 2016
> 1.97R-----19 September 2016*
> 
> *5 out of the 10 ratings above are from the past 3 months. 4 of them consecutively in the past 1 month making it the 1st time ever RAW has had 4 consecutive weeks of sub 2.00R ratings.*
> 
> *WWE Raw rating for the October 3 show
> 
> Monday’s WWE Raw scored a 1.92 rating, up from the 1.75 rating the show drew last week. Raw averaged 2.8 million viewers, up from the 2.478 million average from last week. Powell’s POV: Last week’s number was down due to the U.S. Presidential Debate. This week’s show was opposed by an NFL game that delivered 13.167 million viewers for ESPN (Skol, Vikings!). The October 5, 2015 edition of Raw delivered a 2.35 rating with 3.378 million viewers.*
> 
> http://prowrestling.net/site/2016/10/04/wwe-raw-rating-for-the-october-3-show/


LOL, certainly deserved. Congrats WWE. :clap


----------



## Bink77

The excuse era. There's always a reason why the ratings are shit now. All except that raw just fucking sucks.


----------



## Arkham258




----------



## Reotor

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *All-Time 10 lowest WWE RAW ratings (All under 2.00R):
> 
> 1.50R-----23 December 1996
> 1.60R-----30 December 1996
> 1.75R-----26 September 2016
> 1.80R-----14 October 1996
> 1.87R-----4 July 2016
> 1.88R-----12 September 2016
> 1.90R-----3 March 1997
> 1.90R-----25 September 1995
> 1.92R-----3 October 2016
> 1.97R-----19 September 2016*
> 
> *5 out of the 10 ratings above are from the past 3 months. 4 of them consecutively in the past 1 month making it the 1st time ever RAW has had 4 consecutive weeks of sub 2.00R ratings.*
> 
> *WWE Raw rating for the October 3 show
> 
> http://prowrestling.net/site/2016/10/04/wwe-raw-rating-for-the-october-3-show/*


*

Its funny how 2016 is taking over this chart :lol*


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Not that farfetched to compared 2016 to 1996 in terms of the WWE anymore, isn't it?


----------



## atm

Nitro had better ratings in 2001 than current wwe lol .


----------



## Botchy SinCara

Well when Booman Reings is opening week after week while your champ is in tag team matches it shows


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Botchy SinCara said:


> Well when Booman Reings is opening week after week while your champ is in tag team matches it shows


oh do us all a favour and fuck off


----------



## Darren Criss

Charlotte and Sasha had the best main event match of the Raw this year. The ratings are a lame.


----------



## HenryBowers

What is worrying is Black Ink Crew gets close ratings to Raw. Must be cheaper to produce also. 

I recon if WWE gets to 0.7 demog they are in trouble.


----------



## Ace

This weeks show wasn't bad.

The biggest problem with wrestling is that it isn't cool anymore.

The lame writing only drove people away, so even good writing isn't getting them back. They desperately need a radical change, fast.


----------



## Pummy

4 consecutive week below 2.0 :maury

Can't wait for Triple H to take over :lmao this guy prove his worth very well


----------



## God Movement

Straw Hat said:


> This weeks show wasn't bad.
> 
> The biggest problem with wrestling is that it isn't cool anymore.
> 
> The lame writing only drove people away, so even good writing isn't getting them back. They desperately need a radical change, fast.


It's over. No-one talks about WWE on a wide scale anymore. They do however talk about "WWF".


----------



## Ace

God Movement said:


> It's over. No-one talks about WWE on a wide scale anymore. They do however talk about "WWF".


 Yeah, all the teenage boys and men have moved onto the UFC. 

The UFC is the new WWF in terms of mainstream appeal.

The WWE sent them all over the moment they started catering to women and children.


----------



## it's squezzy bitch

in the uk wrestling faded out because the carney aspect of it had become passe, the same is happening decades later in america, they don't have to follow lucha underground's style with crazy breathing fire dragons and mythology but still believe their tv series format and production style is the way to go to get wrestling's overall image of being nothing but a circus act where it's fans think the stuff is real


----------



## Ace

it's squezzy bitch said:


> in the uk wrestling faded out because the carney aspect of it had become passe, the same is happening decades later in america, they don't have to follow lucha underground's style with crazy breathing fire dragons and mythology but still believe their tv series format and production style is the way to go to get wrestling's overall image of being nothing but a circus act where it's fans think the stuff is real


 Lets be real, they need to give the product some much needed edge.

That means blood, violence and boundary pushing storylines.


----------



## God Movement

There's really only so many women and children you can bring to the product, historically speaking, they're not inclined to watch such shows, you can bring in a little bit more than before, but there's much more potential with targeting males since that has always been wrestling's primary market. It's VIOLENCE for fucks sake, we (men) love that shit. You can't water down violence when UFC is breathing down your neck.


----------



## HenryBowers

IMO wrestling dexlined in WWE because they took Sunday Heat off terrestrial TV meaning you had to have sky to have access to any WWE.


----------



## The RainMaker

Let's see what numbers Bill can pull.


----------



## Ace

The K3vin Ow3ns Show said:


> Let's see what numbers Bill can pull.


 Only guys who are capable of moving the needle now are The Rock, Austin and maybe Hogan. Goldberg at best may get a pop for a week before ratings go back down again.


----------



## Reotor

Straw Hat said:


> Only guys who are capable of moving the needle now are The Rock, Austin and maybe Hogan. Goldberg at best may get a pop for a week before ratings go back down again.


Rock, Austin and Hogan would meet the same fate as Goldberg or Shane if they ever appear on WWE on a regular basis, they will get huge pops at first and even move the needle but after a while it will normalize back to 2.8.

in other news, from cageside seats:


> Dave Meltzer noted on Wrestling Observer Radio that WWE may be getting more lax on verbiage thanks to ratings falling so far. This includes saying "fans" instead of "WWE Universe" every time. There may be other changes made in an attempt to help turn things around.


If true then its really nice, i mean it wont do shit for the ratings its far too late for that but its nice that the WWE will treat their fans like human beings again instead of as an abstract construct.


----------



## Ace

Reotor said:


> Rock, Austin and Hogan would meet the same fate as Goldberg or Shane if they ever appear on WWE on a regular basis, they will get huge pops at first and even move the needle but after a while it will normalize back to 2.8.
> 
> in other news, from cageside seats:
> 
> 
> If true then its really nice, i mean it wont do shit for the ratings its far too late for that but its nice that the WWE will treat their fans like human beings again instead of as an abstract construct.


 Thank god, I hope they do away with that Universe shit and stop calling wrestlers "superstars".


----------



## Second Nature

Straw Hat said:


> Only guys who are capable of moving the needle now are The Rock, Austin and maybe Hogan. Goldberg at best may get a pop for a week before ratings go back down again.


Don't forget CM Punk and Kurt Angle them coming back will definitely increase the ratings even if it will be temporary.


----------



## wwe9391

Botchy SinCara said:


> Well when Booman Reings is opening week after week while your champ is in tag team matches it shows


It shows alright. He was in the highest rated hour of the night :draper2


----------



## Reotor

wwe9391 said:


> It shows alright. He was in the highest rated hour of the night :draper2


With "highest" being incredibly relative:quite


----------



## Mister Sinister

It's going to take as long for them to dig their way out as it took for them to reach the bottom (which they still haven't reached). I don't anticipate that next week will be the end of Reigns destroying the product, the end of Owens' reign, or that they will let the cruiserweights wrestle.

I don't see them collecting their balls and bringing Aries, Roode, or Joe up to Raw; showing more than the same 4 women every week, or pushing the guys that fans cheer for (Enzo and Cass (who they jobbed to Shining Stars a couple weeks back as punishment for Cass drawing more pop than Reigns in their 4-way title match)).

What is happening in the WWE is self mutilation (just like when they turned Styles heel). If someone gets over big, they get pushed under the Roman rug.


----------



## DoubtGin

> Source: F4WOnline
> 
> As seen on Monday's RAW from Los Angeles, the announcers referred to the crowd as "fans" instead of the WWE Universe when Rusev kicked United States Champion Roman Reigns over the ringside barrier. According to Dave Meltzer on Wrestling Observer Radio, this was an intentional change.
> 
> No word yet on if this is a permanent change but Meltzer indicated more minor changes could be coming:
> 
> "They've taken stock of things. Last week's rating... believe it or not, after all the ratings, last week's rating made them... I don't know exactly everything but the verbiage isn't supposed to be as bad now."
> 
> He also indicated that WWE is actually trying to improve RAW, pointing to the upgraded entrances with the use of the ramp and the big screen.


hmm


----------



## God Movement

It's positive that they're trying to change. But a good start would be firing the entire creative staff.


----------



## Cipher

God Movement said:


> It's positive that they're trying to change. But a good start would be firing the entire creative staff.


I dunno why people say this. They go through creatibe guys like toilet paper. Most, if not all, are only around for a few months.

Freddie Prinze Jr. said that.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> It shows alright. He was in the highest rated hour of the night :draper2


So was Michael Cole.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> So was Michael Cole.


fpalm just stop please. You lose this argument


----------



## Reotor

wwe9391 said:


> fpalm just stop please. You lose this argument


What argument? that Roman was put in the opening spot on RAW knowingly that the first hour of RAW is *always* the highest rated hour? please... it would be better serve your argument if you used YouTube ratings.

Now, if Roman was on the main event and the 3rd hour would draw MORE viewers than the 1st or 2nd, then you might had a case.


----------



## it's squezzy bitch

Straw Hat said:


> Lets be real, they need to give the product some much needed edge.
> 
> That means blood, violence and boundary pushing storylines.


and i think that would become more acceptable for them to these things as a fictional tv show rather than something that looks and sounds like a real sporting event, so many pg type shows can get away with blood and violence because it's far removed from reality with no confusion, it may even give them more credibility with advertisers and a bring in a new audience that can watch without the paranoia of having their intelligence insulted?


----------



## wwe9391

Reotor said:


> What argument? that Roman was put in the opening spot on RAW knowingly that the first hour of RAW is *always* the highest rated hour? please... it would be better serve your argument if you used YouTube ratings.
> 
> Now, if Roman was on the main event and the 3rd hour would draw MORE viewers than the 1st or 2nd, then you might had a case.


Not true cause the 2nd hour has beaten the first before. 3rd hour always does bad no matter who's in it. 

And no the YouTube views arguments as been beaten to death.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

They need to take the belt off Roman to save the ratings.


----------



## HenryBowers

They need to take the ratings off Raw to save Roman.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Reotor said:


> What argument? that Roman was put in the opening spot on RAW knowingly that the first hour of RAW is *always* the highest rated hour? please... it would be better serve your argument if you used YouTube ratings.
> 
> Now, if Roman was on the main event and the 3rd hour would draw MORE viewers than the 1st or 2nd, then you might had a case.


oh give it a rest 

romans in the main event= complaints
romans opening the show= complaints
romans in the midcard = complaints 

its all fucking ridiculous


----------



## Reotor

BigDaveBatista said:


> oh give it a rest
> 
> romans in the main event= complaints
> romans opening the show= complaints
> romans in the midcard = complaints
> 
> its all fucking ridiculous


Meh, i dont complain, nothing on RAW matters to me.
Was just pointing out that using the argument that Roman is in the highest rated part of the show when the opening hour is (almost) always the highest rated part of the show for well over 2 years is a flawed argument.
I was corrected that sometimes the 2nd hour is the highest but thats rare.

As for the complaints, this is just something Roman fans will have to deal with so long as Roman is pushed as the top guy. The bigger the push the higher the expectations and the dominant perception is that Roman is not good enough for his push.
And no, Roman is not on the mid card, he technically hold a mid card belt but the Show pretty much still revolves around him, while the main title is taking a back seat.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Reotor said:


> Meh, i dont complain, nothing on RAW matters to me.
> Was just pointing out that using the argument that Roman is in the highest rated part of the show when the opening hour is (almost) always the highest rated part of the show for well over 2 years is a flawed argument.
> I was corrected that sometimes the 2nd hour is the highest but thats rare.
> 
> As for the complaints, this is just something Roman fans will have to deal with so long as Roman is pushed as the top guy. The bigger the push the higher the expectations and the dominant perception is that Roman is not good enough for his push.
> And no, Roman is not on the mid card, he technically hold a mid card belt but the Show pretty much still revolves around him, while the main title is taking a back seat.


dont know how you can watch that show and think it revolves around reigns when hes featured in at best 1 segment
seths seen constantly throughout the show, as are jericho and Owens
not saying thats a bad thing but theyve had far more focus on them than roman recently


----------



## A-C-P

BigDaveBatista said:


> oh give it a rest
> 
> romans in the main event= complaints
> romans opening the show= complaints
> romans in the midcard = complaints
> 
> its all fucking ridiculous


Yeh its like alot of the people that post here don't want to see Reigns at all :draper2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Not true cause the 2nd hour has beaten the first before. 3rd hour always does bad no matter who's in it.
> 
> And no the YouTube views arguments as been beaten to death.


My guess would be you're 16, but I assume there are people here who can actually remember when the Main Event hour was the highest rated. Which was not very long ago.
This complete drop off in the final hour pretty much came with the last 2,5 years.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> My guess would be you're 16, but I assume there are people here who can actually remember when the Main Event hour was the highest rated. Which was not very long ago.
> This complete drop off in the final hour pretty much came with the last 2,5 years.


I'm 28 but ok. Lol. 

Yea 3rd hour used to do good but it doesn't anymore cause the show is just too dam long.


----------



## dumtara

Jeri-KO currently the best entertainers in WWE


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> I'm 28 but ok. Lol.
> 
> Yea 3rd hour used to do good but it doesn't anymore cause the show is just too dam long.


You'd never guess 28 from the way you behave.

The show was too damn long 2 years ago already. Three guesses why the main event hour collapsing coincided with the rise of a certain wrestler.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> You'd never guess 28 from the way you behave.
> 
> The show was too damn long 2 years ago already. Three guesses why the main event hour collapsing coincided with the rise of a certain wrestler.


How old are you? With they way you post I would think you are 12. 

It was too dam long 4 years ago when it went to 3 hours for good. It should be 2 and thats it. And leave Rollins alone. Man is just doing his job. Him and no other superstar is at fault for the 3rd hour collapsing.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

A-C-P said:


> Yeh its like alot of the people that post here don't want to see Reigns at all :draper2


They dont wan't to see him, but appareantly he's the only thing worth to talk about on here for them.

How long before you people accept you just love the guy.


----------



## HenryBowers

Product should be 90 minutes long max.


----------



## HenryBowers

The creative team is Vince McMahon, his clone Stephanie and HHH.


----------



## Starbuck

This is an interesting read.



> _*This afternoon, Darren Rovell tweeted a memo sent by the NFL’s executive vice president of media Brian Rolapp and senior vice president of broadcasting Howard Katz to the league’s “media committee,” regarding the league’s cratering television ratings, primarily for primetime broadcasts. Rolapp and Katz place the blame on two factors—neither of which involves the wave of pro-black national anthem protests started by Colin Kaepernick.
> 
> According to the memo, the NFL believes the main culprit to be interest in the presidential election, citing rising ratings among the big cable news stations and the record-low viewership for the Sept. 26 Monday Night Football game between the Falcons and Saints that went up against the first presidential debate. (The league expects the same thing will happen this Sunday night, when the Giants and Packers have to compete with the second debate.)
> 
> The league sees the second issue as shitty games, basically. The memo reads:
> 
> Additionally, we are challenged in comparison to the first few weeks of the 2015 and 2014 seasons, which from a ratings perspective were two of the three best starts we have had in the last 10 years. No two seasons are the same when you consider the different matchups, game windows and other factors.
> It’s true that this year’s primetime games have been mostly bad. Thursday games are always wretched from both a matchup and play perspective, and Monday nights haven’t been much better. NBC’s Sunday night broadcasts usually get the week’s plum matchup, but this year’s slate has been rough, including a Panthers-Broncos game without Peyton Manning, a Patriots-Cardinals game without Tom Brady, a Bears-Cowboys game without Tony Romo or Jay Cutler, and a Chiefs-Steelers game that was over by the end of the first quarter.
> 
> Of course, the NFL is just offering up theories like any of us could. More to the point, the league hopes the ratings can be blamed on the presidential election or a rash of poor matchups. If it’s something more structural—a growing disgust of the sport or league, a lack of megawatt starpower that may not be filled—then a league who has used an unending shower of money to wash away its many sins may have a longterm problem on its hands.*_


Source: http://deadspin.com/nfl-memo-blames...source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow 

Raw isn't the only one suffering a ratings plummet this 'season'. Then again, you could argue that if WWE's main competition during Fall on Monday nights is taking a hit then Raw should be able to shore up the defenses. Seems like the Presidential debates are destroying everything and I'm not surprised. It is the biggest reality show to ever hit our television screens after all.


----------



## DJHJR86

Straw Hat said:


> Yeah, all the teenage boys and men have moved onto the UFC.
> 
> The UFC is the new WWF in terms of mainstream appeal.
> 
> The WWE sent them all over the moment they started catering to women and children.


And the WWE sure as hell aren't going to get any of them back by catering to the hardcore fans, which is what they are currently doing.


----------



## HenryBowers

Starbuck said:


> This is an interesting read.
> 
> 
> 
> Source: http://deadspin.com/nfl-memo-blames...source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
> 
> Raw isn't the only one suffering a ratings plummet this 'season'. Then again, you could argue that if WWE's main competition during Fall on Monday nights is taking a hit then Raw should be able to shore up the defenses. Seems like the Presidential debates are destroying everything and I'm not surprised. It is the biggest reality show to ever hit our television screens after all.


When trash tv like Love and Hip Hop get better ratings than RAW (which they frequently do) they know they are shit. 

RAW has an aging viewership, too.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

And nobody sees the giant difference that the NFL can't do a damn thing about shitty matches, while Vince and WWE can pretty much manufacture anything they want on the show to get interest back?


----------



## Godway

The debates are the biggest freak show on television, which makes them must-see, it's true. And yeah, the NFL is lacking star power right now and meaningful games. There's why ratings are down for them. But WWE has been in the toilet long before this, it only got significantly worse because of the NFL/Debates, which shows that the fanbase was looking for reasons to bail on the show, they just didn't have anything else to watch Monday night. 

You should be DRAWING the viewers in, not having them watch out of habit, then change the channel the moment something actually entertaining is on.


----------



## Kabraxal

Starbuck said:


> This is an interesting read.
> 
> 
> 
> Source: http://deadspin.com/nfl-memo-blames...source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
> 
> Raw isn't the only one suffering a ratings plummet this 'season'. Then again, you could argue that if WWE's main competition during Fall on Monday nights is taking a hit then Raw should be able to shore up the defenses. Seems like the Presidential debates are destroying everything and I'm not surprised. It is the biggest reality show to ever hit our television screens after all.


I actually find it more damning that the NFL is cratering right now... and it is NOT because of the election. The NFL is now struggling to maintain ratings for the exact same reason the WWE has tanked... their front office is filled with a bunch of out of touch rich assholes that think they can do nothing wrong. From there, you end up with shittier games because of constant rule changes, a shittier image because of weird enforcement of rules and standards, a league that treats celebrating and jersey modifications worse than actual dangerous penalties, and a declining respect from the fanbase that is only exacerbated by all that and then the now growing fad of "protesting" and ESPN's obsession with political bullshit when all fans want is a fucking sports game. 

The NFL is a perfect parallel to the WWE, just a few years behind in pissing off the fans to the point of record low ratings.


----------



## Restomaniac

wwe9391 said:


> I'm 28 but ok. Lol.
> 
> Yea 3rd hour used to do good but it doesn't anymore cause the show is just too dam long.


Are you trying to suggest that a 3 hour show today is somehow longer than a 3 hour show from a few years ago?


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

Restomaniac said:


> Are you trying to suggest that a 3 hour show today is somehow longer than a 3 hour show from a few years ago?


It sure feels like it!


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.790M
H2-2.876M
H3-2.610M
3H-2.759M*









*
Viewership:

H2 Vs H1 (+3.08%/+0.086M) 
H3 Vs H2 (-9.25%/-0.266M) 
H3 Vs H1 (-6.45%/-0.180M) 

10/10/16 Vs 10/3/16
(-1.36%/-0.038M)

Demo:

H1- 0.920D Vs 0.990D
H2- 0.980D Vs 1.010D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.950D
3H- 0.943D Vs 0.983D

Note: RAW is #8, #6 & #7 by demo and #7, #6 & #8 by viewership.*


----------



## Restomaniac

The Cleaner said:


> It sure feels like it!


It wasn't just me that was utterly mindfucked by that statement then.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Pretty much the same exact numbers as last week:

This week: 

2.7
2.8
2.6

Last week:

2.8
2.8
2.6

Remarkably similar. Wow.


----------



## wwe9391

Hour 2 the highest :reigns2


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

God damn, the WWE fucking sucks. RAW is trending towards SD territory, and SD is trending towards sub 2 million viewers.

Nice work on the roster split.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> Hour 2 the highest :reigns2


This is why you get ripped to shreds by everyone on here everyday. All of these numbers are awful. And there's not even any QH's to see who's responsible for what..


----------



## wwe9391

Restomaniac said:


> Are you trying to suggest that a 3 hour show today is somehow longer than a 3 hour show from a few years ago?


Duh


----------



## A-C-P

ShowStopper said:


> Pretty much the same exact numbers as last week:
> 
> This week:
> 
> 2.7
> 2.8
> 2.6
> 
> Last week:
> 
> 2.8
> 2.8
> 2.6
> 
> Remarkably similar. Wow.


Its the new norm, based on a constant 10% drop in audience yearly next year at this time, normal viewing levels should be around 2.5-2.3 viewers



ShowStopper said:


> This is why you get ripped to shreds by everyone on here everyday. Just saying.


Ignore function is your friend :Rollins


----------



## Bret Hart

The amount of viewers that WWE wanted to get rid of are gone, these remaining people are the die-hard... Even if you put on the most garbage product they'll still watch.

It's going to be really tough for WWE to get rid of these 2.8 million or so.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> This is why you get ripped to shreds by everyone on here everyday. Just saying.


TBH I really don't care. And who rips me to shreds raw botch mania? Whatever his name is.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.790M
> H2-2.876M
> H3-2.610M
> 3H-2.759M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Viewership:
> 
> H2 Vs H1 (+3.08%/+0.086M)
> H3 Vs H2 (-9.25%/-0.266M)
> H3 Vs H1 (-6.45%/-0.180M)
> 
> 10/10/16 Vs 10/3/16
> (-1.36%/-0.038M)
> 
> Demo:
> 
> H1- 0.920D Vs 0.990D
> H2- 0.980D Vs 1.010D
> H3- 0.930D Vs 0.950D
> 3H- 0.943D Vs 0.983D
> 
> Note: RAW is #8, #6 & #7 by demo and #7, #6 & #8 by viewership.*


*Y-Y viewership:
10/10/16 Vs 10/12/15

H1- 2.790M Vs 3.518M
H2- 2.876M Vs 3.254M
H3- 2.610M Vs 3.082M
3H- 2.759M Vs 3.285M (-16.01% /-0.526M)

Y-Y demo:
10/10/16 Vs 10/12/15

H1- 0.920D Vs 1.160D
H2- 0.980D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.930D Vs 1.060D
3H- 0.943D Vs 1.100D

Note: RAW this time last year was #6, #8 & #9 by demo and #4, #6 & #7 by viewership.*


----------



## Cipher

So what, we're 5 weeks into a 1. something rating?

I didn't watch RAW this week, but I read the results, and I'm not surprised. I'm being honest when I say I think this is truly the worst WWE's ever been. Yes, worse than 1995 and 2007.

Well, I watched like the first 10 minutes or so and then changed the channel thinking "why am I watching this if I hate it?"


----------



## Chrome

Yeah, WWE ratings have been going down for YEARS, while the NFL's has just gotten bad this season. I blame that on the election, people want to see the fuckery that Trump and Hilary will bring. Also, NFL needs to start flex-scheduling MNF games. Who's fucking with a Panthers/Bucs game besides fans of those teams lol?

That drop from last year to this year though.


----------



## A-C-P

Bret Hart said:


> The amount of viewers that WWE wanted to get rid of are gone, these remaining people are the die-hard... Even if you put on the most garbage product they'll still watch.
> 
> *It's going to be really tough for WWE to get rid of these 2.8 million or so.*


Judging by the Raw shows lately....CHALLENGE ACCEPTED :vince5


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> TBH I really don't care. And who rips me to shreds raw botch mania? Whatever his name is.


Yeah. It's just him.

..


----------



## Bret Hart

Cipher said:


> So what, we're 5 weeks into a 1. something rating?
> 
> I didn't watch RAW this week, but I read the results, and I'm not surprised. I'm being honest when I say I think this is truly the worst WWE's ever been. Yes, worse than 1995 and 2007.
> 
> Well, I watched like the first 10 minutes or so and then changed the channel thinking "why am I watching this if I hate it?"


Well at least in 1995 we still had WCW and the boom they were going to bring and in 2007 we still had stars. 

What do we have in 2016? Goldberg


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> God damn, the WWE fucking sucks. RAW is trending towards SD territory, and SD is trending towards sub 2 million viewers.
> 
> Nice work on the roster split.


Yep. Pathetic job by both shows.


----------



## Cipher

Bret Hart said:


> Well at least in 1995 we still had WCW and the boom they were going to bring and in 2007 we still had stars.
> 
> What do we have in 2016? Goldberg


Nah, I love Goldberg but one guy isn't going to save my plummeting interest in WWE as a whole. He's gonna lose to Brock and go away anyways, so why bother caring?

And shit, with what they did to Sting, I'd rather all my favorites just stay away and not come back.

RAW in 2016 is basically indie ROH shit with a focus on workrate, which I really don't give a shit about. They even do the Code of Honor crap with the Cruiserweights and the Cruiserweights aren't doing anything I haven't seen the Heavyweights of today do. 

I miss compelling stories, charisma and when most of the roster knew how to cut a promo.


----------



## TaterTots

Roman Reigns with the highest rated hour again. Like it or not they guy is the highest draw on the show. He always gets the most eyes on it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yes. That gargantuan difference between a 2.8 and a 2.7 and 2.6. Totally worth it!


----------



## DammitChrist

Just imagine what the ratings will be for this year's Raw Christmas edition


----------



## Cipher

I must say that I love that WWE is doing the exact same thing that they've criticized WCW for in every DVD/documentary release. Relying on old stars.


----------



## Chrome

Cipher said:


> I must say that I love that WWE is doing the exact same thing that they've criticized WCW for in every DVD/documentary release. Relying on old stars.


Yeah, they're doing A LOT of things that WCW did in their dying days. Only real difference now is that there's not a superior company kicking their asses in the ratings right now. The beauty of a monopoly.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Cipher said:


> I must say that I love that WWE is doing the exact same thing that they've criticized WCW for in every DVD/documentary release. Relying on old stars.


Right? You have to be extremely out of touch vince5) if you think current day Goldberg is going to fix anything, especially long term.


----------



## Godway

A-C-P said:


> Its the new norm, based on a constant 10% drop in audience yearly next year at this time, normal viewing levels should be around 2.5-2.3 viewers
> 
> 
> 
> Ignore function is your friend :Rollins


I feel like he's probably on pace to become the most ignored user of 2016. RAW numbers may be on decline, but ignoring 12 year olds numbers are soaring right now on wrestling forums.


----------



## HenryBowers

Good fucking God. You know whats even more pathetic? Love and Hip Hop and Black Ink Crew is giving RAW a pounding in the key demog. RAW isnt just falling out the airplane its doing so and is falling faster than everyone else. 

WWE is creatively bankrupt. They have effectively given up. Oh look lets just announce Goldberg will be taking on Lesnar because that will bring suspense. You got 2 WWE titles that sound the same and look the same; velvet red and blue. Just horrible. They have no creative talent whatsoever.


----------



## wwe9391

Godway said:


> I feel like he's probably on pace to become the most ignored user of 2016.


By users like you? I welcome it


----------



## DemonKane_Legend

Raw deserves this low ratings. That's what happens when you put an old man with a good character who can't be taken seriously anymore in the main events. Chris Jeriold should never be anywhere near the main events because this is fucking 2016. .His matches are slow and lethargic, he gets gassed after 5 minutes and he looks like RIc Flair in the last years of his career....


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Bret Hart said:


> The amount of viewers that WWE wanted to get rid of are gone, these remaining people are the die-hard... Even if you put on the most garbage product they'll still watch.
> 
> It's going to be really tough for WWE to get rid of these 2.8 million or so.


They sure try their damnest.

Story modes in WWE 2K games book better than this crap.


----------



## squarebox

I expected worse, and quite frankly I'm not sure how that many people can still sit through 3 hours of this shit live. I'm growing increasingly impatient for RAW and SD to reach even newer levels of low... just waiting for the penny to finally fucking drop with the 'E.


----------



## Reotor

RAW is doing a pretty decent job at holding what little die hard fans they have left. ratings look stable.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

HenryBowers said:


> Good fucking God. You know whats even more pathetic? Love and Hip Hop and Black Ink Crew is giving RAW a pounding in the key demog. RAW isnt just falling out the airplane its doing so and is falling faster than everyone else.
> 
> WWE is creatively bankrupt. They have effectively given up. Oh look lets just announce Goldberg will be taking on Lesnar because that will bring suspense. You got 2 WWE titles that sound the same and look the same; velvet red and blue. Just horrible. They have no creative talent whatsoever.


It makes my mind explode that a rematch this huge is being announced barely a month in advance, with neither participant actually present to issue the challenge.

Just stunning.


----------



## Pummy

They ain't gonna get 2.0 up until special episode. People who stop watching won't come back. People who still watching might just having habit of keep watching. I know because I used to watch TV show regularly for year. Even I'm getting bored I still watching because it was habit. But since I'm realize it no longer worth watching I stop watching and if I don't feel empty by not watching I would never watching again.


----------



## The RainMaker

So, what's the actual number?


----------



## Piper's Pit

squarebox said:


> I expected worse, and quite frankly I'm not sure how that many people can still sit through 3 hours of this shit live. *I'm growing increasingly impatient for RAW and SD to reach even newer levels of low... just waiting for the penny to finally fucking drop with the 'E.*


LOL. 

You're expecting the people who created the problem (Vince, Steph, Dunn, Triple H) to solve the problem. Hilarious.


----------



## The_Jiz

So is that another raw making the all time 10 lowest rated ever list. 

So like 6 now from 2016 alone?


----------



## squarebox

Piper's Pit said:


> LOL.
> 
> You're expecting the people who created the problem (Vince, Steph, Dunn, Triple H) to solve the problem. Hilarious.


Well something's gotta happen doesn't it? Iirc their TV deal with USA is up in 2018 and who knows how low ratings will have fallen by then. I don't necessarily think they don't know how to put on a good show, I get the sense part of it is that they've just gotten extremely lazy and need someone / something to give them a good kick up the ass again.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Goldberg will put them over a 2.0 next week. I guarantee it.


----------



## Erik.

Randy Lahey said:


> Goldberg will put them over a 2.0 next week. I guarantee it.


What if he doesn't?


----------



## Godway

If Goldberg DOESN'T cause an impressive bump, then you might as well take that as a sign that all of those fans you drove away for the last 15 years, and then made an even greater effort to drive them away in MASS these past two years, are never coming back. They're done with wrestling and waiting for the next Conor/Ronda fights. Which is very possibly going to happen next Monday.


----------



## Bret Hart

Goldberg in 2006 would have been better.


----------



## Piper's Pit

squarebox said:


> *Well something's gotta happen doesn't it?* Iirc their TV deal with USA is up in 2018 and who knows how low ratings will have fallen by then. I don't necessarily think they don't know how to put on a good show, I get the sense part of it is that they've just gotten extremely lazy and need someone / something to give them a good kick up the ass again.


Yeah something is going to happen. The never ending decline in ratings, attendance and overall popularity is going to continue until it begins to decrease their revenue and they start making losses. 
Once that happens the WWE will have two choices:

1. Massively cut costs and decrease the overall quality of their product which will drive away even more fans and send the WWE further into obscurity

2. Sell the company to Disney or some Chinese investment company

As for improving the creative side of things, forget about it, as long as Vince, Stephanie, Dunn and Triple H are in charge they're completely fucked.


----------



## Erik.

What can the WWE do that's fresh, innovative and will gain viewers? 

You'd think they've done everything possible in terms of storylines and angles that's possible within the wrestling business. They even attempt to recreate past storylines that worked with different performers to try and recreate magic and the majority of the time it fails.

Wrestling has simply peaked. It boomed in the 80s because kayfabe was very much real and you had larger than life characters. It then boomed again in the 90s because whilst it had larger than life characters, it was providing storylines NEVER seen before by the mainstream when it comes to wrestling, except this time it was the storylines drawing in viewers and not the wrestling.

You take away that creativity or the shock value and you have nothing. No one wants to tune in to watch fake wrestling when they can just watch real fighting with real people that are far more entertaining than people that do this for a job.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 10/10 did a 1.92 rating and 2,747,000 viewers (1.55 viewers per home), numbers virtually identical with the previous week.
> 
> The show was seventh for the night on cable, going against the Carolina Panthers vs. Tampa Bay Buccaneers in football that did 9,057,000 viewers and the early baseball game with the Cleveland Indians vs. Boston Red Sox game that did 4,018,000 viewers on TBS and the Chicago Cubs vs. San Francisco Giants late game on FS 1 that did 4,097,000 viewers. Interestingly, if you combine the audience for the FS 1 game and the NFL game you get 13,075,000 viewers, and the NFL game by itself the prior week did with the New York Giants vs. Minnesota Vikings did 13,167,000 viewers. So it would appear that baseball took a large chunk of viewers away from football, but with the overall combined audience of the two sports viewership identical to football alone the previous week, Raw ended up almost identical (1.91 rating and 2,789,000 viewers) as the previous week.
> 
> One would expect a decent sized bump next week for the return of Bill Goldberg, especially since it’s being advertised for a week in advance and will be pushed hard. In the past, a return of this caliber would make a huge difference, but one wonders if that’ll be the case because this will be a test of how much glory days nostalgia and casual fan curiosity means. Goldberg is the last big return left that can mean anything aside from yet another Hulk Hogan return, because everyone else is either too far back, been around recently enough or has passed away.
> 
> It was the usual pattern with the second hour being the strongest and a drop in hour three.
> 
> The 8 p.m. hour did 2,790,000 viewers. The 9 p.m. hour did 2,876,000 viewers. The 10 p.m. hour did 2,610,000 viewers.
> 
> The show did a 0.77 in 12-17 (up 4.1 percent), 0.87 in 18-34 (up 3.6 percent), 1.01 in 35-49 (down 9.8 percent) and 1.05 in 50+ (down 0.9 percent).
> 
> The breakdown is 61.9 percent male in 18-49 and 66.9 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Darren Criss

Owens' show is a disaster :lmao


----------



## Blade Runner

Godway said:


> If Goldberg DOESN'T cause an impressive bump, then you might as well take that as a sign that all of those fans you drove away for the last 15 years, and then made an even greater effort to drive them away in MASS these past two years, are never coming back. They're done with wrestling and waiting for the next Conor/Ronda fights. Which is very possibly going to happen next Monday.


Goldberg's WWE debut couldn't even sustain those fans from leaving back in 2003. That entire calendar year marked an impressive downtrend in weekly ratings to the point where a year later they've already lost a sizable chunk of their audience and started taking chances with JBL as their WWE champion. Goldberg was a massive draw in wCW, but he never quite fit in with the WWE product. 12 years later probably won't change much. Bill has no passion for it, and that won't make for sustainably compelling television. He hasn't kept his name fresh in the mainstream eye like The Rock has, so I doubt that the needle will move much if at all


----------



## The Power that Be

Darren Criss said:


> Owens' show is a disaster :lmao


Owens gets the strap and immediately right after they can't break through a 2.0 rating 


Owens 1.92 says i just tanked your ratings :ha


----------



## DammitChrist

Still blaming the low ratings on one wrestler I see....


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The Power that Be said:


> Owens gets the strap and immediately right after they can't break through a 2.0 rating
> 
> 
> Owens 1.92 says i just tanked your ratings :ha


Yep, let's just forget that was the day football started.

My god, the delusion. But what to expect with that avatar...


----------



## wwe9391

DammitC said:


> Still blaming the low ratings on one wrestler I see....


It started with people blaming Rollins, than Reigns, and now Owens. Its a fuckin trend that people on here seem to like. Even tho none of those guys are at fault


----------



## DammitChrist

wwe9391 said:


> It started with people blaming Rollins, than Reigns, and now Owens. Its a fuckin trend that people on here seem to like. Even tho none of those guys are at fault


Hell, even though I wasn't around posting back then, I remember some folks here were blaming CM Punk for the low ratings during his title reign.


----------



## Godway

Punk was the right idea though. He was a much better option for ratings and righting the ship than Roman Reigns is. The only way out of this hole is CHANGE. Punk's entire gimmick was "I want to change the WWE, I want to make wrestling fun again." and the fans were way into that because they agreed with him, the WWE fucking needs change. But you're not allowed to bury "the brand" on TV, so he had to pay for that. 

WWE has followed the WCW playbook to a tee. They even tried doing the "We're in a new era!!!" shit, and then proceeded to continue putting on the same exact show over and over again, like WCW used to do every other week :lol And they keep hiding in the past because they have no new stars. It's pretty embarrassing to watch.

Like Steiner said about Stephanie, there's nothing worse than a dumb person who thinks that they're smart. And that about sums up why WWE is where it is, and why it will continue plummeting. She has no idea what she's doing and thinks all of their social media shit is all that matters. Keep pushing brands!!! Get more followers and likes!!!! Nevermind that we can't fill arenas and no one is watching the show!!! Nevermind that nobody is over!!!


----------



## God Movement

DammitC said:


> Hell, even though I wasn't around posting back then, I remember some folks here were blaming CM Punk for the low ratings during his title reign.


Indeed. I remember this very clearly.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

As much as some folks don't want to hear it, since Reigns, the ratings decline became a fucking freefall, and he IS partially to blame because he didn't justify the faith Vince put in him.


----------



## Godway

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> As much as some folks don't want to hear it, since Reigns, the ratings decline became a fucking freefall, and he IS partially to blame because he didn't justify the faith Vince put in him.


There's a reason why they hid him from TV at times, and now they'll only put him in the most-watched quarters of RAW. WWE's well aware that he causes fans to tune out.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

The product is fucking _boring_ and that's all there is to it. They have no interesting gimmicks that aren't immediately buried and fun, major storylines are apparently a no-no in WWE these days.

PG playground-tier meanies and happy-go-lucky geeks who all look the same and are just excited to be there will never draw worth a fuck. Jericho's list is somewhat amusing, but what the fuck kind of money/ratings is that gimmick drawing? It might have worked as lower-card shit, but he has a prominent role on the show and walking around with a clipboard is doing nothing for business.

When I'm watching WWE, I switch the pure wrestling fan side off and get into the mindset of wanting to see crazy, unpredictable fuckery that has me on the edge of my seat. They don't wanna provide that kind of programming anymore and that means I don't give a single fuck about their garbage company. 

Other promotions are fine, but sometimes I just want some OTT entertainment thrown into the mix. TNA have done a better a job of that lately with Matt and Jeff, but the company is going straight down into oblivion with little hope of survival.

There's just nothing about WWE that is worth my fucking time.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> As much as some folks don't want to hear it, since Reigns, the ratings decline became a fucking freefall, and he IS partially to blame because he didn't justify the faith Vince put in him.


Started way before that son. Only people blaming him are the people who hate him cause its their gimmick. Nice try


----------



## wwe9391

DammitC said:


> Hell, even though I wasn't around posting back then, I remember some folks here were blaming CM Punk for the low ratings during his title reign.


Yea it started with him. Truth is Punk ratings wise didn't live up to the hype he said he was. I can see why Vince always put Cena on after Punk.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

DammitC said:


> Hell, even though I wasn't around posting back then, I remember some folks here were blaming CM Punk for the low ratings during his title reign.


Oh man, I remember that like it was yesterday lol even though I wasn't posting here then either. It was unanimously agreed that Punk wasn't a draw at all and was just a midcarder getting a main event push. And if you didn't agree, some posters like Happenstan would get super upset and write angry posts calling you a blind punk fanboy :lol Times have changed quite a bit.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Yea it started with him. Truth is Punk ratings wise didn't live up to the hype he said he was. I can see why Vince always put Cena on after Punk.


That is factually wrong. Ratings took the first MAJOR hit the week Cena won the title from Rock in 2013, AFTER Punk's run. And they never recovered from it.
Second blow was Bryan feuding KANE and losing the title.

Get your facts straight.
Punk drew numbers they can dream about today, without even being put in the position to draw mostly.


----------



## God Movement

They're actually right. Ratings did take a 0.3 hit during Reigns' push to the top. I think 2014 concluded with a yearly rating of 2.95 and 2015 was 2.64. So yeah, that's about 300,000 viewers I think. Do I think that's entirely Reigns' fault? As in, Roman Reigns the performer? No. I think it's more to do with how his push was handled. It was done against the fans wishes. Had they delayed it by a year I don't think the fans would be as sour about it. Those were probably 300,000 dedicated Daniel Bryan fans. So it's sort of factual that a lot of viewers tuned out after his push.

Was Punk a draw? No, he generally did not boost ratings much at all. But he also wasn't a negative hit on the ratings. He was just there.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> As much as some folks don't want to hear it, since Reigns, the ratings decline became a fucking freefall, and he IS partially to blame because he didn't justify the faith Vince put in him.


Since Reigns? It was Rollins reign he completely killed the ratings a lost a shit ton of viewers way before him, talk about selective memory.


----------



## God Movement

TheFackingCrow said:


> Since Reigns? It was Rollins reign he completely killed the ratings a lost a shit ton of viewers way before him, talk about selective memory.


You _could_ argue this also. Reigns wins the Rumble, night after is a 3.27 rating. Up from the 3.02 the Monday before. Raw before Mania was a 3.67. After Mania however it dropped sharply to a 2.81, which you would not expect given the majority of people appeared to not want Reigns to win the title. Yes, he was in the Mania main event. But he did not win. And people _knew_ that. From that point on there wasn't another 3.0 rating.


----------



## Godway

God Movement said:


> They're actually right. Ratings did take a 0.3 hit during Reigns' push to the top. I think 2014 concluded with a yearly rating of 2.95 and 2015 was 2.64. So yeah, that's about 300,000 viewers I think. Do I think that's entirely Reigns' fault? As in, Roman Reigns the performer? No. I think it's more to do with how his push was handled. It was done against the fans wishes. Had they delayed it by a year I don't think the fans would be as sour about it. Those were probably 300,000 dedicated Daniel Bryan fans. So it's sort of factual that a lot of viewers tuned out after his push.
> 
> Was Punk a draw? No, he generally did not boost ratings much at all. But he also wasn't a negative hit on the ratings. He was just there.


If you look at the biggest draws in combat sports/wrestling of the last 20 years, Roman shares absolutely no traits with any of them. So regardless of anything, there needs to be an acceptance that he's not a guy who will draw big money because there's nothing interesting about him as a persona. He's just the guy they put in the dinosaur outfit after Cena, yet he's failed to even win over THAT fanbase too. 

Conor is the biggest draw in the world currently. Compare what happens when Conor enters a room compared to what happens when Roman enters a room. Or when they pick up a mic. 

People who say otherwise are still hung up on this look nonsense, which means exactly fuckall on its own. You need the type of charisma to make a connection and Roman doesn't have that.


----------



## Godway

God Movement said:


> You _could_ argue this also. Reigns wins the Rumble, night after is a 3.27 rating. Up from the 3.02 the Monday before. Raw before Mania was a 3.67. After Mania however it dropped sharply to a 2.81, which you would not expect given the majority of people appeared to not want Reigns to win the title. Yes, he was in the Mania main event. But he did not win. And people _knew_ that. From that point on there wasn't another 3.0 rating.


That's nonsense. If fans were into Roman they'd have watched the next night just to see the fallout of the screwjob finish at Mania. Instead he got booed out of the building two nights in a row, while the crowd was chanting for Ryback over him lol. 

Fans started tuning out that year because the WWE assasinated Daniel Bryan and nobody cared anymore. Seth being booked as HHH's gimp wasn't going to bring ratings, and didn't.


----------



## God Movement

Godway said:


> If you look at the biggest draws in combat sports/wrestling of the last 20 years, Roman shares absolutely no traits with any of them. So regardless of anything, there needs to be an acceptance that he's not a guy who will draw big money because there's nothing interesting about him as a persona. He's just the guy they put in the dinosaur outfit after Cena, yet he's failed to even win over THAT fanbase too.
> 
> Conor is the biggest draw in the world currently. Compare what happens when Conor enters a room compared to what happens when Roman enters a room. Or when they pick up a mic.
> 
> People who say otherwise are still hung up on this look nonsense, which means exactly fuckall on its own. You need the type of charisma to make a connection and Roman doesn't have that.


Again, I'm not denying this. It's pretty clear that he _does not_ move the needle. But quite frankly, no-one does, BROCK LESNAR doesn't even move the needle. So it's not so much about Roman not being the guy, it's more so that no-one in the entire company seems to be capable of being the guy. Now, we have to ask ourselves, *why* this is. Why is it that a crossover star like Brock Lesnar does nothing to bring in new viewers? I genuinely think it's because no-one cares about the product itself. No-one cares about watching Raw even if it means they get to see Brock Lesnar. I'd be curious to see what would happen to ratings if Ronda Rousey was to appear on Monday Night Raw. If she doesn't move the needle then it'll pretty much confirm my suspicions.

So, what do they do with Roman Reigns? It'd be pretty much a waste of resources and time to just discard him and throw him into the high grass. He's still a known name at this point. If he's not a draw (which is the job of the top face), then he needs to be in a heel role, which frees up the space for a potential major draw (even though I don't think this is possible with interest in the product being at an all-time low).

I will say though (and yes, I'm very clearly a Roman fan), that he does have physical charisma - he LOOKS like a star, but he lacks verbal charisma in abundance, which is a prerequisite to be the top face and a major draw. Hence, he'd be better in a heel role.

As for McGregor? Interest in UFC is at an all-time high. It's MAINSTREAM. And you need to be mainstream or capture the eyes of the mainstream for you to become a draw.



Godway said:


> That's nonsense. If fans were into Roman they'd have watched the next night just to see the fallout of the screwjob finish at Mania. Instead he got booed out of the building two nights in a row, while the crowd was chanting for Ryback over him lol.
> 
> Fans started tuning out that year because the WWE assasinated Daniel Bryan and nobody cared anymore. Seth being booked as HHH's gimp wasn't going to bring ratings, and didn't.


That's a strawman. At no point in that entire post did I say the fans _were_ into Roman. I was speculating that they were _indifferent_ to him. It alludes to the fact that there was neither a positive, nor negative reaction to the push. Numbers went up and down, as they do.

That might very well be the reason. The reality is, there isn't a clear-cut singular reason. Hence, the ongoing discussion.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

God Movement said:


> You _could_ argue this also. Reigns wins the Rumble, night after is a 3.27 rating. Up from the 3.02 the Monday before. *Raw before Mania was a 3.67.* After Mania however it dropped sharply to a 2.81, which you would not expect given the majority of people appeared to not want Reigns to win the title. Yes, he was in the Mania main event. But he did not win. And people _knew_ that. From that point on there wasn't another 3.0 rating.


Actually it was the post WM31 Raw that got a 3.67 rating, not the Raw before WM.


----------



## God Movement

THREE AIN'T ENOUGH said:


> Actually it was the post WM31 Raw that got a 3.67 rating, not the Raw before WM.


My bad. The Raw before was a 3.03 right? Then the Raw after the Raw post-Mania dropped sharply to a 2.81.


----------



## THREE AIN'T ENOUGH

God Movement said:


> My bad. The Raw before was a 3.03 right? Then the Raw after the Raw post-Mania dropped sharply to a 2.81.


Yes, it was.

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2015-tv-ratings/


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Godway said:


> If you look at the biggest draws in combat sports/wrestling of the last 20 years,* Roman shares absolutely no traits with any of them. *
> So regardless of anything, there needs to be an acceptance that he's not a guy who will draw big money because there's nothing interesting about him as a persona. He's just the guy they put in the dinosaur outfit after Cena, yet he's failed to even win over THAT fanbase too.
> 
> Conor is the biggest draw in the world currently. Compare what happens when Conor enters a room compared to what happens when Roman enters a room. Or when they pick up a mic.
> 
> People who say otherwise are still hung up on this look nonsense, which means exactly fuckall on its own. You need the type of charisma to make a connection and Roman doesn't have that.


The way you say this and use Conor Mcgregor as example it seems that you think the only way you can be a big draw in this sport is being outspoken. 

I guess you're forgetting the existence of guys like Golberg, Lesnar, Batista, etc. (Some of the biggest names of the past 20 years) A guy like Reigns he holds a marketeable look, physical charisma, athleticism, size and credibility would be a huge draw in any other era in WWE, he's not because WWE itself doesn't draw anymore.


----------



## Godway

TheFackingCrow said:


> The way you say this and use Conor Mcgregor as example it seems that you think the only way you can be a big draw in this sport is being outspoken.
> 
> I guess you're forgetting the existence of guys like Golberg, Lesnar, Batista, etc. (Some of the biggest names of the past 20 years) A guy like Reigns he holds a marketeable look, physical charisma, athleticism, size and credibility would be a huge draw in any other era in WWE, he's not because WWE itself doesn't draw anymore.


Lesnar wasn't a big draw for the WWE, and he's a better talker than Reigns. He was a big draw because of the UFC. Batista was a good talker and an extremely underrated wrestler, he was actually a much better wrestler than Roman Reigns is. Goldberg had more physical charisma in a pubic hair than Roman has in his whole body, and lets be honest, Goldberg was never going to be a long-term draw because of his limitations. 

You're exaggerating Reigns skillset like only a mark can do. Your "any other era" shit couldn't be more wrong. Reigns would have been SKINNED ALIVE in past eras when guys actually were allowed to use a microphone. You realize like 99% of his "charisma" and "credibility" are products of the machine, don't you? They could make any guy appear the same way if they wanted to. The bottom line is he doesn't have anywhere near the natural charisma of lots of past stars. Without WWE manufacturing for him, he's a nothing. 

Even in the 80s he probably wouldn't have been a star, since he's big but he's not THAT big. And most of the biggest stars of the 80s could cut amazing larger than life promos, which we know Roman can't.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> Shit is shit and the fans have finally realized that. Mania, in many ways for many people, was a fuck you from WWE for all the hijacking nonsense fans pulled for two straight Manias back in 2014. Favorites like New Day, Styles, Sasha, Becky, Ambrose, Shane all lost at Mania with one of the most hated babyfaces of the modern era in Roman Reigns standing tall as the new WWE World champion for a THIRD TIME.
> 
> They deserve this. All of this. That's what you get for thinking putting bandaids (Cesaro, Enzo/Cass, AJ's win) over bullet holes would make everything good again. You couldn't even break a 3.0 for a post-Mania RAW. Absolutely pathetic and inexcusable.
> 
> 2016 may end up being even worse than 2015, if you could even imagine that. I also predict RAW will get a 1.9 or lower rating this year. It's long overdue, honestly. Especially when August/September comes crashing down with football. WWE is about to have a rude awakening and I have no sympathy for them. At all.


I posted this April of this year. Good to see I was right and then some.

It'll get worse from here on out. If Goldberg's return doesn't at least pull a 2.2 rating on Monday....


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> I posted this April of this year. Good to see I was right and then some.
> 
> It'll get worse from here on out. If Goldberg's return doesn't at least pull a 2.2 rating on Monday....


I actually think you are dead-on about Mania, and I also think Mania is a huge reason why fans quit watching. That was one of the worst Manias in history, and had some of the most insulting booking ever. If they booked a Mania like that in 1998 they'd be out of business right now.

Like they were momentarily able to interest fans with the return of Shane, but then that show was the most "same old shit" show humanly possible, so any fans who were watching that normally wouldn't have been, most likely stopped watching immediately after. And also will not be watching Mania this year.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Godway said:


> I actually think you are dead-on about Mania, and I also think Mania is a huge reason why fans quit watching. That was one of the worst Manias in history, and had some of the most insulting booking ever. If they booked a Mania like that in 1998 they'd be out of business right now.
> 
> *Like they were momentarily able to interest fans with the return of Shane, but then that show was the most "same old shit" show humanly possible*, so any fans who were watching that normally wouldn't have been, most likely stopped watching immediately after. And also will not be watching Mania this year.


Didn't help that they made the entire stipulation mean nothing in the end because Shane still ended up with control of Raw even though he lost to Taker. I assume any casual fans who were somewhat interested with Shane's return are probably gone thanks to their intelligence being insulted.


----------



## Godway

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



Dr. Middy said:


> Didn't help that they made the entire stipulation mean nothing in the end because Shane still ended up with control of Raw even though he lost to Taker. I assume any casual fans who were somewhat interested with Shane's return are probably gone thanks to their intelligence being insulted.


Yeah I know. But again, they're WCW now. 

It's just like during the legendary Disco Inferno vs. Ernest Miller feud, where if the Cat lost he was no longer allowed to dance. BUT HE DANCED ANYWAYS, DAMMIT.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Godway said:


> Lesnar wasn't a big draw for the WWE, and he's a better talker than Reigns. He was a big draw because of the UFC. Batista was a good talker and an extremely underrated wrestler, he was actually a much better wrestler than Roman Reigns is. Goldberg had more physical charisma in a pubic hair than Roman has in his whole body, and lets be honest, Goldberg was never going to be a long-term draw because of his limitations.
> 
> You're exaggerating Reigns skillset like only a mark can do. Your "any other era" shit couldn't be more wrong. Reigns would have been SKINNED ALIVE in past eras when guys actually were allowed to use a microphone. You realize like 99% of his "charisma" and "credibility" are products of the machine, don't you? They could make any guy appear the same way if they wanted to. The bottom line is he doesn't have anywhere near the natural charisma of lots of past stars. Without WWE manufacturing for him, he's a nothing.
> 
> Even in the 80s he probably wouldn't have been a star, since he's big but he's not THAT big. And most of the biggest stars of the 80s could cut amazing larger than life promos, which we know Roman can't.


I would have never thought that somebody would in fact believe Batista is more talented than Reigns or worse... Better wrestler? lol I obviously desagree with everything you said and every single ridiculous and biased claim that Reigns is highly inferior at absolutely everything than these past wrestlers, altought is not surprising coming from you.

But besides that point, you would at least understand that even every single one of these guys would have struggled as much or even more than Reigns to become a big star if the were modern stars wrestlers, for obvious reasons.


----------



## Godway

TheFackingCrow said:


> I would have never thought that somebody would in fact believe Batista is more talented than Reigns or worse... Better wrestler? lol I obviously desagree with everything you said and every single ridiculous and biased claim that Reigns is highly inferior at absolutely everything than these past wrestlers, altought is not surprising coming from you.
> 
> But besides that point, you would at least understand that even every single one of these guys would have struggled as much or even more than Reigns to become a big star if the were modern stars wrestlers, for obvious reasons.


LOL. Spoken like someone who has no understanding of pro wrestling, as usual. 

Batista was an excellent psychology guy. Go watch his matches with Taker, Rey, Finlay, Cena, Batista was great at telling a story in the ring, where Roman is terrible. The problem with you and your generation of fans is that you think spots = better wrestlers than previous generations. Dave did so many little things in the ring to tell a story that it's downright embarrassing to say the stupid shit you're saying about him in comparison to someone as bland and WWE paint-by-numbers as Reigns is. 

All of these "great Roman Reigns matches" that you overrate, no one will ever remember them. They're nothing matches in the grand scheme of things, because they're no different from 95% of the other matches WWE has every week. Unless it's a PPV, then Roman's match gets an announce table spot. You equate being a "good wrestler" to things that have nothing to do with it.

Batista always upped his game when he had to put on a big match, too. I still remember when everyone SHIT on the idea of Taker vs. Batista, and figured it would be a horrible match, and by all rights should have been. But he worked his ass off, because he didn't need GOAT bump/sell guys in there with him to be good.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Godway said:


> LOL. Spoken like someone who has no understanding of pro wrestling, as usual.
> 
> Batista was an excellent psychology guy. Go watch his matches with Taker, Rey, Finlay, Cena, Batista was great at telling a story in the ring, where Roman is terrible. The problem with you and your generation of fans is that you think spots = better wrestlers than previous generations. Dave did so many little things in the ring to tell a story that it's downright embarrassing to say the stupid shit you're saying about him in comparison to someone as bland and WWE paint-by-numbers as Reigns is.
> 
> All of these "great Roman Reigns matches" that you overrate, no one will ever remember them. They're nothing matches in the grand scheme of things, because they're no different from 95% of the other matches WWE has every week. Unless it's a PPV, then Roman's match gets an announce table spot. You equate being a "good wrestler" to things that have nothing to do with it.
> 
> Batista always upped his game when he had to put on a big match, too. I still remember when everyone SHIT on the idea of Taker vs. Batista, and figured it would be a horrible match, and by all rights should have been. But he worked his ass off, because he didn't need GOAT bump/sell guys in there with him to be good.


You're just inventing shit, I watched all Batistas matches during his prime as i could say i was a fan as a teenager, he was awful, his lack of movility and versatility was overwhelming, his sense of psychology wasn't bad, but nothing remarkable enough to be mentioned.

Reigns is better than him at almost everything and and so far he has had much more memorable matches than Tista's roided ass had in his entire career.


----------



## wwe9391

TheFackingCrow said:


> *You're just inventing shit*, I watched all Batistas matches during his prime as i could say i was a fan as a teenager, he was awful, his lack of movility and versatility was overwhelming, his sense of psychology wasn't bad, but nothing remarkable enough to be mentioned.
> 
> Reigns is better than him at almost everything and and so far he has had much more memorable matches than Tista's roided ass had in his entire career.


Yep. Thats what he does to fit his narrative. In his mind he can never be wrong even tho there have been many many times where Godway has been proven wrong.


----------



## Godway

TheFackingCrow said:


> You're just inventing shit, I watched all Batistas matches during his prime as i could say i was a fan as a teenager, he was awful, his lack of movility and versatility was overwhelming, his sense of psychology wasn't bad, but nothing remarkable enough to be mentioned.
> 
> Reigns is better than him at almost everything and and so far he has had much more memorable matches than Tista's roided ass had in his entire career.


aka repeat back some of what I said, because you don't know what you're talking about, and then say Reigns is better. Outstanding counter.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



WINNING DA BASED GAWD said:


> I posted this April of this year. Good to see I was right and then some.
> 
> It'll get worse from here on out. If Goldberg's return doesn't at least pull a 2.2 rating on Monday....


Damn, I remember reading that post you made in April. You pretty much just summed up what would happen with the ratings post-WM this year. You just told the future!

Are you willing to try making another bold and clever prediction? What do you think the ratings will be like in a few months?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Before WM, I watched the occasional Raw on a stream.
Wrestlemania was so infuriating frankly, that I quit watching Raw there and then. 

"Oh, you're watching anyway!" 
The fuck I do.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Godway said:


> aka repeat back some of what I said, because you don't know what you're talking about, and then say Reigns is better. Outstanding counter.


seeing this conversation has put me in a awkward position as batista is pretty much my all time favourite (along with the rock) and reigns is my favourite now so ill give a fairly objective viewpoint

batista is everything reigns wants and should be, a man of few words until he gained more confidence, a bloody fantastic psychology wrestler and great range of appropriate power moves
reigns has batista beat on athleticism no doubt, but hes a fucking powerhouse wrestler and shouldn't be doing suicide dives 
batistas character work was also much better than romans, but that is admittedly due to wwe restrictions, turn reigns heel and we can revisit this 

if anything reigns should be striving to be like batista and i hope he does because thats what i see in him, a fucking no nonsense powerhouse face and a cocky fucker heel whod beat you up but sometimes doesn't simply because he doesn't want too


----------



## BigDaveBatista

TheFackingCrow said:


> You're just inventing shit, I watched all Batistas matches during his prime as i could say i was a fan as a teenager, he was awful, his lack of movility and versatility was overwhelming, his sense of psychology wasn't bad, but nothing remarkable enough to be mentioned.
> 
> Reigns is better than him at almost everything and and so far he has had much more memorable matches than Tista's roided ass had in his entire career.


this is so fucking wrong 

im not going to be drawn into mocking roman as im a huge fan, but you're chatting fragrant shit


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Godway said:


> *aka repeat back some of what I said, because you don't know what you're talking about,* and then say Reigns is better. Outstanding counter.


Ironically that's everything you do everytime you respond.

Batista was never known for his in ring work, he wasn't remarkeable at anything (except probably doing great spin busters), he wasn't even a decent big guy wrestler, he was awful and had a lot of deficiences, not only he was slow as fuck, but also very predictable.

He got succes because he was big and had certain appeal, his run was also perfectly booked since Evolution to his feud with HHH. But if you're going to argue about his fictional superior in ring ability when everybody knows thats a load of bullshit, there's not really anything worth say on this.

As a worker, he was bad and that's almost a fact.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

TheFackingCrow said:


> Ironically that's everything you do everytime you respond.
> 
> Batista was never known for his in ring work, he wasn't remarkeable at anything, he wasn't even a decent big guy wrestler, he was awful and had a lot of deficiences, not only he was slow as fuck, but also very predictable.
> 
> He got succes because he was big and had certain appeal, his run was also perfectly booked since Evolution to his feud with HHH. But if you're going to argue about his fictional superior in ring ability when everybody knows thats a load of bullshit, there's not really anything worth say on this.
> 
> As a worker, he was bad and that's almost a fact.


again, horseshit without any abilty to back it up


----------



## wwe9391

*Re: **All TV Ratings, Buys, Draw Talk Here** - THE RATINGS WAR PART V - LOL Ratings*



DammitC said:


> Damn, I remember reading that post you made in April. You pretty much just summed up what would happen with the ratings post-WM this year. You just told the future!
> 
> Are you willing to try making another bold and clever preidiction? What do you think the ratings will be like in a few months?


I thought WM was great as did many many other people i ran into at the stadium but I can see why some would tune out. Especially the Shane vs Taker stuff. Storyline didn't make sense at all


----------



## Godway

BigDaveBatista said:


> seeing this conversation has put me in a awkward position as batista is pretty much my all time favourite (along with the rock) and reigns is my favourite now so ill give a fairly objective viewpoint
> 
> batista is everything reigns wants and should be, a man of few words until he gained more confidence, a bloody fantastic psychology wrestler and great range of appropriate power moves
> *reigns has batista beat on athleticism no doubt, but hes a fucking powerhouse wrestler and shouldn't be doing suicide dives *
> batistas character work was also much better than romans, but that is admittedly due to wwe restrictions, turn reigns heel and we can revisit this
> 
> if anything reigns should be striving to be like batista and i hope he does because thats what i see in him, a fucking no nonsense powerhouse face and a cocky fucker heel whod beat you up but sometimes doesn't simply because he doesn't want too


That's what some aren't getting. They equate athleticism to wrestling. It be like calling Dolph Ziggler a better wrestler than Bret Hart.

Batista was a legit powerhouse wrestler. Roman isn't.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> As much as some folks don't want to hear it, since Reigns, the ratings decline became a fucking freefall, and he IS partially to blame because he didn't justify the faith Vince put in him.


*It's good to see nothing's changed in this thread for two weeks. You're still embarrassingly blaming Reigns for ratings in spite of his segments doing the highest numbers and no one giving a single fuck about this Owens/Rollins feud. Please reach harder. You might grab something logical one day ositivity*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BigDaveBatista said:


> this is so fucking wrong
> 
> im not going to be drawn into mocking roman as im a huge fan, but you're chatting fragrant shit


+1.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

The Power that Be said:


> Owens gets the strap and immediately right after they can't break through a 2.0 rating
> 
> 
> Owens 1.92 says i just tanked your ratings :ha


*Nah breh, take the title off Roman and we'll all be saved!!! :mj4*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It being late 2016 and everyone still getting into ratings mark wars despite it being proven that literally nobody on the roster is a draw at this point, including Cena and the part timers.

:mj2

It's over, guys. Geez.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

ShowStopper said:


> It being late 2016 and everyone still getting into ratings mark wars despite it being proven that literally nobody on the roster is a draw at this point, including Cena and the part timers.
> 
> :mj2
> 
> It's over, guys. Geez.


*
Which makes the Roman hate even more stupid. He's lost to literally every main eventer and been mid carded since August, yet they're STILL desperately trying to find reasons to blame him. Face it, NO ONE is a ratings draw, get the fuck over it. I was wrong, you were wrong, they were wrong, we were all wrong. This thread is pointless and shouldn't even exist anymore.
*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> Which makes the Roman hate even more stupid. He's lost to literally every main eventer and been mid carded since August, yet they're STILL desperately trying to find reasons to blame him. Face it, NO ONE is a ratings draw, get the fuck over it. I was wrong, you were wrong, they were wrong, we were all wrong. This thread is pointless and shouldn't even exist anymore.
> *


Exactly. It's literally pointless at this point. No one is a draw, no one will draw for a very long time, if ever again. It is what it is. I wouldn't have a problem with this thread getting Old-Yeller'd. People used to love this thread, but at a certain point..


----------



## God Movement

We still need the thread, just to monitor just how bad things get.


----------



## DammitChrist

Before I recieve more false accusations of me blaming the current United States champion for the low ratings (or for "everything"), here's this post I made earlier in this thread:



DammitC said:


> If it makes anyone feel any better, nobody can save the ratings. ROMAN isn't to blame for the ratings. Kevin isn't to blame for the ratings. Seth isn't to blame for the ratings. The talents shouldn't be blamed for the ratings. IMO I think the poor product is responsible for the decrease in viewership. Do I think Owens vs Zayn would draw better ratings? Nah, not with a shitty/stale/underwhelming product for Raw they won't


Whether or not I like the wrestler, it doesn't matter. I believed back then that it's crazy to expect ONE wrestler to bring up the ratings as champion, and I still believe that it's crazy to expect ONE wrestler to increase the ratings just because he's now the champion. Times have changed. IMO nobody in the WWE is a draw. Can Goldberg bring up the ratings himself? I highly doubt it, but he possibly can.

I believe that ratings will increase consistently in the long-term if the overall product continues to be entertaining and exciting to watch each week. Right now, this hasn't happened yet. It's not enough for one wrestler to become world champion and bring back the lost viewers. There needs to be a great amount of interest in the overall content on Raw and Smackdown. 

The wrestling quality is fine. However, I think more compelling storylines, entertaining characters, great mic work, and clever booking (using the talents to the best of their ability) is necessary in order to increase the ratings in the long-term.


----------



## Godway

I don't think anyone debates that WWE put themselves in this spot, and it isn't on one individual person on the show. But WWE's decision to push Roman is what KILLED the casual audience, and turned the show into the farce that it is now. No matter how bad you want to deny it, Roman himself takes SOME blame for that. You just want to give him (and everyone else now) a pass because you made an imbecile out of yourself trying to post YouTube views and ratings and whatever the fuck else every time you thought it meant you could shit on Seth Rollins or Dean Ambrose and troll their marks. Once the data turned on him it was time to say that "nobody draws". 

It's not Roman's "fault" that he got pushed, you'd think any intelligent booker would recognize that this guy can't bring in fans at the levels they want him to. But that's just what I mean about WWE putting themselves in this position. WCW did the same thing. They pushed the wrong people, they relied on outdated stars or business models, and everything kept dropping for them like it is for WWE right now. WWE is never getting out of this hole until they recognize that the Cena/Roman business model is the shits and has single handedly killed their product. You can't give fans the same shit over and over again when they've already seen it and HATED it for 10 years. Take a hint from JOHN CENA, the guy who is a walking WWE commercial, but is now running so fast out the door he's going to break it down. If even Cena is ready to bail, then you know you're a sinking ship. 

But what do I know, when you try to point out the stupidity of the direction of this company, the man in charge responds with "How's your territory doing?" So clearly they are all much smarter than me or anyone else watching.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> Exactly. It's literally pointless at this point. No one is a draw, no one will draw for a very long time, if ever again. It is what it is. I wouldn't have a problem with this thread getting Old-Yeller'd. People used to love this thread, but at a certain point..


Now, not so fast. Just because they cut the nuts off guys that get over and could be more popular, and push guys that aren't ready to the moon in the stupidest ways possible, and never ever built someone besides Reigns the last two years that could jump in, now that Reigns is an utter failure, doesn't mean nobody will ever draw again.

Just because the idiot in class can't pass a test doesn't mean nobody else in class will.


----------



## Godway

Nobody was drawing before Austin did, too. Didn't mean someone can't draw. Step 1 for WWE would be recognizing that HHH/Stephanie are NEVER going to draw and start building stars, instead of continuing to build HHH/Stephanie. Could you imagine Steve Austin trying to get over if Vince McMahon acted the way his idiotic daughter and doofus son in law do on screen?

And that's also all the more negative towards Reigns. Since they LET HIM be the guy to destroy HHH/Stephanie, and even that fell completely flat for him because he's just not that kind of next-level talent.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Now, not so fast. Just because they cut the nuts off guys that get over and could be more popular, and push guys that aren't ready to the moon in the stupidest ways possible, and never ever built someone besides Reigns the last two years that could jump in, now that Reigns is an utter failure, doesn't mean nobody will ever draw again.
> 
> Just because the idiot in class can't pass a test doesn't mean nobody else in class will.


I didn't say it was a definite. But if it does happen again, it won't be for awhile. It's not like the past, where they could put someone like a Goldberg on TV for the first time in YEARS and expect to pop a number; like they're hoping for this week, but most likely will not happen. That's my point. Not only that these guys aren't going to draw, but things are different now as well, and not in a good way for WWE. They can't get away with being lazy, put a legend on, and get a big number like they used to be able to count on. Even those days are over for them. It's looking pretty bleak was my point.



> God Movement said:
> 
> 
> 
> We still need the thread, just to monitor just how bad things get.
> 
> 
> 
> Fine by me. Both shows are in the shitter for ratings.
Click to expand...


----------



## wwe9391

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> Which makes the Roman hate even more stupid. He's lost to literally every main eventer and been mid carded since August, yet they're STILL desperately trying to find reasons to blame him. Face it, NO ONE is a ratings draw, get the fuck over it. I was wrong, you were wrong, they were wrong, we were all wrong. This thread is pointless and shouldn't even exist anymore.
> *


Post of the fuckin year right here. It's never gonna stop unfortunately. Some idiots are still gonna blame Reigns cause it's their gimmick and because they can never go back and admit they are run. They are gonna keep blaming him because they made their bed and they have to lie in it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> Post of the fuckin year right here. It's never gonna stop unfortunately. Some idiots are still gonna blame Reigns cause it's their gimmick and because they can never go back and admit they are run. They are gonna keep blaming him because they made their bed and they have to lie in it.


Well, there really is no bed for anyone to lie in. No one drew..


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Now, not so fast. Just because they cut the nuts off guys that get over and could be more popular, and push guys that aren't ready to the moon in the stupidest ways possible, and never ever built someone besides Reigns the last two years that could jump in, now that Reigns is an utter failure, doesn't mean nobody will ever draw again.
> 
> Just because the idiot in class can't pass a test doesn't mean nobody else in class will.


Nobody on this roster is and will never be a draw. Point blank and the period. 

The only thing in 2016 that is a draw in pro wrestling is the fuckin brand itself that is it.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> Well, there really is no bed for anyone to lie in. No one drew..


Totally agree. The brand is the draw. If the brand doesn't draw the company doesn't do well.


----------



## Darren Criss

Beyoncé would draw ratings.

WWE should contract her for an storyline with the Womens Division. She's a feminist, right? Beyoncé managing Sasha...


----------



## HenryBowers

There many be no draws but it was Rollins title reign which hastened the decline.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

HenryBowers said:


> There many be no draws but it was Rollins title reign which hastened the decline.


If you want to go down that road, why not go even further back to when Reigns started his mega FOTC push?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.167M
H2-3.106M
H3-3.118M
3H-3.130M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.93% / - 0.061M ) 
H3 Vs H2 ( + 0.39% / + 0.012M ) 
H3 Vs H1 ( - 1.55% / - 0.049M ) 
10/17/16 Vs 10/10/16 ( + 13.45% / + 0.371M )

Demo (10/17/16 Vs 10/10/16):
H1- 1.170D Vs 0.920D
H2- 1.170D Vs 0.980D
H3- 1.230D Vs 0.930D
3H- 1.190D Vs 0.943D

Note: RAW is #5, #3 & #2 by hourly demo and #3, #6 & #5 by hourly viewership.*


----------



## A-C-P

THE MAN in a higher watched hour than GOLDBERG :Cocky


----------



## Kabraxal

Pretty consistent hours... pretty clear that Goldberg caught enough people's attention and maintained their interest enough they actually sat through 3 hours of Raw just to finally get him.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

That rating was remarkably steady. I assume Goldberg hooked and kept interest throughout the show


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Damn, guess WWE made the right decision in advertising Goldberg ahead of time after all. (Granted numbers are still mediocre, but at least all hours were above 3 mil and viewership stayed consistent).

No doubt though Reigns being in hour 3 kept it from being the highest viewed hour of the show. Goldberg almost had it though!


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.167M
> H2-3.106M
> H3-3.118M
> 3H-3.130M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.93% / - 0.061M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( + 0.39% / + 0.012M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 1.55% / - 0.049M )
> 10/17/16 Vs 10/10/16 ( + 13.45% / + 0.371M )
> 
> Demo (10/17/16 Vs 10/10/16):
> H1- 1.170D Vs 0.920D
> H2- 1.170D Vs 0.980D
> H3- 1.230D Vs 0.930D
> 3H- 1.190D Vs 0.943D
> 
> Note: RAW is #5, #3 & #2 by hourly demo and #3, #6 & #5 by hourly viewership.*


*Viewership (10/17/16 Vs 10/19/15):
H1- 3.167M Vs 3.600M
H2- 3.106M Vs 3.347M
H3- 3.118M Vs 3.123M
3H- 3.130M Vs 3.357M ( -6.76% / -0.227M )

Demo (10/17/16 Vs 10/19/15):
H1- 1.170D Vs 1.200D
H2- 1.170D Vs 1.080D
H3- 1.230D Vs 1.090D
3H- 1.190D Vs 1.123D

Note: RAW this time last year was #5, #6 & #7 by hourly demo and #2, #4 & #5 by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Goldberg single handedly drew nearly 400K viewers this week. Not bad at all.


----------



## DammitChrist

Hey, good for Raw! They managed to keep at least 3 million viewers throughout the whole episode. Goldberg definitely helped 

I'm also happy about that first hour


----------



## Second Nature

Hoping this means Smackdown's rating will improve this week as well there seems to be a trend going on with both shows when Raw is having a bad rating SD will most likely do the same hopefully that is the same when Raw rating is improving.


----------



## The True Believer

Not good. Ratings either tanking or being just as good as last week's would've been for the best.


----------



## Chrome

Makes the current roster look even worse tbh.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

The True Believer said:


> Not good. Ratings either tanking or being just as good as last week's would've been for the best.


They'll be back there again. Goldberg won't be showing up every week.


----------



## Bret Hart

Goldberg was and still is a draw.... Both good and bad...


----------



## The True Believer

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> They'll be back there again. Goldberg won't be showing up every week.


But still, Goldberg being an ineffective "Get out of jail free" card would've spoke volumes.


----------



## Brock

Goldberg 

:bjpenn roud


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> They'll be back there again. Goldberg won't be showing up every week.


What it means is Vince will see his roster can't draw so they keeping bringing in more and more part timers to keep the ratings up.


----------



## chronoxiong

Wow consistent ratings for this week's show. Goldberg coming out last was the right decision. Not only that but last night's MNF game wasn't very good.


----------



## DoubtGin

They should have old legends return every week for THAT BUMP.

That's pretty impressive increase, tbh.


----------



## B316

That's what a legitimate main event babyface will do for you.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Goldberg just outdrew Reigns, Cena, Rollins, HHH, and LESNAR himself.
Not only that, Goldberg with one single appearance announced mere DAYS before the show, singlehandedly bumped Raw 90% to where they were before Football.

I'm shitting my pants laughing :lmao


----------



## Darren Criss

Goldberg slayed KO and Reigns' lifes










Now I want to see next week If they will still hit 3M.


----------



## Swissblade

Not surprised, really. Stars draw. Midcarders like Rollins and Owens don't.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I'm feeling immense joy that the only guy drawing for Vince this year was made big without him.


----------



## Thanks12

I wonder if the roster is jealous that Goldberg who hasn't stepped foot in the WWE for 12 years draws better than them, and Vince always has to bring back part timers because they draw better than them in general. Thats gotta hurt.


----------



## KC Armstrong

Darren Criss said:


> Beyoncé would draw ratings.
> 
> WWE should contract her for an storyline with the Womens Division. She's a feminist, right? Beyoncé managing Sasha...



Beyonce? Didn't the MTV VMA ratings absolutely tank this year when she dominated the show?

Fuck Beyonce, Goldberg = ratings


By the way, the fact that Goldberg actually managed to bring back a couple hundred thousand viewers makes that shitshow they put on last night even worse. Yes, those people sat through the shitshow because they really wanted to see Bill, but at the same time you reminded them of all the reasons why they left. None of these viewers is coming back for meaningless tag matches with Golden Truth, Shining Stars, Titus, Bo Dallas, etc. They fucked up big time last night... again.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Thanks12 said:


> I wonder if the roster is jealous that Goldberg who hasn't stepped foot in the WWE for 12 years draws better than them, and Vince always has to bring back part timers because they draw better than them in general. Thats gotta hurt.


No, certainly not jealousy.
What hurts is the realization that you cannot get to that status in today's environment.


----------



## Dave Santos

A 26% increase in the 18-49 demo and an even higher increase in that Demo in the 3rd hour time slot from last week.


----------



## The Power that Be

My man Goldberg drawing dimes.... Golddddddberg Golddddddberg Golddddddberg !


----------



## Reotor

Wow people should overreact to a small bump in the ratings
A small bump it took a Monday night wars star returning after 12 years to manufacture.

Needless to say they wont be able to maintain it for long

Cant wait for WWE to run out of old stars to call back.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

it was a good show all round I thought
obviously helped by the advertised goldberg return i just hope they keep him on a few upcoming shows whilst still attempting to put on great shows

might as well try and keep the people who tuned in this week


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Nice increase given how bad the numbers have been in recent years. Certainly better than what they've been. Anyone who thought the numbers were going to be huge, were sorely, sorely mistaken, though. This is why his return was advertised a week in advance, too. They wanted that increase. :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> Nice increase given how bad the numbers have been in recent years. Certainly better than what they've been. Anyone who thought the numbers were going to be huge, were sorely, sorely mistaken, though. This is why his return was advertised a week in advance, too. They wanted that increase. :lol


You should keep in mind that Goldberg drew what Ashton Kutcher couldn't.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> You should keep in mind that Goldberg drew what Ashton Kutcher couldn't.


Good. There's no reason for the casuals, or former wrestling fans, to watch because Ashton Kutcher is on Raw. Goldberg is a different story, though.


----------



## Randy Lahey

This rating proves that legit Attitude ERA wrestling dynamics is still a draw. Goldberg popped a huge rating compared to what they usually get.

Vince should change the show and give the people what they want.

The 3rd hour at 3.1 mils. They've been averaging about 2.5 most of football season for that hour. That's 600,000 more people because of one guy. All these people whining about the show being too long are wrong. It's because everyone on Raw sucks.



BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> What it means is Vince will see his roster can't draw so they keeping bringing in more and more part timers to keep the ratings up.


If he did that, I might actually watch. I have no interests in watching the current scrubs. They bring back a guy like Goldberg, who was popular when wrestling was actually cool, and still maintained the same intensity from back then - yes I'll watch.

I have no interest in watching a watered down lame Mick Foley.

Mick Foley from 1998 is turning over in his grave watching 2016 Mick Foley.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Some old wrestling fans that used to watch came back just for a night to see one of the biggest wrestlers ever, not surprising.

Wrestling is not dead, what is dead is WWE.


----------



## Erik.

I guess we'll see if that achieved it's goal.

They were advertising Golderg all week in hope that people tune in to watch the show, not knowing when he was going to be on, and hopefully keeping viewers or gaining viewers in future. They advanced some story lines last night but I don't think anything shown would keep viewers tuning in week in and week out. Plus, if the Golden Truth match didn't lose potential new viewers then the cruiserweight match did.

We'll see next week.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

:bjpenn

It looks good but this also tells us that a man who has been away for 12 years can draw in more viewers than the current roster.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

Good bump for Goldberg but they screwed up by not putting on a good show not giving the people that tuned in a reason to come back next week.


----------



## .MCH

lol, just further proof that the problem IS the current roster and the likes of Seth Rollins, Kevin Owens, etc. :lol

Hopefully Vince purges the roster soon and tells HHH to fuck off.


----------



## Demolition119

I am impressed with that consistent rating. That many people survived until near the overun in order to see Goldberg. WWE got "A attract old viewers card",and manged to fuck that up by having A dreadful card.


----------



## Mra22

:lol this proves how bad the current roster is, who wants to watch a bunch of geeks like Owens, The New Day and Reigns?


----------



## The Renegade

Good business by the WWE. 

They avoided the temptation of placing Goldberg at the top of the show and instead allowed him an opportunity to anchor the dreaded 3rd hour to good numbers. They also capitalized on viewers early on by placing their main event program, and current hottest acts, at the top of the show to ensure that returning folks tuning in would see Owens and Rollins paired with another familiar face, Y2J, straight off the back. 

I'd imagine that this is going to need to be the strategy going forward. Use the part timers drawing capabilities, while placing current top guys in spots to succeed so that old eyes see the new guys in the best light. 

It's a no brainier that someone like Goldberg, a wrestler who performed in perhaps the biggest era ever, is going to draw more than the guys who came into the WWE after its peak, but as long as you give the new talent a spotlight during occasions like these, you increase the chance of some of those viewers sticking around. Let's see how they capitalize moving forward.


----------



## Demolition119

The Renegade said:


> Good business by the WWE.
> 
> They avoided the temptation of placing Goldberg at the top of the show and instead allowed him an opportunity to anchor the dreaded 3rd hour to good numbers. They also capitalized on viewers early on by placing their main event program, and current hottest acts, at the top of the show to ensure that returning folks tuning in would see Owens and Rollins paired with another familiar face, Y2J, straight off the back.
> 
> I'd imagine that this is going to need to be the strategy going forward. Use the part timers drawing capabilities, while placing current top guys in spots to succeed so that old eyes see the new guys in the best light.
> 
> It's a no brainier that someone like Goldberg, a wrestler who performed in perhaps the biggest era ever, is going to draw more than the guys who came into the WWE after its peak, but as long as you give the new talent a spotlight during occasions like these, you increase the chance of some of those viewers sticking around. Let's see how they capitalize moving forward.


1 step forward, 2 steps back. They got a nice boost from Goldberg, the bad news is is almost none of those people are going to stick around due to the god awful filler most of the show was after the opening segment. "Hey, we know you are here to see Goldberg but let us remind you over, and over why you gave up the product in the 1st place."


----------



## xDD

Wow, wrestling legend return first time after 12 years and people is very happy about small ratings bump. Funny part is that, in 2012 or 2013 these ratings would be bad for just regular show.. WWE is dying and even legends can't fix that...


----------



## volde

Didn't ratings also get similar bump when Vince and Shane returned? And then week later were back in same place as before?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SD's attendance last night looked scary bad. Multiple reports it's one of the lowest attended WWE shows of the year. Not a good sign for Smackdown at all.


----------



## Hawkke

Demolition119 said:


> 1 step forward, 2 steps back. They got a nice boost from Goldberg, the bad news is is almost none of those people are going to stick around due to the god awful filler most of the show was after the opening segment. "Hey, we know you are here to see Goldberg but let us remind you over, and over why you gave up the product in the 1st place."


I admittedly let slip a month of being done with WWE for Goldberg, I'm am highly glad I got to see that moment.. but guess what I didn't watch last night and won't be on my TV next week.. And no, even Goldberg isn't going to make me drop a penny for the network again. They tricked me in to that with Sting and slapped me in the face for it at that WM.. Well, I'm done being slapped by WWE.


----------



## HenryBowers

A 2.17 is like a 3.5 just 3 years ago. The name of the WWE has been tarnished for good. For ages WWE has taunted fans thinking theyd come back. They are gone now and never coming back.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Hawkke said:


> I admittedly let slip a month of being done with WWE for Goldberg, I'm am highly glad I got to see that moment.. but guess what I didn't watch last night and won't be on my TV next week.. And no, even Goldberg isn't going to make me drop a penny for the network again. They tricked me I to that with Sting and slapped me in the face for it at that WM.. Well, I'm done being slapped by WWE.


Same here... Only, I don't know what I'd do without The Network. So much great stuff on there from when wrestling was actually good. I prefer to keep the network and just not watch current programming anymore.


----------



## KO Bossy

ShowStopper said:


> SD's attendance last night looked scary bad. Multiple reports it's one of the lowest attended WWE shows of the year. Not a good sign for Smackdown at all.


Yeah, well when it features such stirring main events with talents the likes of James Ellsworth, is this really surprising?


----------



## Ace

There's a ridiculous amount of AJ merch in crowds now, there was even an AJ flag on this weeks SD.

See more AJ, KO and Rollins merch than Cena, Reigns or Ambrose merch these days.

I wonder how AJ, KO and Rollins rank in the overall rankings.


----------



## Dolorian

Straw Hat said:


> There's a ridiculous amount of AJ merch in crowds now, there was even an AJ flag on this weeks SD.
> 
> See more AJ, KO and Rollins merch than Cena, Reigns or Ambrose merch these days.
> 
> I wonder how AJ, KO and Rollins rank in the overall rankings.


I've noticed that too. Don't think there is a source that releases that data now, Meltzer used to do it but it appears that he doesn't anymore.

I do notice Rollins and Styles shirts among the top sellers in the WWEShop site constantly but I am not sure what metric is used there.


----------



## Ace

Dolorian said:


> I've noticed that too. Don't think there is a source that releases that data now, Meltzer used to do it but it appears that he doesn't anymore.
> 
> I do notice Rollins and Styles shirts among the top sellers in the WWEShop site constantly but I am not sure what metric is used there.


 A lot of kids seem to like the gloves as well. Seen a couple of kids with Cena shirts and the AJ gloves on lol. They must have been so confused when he ripped on them :lol


----------



## Dolorian

Straw Hat said:


> A lot of kids seem to like the gloves as well. Seen a couple of kids with Cena shirts and the AJ gloves on lol. They must have been so confused when he ripped on them :lol


Perhaps but I think WWE in particular seems to underestimate how kids tend to like "bad/evil" characters these days and consider them cool. The kids that watch the show must know Styles is a bad guy they just think he is cool and so want the merch.


----------



## DammitChrist

Dolorian said:


> I've noticed that too. Don't think there is a source that releases that data now, Meltzer used to do it but it appears that he doesn't anymore.
> 
> I do notice Rollins and Styles shirts among the top sellers in the WWEShop site constantly but I am not sure what metric is used there.


I'm not saying that they are top sellers, but that wouldn't surprise me too much if they did. AJ Styles and Seth Rollins have cool shirts


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Dolorian said:


> I've noticed that too. Don't think there is a source that releases that data now, Meltzer used to do it but it appears that he doesn't anymore.
> 
> I do notice Rollins and Styles shirts among the top sellers in the WWEShop site constantly but I am not sure what metric is used there.


*The WWE shop "Best Sellers" shows new shirts that they want you to buy. They aren't the actual best sellers.*


----------



## TheClub

I'll tell you what I went to a gaming convention yesterday where Kurt Angle came for Q&A(which is surprising because I live in Middle East) and I saw a lot of kids wearing AJ's gloves and shirts and other merch of Bullet Club members in the WWE or NJPW which is funny because I thought the interest of wrestling was dead here. Seems like Arabs are big fans of Bullet Club but hate Rusev like how people hate Reigns lol

Sent from my Moto G using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dolorian said:


> I've noticed that too. Don't think there is a source that releases that data now, Meltzer used to do it but it appears that he doesn't anymore.
> 
> I do notice Rollins and Styles shirts among the top sellers in the WWEShop site constantly but I am not sure what metric is used there.


His is listed there right now. But KO is now right behind Seth instead of AJ. So, there has been some movement there.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

TheClub said:


> I'll tell you what I went to a gaming convection yesterday where Kurt Angle came for Q&A(which is surprising because I live in Middle East) and I saw a lot of kids wearing AJ's gloves and shirts and other merch of Bullet Club members in the WWE or NJPW which is funny because I thought the interest of wrestling was dead here. Seems like Arabs are big fans of Bullet Club but hate Rusev like how people hate Reigns lol
> 
> Sent from my Moto G using Tapatalk


Doesn't matter. Reigns sold out that one merch stand in LA some time ago, when the Staples Center was 1/3 or something empty. Remember?
That's what matters.


----------



## TheClub

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Doesn't matter. Reigns sold out that one merch stand in LA some time ago, when the Staples Center was 1/3 or something empty. Remember?
> That's what matters.


See here's the problem though, as long as WWE pushes Reigns like Cena, normal crowd will treat him like Cena because I remember during the Q&A Kurt Angle brought up Roman Reigns but there were very few people booed him and also very few cheered Rusev so I instantly knew those were smart fans. I think as long as Reigns makes them money the superman push won't stop. 

Sent from my Moto G using Tapatalk


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.983M
H2-2.806M
H3-2.669M
3H-2.819M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.93% / - 0.177M ) 
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.88% / - 0.137M ) 
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.53% / - 0.314M ) 
10/24/16 Vs 10/17/16 ( - 9.99% / - 0.311M )

Demo (10/24/16 Vs 10/17/16):
H1- 1.070D Vs 1.170D
H2- 0.990D Vs 1.170D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.230D
3H- 1.007D Vs 1.190D

Note: RAW is #4, #5 & #6 by hourly demo & #3, #4 & #6 by hourly viewership.*

*Viewership (10/24/16 Vs 10/26/15):
H1- 2.983M Vs 3.635M
H2- 2.806M Vs 3.213M
H3- 2.669M Vs 3.214M
3H- 2.819M Vs 3.354M ( - 15.95% / - 0.535M )

Demo (10/24/16 Vs 10/26/15):
H1- 1.070D Vs 1.280D
H2- 0.990D Vs 1.110D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.160D
3H- 1.007D Vs 1.183D

Note: RAW this time last year was #4, #5 & #7 by hourly demo & #3, #5 & #4 by hourly viewership.
*


----------



## Therapy

Backdown it goes.. :lol


----------



## JDP2016

So I guess this means Lesnar is not a draw, right? I mean the ratings were up last week with Goldberg so that must mean he is more of a draw at this point, right?


----------



## Chrome

No Goldberg, and back down the ratings go. :lol

Doesn't help that Lesnar just does the same shit every time he comes back now.


----------



## Kabraxal

I'll be honest, I only popped onto Raw when the women's contract signing was up to see if they finally sold the Cell instead of the Revolution.... well, Mick did but the rest sure as hell didn't. Then I simply went back to my previously scheduled programming. Raw is not worth the effort to watch.


----------



## Bret Hart

Who wants to see Lesnar just stand around...


----------



## skarvika

Christ, what a shitshow. Couldn't even stomach more than 20 minutes of Raw last night, watched the Brock segment and it was just...it was bad. No surprise people tuned out.


----------



## Sincere

Kabraxal said:


> I'll be honest, I only popped onto Raw when the women's contract signing was up to see if they finally sold the Cell instead of the Revolution.... well, Mick did but the rest sure as hell didn't. Then I simply went back to my previously scheduled programming. Raw is not worth the effort to watch.


The only issue with Mick's promo, aside from how Sasha/Charlotte seemed to largely ignore it, was that it was several weeks too late. At least he tried to sell the gimmick this time, unlike the actual competitors, but his promo here should have been a promo from when the match was first announced--not all the sudden at the contract signing, after it had been no-sold for several weeks. Why wasn't all that stuff said at the outset? The whole thing has just been a mess.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

JDP2016 said:


> So I guess this means Lesnar is not a draw, right? I mean the ratings were up last week with Goldberg so that must mean he is more of a draw at this point, right?


Lesnar has never been a draw in his entire WWE career outside of two PPVs back in 2012.


----------



## The Power that Be

Bu Bu Bu Bu Bu but Goldberg isn't a draw :ha :ha

No Goldberg = negative 500,000 viewers :damn


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

The main event storyline revolves around a cornball list. No shit the show draws fucking awful numbers.


----------



## TD_DDT

Raw sucks balls. Wwe is shit. About to just give it up completely since smackdown is starting to get boring


----------



## Kabraxal

Sincere said:


> The only issue with Mick's promo, aside from how Sasha/Charlotte seemed to largely ignore it, was that it was several weeks too late. At least he tried to sell the gimmick this time, unlike the actual competitors, but his promo here should have been a promo from when the match was first announced--not all the sudden at the contract signing, after it had been no-sold for several weeks. Why wasn't all that stuff said at the outset? The whole thing has just been a mess.


That's just how the WWE does it now I guess.... remember when that match was announced back in the first few years and the wrestlers would react like they were just told they had to jump out of a flaming plane without a parachute. Now they react like they are jumping into a kiddy ball pit and it completely ruins the aura of the match. They already killed the normal cage and they are pretty much there with the cell.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Pretty weak demo. I skipped RAW. Apparently my number was legion. Time to "Old Yeller" the alleged flagship.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

A 50 year old Goldberg is DA DRAW LOL

Seriously, give him Brock's role, he would be a thousand times better. Fuck those couple of years age difference. And fuck Brock.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw and SD suck these days. The ratings pretty much reflect that even if Raw's are higher every week.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

WCW still draws. :vince3

GOATs gonna GOAT while WWE sucks balls.


----------



## wwf

A lot of people like to bitch about the creative team, but last night showed that the smarks (as in stupid marks), are also contributing to the downfall of wrestling.

Seriously, yes people don't want to watch Brock Lesnar just stand, but they definitely don't want to watch a crowd chant Goldberg sucks. If the same kind of crowd existed back in the AE times, wrestling would have never been popular. And it's likely that mainstream wrestling wouldn't exist today.

Even when the crowd is "good", it's still lame as fuck in comparison. Instead of just going crazy and making noise in a normal way (like what people do when their favorite team wins the Super Bowl or when Mick Foley won the world title), they do their stupid yes chants.

I don't even know how they can climb out of this hole they built, as the smarks attending live events are a significant obstacle to overcome.


----------



## Erik.

Good opportunity for Smackdown this week.

Even I tapped out of Raw last night during the second hour.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

I actually think it's an accomplishment that they still have even that many viewers. Nearly 3 million for that piece of shit show is baffling.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> Raw and SD suck these days. The ratings pretty much reflect that even if Raw's are higher every week.


 That's BS and you know it.

Raw is next level stupid which insults your intelligence every week and tries to push shove shit you don't want to buy down your throat. At least SD is bearable and doesn't insult your intelligence as often. Sure the ratings are terrible, but it's still miles better than Raw which is so severely lacking in stars.

I literally :lmao when I saw their promo picture for next weeks Halloween special. It's Roman + geeks.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> That's BS and you know it.
> 
> Raw is next level stupid which insults your intelligence every week and tries to push shove shit you don't want to buy down your throat. At least SD is bearable and doesn't insult your intelligence as often. Sure the ratings are terrible, but it's still miles better than Raw which is so severely lacking in stars.
> 
> I literally :lmao when I saw their promo picture for next weeks Halloween special. It's Roman + geeks.


Raw is bad and it is worse, and it is also an hour + longer. No surprise there. SD still sucks, too, though, just not as bad. :shrug 

Still being a brand mark.

:lmao

This place fucking sucks these days and this is a great example why.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Erik. said:


> Good opportunity for Smackdown this week.


*









The NBA season starts tonight with a double header between the Cavs vs. Knicks and the Warriors vs. Spurs.*


----------



## ChicagoFit

Well the ratings drop is easily explained:

RAW did go up against Sumo Rodeo on ESPN 2 'The Deuce' last night...


----------



## Erik.

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The NBA season starts tonight with a double header between the Cavs vs. Knicks and the Warriors vs. Spurs.*


Being from Britain, I completely forgot about this snooze fest of a sport. 

Poor Smackdown. I hope the numbers stay relatively solid for them at least.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Last year's Raw numbers are absolutely DECIMATING this year's Raw numbers. 

3H- 2.819M Vs 3.354M ( - 15.95% / - 0.535M )


And that was with a weak, chickenshit Heel Champion. Wow.

:heyman6


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> Last year's Raw numbers are absolutely DECIMATING this year's Raw numbers.
> 
> 3H- 2.819M Vs 3.354M ( - 15.95% / - 0.535M )
> 
> 
> And that was with a weak, chickenshit Heel Champion. Wow.
> 
> :heyman6


Would be interesting to see what happened to those 500,000 viewers. Whether they were simply young viewers who have grown up and moved on to something different or whether or not now they still watch but it's after it's been DVR'd or they illegally stream.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> Last year's Raw numbers are absolutely DECIMATING this year's Raw numbers.
> 
> 3H- 2.819M Vs 3.354M ( - 15.95% / - 0.535M )
> 
> 
> And that was with a weak, chickenshit Heel Champion. Wow.
> 
> :heyman6


 You're silly to believe that those decreases would have happened over night. Rollins feud definitely contributed to where the ratings are now. You'd be foolish to deny it. His reign was possibly one of the worst in recent history, much worse than KO's honestly.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> You're silly to believe that those decreases would have happened over night. Rollins feud definitely contributed to where the ratings are now. You'd be foolish to deny it. His reign was possibly one of the worst in recent history, much worse than KO's honestly.


The ratings have been where they are now since the Football season started, in the high to mid 2's. Before that, they were in the low to early mid 3's. 

Aaaaaand that still doesn't change the fact that last year's numbers have beat this year's numbers every single week of this year by a comfortable margin, even with Rollins as a chickenshit heel, champion. Facts are facts.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Looks like only Goldberg (500,000 jump in the 3rd hour) and The Rock can move ratings. Nobody else can.Too many geeks on the roster. Too much bland pg or g rated material.


----------



## Reotor

So Brock wasnt able to draw more viewers *or* keep the viewers they had for the 3rd hour?
Im shocked!

At least last year you could excuse this with him being a draw. Now not only he does nothing in the ring, he doesnt even put eyeballs on the screen anymore. He literally does nothing for this product :lmao
And to think how much money they are throwing at this guy :lol


----------



## Oda Nobunaga

WWE digging up its old, constantly buried competitor's skeletons > their current product :heston


----------



## Darren Criss

I'm waiting to see the ratings next year.

2.3 / 2.0 :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## The RainMaker

Randy Lahey said:


> Looks like only Goldberg (500,000 jump in the 3rd hour) and The Rock can move ratings. Nobody else can.Too many geeks on the roster. Too much bland pg or g rated material.


The jump wasn't in the third hour. They held over 3 million each hour.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> Raw is bad and it is worse, and it is also an hour + longer. No surprise there. SD still sucks, too, though, just not as bad. :shrug
> 
> Still being a brand mark.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> This place fucking sucks these days and this is a great example why.


I especially love people who insult "smarks", and at the same time can get worked into a desastrous brand war angle like the most dimwitted mark.

Technically, we don't know if Brock didn't draw because those numbers are still marginally better than two weeks ago.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

It's funny all the lobster brains pushing the 'indy geek' narrative here remain totally silent when Brock Lesnar doesn't move the ratings by a single point. I am sure they will finally blame the booking when Goldberg is also all too common and stops bringing in viewers.


----------



## chronoxiong

Pay all that money to Lesnar and even when he shows up, he does nothing! Of course the ratings will go down! This week's RAW was not a good show especially that brutal 2nd hour.


----------



## BehindYou

Honestly surprised it stayed even that high, one of the least interesting RAWs since the split.


----------



## The Power that Be

#SaveUsRusso&Ferrera


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 10/24 did a 2.00 rating and 2,807,000 viewers (1.50 viewers per home).
> 
> The number was down 7.8 percent in ratings and 10.3 percent in totally audience from last week. In both cases, the drop was a little normalizing from the audience the return of Bill Goldberg drew, but increasing a little over the average due to Brock Lesnar, although that was offset by a pretty bad show that cost viewers as the show went on with a significant first-to-third hour drop and no second hour gain.
> 
> The three hours were 2,983,000 viewers at 8 p.m., 2,806,000 viewers at 9 p.m. and 2,669,000 at 10 p.m. As far as the dropoff went, the people who tuned out were mostly women, as 18 percent of the women 18-49 in hour one were gone in hour three, while with men, the drop was only five percent. In teenage women, the drop was 24 percent from hour one to hour three while teenage boys actually grew as the show went on.
> 
> The Houston Texans vs. Denver Broncos NFL game did 11,168,000 viewers, up from recent weeks, but that’s offset by no baseball playoff competition. Raw was third for the night on cable, trailing the NFL game and the O’Reilly Factor (3,268,000 viewers).
> 
> The show did a 0.74 in 12-17 (down 21.3 percent from last week), 0.92 in 18-34 (down 20.7 percent), 1.10 in 35-49 (down 9.8 percent) and 1.04 in 50+ (down 5.5 percent). Basically, 12-17 went back to normal after the Goldberg bump, which is funny since that’s pure curiosity and nostalgia since that age group never saw Goldberg. In 18-49, it went down, but is above the current normal vs. football, in particular 35-49, which I’d attribute to Lesnar. And 50+ didn’t go up much for Goldberg and didn’t go down much without Goldberg.
> 
> The audience was 60.7 percent male in 18-49 and 70.5 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.747M
H2-2.617M
H3-2.436M
3H-2.600M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 4.73% / - 0.130M ) 
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.92% / - 0.181M ) 
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.32% / - 0.311M ) 
10/31/16 Vs 10/24/16 ( - 7.77% / - 0.219M )

Demo (10/31/16 Vs 10/24/16):
H1- 0.930D Vs 1.070D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.990D
H3- 0.870D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.900D Vs 1.007D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 8th, 10th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/31/16 Vs 11/2/15):
H1- 2.747M Vs 3.375M
H2- 2.617M Vs 3.180M
H3- 2.436M Vs 3.189M
3H- 2.600M Vs 3.248M ( - 19.95% / - 0.648M )

Demo (10/31/16 Vs 11/2/15):
H1- 0.930D Vs 1.130D
H2- 0.900D Vs 1.060D
H3- 0.870D Vs 1.150D
3H- 0.900D Vs 1.113D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 6th & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## A-C-P

Didn't take long for the Goldberg effect to wear off :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Goldberg's done as a draw and that third hour.

Yikes.

3rd hour did terribly.


----------



## The True Believer

H3 less than 2.5 million viewers? That's the first time I've ever seen that.


----------



## Chrome

2.4 million in the 3rd hour?









With a Goldberg return and coming off a ppv too nonetheless.


----------



## Reotor

Not even a little post PPV bump? yikes.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Smackdown coming off it's lowest rating since the brand split, too.

Ratings keep going down, down, down..


----------



## Bret Hart

Chrome said:


> 2.4 million in the 3rd hour?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With a Goldberg return and coming off a ppv too nonetheless.


But Goldberg wasn't even in the third hour...

People who wanted to see him saw him in the first and didn't give two fucks about remaining there for the whole show, like myself.



ShowStopper said:


> Smackdown coming off it's lowest rating since the brand split, too.
> 
> Ratings keep going down, down, down..



They're still making money though, at least for now... So probably not going to have any major changes..


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Bret Hart said:


> But Goldberg wasn't even in the third hour...
> 
> People who wanted to see him saw him in the first and didn't give two fucks about remaining there for the whole show, like myself.


The hour he was in is lower than previous weeks Hour 1's, too, though. Or, at least stayed the same. They've been in the high to mid 2's for hour 1 before Goldberg. And that's what Hour 1 got last night.


----------



## Bret Hart

ShowStopper said:


> The hour he was in is lower than previous weeks Hour 1's, too, though. Or, at least stayed the same. They've been in the high to mid 2's for hour 1 before Goldberg. And that's what Hour 1 got last night.


I honestly forgot Goldberg was scheduled, they didn't hype it up enough as they did his return 2 weeks ago.

But whatever.


----------



## Dave Santos

ANyone know how Halloween shows typically do in regards to ratings? This one occured on Halloween day. But it does look like the Goldberg effect may be diminishing. The true test is when Brock and Goldberg meet up.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Bret Hart said:


> I honestly forgot Goldberg was scheduled, they didn't hype it up enough as they did his return 2 weeks ago.
> 
> But whatever.


Yeah, I didn't even know he was going to be on until a couple hours before Raw. :lol


----------



## TaterTots

2.4 million in the 3rd hour with Roman Reigns in the main event? But wasn't he this amazing draw that always pulled out the best numbers week by week?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Halloween didn't help matters, but against a dud of a NFL game and supposedly having a post ppv bounce, these numbers are anemic. Well done, Vince. :clap


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The True Believer said:


> H3 less than 2.5 million viewers? That's the first time I've ever seen that.


Won't be the last though.



Chrome said:


> 2.4 million in the 3rd hour?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With a Goldberg return and coming off a ppv too nonetheless.


Goldberg was the first 20 minutes. How does that pertain hour 3? People watched Goldberg, then turned that shit off in the right assumption nothing will be up to par with that.


----------



## Bret Hart

How did his segment do on YouTube?


----------



## wwe9391

Ratings keep going down yet WWE is still making good amount of money.

This is so backwards lol


----------



## Chrome

Didn't watch, so no idea Goldberg was in the 1st segment. Still, those are bad ratings coming off a ppv. Those alone usually produce some kind of bump.


----------



## wwf

So basically people tuned in for Goldberg and then tuned out lol. Remember that the ratings are a weighted average of viewers watching minute by minute (or maybe even second by second, not entirely sure about the granularity of the data, but I know it's at max minute by minute).

I wouldn't be surprised if Goldberg's sement had around 3 million viewers and then the average of the first hour got weighted down by the remaining 45 minutes.

I'm also very surprised (but happy) they had Goldberg open the show. Thought they were gonna show him the 3rd hour. I still think showing him sometime in the 2nd hour is optimal.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Bret Hart said:


> How did his segment do on YouTube?


GOAT in hatewatch bait.



Chrome said:


> Didn't watch, so no idea Goldberg was in the 1st segment. Still, those are bad ratings coming off a ppv. Those alone usually produce some kind of bump.


Not if you put on those matches. Nobody gives a shit about Reigns after he beat up Rusev a Thousand times already, nobody gives a shit about Owens and Rollins after Rollins pinned both Owens and Jericho clean on Raw SIMULTANEOUSLY, and nobody gives a shit about the two queens of Botchamania headlining a PPV where the hometown girl and Champ was pinned clean in the middle.

And nobody gives a shit about the Rest either. I'm not even sure I could name all the matches from Sunday without looking them up.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

They have enough schemes going on outside of the show itself to make money in. Vince has turned the brand into the draw, which is exactly what he's always wanted.

They have no desire for megastars, they're just people who will eventually leave the company hanging to go and do other shit in McMahon's mind. 

Though, saying that, I can't wait to see how fucking great business is doing when the next TV deal rolls around. They'll get fucked hard if the numbers keep dwindling... and USA doesn't give a turd about YouTube views :lol. Any online platform is a competitor in their eyes.


----------



## Chrome

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Not if you put on those matches. Nobody gives a shit about Reigns after he beat up Rusev a Thousand times already, nobody gives a shit about Owens and Rollins after Rollins pinned both Owens and Jericho clean on Raw SIMULTANEOUSLY, and nobody gives a shit about the two queens of Botchamania headlining a PPV where the hometown girl and Champ was pinned clean in the middle.
> 
> And nobody gives a shit about the Rest either. I'm not even sure I could name all the matches from Sunday without looking them up.


Got a point there lol. And the Raw vs Smackdown stuff isn't really all that interesting tbh, so I'm expecting some more bad ratings in WWE's future. Only thing semi-interesting atm is Lesnar vs Goldberg, and even that's not THAT interesting, given that they both can't seem to be on the same show at the same time.



4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> They have enough schemes going on outside of the show itself to make money in. Vince has turned the brand into the draw, which is exactly what he's always wanted.
> 
> They have no desire for megastars, they're just people who will eventually leave the company hanging to go and do other shit in McMahon's mind.
> 
> *Though, saying that, I can't wait to see how fucking great business is doing when the next TV deal rolls around. They'll get fucked hard if the numbers keep dwindling... and USA doesn't give a turd about YouTube views :lol. Any online platform is a competitor in their eyes.*


Yeah, social media only accounts for like 1.5% of WWE's total profit. And I bet if you took away Facebook, Twitter, etc... and only left Youtube, the number would be even lower. WWE themselves should barely give a shit about Youtube views, let alone anyone else. TV is still king at the end of the day.


----------



## Randy Lahey

That 3rd hour is a disaster. I don't even think you can blame the 3rd hour on Halloween. Most trick or treat'ing is done between 6 and 8 in the US.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> They have enough schemes going on outside of the show itself to make money in. Vince has turned the brand into the draw, which is exactly what he's always wanted.
> 
> They have no desire for megastars, they're just people who will eventually leave the company hanging to go and do other shit in McMahon's mind.
> 
> Though, saying that, I can't wait to see how fucking great business is doing when the next TV deal rolls around. They'll get fucked hard if the numbers keep dwindling... and USA doesn't give a turd about YouTube views :lol. *Any online platform is a competitor in their eyes*.


Like the Network for example. Just food for thoughts.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lol 3rd hour


----------



## Bubba Chuck

I don't think we'll be seeing viewers over 3m in a while. The Goldberg draw effect


----------



## The Boy Wonder

So do they provide the overrun numbers for hour 3 anymore? I'm not sure if the overrun is counted for the final hour. I have to imagine a good amount of viewers tuned in for the main event last night between Reigns/Jericho. It's not far-fetched to believe that when you consider...


----------



## Godway

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> GOAT in hatewatch bait.
> 
> 
> 
> Not if you put on those matches. Nobody gives a shit about Reigns after he beat up Rusev a Thousand times already, nobody gives a shit about Owens and Rollins after Rollins pinned both Owens and Jericho clean on Raw SIMULTANEOUSLY, and nobody gives a shit about the two queens of Botchamania headlining a PPV where the hometown girl and Champ was pinned clean in the middle.
> 
> And nobody gives a shit about the Rest either. I'm not even sure I could name all the matches from Sunday without looking them up.


PREACH.

They're not coming off a PPV. They're coming off streamed house show which rehashed a bunch of matches we've already seen a dozen times on RAW. Like it isn't hard to figure out why they don't get a bump. What would the bump be for? Nothing of relevance happened at that "PPV". It's just the same cycle of shit we've been watching for three months. Charlotte beats Sasha, Sasha beats Charlotte on RAW twice :lol Reigns beats Rusev in the most lopsided feud of the year. Rollins beats both Jericho/Owens but loses on PPV so Owens can keep his belt for his midcard Mania title feud (if he makes it that far) while Rollins can work his dopey HHH feud. It's all so very predictable and boring.

Oh but wait, RAW ended with another Shield reunion. That's totally fresh and not something they do every 3-6 months, right?!?!?!?!?


----------



## BigDaveBatista

one way out of this friends, goldberg needs to wrestle a match on tv with rusev 
cry burial all you like, a loss to goldberg doesnt damage anyone


----------



## RDEvans

Tbh I wouldn't be shocked if viewership was below 2 million next year.


----------



## Dave Santos

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> They have enough schemes going on outside of the show itself to make money in. Vince has turned the brand into the draw, which is exactly what he's always wanted.
> 
> They have no desire for megastars, they're just people who will eventually leave the company hanging to go and do other shit in McMahon's mind.
> 
> Though, saying that, I can't wait to see how fucking great business is doing when the next TV deal rolls around. They'll get fucked hard if the numbers keep dwindling... and USA doesn't give a turd about YouTube views :lol. Any online platform is a competitor in their eyes.


It's almost to hard to believe. You would think if they had social media metrics and other metrics, that 15-20 years ago they would be higher than they are now. Typically as viewership goes up, so do other statistics. 

From observation I have noticed that youtube viewership has gone up. 

-But many internet forums have become more quiet.
-the attendance at live shows has decreased.
-day to day conversations about wrestling are almost non existent.
-and rarely do you see wwe merchandise on the streets anymore.

So as youtube viewership has gone up, it could be do to people spending less time watching live wwe events, or people cutting cable. This doesn't mean the people watching are full time/ regular viewers. 

Here is the attendance of house shows in the wwe over the years.
1992 - 4,250 
1993 - 3,450 
1994 - 2,880 
1995 - 3,039 
1996 - 4,881 
1997 - 5,826 
1998 - 10,006 
1999 - 12,017 
2000 - 11,460 
2001 - 9,200 
2002 - 5,625 
2003 - 4,537 
2004 - 3,862 
2005 - 4,354 
2006 - 5,175 
2007 - 5,998 
2008 - 5,973 
2009 - 6,226 
2010 - 5,810 

The numbers get even lower the last few years.
so where is this new revenue coming from?



Godway said:


> PREACH.
> 
> They're not coming off a PPV. They're coming off streamed house show which rehashed a bunch of matches we've already seen a dozen times on RAW. Like it isn't hard to figure out why they don't get a bump. What would the bump be for? Nothing of relevance happened at that "PPV". It's just the same cycle of shit we've been watching for three months. Charlotte beats Sasha, Sasha beats Charlotte on RAW twice :lol Reigns beats Rusev in the most lopsided feud of the year. Rollins beats both Jericho/Owens but loses on PPV so Owens can keep his belt for his midcard Mania title feud (if he makes it that far) while Rollins can work his dopey HHH feud. It's all so very predictable and boring.
> 
> Oh but wait, RAW ended with another Shield reunion. That's totally fresh and not something they do every 3-6 months, right?!?!?!?!?


Add to that 18 paperviews a year now. Some people might pick and chose the paperviews that seem most important.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

This is what WWE gets for putting their big gun out there in the opening segment.

After burying him the night before. Then they bury him again. Serves them right.


----------



## Randy Lahey

RDEvans said:


> Tbh I wouldn't be shocked if viewership was below 2 million next year.


Well, they are down by about 20% from last year. So if they drop another 20% by next year, they'll be averaging about 2 mils.

When people say ratings don't matter and WWE is still in great financial shape, I have to laugh. Their TV deal is primary thing keeping them in the black. Once that goes away or is drastically reduced, they are screwed.

And if you keep losing 20% of your audience each year, that will inevitably occur.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Randy Lahey said:


> Well, they are down by about 20% from last year. So if they drop another 20% by next year, they'll be averaging about 2 mils.
> 
> When people say ratings don't matter and WWE is still in great financial shape, I have to laugh. Their TV deal is primary thing keeping them in the black. Once that goes away or is drastically reduced, they are screwed.
> 
> And if you keep losing 20% of your audience each year, that will inevitably occur.


Exactly. And Raw is how WWE makes their most amount of money. $32 million annually for the 3rd hour of Raw. That probably makes them more than anything re: SD. If their TV deal is greatly reduced in 2018, they are in some serious trouble..


----------



## Erik.

The WWE clearly didn't give a shit about the third hour. 

For one, they threw Goldberg out straight away in the opening segment instead of building him up like they did last time. They put on a heatless multi man tag match between cruiserweights that no one really cares about, a horrible women's segment and match as well as Sheamus & Cesaro burying the Shining Stars. 

Not surprised at all.


----------



## amhlilhaus

BigDaveBatista said:


> one way out of this friends, goldberg needs to wrestle a match on tv with rusev
> cry burial all you like, a loss to goldberg doesnt damage anyone


Losing in a minute after 4 moves does.

Why dont they just let bruno sammartino come back and pin kevin owens?


----------



## BigDaveBatista

amhlilhaus said:


> Losing in a minute after 4 moves does.
> 
> Why dont they just let bruno sammartino come back and pin kevin owens?


no point in discussing this with you clearly given how different the example you have given is


----------



## Mra22

I watched the opening segment with Goldberg and turned that crap off shortly after because the rest of the roster is a bunch of geeks I did turn over for the very end of the ME.


----------



## jim courier

Should have left Goldberg till the end.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 10/31 did a 1.87 rating and 2,591,000 viewers (1.48 viewers per home). From an audience standpoint, it was the second lowest number of viewers for Raw in the last 19 years, ahead of only the 9/27 show against the Trump-Clinton debate that did a 1.74 rating and 2,464,000 viewers.
> 
> The number should be taken with as much credence as the 9/27 number, or, basically, none at all.
> 
> The last three times WWE has run television on Halloween night saw a decline of five percent in 2014, 16 percent in 2011 and 19 percent in 2008 from the numbers the show was normally getting. The 2011 show actually fell from a show the week before that went against a World Series game (the 16 percent drop was from two weeks earlier or a more normal comparison).
> 
> Figuring an average 13.3 percent drop for Halloween, a normal show should have been expected to do a 1.73 rating and 2,434,000 viewers, so this actually did better than should have been expected. The increase over that figure would likely be due to coming a day after the PPV, and Bill Goldberg, although putting Goldberg in the opening segment was a mastermind stroke that was kind of incomprehensible. Putting Goldberg on first led to an 11.3 percent drop from hour one to hour three, which is significantly greater than usual.
> 
> The main competition, a Minnesota Vikings vs. Chicago Bears game, did 10,476,000 viewers. Raw was only in ninth place for the night on cable.
> 
> The three hours saw the 8 p.m. hour with Goldberg do 2,747,000 viewers, and it dropped to 2,617,000 viewers in the second hour and 2,436,000 viewers in the third hour.
> 
> What's notable is that most of the people who tuned out were the half audience over the age of 40, which dropped 15.4 percent from hour one to hour three. The over 50 audience actually increased from the week before, and that audience is probably the audience less likely to be trick or treating and also the audience that would be most familiar with Bill Goldberg (although that audience gained the least on the Goldberg debut show and the big audience for Goldberg's return that swelled was males 18-34).
> 
> Ages 12-17 and 18-34 both gained as the show went on, which probably can be explained easily as Halloween trick-or-treaters and parents who missed the first hour. Guys in that age group came in during the second hour and slightly declined in the third. Women, particularly teenage girls, came in later and peaked in the third hour. Going against the overall trend, the audience of teenage girls was 14.3 percent higher in hour three than hour one.
> 
> The show did a 0.61 in 12-17 (down 17.6 percent from last week), 0.77 in 18-34 (down 16.3 percent), 1.03 in 35-49 (down 6.4 percent) and 1.08 in 50+ (up 3.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 61.1 percent male in 18-49 and 67.3 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Can't wait for this number.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.066M
H2-2.731M
H3-2.505M
3H-2.767M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 10.93% / - 0.335M ) 
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.28% / - 0.226M ) 
H3 Vs H1 ( - 18.30% / - 0.561M ) 
11/7/16 Vs 10/31/16 ( + 6.42% / + 0.167M )

Demo (11/7/16 Vs 10/31/16):
H1- 1.060D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.860D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.940D Vs 0.900D*

*Note: RAW is 4th, 7th & 9th by hourly demo & 6th, 11th & 13th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/7/16 Vs 11/9/15):
H1- 3.066M Vs 3.480M
H2- 2.731M Vs 3.177M
H3- 2.505M Vs 2.863M
3H- 2.767M Vs 3.173M ( - 12.80% / - 0.306M )

Demo (11/7/16 Vs 11/9/15):
H1- 1.060D Vs 1.150D
H2- 0.900D Vs 1.120D
H3- 0.860D Vs 1.060D
3H- 0.940D Vs 1.110D*

*Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

An increase from last week even though this show was taped and the spoilers were out there hours before it aired here.

:mj4

Odd.


----------



## DoubtGin

That's quite impressive. Thought numbers would be down with the show being taped.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

ShowStopper said:


> An increase from last week even though this show was taped and the spoilers were out there hours before it aired here.
> 
> :mj4
> 
> Odd.


Live vs taped doesn't influence things nearly as much as people think. Smackdown isn't doing better because than before it's live, it's doing better because it has talent you can't see on Raw in interesting storylines.

Sometimes, being taped even helps a show. If a show is good, people will watch. Makind-Rock is a great example of that.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mifune Jackson said:


> Live vs taped doesn't influence things nearly as much as people think. Smackdown isn't doing better because than before it's live, it's doing better because it has talent you can't see on Raw in interesting storylines.
> 
> Sometimes, being taped even helps a show. If a show is good, people will watch. Makind-Rock is a great example of that.


These days it could influence it because unlike the Monday Night Wars era, literally everyone is on the internet these days. SD's doing better because it was a taped show with nothing happening on it. Now it is treated like it's own brand. It had no other way to go but up. It was at rockbottom. And even the increase isn't what it could be.

Surprised the number went up for Raw. It's either random, or the people who read the spoilers liked what they read, I guess.


----------



## DammitChrist

Good to see an increase. I thought this week's Raw was better than last week's episode tbh


----------



## Kabraxal

That makes no sense... were people that bored they had to turn into utter shit to stay awake or something? I don't get it.


----------



## TheFackingCrow

Ratings go up when you put THE guy in the main event again. :reigns2

No, but seriously, i thought ratings would be much lower since no Goldberg/Lesnar.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Kabraxal said:


> That makes no sense... were people that bored they had to turn into utter shit to stay awake or something? I don't get it.


Last week was Halloween, so I think it was going to go up no matter what. That first hour is pretty surprising, though. Not sure what enticed people to watch that.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Mifune Jackson said:


> Last week was Halloween, so I think it was going to go up no matter what. That first hour is pretty surprising, though. Not sure what enticed people to watch that.


They forgot Goldberg or Lesnar isn't happening every week.


----------



## Erik.

Strowman one of the main focuses on the show and the ratings increase?

Not surprised.


----------



## Mr. Socko

Im going to say the UK Crowd was the draw :quimby

Coupled with Halloween bounceback.


Also #StrowmanIsADraw


----------



## Ace

Good numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Smackdown back under 2, I guess due to the election.

:sodone


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> Smackdown back under 2, I guess due to the election.
> 
> :sodone


To be fair, it was the highest rated show that was not related to the election. Which is impressive.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> To be fair, it was the highest rated show that was not related to the election. Which is impressive.


After like the million Election shows that were on, yes..


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 11/7 did a 1.94 rating and 2,755,000 viewers (1.53 viewers per home), a mixed bag in the sense the viewership started surprisingly high but the first-to-third hour drop of 18 percent was alarmingly high. It was an increase of six percent over the Halloween total, but the third hour ended up being the third lowest final hour in modern history.
> 
> It’s hard to point a finger at why. The Seattle Seahawks vs. Buffalo Bills game was close and got exciting as Raw went on, but its 11,206,000 viewers were normal range numbers. It could be that Bill Goldberg and/or Brock Lesnar, or the combination, have brought some viewers back, they were there for the first hour and left realizing neither would be on the show. Live vs. tape clearly didn’t matter, since it started so high for a taped show.
> 
> The biggest drop from hour one to three was in the 35 to 49 demo, as hour three was down 32 percent from hour one, with men in that age group down 27 percent and women fell by 37 percent from hour one to three. Also interesting is that the drop for women was almost all people tuning out in hour two, while with men, it was gradual throughout the show, and actually with teenagers and 18-34, they gained in the second hour and fell slightly in the third, while 35-49 fell more in the second hour but continued to slide in the third.
> 
> In the first 80 minutes of the show, there was seven minutes of wrestling, all in a cruiserweight match, and there was an interview segment with the tag teams on Raw which lasted longer than several one-sided wars.
> 
> The loss of viewers from hour one to three wasn’t as significant in other age groups, although it was there in every age group. 18-34 was down six percent by hour three, 12-17 was down ten percent and 50+ was down 13 percent.
> 
> Raw was tenth for the night on cable, trailing football, Sports Center and a variety of cable news shows.
> 
> The three hours were 8 p.m. at 3,066,000 viewers; 9 p.m. at 2,731,000 viewers and 10 p.m. at 2,505,000 viewers.
> 
> Overall, the show did a 0.70 in 12-17 (up 14.8 percent from Halloween), 0.80 in 18-34 (up 3.9 percent), 1.08 in 35-49 (up 4.9 percent) and 1.08 in 50+ (identical to the previous week).
> 
> The show drew 59.8 percent males in 18-49 and 64.2 percent males in 12-17.


----------



## Pummy

I remember when people upset if Raw rating were below 3 just few year back. Now they celebrated for rating almost 2.0......


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

7 minutes of wrestling in 80 minutes ... And knuckleheads like Russo, and many people here, complain that WWE focuses too much on "Wrestling" and "work rate".

fpalm


----------



## Reotor

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> 7 minutes of wrestling in 80 minutes ... And knuckleheads like Russo, and many people here, complain that WWE focuses too much on "Wrestling" and "work rate".
> 
> fpalm


RAW and smackdown consistently have less than 40% of the time used for wrestling, some times its as low as 20%.
This era being a "work-rate era" is a myth.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.960M
H2-2.930M
H3-2.743M
3H-2.878M
*









*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.01% / - 0.030M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.38% / - 0.187M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.33% / - 0.217M )
11/14/16 Vs 11/7/16 ( + 4.01% / + 0.111M )

Demo (11/14/16 Vs 11/7/16):
H1- 1.000D Vs 1.060D
H2- 1.000D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.950D Vs 0.860D
3H- 0.983D Vs 0.940D*

*Note: RAW is 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 9th, 10th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/14/16 Vs 11/16/15):
H1- 2.960M Vs 3.541M
H2- 2.930M Vs 3.290M
H3- 2.743M Vs 3.047M
3H- 2.878M Vs 3.293M ( - 12.60% / - 0.415M )

Demo (11/14/16 Vs 11/16/15):
H1- 1.000D Vs 1.180D
H2- 1.000D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.090D
3H- 0.983D Vs 1.123D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Expected a lot higher for a Lesnar-Goldberg face off.


----------



## Kabraxal

Man.. when Goldberg leaves they are in some serious trouble.


----------



## Erik.

They completely blew their load in their first hour.

We saw Rollins, Reigns, Strowman, Owens, Jericho all in the first hour as well as The New Day. What they should have done was have Goldberg/Lesnar CLOSE the show and with a brawl too - it's clear they don't give a fuck about the third hour or whether it loses viewers at all.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Better number than last week, and most of the NY market was watching the GIANTS win.  Once football ends, they'll go back up to low 3's. Better than I thought they would get.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Disappointing number all things considered. I guess this is really the best they can do right now outside of a return.


----------



## chronoxiong

James Ellsworth = ratings.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

People waited for Goldberg and Brock, then tuned out, rightfully thinking nothing exciting would Happen in the third hour.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

That demo is not good for RAW. We'll see how much it rebounds post NFL competition.


----------



## The RainMaker

Kabraxal said:


> Man.. when Goldberg leaves they are in some serious trouble.



Lmao, no they aren't. They'll be right around the 2.5-2.7M viewers they always are, and will probably see a slight uptick considering it's RR time and the NFL will be ending.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The fact that this has been their highest rated show is pretty funny.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 11/14 did a 1.97 rating and 2,870,000 viewers (1.57 viewers per home), the second best number against football of the season. The show was expected to do numbers in that range given the advertised appearances of Bill Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, Shane McMahon and Daniel Bryan, pushed around a Goldberg vs. Lesnar face-to-face confrontation.
> 
> Because of the high viewers-per-home, the rating was only up 1.5 percent from last week’s taped show but up 4.2 percent in total viewers.
> 
> The best number of this football season was the 10/17 show which was the return of Bill Goldberg that did a 2.17 rating and 3,130,000 viewers.
> 
> If there is an interesting note on the show, it’s the male audience grew strongly in the second hour, while the female audience started falling in the second hour and continued to fall in the third hour.
> 
> Raw was ninth for the night on cable, trailing the NFL game with the New York Giants vs Cincinnati Bengals that did 10,715,000 viewers, or down four percent from the prior week. The shows that outrated Raw were the NFL game, the SportsCenter after football, and every show all night on Fox News.
> 
> The show did a 0.77 in 12-17 (up 10.0 percent from last week), 0.85 in 18-34 (up 6.3 percent), 1.11 in 35-49 (up 2.8 percent) and 1.09 in 50+ (up 0.9 percent), so the Goldberg shows were again stronger in 12-34, as opposed to the average WCW viewing audience of the Goldberg heyday, which would on average be 52 years old now.
> 
> The audience was 58.9 percent male in 18-49 and 65.7 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## volde

Yeah, Goldberg, as every other return, has shown to have had only initial boost to viewer numbers and after that its back to usual business.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.137M
H2-3.097M
H3-2.772M
3H-3.002M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.28% / - 0.040M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.49% / - 0.325M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.64% / - 0.365M )
11/21/16 Vs 11/14/16 ( + 4.31% / + 0.124M )

Demo (11/21/16 Vs 11/14/16):
H1- 1.160D Vs 1.000D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.000D
H3- 1.010D Vs 0.950D
3H- 1.100D Vs 0.983D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/21/16 Vs 11/23/15):
H1- 3.137M Vs 3.190M
H2- 3.097M Vs 2.990M
H3- 2.772M Vs 2.712M
3H- 3.002M Vs 2.964M ( + 1.28% / + 0.038M )

Demo (11/21/16 Vs 11/23/15):
H1- 1.160D Vs 1.040D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.010D
H3- 1.010D Vs 0.930D
3H- 1.100D Vs 0.993D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 8th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Good number for this era and this time of year (NFL). It was a good show, too. So, I'm okay with them getting a good number this time. :lol


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Goldberg officially the biggest draw on the roster by far.


----------



## wwe9391

Post ppv bump and Goldberg. It was a good show as well. They earned that number


----------



## Cipher

That's the first time they've gotten a 3 in a least a month or two, no?


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Cipher said:


> That's the first time they've gotten a 3 in a least a month or two, no?


First time it's averaged above a 3.0 since Goldberg's debut (10/17). It's amazing how you retain viewers when you keep treating a babyface star well instead of constantly screwing them over and letting the audience down.

WWE has a history of screwing up good things. Really surprised they haven't with Goldberg yet, but I'm not complaining about it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Goldberg is officially the biggest draw in wrestling right now.
Love it.

I watched that match at least 20 times yesterday.


----------



## JDP2016

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Goldberg is officially the biggest draw in wrestling right now.
> Love it.
> 
> I watched that match at least 20 times yesterday.


And it took you less than an hour to do so. :smile2:


----------



## Erik.

That is why it was a good decision to have Goldberg go over. He BRINGS in the viewers. Lesnar hasn't done that in years.

I knew the third hour would drop off, they opened it up with the women and then cruiserweights followed. It probably would have been ALOT worse if the main event wasn't for the title in a No DQ match as people may have tuned back in to potentially see HHH or something.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

:bjpenn Good numbers and the show was good overall last night. Bravo WWE, bravo


----------



## JDP2016

The third hour usually draws the least amount of viewers no matter what. Maybe I'm wrong but I've yet to see a week where the 3rd out drew the 1st.


----------



## Ace

Great numbers this week, they put on a good show too.


----------



## Cipher

Erik. said:


> That is why it was a good decision to have Goldberg go over. He BRINGS in the viewers. Lesnar hasn't done that in years.
> 
> I knew the third hour would drop off, they opened it up with the women and then cruiserweights followed. It probably would have been ALOT worse if the main event wasn't for the title in a No DQ match as people may have tuned back in to potentially see HHH or something.


Lesnar DID bring in viewers/buyrates (before the Network was a thing obviously) until the booking ruined him. Having Cena and then Triple H go over him when he returned was a monstrously stupid decision. That's why I'm hoping Goldberg beats it as soon as possible before they inevitably ruin him.


----------



## Dolorian

Ace said:


> Great numbers this week, they put on a good show too.


Yeah it definitely had a much better flow and structure than the usual. One negative were the commercial breaks during the main event, poor timing on both as we missed a couple of good spots of the match.


----------



## Dave Santos

JDP2016 said:


> The third hour usually draws the least amount of viewers no matter what. Maybe I'm wrong but I've yet to see a week where the 3rd out drew the 1st.


Im not 100% sure but the Raw Goldberg debuted might have been it. His debut was in the third hour. I remember all 3 hours were over 3 million, but dont know the exact breakdown. It's probably a few pages back in the thread.


----------



## Erik.

JDP2016 said:


> The third hour usually draws the least amount of viewers no matter what. Maybe I'm wrong but I've yet to see a week where the 3rd out drew the 1st.


Build up to Wrestlemania, I am SURE there was one episode of Raw where the third hour was the highest rated of the whole night - I think it was when HHH faced Ziggler in a non-title match and we got Vince, Shane and Taker in the main event.

I don't know if the third hour has ever done higher since then. I think Goldbergs return did pretty good numbers though.

Edit -

Just checked:

Hour One: 3.17 million
Hour Two: 3.11 million
Hour Three: 3.12 million

Were the ratings the night Goldberg returned.


----------



## Bret Hart

ShowStopper said:


> Good number for this era and this time of year (NFL). It was a good show, too. So, I'm okay with them getting a good number this time. :lol


Wish they did it more often.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

JDP2016 said:


> And it took you less than an hour to do so. :smile2:


I'd watch the match 60 times in a row instead of Raw.


----------



## JDP2016

Erik. said:


> Build up to Wrestlemania, I am SURE there was one episode of Raw where the third hour was the highest rated of the whole night - I think it was when HHH faced Ziggler in a non-title match and we got Vince, Shane and Taker in the main event.
> 
> I don't know if the third hour has ever done higher since then. I think Goldbergs return did pretty good numbers though.
> 
> Edit -
> 
> Just checked:
> 
> Hour One: 3.17 million
> Hour Two: 3.11 million
> Hour Three: 3.12 million
> 
> Were the ratings the night Goldberg returned.



Yeah and I believe he came in at the end of the final hour. I'm also sure there was a segment involving the women and cruiser-weights in one of those hours. If the show had enough big name MALE stars then all three hours would get a 3 or better but right now they don't.


----------



## Reotor

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I watched that match at least 20 times yesterday.


Well that's not hard considering its a minute long :lol


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Erik. said:


> That is why it was a good decision to have Goldberg go over. He BRINGS in the viewers. Lesnar hasn't done that in years.
> 
> I knew the third hour would drop off, they opened it up with the women and then cruiserweights followed. It probably would have been ALOT worse if the main event wasn't for the title in a No DQ match as people may have tuned back in to potentially see HHH or something.


I agree. Brock just hasn't brought in the viewers since he went on his dominant run. Quite honestly Brock hasn't drawn as well as he's been booked. This is fact. WWE might want to shock the world again by having Goldberg defeat Brock for a third time at WM 33.


----------



## validreasoning

Cipher said:


> Lesnar DID bring in viewers/buyrates (before the Network was a thing obviously) until the booking ruined him. Having Cena and then Triple H go over him when he returned was a monstrously stupid decision. That's why I'm hoping Goldberg beats it as soon as possible before they inevitably ruin him.


Not exactly true. He had little effect on viewership overall across a whole show

He returned night after mania 28 (unannounced so you can't really credit that nights viewership to him) and then next week viewership fell by 20% despite lesnar opening show and that was era of 2'hour raws so no burnout excuse back then. He did have an effect on extreme rules buys and a bigger effect on summerslam buys (so that cena loss didn't hurt him)

Rock in 2011 is really the only guy who has major effect on viewership and his effect was massively reduced when he returned in 2012


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 11/21, the show coming off the Bill Goldberg vs. Brock Lesnar match, did a 2.13 rating and 2,985,000 viewers (1.51 viewers per home), the second best number going against the NFL this season.
> 
> It did so against a solid, close NFL game, with the Oakland Raiders vs. Houston Texans from Mexico City, that did 11,785,000 viewers. The show was sixth for the night on cable.
> 
> Raw was up four percent from last week. Last week, with the Goldberg/Lesnar confrontation and appearances of Shane McMahon and Daniel Bryan, had been the second best number of the season. The high point remains the return of Goldberg on 10/17, which did 3,130,000 viewers.
> 
> The show had a strong first hour with 3,137,000 viewers. The second hour remained strong at 3,097,000 viewers. This could be with fans thinking that Lesnar would be there and something may transpire, since it was never said Lesnar wouldn’t be there and fans would expect a retort. By the third hour, when it was clear that wasn’t going to be the case, even with a Kevin Owens vs. Seth Rollins no DQ Universal title match, it fell strongly to 2,772,000 viewers, which really is a bad drop for a match for the top title.
> 
> The big third hour drop was consistent across the board with the exception of teenagers who peaked in hour two but stayed strong in hour three. Usually the men hold steady or increase, and most of the drop is women, but in 18-49, the women drop was 22 percent from hour one to three, while with men, it was six percent. In 50+ the drop was 12 percent.
> 
> The show did a 0.79 in 12-17 (up 2.6 percent), 0.99 in 18-34 (up 16.5 percent, which would indicate the Survivor Series follow-up was strongest in this age group as far as gains went), 1.21 in 35-49 (up 9.0 percent) and 1.14 in 50+ (up 4.6 percent).
> 
> The audience was 62.9 percent male in 18-49 and 68.5 percent male in 12-17m, both so the increases were more heavily male skewing.


----------



## validreasoning

How does Meltzer manage to screw up the average of 3 numbers? The average of 3.137m, 3.097m and 2.772m is 3.002m not the 2.985m he stated...

Off topic I just noticed how many people have dropped cable over the past 5 years and its pretty obvious that it might not be long until major live sporting events disappear from cable..maybe within the next decade. In 2011 espn was in 100+ million us homes and 88 million today which is a massive drop and this despite the fact the number of us tv homes has grown overall to now stand at over 118 million. Long term I can't see Disney paying big bucks to keep high priced sports on an ever shrinking platform. One Monday night football game costs $135m to air and 12 million less homes means a big drop in subscribers and advertising dollars.

USA is in 8 million less homes since 2011 so that's not fairing much better. 3 million homes have dropped usa over the past year just.


----------



## KO Bossy

No rating for last night?


----------



## Ace

KO Bossy said:


> No rating for last night?


 Delayed till Wednesday.


----------



## JDP2016

^^^ Damm. This was the only reason I logged on today.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/1130/619830/how-was-wwe-raw-viewership-with-sasha-banks-vs-charlotte-in-a/


3.16
3.13
3.04

Surprisingly good numbers for Raw . Surprising a match done for the millionth time actually did very well.


----------



## wwe9391

Those are really good numbers for today's standards. 

See WWE You don't need Brock/Goldberg. Just have good writing/story telling for your full time guys and you will do well.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

What would that good writing be in this case?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Was Raw actually a good show? Only things I took a look at on YouTube were Zayn/Strowman/Zayn's promo afterwards, Owens/Jericho/Reigns segment, Heyman promo and Rollins attacking Jericho. 3/4 of those were actually really good but I'd think the show as a whole had to be of that quality for them to get these numbers this time of year without any part-time draw (Rock or Goldberg) returning.


----------



## A-C-P

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Was Raw actually a good show? Only things I took a look at on YouTube were Zayn/Strowman/Zayn's promo afterwards, Owens/Jericho/Reigns segment, Heyman promo and Rollins attacking Jericho. 3/4 of those were actually really good but I'd think the show as a whole had to be of that quality for them to get these numbers this time of year without any part-time draw (Rock or Goldberg) returning.


It was a pretty good show show top to bottom, very little nothing filler


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#BadNewsSanta said:


> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/1130/619830/how-was-wwe-raw-viewership-with-sasha-banks-vs-charlotte-in-a/
> 
> 
> 3.16
> 3.13
> 3.04
> 
> Surprisingly good numbers for Raw . Surprising a match done for the millionth time actually did very well.


Holy fuck, are these numbers for real? Good numbers.


----------



## wwe9391

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Was Raw actually a good show? Only things I took a look at on YouTube were Zayn/Strowman/Zayn's promo afterwards, Owens/Jericho/Reigns segment, Heyman promo and Rollins attacking Jericho. 3/4 of those were actually really good but I'd think the show as a whole had to be of that quality for them to get these numbers this time of year without any part-time draw (Rock or Goldberg) returning.


It actually was a pretty good show. I think you'll enjoy it.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

Charlotte/Sasha restart = mission accomplished.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.163M
H2-3.130M
H3-3.039M
3H-3.111M










Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.04% / - 0.033M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 2.91% / - 0.091M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.92% / - 0.124M )
11/28/16 Vs 11/21/16 ( + 3.63% / + 0.109M )

Demo (11/28/16 Vs 11/21/16):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.160D
H2- 1.090D Vs 1.130D
H3- 1.080D Vs 1.010D
3H- 1.083D Vs 1.100D

Note: RAW is 7th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.










Viewership (11/28/16 Vs 11/30/15):
H1- 3.163M Vs 3.309M
H2- 3.130M Vs 3.190M
H3- 3.039M Vs 3.005M
3H- 3.111M Vs 3.168M ( - 1.80% / - 0.057M )

Demo (11/28/16 Vs 11/30/15):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.020D
H2- 1.090D Vs 1.050D
H3- 1.080D Vs 1.050D
3H- 1.083D Vs 1.040D

Note: RAW this time last year was 7th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## DammitChrist

It's nice to see a good Raw episode be rewarded with better ratings.



#BadNewsSanta said:


> Was Raw actually a good show? Only things I took a look at on YouTube were Zayn/Strowman/Zayn's promo afterwards, Owens/Jericho/Reigns segment, Heyman promo and Rollins attacking Jericho. 3/4 of those were actually really good but I'd think the show as a whole had to be of that quality for them to get these numbers this time of year without any part-time draw (Rock or Goldberg) returning.


There was also the Cesaro/Sheamus bar room segment + brawl, and the Charlotte vs Sasha Falls Count Anywhere match for the Women's title.


----------



## Strategize

Wait the girls outdrew Seth and KO from last week? Surprising, but I'm happy.


----------



## Y.2.J

Fun show, good ratings. What a concept! 

What's even a bit more impressive is that the Packers-Eagles this Monday drew 13.062 million which is 29% above last year which was 10.116 million.

The product is definitely better this time this year compared to last year and the ratings are slowly coming back or better than last year's.


----------



## Erik.

I'm glad that good episodes of Raw are being rewarded with good numbers.

The last two weeks have been pretty good from giving us better segments to get talent over, backstage segments, off site segments like this past week. Matches that MATTER too (Tag Title matches, Universal title match, Womens title match etc).

I hope they keep it up.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DammitC said:


> It's nice to see a good Raw episode be rewarded with better ratings.
> 
> 
> 
> There was also the Cesaro/Sheamus bar room segment + brawl, and the Charlotte vs Sasha Falls Count Anywhere match for the Women's title.


I passed on watching the brawl because it sounded pretty bad. I'll definitely check it out. The women's match, unless it's a serious MOTYC, I'll probably watch in the future as TBH I'm a bit sick of seeing Sasha/Charlotte right now.


----------



## BehindYou

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I passed on watching the brawl because it sounded pretty bad. I'll definitely check it out. The women's match, unless it's a serious MOTYC, I'll probably watch in the future as TBH I'm a bit sick of seeing Sasha/Charlotte right now.


 Brawl wasn't amazing but it's worth checking out on youtube atleast their trying ideas and progressing stories.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T

Hour 3 held up well. Who says women's wrestling can't draw?


----------



## The Renegade

Funny. I thought that this show was pretty boring. I guess this establishes that one person's opinion means nothing, surprising absolutely no one. haha

In all seriousness though, glad everyone enjoyed the show. I'm probably just upset about the limited Rollins screentime.


----------



## Erik.

Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> Hour 3 held up well. Who says women's wrestling can't draw?


I think it's more the case that title matches draw. 

If it was just a throw away Sasha/Charlotte match there is no way it keeps up. Just like Rollins/Owens last week. It's no surprise that the two times the third hour stays above 3,000,000 viewers it's because there were title matches. It's just that the womens match had more of a chance of a title change.

That's what happens when you have matches that matter. You keep the fans. I'd rather watch The New Day compete with their titles on the line instead of fighting for the sake of it. The past two weeks they have had their titles on the line. It shows what they're willing to do to keep them, act heelish. It's good development of their characters.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Renegade said:


> Funny. I thought that this show was pretty boring. I guess this establishes that one person's opinion means nothing, surprising absolutely no one. haha
> 
> In all seriousness though, glad everyone enjoyed the show. I'm probably just upset about the limited Rollins screentime.


I'd rather a good few minute segment like the backstage brawl they had this week that actually builds towards the match and adds some legitimate heat to the match than a random, meaningless match or promo just to fill time. It was one of the best segments of the show.


----------



## The Renegade

ShowStopper said:


> I'd rather a good few minute segment like the backstage brawl they had this week that actually builds towards the match and adds some legitimate heat to the match than a random, meaningless match or promo just to fill time. It was one of the best segments of the show.


This is true. I am a fan of how they've been utilizing him recently. Way more focused and very rarely is he being put out there in time killing spots. Still getting used to the dramatic decrease in screen time though.


----------



## Ace

Is it true that the women's title match outdrew KO-Rollins from last week?... fpalm


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Is it true that the women's title match outdrew KO-Rollins from last week?... fpalm


The entire hour 3 last night was better than the hour 3 of last week. Good show this week. Except last weeks match was better than this one.


----------



## Strategize

Ace said:


> Is it true that the women's title match outdrew KO-Rollins from last week?... fpalm


2nd highest since football season started. Your nightmare has become a reality friend.


----------



## Ace

Strategize said:


> 2nd highest since football season started. Your nightmare has become a reality friend.


 It says it all about KO, Rollins and Reigns if they more or less have the same star power as Charlotte and Sasha.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

These past few weeks of good ratings are up against Football, too. Ratings are looking up for Raw right now, which is impressive considering the competition on Monday night TV in the Fall AND being a 3 hour show every week. Impressive numbers recently, relative to this era.


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> These past few weeks of good ratings are up against Football, too. Ratings are looking up for Raw right now, which is impressive considering the competition on Monday night TV in the Fall AND being a 3 hour show every week. Impressive numbers recently, relative to this era.


People say the ratings are down but if you compare how many people are watching Raw and Smackdown now as opposed to last year when you compare the ratings, they're actually up.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> People say the ratings are down but if you compare how many people are watching Raw and Smackdown now as opposed to last year when you compare the ratings, they're actually up.


Oh yeah. Raw numbers were bad in 2015, and went even lower in November 2015 for the rest of the year into mid 2016. Past few weeks have picked up, though. Seeing Raw's numbers back in the 3's again is weird. Football is still being played right now too, which makes it even more odd/impressive for Raw.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*BIG LOL @ the people who constantly shit on Sasha and Charlotte when their match maintained over 3 mil while the World Title match couldn't :lol. It's time to let it go.*


----------



## validreasoning

Ace said:


> It says it all about KO, Rollins and Reigns if they more or less have the same star power as Charlotte and Sasha.


Well if you are going to determine starpower based on weekly viewership then Sasha and charlotte have more than brock or goldberg considering this weeks show beat out last weeks and that was with Goldberg coming off a 1 minute win over brock or two weeks ago where brock and goldberg were heavily advertised prior to their meeting

I am not surprised people are interested in Sasha and charlotte (or Bayley when they push her as an underdog face fighting from underneath). They showed why in nxt and fans are yearning for something new and fresh in WWE to be given the main event. No disrespect to reigns, rollins or Ambrose but they have basically been mainevent now for four years, goldberg while cool isn't something new and brocks been doing the same thing for a while and again isn't new anyway

Fans are always drawn to new stuff, that's why styles is doing well (he is new to most who never watched tna) and Ellsworth as he is the underdog that zayn, ziggler et al should have been


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> Oh yeah. Raw numbers were bad in 2015, and went even lower in November 2015 for the rest of the year into mid 2016. Past few weeks have picked up, though. Seeing Raw's numbers back in the 3's again is weird. Football is still being played right now too, which makes it even more odd/impressive for Raw.


Yeah, the product has been relatively good the past few weeks too. Pretty much since Survivor Series really.

This time last year:

Raw - 3.168m
Smackdown - 2.044m


This week:

Raw - 3.111m
Smackdown - 2.576m


That's nearly half a million increase on last year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> Yeah, the product has been relatively good the past few weeks too. Pretty much since Survivor Series really.
> 
> This time last year:
> 
> Raw - 3.168m
> Smackdown - 2.044m
> 
> 
> This week:
> 
> Raw - 3.111m
> Smackdown - 2.576m
> 
> 
> That's nearly half a million increase on last year.


Yep. Literally the first Raw that Rollins missed last year due to injury the 3rd hour went below 3 million for the first time in this era. :lol I'll always love that fact after some people claimed he was the entire problem and that the ratings would magically go up once he was out of the title picture; only for the exact opposite to happen. They went down big time.


----------



## The Renegade

Erik. said:


> Yeah, the product has been relatively good the past few weeks too. Pretty much since Survivor Series really.
> 
> This time last year:
> 
> Raw - 3.168m
> Smackdown - 2.044m
> 
> 
> This week:
> 
> Raw - 3.111m
> Smackdown - 2.576m
> 
> 
> That's nearly half a million increase on last year.


Context is important here too. This time last year we had no Styles, Jericho, Rollins or Cesaro. The show was essentially New Day, Ambrose/Reigns and that foreign stable I already forgot the name of. Last November-December was the pits.


----------



## Erik.

The Renegade said:


> Context is important here too. This time last year we had no Styles, Jericho, Rollins or Cesaro. The show was essentially New Day, Ambrose/Reigns and that foreign stable I already forgot the name of. Last November-December was the pits.


You're not wrong. 

It'll be interesting to see how they do during the Wrestlemania period, especially as it's the first time Smackdown is going to be live during it so we're going to get a lot more build (you'd hope) then we have the previous few years considering Smackdown was only ever a Raw recap show during the build.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Renegade said:


> Context is important here too. This time last year we had no Styles, Jericho, Rollins or Cesaro. The show was essentially New Day, Ambrose/Reigns and that foreign stable I already forgot the name of. Last November-December was the pits.


None of those guys are proven draws anyway, tbh, except maybe Jericho. But even he is no huge draw.


----------



## Godway

validreasoning said:


> Well if you are going to determine starpower based on weekly viewership then Sasha and charlotte have more than brock or goldberg considering this weeks show beat out last weeks and that was with Goldberg coming off a 1 minute win over brock or two weeks ago where brock and goldberg were heavily advertised prior to their meeting
> 
> I am not surprised people are interested in Sasha and charlotte (or Bayley when they push her as an underdog face fighting from underneath). They showed why in nxt and fans are yearning for something new and fresh in WWE to be given the main event. No disrespect to reigns, rollins or Ambrose but they have basically been mainevent now for four years, goldberg while cool isn't something new and brocks been doing the same thing for a while and again isn't new anyway
> 
> Fans are always drawn to new stuff, that's why styles is doing well (he is new to most who never watched tna) and Ellsworth as he is the underdog that zayn, ziggler et al should have been


Or you're just seeing the effect of Goldberg/Brock's finish bringing more eyes back to the product, as it made the WWE the hottest it's been all year. Which is actually what happened here. But lets continue crediting ratings to programs that outlived their usefulness months ago.


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> None of those guys are proven draws anyway, tbh, except maybe Jericho. But even he is no huge draw.


No, but they are a lot more entertaining than what we got last year and entertainment will keep viewers.


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> Yeah, the product has been relatively good the past few weeks too. Pretty much since Survivor Series really.
> 
> This time last year:
> 
> Raw - 3.168m
> Smackdown - 2.044m
> 
> 
> This week:
> 
> Raw - 3.111m
> Smackdown - 2.576m
> 
> 
> That's nearly half a million increase on last year.


 The product is definitely miles better than it was last year. The roster is packed with talented stars, but what it lacks most is megastars. Other than Goldberg, Lesnar, Cena, Orton and Taker (mostly part timers or winding down) there isn't a megastar on either roster. Both shows would be amazing if they had 2 megastars each.


----------



## A-C-P

ShowStopper said:


> None of those guys are proven draws anyway, tbh, except maybe Jericho. But even he is no huge draw.


Not on their own, but I think the point trying to be made here is the shows, both Raw and SD, top to bottom are offering more as a whole than they were a year ago when the roster was so thin Raw (a 3 hour show) was completely centered around 3-4 acts and SD was a Raw recap show...

I mean last year at this time if you were not into Ambrose, Reigns, New Day, or Charlotte (can maybe argue Owens as IC Champ) there was really nothing for you, and even if you were into only a couple of those acts, you were only watching half-time at best.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> No, but they are a lot more entertaining than what we got last year and entertainment will keep viewers.


Yeah, the show these past few weeks has been booked alot better. I completely agree with that.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A-C-P said:


> Not on their own, but I think the point trying to be made here is the shows both Raw and SD top to bottom are offering more as a whole than they were a year ago when the roster was so thin Raw (a 3 hour show) was completely centered around 3-4 acts and SD was a Raw recap show...


True, but these guys were on the shows a month or two ago when the ratings were really bad, stuck in the 2 millions. I think the show is being booked better on the whole, though. It does help when you have some of your best talents back on TV.


----------



## DammitChrist

The Renegade said:


> Context is important here too. This time last year we had no Styles, Jericho, Rollins or Cesaro. The show was essentially New Day, Ambrose/Reigns and that foreign stable I already forgot the name of. Last November-December was the pits.


Oh, you're talking about the League of Nations. Lol I can't blame you for forgetting their name. They were that irrelevant as a stable :lmao

I agree though. That injury epidemic at this time last year definitely didn't help the ratings at all.

Anyways, if ratings are looking good so far now, then I wonder how the ratings will be like during the Road to Wrestlemania assuming nobody gets injured :mark:


----------



## Randy Lahey

Erik. said:


> Yeah, the product has been relatively good the past few weeks too. Pretty much since Survivor Series really.
> 
> This time last year:
> 
> Raw - 3.168m
> Smackdown - 2.044m
> 
> 
> This week:
> 
> Raw - 3.111m
> Smackdown - 2.576m
> 
> 
> That's nearly half a million increase on last year.


Smackdown has more viewers this year because it's not getting demolished by football on Thursday night's anymore. Plus, it's live instead of taped. And USA is a more visible network than ScyFy.

Pointless to even compare those numbers because the parameters are so different.


----------



## A-C-P

ShowStopper said:


> True, but these guys were on the shows a month or two ago when the ratings were really bad, stuck in the 2 millions. I think the show is being booked better on the whole, though. It does help when you have some of your best talents back on TV.


Its a combo of having more talent on the shows and actually booking the talent more competently. I mean look at the tag team divisions on both shows for the prime example, those 2 divisions alone have added something "new" to keep people entertained on both Raw and Smackdown lately.


----------



## Ace

Randy Lahey said:


> Smackdown has more viewers this year because it's not getting demolished by football on Thursday night's anymore. Plus, it's live instead of taped. And USA is a more visible network than ScyFy.
> 
> Pointless to even compare those numbers because the parameters are so different.


 And now it's up against The Voice (10m viewers) and NCIS (14m viewers)...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

You know you're in the dark days when shows like The Voice and NCIS are legitimate competition for a WWE show. Damn. Where did they go wrong?


----------



## Godway

Was the League of Jobbers really a year ago already? Fuck. They're THAT forgettable :lol 

I'm telling you though, this is all the result of Goldberg/Brock whether they're on the show or not. It got a percentage watching again who probably bailed out sometime earlier this year or last year. The finish of that match got a fuckload of attention. Goldberg in general got a lot of attention, unlike the other WWE geeks they throw on ESPN or whatever, he was on there with the actual sports people, not just Coach picking up his WWE paycheck, but he had guys like Stephen A marking out and shit. Goldberg/Brock are legit star power, and like I've said about Brock for the past two years, the reason he's not drawing anymore is because they don't give him any type of interesting foil to work with. Now that they have, it's made the WWE the hottest it's been all year.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> You know you're in the dark days when shows like The Voice and NCIS are legitimate competition for a WWE show. Damn. Where did they go wrong?


 The Voice and NCIS have consistently recorded better numbers than the WWE did in the attitude era... It would have actually been better to keep SD on Thursdays, that way fans aren't fatigued and can pick back up on wrestling a few days later, and TNF has nothing on The Voice and NCIS.


----------



## A-C-P

Godway said:


> *Was the League of Jobbers really a year ago already? Fuck. They're THAT forgettable* :lol
> 
> I'm telling you though, this is all the result of Goldberg/Brock whether they're on the show or not. It got a percentage watching again who probably bailed out sometime earlier this year or last year. The finish of that match got a fuckload of attention. Goldberg in general got a lot of attention, unlike the other WWE geeks they throw on ESPN or whatever, he was on there with the actual sports people, not just Coach picking up his WWE paycheck, but he had guys like Stephen A marking out and shit. Goldberg/Brock are legit star power, and like I've said about Brock for the past two years, the reason he's not drawing anymore is because they don't give him any type of interesting foil to work with. Now that they have, it's made the WWE the hottest it's been all year.


2 of the 4 members don't even work for the company anymore :maury

And I do agree alot of this recent "success" ratings-wise (if you want to call it that) had ALOT to do with Goldberg's return to


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> The Voice and NCIS have consistently recorded better numbers than the WWE did in the attitude era... It would have actually been better to keep SD on Thursdays, that way fans aren't fatigued and can pick back up on wrestling a few days later, and TNF has nothing on The Voice and NCIS.


There just seems to be something very wrong with a WWE TV show not being able to deal with those shows. Sunday night or Monday night Football; I get. But those other shows are so corny. Strange world we live in these days.


----------



## Godway

A-C-P said:


> 2 of the 4 members don't even work for the company anymore :maury
> 
> And I do agree alot of this recent "success" ratings-wise (if you want to call it that) had ALOT to do with Goldberg's return to


And the sad part is, with however many months that run was, within like two months of being in a team with Cesaro, Sheamus is more over than he ever was with them. 

I honestly think WWE learned their lesson from that though. Maybe not a good idea to throw a bunch of midcard/upper card heels in a stable for the sole purpose of getting squashed by Roman Reigns.



ShowStopper said:


> There just seems to be something very wrong with a WWE TV show not being able to deal with those shows. Sunday night or Monday night Football; I get. But those other shows are so corny. Strange world we live in these days.


I didn't know the Voice was still on the air, I thought all of those "talent search" gimmick shows died like a year or two ago. But NCIS has a giant fanbase of like 40-60 or older demos. Old people love that shit.


----------



## validreasoning

Godway said:


> Or you're just seeing the effect of Goldberg/Brock's finish bringing more eyes back to the product, as it made the WWE the hottest it's been all year. Which is actually what happened here. But lets continue crediting ratings to programs that outlived their usefulness months ago.


Brock beating the streak didn't raise viewership 2 weeks later and brock destroying cena for title saw viewership fall but now you think brock losing is the reason people stick around for 3+ hours for a show they ain't even on, its an interesting hypothesis which of course can't be proved one way or another

I didn't credit ratings to anyone btw.


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> You know you're in the dark days when shows like The Voice and NCIS are legitimate competition for a WWE show. Damn. Where did they go wrong?


Don't those shows get more viewers than Raw during the Attitude Era ever did though? They are mightily popular shows.


----------



## A-C-P

Erik. said:


> Don't those shows get more viewers than Raw during the Attitude Era ever did though? They are mightily popular shows.


The Voice is also on Free TV and not Cable


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> Don't those shows get more viewers than Raw during the Attitude Era ever did though? They are mightily popular shows.


As Godway pointed out, NCIS is popular amongst the older crowd. And I also had no idea The Voice was even on anymore. The fact that that show can beat a wrestling show head to head shows just how far behind WWE is these days even despite this little increase in recent weeks. WWE could have so much better ratings if they really wanted them. People STILL DO watch TV, even though some try to tell us they don't. They clearly do when you look at the ratings for those geek shows. Voice is also on NBC, which is not cable, and has access to more viewers.


----------



## Erik.

A-C-P said:


> The Voice is also on Free TV and not Cable


#GetWWEonFreeTV

#MakeWWEGreatAgain


----------



## A-C-P

Erik. said:


> #GetWWEonFreeTV
> 
> #MakeWWEGreatAgain


Problem is WWE/Pro-Wrestling can't sell advertising at high enough prices for Networks to put on Free TV on primetime


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It's positive to see an increase. It does show that some absentee viewers haven't entirely forsaken the product.


----------



## Godway

validreasoning said:


> Brock beating the streak didn't raise viewership 2 weeks later and brock destroying cena for title saw viewership fall but now you think brock losing is the reason people stick around for 3+ hours for a show they ain't even on, its an interesting hypothesis which of course can't be proved one way or another
> 
> I didn't credit ratings to anyone btw.


Unstoppable force vs. Immovable object is still the greatest narrative in wrestling. And Goldberg/Brock is the last true example of that. Who else has created any kind of buzz for this company lately? No one that I can see. To think Charlotte/Sasha or any of this male roster are suddenly drawing ratings when they never have before is ridiculous to me. 

I just think this is having the same effect as when the Rock returned. Whether he's there or not, just the fact that he WAS there puts eyes on the product that weren't previously because they bailed for whatever reason. So maybe they'll watch for a few weeks after. Maybe they'll stay watching. They probably won't. But it puts a certain hotness on the product that wasn't there previously. I don't really think that it can be argued that Goldberg most definitely gave the WWE a shot in the arm with his return, since they have no clear cut star right now.

I'm certainly going to hand credit to Brock/Goldberg before any of these people who have had all year to draw and set record after record for embarrassing ratings. Especially two women having a shit match that they've already had a dozen times being the main event.


----------



## The Renegade

ShowStopper said:


> None of those guys are proven draws anyway, tbh, except maybe Jericho. But even he is no huge draw.


Maybe not, but they're entertaining enough to keep the base from tuning out. 



DammitC said:


> Oh, you're talking about the League of Nations. Lol I can't blame you for forgetting their name. They were that irrelevant as a stable :lmao
> 
> I agree though. That injury epidemic at this time last year definitely didn't help the ratings at all.
> 
> Anyways, if ratings are looking good so far now, then I wonder how the ratings will be like during the Road to Wrestlemania assuming nobody gets injured :mark:


Yea, really interested to see that. The RTWM should be infinitely better this year than it was last. The brand split alone has elevated a handful of competitors up to main event status and that has a huge affect that's most noticeable when the brands do shows together.


----------



## The Power that Be

The Women's Revolution led by your WWE RAW Women's champion Dat Girl Sasha :sasha3

Making WWE RAW ratings great again!


----------



## gothamshady

The Power that Be said:


> The Women's Revolution led by your WWE RAW Women's champion Dat Girl Sasha :sasha3
> 
> Making WWE RAW ratings great again!


I thought it was a very solid main event.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 11/28 had good ratings news as the show built around the Sasha Banks title win over Charlotte did 3,107,000 viewers, actually up from the day after Survivor Series and the second highest of the fall season. And that number was drawn against a Green Bay Packers vs. Philadelphia Eagles game that did 13,062,000 viewers, one of the best numbers of the season.
> 
> This is the first time you can conclusively say the expanded push of women’s wrestling has been a ratings draw.
> 
> The key is that the rating held up better than most weeks in hour three, which was built around the women’s title match, so even though the show opened stronger than usual, it also maintained the audience very well, particularly Males 12-17 and 18-34 which peaked in the third hour, and women dipped only a small amount in the third hour.
> 
> However, the increase was due more to older viewers, which is even more surprising since football skews older. The number was very slightly down with viewers under the age of 35, slightly up in 35-49 but the big increase was in viewers over the age of 50, which in theory would be the ones less interested in something new, but that was also the demo that fell slightly in both the second and third hours.
> 
> The first hour did 3,163,000 viewers, with the second hour doing 3,130,000 viewers and the third hour doing 3,039,000 viewers. The first and second hours were slightly up from last week, but the third hour was up ten percent from last week.
> 
> Raw was fourth for the night on cable, and was overall up four percent from a strong number last week.
> 
> The show did a 0.78 in 12-17 (down 1.3 percent), 0.93 in 18-34 (down 6.1 percent), 1.23 in 35-49 (up 1.7 percent) and 1.23 in 50+ (up 7.9 percent).
> 
> The audience was 63.3 percent male in 18-49 and 67.7 percent male in 12-17, which is no significant change from the prior week.
> 
> The only show that beat this was the 10/17 show which averaged 3,130,000 viewers.


----------



## The RainMaker

So I can say KO as champ = Ratings right?



























Right?


----------



## wwetna1

To be honest it would be in WWE's best interest to be on free tv. Even something like NXT would benefit from a low key spot on Ion, MyTV, or CW. They lost an avenue to fans that UPN and the CW provided for them when they jumped to cable. They had a heavy black and hispanic demographic supporting their UPN and CW shows because it was on broadcast. They really have no outlet to that audience be it broadcast or simple syndication for stuff like Main Event which they used to do with JAkked


@ShowStopper

Also it is beyond silly to ignore NCIS lowest rated season was year one with 13 million viewers. They spent the next 4 years averaging 15mil. Year 6 hit 18 mil on average. Since then they haven't dipped blow 19 and have actually been up to over 20mil the last three years. They have actually gotten progressively stronger ratings with the creation of their spinoffs. And they have not changed nights, channel, or timeslots since inception. The rights to syndication sell for millions on average. 

And you know whats even crazier, NCIS LA the original spinoff of NCIS can average 10 mil viewers on every day they have flipped too plus another 2-3 mil more in dvr views on average per episode. And they have flipped that show from Monday to Thrusday to Wednesday to Sunday to lead into any new show they want to try. The ad rates are also insanely high on the spinoff, higher than on the original because people sell more with LL Cool J and Chris O'Donnel. I remember Forbes saying years ago they were charging between 80-100k per ad during LA in season 2. Netflix can't even buy the rights to air NCIS LA. USA pays an 8 figure sum every year for NCIS and NCIS Los Angeles syndication rights.

Not even talking about NCIS New Orleans which was a top dvd and bluray seller and one of the things they push for CBS All Access. 

They are insanely popular as is HAwaii Five 0 for revenue which they have done crossovers with.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

This is a big blow to those that complained about Sasha/Charlotte, particularly the girls backstage who tweeted their displeasure. Not to mention guys like Rift who were crying about the title being used as a hot potato. Which really is stupid because there's two women's championships in WWE. Three if you count NXT. What's wrong with one title having multiple title reigns while the others have longer ones? Isn't that a good balance to have?


----------



## Godway

Big blow :lol Why do you even post? 

Charlotte/Sasha have been feuding practically all year, while not drawing shit with it. It just so happens, after Goldberg makes the product hotter than it's been all year, Charlotte/Sasha main event doesn't draw as terribly as past main events. Note that it didn't draw GOOD, or like do any kind of ground breaking number or anything. It's cause for celebration when the scenario is "Charlotte/Sasha cause a 800k gain" for their match or something. 

So to all retards trying to troll with this info, remember that when you start blindly crediting people with ratings successes, despite clearly not understanding the context, you'll have to be sitting here when those same people are seeing the ratings go down on them.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Godway said:


> Big blow :lol *Why do you even post? *
> 
> Charlotte/Sasha have been feuding practically all year, while not drawing shit with it. It just so happens, after Goldberg makes the product hotter than it's been all year, Charlotte/Sasha main event doesn't draw as terribly as past main events. Note that it didn't draw GOOD, or like do any kind of ground breaking number or anything. It's cause for celebration when the scenario is "Charlotte/Sasha cause a 800k gain" for their match or something.
> 
> So to all retards trying to troll with this info, remember that when you start blindly crediting people with ratings successes, despite clearly not understanding the context, you'll have to be sitting here when those same people are seeing the ratings go down on them.


Why do you even care? Do you think I post here for people like you and the usual Reigns/Sasha hating suspects? No. I post here to engage with reasonable posters who aren't so angry and butt hurt all the time. Fans like you take wrestling too seriously. And that's why you're always unhinged. Sure I'll bring up certain guys I don't like that, but I'll do it in a thread started about that person or in reaction to a post where I feel someone is related to that thread topic.


----------



## Godway

The Boy Wonder said:


> Why do you even care? Do you think I post here for people like you and the usual Reigns/Sasha hating suspects? No. I post here to engage with reasonable posters who aren't so angry and butt hurt all the time. Fans like you take wrestling too seriously. And that's why you're always unhinged and angry.


Yes. Poking through your dopey trolling attempts with logic = butthurt. Keep fishing son. Maybe go shoot a fresh Roman Reigns tshirt stand clip for fresh material.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Godway said:


> Yes. Poking through your dopey trolling attempts with logic = butthurt. Keep fishing son. * Maybe go shoot a fresh Roman Reigns tshirt stand clip for fresh material*.


You're still on that? LOL.

But you have no right to try and question why anyone posts here. And people like you try to shut people out for having an opposing view. Do people that are on the other side of the IWC ever do that? I don't think so. We disagree, but we don't try to question why people post here. I work all day and just want to relax by posting here — who the hell are you to question me on why I post here?


----------



## squarebox

Godway said:


> Yes. Poking through your dopey trolling attempts with logic = butthurt. Keep fishing son. Maybe go shoot a fresh Roman Reigns tshirt stand clip for fresh material.


He's all about attacking the 'smarks' as they're called, but his arguments most of the time don't make any sense. Like in another thread, calling out 'smarks' for doing the Fandango thing a couple of years ago yet I bet my left nut those SAME group of people are the people still dancing and gyrating every time New Day come out...which he's fully supportive of. That is extremely hypocritical.


----------



## Godway

The Boy Wonder said:


> You're still on that? LOL.
> 
> But you have no right to try and question why anyone posts here. And people like you try to shut people out for having an opposing view. Do people that are on the other side of the IWC ever do that? I don't think so. We disagree, but we don't try to question why people post here. I work all day and just want to relax by posting here — who the hell are you to question me on why I post here?


Or you rarely ever enter a thread without an agenda of trying to troll or bait in the most dopey ways possible. I said "Why do you even post" as a simple expression of how terrible your posts are, really. But you're taking that very literal. Stop being a trash poster if you don't like getting called on it. I don't try shutting you out for having an opposing view. I try pointing out your obvious baiting bullshit. If you don't like it then you should pick a different target.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

squarebox said:


> He's all about attacking the 'smarks' as they're called, but his arguments most of the time don't make any sense. Like in another thread, calling out 'smarks' for doing the Fandango thing a couple of years ago yet I bet my left nut those *SAME group of people are the people still dancing and gyrating every time New Day come out...which he's fully supportive of. That is extremely hypocritical.*


There's a difference don't you think? The same people that are cheering New Day now are probably the same people that were getting a kick out of the "NEW... DAY-SUCKS" chants at WM 31. 

I believe Triple H somewhat blamed the fans for Fandango's fall from grace. He was right. The fans took a character with potential and turned it into a comedic act simply because they wanted to work themselves into the show. With the New Day it's different: they don't need the fans to work themselves into the show — they're entertaining on their own. They didn't ask to become faces. They were entertaining and the fans caught on. With Fandango they took a character that was going somewhere after WM 29 and drove it into the ground.

See the difference?



Godway said:


> Or you rarely ever enter a thread without an agenda of trying to troll or bait in the most dopey ways possible. I said "Why do you even post" as a simple expression of how terrible your posts are, really. But you're taking that very literal. Stop being a trash poster if you don't like getting called on it. I don't try shutting you out for having an opposing view. I try pointing out your obvious baiting bullshit. If you don't like it then you should pick a different target.


No. I'm just reacting to what you guys do 24/7. The countless number of Reigns threads, which now have transferred to anti-Sasha threads.


----------



## wwe9391

Godway said:


> Or you rarely ever enter a thread without an agenda of trying to troll or bait in the most dopey ways possible. I said "Why do you even post" as a simple expression of how terrible your posts are, really. But you're taking that very literal. Stop being a trash poster if you don't like getting called on it. I don't try shutting you out for having an opposing view. I try pointing out your obvious baiting bullshit. If you don't like it then you should pick a different target.


:lmao the hypocrisy in this post is too big for this site to handle


----------



## The Boy Wonder

wwe9391 said:


> :lmao the hypocrisy in this post is too big for this site to handle


The problem is that we are incapable of handling other people's opinions here. It's as if once we see a certain member has posted we immediately get negative about their post and don't even give it a chance. I have my disagreements with people here, but I'll agree with them from time to time by hitting "LIKE" or supporting their opinion. We are so divided as wrestling fans. I hate to compare us to the political landscape but it's really no different when you think about it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Godway said:


> Or you rarely ever enter a thread without an agenda of trying to troll or bait in the most dopey ways possible. I said "Why do you even post" as a simple expression of how terrible your posts are, really. But you're taking that very literal. Stop being a trash poster if you don't like getting called on it. I don't try shutting you out for having an opposing view. I try pointing out your obvious baiting bullshit. If you don't like it then you should pick a different target.


+1


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Godway said:


> Or you rarely ever enter a thread without an agenda of trying to troll or bait in the most dopey ways possible. I said "Why do you even post" as a simple expression of how terrible your posts are, really. But you're taking that very literal. Stop being a trash poster if you don't like getting called on it. I don't try shutting you out for having an opposing view. I try pointing out your obvious baiting bullshit. If you don't like it then you should pick a different target.





ShowStopper said:


> +1


How is it "baiting bullshit?" My common talking points here:

• Reigns is over with the kids and ladies despite people like you saying he's NOT over with anyone
• Pointing how what a douchebag Daniel Bryan is which is evident on Talking Smack
• I caught so much grief for saying the Bryan/Miz shoot was real — which has been proven true. There's a story out yesterday stating how Bryan breaks kayfabe by himself and how people brag, "Bryan gives no fucks." If he gives no fucks then his shoot with Miz was real. And he got destroyed.
• Calling out hypocrisy such as in this ratings thread: People doubting the Hour 3 numbers of Bryan's retirement speech yet are always so sure that certain guys are to blame for Hour 3 numbers — basically using the "overrun" as excuse for Bryan but not taking overruns into account for main events in Hour 3.

Do you guys consider this "baiting?" If so I'm sorry you feel that way. For instance when I posted the video of Reigns merchandise sales people jumped down my throat. I made the post in a way to show that he does sell merchandise. I had video proof, yet people got pissed off. How was that a "baiting thread?" I make a claim, have video proof, and it's a "bait" thread? If you want to prove he doesn't — buy a ticket, go to a stand and ask how many Reigns shirts are left.

What about KO's flub? Imagine if Reigns did that? You guys would have been all over him. A thread would have been made with 15 pages of comments. The thread on KO's flub has very little comments from the people who are usually so critical of Reigns.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> How is it "baiting bullshit?" My common talking points here:
> 
> • Reigns is over with the kids and ladies despite people like you saying he's NOT over with anyone
> • Pointing how what a douchebag Daniel Bryan is which is evident on Talking Smack
> • I caught so much grief for saying the Bryan/Miz shoot was real — which has been proven true. There's a story out yesterday stating how Bryan breaks kayfabe by himself and how people brag, "Bryan gives no fucks." If he gives no fucks then his shoot with Miz was real. And he got destroyed.
> • Calling out hypocrisy such as in this ratings thread: People doubting the Hour 3 numbers of Bryan's retirement speech yet are always so sure that certain guys are to blame for Hour 3 numbers — basically using the "overrun" as excuse for Bryan but not taking overruns into account for main events in Hour 3.
> 
> Do you guys consider this "baiting?" If so I'm sorry you feel that way. For instance when I posted the video of Reigns merchandise sales people jumped down my throat. I made the post in a way to show that he does sell merchandise. I had video proof, yet people got pissed off. How was that a "baiting thread?" I make a claim, have video proof, and it's a "bait" thread? If you want to prove he doesn't — buy a ticket, go to a stand and ask how many Reigns shirts are left.
> 
> What about KO's flub? Imagine if Reigns did that? You guys would have been all over him. A thread would have been made with 15 pages of comments. The thread on KO's flub has very little comments from the people who are usually so critical of Reigns.


So, go make a thread about KO's flub. :lol Who's going to take that personally? :lol

I'm not getting into anything else. Not worth it. Enjoy your day.


----------



## TaterTots

The Boy Wonder said:


> Reigns is over with the kids and ladies despite people like you saying he's NOT over with anyone


Maybe he should try doing some more MakeAWish for the males to try and win them over.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Also, the least amount of kids and women are watching right now in a very long time. So, being over with them isn't the same as what it once meant. 

The average Raw viewer is 41 years old and the average SD viewer is 46. So, what does "being over with the women and children" really mean? Not as much as it once did.


----------



## Bret Hart

Lol please, fandango was going nowhere with that shitty gimmick


----------



## Darren Criss

This is the first time that the first, second and third hour had 3m+ this year?


----------



## The RainMaker

Darren Criss said:


> This is the first time that the first, second and third hour had 3m+ this year?


Goldbergs first show back held 3 plus all 3 hours.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.153M
H2-2.981M
H3-2.796M
3H-2.977M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.46% / - 0.172M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.21% / - 0.185M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.32% / - 0.357M )
12/5/16 Vs 11/28/16 ( - 4.31% / - 0.134M )

Demo (12/5/16 Vs 11/28/16):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.960D Vs 1.090D
H3- 0.920D Vs 1.080D
3H- 0.973D Vs 1.083D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/5/16 Vs 12/7/15):
H1- 3.153M Vs 3.270M
H2- 2.981M Vs 3.042M
H3- 2.796M Vs 2.850M
3H- 2.977M Vs 3.054M ( - 2.52% / - 0.077M )

Demo (12/5/16 Vs 12/7/15):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.090D
H2- 0.960D Vs 1.000D
H3- 0.920D Vs 1.020D
3H- 0.973D Vs 1.037D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 7th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## wwe9391

Not bad. Went down a little bit, but not much.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Numbers seemed to hold steady for the most part, though still went down despite a US Title match (was this in the second or third hour) and Ric Flair's first advertised appearance in months.

Next week goes against Giants/Cowboys so will be interesting to see if it still holds up to that.


----------



## Chrome

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Numbers seemed to hold steady for the most part, though still went down despite a US Title match (was this in the second or third hour) and Ric Flair's first advertised appearance in months.
> 
> Next week goes against Giants/Cowboys so will be interesting to see if it still holds up to that.


Nah, Patriots/Ravens is the MNF game. Still not gonna be easy for them though.


----------



## A-C-P

Shows how the bar has been lowered when a Raw that averaged under 3 million viewers for the 2 hours is having things said about it like "Not To Bad" "Hey they did ok" :heston

Not saying I really disagree with these #s not being "to bad" but just goes to show you where things have fallen for the WWE.


----------



## Chrome

A-C-P said:


> Shows how the bar has been lowered when a Raw that averaged under 3 million viewers for the 2 hours is having things said about it like "Not To Bad" "Hey they did ok" :heston
> 
> Not saying I really disagree with these #s not being "to bad" but just goes to show you where things have fallen for the WWE.


Yeah, show these numbers to people a couple of years ago and they're hitting the....










In a few years, anything above a 2 is going to be considered "great."


----------



## Sensei Utero

For dummies like myself, what is the usual RAW rating today? Like is it a 2.1 etc.? Sorry, don't know how the numbers translate.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Chrome said:


> Nah, Patriots/Ravens is the MNF game. Still not gonna be easy for them though.


Did that change recently? Could've sworn it was Giants/Cowboys... or are Giants on Monday the week after?


----------



## Chrome

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Did that change recently? Could've sworn it was Giants/Cowboys... or are Giants on Monday the week after?


Nah, they don't change MNF games unfortunately. Following week is Redskins/Panthers.


----------



## Arya Dark

*Giants/Cowboys is the Sunday Night game.*


----------



## Mordecay

Where are those people saying that Sasha and Charlotte are a huge draw and they will lead it to another boom period? Ratings were good last week because last week show was decent, this wasn't


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I am curious to see how much of a bump RAW gets post NFL. There's little to be excited about, looking these current numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hovering around 3 million. This is pretty much the norm during the in-between weeks (meaning, not a go-home show, and not the Raw after a PPV), during the NFL season.


----------



## Strategize

Mordecay said:


> Where are those people saying that Sasha and Charlotte are a huge draw and they will lead it to another boom period? Ratings were good last week because last week show was decent, this wasn't


Lol who the fuck was saying that? At most all I saw was people impressed the girls held the ratings for their big match.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Mordecay said:


> Where are those people saying that Sasha and Charlotte are a huge draw and they will lead it to another boom period? Ratings were good last week because last week show was decent, this wasn't


*
No one said that. We simply pointed out that their title match outdrew Owens and Rollins' match, which is true. Losing 200,000 isn't bad when the "main event" was only advertised as an apology segment. No one expected Sasha to get her ass beaten like that.*


----------



## Mordecay

Strategize said:


> Lol who the fuck was saying that? At most all I saw was people impressed the girls held the ratings for their big match.





Legit BOSS said:


> *
> No one said that. We simply pointed out that their title match outdrew Owens and Rollins' match, which is true. Losing 200,000 isn't bad when the "main event" was only advertised as an apology segment. No one expected Sasha to get her ass beaten like that.*


Not talking about you guys, but I've seen people praising them way too much, like if they are the 2nd coming of Rock and Austin for last week's rating, not just here, but on Twitter and other forums. I give them credit for keeping the ratings last week, but there is a big difference between that and calling them a huge draw


----------



## Randy Lahey

Goldberg bumped ratings for a bit, but once the people know he's gone and the buzz lessens, the audience drops. It was also against probably the worst MNF game of the season.

Next week, they go against the Patriots on MNF and will get slammed. I will predict next week's show does a record low.



Chasing Yesterday said:


> For dummies like myself, what is the usual RAW rating today? Like is it a 2.1 etc.? Sorry, don't know how the numbers translate.


You can go here and look at every rating going back to 1999.



http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 12/5 did a 2.07 rating and 2,965,000 viewers (1.55 viewers per home), a drop of six percent in ratings and five percent in viewers from the prior week.
> 
> It was still the fourth best number of the fall season, behind the two non-Halloween shows that Bill Goldberg appeared on and last week’s show with the Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks title match.
> 
> The show actually opened at similar levels to the prior week, but didn’t keep the audience nearly as well. They did have Roman Reigns vs. Chris Jericho at the top of the third hour, but the show was built to Charlotte confronting Ric Flair.
> 
> Raw had far easier competition this week, as the NFL game with the Indianapolis Colts vs. New York Jets was a blow-out, and only did 8,091,000 viewers, down from 13,062,000 the week before. The cable news ratings were also down. Raw placed third on cable for the night, trailing only football and The O’Reilly Factor (3,755,000 viewers).
> 
> The three hours were 3,153,000 for the first hour, 2,981,000 viewers for the second hour and 2,796,000 viewers for the third hour. In the 18-49 demo, women dropped 16 percent from hour one to three and men dropped eight percent from hour one to two and stayed even in hour three. Teenage girls dropped 30 percent from hour one to three but teenage boys were up nine percent in the same time frame.
> 
> The show did a 0.73 in 12-17 (down 6.4 percent), 0.81 in 18-34 (down 14.8 percent), 1.13 in 35-49 (down 8.1 percent) and 1.15 in 50+ (down 6.5 percent).


----------



## TaterTots

Legit BOSS said:


> *No one said that. We simply pointed out that their title match outdrew Owens and Rollins' match, which is true. Losing 200,000 isn't bad when the "main event" was only advertised as an apology segment. No one expected Sasha to get her ass beaten like that.*


Oh the Shield guys are not a draw, no surprise there. That Sasha and Charlotte title match also outdrew the two back to back main event matches between Roman and Owens on RAW before Clash of Champions (one of which was a cell match). Same for all those main event matches by Dean Ambrose on SmackDown Live.


----------



## Erik.

Strowman left off Raw and the ratings drop considerably. Not surprised.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.929M
H2-2.713M
H3-2.632M
3H-2.758M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 7.37% / - 0.216M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 2.99% / - 0.081M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.15% / - 0.297M )
12/12/16 Vs 12/5/16 ( - 7.36% / - 0.219M )

Demo (12/12/16 Vs 12/5/16):
H1- 0.950D Vs 1.040D
H2- 0.890D Vs 0.960D
H3- 0.920D Vs 0.920D
3H- 0.920D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW is 5th, 8th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 8th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/12/16 Vs 12/14/15):
H1- 2.929M Vs 4.043M
H2- 2.713M Vs 3.786M
H3- 2.632M Vs 3.825M
3H- 2.758M Vs 3.885M ( - 29.01% / - 1.127M )

Demo (12/12/16 Vs 12/14/15):
H1- 0.950D Vs 1.320D
H2- 0.890D Vs 1.290D
H3- 0.920D Vs 1.400D
3H- 0.920D Vs 1.337D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 6th & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## A-C-P

The :goldberg effect officially completely worn off


----------



## Dolorian

That was a nice hold for the third hour considering the drop on the second hour.


----------



## wwe9391

Not bad. Pretty much the same as last week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Men like Goldberg draw. Women draw too sometimes.

Boys like Reigns, Rollins, The New Day and the rest of the roster don't.


----------



## Ace

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Men like Goldberg draw. Women draw too sometimes.
> 
> Boys like Reigns, Rollins, The New Day and the rest of the roster don't.


 Safe to say it was the Goldberg effect. Wasn't Heyman interviewed after Lesnar's loss to Goldberg (Promo the year IMO) the same week Charlotte-Sasha main evented as well?


----------



## Randy Lahey

Another rating under 2.0. What was going on last year to pop that number? 29% decrease between last year and this year.

You know what's funny is that WWE's new tv deal with USA started in 2015, which coincides with Raw's ratings decline:

2012 - 3.0
2013 - 3.01
2014 - 2.95
2015 - 2.64
2016 - 2.25~ year's not over yet

2015 and 2016 were a disaster for Raw. We'll see if 2017 continues to decline or bottoms out.


----------



## Mr. Socko

:goldberg


GOLDBERG vs Strowman is the match to make for Mania :cudi


----------



## A-C-P

Randy Lahey said:


> Another rating under 2.0. What was going on last year to pop that number? 29% decrease between last year and this year.


Last year about this time is when Vince showed up for those couple weeks to put Reigns over himself...


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The demo is getting horrid. Sub 1.0 is becoming the norm. Time for a certain HOF'er to make RAW's ratings great again. :trump2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not a good number. Tom Brady Monday Night Football game probably didn't help, though.


----------



## Chrome

Crappy rating. Hard to believe just a year ago they had an hour that had over 4 millions. Now they're lucky to have anything that goes over 3 lol. They should rebound a bit next week though since the Skins/Panthers matchup isn't very appealing.


----------



## Bushmaster

ShowStopper said:


> Not a good number. Tom Brady Monday Night Football game probably didn't help, though.


:brady5 Tom draws whenever he's on.


----------



## Erik.

Highest rated hour was the first hour? - Strowman was in the first hour, makes sense.


----------



## A-C-P

Highest rated hour is always the first hour :goldberg :lol


----------



## Erik.

A-C-P said:


> Highest rated hour is always the first hour :goldberg :lol


That's why they put Strowman there. :goldberg


----------



## Chrome

This thread was poppin' a year ago, kinda quiet now. What happened?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> This thread was poppin' a year ago, kinda quiet now. What happened?


Brand split killed it. Not as much fun anymore, and it hasn't exactly been a ratings war between the two shows since the brand split, either.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw was down seven percent overall on 12/12, doing 2,753,000 viewers. It would be the sixth lowest audience for the show on a non-holiday night dating back to 1997, and the lowest since Halloween and the show going against the Trump-Clinton debate.
> 
> The big drop was in the second hour, which until daylight savings time, had usually been the most-watched hour of the show. Some of the difference was the New England Patriots vs. Baltimore Ravens NFL game did a 9.1 rating and 12,921,000 viewers, among the best numbers of the year, and way up from the very low 8,091,000 last week. But two weeks ago, the show that went against the Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks show, did 13,062,000 viewers and that did the highest rating and second highest audience of the fall.
> 
> The quest for the tag team title record was of interest to Males 18-49, as they grew during the show, but with women 18-49, they fell nine percent between hour one and three, and teenage girls fell 15 percent, while teenage boys grew 10 percent during the same period. But the largest audience, which is the over 50 audience, wasn’t interested and fell 13 percent from hour one to three.
> 
> Overall, the first hour did 2,929,000 viewers, the second hour did 2,713,000 viewers and the third hour did 2,632,000 viewers.
> 
> In the demos, the show did a 0.69 in 12-17 (down 5.5 percent), 0.81 in 18-34 (the same as last week), 1.03 in 35-49 (down 8.8 percent) and 1.12 in 50+ (down 2.6 percent).
> 
> The audience was 62.2 percent male in 18-49 and 66.9 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## The Figure 4

*"Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*



> Tribute to the Troops last night did 1,394,000 viewers. That's down from 1,802,000 last year and makes it the least watched prime time pro wrestling show ever on the USA Network.


http://www.f4wonline.com/daily-upda...-injured-wxw-floslam-northcutt-vs-gall-226526


----------



## wwetna1

*Re: "Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*

It didn't feel the same either. I'm not sure how to express it but in years past the troops were humanized by showing their life at base and it being held in a bunker

Also got killed by the Empire winter finale and debut of Star


----------



## American_Nightmare

*Re: "Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*

This is why people like Brock Lesnar, The Rock, Goldberg, etc. need to be there.


----------



## Cipher

*Re: "Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*

I quit watching these when they stopped going to actual military bases.


----------



## American_Nightmare

*Re: "Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*



Cipher said:


> I quit watching these when they stopped going to actual military bases.


They're supposedly going to Pearl Harbor next year.


----------



## TaterTots

*Re: "Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*

But Roman Reigns, the U.S. Champion, was on the main event and also opened the show, what happened?


----------



## HereNThere

*Re: "Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*

I only watched it the first year they did it. Since it was over there. Now its in some every day venue .


----------



## Chrome

All their show's ratings are "down significantly" from last year, so this really isn't that surprising.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Dave Meltzer at http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/raw-ratings-post-roadblock-episode-226871



> Getting a post-PPV bump, Raw did 2.95 million viewers last night, a solid seven percent increase from last week.
> 
> While the show started higher, with 3.06 million in hour one as compared to 2.93 million last week, the key was retaining the viewers through the three hours.
> 
> What was notable about last night's show was the different way fans viewed it. Male fans grew, particularly those between the ages of 12 to 34, where there was an amazing 19 percent growth from hour one to three. However, this growth was reversed among women, who tuned out, losing 19 percent of the viewers between the first and third hour between those same ages.
> 
> Because the audience is heavily male skewed, even though overall viewership did decline as the show went on, the overall decline was less than last week. Essentially the tag team match with Seth Rollins & Roman Reigns vs. Chris Jericho & Kevin Owens was a positive with men between the ages of 12 to 34 and a negative with women in the same age range.
> 
> The Charlotte vs. Bayley match in hour three probably wasn't a big difference maker because it wasn't announced ahead of time, so if women had tuned out earlier it wasn't because of that match as they didn't know it was going to happen.
> 
> Last night's football game between the Carolina Panthers and Washington Redskins did 11.21 million viewers, which is at normal levels so it wouldn't have been a big factor. Raw ended up in 8th place for the night on cable.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.06 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 2.97 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.83 million viewers
> 
> Here's a chart from Paul Fontaine that looks at the last 10 weeks of Raw ratings compared to previous years:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here's another that examines the past 20 weeks of hourly ratings and compares year-over-year declines in viewership:


----------



## The RainMaker

Goes to show that Jeri KO still draws. They reunite, have the first segment, BOOM over 3 mil.


----------



## Erik.

I see the show gained 200,000 more viewers than last week? Strowman was highlighted alot on Monday...

Not surprised.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.062M
H2-2.971M
H3-2.834M
3H-2.956M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.97% / - 0.091M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.61% / - 0.137M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.45% / - 0.228M )
12/19/16 Vs 12/12/16 ( + 7.18% / + 0.198M )
*
*Demo (12/19/16 Vs 12/12/16):
H1- 1.040D Vs 0.950D
H2- 1.050D Vs 0.890D
H3- 1.040D Vs 0.920D
3H- 1.043D Vs 0.920D*

*Note: RAW is 6th, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/19/16 Vs 12/21/15):
H1- 3.062M Vs 3.443M
H2- 2.971M Vs 3.374M
H3- 2.834M Vs 3.316M
3H- 2.956M Vs 3.377M ( - 12.47% / - 0.421M )

Demo (12/19/16 Vs 12/21/15):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.160D
H2- 1.050D Vs 1.100D
H3- 1.040D Vs 1.150D
3H- 1.043D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership*.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.974M
H2-2.878M
H3-2.715M
3H-2.856M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.23% / - 0.096M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.66% / - 0.163M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.71% / - 0.259M )
12/26/16 Vs 12/19/16 ( - 3.38% / - 0.100M )*

*Demo (12/26/16 Vs 12/19/16):
H1- 1.060D Vs 1.040D
H2- 1.020D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.040D
3H- 1.010D Vs 1.043D*

*Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/26/16 Vs 12/28/15):
H1- 2.974M Vs 3.695M
H2- 2.878M Vs 3.488M
H3- 2.715M Vs 3.425M
3H- 2.856M Vs 3.536M ( - 19.23% / - 0.680M )*

*Demo (12/26/16 Vs 12/28/15):
H1- 1.060D Vs 1.230D
H2- 1.020D Vs 1.210D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.180D
3H- 1.010D Vs 1.207D*

*Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## wwe9391

Higher then I thought it be


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Losing 10% of the audience between hours 1 and 3. It's not the worst by any means, but not good either.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Higher then I thought it be


- wwe9391 after his first IQ test.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> - WF after their IQ test.


Fixed that for you


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Decent for the new normal, but nothing to get overly enthusiastic about. I am anxious to see what ratings January ushers in.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 12/26 did 2,848,000 viewers, down three percent from the prior week. The number is actually more impressive as the final Monday Night NFL game of the season, with the Dallas Cowboys vs. Detroit Lions, did 18,605,000 viewers, the best number of the season. Raw did benefit by most of television being in reruns and far less cable competition.
> 
> Raw was fifth for the fight on cable, trailing only football-related programming.
> 
> The Jan. 2 Raw will go head-to-head with the Sugar Bowl, with Oklahoma vs. Auburn. That should have some impact, but not at the level of a strong NFL game. The 1/9 Raw goes against the college football championship game, which will outdraw any NFL Monday game. Raw’s numbers in theory should increase more than ten percent starting on 1/16.
> 
> The three hours were 2,974,000 viewers for the first hour; 2,878,000 viewers for the second hour and 2,715,000 viewers for the third hour.
> 
> Once again, it was women who lost interest as the show went on. Women 18-49 dropped 17.4 percent from hour one to three, while men only dropped 4.2 percent. But it was the increase in women that hid the decline in men.
> 
> The show did a 0.76 in 12-17 (up 11.8 percent from last week), 0.88 in 18-34 (up 10.0 percent), 1.14 in 35-49 (down 10.9 percent) and 1.12 in 50+ (down 1.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 58.6 percent men in 18-49 and 62.6 percent men in 12-17. In the 18-49 demo, compared to last week, men were down 9.2 percent and women were up 7.8 percent.


----------



## Cipher




----------



## ecclesiastes10

*Re: "Tribute to the Troops" rating down significantly from last year*



TaterTots said:


> But Roman Reigns, the U.S. Champion, was on the main event and also opened the show, what happened?


get over it man


----------



## Erik.

Do you think the WWE feels that opening the show with a droning promo works? I mean the first hour is ALWAYS the highest and usually always will be and it's always filled with an opening promo.

I personally think it's the start of turning the channel over for something else which is why the rest of show goes downhill in terms of ratings. I love how Smackdown usually just starts with a match to get the crowd straight into the show. This past week on Smackdown was obviously John Cena opening but he KNOWS how to work the crowd, has the intensity and charisma to pull off a show opener and I heard Smackdown outdrew Raw in the same building this past week too.


----------



## Not Lying

Cipher said:


>


I swear I don't know how people can look at this graph and say that WM had any positive impact, the biggest fuck you of all times to many hardcore fans surely drove many people away.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Fixed that for you


You ARE Wrestlingforum.
But thanks for driving my point home.


----------



## Erik.

Smackdown beat Raw in the ratings this week!

:cena


----------



## D.M.N.

With quarter four (October to December) now complete, here are how things are looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q4 2016):

- the previous quarter (Q3 2016)
- one year earlier (Q4 2015)
- two years earlier (Q4 2014)

Here are the quarter four percentage figures for recent years:

-3.5% = 2013
-4.2% = 2014
-4.2% = 2011
-12.3% = 2015
*-13.7% = 2016*
-16.0% = 2012

From a year perspective:

Q4 2009 = 4.90 million
Q4 2010 = 4.69 million (down 4.2%)
Q4 2011 = 4.47 million (down 4.6%)
Q4 2012 = 3.81 million (down 14.7%)
Q4 2013 = 3.93 million (up 3.1%)
Q4 2014 = 3.78 million (down 3.8%)
Q4 2015 = 3.31 million (down 12.5%)
Q4 2016 = 2.88 million (down 13.1%)

Across 2016, WWE Raw averaged *3.20 million viewers*.


----------



## Starbuck

The Definition of Technician said:


> I swear I don't know how people can look at this graph and say that WM had any positive impact, the biggest fuck you of all times to many hardcore fans surely drove many people away.


This. They rendered the entire point of the show, everybody on it and everything that happens, irrelevant in Dallas. Why bother watching when there is no substance behind anything they do?


----------



## wwe9391

The Definition of Technician said:


> I swear I don't know how people can look at this graph and say that WM had any positive impact, the biggest fuck you of all times to many hardcore fans surely drove many people away.


because the quarterly financial results says otherwise.


----------



## The RainMaker

*Anyone Else A Little Surprised They Actually Mentioned..*

RAW losing the ratings war to SD? I don't know. Didn't expect it.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Anyone Else A Little Surprised They Actually Mentioned..*

Nothing boosts ratings than another KO-Rollins or Jericho-Reigns match.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Anyone Else A Little Surprised They Actually Mentioned..*

Not really. They need to outwardly make it seem like the brands are actually competitive, so when they get their first and only win in history, they might as well take it. Not to mention they probably credit it to Cena and they do everything for him.


----------



## ka4life1

*Re: Anyone Else A Little Surprised They Actually Mentioned..*

I shall be more shocked if they start winning on a consistent basis.

As much as i prefer SD,
I think in general Raw is the more well known brand.

I even catch myself sometimes saying Raw and Smackdown not Smackdown and Raw its just a natural way of referring to the shows and although it may seem minor, 
to me it does emphasise a lot about the perception of the two brands.

I just hope Smackdown keeps improving and outperforming Raw so that the powers that be really do see what a sorry state of affairs Raw is currently in.


----------



## 3ku1

*Re: Anyone Else A Little Surprised They Actually Mentioned..*

You mean KO Rollins is not bringing in the ratings? SD fluctates. Better estimation if they are consistent. SD has Orton, Bray, Styles, Cena when he comes backish. The womans division is far better. Alexa/Becky > Charlotte/Sasha. So you know.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They've beaten SD all but one week...even with all of the rematches. Even with going up against some big football games.

But I have no problem with SD winning from here on out, as unlikely as it is.


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> They've beaten SD all but one week...even with all of the rematches. Even with going up against some big football games.
> 
> But I have no problem with SD winning from here on out, as unlikely as it is.


Smackdown have beat them twice. Considering they hadn't even beaten them once in the previous 11 years. I'd say it was quite the achievement.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> Smackdown have beat them twice. Considering they hadn't even beaten them once in the previous 11 years. I'd say it was quite the achievement.


Pretty sure it was just last week. Considering the 3 hour vs 2 hour thing, NFL, and the insurmountable amount of rematches on Raw recently, I don't know. But I hope they go on to beat them multiple times as unlikely as it is.


----------



## Erik.

ShowStopper said:


> Pretty sure it was just last week. Considering the 3 hour vs 2 hour thing, NFL, and the insurmountable amount of rematches on Raw recently, I don't know. But I hope they go on to beat them multiple times as unlikely as it is.


They beat them literally the first week of the rating wars. So it was back in July but still, twice in 5 months is an achievement considering they were getting under 2,000,000 viewers for years.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> They beat them literally the first week of the rating wars. So it was back in July but still, twice in 5 months is an achievement considering they were getting under 2,000,000 viewers for years.


I have to go back and check. Everyone is saying last week was the first time.


----------



## Ace

It's the second time if you count the draft.


----------



## wwe9391

I would love it if they trade wins back and forth so there no stupid ratings war they can bring up on TV


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.042M
H2-3.159M
H3-2.939M
3H-3.047M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.85% / + 0.117M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.96% / - 0.120M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.89% / - 0.103M )
1/2/17 Vs 12/26/16 ( + 6.69% / + 0.191M )

Demo (1/2/17 Vs 12/26/16):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.060D
H2- 1.110D Vs 1.020D
H3- 1.080D Vs 0.950D
3H- 1.090D Vs 1.010D

Note: RAW is 10th, 8th & 11th by hourly demo & 9th, 8th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/2/17 Vs 1/4/16):
H1- 3.042M Vs 3.707M
H2- 3.159M Vs 3.516M
H3- 2.939M Vs 3.503M
3H- 3.047M Vs 3.575M ( - 14.77% / - 0.528M )

Demo (1/2/17 Vs 1/4/16):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.210D
H2- 1.110D Vs 1.190D
H3- 1.080D Vs 1.260D
3H- 1.090D Vs 1.220D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## A-C-P

:goldberg effect still hanging on a bit

:goldberg2


----------



## Dolorian

A-C-P said:


> :goldberg effect still hanging on a bit


Well the viewers the show gained for the second hour didn't stick for Goldberg so it doesn't seems the effect is doing much.


----------



## Erik.

HOUR 2 WAS THE HIGHEST!?

A quarter of that was Strowman/Zayn LMS. Not surprised :mark: :mark:


----------



## A-C-P

Dolorian said:


> Well the viewers the show gained for the second hour didn't stick for Goldberg so it doesn't seems the effect is doing much.


Well then you are arguing Jericho, Stroman, and Zayn and the draws....

:thelist a bigger draw than :goldberg :mark:


----------



## TD_DDT

Not being a troll but people probably got tired of waiting for the Goldberg segment and tuned out lol.


----------



## wwf

TD_DDT said:


> Not being a troll but people probably got tired of waiting for the Goldberg segment and tuned out lol.


That's exactly what I did. I was hoping it would open the 3rd hour (i.e. start at 10 pm), but it was Reigns vs Jericho so I turned off the tv and chose to go out instead.


----------



## wwe9391

I be flabbergasted if Smackdown beat that


----------



## ecclesiastes10

be honest if Goldberg wasn't advertise to be in 3rd hour and it was just ko n Jericho the third hour, they would have lose like 400k viewers


----------



## The Caped Crusader

wwe9391 said:


> I be flabbergasted if Smackdown beat that


It won't. They don't have a huge advertising push or John Cena's return to help anymore. It'll start going back down slowly, and settle in over the coming weeks. The only thing that can help it is Cena/Taker, and it's going to be lolworthy if that can't push over 3 million viewers when Batista/Taker did much more than that while being taped and stuck on a shitty network.


----------



## ElTerrible

Erik. said:


> HOUR 2 WAS THE HIGHEST!?
> 
> A quarter of that was Strowman/Zayn LMS. Not surprised :mark: :mark:


The hour with the only storyline on the show got the biggest rating.*shocked* Leeching of Smackdown providing quality and cashing in on the only storyline on Raw. Ratings drop for Oldberg. :vince7


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

A 15% viewership decline from 2016, _despite_ the Goldberg appearance. It would be closer to 20% without him. That's rather shocking.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

TD_DDT said:


> Not being a troll but people probably got tired of waiting for the Goldberg segment and tuned out lol.


Of course. Especially when you can watch it the next day.
Raw isn't "must watch today" hot.

Not even "must watch this month" hot.


----------



## The Figure 4

> Raw ratings on Monday were up to 3.04 million viewers, an increase of seven percent, likely due to a combination of Bill Goldberg's appearance keeping the third hour from too much of a decline and slightly easier football competition.
> 
> The one notable difference is that the second hour was the highest instead of the first hour. The usual pattern is first hour highest in the winter and second hour in the summer due to daylight savings time. The difference was the first hour and early second hour went against the Rose Bowl game with Penn State vs. USC which did 15.74 million viewers, which is more than almost all NFL games have been doing against Raw.
> 
> Much of the second hour and all of the third hour went against the lower-rated Sugar Bowl game with Auburn vs. Oklahoma, which did 9.52 million viewers, which is lower than most NFL games have been doing on Monday.
> 
> Last week's show went against the Cowboys-Lions NFL game that did 18.61 million viewers, the best of the season.
> 
> Raw finished 8th for the day on cable, trailing only college football related programming on ESPN, and beating all the news channels, which were way down.
> 
> It was the most-watched Raw since the November 28th show headlined by the Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks women's title match.
> 
> Next week, going against the college football championship game, will be the last episode against football until the fall. The traditional bounce-back show should be on January 16th.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.04 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.16 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.94 million viewers
> 
> Here's a chart from Paul Fontaine that looks at the last 10 weeks of Raw ratings compared to the last four years:


http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/goldbergs-appearance-raw-helps-boost-weeks-ratings-227661


----------



## hunterxhunter

so who won this week raw or smackdown


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW may sink a lot this week being up against the College Football National Championship game.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.014M
H2-3.019M
H3-2.689M
3H-2.907M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.16% / + 0.005M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.93% / - 0.330M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.78% / - 0.325M )
1/9/17 Vs 1/2/17 ( - 4.59% / - 0.140M )

Demo (1/9/17 Vs 1/2/17):
H1- 0.990D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.990D Vs 1.110D
H3- 0.920D Vs 1.080D
3H- 0.967D Vs 1.090D

Note: RAW is 7th, 8th & 9th by hourly demo & 7th, 11th & 12th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/9/17 Vs 1/2/17):
H1- 3.014M Vs 3.536M
H2- 3.019M Vs 3.206M
H3- 2.689M Vs 3.228M
3H- 2.907M Vs 3.323M ( - 12.52% / - 0.416M )

Demo (1/9/17 Vs 1/11/16):
H1- 0.990D Vs 1.220D
H2- 0.990D Vs 1.150D
H3- 0.920D Vs 1.170D
3H- 0.967D Vs 1.180D

Note: RAW this time last year was 7th, 9th & 8th by hourly demo & 6th, 8th & 7th by hourly viewership*


----------



## Dolorian

Damn, that's quite a drop on the third hour.


----------



## A-C-P

WWE got lucky the National Championship game was boring until after halftime, or those first 2 hours would not have been as high


----------



## ecclesiastes10

yea, I didn't watch was it that bad?


----------



## wwe9391

The last 2 quarters of that game was really good. Not surprised about the last hour. Still very solid. Smackdown could be beat it but slim chance.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Road to Mania just hit a massive pothole. :bryanlol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

First two hours did really well against the National Championship. 3rd hour took a big hit. Overall good number and they'll win this week against SD even with the National Championship being played head to head against Raw.


----------



## JDP2016

A-C-P said:


> WWE got lucky the National Championship game was boring until after halftime, or those first 2 hours would not have been as high


Boring? The score was 14-7 Bama going into halftime. How was that boring? Besides, college football is more of a regional thing unlike the NFL. I doubt people in the Northeast gave a shit about it last night.


----------



## A-C-P

JDP2016 said:


> Boring? The score was 14-7 Bama going into halftime. How was that boring? Besides, college football is more of a regional thing unlike the NFL. I doubt people in the Northeast gave a shit about it last night.


It was 14-0 before Clemson finally started playing, but you are right about college football being more regional of a sport than the NFL.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Big drop for 3rd hour. People probably tuned out in droves after Taker. A US Tile match that has been seen several times in the past couple of months was never going to help things.


----------



## Dolorian

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Big drop for 3rd hour. People probably tuned out in droves after Taker. A US Tile match that has been seen several times in the past couple of months was never going to help things.


Yeah it is not even the talent's fault at this point, they had done Reigns vs Owens or Jericho so much over the last couple of weeks and many times for the US title that people just don't care anymore. Making it a handicap match when there has always been some form of interference doesn't makes it unique or special enough.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That's what happens when people expect your Superman booked guy to go through two world champions like butter.


----------



## Erik.

Second hour beating the first hour for the second consecutive week?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

SHIVVY POO II: ELECTRIC BOOGALOO said:


> The Road to Mania just hit a massive pothole. :bryanlol


Same name attached to it like the last two years. Big surprise.

Third annual ratings drop initiated.

I swear Vince's goal is to make WWE decrease so much in value that he can buy back to 100% ownership.


----------



## wwe9391

And here come the people blaming Reigns. SMH it never ends.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

You think Batista may return in two weeks, so who really gives a dud about your opinion?


----------



## Cliffy

They need to start from scratch again

The rollins, owens, ambrose, reigns generation arent cutting it 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk


----------



## Chrome

Damn, that 3rd hour drop. :deandre


----------



## Dolorian

Nigel Farage said:


> The rollins, owens, ambrose, reigns generation arent cutting it


Put Goldberg, Taker and Lesnar every week with the same creative team they have to deal with and you'll see how they don't "cut it" either. Those part timers are protected due to how few dates they work. Meltzer mentioned recently that things are at a point now where the more screen time a superstar gets the worse off they seem to be. It is working the opposite way it should be. Look at the nonsense they had HBK doing, have him show up every week and having to deal with the terrible writing/booking and you'll see how even he would struggle.


----------



## Ace

Reigns deserves the shovel here.

That 3rd hr is all on him, he's the champion, he's the guy who has been given the rocket since debuting with TS.

Justify those numbers marks.

The dude is a flop in every metric and you can talk about reaction all you like - but you could replace him with any muscle head and they would get the same reception. Women and children would cheer for the superhero while smarks will rip on the green ass bitch who bores them to tears.


----------



## Ace

Chrome said:


> Damn, that 3rd hour drop. :deandre


 Which metric is Roman actually good?

I've said it a thousand times before - he is just another guy they're fooling themselves into thinking is the guy.

He isn't, never was and never will be. They can throw as many accolades at him as they like but that will NEVER change.

And yeah, this is all on Reigns. He's the supposed FOTC now according to his fans, when you deliver shit house numbers like that when you're in the main event and have been given the world, you deserve to be :buried


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Reigns deserves the shovel here.
> 
> That 3rd hr is all on him, he's the champion, he's the guy who has been given the rocket since debuting with TS.
> 
> Justify those numbers marks.
> 
> The dude is a flop in every metric and you can talk about reaction all you like - but you could replace him with any muscle head and they would get the same reception. Women and children would cheer for the superhero while smarks will rip on the green ass bitch who bores them to tears.


its only on him very little. its due cause of the football game, and seeing the same matches over again with the same people. BTW AJ could of been in that spot and still draw the same rating. Hell that hour still might draw better than any smackdown hours this. 

Reigns is the guy weather some like it or not. I don't know how many times I have to say it for it to register with some.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> And here come the people blaming Reigns. SMH it never ends.


 LMAO he should be! Imagine if Cena drew those numbers in an advertised main event. Like his fans say, he is the guy. The machine are behind him and he's delivering those piss poor numbers, those are numbers you'd expect from the others. Not the guy who is in every WWE promotional ad or campaign, main evented 3 Manias, won the Rumble etc. He should be a big deal bu he isn't - that's the truth, it's time for Roman marks to accept he is a flop on all fronts.



wwe9391 said:


> its only on him very little. its due cause of the football game, and seeing the same matches over again with the same people. BTW AJ could of been in that spot and still draw the same rating. Hell that hour still might draw better than any smackdown hours this.
> 
> Reigns is the guy weather some like it or not. I don't know how many times I have to say it for it to register with some.


 AJ hasn't been thrown WM main event after WM main event, accolade after another or title after title, nor has he been booked above the rest of the roster. The fact he would draw the same numbers without all that shows you how big of a failure Reigns is. 

JAG - Just Another Guy.


----------



## Bushmaster

wwe9391 said:


> And here come the people blaming Reigns. SMH it never ends.


I'm sure if it were good there'd be a few giving him all the credit. I've seen idiots do it before even when he wasn't even advertised.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> LMAO he should be! Imagine if Cena drew those numbers in an advertised main event. Like his fans say, he is the guy. The machine are behind him and he's delivering those piss poor numbers, those are numbers you'd expect from the others. Not the guy who is in every WWE promotional ad or campaign, main evented 3 Manias, won the Rumble etc. He should be a big deal bu he isn't - that's the truth, it's time for Roman marks to accept he is a flop on all fronts.


No cause its not the truth. ANYBODY with the exception of the part timers would have drawn that number due to the circumstances that accord. AJ would have drawn that number maybe even worse. Reigns is the guy weather you like it or not. Vince has made it so where only the WWE brand is the draw so he can push anybody and not lose business. Go look at the last quarterly financial results business is doing just fine. 

Reigns gets the biggest reaction good or bad out of anyone on the Raw roster, he wakes up dead crowds from their sleep during a boring show, he is constantly talked about everywhere there is pro wrestling, he is the #3 merch seller in the company. YES #3 . Better than AJ mind you, Is the 2nd most asked wrestler for make a wishes behind Cena. He is the GUY. Learn to deal with it. It will be better for everyones mental heath if everyone excepts it. Nothing will stop this Reigns push. Not Rollins, not AJ, not Omega, NO ONE. He has the machine behind him and its not stopping.

Dont mean to be so hard but its the truth.

Your a cool poster man and have lots of respect for you. Don't stoop as low as some of the other anti Reigns marks on here.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> No cause its not the truth. ANYBODY with the exception of the part timers would have drawn that number due to the circumstances that accord. AJ would have drawn that number maybe even worse. Reigns is the guy weather you like it or not. Vince has made it so where only the WWE brand is the draw so he can push anybody and not lose business. Go look at the last quarterly financial results business is doing just fine.
> 
> Reigns gets the biggest reaction good or bad out of anyone on the Raw roster, he wakes up dead crowds from their sleep during a boring show, he is constantly talked about everywhere there is pro wrestling, he is the #3 merch seller in the company. YES #3 . Better than AJ mind you, Is the 2nd most asked wrestler for make a wishes behind Cena. He is the GUY. Learn to deal with it. It will be better for everyones mental heath if everyone excepts it. Nothing will stop this Reigns push. Not Rollins, not AJ, not Omega, NO ONE. He has the machine behind him and its not stopping.
> 
> Dont mean to be so hard but its the truth.
> 
> Your a cool poster man and have lots of respect for you. Don't stoop as low as some of the other anti Reigns marks on here.


 Bottom line is it is nowhere near good enough for the guy they're positioning to be the FOTC.

If KO, Jericho, AJ or Zayn had drawn that, I would have shrugged it off. But for Cena's supposed heir who has been given the world by Vince and has been booked to be the be all to end all of the WWE to draw that is embarrassing, especially after last week where _in their own way_ they tried to portray him as Goldberg's equal.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Bottom line is it is nowhere near good enough for the guy they're positioning to be the FOTC.
> 
> If KO, Jericho, AJ or Zayn had drawn that, I would have shrugged it off. But for Cena's supposed heir who has been given the world by Vince and has been booked to be the be all to end all of the WWE to draw that is embarrassing, especially after last week where _in their own way_ they tried to portray him as Goldberg's equal.


Problem with your argument is Reigns has nothing fresh for him. He is given the same guys for the last 2 months to wrestle. His program with Rusev drew bigger than this. It takes 2 to tango. Even if Cena wrestle the same guys people would get tired of it and change the channel. He needs something fresh.


----------



## Mr. Socko

Reigns has been more established as the FOTC than most FOTC's ever were. His push has been longer than most guys at the top ever stay there. If the ship is sinking it's on him and the bookers.

Reigns is a failure as a draw.

Is he a bad wrestler? No, he's proven that with his performances. That doesn't change the fact he is a failure as FOTC material.


----------



## Ace

Mr. Socko said:


> Reigns has been more established as the FOTC than most FOTC's ever were. His push has been longer than most guys at the top ever stay there. If the ship is sinking it's on him and the bookers.
> 
> Reigns is a failure as a draw.
> 
> Is he a bad wrestler? No, he's proven that with his performances. That doesn't change the fact he is a failure as FOTC material.


 I read online that If he main events WM this year, he will equal Austin for most consecutive WM main events.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The good news is that RAW faces no more major sporting events until the NCAA Basketball Championship game in April. Ratings should increase now without NFL opposition and the Road to Mania. It will be interesting to see just how much viewer interest WWE can garner in the next three months.


----------



## FITZ

JDP2016 said:


> Boring? The score was 14-7 Bama going into halftime. How was that boring? Besides, college football is more of a regional thing unlike the NFL. I doubt people in the Northeast gave a shit about it last night.


Over 25 million people watched it last night.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> I read online that If he main events WM this year, he will equal Austin for most consecutive WM main events.


:lol Austin doesn't even have that record. Hogan does at 5 WM5 -WM9


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> :lol Austin doesn't even have that record. Hogan does at 5 WM5 -WM9


 You're right, I never checked it. However having a look now.. he'd equal Austin for WM main events.. which is much worse :lol

Think it's equal with Rock too if we're only looking at his FT run.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Youre right, I never checked it. However having a look now.. he'd equal Austin for WM main events.. Which is much worse :lol


Im sure Austin doesn't mind. He likes Reigns. He knew several people would pass his main event number when he retired early.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Ace said:


> Which metric is Roman actually good?
> 
> I've said it a thousand times before - he is just another guy they're fooling themselves into thinking is the guy.
> 
> He isn't, never was and never will be. They can throw as many accolades at him as they like but that will NEVER change.
> 
> And yeah, this is all on Reigns. He's the supposed FOTC now according to his fans, when you deliver shit house numbers like that when you're in the main event and have been given the world, you deserve to be :buried


im starting to think you've cranked up the reigns hate just to be liked on the forum which is really sad when you think about it


----------



## JDP2016

FITZ said:


> Over 25 million people watched it last night.



That's great. 114 million people watched Super Bowl 50.


----------



## squarebox

The people who tuned in just to see HBK / Taker were probably like, 'wow this shit is bad' and won't be back anytime soon lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> :lol Austin doesn't even have that record. Hogan does at 5 WM5 -WM9


Comparing Reigns to Hogan is like comparing you to William Shakespeare.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Comparing Reigns to Hogan is like comparing you to William Shakespeare.


I wasn't comparing them at all. I was just correcting him on who has the most consecutive WM main events.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

wwe9391 said:


> I wasn't comparing them at all. I was just correcting him on who has the most consecutive WM main events.


There's little point. Even Cena, HHH, and Rock have more consecutive headlines than Austin, and several other guys like Macho Man and Bret Hart have the same as Austin. That dude's still emotionally unsettled with the impending loss of Styles so he's lashing out at Reigns to try and make himself feel better. Not that it accomplishes much.


----------



## Bret Hart

Mr. Socko said:


> Reigns has been more established as the FOTC than most FOTC's ever were. His push has been longer than most guys at the top ever stay there. If the ship is sinking it's on him and the bookers.
> 
> Reigns is a failure as a draw.
> 
> Is he a bad wrestler? No, he's proven that with his performances. That doesn't change the fact he is a failure as FOTC material.


It's on the bookers, I don't know how you can blame Roman...


----------



## Mr. Socko

Bret Hart said:


> It's on the bookers, I don't know how you can blame Roman...


He has failed to get fans on side.

Put someone like Dean, Seth etc in his position and they wouldn't be rejected anywhere near as much or maybe not even at all.


----------



## Bret Hart

Mr. Socko said:


> He has failed to get fans on side.
> 
> Put someone like Dean, Seth etc in his position and they wouldn't be rejected anywhere near as much or maybe not even at all.


How the hell do you expect him (on his own) to get the fans on his side when the booking doesn't support him? 

Even with the current booking that Dean and Seth have gotten, the fans are losing interest in them too.. 

It's all in the booking, you can't blame it on the superstars.


----------



## Not Lying

Ace said:


> Which metric is Roman actually good?
> 
> I've said it a thousand times before - he is just another guy they're fooling themselves into thinking is the guy.
> 
> He isn't, never was and never will be. They can throw as many accolades at him as they like but that will NEVER change.
> 
> And yeah, this is all on Reigns. He's the supposed FOTC now according to his fans, when you deliver shit house numbers like that when you're in the main event and have been given the world, you deserve to be :buried


It's pretty obvious for a while now that Reigns is a complete failure but his marks will never admit it, and guys like wwe9391 are just trolling right now so don't even give them the time of the day. They've been crushed a million times and had their excuses shoved in their face but they stop replying and go spout the same shit again and again.
Reigns not only has he been given a FOTC like push, no one is even portrayed as his equal considering he was facing Part-Timers the past 2 WM, not someone on the roster even, which is worse! He's the guy that got to spear Stephanie, beat HHH, beat up Shane and Vince, he got to destroy the McMahons and still no one gives a shit. 
He should be the sole star, the biggest draw, and yet he's just so generic and boring and many of co-main eventers outdraw him. His rise is aligned with the RAPID continued drop in viewership. Literally, get any muscle head that can't talk or wrestle (at first at least) and push him the same way and he'll literally get the same reaction as Reigns. Seriously, push any guy that sucks this hard, this is the resulting the reaction, and this is the failure Vince's stubbornness and stupidity deserves.


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> How the hell do you expect him (on his own) to get the fans on his side when the booking doesn't support him?
> 
> Even with the current booking that Dean and Seth have gotten, the fans are losing interest in them too..
> 
> It's all in the booking, you can't blame it on the superstars.


 Reigns hasn't been able to connect with fans enough to justify the rocket. Why the hell should the majority get behind him when he is neither relatable or larger than life?


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Reigns hasn't been able to connect with fans enough to justify the rocket. Why the hell should the majority get behind him when he is neither relatable or larger than life?


Its all about the booking thats why. He he does connect with fans the mothers and kids to be exact. That a huge portion on the audience. The only people he hasn't fully connect with is the hardcore crowd.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> Its all about the booking thats why. He he does connect with fans the mothers and kids to be exact. That a huge portion on the audience. The only people he hasn't fully connect with is the hardcore crowd.


 Women and kids will always flock to whoever the company wants them to get behind... fpalm

Even then, he hasn't connected with them like Cena, Bryan and arguably Orton.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Women and kids will always flock to whoever the company wants them to get behind... fpalm
> 
> Even then, he hasn't connected with them like Cena, Bryan and arguably Orton.


So? if they will flock to Reigns so be it and I disagree I think he has connected to them just them as those guys. 

Like I said he is the guy as long as Vince is running things. Its not gonna change.


----------



## Dolorian

Ace said:


> Women and kids will always flock to whoever the company wants them to get behind...
> 
> Even then, he hasn't connected with them like Cena, Bryan and arguably Orton.


Your first sentence runs against the second. If Reigns hasn't connected with them like Cena then it is not true that women and kids will always flock to whomever the company wants them to get behind. The implication on your first sentence is that women and children lack agency and just mindlessly flock to whomever the company wants them to but your second sentence implies that is not the case and that they do in fact decide who to flock to.

You want to deny Reigns any positive or credit for the connection he makes with women and kids yet are giving it to Cena and others.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> Reigns hasn't been able to connect with fans enough to justify the rocket. Why the hell should the majority get behind him when he is neither relatable or larger than life?


How is he going to connect when his booking is atrocious? People hate him because of the way he's booked. 



He has everything that's needed to become a top star but the booking team is terrible at it.


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> How is he going to connect when his booking is atrocious? People hate him because of the way he's booked.
> 
> 
> 
> He has everything that's needed to become a top star but the booking team is terrible at it.


 He doesn't have 'it'. 

You need that to get to the top, Hogan, Austin, Rock, Cena, Punk and Bryan all had it.

All of them had that special charm that allowed them to connect with a large part of the fan base, in a way that those fans were emotionally invested in the character and what they were doing on TV on a weekly basis.


----------



## Ace

Dolorian said:


> Your first sentence runs against the second. If Reigns hasn't connected with them like Cena then it is not true that women and kids will always flock to whomever the company wants them to get behind. The implication on your first sentence is that women and children lack agency and just mindlessly flock to whomever the company wants them to but your second sentence implies that is not the case and that they do in fact decide who to flock to.
> 
> You want to deny Reigns any positive or credit for the connection he makes with women and kids yet are giving it to Cena and others.


 The difference is Cena, Bryan and Orton have the charisma to connect with them on a level Reigns never will.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> He doesn't have 'it'.
> 
> You need that to get to the top, Hogan, Austin, Rock, Cena, Punk and Bryan all had it.








































If I showed you these pictures before they became stars would you say they had "it"? 



> All of them had that special charm that allowed them to connect with a large part of the fan base, in way that those fans were emotionally invested in the character and what they were doing on TV on a weekly basis.


So why didn't Stunning Steve Austin get over? Why didn't Triple H become champion when he had that gimmick of a prince or whatever the fuck he was supposed to be?

Why didn't The Rock get over as Rocky Maivia in 1997/1998?

Because they didn't have the proper booking that was playing to their strengths. 

"What they were doing on TV on a weekly basis"

They don't fucking decide what they do on a weekly basis, the booking does.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> The difference is Cena, Bryan and Orton have the charisma to connect with them on a level Reigns never will.


Cena/Bryan/Orton have had booking that benefits them, when Roman gets it too then you can say that.


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> If I showed you these pictures before they became stars would you say they had "it"?
> 
> 
> 
> So why didn't Stunning Steve Austin get over? Why didn't Triple H become champion when he had that gimmick of a prince or whatever the fuck he was supposed to be?
> 
> Why didn't The Rock get over as Rocky Maivia in 1997/1998?
> 
> Because they didn't have the proper booking that was playing to their strengths.
> 
> "What they were doing on TV on a weekly basis"
> 
> They don't fucking decide what they do on a weekly basis, the booking does.


 Bryan was made out to be a joke and yet he still managed to connect on a level Reigns could only dream of.

That's a poor rebuttal, none of those guys were booked to be the be all and end all of the WWE. If Roman had the ability or personality, he would have found a way to make it work.

Roman has been given the rocket for years and failed to go anywhere with it. He is a massive bust and it's time for his fans and Vince to accept that he'll never be the guy because he simply is lacking in way too many departments for it to ever work.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> Bryan was made out to be a joke and yet he still managed to connect on a level Reigns could only dream of.
> 
> And poor rebuttals, none of those guys were booked to be the be all and end all of the WWE.
> 
> Roman has been given the rocket for years and failed to go Nyshere with it. He is a massive bust and it's time for his fans and Vince to accept that he'll never be the guy because he simply is lacking in way too many departments.


He was a joke in 2012 and before not in 2013 and thereafter. 

Nah, you just can't defend yourself because you know booking is what makes or breaks a wrestler.

Your boy toy AJ Styles could have been booked like a bitch but luckily they've given him the right booking and have turned him Heel/Face when needed too. Roman hasn't had that luxury. 

Yes he has but he hasn't had the proper booking that would benefit him.

It's time for you to accept booking has a lot to do with everything. 

He's already achieved more than Omega ever will.


"None of them were booked to be the be all and end all of the WWE"

What the fuck? Hogan took WWF to heights never before seen, so did Steve Austin.

Stick to TNA or ROH or where ever the fuck you get your wrestling knowledge from.


----------



## God Movement

Ratings will return to normal when Reigns is world champ


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> He was a joke in 2012 and before not in 2013 and thereafter.
> 
> Nah, you just can't defend yourself because you know booking is what makes or breaks a wrestler.
> 
> Your boy toy AJ Styles could have been booked like a bitch but luckily they've given him the right booking and have turned him Heel/Face when needed too. Roman hasn't had that luxury.
> 
> Yes he has but he hasn't had the proper booking that would benefit him.
> 
> It's time for you to accept booking has a lot to do with everything.
> 
> He's already achieved more than Omega ever will.
> 
> 
> "None of them were booked to be the be all and end all of the WWE"
> 
> What the fuck? Hogan took WWF to heights never before seen, so did Steve Austin.
> 
> Stick to TNA or ROH or where ever the fuck you get your wrestling knowledge from.


 Roman even if booked better won't be he guy because he simply isn't the guy.

Why can't his fans realise this fpalm

If he had a shred of ability or personality his rise to FOTC wouldn't have been so forgettable.


----------



## Ace

Can one of Romans deluded fans try to justify his selection as FOTC without falling on the reaction (booed out of the building 90% of the time) or 3rd biggest merch mover BS (well behind Cena and New Day despite stores stocking heavily on Roman and Cena merch).

He isn't even the biggest YouTube draw nowadays :ha


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> Roman even if booked better won't be he guy because he simply isn't the guy.
> 
> Why can't his fans realise this fpalm
> 
> If he had a shred of ability or personality his rise to FOTC wouldn't have been so forgettable.


He'll be more tolerable as a Heel and when not shoved down our throats... How will we get that? When we have competent bookers and when an out of touch old bastard stops fucking with his product for the worse.


Anyone would be booed if they were shoved down our throats.... Look at Cena.....


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> He'll be more tolerable as a Heel and when not shoved down our throats... How will we get that? When we have competent bookers and when an out of touch old bastard stops fucking with his product for the worse.
> 
> 
> Anyone would be booed if they were shoved down our throats.... Look at Cena.....


 He simply won't be the guy because of the reasons I mentioned earlier. To be the guy you need to be either relatable or have a larger than life personality, Roman has neither and falls well short on both fronts. 

Roman is a pretty boy no one can truly get behind, the difference between him and the Rock is that while The Rock was a pretty boy, he also had unreal charisma and ability to entertain that no one could deny.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> He simply won't be the guy because of the reasons I mentioned earlier. To be the guy you need to be either relatable or have a larger than life personality, Roman has neither and falls well short on both fronts.
> 
> Roman is a pretty boy no one can truly get behind, the difference between him and the Rock is that while The Rock was a pretty boy, he also had unreal charisma, charm and ability to entertain that no one could deny.


How do you know he can't be the guy when they haven't even booked him with common sense? Of course he won't be the guy with the way those fuckers book things. 

Again, what the fuck was so larger than life about Stunning Steve Austin before he became Stone Cold Steve Austin?

Yeah that's why The Rock was booed in 1997/1998 right? because he had unreal charisma? It wasn't until they started booking him to perfection and giving him the mic to showcase his skills.

You were probably one of those fans booing him too.


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> How do you know he can't be the guy when they haven't even booked him with common sense? Of course he won't be the guy with the way those fuckers book things.
> 
> Again, what the fuck was so larger than life about Stunning Steve Austin before he became Stone Cold Steve Austin?
> 
> Yeah that's why The Rock was booed in 1997/1998 right? because he had unreal charisma? It wasn't until they started booking him to perfection and giving him the mic to showcase his skills.
> 
> You were probably one of those fans booing him too.


 What on earth has Roman shown outside the WWE to suggest he could have a personality or ability that would work? Ah yessir fpalm

Rock was booed in 97/98 because he was a bland babyface, he had the ability to so much for which he showed once he joined The Nation. Roman on the other hand hasn't shown shit in his entire 4 year stint or outside the WWE in media appearances to suggest he could do the same.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> What on earth has Roman showed outside the WWE to suggest he could have a personality or ability that would work? Ah yessir fpalm


What did The Rock show... What did Cena show?


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> What did The Rock show... What did Cena show?


 You're joking right?

The WWE ran with Thugsnomics Cena after they heard Cena rapping backstage.

The Rock didn't have many media appearances where he could show off his personality at that time, but are we really going to fucking compare The Rock to a 4 year dud like Roman Reigns.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> You're joking right?
> 
> The WWE ran with Thugsnomics Cena after they heard Cena rapping backstage.
> 
> The Rock didn't have many media appearances where he could show off his personality at that time, but are we really going to fucking compare The Rock to a 4 year dud like Roman Reigns.


Yeah and they booked him properly after that, before that he was going nowhere. 


No we're comparing The Rock 1996/1997 to Roman Reigns.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Roman has been given the rocket for years and failed to go anywhere with it. He is a massive bust and it's time for his fans and Vince to accept that he'll never be the guy because he simply is lacking in way too many departments for it to ever work.


No were not gonna accept it cause its not true. lol


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> Yeah and they booked him properly after that, before that he was going nowhere.
> 
> 
> No we're comparing The Rock 1996/1997 to Roman Reigns.


 4 years in and out (professional and casual) of the WWE to prove he can do the same and he hasn't done jack shit.

The likes of AJ, Rusev and Neville have shown a lot more personality in a few eps of Upupdowndown and a few media appearances than Roman ever has.


----------



## squarebox

How anyone can ever compare guys like The Rock or Stone Cold even before they were pushed, to Roman Reigns is absolutely beyond me. Those guys were larger than life characters and could talk, Reigns has showed time and time again that he can't hold a candle to any of those guys, everything he says sounds extremely forced, he sounds like a robot. I believe Ace is right when he says you either have that or you don't, and I don't believe Reigns does, or ever will.


----------



## Bret Hart

Ace said:


> 4 years in and out (professional and casual) of the WWE to prove he can do the same and he hasn't done jack shit.
> 
> The likes of AJ, Rusev and Neville have shown a lot more personality in a few eps of Upupdowndown and a few media appearances than Roman ever has.


It's all in the booking.


----------



## NieNie

Ace said:


> He isn't even the biggest YouTube draw nowadays :ha


He isn't and his popularity has been declining over the last year. Early last year he was the clear top draw in terms of YouTube views only people like Brock Lesnar or Undertaker would outdraw him there but nowadays every week segments by Dean Ambrose and Styles and even Seth Rollins sometimes outdraw Roman Reigns regularly.

Other talent is catching up and passing him by while his popularity declines.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Really looking forward to the rating. I imagine it'll be a relatively good number post NFL competition.


----------



## ste1592

Bret Hart said:


> It's all in the booking.


So Rusev and Neville have both been booked better than Reigns? :kobe11


----------



## Bret Hart

ste1592 said:


> So Rusev and Neville have both been booked better than Reigns? :kobe11


WWE's booking as a whole is trash.


----------



## ste1592

Bret Hart said:


> WWE's booking as a whole is trash.


Now, that's something we can agree on.

Even though I don't think booking per se it's their problem, is how they choose who to book and present in certain manners. Leaving aside for a second the whole "You push Reigns even if most people hate him", it's really telling how bad they are in assigning roles when you look at the Shield singles career:

-the one that made a name for himself as babyface both in NXT and in the indies, who has the most babyface moveset, is the one to betray the Shield and become the Corporate goon;

-the one who made a name for himself in the indies as the psychotic/sadistic heel, is the underdog babyface;

-the one with no previous experience but with glaring heel traits is the top babyface of your company;

Talking about perfect casting, right?


----------



## Bret Hart

ste1592 said:


> Now, that's something we can agree on.
> 
> Even though I don't think booking per se it's their problem, is how they choose who to book and present in certain manners. Leaving aside for a second the whole "You push Reigns even if most people hate him", it's really telling how bad they are in assigning roles when you look at the Shield singles career:
> 
> -the one that made a name for himself as babyface both in NXT and in the indies, who has the most babyface moveset, is the one to betray the Shield and become the Corporate goon;
> 
> -the one who made a name for himself in the indies as the psychotic/sadistic heel, is the underdog babyface;
> 
> -the one with no previous experience but with glaring heel traits is the top babyface of your company;
> 
> Talking about perfect casting, right?


Exactly! Hit the nail on the head... 

That's exactly what I'm talking about.. 

When WWE books a guy they need to book them with the mind set of "Ok, how can I get this guy to make me the most amount of money he can?" that is exactly what they're NOT doing and it pisses me off because we, the fans, get robbed of a TV show that has the potential to be so damn good..

Of course Roman is going to get booed when he's not being booked to his strengths and when he's shoved down our throats.

I'm not a big fan of Roman or any of the Shield members but they each have something that can make them great and if it makes them great it makes the TV show as a whole great.. 

Hell, the whole roster is talented as fuck but Vince is a fucking idiot.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.519m
=> highest since April 4th, 2016
Hour 2 - 3.221m
=> highest since August 29th, 2016
Hour 3 - 3.074m
=> highest since October 17th, 2016
Average => 3.27m
=> highest since August 29th, 2016

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...cable-originals-network-finals-1-16-2017.html

Year-on-year (18/01/15)

Hour 1 - 3.775m
Hour 2 - 3.591m
Hour 3 - 3.123m
Average => 3.50m


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not surprised it achieved it's highest hours in months. No football is a blessing for RAW. That third hour never fails to disappoint, regardless of the competition.


----------



## Reotor

Wonder if Smackdown will keep the 85% ratio


----------



## Kabraxal

Interesting spike for the first hour... then the show collapses as those returning after MNF realise the show is still awful. Raw really needs to fix itself, especially since it could be clouding some people's opinions on the other WWE shows which are actually doing well creatively in NXT and SDL.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Reotor said:


> Wonder if Smackdown will keep the 85% ratio


That will be interesting to see because SDL still faces stiff competition on Tuesdays, much stiffer than RAW faces.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

WOW. That's a REALLY good number. Holy shit. Even Hour 3 stayed above 3 million viewers. No question that football is the stiffest competition ANY WWE show faces.


----------



## The Caped Crusader

That's a good viewership number. Even higher than expected if I'm honest. But as usual, the 3rd hour is a problem for them. Although if the viewership remains in the mid-3 millions, WWE should honestly take that as a good sign. The roster has been utter shit in terms of overall starpower since Punk and Bryan left, and they only started getting to a better position last year with guys like Reigns, Rollins, and Ambrose finally being cemented, and the likes of Styles being elevated, but they've done another brand split as soon as they were in that position. You've got 2 thin rosters with barely any starpower on each.

If Raw can pull mid-3 million viewership numbers despite the fact that it has 2 main eventers, and 2 guys who are more like uppercarders, that's probably a good sign. It means if they make the right moves, and build a few more stars, they might be able to make the product feel fresh enough that they're able to take things in an upswing again like back in 2005.

This is also why a Cena/Taker title fued for WM33 would be a good move for SDL, as it will help bring a lot of legitimacy to that brand, and potentially, elevate it further. It may not for all I know, but that's a big fued, and it has more potential to draw viewers to SDL than any other fued they could do.

Obviously, we're entering WM season now with less competition, but the real test is going to be the next 8 months. It'll be interesting to see where they fall and what they manage.

I'm also honestly curious what kind of number Goldberg would've pulled off if he returned in WM season rather than the dead period. The highest number for a return is still The Rock, then it's Batista, and finally Brock Lesnar. While I don't think Goldberg would've got as high as 5 million to pass Batista, due to the state of the current product, I think he would have been able to get it past the 4 million viewership mark.


----------



## SovereignVA

Roman Makes Me Hard said:


> Roman even if booked better won't be he guy because he simply isn't the guy.
> 
> Why can't his fans realise this fpalm
> 
> If he had a shred of ability or personality his rise to FOTC wouldn't have been so forgettable.


That's actually not true.

When he beat the living shit out of Triple H and then Vince Mcmahon it was the first time like 2 years they got his booking right.

The fans responded well and he was over (actually over, not pretend over like some people here like to claim he is) but only for two days until his booking went back to normal.


----------



## wwe9391

WOW LOOK at that Rating. No Goldberg, no Steph or Mick. Yea there was Brock but he was there for a cup of coffee. See WWE if you book a good show people watch. Things are looking good! 

And just cause I want too :reigns2


----------



## Mr. Socko

wwe9391 said:


> WOW LOOK at that Rating. No Goldberg, no Steph or Mick. Yea there was Brock but he was there for a cup of coffee. See WWE if you book a good show people watch. Things are looking good!
> 
> And just cause I want too :reigns2


In Brock's defence it was his hour that carried the rating. Not saying it was just Brock since Angle's HOF announcement likely drew some fans in addition to no football.


----------



## wwe9391

Mr. Socko said:


> In Brock's defence it was his hour that carried the rating. Not saying it was just Brock since Angle's HOF announcement likely drew some fans in addition to no football.


Thats right yea Angles announcement could brought people in.


----------



## JDP2016

:clap:clap:clapDam those are some good numbers. Let's see what SDL does.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.519M
H2-3.221M
H3-3.074M
3H-3.271M
*









*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.47% / - 0.298M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.56% / - 0.147M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.65% / - 0.445M )
1/16/17 Vs 1/9/17 ( +12.52 % / + 0.364M )

Demo (1/16/17 Vs 1/9/17):
H1- 1.230D Vs 0.990D
H2- 1.100D Vs 0.990D
H3- 1.080D Vs 0.920D
3H- 1.137D Vs 0.967D

Note: RAW is 3th, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 6th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/16/17 Vs 1/18/16):
H1- 3.519M Vs 3.775M
H2- 3.221M Vs 3.591M
H3- 3.074M Vs 3.123M
3H- 3.271M Vs 3.496M ( - 6.44% / - 0.225M )

Demo (1/16/17 Vs 1/18/16):
H1- 1.230D Vs 1.310D
H2- 1.100D Vs 1.240D
H3- 1.080D Vs 1.110D
3H- 1.137D Vs 1.220D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 8th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 1/16 did a 2.15 rating and 3,264,000 viewers (1.65 viewers per home, which were Attitude Era numbers, although there are reasons explained before why this figure is continuing to rise having to do with homes that have multiple fans are unlikely to drop cable and homes with one fan or no fans are more likely, so the average per home will gain as USA loses homes) for the post-football bounce-back show.
> 
> There is a positive and a negative to this number. Last year’s post-football bounce back did 3,478,000 viewers, so the year-to-year drop was six percent, far less than the double-digit drops for Raw through most of 2016.
> 
> If they can stay at this level, while it is a decline from last year, it shows that some of the really bad numbers from September were just football hurting WWE worse than usual. But it’ll take a few weeks to see where things settle in, especially with the mixed messages sent by the hourly numbers.
> 
> The first hour did 3,519,000 viewers, a great number. But then they fell strongly, to 3,221,000 viewers in the second hour and 3,074,000 in the third hour. The loss of viewers from beginning to end was the highest number since the 11/7 show.
> 
> It was the best Raw viewership number since 8/22, right before football season started. It was the best rating since 11/28 show with the Charlotte vs. Sasha Banks title switch.
> 
> As far as why, that’s the big question. The main attraction on the show was Brock Lesnar, who appeared in the first segment, and never again. It was Lesnar’s first time on the show since the loss to Bill Goldberg. Still, it was never said Lesnar wouldn’t be back on, although by midway through the second hour when nothing was promoted for him later, you did get that impression.
> 
> The audience fell almost across the board. Women 18-49 were down 14 percent from the first hour to the third hour. Men 18-49 were down 10 percent. Teenage girls were down 28 percent. Teenage boys were up six percent (only demo that stayed). Over 50 declined 13 percent. The key is most of the drop was in hour two, which is usually the highest rated hour, so there may have been a major turnoff during that hour.
> 
> The show was fifth for the night on cable, and went head-to-head with an NBA game featuring the league’s two biggest marquee teams, the Warriors and Cavs, which did 4,518,000 viewers.
> 
> As far as how football being gone affected the numbers, the show did a 0.83 in 12-17 (up 13.7 percent from last week), 0.93 in 18-34 (up 9.4 percent), 1.23 in 35-49 (up 12.8 percent) and 1.25 in 50+ (up 7.8 percent).
> 
> The funny thing about that is the 50+ audience is the strongest football audience.
> 
> The show did 60.1 percent male viewers in 18-49 and 72.5 percent males in 12-17.


----------



## DammitChrist

Wow, good for Raw! Hopefully they can keep the numbers up as long as their booking is good


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Number down from last year, and dropped half a million throughout show. I suppose compared to Football season numbers it's great, but otherwise it's still a mediocre number continuing a year on year decline. 3.5 million for the first hour is solid though.


----------



## Bret Hart

I stopped watching once the crusierweights came on... They're useless keep them on 205 live.


----------



## Randy Lahey

A 2.15 running unopposed (no football) is a terrible rating. This is nothing more than a continuation of bad ratings, and if Raw loses 5-10% of their viewership per year, by 2019 they will be cancelled, or obviously paid way less than what they are getting paid now to produce the ratings they produce.


----------



## Starbuck

First hour gets 3.5 million because everybody expected Triple H to show up. Just sayin.

:bosstrips


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.309M
H2-3.457M
H3-3.111M
3H-3.292M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.47% / + 0.148M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.01% / - 0.346M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 5.98% / - 0.198M )
1/23/17 Vs 1/16/17 ( + 0.64% / + 0.021M )

Demo (1/23/17 Vs 1/16/17):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.230D
H2- 1.260D Vs 1.100D
H3- 1.200D Vs 1.080D
3H- 1.203D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW is 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 8th, 7th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/23/17 Vs 1/25/16):
H1- 3.309M Vs 4.140M
H2- 3.457M Vs 4.183M
H3- 3.111M Vs 3.972M
3H- 3.292M Vs 4.098M ( - 19.67% / - 0.806M )

Demo (1/23/17 Vs 1/25/16):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.440D
H2- 1.260D Vs 1.530D
H3- 1.200D Vs 1.510D
3H- 1.203D Vs 1.493D
*
*Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3 by far the lowest, even with Taker, Goldberg, and Brock.

This proves that it doesn't matter who is in hour 3. It will always be the lowest rated hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Jeez, what a drop from last year. Was last year the Rumble go-home show as well or the fallout?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Jeez, what a drop from last year. Was last year the Rumble go-home show as well or the fallout?


Go-home show. The Rumble fallout RAW of last year had more viewers than even the WM32 fallout show.


----------



## The Renegade

Good numbers. Should go up next week with the promise of Triple H and more Goldberg and Brock.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Go-home show. The Rumble fallout RAW of last year had more viewers than even the WM32 fallout show.


Thanks. Just making sure we're comparing apple to apple here. 

Although at least hour of 3 wasn't half a million below the highest hour of the night, still not particularly good. Maybe it would have fair better if they advertised something like Lesnar confronting Goldberg as opposed to just Goldberg. Throw in that Taker might be lurking in the shadows, then it probably would've done better. Unfortunately it was just Goldberg, which while it obviously helps, it wasn't the best they could do.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 is an albatross around RAW's neck, but it's a permanent fixture on Mondays. Quite a bit of yearly attrition. Was last year's RAW post Rumble?


----------



## The Caped Crusader

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Go-home show. The Rumble fallout RAW of last year had more viewers than even the WM32 fallout show.


Roman Reigns clearly draws.

*insert winking gif*

What this really shows is that you need to have feuds that matter. Last year the main story was about Reigns being forced to defend his title against 29 guys. It's something that has a clear effect on the show, and there are high stakes.

This year, Reigns and Owens are in a filler feud that's been going on months now. Like, not even the guys involved probably care that much. It's also being treated as filler which shows in the booking. And the main Royal Rumble story is about a part-timer (Goldberg), who no one is expecting to win anyway.

When the novelty is gone, you need stories. Maybe, build some. Seems like a crazy idea, I know.


----------



## wwe9391

3 hour will always go down no matter who's in it it seems


----------



## Dolorian

The Rollins/Sami match ended at around the start of the second hour if I recall correctly, I guess the whole thing with Triple H possibly being there lead to the increase of viewers during the second hour.


----------



## A-C-P

That drop from last year :bosque


----------



## Erik.

3,400,000 for the second hour?

Is that the highest second hour in a while or is it just me?

Strowman was in that hour, so not shocked. Crowd reacted very positively when he went toe to toe with Big Show too :mark:


----------



## The Caped Crusader

wwe9391 said:


> 3 hour will always go down no matter who's in it it seems


It will, and we've known this for years really.

The larger problem with Raw is the thin roster. I've been saying this for months now. WWE literally has a formula, and fans have gotten savvy to this shit. They treat the end of the year and the pre-WM time as filler. They need to stop that.

There needs to be something meaningful going on. From the way they basically fucked over Rollins and made him stuck in limbo when they had HHH interfere, to the way Reigns and Owens are literally passing the time.

Even the whole dual champion thing. I said it last month, it's just filler. It ain't happening. And what do you know? It's almost 2 months later. It was clearly filler, and it ain't happening. Their problem is they don't care, and they're just trying to bide time until WM season, but that's not a good thing. There needs to be something significant going on. Always.


----------



## validreasoning

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Go-home show. The Rumble fallout RAW of last year had more viewers than even the WM32 fallout show.


Rumble took place on January 24th last year so a week ago this week was the post rumble show with a wwe title change previous night

If we compare post rumble raws year on year it would be

3.292 million vs 3.496 million

1.20 in 18-48 demo vs 1.22


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

validreasoning said:


> Rumble took place on January 24th last year so a week ago this week was the post rumble show with a wwe title change previous night
> 
> If we compare post rumble raws year on year it would be
> 
> 3.292 million vs 3.496 million
> 
> 1.20 in 18-48 demo vs 1.22


Well that changes my view then. Number still isn't good, but not disastrous like dropping 800k viewers week on week.


----------



## validreasoning

8pm - 3.628 million 
9pm - 3.643 million
10pm - 3.574 million 

Average - 3.615 million

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/monday-cable-ratings-jan-30-2017/

Down about 10% from last year's post rumble show but that did have new champion and rock appearance


----------



## Erik.

Strowman/Owens title match was in the second hour. Good stuff :mark:


----------



## A-C-P

Right in line with that 10% yearly drop


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3 last week did a 3.11 with the show ending with Brock, Goldberg, and Taker.

Hour 3 this week did a 3.57 with the show closing with Triple H, Rollins, and Joe.

Wow.

Hour 2 also increased from Hour 1 which rarely happens. Glad that 2nd hour kicked off with the awesome Steph/Rollins segment where Seth was spittin' fire.

:mark:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So still down on last year? Well, guess it'll just keep declining at this point. Wonder if they'll have an episode that beats the same respective week/fallout/go-home show from the year prior.

Still, good that the third hour maintained most of the viewership for once. Of course it took a Universal Title match involving Strowman, a Brock Lesnar appearance (though this doesn't have as much to do with it but may have helped keep viewers tuned in since it was around 10 minutes into the first quarter of the third hour he was shown coming to the ring), and the advertised HHH return/Rollins face-off which had been building for months to do it. 

All in all, I credit whatever success this number has to the fact Roman Reigns was barely on the show/advertised. Because why not?



> Hour 3 last week did a 3.11 with the show ending with Brock, Goldberg, and Taker.
> 
> Hour 3 this week did a 3.57 with the show closing with Triple H, Rollins, and Joe.


To be fair, only Goldberg was advertised for that segment last week. Lesnar I'm not even sure was advertised beforehand. Taker I know wasn't. This week's third hour had the HHH/Rollins storyline with both of them clearly there, and a Universal Title match, and the fact it was the fallout (though it is still good they maintained viewers so credit to them on that).


----------



## Randy Lahey

A-C-P said:


> Right in line with that 10% yearly drop


There's not going to be any momentum for Raw numbers until they reverse the yearly trend of losing viewers. If they start beating the prior year's numbers, then you can be assured that Raw has bottomed out and the base remaining is strong. But if they keep bleeding, it's going to be a continous bleed till they are dead.


----------



## Starbuck

Look what happens when you create a running thread throughout the show and give people something to look forward to. Surprise surprise most people stick around and hardly anybody tunes out. Some fun segments on the show this week, the big fallout from the Rumble, a fresh championship match and a continued tease of HHH/Rollins finally happening. Best rating in months and well deserved. For once lol.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.628M
H2-3.643M
H3-3.574M
3H-3.615M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.004% / + 0.015M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 1.89% / - 0.049M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 1.49% / - 0.054M )
1/30/17 Vs 1/23/17 ( + 10.52% / + 0.344M )

Demo (1/30/17 Vs 1/23/17):
H1- 1.350D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.360D Vs 1.260D
H3- 1.390D Vs 1.200D
3H- 1.367D Vs 1.203D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 1st by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/30/17 Vs 2/1/16):
H1- 3.628M Vs 3.592M
H2- 3.643M Vs 3.464M
H3- 3.574M Vs 3.094M
3H- 3.615M Vs 3.383M ( + 6.86% / + 0.232M )

Demo (1/30/17 Vs 2/1/16):
H1- 1.350D Vs 1.240D
H2- 1.360D Vs 1.260D
H3- 1.390D Vs 1.150D
3H- 1.367D Vs 1.217D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 7th, 9th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## The Renegade

Good numbers I expect to see improve next week. That ending was a killer hook, and with a possible Goldberg reign on the horizon, Brock once again a weekly fixture, and Taker v Reigns likely on the way as well, there's no reason this year shouldn't surpass the pot hole filled Road to Wrestlemania we dealt with last year.


----------



## Saiyanjin2

RAW was really good last night, glad it got good ratings.


----------



## TheGreatBanana

ShowStopper said:


> Hour 3 last week did a 3.11 with the show ending with Brock, Goldberg, and Taker.
> 
> Hour 3 this week did a 3.57 with the show closing with Triple H, Rollins, and Joe.
> 
> Wow.


How stupid. Firstly the show after a PPV always gets a higher viewership than the previous week, especially the Big 4 PPV's. Secondly if people knew Lesnar and Undertaker were going to appear, viewership would have gone through the roof. Both appeared unexpectedly.


----------



## Mra22

RAW was epic last night, great story telling throughout the night and a great cliffhanger to end the show, I am actually looking forward to next week :clap


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

A-C-P said:


> Right in line with that 10% yearly drop


And that 46% drop since they went to three hours.

Post Rumble and post Mania aren't really representing average numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheGreatBanana said:


> How stupid. Firstly the show after a PPV always gets a higher viewership than the previous week, especially the Big 4 PPV's. Secondly if people knew Lesnar and Undertaker were going to appear, viewership would have gone through the roof. Both appeared unexpectedly.


Ratings would've gone through the roof? Then why don't they anyother time those guys are advertised?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Undertaker was the last guy left to destroy as a draw, and they managed to do that, too.

I'm sure it won't take much longer with Goldberg.


----------



## Y.2.J

Good ratings for a very good episode of RAW. Best ratings for RAW in a while, surely?

Hopefully they can retain and grow their viewership in the upcoming weeks.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 1/30, the day after the Royal Rumble, did a 2.49 rating and 3,613,000 viewers (1.58 viewers per home). The Raw after the Rumble show is likely to be one of the highest rated episodes of the year, so this looks to be near the 2017 ceiling level. Plus they pushed the return of HHH, who helped keep the third hour drop to a minimum.
> 
> Raw was up nine percent in ratings and ten percent in total audience from the prior week. But a big gain would be expected. Last year’s day after the Rumble Raw show did a 2.93 rating and 4,091,000 viewers, so the year-to-year drop was 15 percent in ratings and 12 percent in viewers. But that’s not a perfect comparison since the 2016 show featured the return of Dwayne Johnson and was the most-watched episode of Raw of the entire year.
> 
> This is likely to be either the first or second highest Raw number for 2017. It was the most viewers for a Raw episode since 4/4, the day after last year’s WrestleMania, which did 4,079,000 viewers.
> 
> Raw was fourth for the night on cable.
> 
> The first hour did 3,628,000 viewers. The second hour did 3,643,000 viewers. The third hour did 3,574,000 viewers, which has to be credited to mostly the show-long build for HHH’s return. Brock Lesnar was on the show, but that wasn’t pushed and even though locally advertised, his appearing was positioned as a “surprise” not pushed until the third hour.
> 
> The male audience grew, as 18-49 males were up nine percent in hour three vs. hour one, which is unusually high growth, while 18-49 women were down five percent in the same period. In 12-17, the girls were down 13 percent from hour one to three while guys were up 33 percent from hour one to hour three which is really significant. That was the age group most into the HHH return.
> 
> The show did a 0.98 in 12-17 (up 11.4 percent from last week), 1.24 in 18-34 (up 31.9 percent), 1.50 in 35-49 (up 2.7 percent) and 1.29 in 50+ (up 8.4 percent).
> 
> The audience was 60.6 percent male in 18-49 and 60.2 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Starbuck

> *The male audience grew, as 18-49 males were up nine percent in hour three vs. hour one, which is unusually high growth, while 18-49 women were down five percent in the same period. In 12-17, the girls were down 13 percent from hour one to three while guys were up 33 percent from hour one to hour three which is really significant. That was the age group most into the HHH return.
> 
> The show did a 0.98 in 12-17 (up 11.4 percent from last week), 1.24 in 18-34 (up 31.9 percent), 1.50 in 35-49 (up 2.7 percent) and 1.29 in 50+ (up 8.4 percent).
> 
> The audience was 60.6 percent male in 18-49 and 60.2 percent male in 12-17.*


Triple GOAT drawing in that key demo. 

:bosstrips


----------



## wwe9391

Starbuck said:


> Triple GOAT drawing in that key demo.
> 
> :bosstrips


Bow down to the king the king of kings. :HHH2


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.339M
H2-3.165M
H3-2.842M
3H-3.115M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.21% / - 0.174M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.21% / - 0.323M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.88% / - 0.497M )
2/6/17 Vs 1/30/17 ( - 13.83% / - 0.500M )

Demo (2/6/17 Vs 1/30/17):
H1- 1.190D Vs 1.350D
H2- 1.160D Vs 1.360D
H3- 1.060D Vs 1.390D
3H- 1.137D Vs 1.367D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/6/17 Vs 2/8/16):
H1- 3.339M Vs 3.907M
H2- 3.165M Vs 3.905M
H3- 2.842M Vs 3.368M
3H- 3.115M Vs 3.727M ( - 16.42% / - 0.612M )

Demo (2/6/17 Vs 2/8/16):
H1- 1.190D Vs 1.370D
H2- 1.160D Vs 1.410D
H3- 1.060D Vs 1.320D
3H- 1.137D Vs 1.367D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## NieNie

Roman Reigns vs Samoa Joe couldn't keep the 3rd hour over 3M.

Ooops


----------



## A-C-P

Goldberg effect almost completely worn off now :vince7


----------



## DoubtGin

No ROLLINS NO RATINGS


----------



## Erik.

Strowman vs. Jobbers = draw.

DRAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN STROWMAN.


----------



## A-C-P

DoubtGin said:


> No ROLLINS NO RATINGS


THE MAN

rollins2:rollins4
:Seth:Cocky:Rollins:Rollins2


----------



## Bret Hart

3 hours is toooooooooooooooooo fucking long.


They should do something where the first hour is all the lame stuff and then at 9 is when the good stuff starts.


----------



## wwe9391

That 3rd hour is cancer.










That brings in 34 million


----------



## Erik.

Bret Hart said:


> 3 hours is toooooooooooooooooo fucking long.
> 
> 
> They should do something where the first hour is all the lame stuff and then at 9 is when the good stuff starts.


They should just full the first two and a bit hours with Raw and have the rest of it like a panel show at the end with some off script promo's in the ilk of Talking Smack.


----------



## Chrome

That :goldberg2 stimulus package has expired it seems. Any hour under 3 million at this point is sad.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3 back below 3 million.


----------



## Ace

Wasn't Raw built around Goldberg and Reigns? They even advertised an update for Rollins :lol



DoubtGin said:


> No ROLLINS NO RATINGS


 Except they were advertising an injury update for Rollins...


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Big decline from last week, big decline year on year, big decline hour 1 to hour 3...

... I think I see what Vince is going to do. He's going to make Roman beat Taker at Mania, then send him to Smackdown to tank their ratings so any slim chance that SD has of beating Raw in the ratings will be completely gone. What an evil genius....


----------



## Starbuck

DoubtGin said:


> No HHH NO RATINGS


Fixed that for ya. It was pretty obvious Our Sith Lord and Saviour King Paul wasn't going to be there last night, nor Young Padawan Rollins, therefore everybody switched off. 

Can't say I blame them. KO/Jericho are a midcard act. Reigns is boring as fuck and everybody knows all his matches involve shenanigans so why bother watching them. Goldberg is lame. 

First hour had a lot of promise and then it all went to shit. Poor Joe. That 3rd hour burden isn't kind to anybody...UNLESS YOU'RE THE KING OF KINGS.



> *Last week: The third hour did 3,574,000 viewers, which has to be credited to mostly the show-long build for HHH’s return. *


:bosstrips


----------



## Dr. Middy

I mean, the Royal Rumble was only going to affect the Raw following it, that was for sure. And Goldberg was a temporary stopgap, but after the RR altercation with Brock and their feud and match at Survivor Series, the magic has worn off a bit. Now it's really just the same old overly long (this third hour is DEATH) Raw.


----------



## Kabraxal

The WM card is shaping up to be awful.. people tune out and Raw starts to plummet back to the dregs it was at before the WM buzz began. 

WWE is fucked if they don't pull their heads out of their ass and start giving the fans what they want. You shouldn't be under 3 million for any hour with a roster stacked with guys wrestling fans actually would love to see in meaningful feuds.... but instead we are getting what looks to be a face Roman retiring Taker, Shane gobbling up Style's momentum, Orton and Bray's heatless feud or Orton and Cena boring us to tears, and another part timer fest where a championship is killed off because they have to give Lesnar his win back against Goldberg in a match that will either be short and awful or torturously long and awful. Any wonder fans are tuning out?


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.339M
> H2-3.165M
> H3-2.842M
> 3H-3.115M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.21% / - 0.174M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.21% / - 0.323M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.88% / - 0.497M )
> 2/6/17 Vs 1/30/17 ( - 13.83% / - 0.500M )
> 
> Demo (2/6/17 Vs 1/30/17):
> H1- 1.190D Vs 1.350D
> H2- 1.160D Vs 1.360D
> H3- 1.060D Vs 1.390D
> 3H- 1.137D Vs 1.367D
> 
> Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 8th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (2/6/17 Vs 2/8/16):
> H1- 3.339M Vs 3.907M
> H2- 3.165M Vs 3.905M
> H3- 2.842M Vs 3.368M
> 3H- 3.115M Vs 3.727M ( - 16.42% / - 0.612M )
> 
> Demo (2/6/17 Vs 2/8/16):
> H1- 1.190D Vs 1.370D
> H2- 1.160D Vs 1.410D
> H3- 1.060D Vs 1.320D
> 3H- 1.137D Vs 1.367D
> 
> Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*



Horrible numbers and continues the down trend. RTWM drawing barely over 3 mils? I remember last year when a few shows on RTWM had near what the ratings for football were doing, and the same thing is happening this year.

Bleed bleed bleed....continue to bleed.


----------



## wwe9391

Once again no talent is at fault for ratings decline. Whats it gonna take for it to register with some? smh


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

wwe9391 said:


> Once again no talent is at fault for ratings decline. Whats it gonna take for it to register with some? smh


Don't worry man, one day they'll get it.


----------



## Y.2.J

People like to bash RAW's ratings but some need to understand that it's not the same landscape as 20, 15 or even 10 years ago. 

Does anyone talk about how RAW outdraws NBA games literally any day of the week?

People consume their TV differently nowadays. PVR, Hulu, online, Youtube, etc. WWE has grown globally as well, that's not accounted for. The TV ratings are only US views.

It just irks me sometimes. The WWE isn't going anywhere for a long time. Their biggest revenue numbers yet prove that.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Avada Kedavra said:


> People like to bash RAW's ratings but some need to understand that it's not the same landscape as 20, 15 or even 10 years ago.
> 
> Does anyone talk about how RAW outdraws NBA games literally any day of the week?
> 
> People consume their TV differently nowadays. PVR, Hulu, online, Youtube, etc. WWE has grown globally as well, that's not accounted for. The TV ratings are only US views.
> 
> It just irks me sometimes. The WWE isn't going anywhere for a long time. Their biggest revenue numbers yet prove that.


Yes, WWE has grown so well globally that Raw's viewership in Germany is at an all time low.

I'm pretty sure YouTube existed 10 years ago in 2007, as well as streaming. And as long as YouTube and Hulu (lol) don't pay 200 million a year to WWE, they, and all international markets are worth less than shit because they all depend on the core market, which is the US.
And if ratings continue to suck for USA, they will cut the TV deal, and the oh-so-fantastic Revenue, nevermind profit (some still don't grasp the difference) is in the shits.


----------



## Y.2.J

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Yes, WWE has grown so well globally that Raw's viewership in Germany is at an all time low.
> 
> I'm pretty sure YouTube existed 10 years ago in 2007, as well as streaming. And as long as YouTube and Hulu (lol) don't pay 200 million a year to WWE, they, and all international markets are worth less than shit because they all depend on the core market, which is the US.
> And if ratings continue to suck for USA, they will cut the TV deal, and the oh-so-fantastic Revenue, nevermind profit (some still don't grasp the difference) is in the shits.


Semantics.

Germany is one country - let's just ignore the growth in the UK, middle east, Asian countries, etc.

You know very well that streaming and Youtube wasn't as popular or reached as big of an audience in 2007 as they do today. Their Youtube channels gets millions of hits a week - considerable revenue and publicity that they didn't have 10+ years ago.

Yes, obviously the US market is the most important but the USA network will not cancel RAW any time soon. Mostly everything on cable television is down. Networks are starving for live sports/entertainment, its where they make the most ad revenue.

I understand the difference between profit and revenue but its not so black and white when it comes to finances and showing the health of a company. More numbers are needed.


----------



## Bret Hart

Damn, just under 4 million people were watching last year.

Who the hell watches Love and Hip Hop?


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

I admit I am a bit irked the ratings haven't stooped below a two million yet. I will chalk that up to road to wrestlemania hype. Hopefully by June this shitbag of a show gets the sub-two million ratings it deserves.



Bret Hart said:


> Who the hell watches Love and Hip Hop?


Dumb fucking Americans.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

Wrestlemania card looks bad. People are not buying in Reigns or Rollins as top guys.

Joe is a new heel and in the main event a week later with Roman with no build up. No hype or reason for fans to go i cant miss this.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 2/6 drew a very disappointing number, averaging a 2.19 rating and 3,100,000 viewers (1.54 viewers per home)
> 
> It was the fifth lowest non-holiday, non-football number for the show since 1997, made even more disappointing because it was coming off a big number the week before. There was no competition to explain the number, although the show finished fourth for the night on cable, which is better than it had been doing in that regard.
> 
> The previous four lowest non-football numbers, which all came in 2016, were two weeks against major NBA playoff games, and two weeks against the Olympics. So this would be the lowest number in two decades when not against a major sporting event or being on a holiday.
> 
> Also, in bad news, the audience dropped significantly from the start-to-the-finish of the show, meaning, to the public it was not a good show. It was, by a percentage basis, one of the 20 biggest drops from hour one to hour three since the show went to three hours.
> 
> It should be noted that the drop was almost entirely women, as from hour one to hour three among men 18-49, the drop was two percent, but among women, it was 22 percent. In 12-17, among boys, the show gained 12 percent while girls were down 14 percent.
> 
> The show was fourth for the night on cable and the closest thing to competition were NBA games that did 1,730,000 viewers against the first half of the show and did 1,308,000 viewers against the second half. So it wasn’t competition that led to the 14 percent drop from last week. There was going to be a major drop, given the day after Rumble show was going to be among the highest of 2017, but there’s no real explanation for the drop to be as large as it turned out to be.
> 
> The 8 p.m. hour did 3,339,000 viewers. The 9 p.m. hour did 3,165,000 viewers. The 10 p.m. hour did 2,842,000 viewers.
> 
> The show did a 0.81 in 12-17 (down 17.3 percent from last week), 0.99 in 18-34 (down 20.2 percent), 1.29 in 35-49 (down 14.0 percent) and 1.14 in 50+ (down 11.6 percent).
> 
> The audience was 61.4 percent male in 18-49 and 72.5 percent male in 12-17.





> For the weekend house shows, as noted last week, Reigns had the weekend shows off on the Raw side. But then with Rollins injured, Reigns was advertised as his replacement on Broomfield and Eugene, but not Salt Lake City (where Lesnar was the star attraction). However, Reigns wasn’t there and instead they headlined with Owens vs. Show in non-title street fights, except in Salt Lake City where Lesnar beat Show and Owens beat Zayn in the main event. Swann’s ankle injury caused him to miss the house shows so Neville instead defended against Alexander. On the Smackdown side, both Cena and Orton were off. Nikki was also off, which may have been neck injury related. Lynch was also off, leaving a weakness on the face side so Natalya worked as a face but then turned back. So they headlined by Ambrose vs. Styles vs. Miz for the IC title
> 
> The Raw crew opened on 2/3 in Broomfield, CO, just outside Denver, before 2,000 fans. The crowd was below usual due to an ice storm. 2/4 in Salt Lake City drew 4,700 which included Lesnar. We didn’t get a crowd for 2/5 in Eugene, OR


----------



## ShiningStar

WWE is very lucky that Emmalina will debut next week and save the ratings.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Interesting that the females tuned out. So much for Reigns being a pussy magnet.


----------



## squarebox

Haha, just under 3M last year down to low 3's / high 2's this year.

You can't deny the trend.


----------



## Bung

3 hours is too long of a show 

I blame the fans, they will follow anything wwe does.

Am i the only one that cringes at new days forced comedy? 

Its not funny at all. 

When they talk about the cereal and say "they make sure you aint booty"

Its not funny, and the brony shit, i cant relate to that and neither can any other black guy in america.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.199M
H2-3.153M
H3-2.909M
3H-3.087M










Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.44% / - 0.046M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.74% / - 0.144M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 9.07% / - 0.190M )
2/13/17 Vs 2/6/17 ( - 0.90% / - 0.028M )

Demo (2/13/17 Vs 2/6/17):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.190D
H2- 1.120D Vs 1.160D
H3- 1.050D Vs 1.060D
3H- 1.107D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.










Viewership (2/13/17 Vs 2/15/16):
H1- 3.199M Vs 3.661M
H2- 3.153M Vs 3.537M
H3- 2.909M Vs 3.233M
3H- 3.087M Vs 3.477M ( - 11.22% / - 0.390M )

Demo (2/13/17 Vs 2/15/16):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.260D
H2- 1.120D Vs 1.220D
H3- 1.050D Vs 1.160D
3H- 1.107D Vs 1.213D

Note: RAW this time last year was 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Chrome

Bit of a mixed bag there tbh. Hour 1 went down, hour 2 basically stayed the same, but the 3rd hour went up. They're still down from last year when last year's ratings weren't exactly great either.


----------



## JDP2016

Meh. Was hoping for a 3 in the third hour like when Sasha and Charlotte main evented in December but whatever.


----------



## Kabraxal

WWE is struggling horribly in the heat of the WM season... hopefully they get a small boost for the Jericho/KO angle next week. That was one of the few times the WWE knocked a segment out of the park on Raw... to the point you can't find one negative to say about it.


----------



## A-C-P

10% drop again this WM season :draper2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

That's low for an Hour 1. Just saying. Good to see the Hour 1 rating reflected by far the worst hour of the show.


----------



## Strategize

ShowStopper said:


> That's low for an Hour 1. Just saying.


It didn't seem like a very intriguing show on paper so it's not surprising.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Strategize said:


> It didn't seem like a very intriguing show on paper so it's not surprising.


And they certainly didn't help their cause in Hour 1 to bring the viewers in.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That godforsaken second hour drew 3 million?
My god.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

well see what happens if they put the belt on bill, chances are a significant ratings boost

im so conflicted, owens jericho deserves the title, the goldberg mark in me wants to see him hold a world title again and 
the bray mark in me thinks if goldie wins and drops it to brock theres more of a chance of them having bray retain


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I wonder what the overrun number was for Charlotte/Bayley. What I found interesting was the little kids who were into the match. WWE has done a solid job appealing to that demographic.


----------



## wwe9391

Hour 1 the highest go figure.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Weak hour 1, but considering how it started, can't say I'm surprised.

At least hour 2 held pretty well and the drop from hour 1 to hour 3 wasn't as bad as last week's (and hell, hour 3 was better this week!)

I'd really like to see a quarterly/minute-minute breakdown of this show though. Wonder how well the Festival of Friendship actually did. It filled up the first quarter of the third hour and I wonder if it gained viewers as it went on (I think PWTorch used to do those breakdowns?)


----------



## Starbuck

Raw on track to beat record low levels of interest for the RTWM 32 this year it's looking like. Given the stinker of a card that's rumored I can't say I'm surprised.


----------



## Erik.

They missed a trick by not building up the Festival of Friendship ending the show.

Absolutely NO reason why that shouldn't have gone on last. I mean if I was watching Raw live, I'd honestly have switched off INSTANTLY after that segment, nothing was ever going to top it.


----------



## wwf

Erik. said:


> They missed a trick by not building up the Festival of Friendship ending the show.
> 
> Absolutely NO reason why that shouldn't have gone on last. I mean if I was watching Raw live, I'd honestly have switched off INSTANTLY after that segment, nothing was ever going to top it.


That's a terrible reason for it to go last. Most people are not going to turn off the TV simply because the best segment already showed. People will turn off the TV if the remainder of the show doesn't interest them or if they have to go to sleep. 

Thus, it's much better to show it earlier since some people aren't going to watch the last hour/last segment, regardless of how good it is.


----------



## Erik.

wwf said:


> That's a terrible reason for it to go last. Most people are not going to turn off the TV simply because the best segment already showed. People will turn off the TV if the remainder of the show doesn't interest them or if they have to go to sleep.
> 
> Thus, it's much better to show it earlier since some people aren't going to watch the last hour/last segment, regardless of how good it is.


And that is why their ratings fail in the third hour.

Third hour ratings will stay at a steady height or maybe even increase if you have something big for people to look forward to. Mostly big segments, returns or big title matches. Hence why third hours have stayed high when Goldberg returned and the Charlotte/Sasha title match, because both were heavily advertised throughout the show. 

I can't even remember what the last segment of this show was. Bayley winning the belt wasn't it? Sums it up really. 

I have absolutely no doubt if they continued to build the festival of friendship throughout the show by showing us clips of Jericho and Owens and backstage segments of Jericho giving Owens gifts etc it wouldn't have suffered such a terrible drop.


----------



## Strategize

Erik. said:


> And that is why their ratings fail in the third hour.
> 
> Third hour ratings will stay at a steady height or maybe even increase if you have something big for people to look forward to. Mostly big segments, returns or big title matches. Hence why third hours have stayed high when Goldberg returned and the Charlotte/Sasha title match, because both were heavily advertised throughout the show.
> 
> I can't even remember what the last segment of this show was. Bayley winning the belt wasn't it? Sums it up really.
> 
> I have absolutely no doubt if they continued to build the festival of friendship throughout the show by showing us clips of Jericho and Owens and backstage segments of Jericho giving Owens gifts etc it wouldn't have suffered such a terrible drop.


The fuck you talking bout? *Both* the Festival of friendship and Charlotte/Bayley were in hour 3. 

Wouldn't of mattered which order these 2 were in, nobody knew Festival of friendship = JeriKO breakup.


----------



## Erik.

Strategize said:


> The fuck you talking bout? *Both* the Festival of friendship and Charlotte/Bayley were in hour 3.
> 
> Wouldn't of mattered which order these 2 were in, nobody knew Festival of friendship = JeriKO breakup.


Pretty sure it started in the second hour.

And I have no doubt once the festival of friendship ended, people switched off. Hence the huge drop. 

Of course it mattered what order. If Jericho/Owens goes on last, you know shits going down. 

You think if Goldberg return opened the show or was put in the second hour, people would have stuck around? Fuck that. 

Clownshoe.


----------



## Strategize

Erik. said:


> Pretty sure it started in the second hour.
> 
> And I have no doubt once the festival of friendship ended, people switched off. Hence the huge drop.
> 
> Of course it mattered what order. If Jericho/Owens goes on last, you know shits going down.
> 
> Clownshoe.


It was like a 30min segment lol. They were WELL into the 3rd hour by the time it was over. I seriously doubt they see an amazing segment then just switch off. 

Hell, judging by the crowds reaction it woke them up, their momentum carried over into the main event and they were hot for it despite being dead the first 2 hours.

I said this earlier in the thread, but on paper the show didn't look strong at all, hence why the 1st hour was down. 

The 3rd hour actually outdrew the previous week despite having a Goldberg segment and Roman in the main event.


----------



## Erik.

Strategize said:


> It was like a 30min segment lol. They were WELL into the 3rd hour by the time it was over. I seriously doubt they see an amazing segment then just switch off.
> 
> Hell, judging by the crowds reaction it woke them up, their momentum carried over into the main event and they were hot for it despite being dead the first 2 hours.
> 
> I said this earlier in the thread, but on paper the show didn't look strong at all, hence why the 1st hour was down.
> 
> The 3rd hour actually outdrew the previous week despite having a Goldberg segment and Roman in the main event.


And like I said, considering the humongous drop, it wouldn't surprise me if people tuned out afterwards. I know I would have. Mainly because women wrestling is the most boring form of entertainment and I'd just seen one of the best segments in a decade. 

You're right in the sense that on paper it wasn't a strong show. Pretty much the same with this week's show, but this week's show has the fall out from the festival of friendship, which shows what a good segment could do, it's a shame they didn't end on that segment last week, that's what the WWE need. Endings that make you want to tune in the following week.


----------



## Strategize

Erik. said:


> And like I said, considering the humongous drop, it wouldn't surprise me if people tuned out afterwards. I know I would have. Mainly because women wrestling is the most boring form of entertainment and I'd just seen one of the best segments in a decade.


"Humongous drop" sure lets be hyperbolic as fuck. 
Also, should of known they'd some kind of sexist motivation behind this lol.


----------



## Erik.

Strategize said:


> "Humongous drop" sure lets be hyperbolic as fuck.
> Also, should of known they'd some kind of sexist motivation behind this lol.


Yes, I'm sexist because I feel majority of men are better and more athletic than women when it comes to professional wrestling. 

I guess I'm sexist for preferring to watch men's football over women's football too.


----------



## Strategize

Erik. said:


> Yes, I'm sexist because I feel majority of men are better and more athletic than women when it comes to professional wrestling.
> 
> I guess I'm sexist for preferring to watch men's football over women's football too.


I agree, the men are usually better. In this *particular* instance the girls had a great match worthy of the spot the were given. 

But that's not what you said, you pretty much said "they're women and the women suck" despite having the best match on the show.


----------



## Erik.

Strategize said:


> I agree, the men are usually better. In this *particular* instance the girls had a great match worthy of the spot the were given.
> 
> But that's not what you said, you pretty much said "they're women and the women suck" despite having the best match on the show.


Actually, I said I find women's wrestling boring. Charlotte and Alexa Bliss I am more than happy to watch because their character work is brilliant and I prefer characters and charisma over ring work. I prefer a Charlotte segment than a Charlotte match for example. 

But we are moving off topic. Where are the damn ratings for this week! :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Did they stop recording ratings because smarks think they don't matter? Or where is Johnny Ace?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.259M
H2-3.261M
H3-3.127M
3H-3.216M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.06% / + 0.002M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.11% / - 0.134M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.05% / - 0.132M )
2/20/17 Vs 2/13/17 ( + 4.18% / + 0.129M )

Demo (2/20/17 Vs 2/13/17):
H1- 1.170D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.160D Vs 1.120D
H3- 1.140D Vs 1.050D
3H- 1.157D Vs 1.107D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/20/17 Vs 2/22/16):
H1- 3.259M Vs 4.201M
H2- 3.261M Vs 4.055M
H3- 3.127M Vs 3.396M
3H- 3.216M Vs 3.884M ( - 17.20% / - 0.668M )

Demo (2/20/17 Vs 2/22/16):
H1- 1.170D Vs 1.430D
H2- 1.160D Vs 1.420D
H3- 1.140D Vs 1.200D
3H- 1.157D Vs 1.350D

Note: RAW this time last year was 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## wwf

Erik. said:


> And that is why their ratings fail in the third hour.
> 
> Third hour ratings will stay at a steady height or maybe even increase if you have something big for people to look forward to. Mostly big segments, returns or big title matches. Hence why third hours have stayed high when Goldberg returned and the Charlotte/Sasha title match, because both were heavily advertised throughout the show.
> 
> I can't even remember what the last segment of this show was. Bayley winning the belt wasn't it? Sums it up really.
> 
> I have absolutely no doubt if they continued to build the festival of friendship throughout the show by showing us clips of Jericho and Owens and backstage segments of Jericho giving Owens gifts etc it wouldn't have suffered such a terrible drop.


Me thinks you like to respond without really reading, or perhaps comprehending (giving you the benefit of the doubt this time), what a person writes.

So I'll repeat myself again. Some people aren't going to stay up that late, regardless of what's going to happen in the third hour. Yes, that even includes Goldberg. 

The numbers indicate that it is better to show the good segments earlier, because maximizing the first two hours, where people will actually watch based off of the quality of the show, is better than maximizing the last hour, in which a lot of people will go to bed regardless of quality.


----------



## JDP2016

RAW got off to a terrible start last week beginning the show with Roman and Steph. Wasn't the Enzo v. Cesaro match in that third hour as well? Didn't it go in between the Festival of Friendship and the women's match?


----------



## Erik.

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.259M
> H2-3.261M
> H3-3.127M
> 3H-3.216M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.06% / + 0.002M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.11% / - 0.134M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.05% / - 0.132M )
> 2/20/17 Vs 2/13/17 ( + 4.18% / + 0.129M )
> 
> Demo (2/20/17 Vs 2/13/17):
> H1- 1.170D Vs 1.150D
> H2- 1.160D Vs 1.120D
> H3- 1.140D Vs 1.050D
> 3H- 1.157D Vs 1.107D
> 
> Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (2/20/17 Vs 2/22/16):
> H1- 3.259M Vs 4.201M
> H2- 3.261M Vs 4.055M
> H3- 3.127M Vs 3.396M
> 3H- 3.216M Vs 3.884M ( - 17.20% / - 0.668M )
> 
> Demo (2/20/17 Vs 2/22/16):
> H1- 1.170D Vs 1.430D
> H2- 1.160D Vs 1.420D
> H3- 1.140D Vs 1.200D
> 3H- 1.157D Vs 1.350D
> 
> Note: RAW this time last year was 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


That's solid consistency.


----------



## Kabraxal

Festival of Friendship paid some dividends... maybe they should realize long, slow builds into a climactic spike that will flow right into more build to culminate the feud is what fans like. Jericho/KO has been of the few good things about Raw.


----------



## Ace

Those are horrible numbers for the RTWM.


----------



## Erik.

One Winged Angel said:


> Those are horrible numbers for the RTWM.


Doubt they care. 

Because they'll sell out Mania and tens of millions will watch it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUN!


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Viewership (2/20/17 Vs 2/22/16):
> H1- 3.259M Vs 4.201M
> H2- 3.261M Vs 4.055M
> H3- 3.127M Vs 3.396M
> 3H- 3.216M Vs 3.884M ( - 17.20% / - 0.668M )
> 
> Demo (2/20/17 Vs 2/22/16):
> H1- 1.170D Vs 1.430D
> H2- 1.160D Vs 1.420D
> H3- 1.140D Vs 1.200D
> 3H- 1.157D Vs 1.350D
> 
> Note: RAW this time last year was 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


So 17% lower than last year, which was Raw's worst ratings ever. lol...At this point, I suppose any year that does not do a record low rating will be a positive. Perhaps monday night wrestling on TV has ran it's course...Every show eventually gets cancelled. Even long running soap operas.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Erik. said:


> Doubt they care.
> 
> Because they'll sell out Mania and tens of millions will watch it.


They'll care when it's time to re-up the USA deal that expires in 2019. You think USA is going to give them anywhere close to what they got last time? Last time they signed that contract, they were a consistent 3.0 and over show. Now they are trending towards 2.0 and under. Lost 1/3 of their audience since the last time they sat down with USA.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 2/20 did a 2.21 rating and 3,208,000 viewers (1.58 viewers per home), up one percent in ratings and three percent in viewers from the record low non-heavy sports competition ratings of the week before.
> 
> The ratings are still poor for the Mania season, a 19 percent drop from the same week last year. The positive is that the Braun Strowman vs. Big Show main event held viewers better than the third hour has been doing.
> 
> The first hour did 3,259,000 viewers. The second hour did 3,261,000 viewers. The third hour did 3,127,000 viewers.
> 
> The show was second for the night on cable, trailing only the O’Reilly factor, which did 3,998,000 viewers.
> 
> As far as the demo drops from hour one to three went, women 18-49 dropped 11 percent from the first to third hour while men grew two percent. Last week women fell 14 percent and men fell three percent. The teenage girl drop of 38 percent last week was not repeated at close to that level this week, although it did fall 15 percent.
> 
> Raw did a 0.80 in 12-17 (up 3.9 percent), 0.88 in 18-34 (down 3.3 percent), 1.44 in 35-49 (up 9.9 percent) and 1.23 in 50+ (up 2.4 percent).
> 
> The audience was 67.8 percent male in 18-49, which is a lower than usual female skew, and 64.7 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Mra22

I heavily doubt the USA network renews the WWE when their contract expires. It might be a good thing though then they can move to a network with no restrictions


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Mra22 said:


> It might be a good thing though then they can move to a network with no restrictions


That's possible... If another channel wants them. I recall only USA did last time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Good number. Very consistent from start to finish despite the first hour being a bit of a drag. Second hour was better and the rating stayed consistent throughout. Good stuff for Raw.


----------



## wwe9391

Mra22 said:


> I heavily doubt the USA network renews the WWE when their contract expires. It might be a good thing though then they can move to a network with no restrictions


USA is gonna renew them. Other than Mr. Robot, Raw and smackdown are USAs highest rated programs


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

USA shall renew them. But they are gonna be in a far better vantage point to negotiate lower pay. Which is great.


----------



## Nirvash

Network only mean almost giving up making new fans, is a suicide.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Nirvash said:


> Network only mean almost giving up making new fans, is a suicide.


This is a great point I never see brought up. 

Not only that, but how many paying network subscribers does WWE have? 1.5 million (I genuinely don't remember what the report said, and on my phone now so can't be arsed to look it up). They average what? 3 million viewers a week for Raw (I'm sure it'll be less this year, but for the sake of keeping it simple we'll go win that). How many of that remaining 1.5 million would even bother subscribing to the Network if everything was moved to the Network? I really don't know. Pretending for a second they were able to get that much, that's an extra $180 million a year. But if it's a million then that reopen to $120 million a year. A third would be $60 million a year. I'd imagine they'd have to spend more on advertising on TV for the Network itself, but he's a many new fans could the possibly get off of that? Would it make up for he advertising costs? Otherwise it's all through word of mouth, which I don't think many talk about WWE anymore in real life.

I'm sure there are many other factors too that go into it. I'm sure WWE will still get an offer from USA and all of this is pointless speculation. But I think the idea of going all in on the Network, based off all of this is pretty stupid. Then again I don't know much about financials/deals and all that jazz, so someone feel free to correct me on anything.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Erik. said:


> Doubt they care.
> 
> Because they'll sell out Mania and *tens of millions *will watch it.


Are you on crack, dude?


----------



## Erik.

P.H. Hatecraft said:


> USA shall renew them. But they are gonna be in a far better vantage point to negotiate lower pay. Which is great.


Agreed.

It may even force the WWE to go back to 2 hours.


----------



## chronoxiong

So big men main eventing draws viewers? That's just great. It's going to add to Vince's big men fetish for sure.


----------



## The RainMaker

One Winged Angel said:


> Those are horrible numbers for the RTWM.


I don't know. I mean, I don't think most people really kick into WM mode until March. Plus, Taker isn't there, HHH isn't there, Rollins isn't there, Y2J won't be back until after FL, Brock and Goldberg are sporadic and never on the same show, Shaq hasn't come yet..(This is still a thing..right?)


I mean if in 2 to 3 weeks from Mania when they're doing shows with HHH, Rollins, Taker, Shaq, Brock, Goldberg, Y2J, etc all there and they're not getting a bigger bump than this, then I would go into worry mode.


----------



## A-C-P

chronoxiong said:


> So big men main eventing draws viewers? That's just great. It's going to add to Vince's big men fetish for sure.


I didn't exactly "Draw Viewers" there just wasn't as big a drop as normal, but that has more to do with the show starting out with less viewers of late. Which means the people that started watching and turned off during the show are just not watching at all now...


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.127M
H2-3.233M
H3-2.918M
3H-3.093M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.39% / + 0.106M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.74% / - 0.315M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 6.68% / - 0.209M )
2/27/17 Vs 2/20/17 ( - 3.79% / - 0.123M )*

*Demo (2/27/17 Vs 2/20/17):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.170D
H2- 1.140D Vs 1.160D
H3- 1.020D Vs 1.140D
3H- 1.080D Vs 1.157D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/27/17 Vs 2/29/16):
H1- 3.127M Vs 3.961M
H2- 3.233M Vs 3.660M
H3- 2.918M Vs 3.551M
3H- 3.093M Vs 3.724M ( - 16.94% / - 0.631M )

Demo (2/27/17 Vs 2/29/16):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.380D
H2- 1.140D Vs 1.310D
H3- 1.020D Vs 1.260D
3H- 1.080D Vs 1.317D

Note: RAW this time last year was 1st, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Erik.

Only one man could have raised that second hour rating...


..











:mark:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HHH made his entrance well into Hour 3. The segment started (Rollins entrance) took place at 9:57 PM ET with only 3 minutes left in Hour 2.


----------



## Ace

Those numbers, wow :lol

RTWM is a mess...

Goldberg can't even draw now.

Why is this MF being given the title again?



ShowStopper said:


> HHH made his entrance well into Hour 3. The segment started (Rollins entrance) took place at 9:57 PM ET with only 3 minutes left in Hour 2.


 I don't think anyone really drew, it was just peak viewership.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> I don't think anyone really drew, it was just peak viewership.


Of course. No one ever does these days. I'm just saying the majority of the Rollins/HHH segment took place in Hour 3, not hour 2. Hour 3 did how it usually does; low 3's or very high 2's. It's nothing new. Even the big name part timers draw that in hour 3 these days. They've tried everyone and everything for that hour. It's just impossible.


----------



## Mr. Socko

I'd like to think the drop wasn't anyone's fault in particular. Just the product of a pretty poor show with no real big storyline hook.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mr. Socko said:


> I'd like to think the drop wasn't anyone's fault in particular. Just the product of a pretty poor show with no real big storyline hook.


Sadly, that's not even considered a big drop these days. There's much bigger drops than that from hour 2 to hour 3 on most weeks.


----------



## Ace

Goldberg, the part time megastar, who will be main eventing WM in 2017 is just another geek who can't move the needle :lol

Goes to show everyone that pro wrestling simply doesn't draw in its current state.


----------



## JDP2016

I wonder how many teenage girls tuned out this week, huh Dave Meltzer?



JDP2016 said:


> I wonder how many teenage girls tuned out this week, huh Dave Meltzer?


I guess he's still searching for them.



JDP2016 said:


> I guess he's still searching for them.


Maybe he will have the numbers tomorrow.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 2/27 did a 2.15 rating and 3,083,000 viewers (1.54 viewers per home), a drop of three percent in ratings and four percent from the prior week and tied the lowest rating and was the second lowest audience for an episode that wasn’t on a holiday or opposing a major sporting event over the past 20 years.
> 
> The good news is that it held up better than most of cable, as Raw was second for the night, beating a lot of the FOX News shows that usually beat it.
> 
> The record non-sports competition or holiday low was on 2/13, which did an identical 2.15 rating and 3,073,000 viewers.
> 
> The culprit this week was a loss of ten percent of the viewers between hour two and hour three. The hour two to three decline was 12 percent among women 18-49, 10 percent among men 18-49 (which is highly unusual, women usually drop while men usually stay steady unless there’s competition), 16 percent among girls 12-17 and 10 percent among boys 18-49. The audience that stayed with the third hour the best was 50+, but it also dropped seven percent.
> 
> The show did 3,127,000 viewers in the first hour, 3,233,000 viewers in the second hour and 2,918,000 viewers in the third hour.
> 
> The show did a 0.76 in 12-17 (down 5.0 percent), 0.89 in 18-34 (up 1.1 percent), 1.27 in 35-49 (down 11.8 percent) and 1.22 in 50+ (down 0.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 62.5 percent male in 18-49 and 62.6 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

Awesome. I like a slow descent.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.318M
H2-3.380M
H3-2.950M
3H-3.216M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 1.87% / + 0.062M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.72% / - 0.430M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.09% / - 0.368M )
3/6/17 Vs 2/27/17 ( + 3.98% / + 0.123M )

Demo (3/6/17 Vs 2/27/17):
H1- 1.140D Vs 1.080D
H2- 1.170D Vs 1.140D
H3- 1.060D Vs 1.020D
3H- 1.123D Vs 1.080D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/6/17 Vs 3/7/16):
H1- 3.318M Vs 3.760M
H2- 3.380M Vs 3.614M
H3- 2.950M Vs 3.279M
3H- 3.216M Vs 3.551M ( - 9.43% / - 0.335M )

Demo (3/6/17 Vs 3/7/16):
H1- 1.140D Vs 1.290D
H2- 1.170D Vs 1.270D
H3- 1.060D Vs 1.230D
3H- 1.123D Vs 1.263D

Note: RAW this time last year was 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Stayed for Goldberg, didn't give a shit about Reigns and Taker.

Well, who would?

Funny though that they still put Reigns to close the show instead of the WM Main Event storyline.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And the sad part is those numbers will probably be enough to beat SD, even with it being a 3 hour show vs. a 2 hour show.

:mj4


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> And the sad part is those numbers will probably be enough to beat SD, even with it being a 3 hour show vs. a 2 hour show.
> 
> :mj4


 At least SD viewership has grown over the last year.

Raw has lost 300,000 viewers from last years show.

Imagine how bad it would be without Goldberg.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> At least SD viewership has grown over the last year.


Impossible not to considering what SD was before the brand split and only being 2 hours and having Cena and Orton on it. Lot of advantages that haven't panned out to much ratings wise. They went from low 2's to mid 2's even with all the changes.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> Impossible not to considering what SD was before the brand split and only being 2 hours and having Cena and Orton on it. Lot of advantages that haven't panned out to much ratings wise.


 Dude, you're delusional if you really thought SD was going to beat Raw in ratings this quickly.

There are probably hundreds of thousands who are purely watching Raw out of habit. I am one, I hate the show but watch it because I have been watching it almost every week for a decade (with breaks in between).

Then there's Taker, Lesnar and Goldberg. Once those guys go and SD has established itself, there's a realistic chance of SD beating Raw consistently.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> Dude, you're delusional if you really thought SD was going to beat Raw in ratings this quickly.
> 
> There are probably hundreds of thousands who are purely watching out of habit.
> 
> Then there's Taker, Lesnar and Goldberg. Once those guys go and SD has established itself, there's a realistic chance of SD beating Raw consistently.


I never thought SD was going to beat Raw, but there were some who thought so after the rosters were announced. And it hasn't happened despite all of the changes.

Dude, Raw was beating SD even without the part timers AND during the NFL season just a few short months ago..

Just saying.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> I never thought SD was going to beat Raw, but there were some who thought so after the rosters were announced. And it hasn't happened despite all of the changes.
> 
> Dude, Raw was beating SD even without the part timers AND during the NFL season just a few short months ago..
> 
> Just saying.


 You're not going to gain a million+ viewers overnight, it happens over time. If SD are going to consistently beat Raw in the ratings, it's going to take time, good booking and star power. You bring up Cena, but the dude has barely been on SD.

If you want to compare drawing power, compare the house show numbers without part timers and habitual viewers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> You're not going to gain a million+ viewers overnight, it happens over time. If SD are going to consistently beat Raw in the ratings, it's going to take time, good booking and star power. You bring up Cena, but the dude has barely been on SD.


By that time, the rosters will be completely different for both shows, though. I brought up Cena, but the part timers are barely on Raw considering they are...part timers, and mostly only show up this time of year; the Road to WM. I'm not so sure SD beats Raw consistently no matter the rosters just due to the name and history of Raw being the flagship show. It's been 8 months since the Draft and SD's ratings flucuate in the mid 2's every week.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> By that time, the rosters will be completely different for both shows, though. I brought up Cena, but the part timers are barely on Raw considering they are...part timers, and mostly only show up this time of year; the Road to WM. I'm not so sure SD beats Raw consistently no matter the rosters just due to the name and history of Raw being the flagship show. It's been 8 months since the Draft and SD's ratings flucuate in the mid 2's every week.


 Let me repeat.

Goldberg addressing the crowd after winning the Raw title is 300,000 down from where it was last year.

Raw the same time last year was missing Cena, Orton and Rollins.

No excuses.

The ratings shouldn't be compared to SD as it is not an established brand which has anywhere near as many viewers who are watching out of habit.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

:ti

So the fallout of a the last PPV before Mania, Goldberg winning the Universal title, Jericho/Brock/Taker all returning on RAW, and the usual Mania "hype" and this company *STILL* couldn't get three and half million viewers and more. The third hour *STILL* dropped below 3 million.

:mj4 We're in for one of the WOAT Manias, folks. Can't wait.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

Is this Mania season? Sure doesn't feel like it.


----------



## Ace

WINNING said:


> :ti
> 
> So the fallout of a the last PPV before Mania, Goldberg winning the Universal title, Jericho/Brock/Taker all returning on RAW, and the usual Mania "hype" and this company *STILL* couldn't get three and half million viewers and more. The third hour *STILL* dropped below 3 million.
> 
> :mj4 We're in for one of the WOAT Manias, folks. Can't wait.


 But but but it's so far ahead of SD.... Who cares that it's down 300,000 from last year...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> Let me repeat.
> 
> Goldberg's addressing the crowd after winning the Raw title is 300,000 down from where it was last year.
> 
> Raw the same time last year was missing Cena, Orton and Rollins.
> 
> No excuses.


Who's making excuses? I brought up Cena being on SD and you said "but he's barely there." You brought up part timers and I said the same, considering they are there even less. Seem fair to me. And despite the drop, they still beat SD handily every single week. SD can't even get to 3 million viewers with a 2 hour show, the top 2 big names, and no competition. If SD was coming close, I can understand. But we are now 8 months into the brand split; it is 2/3 over with until the next draft, and SD is still the mid 2 millions consistently. They've plateaued.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> Who's making excuses? I brought up Cena being on SD and you said "but he's barely there." You brought up part timers and I said the same, considering they are there even less. Seem fair to me. And despite the drop, they still beat SD handily every single week. SD can't even get to 3 million viewers with a 2 hour show, the top 2 big names, and no competition. If SD was coming close, I can understand. But we are now 8 months into the brand split; it is 2/3 over with until the next draft, and SD is still the mid 2 millions consistently. They've plateaued.


 Why on earth are you comparing it to SD? Everyone knows Raw will beat SD consistently, stop deflecting.

If quality = ratings, NJPW would be the number 1 wrestling company in the world while the WWE would be almost out of business. But that isn't the case. 

Compare Raw to its historical numbers, this is another year where the ratings are down significantly on the RTWM. What makes this worse is that they've mitigated this loss with Goldberg. Imagine how bad the numbers would look without Goldberg around.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> WHy on earth are you comparing it to SD? Everyone knows Raw will beat SD consistently. If quality = ratings, NJPW would be the number 1 wrestling company in the world while the WWE would be dead last. That isn't the case. Compare Raw to where it has been in the past, this is another year where the ratings are down significantly on the RTWM. What makes this worse is that they've mitigated this loss with Goldberg. Imagine how bad the numbers would look without Goldberg around


I can compare it to SD because SD has some advantages that haven't paid off for them. 2 hours vs. 3 hours, Raw vs. NFL for 4-5 months, and Cena. And yet still Raw comfortably beats SD every single week. I find that fascinating. Add onto that SD has been billed as the new, "fresh" show, and it hasn't done anything for them as they're still stuck in the mid 2 millions. Raw drops every year, but no matter the drop they are still comfortably ahead of SD. If Raw numbers continue to go down, guess what? So, will SD numbers. That's been bared out the past 8 months since the brand split. If Raw goes slightly up, most of the time SD does. If Raw goes down, so does SD. It's very dependent on Raw.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> I can compare it to SD because SD has some advantages that haven't paid off for them. 2 hours vs. 3 hours, Raw vs. NFL for 4-5 months, and Cena. And yet still Raw comfortably beats SD every single week. I find that fascinating. Add onto that SD has been billed as the new, "fresh" show, and it hasn't done anything for them as they're still stuck in the mid 2 millions. Raw drops every year, but no matter the drop they are still comfortably ahead of SD. If Raw numbers continue to go down, guess what? So, will SD numbers. That's been bared out the past 8 months since the brand split. If Raw goes slightly up, most of the time SD does. If Raw goes down, so does SD. It's very dependent on Raw.


 You don't get it do you? :lol

*You don't just gain a million damn viewers over night for a show.*

Cena is a draw in the WWE environment, he's nowhere near big enough to pop 200,000 viewers let alone a 1.2m :lmao

Those numbers will only slowly build through putting on good shows.

According to Meltzer, the WWE wanted 2.5m after the split. Those are considered good numbers for SD, they aren't great but it's expected after having no midcard and booking often being mediocre.

If you want to compare Raw to anything, compare it to previous numbers on the RTWM.


----------



## JDP2016

I'm convinced a lot of people watch RAW just so they can have something to be miserable about. Is _hate watching_ still a thing?

https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&...SAhVKRCYKHW8AA8sQPAgD#hl=en&q=hate+watching&*



> hate-watch
> verb informal
> gerund or present participle: hate-watching
> watch (a television program) for the sake of the enjoyment one derives from mocking or criticizing it.
> "I hate-watched every single episode"


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Swear to god if that Wrestlemania sign wasn't up there, I wouldn't know its Mania season, let alone we're a month away from Mania. :ti


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> You don't get it do you? :lol
> 
> *You don't just gain a million damn viewers over night for a show.*
> 
> Cena is a draw in the WWE environment, he's nowhere near big enough to pop 200,000 viewers let alone a 1.2m :lmao
> 
> Those numbers will only slowly build through putting on good shows.
> 
> According to Meltzer, the WWE wanted 2.5m after the split. Those are considered good numbers for SD.
> 
> If you want to compare Raw to anything, compare it to previous numbers on the RTWM.


You're the one who doesn't get it. *IT'S BEEN 8 MONTHS. Do you know what that means??? These current rosters have 3-4 months left before both shows get NEW rosters and a NEW draft takes places. I'm just talking about the ratings for these 2 current rosters.* Overnight. It's been the better part of a year now. :lol


----------



## Ace

JDP2016 said:


> I'm convinced a lot of people watch RAW just so they can have something to be miserable about. Is _hate watching_ still a thing?
> 
> https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&...SAhVKRCYKHW8AA8sQPAgD#hl=en&q=hate+watching&*


 Watching it out of habit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JDP2016 said:


> I'm convinced a lot of people watch RAW just so they can have something to be miserable about. Is _hate watching_ still a thing?
> 
> https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&...SAhVKRCYKHW8AA8sQPAgD#hl=en&q=hate+watching&*


:lmao

Yup. And the funny part is EITHER WWE show hasn't hit mid 3 million viewers before last night, in quite a while. So making fun of the numbers when they're the highest they've been for EITHER show in quite some time? Yeah, that makes sense.

:mj4


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> You're the one who doesn't get it. *IT'S BEEN 8 MONTHS. Do you know what that means??? These current rosters have 3-4 months left before both shows get NEW rosters and a NEW draft takes places. I'm just talking about the ratings for these 2 current rosters.* Overnight. It's been the better part of a year now. :lol


 Yeah and the show hasn't been good enough to close the gap. If SD is doing the same numbers or less next year, then you can criticize the show and call it a failure. 

It's too early and unfair to compare them at this stage. Next year is fair game.

SD's numbers don't take Raw off the hook.

Raw is still doing woeful numbers with the brand name and big names on the show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One Winged Angel said:


> Yeah and the show hasn't been good enough to close the gap. It doesn't take Raw off the hook, it's still doing woeful with big names on the show.


Oh, absolutely. It's been doing woeful numbers for years now, too. Hey, there's no one on either show that I really care about or is the 'top guy' on either show that I care about, so no hair off my sac. Each Road to WM and WM seems to get worse and worse every year.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

WINNING said:


> Swear to god if that Wrestlemania sign wasn't up there, I wouldn't know its Mania season, let alone we're a month away from Mania. :ti


This. :chlol


----------



## Erik.

Ratings don't equal a successful or unsuccessful Wrestlemania.

But the fact ratings have pretty much stayed exactly the same are startling.


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> Ratings don't equal a successful or unsuccessful Wrestlemania.
> 
> But the fact ratings have pretty much stayed exactly the same are startling.


 Is Goldberg drawing power gone or is he mitigation the losses? It's interesting.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Goldbergs' already shown signs of his drawing power not being what it was his first time or so he came on Raw. I think the rating is just what it is, basically.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

Goldberg DID appear at the tail-end of the first hour/into the second hour. :draper2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They haven't gotten to 3.3+ in awhile, and this is coming off what many called the worst PPV in quite awhile. It's actually higher than I thought it would be, especially coming off of a shit-show like FastLane.


----------



## Kabraxal

Despite getting a peak number closer to middle 3s, that is still an awful number post PPV and the very first true Raw on the road to WM... not people showed back up to see what the WWE was doing. That should terrify the shit out of them.


----------



## wwe9391

Once again you cant say this is gonna be one of the WOAT WMs until AFTER ITS OVER. You cant judge something until you see it. SMH


----------



## The_Jiz

wwe9391 said:


> Once again you cant say this is gonna be one of the WOAT WMs until AFTER ITS OVER. You cant judge something until you see it. SMH


Hey its Mr. “i started watching wrestling like last year but I totally lived through the attitude era” spreading that wisdom.


----------



## wwe9391

The_Jiz said:


> Hey its Mr. “i started watching wrestling like last year but I totally lived through the attitude era” spreading that wisdom.


Ive been a fan for 19 years. I started watching during the attitude era lol


----------



## The_Jiz

wwe9391 said:


> Ive been a fan for 19 years. I started watching during the attitude era lol


ofc ofc


----------



## Dave Santos

There has been some good news. Raw has been above the 3 million mark most Mondays since November. It was going downhill for a few months and reached a record low last year.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Dave Santos said:


> There has been some good news. Raw has been above the 3 million mark most Mondays since November. It was going downhill for a few months and reached a record low last year.


They were going against the NFL in November. The current ratings are awful. If you are drawing 2.15 - 2.25 in your peak rating season - that will tell them everything they need to know about how the rest of the year is going to go.

This summer they will be in the 1.9s, and next football season they will really tank. Probably do 1.7s. 

Raw is 10% lower this year, than it was last year at this time. And last year at this time was record lows. There's no end in sight other than cancellation if you continue to lose viewers year after year after year. This has been drastic decline since 2014.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

Randy Lahey said:


> They were going against the NFL in November. The current ratings are awful. If you are drawing 2.15 - 2.25 in your peak rating season - that will tell them everything they need to know about how the rest of the year is going to go.
> 
> This summer they will be in the 1.9s, and next football season they will really tank. Probably do 1.7s.
> 
> Raw is 10% lower this year, than it was last year at this time. And last year at this time was record lows. *There's no end in sight other than cancellation* if you continue to lose viewers year after year after year. This has been drastic decline since 2014.


Which is not going to happen now they've hit their peak and are all but living on their core base fan-base.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Rainmaka! said:


> Which is not going to happen now they've hit their peak and are all but living on their core base fan-base.


What do you mean not going to happen? They are losing even their core fan-base at 10-15% a year. They haven't bottomed out. That's the point. Just when you think that ratings can't get even worse, they continue to bleed. 

Literally every single American TV show gets cancelled at some point due to falling ratings. Every single one.


----------



## Erik.

Cancellation :lol :lol


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

Randy Lahey said:


> What do you mean not going to happen? They are losing even their core fan-base at 10-15% a year. They haven't bottomed out. That's the point. Just when you think that ratings can't get even worse, they continue to bleed.
> 
> Literally every single American TV show gets cancelled at some point due to falling ratings. Every single one.


How much did WWE make last year? Like over $700 million? Unless NBCUniversal gets a new President and decides they don't like wrestling on their station, it's not going to get cancelled.


----------



## A-C-P

Anyone trying to spin these #s as "good" :bosque. What they are is NOT terrible, but they sure as hell aren't "good".

Still right in line for another 10% drop in audience again this year...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

If Raw ratings are bad, that must make SD ratings horrific, considering it's only a 2 hour show. Let's be fair here for once when evaluating both shows.


----------



## wwe9391

Rainmaka! said:


> How much did WWE make last year? Like over $700 million? Unless NBCUniversal gets a new President and decides they don't like wrestling on their station, it's not going to get cancelled.


It wont. Some people on here think they won't get a great tv deal next time when the contracts are up. They don't realize Raw and Smackdown are 2 of USAs highest rated shows


----------



## Nirvash

wwe9391 said:


> It wont. Some people on here think they won't get a great tv deal next time when the contracts are up. They don't realize Raw and Smackdown are 2 of USAs highest rated shows


Yes, and? That was true for all the past networks, or not?

Usa paid wwe X for Y rating, that's all.

Also, praising record renevue is pointless, what wwe is doing is just monetize more using new tecnology (network and stuff) and "spinoff" (bella and stuff) a DECLINING userbase.

Tomorrow, less people will follow wwe than today.


----------



## A-C-P

ShowStopper said:


> If Raw ratings are bad, that must make SD ratings horrific, considering it's only a 2 hour show. Let's be fair here for once when evaluating both shows.


Raw's rating are 10% lower than last year at this time, SD's are 40% higher than last year at this time :draper2

Think I'm being plenty fair...


----------



## Randy Lahey

The bottomline is that back in 2013 when WWE was in talks to with USA about their TV deal, Raw was a consistent 3.0 show, and it been at least 3.0 or above for 14 straight years.

In only the last 3 years, Raw has dropped to a 2.1 rated show. And by 2018 could very well be a 1.7 - 1.8 rated show.

USA paid WWE expecting 3.0 Raws at least. They are going to be in the 1.7 range by this fall.

There is literally no logical reason for USA to pay WWE anywhere close to what they are currently paying them, when they've lost at least 1/3 of the projected audience.

And to NBC, ratings matter in context to how much they are paying for the show. Nitro was still the highest rated show on Turner when it got cancelled because Turner was still losing money on it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A-C-P said:


> Raw's rating are 10% lower than last year at this time, SD's are 40% higher than last year at this time :draper2
> 
> Think I'm being plenty fair...


SD pre-brand split was like a D show, though. It was in the low 2 millions, and now averages somewhere in the mid 2 millions. Not exactly lighting it up considering its a only a 2 hour show and has Cena and Orton on it.


----------



## A-C-P

ShowStopper said:


> SD pre-brand split was like a D show, though. It was in the low 2 millions, and now averages somewhere in the mid 2 millions. Not exactly lighting it up considering its a only a 2 hour show and has Cena and Orton on it.


Thats the problem with SD, that brand name still carries the stigma of its just a D show from the pre-brand split and I think its been working to shed that nicely, SDL was never going to recover instantly like people thought it was/is going to take time and consistent quality. Granted SD really had no where to go but up, but Raw continues its downward slide since the brand split.

And its not just the 3rd hour that the Raw ratings are 10% down from last year, each hour is 10% lower than it was last year at this time.

Plus just the rating #s is not necessarily the measure of the quality of the show. 1996-1997 are considered some of the best years (quality wise) for the WWE, but they still were getting beat by WCW in the ratings for most of those 2 years...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A-C-P said:


> Thats the problem with SD, that brand name still carries the stigma of its just a D show from the pre-brand split and I think its been working to shed that nicely, SDL was never going to recover instantly like people thought it was/is going to take time and consistent quality. Granted SD really had no where to go but up, but Raw continues its downward slide since the brand split.
> 
> And its not just the 3rd hour that the Raw ratings are 10% down from last year, each hour is 10% lower than it was last year at this time


I agree Raw ratings are shit. Though, they did go back up once the NFL season ended when some claimed they would not. SD has had more than an overnight to make a bigger jump, though. The draft was 8 months ago. We are only a few months away from a new draft and new rosters for each show. So, unless SD beats Raw for the majority of these next 3 months before the new draft, Raw beat them soundly practically every week.


----------



## A-C-P

I'm not arguing that Raw beat SD in the ratings, they were going to no matter what happened over this first year.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 3/6 did a 2.27 rating and 3,201,000 viewers (1.54 viewers per home), six percent up in ratings and four percent up in viewers from the prior week, for the show the day after Fast Lane.
> 
> The number was almost identical to two weeks earlier. The show was paced by a stronger-than-usual second hour, built around the Brock Lesnar/Bill Goldberg in-ring confrontation. But 13 percent loss of viewers in hour three, a decrease across the board in every demo, was a much larger than usual one hour drop. The second-to-third hour drop was 11 percent in women 18-49, nine percent in men 18-49, 11 percent in teenage girls, 21 percent in teenage boys and 12 percent over 50.
> 
> Raw was second for the night on cable behind The O’Reilly Factor (3,848,000 viewers).
> 
> The show did 3,318,000 viewers in the first hour, grew to 3,380,000 viewers in the second hour, and dropped to 2,950,000 viewers in the third hour.
> 
> The show did a 0.84 in 12-17 (up 10.5 percent), 0.96 in 18-34 (up 7.9 percent), 1.28 in 35-49 (up 0.8 percent) and 1.26 in 50+ (up 3.3 percent).
> 
> The show did 64.2 percent male viewers in 18-49 and 69.2 percent male viewers in 12-17.





> Notes from the 3/6 Raw show in Chicago. They did a sellout of 11,000 fans. Usually at this time of the year all Raws sell out, but this year it’s been tough.





> The Raw crew had the weekend off because of the tough schedule last week where they went from TV to Germany, right back to TV, so they were given off until the PPV


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That Raw is tough to sell out during WM season is disturbing.

But hey, it's fine, they make revenue, which apparently in the logic of some people means they don't need an audience.
I'm waiting for the day the first moron explains attendance doesn't matter.


----------



## The Power that Be

Why does Vince like New Day so much? Is it because he's a seventy something year old man and this is type of black comedy that he grew up on in the 50s and 60s ?

Will these geeks ever get some new material ?


----------



## DoubtGin

> Monday's WWE RAW, featuring Brock Lesnar in the opener and an advertised tag team match with Sheamus & Cesaro vs. Enzo Amore & Big Cass plus a main event segment built by Mick Foley and Stephanie McMahon, drew 3.232 million viewers. This is up 0.5% from last week's 3.216 million viewers for the post-Fallout episode.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.176 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.323 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.197 million viewers.
> RAW was #2 on cable for the night in viewership, behind The O'Reilly Factor. RAW was #2 on the night in the 18-49 demographic, behind Love & Hip-Hop.
> 
> Below is our 2017 RAW Viewership Tracker:
> 
> January 2nd Episode: 3.046 million viewers
> January 9th Episode: 2.907 million viewers
> January 16th Episode: 3.271 million viewers
> January 23rd Episode: 3.292 million viewers
> January 30th Episode: 3.615 million viewers
> February 6th Episode: 3.115 million viewers
> February 13th Episode: 3.087 million viewers
> February 20th Episode: 3.216 million viewers
> February 27th Episode: 3.093 million viewers
> March 6th Episode: 3.216 million viewers
> March 13th Episode: 3.232 million viewers


Pretty much the same as last week overall.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.176M
H2-3.323M
H3-3.197M
3H-3.232M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.63% / + 0.147M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 3.79% / - 0.126M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 0.66% / - 0.021M )
3/13/17 Vs 3/6/17 ( + 0.50% / + 0.016M )

Demo (3/13/17 Vs 3/6/17):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.160D Vs 1.170D
H3- 1.150D Vs 1.060D
3H- 1.133D Vs 1.123D

Note: RAW is 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.
*









*Viewership (3/13/17 Vs 3/14/16):
H1- 3.176M Vs 3.471M
H2- 3.323M Vs 3.392M
H3- 3.197M Vs 3.510M
3H- 3.232M Vs 3.458M ( - 6.54% / - 0.226M )

Demo (3/13/17 Vs 3/14/16):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.220D
H2- 1.160D Vs 1.250D
H3- 1.150D Vs 1.360D
3H- 1.133D Vs 1.277D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 1st by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 2nd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## wwe9391

Undertaker vs Roman has people interest hence the increase. :mark:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:hbk1 in the highest hour. That pop.

And the third hour actually outdid the first. Wow. That rarely happens. That segment was awesome, though, to be fair. That comeback. :mark: Maybe they should keep this storyline in the 3rd hour more to see if it continues to keep them well above 3 million when the norm for the third hour is somewhere in the 2 millions.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Nah, nothing to do with HBK, they tuned in for ROMAN!!!!!1111!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Hm... Reigns doesn't main event and 3rd hour is almost the highest. Go figure.


----------



## wwe9391

Reigns was in the 2nd hour and that was the highest. Go figure.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^True. 2nd hour is never the highest. Good thing Roman was there this week.

Edit: Actually just realized this is the first time Mahal had ever been given a match of any significance. And he pulls in the highest hour viewership? Fuck Roman, don't hinder Jinder (or however it's supposed to go).


----------



## DammitChrist

Shawn Michaels still helping out Raw 7 years after he retired. What a legend :banderas


----------



## Starbuck

wwe9391 said:


> Undertaker vs Roman has people interest hence the increase. :mark:


You realize you're marking out over a 0.147 & 0.126 difference? I mean, if you want to celebrate that you go right ahead lol. 

If anything, Raw performed consistently across the board and more than that, there wasn't a hemorrhage of viewers in the third hour like there usually is. The hook of Foley having to fire somebody clearly kept people watching. Funny how that happens every time WWE gives a strong reason for people NOT to change the channel at 10.15pm. You know what happened the last time they did that? Raw also performed consistently across the board and there was a minimal drop in the third hour. What a coincidence.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.163M
H2-3.117M
H3-2.866M
3H-3.049M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.45% / - 0.046M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.05% / - 0.251M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 9.39% / - 0.297M )
3/20/17 Vs 3/13/17 ( - 5.66% / - 0.183M )

Demo (3/20/17 Vs 3/13/17):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.090D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.160D
H3- 1.010D Vs 1.150D
3H- 1.097D Vs 1.133D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership.
*









*Viewership (3/20/17 Vs 3/21/16):
H1- 3.163M Vs 3.466M
H2- 3.117M Vs 3.416M
H3- 2.866M Vs 3.317M
3H- 3.049M Vs 3.400M ( - 10.32% / - 0.351M )

Demo (3/20/17 Vs 3/21/16):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.160D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.200D
H3- 1.010D Vs 1.200D
3H- 1.097D Vs 1.187D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 3rd & 2nd by hourly demo & 1st, 3rd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Roman-Braun couldn't even keep the 3rd hr close to 3m :lmao

That draw yo :lmao


----------



## A-C-P

WM Season :bosque


----------



## Ace

A-C-P said:


> WM Season :bosque


 Roman-Braun has been promoted since last week... they even mentioned them main eventing throughout the show. For the heir to throne to pull a number like that on the RTWM while in a feud with Undertaker should say it all.

2.866m :lmao


----------



## Little Miss Ingobernable

You're awake, by the way. You're not having a terrible, terrible dream. Also, you're not dead and you haven't gone to hell. This is your Road to Wrestlemania now. This is the state of WWE in 2017. This is the business now. This is great.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

HerNotThem said:


> You're awake, by the way. You're not having a terrible, terrible dream. Also, you're not dead and you haven't gone to hell. This is your Road to Wrestlemania now. This is the state of WWE in 2017. This is the business now. This is great.


Hm. Roman is in the main event 3rd hour and it drew the lowest. Go figure.


----------



## Ace

Rainmaka! said:


> Hm. Roman is in the main event 3rd hour and it drew the lowest. Go figure.


 No Roman marks in here to defend this one @Bret Hart @Legit BOSS

2.8m on the RTWM while in a feud with THE UNDERTAKER :lmao

He's a nobody after being pushed as the be all and end all for 4 years :lmao


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

One Winged Angel said:


> No Roman marks in here to defend this one @Bret Hart @Legit BOSS
> 
> 2.8m on the RTWM while in a feud with THE UNDERTAKER :lmao
> 
> He's a nobody after being pushed for 4 years :lmao


Butbutbut DAE made $700 million last year!!!!


----------



## Ace

This shit is hilarious :lmao

If you wanted proof of how big of a star Roman is, this is it. His haters are NOT a small minority.

2.8m in the last hr on the RTWM in a main event which was advertised and built up for weeks. The match was constantly plugged as the main event throughout the show too :lmao

I want to see a Roman mark dare to show himself in here after this embarrassment.

This is why the WWE keep him out of the ME, so fans don't pick up how big of a failure the Roman Reigns project is :lmao


----------



## Dr. Middy

Honestly, with the profit they made despite the ratings in steady decline, I don't think they give a shit about what the ratings are anymore.


----------



## Little Miss Ingobernable

To be fair, last night's show was ungodly boring so that had played a part in it but c'mon, the only thing you promoted was Roman vs. Strowman where they did the finish they should've done at the PPV on free TV and you still did that number? unkout


----------



## Ace

Dr. Middy said:


> Honestly, with the profit they made despite the ratings in steady decline, I don't think they give a shit about what the ratings are anymore.


 Most of their money comes from their TV deal, no chance they get the same deal with the numbers dropping 10% yearly.


----------



## Dr. Middy

One Winged Angel said:


> Most of their money comes from their TV deal, no chance they get the same deal with the numbers dropping 10% yearly.


True, but televisions ratings across the board are down, including their own. Even with lower ratings, they still are near the top cable programs in terms of ratings on the night they air Smackdown and Raw, so I'm sure some company will gladly put them on their channel.


----------



## Ace

Dr. Middy said:


> True, but televisions ratings across the board are down, including their own. Even with lower ratings, they still are near the top cable programs in terms of ratings on the night they air Smackdown and Raw, so I'm sure some company will gladly put them on their channel.


 Good shows are still sustaining, if not growing their viewership. No excuses.


----------



## Ace

It would have been fine if any other FT talent drew that number, they haven't gotten the rocket for years and haven't been booked above everyone.

Roman doing it just proves that he's on everyone elses level, if not below it.

I shudder to think where he would be without that rocket or accomplishments.


----------



## Dr. Middy

One Winged Angel said:


> Good shows are still sustaining, if not growing their viewership. No excuses.


Oh I'm not given them excuses, god no. There's a laundry list of reasons as to why their television has declined for a decade and counting now, but I don't really need to go into that, it would take way too much time :lol

Regardless, I would be very surprised if they got NOBODY to take a new tv deal when this one with USA expires. If anything, the amount of money for a new deal will be lower, which could maybe wake them up into putting a better product together, but who knows?


----------



## wwe9391

HerNotThem said:


> You're awake, by the way. You're not having a terrible, terrible dream. Also, you're not dead and you haven't gone to hell. This is your Road to Wrestlemania now. This is the state of WWE in 2017. This is the business now. This is great.


Oh god not that stupid cunt.



Dr. Middy said:


> Honestly, with the profit they made despite the ratings in steady decline, I don't think they give a shit about what the ratings are anymore.


They don't. Vince has made that perfectly clear. After that record reveune last year he gives no fucks about ratings anymore. He is gonna continue to make money no matter what.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Reigns main events and look at that third hour drop. Interesting. 

Also HHH in the third hour appears to have not helped in the slightest (but then again, maybe he and the expected Taker appearance kept things from sinking even more).

If they had Strowman beat Reigns at Fastlane and remain undefeated, that third hour probably would've been better tbh.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/raw-posts-low-ratings-week-wrestlemania-approaches-232186


> *Last night's Raw broke the record for the lowest audience to watch the show since 1997 on a night when they weren't facing major sports competition or it being a major holiday, with 3.04 million viewers.*
> 
> The previous record low outside of shows during football season, or going against either the NBA playoffs or the Olympics was 3.07 million viewers for the February 13th show.
> 
> What's bad is that leading up to WrestleMania, and before the NBA playoffs, ratings are often at their highest marks of the year. Still, part of this was the state of television, as Raw was second to the O'Reilly Factor on cable which did 3.56 million viewers.
> 
> Dancing with the Stars can't be seen as the reason because there was a big third hour drop, and that's after Dancing with the Stars ended. Interestingly, this was an audience that declined throughout the show, as opposed to the late arriving audience which is usually the case this time of year.
> 
> *In particular, women tuned out heavily in the third hour.* The show was built around a Roman Reigns vs. Braun Strowman main event, promoted for the entire week. Undertaker appeared at the end of the show, but was not advertised. Brock Lesnar was there, but only appeared in a dark segment.


----------



## Lothario

^ Yikes


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Guess more of them are finding out Roman's married. :lmao


----------



## Gravyv321

but i thought women loved lolman reignz. LMFAO xD!!!!



One Winged Angel said:


> Roman-Braun couldn't even keep the 3rd hr close to 3m :lmao
> 
> That draw yo :lmao


LOL im laughing so hard right now brah. all dat megapush and strong push these past few years and he's still aint an impressive draw. at least most of the other talents have the excuse to pull these #s cuz they don't have as much kayfabe accomplishments, records, and strong booking as this "guy." but omg, get a load of this samoan piece of trash pulling these "impressive" #s! xD xD


----------



## wwe9391

3rd hour is cancer. It gives them no benefits accept an extra $34 million.


This thread is literally one big loop. That goes no where. Laugh at rating, insult Reigns, Reigns still getting pushed, leave. Its one big loop.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

On the plus side, certainly next week will go up, right? It's the go-home show, surely they're going to have all the big names (Goldberg, Lesnar, Taker, HHH) and it's got to see some kind of bump.

Of course if it goes below 3 million with all those factors, that'll be hilarious.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

One Winged Angel said:


> No Roman marks in here to defend this one @Bret Hart @Legit BOSS
> 
> 2.8m on the RTWM while in a feud with THE UNDERTAKER :lmao
> 
> He's a nobody after being pushed as the be all and end all for 4 years :lmao


*I haven't posted in this thread since Sasha and Charlotte outdrew a World Title match and made you bang your head against the wall :kobe9. I don't care if Roman draws a 0.5. Low ratings didn't stop them from having the highest grossing Wrestlemania last year, low ratings didn't stop them from breaking merch sales records, and low ratings didn't stop Roman's push. At the end of the day, Roman Reigns is STILL fighting The Undertaker, AJ Styles is STILL stuck with Shane, and you're STILL miserable. I see no reason to drag myself down to your level. Now refrain from polluting my notifications with your terrible posts.*


----------



## wwe9391

Legit BOSS said:


> *I haven't posted in this thread since Sasha and Charlotte outdrew a World Title match and made you bang your head against the wall :kobe9. I don't care if Roman draws a 0.5. Low ratings didn't stop them from having the highest grossing Wrestlemania last year. Low ratings didn't stop them from breaking merch sales records, and low ratings didn't stop Roman's push. At the end of the day, Roman Reigns is STILL fighting The Undertaker, AJ Styles is STILL stuck with Shane, and you're STILL miserable. I see no reason to drag myself down to your level. Now refrain from polluting my notifications with your terrible posts.*


Ratings are the only thing they have against Roman when he is very successful in every other department. Low ratings haven't stopped the Reigns push and they wont now. We can just sit back and enjoy the ride while others continue to be miserable.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> 3rd hour is cancer. It gives them no benefits accept an extra $34 million.
> 
> 
> This thread is literally one big loop. That goes no where. Laugh at rating, insult Reigns, Reigns still getting pushed, leave. Its one big loop.


You think that because you're on a Loop.

You're more on a loop than Mick Foley at Disneyland.


----------



## Tanahashis_Hair

HerNotThem said:


> You're awake, by the way. You're not having a terrible, terrible dream. Also, you're not dead and you haven't gone to hell. This is your Road to Wrestlemania now. This is the state of WWE in 2017. This is the business now. This is great.


:mj4 :mj4


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> You think that because you're on a Loop.
> 
> You're more on a loop than Mick Foley at Disneyland.


Enjoying being miserable while some of us enjoy the ride.


----------



## Ace

Legit BOSS said:


> *I haven't posted in this thread since Sasha and Charlotte outdrew a World Title match and made you bang your head against the wall :kobe9. I don't care if Roman draws a 0.5. Low ratings didn't stop them from having the highest grossing Wrestlemania last year, low ratings didn't stop them from breaking merch sales records, and low ratings didn't stop Roman's push. At the end of the day, Roman Reigns is STILL fighting The Undertaker, AJ Styles is STILL stuck with Shane, and you're STILL miserable. I see no reason to drag myself down to your level. Now refrain from polluting my notifications with your terrible posts.*


 I think I've hit a nerve, you can't defend your home boy. This is it, the dude is a bust and this just proves it. You can't hide behind him drawing better when his match with Braun tanked so badly with everything going in its favor.

Instead of replying to Roman failing to draw after being given the biggest push in pro wrestling history, you bring up Sasha, Charlotte, AJ and then go on to bag me. Yet I'm the one with terrible posts :lmao

I'm not thrilled about AJ being in a match with Shane, but I would take that over fighting over some yard which neither man owns and then have to carry Taker to a match that doesn't suck ass. So far AJ-Shane has only been going for a week and is infinitely better than Taker-Roman's non existent feud.

I would take Shane McMahon over 2017 Deadman every day of the week.


----------



## Chrome

Think people need to chill a bit in this thread. Instead of pointing fingers at the wrestlers, we should be pointing fingers at Vinnie Mac and "creative." They're the primary reason these ratings are garbage. Don't care if "TV ratings are down across the board", no reason they shouldn't be getting at least 3.5-4.0 million during fucking WM season. LOL. :bosque

No way does USA give them a deal that's as good as the current one, and the current one was even considered lower than they anticipated. If they do, they're either on crack or Stephanie is giving USA execs the business.


----------



## ilovebayley

Raw CANNOT continue to be 3 hours, it is murdering the show. They need to bring back over the top story lines again like Orton vs Wyatt are having. 
That keeps my interest. Part-timers are great for the main PPV matches, but I want to see the new blood do some interesting feuds with great matches. 
Raw is dying because their booking is AWFUL. 
Somehow they took the hottest thing in the world with the horsewomen and ruined their momentum. 
Strowman was looking great then they ruined HIS momentum. 
Goldberg was super over and they even found a way to kill HIS momentum. 
Owens was booked as the weakest champion in history. 

Then to close AND open the show we have Stephanie and HHH in the spotlight, not the talent, not the matches, not an actual story line, but the GM in a pointless fued that serves no purpose in regard to Wrestlemania. They have Seth Rollins in the Sasha banks storyline where they get beat down and look weak, then comeback and the crowd cheers only for them to be beaten down AGAIN. 
Maybe Im wrong but when Stone Cold came back he always opened a can of Whoopass. I still remember the DX bus, the ambulance, can anyone remember a storyline from the last 3 years outside Orton vs Bray?


----------



## The_It_Factor

People are still blaming 1 guy for ratings when the entire product, from top to bottom, is complete garbage? :lol

And I don't even like Reigns like that, but give me a break. No one watches wrestling anymore because it's awful. Every bit of it.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Dr. Middy said:


> Honestly, with the profit they made despite the ratings in steady decline, I don't think they give a shit about what the ratings are anymore.


They will when their current TV deal ends. The TV deal was signed when Raw as a 3.0 and above show. It will be negotiated at a point when it's 2.0 and below in the coming years...

You lose that much of your audience, with no sign of gaining them back, you aren't getting anywhere close to the deal that enabled your company to be profitable anyway. And if Vince plays the "we'll just it on the Network" card if you don't pay me what I want...USA will say BUH BYE.


----------



## Randy Lahey

wwe9391 said:


> We can just sit back and enjoy the ride while others continue to be miserable.


Enjoy the ride to cancellation. A show that's been on the air for 20 years, doing the worst ratings it's ever done. A show that has lost more than 40 percent of it's audience from the last time it was re-upped, yeah, that show is really in a healthy state.

What's your excuse going to be when WWE is pulling 1.6s next fall. You think USA is going to be thrilled when they gave WWE that deal, and were expected to pull at least 3.0s thru the entire year?

Good grief you are an apologist. You're the like the last guy at a concert of a shitty band, where everyone else has left, and you're still saying "This band is awesome!". It's fanboy nonsense.


----------



## Ace

The_It_Factor said:


> People are still blaming 1 guy for ratings when the entire product, from top to bottom, is complete garbage? :lol
> 
> And I don't even like Reigns like that, but give me a break. No one watches wrestling anymore because it's awful. Every bit of it.


 The WWE is built around Roman.

Everyone on the roster lays down to him, that's Taker at WM included. Hell Brock only went over Taker so he could indirectly give that rub to Roman, but they've decided to have him do both :lmao

Roman is the be all and end all, the fact he isn't above everyone else is testament to how badly he has flopped. A complete waste of 4 years that have resulted in producing a failure who feeds off others momentum and goes nowhere with it.


----------



## wwe9391

Randy Lahey said:


> Enjoy the ride to cancellation
> Good grief you are an apologist. You're the like the last guy at a concert of a shitty band, where everyone else has left, and you're still saying "This band is awesome!". It's fanboy nonsense.


Not gonna happen for a very long time. Ratings are down all across the board, Its not just WWE ffs. Also you do realize Raw and Smackdown are 2 of USAs highest rated shows. Its not like they have all these other shows that are doing so much better. Once their TV deal is up Im pretty certain USA will give them a smiler deal. Since USA are bleeding for shows. 

Anyways they received record revenue last year. The company is not going out of business for a long long time. Reigns is gonna be the top guy and many will continue to be miserable.

Im not an apologist I just speak the truth and many people here hate that.


----------



## The XL 2

This tv bubble is going to burst and WWE will be completely screwed when it does. USA isn't going to pay them this much for these kind of ratings.


----------



## God Movement

People still think Raw is gong to get cancelled? Lmao.


----------



## Asuka842

Wow, so you're telling me that Stephanie once again being the untouchable b**ch queen heel authority figure who gets to abuse/talk down to/emasculate anyone she wants anytime she wants without suffering any kind of real consequences, isn't exactly riveting television for many people.

You could have seen that coming (sarcasm).


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Just want to point out how satisfying those numbers are.

Next week is gonna be the WOAT Go Home show for WOAT Wrestlemania.


----------



## V-Trigger

@Legit BOSS


----------



## Brock

> Raw broke the record for the lowest audience to watch the show since 1997 on a night when they weren't facing major sports competition or it being a major holiday


:damn


----------



## Ace

Brock said:


> :damn





> Last night's Raw broke the record for *the lowest audience to watch the show since 1997 on a night when they weren't facing major sports competition or it being a major holiday, with 3.04 million viewers.*
> 
> In particular, *women tuned out heavily in the third hour.* *The show was built around a Roman Reigns vs. Braun Strowman main event, promoted for the entire week*.


 :reneelel


----------



## The_Jiz

Mania is in 2 weeks :kobe9


----------



## JDP2016

Erik hasn't weighed in on this. I wonder where he is at the moment? :rockwut




wwe9391 said:


> 3rd hour is cancer. It gives them no benefits accept an extra $34 million.
> 
> 
> This thread is literally one big loop. That goes no where. Laugh at rating, insult Reigns, Reigns still getting pushed, leave. Its one big loop.


This thread is repetitive and accomplishes nothing.



Chrome said:


> Think people need to chill a bit in this thread. *Instead of pointing fingers at the wrestlers, we should be pointing fingers at Vinnie Mac and "creative."* They're the primary reason these ratings are garbage. Don't care if "TV ratings are down across the board", no reason they shouldn't be getting at least 3.5-4.0 million during fucking WM season. LOL. :bosque
> 
> No way does USA give them a deal that's as good as the current one, and the current one was even considered lower than they anticipated. If they do, they're either on crack or Stephanie is giving USA execs the business.


How long have you been here? We only blame creative/Vince when it's someone we like. When it's someone we don't like, we blame the wrestler for his or her failure.


----------



## Dr. Middy

Randy Lahey said:


> They will when their current TV deal ends. The TV deal was signed when Raw as a 3.0 and above show. It will be negotiated at a point when it's 2.0 and below in the coming years...
> 
> You lose that much of your audience, with no sign of gaining them back, you aren't getting anywhere close to the deal that enabled your company to be profitable anyway. And if Vince plays the "we'll just it on the Network" card if you don't pay me what I want...USA will say BUH BYE.


Honestly, that might be the ONLY shit that finally wakes them up. Realizing that their next television deal will surely be much lower and more in line with their current ratings will maybe make them realize that things need to improve if they actually want to remain on tv for the future



Chrome said:


> Think people need to chill a bit in this thread. Instead of pointing fingers at the wrestlers, we should be pointing fingers at Vinnie Mac and "creative." They're the primary reason these ratings are garbage. Don't care if "TV ratings are down across the board", no reason they shouldn't be getting at least 3.5-4.0 million during fucking WM season. LOL. :bosque
> 
> No way does USA give them a deal that's as good as the current one, and the current one was even considered lower than they anticipated. If they do, they're either on crack or Stephanie is giving USA execs the business.


I hope their new deal is SIGNIFICANTLY less. Maybe it would wake them the fuck up finally and realize that their product is just is NOT good overall, and is NOT bringing in new viewers. Rather, they're steadily losing the ones who always stuck by their side. 

Get ready, WWE live on Destination America :lol


----------



## wwe9391

USA is gonna resign WWE no doubt about it.


----------



## Bushmaster

See ya next week, see ya next week, see ya next week, see ya next week, see ya next week ....:LOL


----------



## Randy Lahey

The XL 2 said:


> This tv bubble is going to burst and WWE will be completely screwed when it does. USA isn't going to pay them this much for these kind of ratings.


The TV - or really it should be called "sports rights fees" bubble is already bursting. ESPN will be insolvent within 7 years due to the deals that they cut. 

USA/NBA/Universal is definitely not going to go down that same path paying any sport more than it's worth to broadcast - which they most certainly are doing right now for WWE right now


----------



## Will Thompson

Randy Lahey said:


> The TV - or really it should be called "sports rights fees" bubble is already bursting. ESPN will be insolvent within 7 years due to the deals that they cut.
> 
> USA/NBA/Universal is definitely not going to go down that same path paying any sport more than it's worth to broadcast - which they most certainly are doing right now for WWE right now


 This is pretty much the heart of the matter. The television networks and their advertisers/sponsors are in it to make money. It is no secret that Tv viewership and ratings figures have gone down considerably over the last 2-3 years with more and more people utilizing the internet and other streaming capable devices for their television related entertainment dose. The advertisers pay the shows/network on the basis of the viewership across the relevant demographics for them and it doesn't make sense for them to continue paying the networks the same rates as before. The impact of the same is already being felt with some of the top rated comedies and reality shows getting lower ad rates for their slots. And the networks in turn trying to renegotiate the actors' contracts and reduce the production costs to match the lesser revenue.

With the WWE being a product that is largely dependent on a very niche customer base and the consistent year on year decline in ratings, it is highly likely they will be offered a lesser deal by the USA network compared to the current one. And with wrestling no longer being a mainstream pop culture phenomenon and the E's lack of "Stars" who have major crossover appeal to the casuals, I don't see any other major networks falling head over heels to pay them what they expect to air their content. Just making their content exclusive to the WWE network will likely result in an even greater loss of the casual audience which they don't want for sure. I think they will have to start catering to the hardcore audience more and more in the future (To atleast keep their main demographics stable) while trying to appeal to the casuals (and add to their revenue streams) by focusing more on their reality show and movie production arms. That is the only way their profits and brand will continue to be as successful as it is now.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 3/20 did a 2.11 rating and 3,036,000 viewers (1.57 viewers per home), making it the least watched non-holiday show that didn’t go against a major marquee sporting event since 1997.
> 
> The audience was down six percent and rating down five percent from the previous week, Raw was still second place on cable behind only The O’Reilly Factor which did 3,559,000 viewers.
> 
> The previous lowest rated Raw that didn’t go against a major sporting event or a holiday night was the 2/13 show that did a 2.15 rating and 3,073,000 viewers. In the last 20 years, there were three non-holiday and non-football shows that did worse, all last year, one against a gigantic NBA playoff game and the other two against the Olympics, which all did less than three million viewers.
> 
> The key to the drop was a major drop in the third hour, which was built around the Roman Reigns vs. Braun Strowman match. While “Dancing with the Stars,” opened, that wouldn’t tell the story because the big issue was the third hour drop, after DWTS was already over.
> 
> The partial reason for the drop was sports, as there was a major NBA regular season game with the Golden State Warriors vs. San Antonio Thunder that did 2,554,000 viewers which are two of the best drawing teams in the league and well above what usual NBA Monday night games do.
> 
> But the key to the low number was the third hour, as 18 percent of the 18-49 women viewers left from hour two to hour three. 18-49 male viewers were down seven percent during the third hour.
> 
> The first hour averaged 3,163,000 viewers. The second hour averaged 3,117,000 viewers. The third hour averaged 2,866,000 viewers. The pattern was different than usual during Daylight Savings Time. The only theories I have is the Mick Foley firing may have led the audience to tune out, which is why there was no second hour growth, and then Reigns vs. Strowman was the only thing pushed in the third hour with Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman not even used on the show and Undertaker’s appearance being a surprise that wasn’t even hinted at.
> 
> The show did a 0.77 in 12-17 (down 2.5 percent from last week), 0.93 in 18-34 (down 7.9 percent), 1.27 in 35-49 (up 1.6 percent) and 1.20 in 50+ (down 4.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 60.7 percent male in 18-49 and 61.7 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

The only saving grace to WWE ratings problem is all of tv is down mostly. Even the godly ratings of the Walking Dead have dropped about 6 million this season.

So if everything drops WWE can still end up ahead in its usual position.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

I think USA will re-up with WWE in the end, and they may be stupid enough to do it for the same amount of money (if not greater), but when you think about it, even if WWE gets that kind of deal, they're still a sinking ship ratings-wise, and if cable TV goes down, they'll take WWE with them. 

They really should be in the upper 3.0 range ratings-wise and are doing roughly .5 less than they were a year ago and haven't hit above 4 million since last year's post-Mania Raw (the only Raw where people know something will happen). It's rare that they even are within getting 3.5 million people.


----------



## HenryBowers

I think what is most concerning is that in the 18-49 demog they are consistently behind love and hip hop and only a few points ahead of some much cheaper shows.


----------



## HenryBowers

wwe9391 said:


> Randy Lahey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy the ride to cancellation
> Good grief you are an apologist. You're the like the last guy at a concert of a shitty band, where everyone else has left, and you're still saying "This band is awesome!". It's fanboy nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Not gonna happen for a very long time. Ratings are down all across the board, Its not just WWE ffs. Also you do realize Raw and Smackdown are 2 of USAs highest rated shows. Its not like they have all these other shows that are doing so much better. Once their TV deal is up Im pretty certain USA will give them a smiler deal. Since USA are bleeding for shows.
> 
> Anyways they received record revenue last year. The company is not going out of business for a long long time. Reigns is gonna be the top guy and many will continue to be miserable.
> 
> Im not an apologist I just speak the truth and many people here hate that.
Click to expand...

TV shows like love and hip hop get similar if not better 18-49 ratings than RAW. They are a hell of a lot cheaper, too.

I reckon when RAW gets to 0.7 they are fucked. Its not like RAW is a bafta nominated show like Mr Robot. Its a boring, expensive show that has lost a 3rd of a rating in as many years.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

CenaBoy4Life said:


> The only saving grace to WWE ratings problem is all of tv is down mostly. Even the godly ratings of the Walking Dead have dropped about 6 million this season.
> 
> So if everything drops WWE can still end up ahead in its usual position.


Why do people constantly repeat the bullshit WWE propaganda? TV consumed differently, everything is down ...
Everything is NOT down. UFC is doing consistently great for example. Despite their Network. Other Shows decline at a much much slower pace.

They always brag about being the longest running TV series or some shit. Well, sports will always do well. But if you remodel yourself into a self-proclaimed soap opera TV Show, you will have a shelf life like any other series because inevitably your shit will get boring because the main actors get stale. And the McMahons have been the main cast of Raw for 19 years now.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.253M
H2-3.426M
H3-3.197M
3H-3.292M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 5.32% / + 0.173M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.68% / - 0.229M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 1.72% / - 0.056M )
3/27/17 Vs 3/20/17 ( + 7.97% / + 0.243M )

Demo (3/27/17 Vs 3/20/17):
H1- 1.170D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.220D Vs 1.130D
H3- 1.140D Vs 1.010D
3H- 1.177D Vs 1.097D

Note: RAW is 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 4th, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/27/17 Vs 3/28/16):
H1- 3.253M Vs 3.818M
H2- 3.426M Vs 3.845M
H3- 3.197M Vs 3.629M
3H- 3.292M Vs 3.764M ( - 12.54% / - 0.472M )

Demo (3/27/17 Vs 3/28/16):
H1- 1.170D Vs 1.350D
H2- 1.220D Vs 1.360D
H3- 1.140D Vs 1.340D
3H- 1.177D Vs 1.350D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## DoubtGin

what happened in the second hour? hhh-rollins?

still shitty numbers overall


----------



## Ace

Is that an all time low?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wow. Hour 2 is the highest rated hour and that rarely happens.


----------



## Ace

Hr 3 had Taker-Reigns and Goldberg-Lesnar, right?


----------



## Dolorian

One Winged Angel said:


> Hr 3 had Taker-Reigns and Goldberg-Lesnar, right?


Reigns/Taker was right before the end of the second hour. Third hour had Enzo/Cass match with Cesaro/Sheamus and The Club, Sami/Owens, Lesnar/Goldberg.


----------



## Little Miss Ingobernable

One Winged Angel said:


> Hr 3 had Taker-Reigns and Goldberg-Lesnar, right?


I think Reigns/Taker bled into the 3rd hour.


----------



## Randy Lahey

12% drop from last year. I'll be interested to see what the ratings are next week because next week's show will be the highest rating of the entire year. Doubt they even top a 3.5 mils average


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> The loaded up go-home Raw on 3/27 with Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, Bill Goldberg, HHH and Seth Rollins appearing for the final WrestleMania angles did a 2.24 rating and 3,286,000 viewers (1.60 viewers per home).
> 
> Raw was up six percent in ratings and eight percent in audience, finishing third for the night on cable. With the exception of the show the day after the Royal Rumble, it was the most-watched episode of the show since 8/29.
> 
> As compared with the previous few years go-home shows, this year was down 15.5 percent in ratings and 12.6 percent in viewers from last year. It’s down 26 percent in ratings and 22 percent in viewers from two years ago and 28 percent in ratings and 25 percent in viewers from three years ago.
> 
> The key note is that it showed last week was not the pattern, but an aberration and the record low number was caused by people clearly tuning out early meaning they didn’t like the show. My gut says it was the reaction to the Foley firing segment and lack of good things promoted for the rest of the show. This week, with saving Goldberg and Lesnar to the final segment and promoting them, they kept the audience better, in particular in the second hour even though there was a third-hour drop across the board.
> 
> The show did 3,253,000 viewers in the first hour; 3,426,000 viewers in the second hour and 3,197,000 viewers in the third hour.
> 
> The second to third hour drop was nine percent in women 18-49 six percent with men, 19 percent with girl teens, four percent with teenage boys and five percent with those over 50, so it was across the board but more skewed female.
> 
> The show did a 0.88 in 12-17 (up 14.3 percent from the prior week), 1.00 in 18-34 (up 7.5 percent), 1.36 in 35-49 (up 7.1 percent) and 1.21 in 50+ (up 0.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 61.0 percent male in 18-49 and 61.4 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Love it how sarcastic Meltzer was this week on WWE boasting about social media.

"Hey, my subscribers are low and I'm broke, but look at my ten million Twitter followers!"


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

The Figure 4 said:


> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


61% 18-49 and 61% 12-17....

122% Can any explain how the hell that makes sense?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.826M
H2-3.893M
H3-3.583M
3H-3.767M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 1.75% / + 0.067M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.96% / - 0.310M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 6.35% / - 0.243M )
4/3/17 Vs 3/27/17 ( + 14.43% / + 0.475M )

Demo (4/3/17 Vs 3/27/17):
H1- 1.440D Vs 1.170D
H2- 1.460D Vs 1.220D
H3- 1.380D Vs 1.140D
3H- 1.427D Vs 1.177D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/3/17 Vs 4/4/16):
H1- 3.826M Vs 4.287M
H2- 3.893M Vs 4.178M
H3- 3.583M Vs 3.816M
3H- 3.767M Vs 4.094M ( - 7.99% / - 0.327M )

Demo (4/3/17 Vs 4/4/16):
H1- 1.440D Vs 1.600D
H2- 1.460D Vs 1.560D
H3- 1.380D Vs 1.480D
3H- 1.427D Vs 1.547D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 7th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not bad considering they went up against the NCAA basketball championship game, I guess. Not great either, though. :lol


----------



## wwe9391

Big increase


----------



## KO Bossy

ShowStopper said:


> Not bad considering they went up against the NCAA basketball championship game, I guess. Not great either, though. :lol


In 2017, that rating may as well be Rock/Mankind "This is Your Life"...


----------



## Erik.

Just from looking at the figure, it seems to be the biggest rating in a while? Is that the highest this year?


----------



## Dolorian

Lesnar was at the end of the second hour, so that explains the drop on the third hour I think.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

That's really the best they can do, isn't it? Sad.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

500.000 viewers plus for Raw After Mania.

If I saw that opening segment, I wouldn't return next week.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

That's as high as it's going to get, isn't it?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Erik. said:


> Just from looking at the figure, it seems to be the biggest rating in a while? Is that the highest this year?


Highest viewership/rating since last year's WM RAW and the lowest WM RAW viewership/rating in exactly 20 years since 3/24/97 (WM13).


----------



## Erik.

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Highest rating since last year's WM RAW and the lowest WM RAW viewership/rating in 20 years since WM13/March 97.


We'll see what happens next week.

Once again, they FAILED to end the Raw on any sort of cliffhanger - but they did have some entertaining spots on the show and they are billing next week as the Superstar Shake Up so we'll see what happens.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

ppl are so melodramatic...this has been stated countless times, I will remind u, ppl stream shows nowadays, or TiVo, or wait to watch on network or hulu or whatever else there is nowadays, but whatever


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

According to Meltzer, the NCAA tournament was up 30% from last year. So, not everything is declining in ratings on TV. But WWE TV shows are.


----------



## Erik.

I don't think the WWE should ever be compared to legit sports though when it comes to ratings though. It's perfectly normal for TV shows to decline in ratings, but them TV shows can also still turn a higher profit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

There are TV shows that are doing much better, as well.


----------



## Y.2.J

Live Sports are the only thing increasing significantly. Rarely anyone is going to DVR or watch the game later. If you miss the game, you'll check your phone or your computer for the score. You won't watch a sports game that already past and you know the score too.

WWE is more like a TV show. Like today for example, I'm going to be missing SD Live but I got it scheduled to record on my box. Or I find it up tomorrow online somewhere. 

What I'm trying to say is that, real Live Sports shouldn't be necessarily compared to the WWE. the WWE shows are like dramas.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sports count, guys. As do TV shows. It's all on TV. Anyway, found this on Twitter:










:rollins

*I don't necessarily agree it's all on Reigns, just found the first 3 lines interesting.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Rainmaka! said:


> That's as high as it's going to get, isn't it?


Yes, the Raw after WM is always the highest rated show of the year. So their ceiling continues to decline on a consistent basis. Looking at 1.7s during football season.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> Sports count, guys. As do TV shows. It's all on TV. Anyway, found this on Twitter:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :rollins
> 
> *I don't necessarily agree it's all on Reigns, just found the first 3 lines interesting.


Holy mackerel Jesus!
1.5 million viewers lost year to year!

Fuck me! Can we end this charade please? It's like we get to witness a 70-year old dude playing with his barbie doll house.


----------



## Dave Santos

The Phenom. said:


> Live Sports are the only thing increasing significantly. Rarely anyone is going to DVR or watch the game later. If you miss the game, you'll check your phone or your computer for the score. You won't watch a sports game that already past and you know the score too.
> 
> WWE is more like a TV show. Like today for example, I'm going to be missing SD Live but I got it scheduled to record on my box. Or I find it up tomorrow online somewhere.
> 
> What I'm trying to say is that, real Live Sports shouldn't be necessarily compared to the WWE. the WWE shows are like dramas.


Walking dead, Game of thrones and X Files have had excellent years. I was suprised to see NCIS get 21 million viewers.

http://www.indiewire.com/2016/05/mo...thrones-the-walking-dead-football-1201682396/


----------



## Y.2.J

Dave Santos said:


> Walking dead, Game of thrones and X Files have had excellent years. I was suprised to see NCIS get 21 million viewers.
> 
> http://www.indiewire.com/2016/05/mo...thrones-the-walking-dead-football-1201682396/


Those are rare pop culture phenomenons though.

And if GoT and Walking Dead went on every week for 20 years plus, they'd have nothing even close to that. It's the trend right now.

GoT and WD will fade away, but the WWE will still be here.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Why does anybody compare GoT to WWE? Is that a joke? It's like comparing Walking Dead to NFL. One is a series with a limited amount of characters, a limited story, and a shelf life, the other is, though simulated, a sport that can invent itself time and time again through new competitors.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

ShowStopper said:


> Sports count, guys. As do TV shows. It's all on TV. Anyway, found this on Twitter:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :rollins
> 
> *I don't necessarily agree it's all on Reigns, just found the first 3 lines interesting.


2014 went up against the NCAA championship game. 2015 didn't. That 2014 number was monstrous.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Soul Man Danny B said:


> 2014 went up against the NCAA championship game. 2015 didn't. That 2014 number was monstrous.


It is a very good number. Just posting what was posted on Twitter. Numbers are still 100% accurate.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

ShowStopper said:


> It is a very good number. Just posting what was posted on Twitter. Numbers are still 100% accurate.


Just providing some context. Certainly, these numbers are trending in the wrong direction.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

Bryan was a big draw!


----------



## IEatFatKidz

Of course the ratings drop during the third with the Main Event featuring Team Cheeseburger and the twig.


----------



## fabi1982

ShowStopper said:


> Sports count, guys. As do TV shows. It's all on TV. Anyway, found this on Twitter:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :rollins
> 
> *I don't necessarily agree it's all on Reigns, just found the first 3 lines interesting.


All I see here is how fucking popular Bryan was and how a real storyline can get people interested into something. All what people had this Monday was waiting for Romainan Rasin to get shit on.


----------



## fabi1982

...


----------



## fabi1982

...


----------



## Reotor

Sadly this years drop wasn't as sharp as last years.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Don't worry, there is plenty of year left.


----------



## Erik.

Daniel Bryan :mark: :mark:


----------



## A-C-P

Daniel Bryan and THE MAN dem draws wens3


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

All I know is AmDrag>>>>>>> 

:mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## Y.2.J

I think WWE may have stopped the bleeding

What RAW lost from last year to this year has moved to SD. In fact, if you piece RAW & SD viewership together it's actually higher than last year which must be a first in a long time.

*2016:*
RAW (April 4th) - 4.094 million
SD (April 7th) - 2.444 million
= 6.538 million

*2017:*
RAW (April 3rd) - 3.767 million
SDL (April 4th) - 2.885 million
= 6.652 million

So WWE is actually up 114,000 viewers in this week of 2017 as opposed to last year at this time. WWE may have stopped the bleeding. We'll see I suppose.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

The Phenom. said:


> I think WWE may have stopped the bleeding
> 
> What RAW lost from last year to this year has moved to SD. In fact, if you piece RAW & SD viewership together it's actually higher than last year which must be a first in a long time.
> 
> *2016:*
> RAW (April 4th) - 4.094 million
> SD (April 7th) - 2.444 million
> = 6.538 million
> 
> *2017:*
> RAW (April 3rd) - 3.767 million
> SDL (April 4th) - 2.885 million
> = 6.652 million
> 
> So WWE is actually up 114,000 viewers in this week of 2017 as opposed to last year at this time. WWE may have stopped the bleeding. We'll see I suppose.


They just put a band-aid over it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Smackdown wasn't live 2016.
They didn't get new viewers, they generated more interest in Smackdown by going live, and moved a small portion of Raw viewers to Smackdown that otherwise wouldn't give a shit.

Raw viewership is core viewership, and it's going down.


----------



## Little Miss Ingobernable

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Smackdown wasn't live 2016.
> They didn't get new viewers, they generated more interest in Smackdown by going live, and moved a small portion of Raw viewers to Smackdown that otherwise wouldn't give a shit.
> 
> Raw viewership is core viewership, and it's going down.


All this. They're not likely to add anymore viewers outside of those they already have.


----------



## SureUmm

For all this Roman Reigns is actually such an amazing lightning rod and people care, 300k less watched the Raw after Mania this year. That's a bottom line stat. Talk about his mentions or whatever the hell else, USA cares about viewership and that's where their TV money comes from.


----------



## AoEC_

The Hardys' Youtube numbers since their return: 












Astonishing numbers, especially their return video which is moving much faster than even the Goldberg-Lesnar-Undertaker confrontation before the Rumble!


----------



## Y.2.J

What I was trying to say was that the 400K displaced from RAW 2016-2017 has moved to SD.

You can see the shift from when the brand split initiated in summer 2016.

It's like they have stopped the bleeding and hit rock bottom. Hopefully its only up from here and not a band-aid like others have mentioned.


----------



## HenryBowers

Last year the rating up to and incl the RAW after Mania was 2.587....the year itself averaged 2.26, a 12.8% difference. This year its averaged 2.2.

This year will end on a 1.9184, which is what Smackdown got in 2014 (RAW itself got a 2.95 that year

Pretty incredible that in 4 years they will lose a whole rating or 42% of their ratings! 

By 2028 they will be below a 1 rating if they keep losing the same % of ratings each year. The good news is because the number gets smaller and smaller there is a diminishing returns/impact. But then again the difference between 2014 and 2018 is pretty dramatic, especially if it happens again. If it does then they will get a 0.8 rating as soon as 2022. 

Question is can WWE bleed any further?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

HenryBowers said:


> Question is can WWE bleed any further?


As long as there are people watching, there's no question about it.

Pretty sure I remember back in September-December of 2012 when they were getting in the mid 3-millions (during Football season) that they had hit rock-bottom then. Now they can only barely get above that for their highest viewed shows of the year.

Though obviously they'll never reach 0, at this point I think we have to wait and see 3 years in a row of identical viewership year on year before we can determine what the lowest they'll go is (and even then - unless they attract new fans it'll still go down somewhat over time no matter what).


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

One thing buried in these ratings breakdowns is the amount of female viewers that have grown but rapid decrease of male viewers, especially male teenagers.


----------



## squarebox

The Phenom. said:


> I think WWE may have stopped the bleeding
> 
> What RAW lost from last year to this year has moved to SD. In fact, if you piece RAW & SD viewership together it's actually higher than last year which must be a first in a long time.
> 
> *2016:*
> RAW (April 4th) - 4.094 million
> SD (April 7th) - 2.444 million
> = 6.538 million
> 
> *2017:*
> RAW (April 3rd) - 3.767 million
> SDL (April 4th) - 2.885 million
> = 6.652 million
> 
> So WWE is actually up 114,000 viewers in this week of 2017 as opposed to last year at this time. WWE may have stopped the bleeding. We'll see I suppose.


RAW is the flagship show so let's use it:

RAW after Mania 2014 - D Bry wins championship - *5.145 million viewers* - http://www.prowrestling.net/article....0-rating-36542
RAW after Mania 2015 - Rollins Cash in - *5.636 million viewers* - http://prowrestling.net/article.php?...Mania-31-41620
RAW after Mania 2016 - Reigns wins title - *4.093 million viewers* - http://prowrestling.net/site/2016/04...ia-32-edition/
RAW after Mania 2017 - Reigns beats Undertaker - *3.76 million viewers* - http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe/201...restlemania-33

I mean seriously, how can people defend that sort of drop off in viewership?


----------



## Mr. Socko

Rainmaka! said:


> One thing buried in these ratings breakdowns is the amount of female viewers that have grown but rapid decrease of male viewers, especially male teenagers.


WWE with that Dragon Gate marketing strategy. :reigns2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A heel cashing in at the main event of WM drawing the biggest Raw after WM number in 5 years.

:mj4

And the women viewers continue to go down.


----------



## Bushmaster

ShowStopper said:


> A heel cashing in at the main event of WM drawing the biggest Raw after WM number in 5 years.
> 
> :mj4
> 
> And the women viewers continue to go down.


A heel. Rollins would be a face if we went by what Trips said. A face cashed in and got the biggest Raw numbers. Heel winning the last 2 years is not helping.


----------



## Little Miss Ingobernable

Mr. Socko said:


> WWE with that Dragon Gate marketing strategy. :reigns2


----------



## Dolorian

squarebox said:


> RAW is the flagship show so let's use it:
> 
> RAW after Mania 2014 - D Bry wins championship - *5.145 million viewers* - http://www.prowrestling.net/article....0-rating-36542
> RAW after Mania 2015 - Rollins Cash in - *5.636 million viewers* - http://prowrestling.net/article.php?...Mania-31-41620
> RAW after Mania 2016 - Reigns wins title - *4.093 million viewers* - http://prowrestling.net/site/2016/04...ia-32-edition/
> RAW after Mania 2017 - Reigns beats Undertaker - *3.76 million viewers* - http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe/201...restlemania-33
> 
> I mean seriously, how can people defend that sort of drop off in viewership?


Shouldn't the brand split be taken into consideration for this year's RAW after Mania viewership? I mean, people who want to see Cena, Styles, Ambrose and such wouldn't tune in to RAW because they only show up on SD.


----------



## squarebox

Dolorian said:


> Shouldn't the brand split be taken into consideration for this year's RAW after Mania viewership? I mean, people who want to see Cena, Styles, Ambrose and such wouldn't tune in to RAW because they only show up on SD.


Maybe...but how many fans are there that only watch one show? I mean if you're a long time fan then chances are you're still gonna want to follow both shows. It also doesn't explain the 1.543 million viewer drop-off from 2015 to 2016 either, that is huge.

The one thing WWE can't manipulate is TV ratings so imo it's by far and away the best indication of how they're really going.


----------



## Y.2.J

squarebox said:


> RAW is the flagship show so let's use it:
> 
> RAW after Mania 2014 - D Bry wins championship - *5.145 million viewers* - http://www.prowrestling.net/article....0-rating-36542
> RAW after Mania 2015 - Rollins Cash in - *5.636 million viewers* - http://prowrestling.net/article.php?...Mania-31-41620
> RAW after Mania 2016 - Reigns wins title - *4.093 million viewers* - http://prowrestling.net/site/2016/04...ia-32-edition/
> RAW after Mania 2017 - Reigns beats Undertaker - *3.76 million viewers* - http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe/201...restlemania-33
> 
> I mean seriously, how can people defend that sort of drop off in viewership?


It shouldn't work like that.

The brand extension wasn't used in those years, all the superstars were on RAW. Now, they're split between shows. Some fans only watch RAW, some only watch SD. I think it's better to look at the whole picture especially because Smackdown is on the USA network and 2017 saw a higher viewership for the RAW & SD after Mania's compared to 2016.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Phenom. said:


> It shouldn't work like that.
> 
> The brand extension wasn't used in those years, all the superstars were on RAW. Now, they're split between shows. Some fans only watch RAW, some only watch SD. I think it's better to look at the whole picture especially because Smackdown is on the USA network and 2017 saw a higher viewership for the RAW & SD after Mania's compared to 2016.


Except for the fact the Raw after WM last year dropped a significant margin from the previous year, and last year's Raw after WM was still pre-brand split.


----------



## Y.2.J

ShowStopper said:


> Except for the fact the Raw after WM last year dropped a significant margin from the previous year, and last year's Raw after WM was still pre-brand split.


That's exactly my point though.

It seems that the WWE has finally stopped to the bleeding and have hit rock bottom ratings and hopefully are only up from here.

The 400,000 viewers lost on RAW after Mania from 2016 to 2017 have been displaced to SDLive because of the brand split. So hopefully the WWE haven't just lost 400K viewers outright, hopefully they just jumped over to watching the blue brand exclusively which is still $ for the WWE and I think the numbers are there to back that up.

Don't get me wrong, the situation the WWE is in is not ideal. All I'm saying is hopefully they've stopped the free fall ratings drop.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Phenom. said:


> That's exactly my point though.
> 
> It seems that the WWE has finally stopped to the bleeding and have hit rock bottom ratings and hopefully are only up from here.
> 
> The 400,000 viewers lost on RAW after Mania from 2016 to 2017 have been displaced to SDLive because of the brand split. So hopefully the WWE haven't just lost 400K viewers outright, hopefully they just jumped over to watching the blue brand exclusively which is still $ for the WWE and I think the numbers are there to back that up.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, the situation the WWE is in is not ideal. All I'm saying is hopefully they've stopped the free fall ratings drop.


We shall see. They've been dropping for years, though, well before the brand split, which was my only point.


----------



## validreasoning

squarebox said:


> Maybe...but how many fans are there that only watch one show? I mean if you're a long time fan then chances are you're still gonna want to follow both shows. It also doesn't explain the 1.543 million viewer drop-off from 2015 to 2016 either, that is huge.
> 
> The one thing WWE can't manipulate is TV ratings so imo it's by far and away the best indication of how they're really going.



2015 post mania raw didn't go head to head with the ncaa championship so that explains alot. Raw viewership dropped massively the following week when they did have to face the big game. Next years post mania raw won't go head to head with the basketball either but obviously usa will be in millions of less homes in April 2018 compared to march 2015 so there's that 

Also rousey appearing probably added a couple of hundred thousand viewers expecting her to appear on raw.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

wrong thread my bad lmao


----------



## IEatFatKidz

ShowStopper said:


> Sports count, guys. As do TV shows. It's all on TV. Anyway, found this on Twitter:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :rollins
> 
> *I don't necessarily agree it's all on Reigns, just found the first 3 lines interesting.


lol people tuned into because Undertaker lost his streak. The hate for Reigns in the website strong here. Here's pic of Big Show and Vicki Guerrero actually drawing in more viewers when Daniel Bryan even when he was heavily featured.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

IEatFatKidz said:


> lol people tuned into because Undertaker lost his streak. The hate for Reigns in the website strong here. Here's pic of Big Show and Vicki Guerrero actually drawing in more viewers when Daniel Bryan even when he was heavily featured.


Yeah, I'm sure the Bryan storyline that had months of build up to it to the point where fans actually hijacked shows for Bryan had no factor in that rating. And in this thread, historically the Champion gets all of the credit or blame, right or wrong. I'm just using other folks' logic. Get on them if you don't like their logic. :shrug


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.432M
H2-3.600M
H3-3.256M
3H-3.429M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.90% / + 0.168M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.56% / - 0.344M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 5.13% / - 0.176M )
4/10/17 Vs 4/3/17 ( - 8.97% / - 0.338M )

Demo (4/10/17 Vs 4/3/17):
H1- 1.240D Vs 1.440D
H2- 1.310D Vs 1.460D
H3- 1.190D Vs 1.360D
3H- 1.247D Vs 1.420D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/10/17 Vs 4/11/16):
H1- 3.432M Vs 3.474M
H2- 3.600M Vs 3.687M
H3- 3.256M Vs 3.427M
3H- 3.429M Vs 3.529M ( - 2.83% / - 0.100M )

Demo (4/10/17 Vs 4/11/16):
H1- 1.240D Vs 1.200D
H2- 1.310D Vs 1.310D
H3- 1.190D Vs 1.250D
3H- 1.247D Vs 1.253D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 2 wins the night.

:rollins :angle


----------



## wwe9391

Seems like Reigns beating Undertaker is paying off in the ratings. Nothing but good numbers since WM.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

ShowStopper said:


> Yeah, I'm sure the Bryan storyline that had months of build up to it to the point where fans actually hijacked shows for Bryan had no factor in that rating. And in this thread, historically the Champion gets all of the credit or blame, right or wrong. I'm just using other folks' logic. Get on them if you don't like their logic. :shrug


There's no point talking about ancient history, but HHH isn't putting over Bryan clean as a fucking whistle unless he was doing big numbers during the RTWM. PWTorch has the quarter-hour breakdowns if you Google.

Also...
*Q1: Raw opened with a regular-show-high 2.70 rating for the immediate WM30 follow-up and Daniel Bryan's celebration. Noteworthy is the quarter-hour grew substantially from the beginning to end. So, it was not a case of a huge surge at 8:00 p.m. EST for immediate follow-up on The Streak ending, then viewers tuning out.

The segment grew from 1.555 million viewers at 8:03 p.m. to 1.770 million viewers at 8:06 p.m. to 1.814 million viewers at 8:08 p,m. to 1.836 million viewers at 8:12 p.m. to a peak audience of 1.843 million viewers at 8:13 p.m. when the title match main event was set up.*


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.432M
> H2-3.600M
> H3-3.256M
> 3H-3.429M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.90% / + 0.168M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.56% / - 0.344M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 5.13% / - 0.176M )
> 4/10/17 Vs 4/3/17 ( - 8.97% / - 0.338M )
> 
> Demo (4/10/17 Vs 4/3/17):
> H1- 1.240D Vs 1.440D
> H2- 1.310D Vs 1.460D
> H3- 1.190D Vs 1.360D
> 3H- 1.247D Vs 1.420D
> 
> Note: RAW is 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (4/10/17 Vs 4/11/16):
> H1- 3.432M Vs 3.474M
> H2- 3.600M Vs 3.687M
> H3- 3.256M Vs 3.427M
> 3H- 3.429M Vs 3.529M ( - 2.83% / - 0.100M )
> 
> Demo (4/10/17 Vs 4/11/16):
> H1- 1.240D Vs 1.200D
> H2- 1.310D Vs 1.310D
> H3- 1.190D Vs 1.250D
> 3H- 1.247D Vs 1.253D
> 
> Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


Well, a 3% drop from last year is better than the 8-15% drops they had been averaging this year. Still a record low rating for a show 1 week after WM.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

3.6 million for the 2nd hour is amazing these days, tbh. Good numbers.


----------



## TakerFreak

Ill wait and see in a few more weeks if the ratings will be this decent still. Raw after mania and the whole shake up Raw thing gave kind of a reason.


----------



## Erik.

That does seem like a pretty damn big second hour jump.

Was there something heavily promoted in the second hour? It's the only thing I can think of as to why so many people tuned in and then tuned out considering the drop to the third hour. Though saying that, wasn't the Strowman/Reigns segment at the end of the 2nd hour? I guess after that segment, you'd want to tune out. Nothing was topping it :lol


Edit - Hardys, Women and Ambrose/Owens were the segments/matches in the third hour - which doesn't bode well. 

Second hour was Angle/Rollins/Joe, Women, Balor, MIZ and Reigns/Strowman. Which is all interesting to me. Nothing was really promoted well throughout the second hour so it's interesting that some of the matches and segments they had on managed to keep viewers.

Basically, push Joe, Rollins, Balor, Miz and Strowman :mark:


----------



## The Catche Jagger

Well, the Reigns/Undertaker aftermath did stir up a lot of intrigue, particularly as it pertains to the direction of Roman's character. WWE kind of stunted that going forward, by using the segment to boost Strowman. That's not to say that pushing Strowman is wrong, it just keeps Roman off TV and keeps him face.

There's also a bit of intrigue as to the future trajectory of Rollins and Balor, but not nearly as much, they need to get a bit more momentum behind them before they can really be bigger viewership draws. Seth is on his way there, as long as he doesn't become to milquetoast. Balor's a bit more up in the air.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.405M
H2-3.469M
H3-3.165M
3H-3.346M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 1.88% / + 0.064M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.76% / - 0.304M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.05% / - 0.240M )
4/17/17 Vs 4/10/17 ( - 2.42% / - 0.083M )

Demo (4/17/17 Vs 4/10/17):
H1- 1.170D Vs 1.240D
H2- 1.220D Vs 1.310D
H3- 1.180D Vs 1.190D
3H- 1.190D Vs 1.247D

Note: RAW is 7th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/17/17 Vs 4/18/16):
H1- 3.405M Vs 3.486M
H2- 3.469M Vs 3.541M
H3- 3.165M Vs 2.980M
3H- 3.346M Vs 3.336M ( + 0.30% / + 0.010M )

Demo (4/17/17 Vs 4/18/16):
H1- 1.170D Vs 1.240D
H2- 1.220D Vs 1.250D
H3- 1.180D Vs 1.080D
3H- 1.190D Vs 1.190D

Note: RAW this time last year was 6th, 5th & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Raw doing ok with da big dawg off the show.


----------



## Chrome

3rd hour did better this year than last year.









Seems like Show/Strowman is a match that gets decent ratings. Didn't the 3rd hour do well the last time they main-evented?


----------



## A-C-P

The New Face of the WWE :braun


----------



## Dolorian

Third hour had the Hardy Boys and Braun/Show matches yet it still lost over 300,000 viewers. The increase in the second hour was likely due to the women's #1 contender match.


----------



## Erik.

So they managed to maintain 50,000+ more viewers for the third hour this week then they did last week?

Not bad.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not bad at all compared to last week.


----------



## sarcasma

Ambrose/Miz highest rated hour?


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 4/17 did a healthy 3,333,000 viewers, down three percent from last week, but considering this was a regular show and not a show built around roster movement, plus had NBA playoff competition, that minor drop has to be considered good news.
> 
> Until football season, for any regular episode of Raw, a figure of 3.2 million or greater should be considered successful. And even numbers less than 3.2 million as they get deeper into the NBA playoffs, would be good.
> 
> The first hour did 3,405,000 viewers. The second hour did 3,469,000 viewers. The third hour, built around Braun Strowman vs. Big Show, did 3,165,000 viewers. The first Strowman vs. Show match did a comparatively great job of holding viewers in the third hour, but this was back to normal patterns.
> 
> The third hour drop was mostly women, as the second to third hour decline was nine percent overall, but in 18-49, it was seven percent among women and one percent among men. The third hour decline was ten percent in the 50+ age group.
> 
> The show did a 0.90 in 12-17 (down 4.3 percent from last week), 1.04 in 18-34 (down 3.7 percent), 1.34 in 35-49 (down 5.6 percent) and 1.24 in 50+ (up 0.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 62.2 percent male in 18-49 and 59.4 percent male in 12-17.
> 
> The first half of the show went against the Indiana Pacers vs. Cleveland Cavaliers game on TNT that did 3,582,000 viewers, which was the only show on cable that beat Raw. With Bill O’Reilly on Fox News out of action and likely down for the count, Raw is likely to be the highest rated show most Mondays other than weeks with key sporting events. The second half of Raw went against a Memphis Grizzles vs. San Antonio Spurs game that did 3,174,000 viewers.


----------



## krillep

Don't they post the full ratings anymore?

I'm just seeing viewers and ratings for 18-49.

Where is the whole ratings for the show?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw was trash last night and deserves a trash rating.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> Raw was trash last night and deserves a trash rating.


Yeah, if it does relatively well, then they're in pretty good shape because that episode was below average.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.999M
H2-3.141M
H3-2.881M
3H-3.007M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.73% / + 0.142M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.28% / - 0.260M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.93% / - 0.118M )
4/24/17 Vs 4/17/17 ( - 10.13% / - 0.339M )

Demo (4/24/17 Vs 4/17/17):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.170D
H2- 1.050D Vs 1.220D
H3- 1.000D Vs 1.180D
3H- 1.030D Vs 1.190D

Note: RAW is 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/24/17 Vs 4/25/16):
H1- 2.999M Vs 3.263M
H2- 3.141M Vs 3.184M
H3- 2.881M Vs 2.938M
3H- 3.007M Vs 3.128M ( - 3.87% / - 0.121M )

Demo (4/17/17 Vs 4/18/16):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.050D Vs 1.150D
H3- 1.000D Vs 1.060D
3H- 1.030D Vs 1.117D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:ha

Horrible rating and well deserved. Hour 2 only hour above 3 million.

:rollins


----------



## Chrome

That's a pitiful rating lol.


----------



## wwe9391

Lol at those ratings. Should of had Roman on.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Braun is being featured. But it is what it is. They could be featuring anyone on the roster right now, and it wouldn't be any different.


----------



## The Renegade

Playoff basketball is probably the culprit here. At any rate, the show was pretty buns.


----------



## Gravyv321

silly fans thinking that the samoan shithead would cause ratings to skyrocket back up. the delusions are making my chest hurt! LMFAO xD


----------



## V-Trigger

wwe9391 said:


> Lol at those ratings. Should of had Roman on.


Like that low record ratings a couple of weeks ago?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Tucker Carlson > RAW (in total viewers):bryanlol. That rating? *THEY DESERVED IT...THEY DESERVED IT.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Think this number is bad? Look at SD's number last week. 2.5 million for a 2 hour show. Yowza.


----------



## Vyer

Braun "Ratings" Strowman bringing in those viewers for the second hour. I hope Mark Henry is proud that someone is carrying on the legacy.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Vyer said:


> Braun "Ratings" Strowman bringing in those viewers for the second hour. I hope Mark Henry is proud that someone is carrying on the legacy.


He was in more than just Hour 2, though.


----------



## MOXL3Y

ShowStopper said:


> Braun is being featured. But it is what it is. They could be featuring anyone on the roster right now, and it wouldn't be any different.


Maybe its just everyone knowing what is coming with Braaaaaun being fed to Roman again.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

How could anyone watch that shitty second hour?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Remember you can't spell ratings w/o Roman Reigns. :reigns2


----------



## Chrome

Just for kicks, I looked at the Raw rating for around this time 5 years ago.(4/23/12) For some reason, that was a 3 hour show too:

WWE RAW Hour 1 - 3.662
WWE RAW Hour 2 - 4.671
WWE RAW Hour 3 - 4.832
Average = 4.39

Average without 1st hour = 4.76

Keep in mind, back before they started doing 3 hours regularly, whenever they did a "special" 3-hour Raw the 1st hour usually did very poorly because a lot of people would forget it was on. So yeah, they've lost close to 2 million viewers in 5 years lol.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Putting the main belt on Brock this time is going to work just as well as it did last time. I'm sure he'll pop a rating when he comes back, but the effect when he isn't around is that everything isn't important when he's gone, so why watch?

If Brock's going to disappear, Braun should have beaten him the night after Mania and held the belt till Brock was ready to take it back.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Just for kicks, I looked at the Raw rating for around this time 5 years ago.(4/23/12) For some reason, that was a 3 hour show too:
> 
> WWE RAW Hour 1 - 3.662
> WWE RAW Hour 2 - 4.671
> WWE RAW Hour 3 - 4.832
> Average = 4.39
> 
> Average without 1st hour = 4.76
> 
> Keep in mind, back before they started doing 3 hours regularly, whenever they did a "special" 3-hour Raw the 1st hour usually did very poorly because a lot of people would forget it was on. So yeah, they've lost close to 2 million viewers in 5 years lol.


Crazy. And even with being a 2 hour show, SD is stuck in the mid 2 millions. WWE's ratings are dead in the water.


----------



## A-C-P

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Remember you can't spell *"LOW"* ratings w/o Roman Reigns. :reigns2


Fixed that for you :troll


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

A-C-P said:


> Fixed that for you :troll


They should just change it to Monday Ñight BLOW. :hmm Bet Orton would like to be on the brand. :bryanlol


----------



## wwe9391

LOL I love this thread.

People make fun of the ratings yet buissness is better than ever.


----------



## TakerFreak

Raw rating sucks because Roman is not there. Vince's plan all along i get it now.


----------



## Mra22

Lol a horrible rating, it's fitting they had a dumpster match on this show because this show was absolute garbage.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw beat SD pretty handily again. SD's number actually went down from last week's poor number.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 4/24 did a 2.03 rating and 3,003,000 viewers (1.62 viewers per home), making it the lowest rated and the fourth lowest-watched non-holiday show outside of football season since 1997.
> 
> It was the lowest rated Raw not on a holiday or not against football since a March 3, 1997, show did a 1.9 rating going head-to-head with Nitro. The three shows, all of which did higher rating, but fewer viewers, were shows last year against a monster NBA Playoff game and two weeks head-to-head with the Olympics. There was an NBA game head-to-head with this week’s show that did 3,019,000 viewers, but that’s hardly monster numbers to the point it would be a reason for the drop.
> 
> It was just a lackluster show, but the first hour being just under three million viewers is significant, because it shows it was a lack of interest in the show from the start as compared to most weeks, as the first hour was down 12 percent from the previous week so it says the drop was more lack of interest in the show this week as opposed to a bad show driving off a larger than usual number of viewers as it went on.
> 
> The previous lowest mark in that regard would have been when the 3/20 show did a 2.11 rating and 3,036,000 viewers. Viewership was down ten percent overall from last week, which went against a higher-rated game. It was fourth for the night on cable.
> 
> The first hour did 2,999,000 viewers. The second hour did 3,141,000 viewers. The third hour did 2,881,000 viewers.
> 
> The show did a 0.84 in 12-17 (down 6.7 percent), 0.88 in 18-34 (down 15.4 percent), 1.18 in 35-49 (down 11.9 percent) and 1.14 in 50+ (down 8.1 percent).
> 
> The audience was 59.9 percent male in 18-49 and 61.5 percent male in 12-17.
> 
> Raw on 4/17 did a strong 2.25 rating and 3,333,000 viewers which was also 1.61 viewers per home.
> 
> A key to the viewers per home rising to record levels is that it’s the homes with less than two fans that are more likely to be the type of people who would drop cable. But the lower ratings indicates a lower percentage of homes that still have USA are also watching the show than at any time since the Monday Night Wars when there was head-to-head competition from Nitro.
> 
> The prevailing theory of the kids that watch on YouTube is what is causing the ratings drop seems to fall apart by the larger viewers per home figure. It just seems to indicate that in homes where there is wrestling on, multiple people are more likely to be watching in a hoime than at any time since the Attitude era (where VPH’s hit 1.7). But fewer homes than ever by percentage of those that still get cable or satellite are still watching Raw.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.924M
H2-3.039M
H3-2.649M
3H-2.871M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.93% / + 0.115M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.83% / - 0.390M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 9.40% / - 0.275M )
5/1/17 Vs 4/24/17 ( - 4.52% / - 0.136M )

Demo (5/1/17 Vs 4/24/17):
H1- 1.000D Vs 1.040D
H2- 1.060D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.000D
3H- 1.007D Vs 1.030D

Note: RAW is 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/1/17 Vs 5/2/16):
H1- 2.924M Vs 3.458M
H2- 3.039M Vs 3.457M
H3- 2.649M Vs 3.383M
3H- 2.871M Vs 3.433M ( - 16.37% / - 0.562M )

Demo (5/1/17 Vs 5/2/16):
H1- 1.000D Vs 1.210D
H2- 1.060D Vs 1.240D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.230D
3H- 1.007D Vs 1.227D

Note: RAW this time last year was 7th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NBA destroyed them. :lmao Good. Fuck this company.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ouch. Crap show drew a crap rating. Shame that so many missed the strong main event.


----------



## Erik.

That's what happens when you keep your most gripping feud OFF television.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> That's what happens when you keep your most gripping feud OFF television.


It would've been bad either way with the NBA Playoffs on.


----------



## Erik.

That's got to be the lowest Raw rating all year though? 

The one week they left off Strowman so he didn't get cheers for being a heel.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Granted that the NBA layed the smackdown on RAW's candy ass, but Roman's and Braun's absence clearly exacerbated things. It also appears the IC title isn't a draw. Time to put the Universal title on someone who'll be active week to week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ah just checked, LeBron had a game last night up against Raw. WWE fucked until the NBA Playoffs end.


----------



## wwe9391

That's what happens when Roman and Braun the 2 men in your biggest feud on Raw are absence from the show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They've had sub 3 million numbers, including Hour 1, with those guys on the show, too. They have no shot up against LeBron.


----------



## JDP2016

Nice to know Finn, Miz and Seth will get the blame for that third hour number. LOL This is great news. Just makes my day.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## AVX

I thought the show was good, but I do watch the truncated HULU version so...


----------



## JDP2016

AVX said:


> I thought the show was good, but I do watch the truncated HULU version so...


The Hulu version is better. They cut out all the crap.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JDP2016 said:


> Nice to know Finn, Miz and Seth will get the blame for that third hour number. LOL This is great news. Just makes my day.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


You don't like talent, eh?


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> They've had sub 3 million numbers, including Hour 1, with those guys on the show, too. They have no shot up against LeBron.


Still be better than what they got.


----------



## JDP2016

ShowStopper said:


> You don't like talent, eh?


Nah. If I wanna see a bunch of 210 pound guys in the main event I'll watch Ring of Honor.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JDP2016 said:


> Nah. If I wanna see a bunch of 210 pound guys in the main event I'll watch Ring of Honor.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


I knew it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:lelbron


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Who would have guessed that RAW's ratings would be the true House of Horrors. :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Almost as bad as a SD rating, but not quite.


----------



## God Movement

YIKES!


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> Ah just checked, LeBron had a game last night up against Raw. WWE fucked until the NBA Playoffs end.


... at which point football season is on the horizon :nash 

I guess so much for ratings recovering significantly after football season.
Post-WM curiosity is gone.

And people really needed to be shown that the IC belt is not a draw? :booklel


----------



## JDP2016

I kinda wish they drew this number without the Lebron game as an excuse.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dolorian

Well that's quite a TJP rating.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I can't wait until WWE has to negotiate a new TV deal with USA Network. Should be interesting.


----------



## God Movement

If Raw drew this bad I can only imagine what Smackdown's rating will be for tonight's show.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

JDP2016 said:


> Nah. If I wanna see a bunch of 210 pound guys in the main event I'll watch Ring of Honor.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


... or Steve Austin (250) VS Shawn Michaels (205)

Or Randy Savage.

But good luck with those Sid Vicious VS Undertaker matches.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Dolorian said:


> Well that's quite a TJP rating.


TJP will be the GOAT drinking game next RAW. :liquor


----------



## Dolorian

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> TJP will be the GOAT drinking game next RAW. :liquor


Or in 205 Live tonight. I don't watching but I am sure it will be very TJP.


----------



## JDP2016

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> ... or Steve Austin (250) VS Shawn Michaels (205)
> 
> Or Randy Savage.
> 
> But good luck with those Sid Vicious VS Undertaker matches.


Shawn weighed 225 when he fought Austin in 1997-1998. Savage weighed around 230-235 in his day. 

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

There's only one thing left to do: get Steph back on tv, dammit.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

JDP2016 said:


> Shawn weighed 225 when he fought Austin in 1997-1998. Savage weighed around 230-235 in his day.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


So? Rollins is billed as 217.

Also, do you know the term kayfabe? And that Undertaker is not from Death Valley despite being billed as such?
Vader confirmed Shawn was around 200 back then.

Also, 10-15 pounds don't make one fuck of a difference, unless you're a smark who has a psychological barrier against "indy guys".


----------



## God Movement

500 - Internal server error said:


> There's only one thing left to do: get Steph back on tv, dammit.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Erik. said:


> That's what happens when you keep your most gripping feud OFF television.


agreed, they should at least of had a strowman segment


----------



## Ace

BigDaveBatista said:


> agreed, they should at least of had a strowman segment


 Excuse me, but aren't the numbers for the first 2 hrs also garbage?.... No one knew Roman and Strowman were going to no show, they expected a fall out.


----------



## Chrome

at those numbers. And this was a fallout show too.


----------



## Ace

Chrome said:


> at those numbers. And this was a fallout show too.


 The fallout of Roman-Braun drew squat :lmao

You can't use the excuse of either not showing because no one knew they were going to be kept off.

And... ALL 3 HOURS BOMBED :reigns2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

It's May. Post-Wrestlemania fever is over. Time for things to sink, go back up a little around July/August, then super sink for Football season.


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> That's what happens when you keep your most gripping feud OFF television.


 LOL fans expected a fall out! The numbers were still trash.

Not like they had an idea both were going to be kept off.


----------



## Chrome

One Winged Angel said:


> The fallout of Roman-Braun drew squat :lmao
> 
> You can't use the excuse of either not showing because no one knew they were going to be kept off.
> 
> And... ALL 3 HOURS BOMBED :reigns2


Reigns I can understand, but why was Strowman not on this show? Was he kayfabe suspended or something?


----------



## Ace

JDP2016 said:


> The Hulu version is better.* They cut out all the crap.*
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


 So what's usually left to watch? :lol


----------



## God Movement

Today I have learned that if you're on a show you are culpable for poor ratings and if you aren't on it you are still also culpable for poor ratings.


----------



## wwe9391

God Movement said:


> Today I have learned that if you're on a show you are culpable for poor ratings and if you aren't on it you are still also culpable for poor ratings.


Yep it really is a lose lose situation. Thankfully ratings don't matter as much as they used too.

Anyways if Raws were bad, smackdowns ratings will be much worse.



One Winged Angel said:


> The fallout of Roman-Braun drew squat :lmao
> 
> You can't use the excuse of either not showing because no one knew they were going to be kept off.
> 
> And... ALL 3 HOURS BOMBED :reigns2


Or maybe fans were pissed Braun won vs Reigns and tuned out in protest :jericho2


----------



## Ace

God Movement said:


> Today I have learned that if you're on a show you are culpable for poor ratings and if you aren't on it you are still also culpable for poor ratings.


 The show succeeds or dies on the main program i.e. Roman vs Braun.

The big angle out of last night was from that feud, irrespective of this, the numbers for the first 2 hours were abysmal..

Sure there was competition, but they were slaughtered here the night after a PPV :ha

When did they actually even mention neither of them were appearing? Because I can't recall that at all, you would have only realized this 2 hrs and 30 mins in.


----------



## Iapetus

One Winged Angel said:


> The show succeeds or dies on the main program i.e. Roman vs Braun.
> 
> The big angle out of last night was from that feud, irrespective of this, the numbers for the first 2 hours were abysmal..
> 
> Sure there was competition, but they were slaughtered here the night after a PPV :ha
> 
> When did they actually even mention neither of them were appearing? Because I can't recall that at all, you would have only realized this 2 hrs and 30 mins in.


Roman wasn't expected to be on Raw. It's Braun that they threw the surprise injury angle on and kept off. So keep reaching.


----------



## JDP2016

I just checked the TV guide listings from last night and the Cavs v. Raptors game was supposed to end at around 9:30 and Rockets/Spurs would have been on after that. So the third hour couldn't even compete with James Harden and Kahwai Leonard. :lol


----------



## Seafort

wwe9391 said:


> Yep it really is a lose lose situation. Thankfully ratings don't matter as much as they used too.
> 
> Anyways if Raws were bad, smackdowns ratings will be much worse.


They will primarily when WWE tries to get more money in its deal with USA when it is up for renewal. They cannot continue to outpace the average erosion of the traditional television audience and still be in a position in two years to get more money. Without that steady NBC revenue (at present or greater levels), WWE will have to restructure in order to stay profitable.


----------



## Ace

Iapetus said:


> Roman wasn't expected to be on Raw. It's Braun that they threw the surprise injury angle on and kept off. So keep reaching.


 I'm a smark and I thought Roman was going to be there after what happened post match. Roman was left standing tall.

Shocked there was no fall out after last night considering the finish, it suggested the feud was going to continue to ER.


----------



## Iapetus

One Winged Angel said:


> I'm a smark and I thought Roman was going to be there after what happened post match. Roman was left standing tall.
> 
> Shocked there was no fall out after last night considering the finish, it suggested the feud was going to continue to ER.


We're basically having the same conversation in two different threads, but anyways..Roman wasn't advertised for Raw and after the beatdown I didn't expect him to be on. They already peddled that internal injuries thing and after the blood spit-up it was pretty obvious they'd play it up again. I expected Braun but he wasn't there. At any rate, viewership was down last week as well, so I doubt it's down because they were expecting StRoman on and DIDN'T want to see it.


----------



## Ace

Iapetus said:


> We're basically having the same conversation in two different threads, but anyways..Roman wasn't advertised for Raw and after the beatdown I didn't expect him to be on. They already peddled that internal injuries thing and after the blood spit-up it was pretty obvious they'd play it up again. I expected Braun but he wasn't there. At any rate, viewership was down last week as well, so I doubt it's down because they were expecting StRoman on and DIDN'T want to see it.


 I don't think you get my point.

The number would have been the same irrespective of whether Roman is there or not. He's not a draw.... the only ratings draw the WWE have left is Cena. 

That number is what the main program is drawing (Roman-Braun) when up against competition. Regardless of all the hoss booking they never give to anyone else, it's not drawing.

Accept it.


----------



## The XL 2

JDP2016 said:


> Raw-Is-Botchamania said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... or Steve Austin (250) VS Shawn Michaels (205)
> 
> Or Randy Savage.
> 
> But good luck with those Sid Vicious VS Undertaker matches.
> 
> 
> 
> Shawn weighed 225 when he fought Austin in 1997-1998. Savage weighed around 230-235 in his day.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

They were billed at those weights, it's unlikely that they were those weights in real life.



wwe9391 said:


> God Movement said:
> 
> 
> 
> Today I have learned that if you're on a show you are culpable for poor ratings and if you aren't on it you are still also culpable for poor ratings.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep it really is a lose lose situation. Thankfully ratings don't matter as much as they used too.
> 
> Anyways if Raws were bad, smackdowns ratings will be much worse.
Click to expand...

Oh, they definitely matter. They're not a solvent company without their TV deal. They probably won't be canceled, but they're playing with fire. Even a drop in pay would put them in serious danger.


----------



## Iapetus

One Winged Angel said:


> I don't think you get my point.
> 
> The number would have been the same irrespective of whether Roman is there or not. He's not a draw.... the only ratings draw the WWE have left is Cena.
> 
> That number is what the main program is drawing (Roman-Braun) when up against competition. Regardless of all the hoss booking they never give to anyone else, it's not drawing.
> 
> Accept it.


If we're being honest, they've dropped since he's been gone. And they also dropped when he was suspended, and I think when he was on vacation as well, so...

I'm not saying he's some massive draw, but given the circumstances he shouldn't be expected to be, and there are also many people who don't watch when he's on and I'm one of them.

Basing drawing capability off the main event is as outdated as analog TVs.


----------



## Ace

Iapetus said:


> If we're being honest, they've dropped since he's been gone. And they also dropped when he was suspended, and I think when he was on vacation as well, so...
> 
> I'm not saying he's some massive draw, but given the circumstances he shouldn't be expected to be, and there are also many people who don't watch when he's on and I'm one of them.


 Dude, his main events have actually drawn really poorly.

Braun has done quite well with Big Show.


----------



## Iapetus

One Winged Angel said:


> Dude, his main events have actually drawn really poorly.
> 
> Braun has done quite well with Big Show.


Yeahhh that's a lie....


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

God Movement said:


> Today I have learned that if you're on a show you are culpable for poor ratings and if you aren't on it you are still also culpable for poor ratings.


Raw draws shit when Reigns is on, and it draws shit when he isn't. 0.2 Million here or there are irrelevant.
The only thing he is culpable for is drawing shit when he is supposed to.

Besides being outshined by a dude who's even greener than he was when he got the rocket strapped to his ass, of course.


----------



## JDP2016

God Movement said:


> Today I have learned that if you're on a show you are culpable for poor ratings and if you aren't on it you are still also culpable for poor ratings.


I've learned that we blame the wrestler for low ratings when we don't like the person and blame everything else when we do.



Iapetus said:


> Basing drawing capability off the main event is as outdated as analog TVs.



Is it? The main event is supposed to be made up of guys fans want to see the most so if they are drawing a low number, it should be argued that they aren't much of a draw at the top of the card.


----------



## Lykos

JDP2016 said:


> I've learned that we blame the wrestler for low ratings when we don't like the person and blame everything else when we do.


I've learned that we blame Reigns for everything, doesn't matter what it is, is Reigns fault.


----------



## wwe9391

The XL 2 said:


> Oh, they definitely matter. They're not a solvent company without their TV deal. They probably won't be canceled, but they're playing with fire. Even a drop in pay would put them in serious danger.


They matter but not to the extant they used to. Same goes for every tv show out there. 

Anyways im not worried


----------



## moveznflips_

No Roman = No Ratings. Simple as that. 
I didn't watch because he wasn't on and looks like I wasn't alone


----------



## Ace

Iapetus said:


> Yeahhh that's a lie....


 Braun's main events have held somewhat well from the second hr. The drop from 2nd to 3rd hr is expected, it's about reducing the losses.


----------



## Randy Lahey

I thought Raw had almost stopped the bleeding in April because they were only doing about 3-5% off the previous year, but then they put out a show like last night that has to be the worst rating of all time coming off a PPV. Last night's show and rating should send a message that WWE Raw is on its last legs.

I expect 1.5-1.7s during football.

And a cancellation next year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Randy Lahey said:


> I thought Raw had almost stopped the bleeding in April because they were only doing about 3-5% off the previous year, but then they put out a show like last night that has to be the worst rating of all time coming off a PPV. Last night's show and rating should send a message that WWE Raw is on its last legs.
> 
> I expect 1.5-1.7s during football.
> 
> And a cancellation next year.


Honestly, they are no where near cancellation and regularly are among the top rated Monday cable shows. I wonder what it would take, just how far the ratings would have to fall to cause cancellation. :evilmatt


----------



## Ace

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Honestly, they are no where near cancellation and regularly are among the top rated Monday cable shows. I wonder what it would take, just how far the ratings would have to fall to cause cancellation. :evilmatt


 I waiting for the US TV deal, no chance they get anywhere as much this time around.

They're going to have to add a 4th hr to get the same deal :ha


----------



## fabi1982

DONT JINX IT!!!!!!



One Winged Angel said:


> I waiting for the US TV deal, no chance they get anywhere as much this time around.
> 
> They're going to have to add a 4th hr to get the same deal :ha


----------



## wwe9391

Iapetus said:


> Yeahhh that's a lie....


Game, Set, Match


----------



## V-Trigger

moveznflips_ said:


> No Roman = No Ratings. Simple as that.
> I didn't watch because he wasn't on and looks like I wasn't alone


----------



## Demolition119

Quite the TJP rating


----------



## Gravyv321

moveznflips_ said:


> No Roman = No Ratings. Simple as that.
> I didn't watch because he wasn't on and looks like I wasn't alone


LOL, atrocious taste in talent u have.


----------



## Randy Lahey

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Honestly, they are no where near cancellation and regularly are among the top rated Monday cable shows. I wonder what it would take, just how far the ratings would have to fall to cause cancellation. :evilmatt


It doesn't matter if they are among the top rated shows. It matters how much a TV Network would be willing to pay to get that show. There's no way USA/NBC/Universal would have expected Raw to pull in 2.0 and below. They re-upped their deal when they were a 3.0 and above show. TV Networks will pay money for a 3.0 and above show. If they get down to 1.5 or below, hardly anyone will want to continue to pay for that. It doesn't bring in the ad revenue anyway.

Look what Nitro ratings were when Ted Turner said - nope, not going to put that on my stations anymore. And while Nitro's ratings had fallen way off, I'm certain they were still "among the top rated shows" still.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Raw Rating: First sub 2.0 rating of the year, big drop-off in third hour (w/Keller’s Analysis)

The May 1 edition of Raw drew a 1.99 rating, the first sub-2.00 rating since Dec. 26. Dec. 12 was the last episode that wasn’t considered a “holiday” edition to drop below 2.00. The 1.99 is below the 2.32 April average and the 2.22 average for 2017 so far. The ten week rolling average headed into this week was 2.25. One year ago, Raw drew a 2.35. The average for 2016 this far into the year was 2.54 compared to this year’s average so far of 2.22.

Keller’s Analysis: The stat that leaps out is the drop-off from the first to the third hour. The first hour drew a 2.92 million viewers, the second hour 3.04 million viewers, and the third hour 2.65 million viewers. The first-to-third hour drop-off was 275,000, well above the 181,000 average of the last ten weeks. That’s not a great sign as far as where Seth Rollins, Finn Balor, and The Miz stand in terms of being main event TV match draws, but it’s just one week, and that’s just one match in the third hour.*

http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2017/05/03/raw-rating-first-sub-2-0-rating-year-big-drop-off-third-hour-wkellers-analysis/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Damn, just saw SD's ratings. They got hit HARD, too. NBA decimating WWE.


----------



## A-C-P

Need to get :braun back on TV......OR ELSE :braun


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Randy Lahey said:


> It doesn't matter if they are among the top rated shows. It matters how much a TV Network would be willing to pay to get that show. There's no way USA/NBC/Universal would have expected Raw to pull in 2.0 and below. They re-upped their deal when they were a 3.0 and above show. TV Networks will pay money for a 3.0 and above show. If they get down to 1.5 or below, hardly anyone will want to continue to pay for that. It doesn't bring in the ad revenue anyway.
> 
> Look what Nitro ratings were when Ted Turner said - nope, not going to put that on my stations anymore. And while Nitro's ratings had fallen way off, I'm certain they were still "among the top rated shows" still.


Not being a history nazi, but Turner didn't cancel Nitro, Jamie Kellner did because wrestling wasn't the kind of program the newly structured station wanted, and Turner couldn't do anything about it. I'm fairly certain Turner would have never cancelled Nitro because, as he Said, Wrestling was his foundation.
And because Nitro still did better ratings in 2001 than Raw does today.

But true, finding sponsors for wrestling was always not easy.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 5/1 did a shockingly bad number coming the day after a PPV show, doing a 1.98 rating and averaging 2,859,000 viewers (1.58 viewers per home), the lowest since 1997 for a non-football or non-holiday show.
> 
> It was five percent down from last week, which didn’t have the benefit of coming off a PPV. The previous rating low was a 2.03 last week, and audience low in that category was 2,904,000 viewers for the 8/8 show, which was going against the Summer Olympics.
> 
> The culprit, as it will be for the next several week, are the NBA playoffs. The first half of Raw went against a Cleveland Cavaliers vs. Toronto Raptors game that did 3,577,000 viewers. The second half went against a San Antonio Spurts vs. Houston Rockets game that did 4,428,000 viewers. There was also an NHL Stanley Cup playoff game that did 1,875,000 viewers.
> 
> But for a comparison, last year’s Raw on the same week did 3,430,000 viewers, so it’s a 16.6 percent year-to-year drop, and that went against NBA games that did 5,200,000 and 3,636,000 and an NHL game that did 1,647,000, as well as Paige VanZant on Dancing With The Stars doing nearly12 million viewers. The fact is the late NBA game and Dancing With The Stars also had double digit declines from last year, not as big as WWE, but still big, so it’s more a television story. The NHL game and first NBA game were both slightly up from last year.
> 
> This was also going against the declining ratings of Fox News Network in prime time since the departure of Bill O’Reilly. Raw was third for the night on cable, trailing only the two NBA games.
> 
> Another aspect is that next week’s show is taped, and isn’t coming off a PPV the night before, may do worse. That is going right now against a Warriors vs. Utah Jazz game, but the game won’t start until 9 p.m. so they’ll get an hour unopposed. The ratings are likely to be down until the NBA playoffs no longer are on Mondays since NBA ratings will increase as the playoffs get deeper.
> 
> On a show that didn’t have either Roman Reigns or Braun Strowman appearing, and built to a Seth Rollins vs. Finn Balor vs. The Miz match, there was a huge decline from hour two to hour three of 13 percent. As far as who tuned out, 18-49 women were down 12.0 percent, 18-49 men were down 7.0 percent, 12-17 boys were down three percent, 12-17 girls were down 13.4 percent and over 50 were down 12.7 percent. However, the drop from last week was the hardest among teenagers, as once you got past the age of 35, the numbers were roughly the same as last week and up slightly among men.
> 
> The first hour did 2,924,000 viewers, so it started out with less interest than usual. That hour was down from 2,999,000 last week but the first hour coming off a PPV should have the best increase of the three hours. The second hour did 3,039,000 viewers and the big drop was to 2,649,000 viewers in hour three. That was not only lower than the third hour against both weeks of the Olympics, but was almost identical to the third hour of the show that aired on July 4, 2016, and that’s really telling.
> 
> The show did a 0.75 in 12-17 (down 10.7 percent from last week; 25.7 percent from last year), 0.85 in 18-34 (down 3.4 percent, 26.7 percent from last year), 1.17 in 35-49 (down 0.8 percent, ten percent from last year) and 1.13 in 50+ (down 0.9 percent, 13.1 percent from last year).
> 
> The audience was 60.9 percent male in 18-49 and 64.1 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I thought Raw just had to fear Football. But these days, they have to be afraid of just about everything it seems.


----------



## Chrome

I swear we see that "lowest since 1997 for a non-holiday/non-football episode" stat almost every week now.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.827M
H2-2.845M
H3-2.417M
3H-2.696M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.64% / + 0.018M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 15.04% / - 0.428M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.50% / - 0.410M )
5/8/17 Vs 5/1/17 ( - 6.10% / - 0.175M )

Demo (5/8/17 Vs 5/1/17):
H1- 0.960D Vs 1.000D
H2- 0.960D Vs 1.060D
H3- 0.860D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.927D Vs 1.007D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 8th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/8/17 Vs 5/9/16):
H1- 2.827M Vs 3.345M
H2- 2.845M Vs 3.356M
H3- 2.417M Vs 3.013M
3H- 2.696M Vs 3.238M ( - 17.74% / - 0.542M )

Demo (5/8/17 Vs 5/9/16):
H1- 0.960D Vs 1.140D
H2- 0.960D Vs 1.190D
H3- 0.860D Vs 1.060D
3H- 0.927D Vs 1.130D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

2.4m in the 3rd hr :lmao

They were lucky the first half of GSW-Jazz was one sided or that second hr number would have been lower.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

WWE's starpower is at an all time high these days, isn't it?

:ha


----------



## Sweggeh

2.6?

God damn...


----------



## wwe9391

Taped Raws man. That will give you those number. 

Smackdowns are gonna be much worse.


----------



## God Movement

Wow. That is shocking.


----------



## CesaroSwing

Imagine what their ratings would be like if the play-offs were actually competitive.

Does anyone know if any of the NBA finals games fall on a Monday or Tuesday night? That would be brutal


----------



## Erik.

Was always going to happen on a taped Raw.

They'll increase next week.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> Taped Raws man. That will give you those number.
> 
> Smackdowns are gonna be much worse.


 No doubt, they're up against a much better NBA match up.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3. :heston

WWE?


----------



## God Movement

What was in hour 3? I went to sleep after the second hour.


----------



## Ace

CesaroSwing said:


> Imagine what their ratings would be like if the play-offs were actually competitive.
> 
> Does anyone know if any of the NBA finals games fall on a Monday or Tuesday night? That would be brutal


 Cavs-GSW is going to butcher both shows :lol

SD will be doing less than 2m while Raw will be in the low 2 millions.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Raw doesn't always drop when it's taped. Last year's 11/7 Raw in Glasgow drew a higher number than the previous week. 

It was a bad show against the NBA Playoffs headlined by the usual geeks. That's virtually a guarantee at a low rating.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And the 'top' title of the show main evented.

:ha


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

One Winged Angel said:


> No doubt, they're up against a much better NBA match up.


SDL will never regularly beat RAW. It'll probably get it's usual 80% of RAW's audience.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If last week's third hour with a main event to determine IC Title #1 contender didn't draw, what chance did a pointless repeat Ambrose/Wyatt non title match have? 

They knew it was taped and didn't even try.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

One thing's for certain: RAW deserved this rating. The bookers phoned it in and RAW was a three hour exercise in mediocrity.


----------



## CesaroSwing

One Winged Angel said:


> Cavs-GSW is going to butcher both shows :lol
> 
> SD will be doing less than 2m while Raw will be in the low 2 millions.


They better hope that none of the games fall on a Monday/Tuesday. 

When the Lavar and Lonzo ball show begins it's over for the WWE


----------



## DELETE

Lesnar ruining raw tbh


----------



## Ace

Least-watched non-holiday Raw in over two decades. 

Roman breaking them kayfabe and non kayfabe records :reigns2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They drew more when they were going up against the FUCKING NWO head to head.

:lmao

:hbk1


----------



## The XL 2

That's brutal. The business isn't a healthy state.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bring back :brock. That'll be sure to put asses in the seats.


----------



## The_Jiz

That has got to be the lowest raw ever. 

1.6 rating?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

To quote a certain delusional being on here: No Roman, No Ratings. :booklel


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> To quote a certain delusional being on here: No Roman, No Ratings. :booklel


If anything, Roman's push almost perfectly coincides with a greatly accelerated decline in ratings.

Don't believe me? Check the year over year averages from 2012-2014, then take a look at the year over year declines from 2015-2017. The difference is fucking stark.

Honestly, WWE is going to be fine. They aren't going out of business anytime soon. Most people don't want them to go out of business. Most people just want them to improve the product.


----------



## Bushmaster

See you next week.


----------



## Ace

Raw fell to yet another non-football season and non-holiday record modern low last night with 2.68 million viewers for the show in London.

The audience dropped six percent over the previous low mark set last week of 2.86 million viewers.

The last time Raw numbers were at this point outside of football season was 1997, when it went head-to-head with Nitro.

Still, due to the declines at Fox News, Raw was second only to the Golden State Warriors-Utah Jazz NBA playoff game on TNT which did 4.52 million viewers.

The new low mark, besides a clear decline in interest since the switching of talent on the superstar shakeup show and following week for the novelty, would be due to the NBA competition and the fact the show was taped about five hours earlier.

In the past, being taped hadn't hurt the rating but it does appear that was the case here. Next week will be more evident because if the number is in the same ballpark for a live show, that would be a very bad sign.

The three hours were:

8 p.m. 2.83 million viewers
9 p.m. 2.85 million viewers
10 p.m. 2.42 million viewers

http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/raw-ratings-down-again-show-taped-london-235226


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Iron Man said:


> See you next week.


----------



## Mra22

Soul Man Danny B said:


>


Looks like a lot of people have stopped watching :lol


----------



## JDP2016

If only those pesky black guys in shorts didn't play that damm basketball on Monday and Tuesday nights.


----------



## Erik.




----------



## Chrome

Soul Man Danny B said:


>


Looks like a lot of "Marks" stopped watching if those record-low ratings are anything to go by.


----------



## Y.2.J

Those are shocking numbers.

Wow.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

The show just isn't fun anymore. I watched last night, my first full RAW for a while, and it was utter fucking trash. Overseas throwaway episode is not an excuse for the absolute garbage I witnessed. 

It's painfully boring and that's simply all there is to it. You can argue until you're blue in the face and attribute highs/lows to your favourite and least favourite talents, using the ratings to push an agenda, but it comes down to one thing above all else: RAW FUCKING SUCKS.

Watch any episode of RAW (and SD! too) from the late 90's and you'll see some immense star power throughout the show. Guys like Jericho and Angle would flounder as young wrestlers today because they wouldn't be allowed to do _any_ of the stuff that got them over back then, they'd be treated with zero respect and have their talents stamped out and hidden from the world, while they stand in the ring like geeks cutting shit-tier promos. 

Fuck this company. WWE is dreadful and no one wrestler is responsible for that, they're doing their damned best to bring to life awful garbage that was written on a colouring book with crayon 5 minutes before RAW began. How the fuck is a 6'3, adult male like Roman Reigns, a legitimate athlete, supposed to seriously give a fuck about some of the shit they've asked of him since going solo? The promos, literally playing tug-of-war over the title with Brock Lesnar... Christ, the ratings are in the toilet because Vince is a dipshit. 

Man, this rant was supposed to be about a paragraph long :lol. There's just so much crap going on behind the curtain that it sucks to see the guys and gals getting dumped on and having to take responsibility for this failure of a product. McMahon is to blame and that's that. 

They are contractually obliged to act out the visions of a crazy old man who lost his touch years ago.


----------



## V-Trigger




----------



## The Dazzler

Wow at how fast they're falling. It was a bad show so they deserve it. :smile2:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Dazzler said:


> Wow at how fast they're falling. It was a bad show so they deserve it. :smile2:


Yeah, when you're descending into 1995 territory, something is rotten in the city of Stamford. I do wonder what their ratings floor is? How low can they go?


----------



## InexorableJourney

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Yeah, when you're descending into 1995 territory, something is rotten in the city of Stamford. I do wonder what their ratings floor is? How low can they go?


Well Suits USA network's highest rated original show has dropped to 1.2million viewers, and was on the cusp of being cancelled, but was renewed.

Of course you might have to account for the relative cost of the shows, their international resale, and their ad revenue.

But, if RAW lost say, another 500,000 viewers they would almost certainly get cancelled.


----------



## wwe9391

"Marks" are the ones they will always watch and when they say they don't then they are full of crap. If you really didn't watch you wouldn't be posting on here.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

A couple of things that make fans tune out or not tune in:

• No World Champion on the show
• No Kurt Angle: that opening segment with Ambrose acknowledging Kurt wasn't there basically told the fans NOTHING big was going to happen or be announced
• They didn't announce if Reigns or Braun were going to be on RAW on the preview — they just said a medical update would be given

*RAW YouTube Numbers:*

1. Roman Reigns attacks Braun Strowman — 2,320,008 Views
2. Balor vs. The Miz — 1,206,153 Views
3. Seth Rollins ambushes Samoa Joe — 887,806
4. Ambrose vs. Bray Wyatt — 804,033 Views
5. Rollins vs. Joe — 666,662 Views
6. Opening Segment w/ Ambrose and The Miz — 558,510 Views
7. Tag Team Turmoil — 509,876 Views
8. Nia Jax Has A Propostion for Alexa — 416,272 Views
9. Alexa vs. Mickie — 383, 161 Views
10. Sasha vs. Fox — 254,556 Views



wwe9391 said:


> "Marks" are the ones they will always watch and when they say they don't then they are full of crap. If you really didn't watch you wouldn't be posting on here.


It's the cool thing to do now: Bragging about "not watching" WWE. Yet these guys still post about it. If people really stopped watching they would get away from it completely — no forums or social media. The reason they don't is because wrestling is a big part of their daily lives: WAKE UP, POST, REPEAT. 

I do it. Not everyday though. I'll quickly look at a few news sites to see what's going on. I don't understand the need to tell people that you're not watching. My only guess is that they want attention because they get very little of it in their everyday lives.


----------



## joesmith

I have 2 theories 

first theory people don't watch TV like they used with computers and the internet being bigger then before so I don't really think you can compare Attitude Era numbers to today also TV was now hundreds if thousand of channels, plus netflix, hulu, etc also DVRS as well

second theory WWE going back to TV 14 lets face the Ruthless Aggression and Attitude Eras were a little different then today's WWE would going back to TV 14 skyrocket ratings?


----------



## Pojko

It's funny how now that the WWE has every star this site has ever clamored for that the ratings are hitting record lows on a consistent basis. And how every new champion from Rollins to Reigns to Owens to Ambrose brings a new record as time goes by. 

You finally have everything you've ever wanted. Samoa Joe, Zayn, Styles, Nakamura, Becky Lynch, Ambrose, Owens, the list goes on. Yet people here are still never happy. And ratings continue to plummet. 

Really telling, isn't it?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

joesmith said:


> I have 2 theories
> 
> first theory people don't watch TV like they used with computers and the internet being bigger then before so I don't really think you can compare Attitude Era numbers to today also TV was now hundreds if thousand of channels, plus netflix, hulu, etc also DVRS as well
> 
> second theory WWE going back to TV 14 lets face the Ruthless Aggression and Attitude Eras were a little different then today's WWE would going back to TV 14 skyrocket ratings?


Oh yes, digital media.
Also known as the division they recently lost half a Million on.

:HA


----------



## Piper's Pit

wwe9391 said:


> "Marks" are the ones they will always watch and when they say they don't then they are full of crap. *If you really didn't watch you wouldn't be posting on here.*


*Wrong.*

I genuinely don't watch and I post on here, I read the results on sites like 411mania. In fact I don't even watch highlight clips on WWE's Youtube channel anymore. I genuinely am done with it, there isn't a single thing worth watching on any WWE show and that includes the embarrassing geekfest known as NXT.


----------



## Dolorian

Here is a breakdown of what went down during each hour. This is purely based on viewing the downloaded video file without the commercials and dividing it's total runtime by three to get an estimate of what segment fell under each hour.

*Hour 1 (2.827M)*
- Miz/Ambrose, Braun/Kalisto opening segment
- Balor vs Miz
- Bliss vs Mickie
- Rollins/Joe backstage brawl

*Hour 2 (2.845M)*
- Braun vs Kalisto
- Reigns/Braun brawl
- Tag Team Turmoil Match
- Rollins vs Joe

*Hour 3 (2.417M)*
- TJP vs Jack
- Sasha vs Alicia
- Wyatt vs Ambrose


----------



## wwe9391

Piper's Pit said:


> *Wrong.*
> 
> I genuinely don't watch and I post on here, I read the results on sites like 411mania. In fact I don't even watch highlight clips on WWE's Youtube channel anymore. I genuinely am done with it, there isn't a single thing worth watching on any WWE show and that includes the embarrassing geekfest known as NXT.


I'm sorry nothing personal but I think your full of crap. I'll have no way of knowing your telling the truth


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Piper's Pit said:


> *Wrong.*
> 
> I genuinely don't watch and I post on here, I read the results on sites like 411mania. In fact I don't even watch highlight clips on WWE's Youtube channel anymore. I genuinely am done with it, there isn't a single thing worth watching on any WWE show and that includes the embarrassing geekfest known as NXT.


This.
Almost always I go to the gym at night, and think "maybe I catch the opening of Raw". Then I always think "fuck it, I like my workout". Then I think "I can catch up on the opening online". Guess what, I never do.
Then I make something to eat with Raw in the background, then I watch while eating, then I read this thread for reactions, and halfway through hour 3 I surrender.

The Wrestling Observer Radio Review of Raw (or any WWE Show), is far more entertaining than the Show itself.


----------



## Piper's Pit

wwe9391 said:


> I'm sorry nothing personal but I think your full of crap. I'll have no way of knowing your telling the truth


Why would I lie ?? To win an argument on an internet message board ?? LOL.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Piper's Pit said:


> Why would I lie ?? To win an argument on an internet message board ?? LOL.


Rule number one on Wrestlingforum: don't argue with users with track records of heavy delusions.


----------



## Erik.

Braun in the highest rated hour. SHOCK.

:braun


----------



## wwe9391

Piper's Pit said:


> Why would I lie ?? To win an argument on an internet message board ?? LOL.


You would like cause "it's the cool thing to do" not watching WWE.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Rule number one on Wrestlingforum: don't argue with users with track records of heavy delusions.


So no one should argue with you then? Gotcha thanks for the advice.


----------



## Piper's Pit

wwe9391 said:


> You would like cause "it's the cool thing to do" not watching WWE.


Being cool/popular on an internet message board is of absolutely no importance to me, an utter irrelevance.


----------



## chronoxiong

Awful numbers. Will Brock Lesnar care to show up and maybe wrestle a quick match on RAW to boost up ratings? Nope. Keep it up on these horrible numbers WWE. Not looking like it will change.


----------



## Ace

I wonder if a Brock appearance is able to pop a rating, the geeks on Raw certainly can't. Tbf, aside from Roman, they haven't been put in a position to do so.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

One Winged Angel said:


> I wonder if a Brock appearance is able to pop a rating, the geeks on Raw certainly can't.


RAW will rise because it's not taped. Brock should appear and take credit for the rise. :brock


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Raw & SD numbers this week are PUTRID. Yeah, I know, NBA Playoffs. But, at least during the regular season, NBA ratings were actually DOWN this season. I do not know if that is the case for the Playoffs going on now, though.

Either way, sad as fuck. And to think a couple short years ago, some folks in here used to make fun of the New Generation Era ratings. At least in that era, starting in September 1995, they had legitimate head to head competition with a legit wrestling company. NOW, we are getting those types of ratings TODAY with no competition.

Scary.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> The Raw & SD numbers this week are PUTRID. Yeah, I know, NBA Playoffs. But, at least during the regular season, NBA ratings were actually DOWN this season. I do not know if that is the case for the Playoffs going on now, though.
> 
> Either way, sad as fuck. And to think a couple short years ago, some folks in here used to make fun of the New Generation Era ratings. At least in that era, starting in September 1995, they had legitimate head to head competition with a legit wrestling company. NOW, we are getting those types of ratings TODAY with no competition.
> 
> Scary.


 Hopefully, they continue to fall, the company desperately needs a change in direction. I for one cannot wait until negotiations for the next TV deal begin.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> The Raw & SD numbers this week are PUTRID. Yeah, I know, NBA Playoffs. But, at least during the regular season, NBA ratings were actually DOWN this season. I do not know if that is the case for the Playoffs going on now, though.
> 
> Either way, sad as fuck. And to think a couple short years ago, some folks in here used to make fun of the New Generation Era ratings. At least in that era, starting in September 1995, they had legitimate head to head competition with a legit wrestling company. NOW, we are getting those types of ratings TODAY with no competition.
> 
> Scary.


Yeah they sucked. You can tell WF interest is down too because the Live discussion threads are down big time from previous years.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Yeah they sucked. You can tell WF interest is down too because the Live discussion threads are down big time from previous years.


Yep. I wonder how NBA Playoffs ratings are doing. Like, obviously they are better than WWE numbers. But are they up from last year's playoffs? Down? Stagnant?

:hmm:

3-4 years ago, we used to get 4-5K posts in those threads every week.


----------



## jim courier

ShowStopper said:


> The Raw & SD numbers this week are PUTRID. Yeah, I know, NBA Playoffs. But, at least during the regular season, NBA ratings were actually DOWN this season. I do not know if that is the case for the Playoffs going on now, though.
> 
> Either way, sad as fuck. And to think a couple short years ago, some folks in here used to make fun of the New Generation Era ratings. At least in that era, starting in September 1995, they had legitimate head to head competition with a legit wrestling company. NOW, we are getting those types of ratings TODAY with no competition.
> 
> Scary.


Least the New Gen era had Bret, HBK, Taker, Diesel and Razor who blow away this current roster.


----------



## ste1592

wwe9391 said:


> "Marks" are the ones they will always watch and when they say they don't then they are full of crap. If you really didn't watch you wouldn't be posting on here.


If I watch by online illegal streaming do I count as watching or not? Because I am indeed watching, but WWE makes zero penny off me.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

jim courier said:


> Least the New Gen era had Bret, HBK, Taker, Diesel and Razor who blow away this current roster.


Absolutely. Mankind, Bulldog, Owen, Vader, Sid, too. All in their prime, as well. Loaded roster severely mishandled.


----------



## HankHill_85

*Info on Canadian TV Ratings???*

Every Tuesday afternoon, the TV ratings for Raw are available, and every Wednesday afternoon, same thing goes for Smackdown.

But these ratings only offer info on the American households watching the WWE product.

I was wondering if anyone has ever come across data on the number of Canadian viewers that watch the shows? I've Googled as much as I can but can't seem to come across any specific numbers, or the links are several years old.

Just curious about the actual WWE viewership in my country.


----------



## wwe9391

ste1592 said:


> If I watch by online illegal streaming do I count as watching or not? Because I am indeed watching, but WWE makes zero penny off me.


Watching is watching. Doesn't matter how you do it


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ste1592 said:


> If I watch by online illegal streaming do I count as watching or not? Because I am indeed watching, but WWE makes zero penny off me.


You give them zero pennies by watching on TV, too. It's USA that's forking over the dough based on expected numbers.

I wonder if the smarks who constantly insist ratings are no parameter because people "watch differently", realize that despite TV ratings going down fast, YouTube views and other numbers are NOT going up. 
And in case that is still not clear enough: people who quit WWE on TV aren't watching it somewhere else, they are gone period.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> The Raw numbers on 5/8 were disastrous, averaging a 1.89 rating and 2,683,000 viewers (1.55 viewers per home), for the taped show from London, breaking the non-football, non-holiday lowest mark in the history of the show, set the week before by 6.2 percent.
> 
> The drop is largely a show that people didn’t care about seeing, sprinkled in with it being a lackluster show with nothing that interested the audience in staying with it. The NBA playoffs didn’t help either.
> 
> On 5/1, there was an early game which there wasn’t this week, and this week’s late game with the Golden State Warriors vs. Utah Jazz did 4,515,000 viewers, as compared to 4,428,000 for the late game the week before, so ultimately about the same. NHL Playoffs on NBC Sports head-to-head did 1,868,000 viewers, almost identical with the 1,875,000 the week before.
> 
> There was also a 15 percent drop from hour two to hour three (the fifth largest hourly drop in the history of the show–and that can’t be blamed on technology or it being taped any of the million excuses people come up with these days, because those were viewers already watching television live who chose to turn off their television sets), which tells you that people didn’t care at all about seeing a Dean Ambrose vs Bray Wyatt main event.
> 
> Still, with the decline of Fox News, Raw was still second for the night on cable behind the NBA game.
> 
> The first hour did 2,827,000 viewers. The second hour did 2,845,000 viewers, which is a lower than usual gain. The third hour did 2,417,000 viewers, which is a disaster of a number. A significant third-hour drop was consistent in every demo, with 11 percent in Women 18-49, nine percent in Men 18-49, 16 percent in teenage girls, 11 percent in teenage boys and 15 percent among those over the age of 50.
> 
> To put into perspective how bad the third hour was, it was lower than the third hour on either July 4th or on Halloween last year, or against all but one NFL game last season. The only time the 10 p.m. hour did worse in modern times was on 9/26, when it went head-to-head with the Trump-Clinton debate as well as NFL football. So putting everything into perspective, being on its regular time, in its regular time slot, with no NFL or gigantic television competition, this realistically the worst rating, not the lowest, but the worst, all things considered, in Raw history.
> 
> The show did a 0.69 in 12-17 (down 8.0 percent from last week), 0.81 in 18-34 (down 4.7 percent), 1.05 in 35-49 (down 10.3 percent) and 1.10 in 50+ (down 2.7 percent).
> 
> The audience was 57.3 percent men in 18-49 and 55.9 percent men in 12-17. So the overall male drop from last week, a show that did record non-football lows, was another 13.4 percent in 18-49, and 19.8 percent in 12-17.
> 
> Next week should give us an idea of how much being taped hurt. If the number is back around 2.85 million, while still not good, it would at least attribute the drop from that level as being due to being taped. If the number is any lower, it sends a message that shouldn’t be ignored, because it’s a clear sign that people are losing interest rapidly, and all the excuses don’t wash when you are comparing with levels of just a few weeks ago.
> 
> Right now, the only possible NBA game next Monday would be the seventh game, if needed, in the Boston Celtics vs. Washington Wizards series. It is possible the next round of the playoffs, right now scheduled to begin next Tuesday against Smackdown, could be moved up a day so it’s up in the air.
> 
> Historically being taped has only hurt ratings slightly, but in time, it was going to make more of a difference.


----------



## Chrome

> The Raw numbers on 5/8 were disastrous, averaging a 1.89 rating and 2,683,000 viewers (1.55 viewers per home), for the taped show from London, breaking the non-football, non-holiday lowest mark in the history of the show, set the week before by 6.2 percent.


Oof.


----------



## Ace

Chrome said:


> Oof.


 Meltzer being savage :lol

The "set the week before" bit got me :kobelol


----------



## Chrome

One Winged Angel said:


> Meltzer being savage :lol
> 
> The "set the week before" bit got me :kobelol


WWE out here settin' records. :clap


----------



## V-Trigger

See you next week.

:ha


----------



## ste1592

wwe9391 said:


> Watching is watching. Doesn't matter how you do it


Yeah, sounds pretty convenient to your own cause, though. I'm quite sure Vince wouldn't be happy if everyone started streaming his PPVs, rather than paying 9.99 to watch them on the Network. Sure, you'd prove your point that smarks always watch, but what's the point if you don't make money off them?




Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> *You give them zero pennies by watching on TV, too. It's USA that's forking over the dough based on expected numbers.*
> 
> I wonder if the smarks who constantly insist ratings are no parameter because people "watch differently", realize that despite TV ratings going down fast, YouTube views and other numbers are NOT going up.
> And in case that is still not clear enough: people who quit WWE on TV aren't watching it somewhere else, they are gone period.


In Italy, where I live, the only way to see WWE on TV is though a second rate channel which broadcasts Raw and SD almost two weeks later their original airing. In other words, when they had the "superstar shakeup" here in our TV we still had the go home show to Mania, IIRC.

Now, it would be rather the pain in the ass to watch like that, and PPVs aren't included anyway. So granted, watching on TV doesn't give them money anyway, but I was talking about PPVs mostly.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*COME WATCH THE RECORD SETTING MONDAY NIGHT RAW!!!:vince5*


----------



## wwe9391

ste1592 said:


> Yeah, sounds pretty convenient to your own cause, though. I'm quite sure Vince wouldn't be happy if everyone started streaming his PPVs, rather than paying 9.99 to watch them on the Network. Sure, you'd prove your point that smarks always watch, but what's the point if you don't make money off them?


Thats a whole different discussion. The point I was trying to make was smarks always watch. I didn't say how you watch.


----------



## ste1592

wwe9391 said:


> Thats a whole different discussion. The point I was trying to make was smarks always watch. I didn't say how you watch.


Fair enough then.


----------



## BlueRover

Great news about the ratings, hopefully they continue to plunge. Vince getting slapped around.


----------



## xio8ups

So will raw be doing 1.3 this football seaosn


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> *COME WATCH THE RECORD SETTING MONDAY NIGHT RAW!!!:vince5*


"Raw and Smackdown are ratings behemoths."

- Vince McMahon 2 years ago


----------



## Reggie Dunlop

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> "Raw and Smackdown are ratings behemoths."
> 
> - Vince McMahon 2 years ago


Relatively speaking, that senile old bastard still isn't too far off. Now keep in mind I love shitting on WWE as much as the next guy every chance I get, especially on ratings days, because I can't stand the product. But, regardless of Youtube views and whatnot, declining tv ratings are most definitely part of a wider trend. _Everything_ on tv is declining, to the point that advertisers are starting to refuse to pay higher rates because actual viewship is down. That's not to say that WWE isn't shit ... it's just that the ratings aren't necessarily the best bellwether for that. But even with their ratings declining year-over-year, as much as it pains the fuck out of me to say it, they're still among the highest viewed shows on cable. 

Also, last I heard, network subscriptions were up (and I'm NOT one of them), which explains why they don't give much of a shit about cable ratings, and also suggests *gasp* how far ahead of the game they were when they launched the network. :surprise:


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

500 - Internal server error said:


> Relatively speaking, that senile old bastard still isn't too far off. Now keep in mind I love shitting on WWE as much as the next guy every chance I get, especially on ratings days, because I can't stand the product. But, regardless of Youtube views and whatnot, declining tv ratings are most definitely part of a wider trend. _Everything_ on tv is declining, to the point that advertisers are starting to refuse to pay higher rates because actual viewship is down. That's not to say that WWE isn't shit ... it's just that the ratings aren't necessarily the best bellwether for that. But even with their ratings declining year-over-year, as much as it pains the fuck out of me to say it, they're still among the highest viewed shows on cable.
> 
> Also, last I heard, network subscriptions were up (and I'm NOT one of them), which explains why they don't give much of a shit about cable ratings, and also suggests *gasp* how far ahead of the game they were when they launched the network. :surprise:


First of all, WWE is going down in ratings at a ridiculously faster speed than any other show on TV. The Observer stated this multiple times.
Secondly, the WWE Network will never replace television equally when it comes to revenue. Ever. Not least of all because television money is 50 cents on the dollar, while Network money is 20 cents on the dollar. Which means not only would they need to increase subscribers by two million or more, they then would also need to double the Network revenue.

And wrestling is not rising in popularity, it's declining, and fast. So, at most, the ceiling for Network subscribers is the Raw viewership. And that declines. So, I think in the long run, Network subscriber Numbers and Raw viewership will meet, somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million.


----------



## HenryBowers

How is WWE doing compared to Love and Hiphop?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

HenryBowers said:


> How is WWE doing compared to Love and Hiphop?


It beats RAW in the 18-49 demo every week, but RAW usually has a bit more total viewers.


----------



## HenryBowers

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> HenryBowers said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is WWE doing compared to Love and Hiphop?
> 
> 
> 
> It beats RAW in the 18-49 demo every week, but RAW usually has a bit more total viewers.
Click to expand...

Isnt the 18-49 the only demog advertisers care about anyway?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

HenryBowers said:


> Isnt the 18-49 the only demog advertisers care about anyway?


Yeah, pretty much.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

*RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Wow, how the mighty have fallen. WWE ratings continue to plummet, and a new low was reached last week as RAW drew a 1.89 rating. Just for some context, this is WCW late 2000's, 2001 territory. 

Can you explain that?

One thing that has to be taken into account is online streaming. To what extent, I'm not sure. Streaming isn't absolutely mainstream yet, everyone I know still watches actual TV. But, there certainly could be a small difference. However, with the current roster, there's just no excuse for such horrible TV, which causes such ratings. 

I know there will be many people who will attempt to push their own agenda by making charges. However, 3 things come to my mind as far as major issues that could push away viewers, and they're of greater and greater significance as you go down the three factors.

1. The push of Roman Reigns. Yes, I know some on here will give the Neanderthal argument and say "You're just a h8ter!!!".. but, there's simply no compelling or intellectual way to say Roman Reigns has been used well. He's the most failed face in the history of wrestling, I think that's safe to say. As many have stated, it's not even his own personal fault. He's simply been put in places that are un-intendedly designed to fail, even though it's as apparent as a continent. I mean, I couldn't have done a better job of getting my next wrestling meal-ticket-face hated.. seriously. This has, as we all know, caused quite the backlash. And, after week after week, month after month, I think it's obvious that some fans are just done with it. They're sick of seeing any non-Reigns character they subscribe in to inevitably be sacrificed and jobbed to him. The same pattern, over and over. It becomes redundant, predictable, and just un-stimulating for the mind. 

2. The PG Era. Now, I'm not some Attitude Era glorifier, and I'm not some "Bring me the raunchy stuff" that comes with it. My issue with the PG era isn't that it's not edgy, but that's it's simple. It's written for children not just in content, but in complexity. Everything is straightforward, there's very little nuance. I think it's only natural for children's content to bring with it children's simplicity. I don't like sexual stuff in wrestling, and while I like some extreme, hardcore stuff, it has to be used correctly. However, the simplicity I think is pushing people who need mental stimulation away. 

3. WWE Creative Writing, and Not Booking. This is the biggest point. The difference between writing and booking is huge. The WWE was actually forced to book Daniel Bryan in winning WM 30. That's what a booker does. They observe what is working, and roll with it. That is sadly not what the WWE does much of at all anymore. Hell, we already seem to have next year's WM main event set and locked, and hey, guess who's going over? (back to point #1 ). 

Anyways, with creative writing, and not booking, they've clearly become laughably tone-deaf to what the audience seems to want. How many guys have we seen buried that the audience seemed to really support? Damien Sandow? Dolph Ziggler? These guys got hot, but weren't in the "script". And how many guys have been pushed in a roll that they are absolutely rejected in.. Bobby Lashley in ECW? Super Sheamus? Boo-tista? Roman Reigns? 

I think most of this comes down to the proven effects of a monopoly. The product suffers. There's no urgency, creativity is stifled, nobody has to tighten their belt, and certainly about ego. The WWE seems to want to dictate. Writers can be some of the most arrogant people, and Vince appears to let his previous success (albeit from stealing others ideas and implementing them in a larger scale) get to his head. 

However, a 1.89 rating is a 1.89 rating. I'm sure it'll get back into the 2's, especially when Brock Lesnar comes back. But the trend appears to be that the lower ratings are getting lower every time there's a dip. Why is that? 

It's not all good in Samford, and hopefully lessons are learned.


----------



## DELETE

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Maybe if a no talent part timer didnt have the main title this wouldnt be a problem.


----------



## Ronny

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Maybe if Vince keeps Bayley off TV, actually listens to the "Go Away" heat and let some other guys be in the Main Event, or have Strowman back ASAP to continue decimating him; ratings would not be as bad.


----------



## Ibracadabra

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Still discussing ratings.. Ratings didn't kill WCW, massive monetary losses did. 

Cable is dying, the fact the Raw is still among the top shows on cable is all the WWE needs to worry about.


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

If the current trend continues, in a couple of years WWE would be getting the same ratings as TNA in 2010. Which would be hilarious to say the least.


----------



## JokersLastLaugh

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

At least Vince gets to have fun playing with his toys.


----------



## Stinger Fan

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Ibracadabra said:


> Still discussing ratings.. Ratings didn't kill WCW, massive monetary losses did.
> 
> Cable is dying, the fact the Raw is still among the top shows on cable is all the WWE needs to worry about.


Ratings are incredibly important to sponsors and how much money a TV show gets. The more viewers , the more potential customers for a product that's shown during commercials. The idea that ratings aren't important anymore, is ridiculous and incredibly ignorant . There's big money that's at play and if no one watches a show it either has ads pulled which means less money for the show to continue or the show gets cancelled entirely.


----------



## JC00

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

DVR, Youtube, etc... All TV Networks are down significantly from what they were pulling in the early 00s. As far as the key demo goes 18-49, back then getting anything less than a 1.5 meant cancellation now shows that aren't even above 1.0 are getting renewed.

WWE still gives USA its highest rated 5 hours every week.


----------



## HandsomeRTruth

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

This is what happens when you let a bunch of Jersey trash disrespect The Titus Brand


----------



## YankBastard

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Is Raw still USA's top rated program?


----------



## JC00

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



YankBastard said:


> Is Raw still USA's top rated program?


Raw is # 1 and SD is # 2


----------



## Matthew Incredible

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Cable is indeed on the way down and viewing habits are changing. However, anybody who believes that is the biggest reason for the ratings decline is absolutely delusional. Changing viewing habits and the decline of cable sure isn't hurting the NBA playoffs, Better Call Saul, The Walking Dead, or a whole host of other hot shows on cable. People will watch a HOT show, period. WWE and the fans coming up with all these excuses are just that and they don't hold much truth. Do you think USA Network, when it comes time to negotiate the TV deal, is going to say "aw shucks Vince you're right, viewing habits are changing, lets give WWE more money for TV rights...." 

WCW Nitro 2000 would be kicking RAW's ass right now, think about that for minute. The product sucks, the booking sucks, the writing sucks, and the casual viewer is long gone. I also think that this insane PC culture and PC wrestling journalism has hurt as well. Morons like Wade Keller will bitch about a stale and boring product, yet they will write a many page editorial chastising any wrestling company pushes the envelope in any sort of way.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Ratings are out already? Don't you mean for last Monday?


----------



## Ronny

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



YankBastard said:


> Is Raw still USA's top rated program?


EDIT: Wrong graph, I don't understand American television, I'm sorry for providing a misleading graph.


----------



## BaeJLee

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Ronny927 said:


>


What does that have to do with USA Network...?


----------



## Xenoblade

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

I still don't understand why Lesnar is champ again..

They already had him do this once before where he won the title, dissapeared and everyone thought it sucked and ruined the product...

Now they are doing it agian.. ROFL..


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

People still watch TV. Just not WWE shows as that chart shows..


----------



## JC00

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Matthew Incredible said:


> Changing viewing habits and the decline of cable sure isn't hurting the NBA playoffs, Better Call Saul


Sports playoffs shouldn't even be considered, those are always going to draw. But look at the regular season ratings those aren't like they once were, 2016 NFL regular season is proof of that. Ratings were down across the board. 


Better Call Saul?? This season is averaging 1.62 million viewers and a 0.6 in the key demo of A18-49 and is actually down 40% from last season. Its season 1 premiere had 6.81 million viewers and did a 3.4 in A18-49, last week's episode had 1.76 million viewers and did a 0.6 in A18-49....


----------



## Jonasolsson96

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Good because the show sucks. Every week its the same shit. No interesting storylines, just boring match after boring match. Maybe someone gets in the ring and cuts a drawn out promo before being interrupted by his current feud. The show is absolute trash. 

Also everyone feels like a midcarder these days. The only one thats gotten really over and feels like a maineventer out of the new guys is Styles.


----------



## Joshi Judas

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Is this out so soon? Or is this for the taped edition from the UK last week?


----------



## ImSumukh

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

I honestly think that now WWE should take this seriously & make some major changes.


----------



## Ronny

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



BaeJLee said:


> What does that have to do with USA Network...?


I just did a quick google, I'm not familiar with American television, I'm sorry. I'm gonna change the post now.


----------



## LoveMyMoos

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



LongLiveTNA said:


> Wow, how the mighty have fallen. WWE ratings continue to plummet, and a new low was reached last week as RAW drew a 1.89 rating. Just for some context, this is WCW late 2000's, 2001 territory.
> 
> Can you explain that?
> 
> One thing that has to be taken into account is online streaming. To what extent, I'm not sure. Streaming isn't absolutely mainstream yet, everyone I know still watches actual TV. But, there certainly could be a small difference.


I don't. We haven't had cable in years. I can watch RAW and SD on Hulu the next day but it's really cut up and it's almost so cut up that I don't watch it the next day most of the time, unless my kids ask to. I do have the WWE Network and am rather bummed that WWE doesn't show it's own shows there. I've been a faithful RAW watcher for over half my life now, at least until we cut cable. And a good chunk of people I know, down to my own parents, have cut cable in favor of some form of streaming.


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

I was watching the Pens game last night, however even if that wasn't on, I don't even know if I would have been watching. I find it harder and harder to tune in anymore. Its almost like I have to force myself to watch anymore. 

How much lower do the ratings have to get before some changes are made?


----------



## tducey

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Ratings don't matter given the money the WWE is still making. People hardly watch cable these days. I have a TV box that will give me RAW and Smackdown later in the week, that's when I'll watch them. Yeah the product's bad and Lesnar should not be champ but lots of other reasons ratings are down.


----------



## Taroostyles

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

The ratings are in the toilet cause the product is in the toilet, plain and simple. 

Stop blaming cable or anything else, nobody's watching cause it just isn't interesting and hasn't been for some time.


----------



## Matthew Incredible

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



JC00 said:


> Sports playoffs shouldn't even be considered, those are always going to draw. But look at the regular season ratings those aren't like they once were, 2016 NFL regular season is proof of that. Ratings were down across the board.


The 2016 NFL regular season is the first NFL ratings decline in how long? Viewing habits didn't suddenly change from 2015 to 2016. Also, many speculate that that decline is due to the sitting during the National Anthem. One down year in the NFL is not the same as RAW, which has been in decline since when, like 2001? A hot product is a hot product and the NBA playoffs have been up and the NFL is still an incredibly hot product. WWE is getting dangerously close to 2010 TNA ratings, this is not good and I doubt USA is happy (regardless of whether it is their #1 show, they are not going to want to pay as much). WWE isn't some secretly hot product, where there are millions that are just streaming RAW in the USA. I would say there may be 100,000 or so streaming, but certainly not millions. 




> Better Call Saul?? This season is averaging 1.62 million viewers and a 0.6 in the key demo of A18-49 and is actually down 40% from last season. Its season 1 premiere had 6.81 million viewers and did a 3.4 in A18-49, last week's episode had 1.76 million viewers and did a 0.6 in A18-49....


Okay, maybe that show is cooling off (I don't have cable and don't know what is still currently still hot). However, Breaking Bad had no trouble bringing in a big cable rating and Walking Dead still brings in a big rating. There are probably a number of other hot shows doing big ratings as well. The point being, people tune-in in record breaking numbers for hot cable shows. There are not some magical millions streaming RAW in the USA on a Chromecast, I'm just not buying it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Ibracadabra said:


> Still discussing ratings.. Ratings didn't kill WCW, massive monetary losses did.


It didn't either.
But even if it did, what do you think WWE is going to make when their TV Deal shrinks, or USA or another station can't afford flushing down 200 million down the drain for record breaking viewership losses that also sells average ads?
At most, they will break even.

Rely on the Network? :lmao
For every dollar of TV money, they have to make two Dollars on the Network if they want to replace TV with Network revenue. And that's never ever going to happen.

Btw, Raw lost a million viewers the last two years. Does this million show in YouTube views? Network subscriber numbers? No, they are GONE.
So, the argument of people just "watching differently" is horseshit.

No, ratings don't matter! It's just their bread and butter money, who cares? Every expert on financials, like Chris Harrington, says it's vital for WWE, but Mark Smark on Wrestlingforum tells me "it don't matter", so it doesn't matter.


----------



## Mr.Amazing5441

1.89? Isnt that what they usually get now. Last I checked, both Raw and SDL were in the high 1´s.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

As someone that doesn't watch anymore, but still watches the network, what's funny is that I tuned in to 99-01 Nitro episodes recently just to see how bad they were.... and they were way more entertaining than the stuff I've seen on Raw/Smackdown over the past few years.

Ratings are declining because everything about WWE is terrible. Most people don't care about wrestling matches, and that's what they've catered to - the minority of fans that like dozens of matches every week with no build up. Most people (myself included) don't have 3 hours a week to dedicate to that, let alone 5-8 hours depending on whether there's a ppv or special event (which seems to be every other week nowadays). 

Ratings arguments aside, what about attendance? I don't know for sure, but I was under the impression that attendance is down as well - that's the TRUE indicator that people aren't interested. They don't even do TV in my hometown anymore because they have to curtain off half the seating. Back around 97-01, they could sell it out every time they came to town (in fact, I remember people camping out overnight to tickets to a HOUSE SHOW - I know ticketing doesn't work the way it used to, but I highly doubt people would camp out nowadays even for a PPV in my town). Heck, we used to get PPV's almost yearly just in my hometown, and we haven't had one in the entire state in ~5 years because NC isn't a wrestling state anymore (which says a lot in and of itself)


----------



## Matthew Incredible

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> It didn't either.
> But even if it did, what do you think WWE is going to make when their TV Deal shrinks, or USA or another station can't afford flushing down 200 million down the drain for record breaking viewership losses that also sells average ads?
> At most, they will break even.
> 
> Rely on the Network? :lmao
> For every dollar of TV money, they have to make two Dollars on the Network if they want to replace TV with Network revenue. And that's never ever going to happen.
> 
> Btw, Raw lost a million viewers the last two years. Does this million show in YouTube views? Network subscriber numbers? No, they are GONE.
> So, the argument of people just "watching differently" is horseshit.
> 
> *No, ratings don't matter! It's just their bread and butter money, who cares? Every expert on financials, like Chris Harrington, says it's vital for WWE, but Mark Smark on Wrestlingforum tells me "it don't matter", so it doesn't matter.*


This is the most important aspect of this and it is completely lost on so many people. TV revenue is WWE's biggest single source of revenue. Remember the last deal with USA and WWE and the financial experts were disappointed by the deal they got? Ratings have tanked even more since then and USA is not going to want to give them the same deal if things continue.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

DELETE said:


> Maybe if a no talent part timer didnt have the main title this wouldnt be a problem.


I don't have direct numbers, but Brock Lesnar usually = ratings. When he headlined PPV's in the UFC, they were the most bought in history. 

If Brock doesn't do a surprise entrance and is announced for the next week, you can bet the ratings will climb into the mid 2's. 

You can not like a champion not being on TV every week. Personally, I think it enhances the championship and character, as they truly become "must-see". Miz has a great gimmick, but in reality, Brock Lesnar is the most must-see wrestler in the WWE. 

However, I'd love for the fact that Lesnar isn't around all the time, and hasn't defended it, to be brought into the storyline. That's the reality of the situation. People like reality in story telling. They like when the obvious isn't ignored.



Ibracadabra said:


> Still discussing ratings.. Ratings didn't kill WCW, massive monetary losses did.
> 
> Cable is dying, the fact the Raw is still among the top shows on cable is all the WWE needs to worry about.


Actually, a new TV executive who took over killed WCW. WCW, despite its massive losses, had a soft spot in Ted Turner's heart. 

However, what good is a wrestling promotion without a network. A strictly business TV exec came in, slashed WCW, even though Bischoff and some partners had a bid to buy it. 

Meanwhile, your "cable is dying" theory doesn't explain it. It might have a slight effect, but no, It's pretty apparent the WWE has to look in the mirror.



JC00 said:


> DVR, Youtube, etc... All TV Networks are down significantly from what they were pulling in the early 00s. As far as the key demo goes 18-49, back then getting anything less than a 1.5 meant cancellation now shows that aren't even above 1.0 are getting renewed.
> 
> WWE still gives USA its highest rated 5 hours every week.


I never said the WWE was ruined, I simply pointed out a factual trend. 

Sadly, as of right now, the WWE seems to own the uber-majority of "pro wrestling" culture in the world. Sure, there's Impact, there's ROH, Japan.. but as far as the culture, WWE has conquered. I personally think it's unfortunate, but it is what it is. 

So, since they've taken on that responsibility, and their numbers are dropping, it's fair and certainly warranted to critique them.


----------



## V-Trigger

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

See you next week :ha


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Stinger Fan said:


> Ratings are incredibly important to sponsors and how much money a TV show gets. The more viewers , the more potential customers for a product that's shown during commercials. The idea that ratings aren't important anymore, is ridiculous and incredibly ignorant . There's big money that's at play and if no one watches a show it either has ads pulled which means less money for the show to continue or the show gets cancelled entirely.


Its not that tv ratings aren't still extremely important. Its the manner in which they are judged that needs to be adjusted. There's less people than ever watching tv in the traditional manner and that has to be taken into account when looking at the numbers for WWE or any other TV Show. A 1.89 in 98 and that same rating in 2017 tell two completely different stories.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Ratings are out already? Don't you mean for last Monday?


Yes, I'm talking about last Monday, not last night.


----------



## Littbarski

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

How are TNA ratings?


----------



## LongLiveTNA

BrotherNero said:


> See you next week :ha


Wanna bet?

Even if I record the program, I skip over probably 85%-90% of the program. Personally, the only worthwhile things on RAW right now are The Miz, Brock Lesnar when he's on TV, and the world heavyweight title picture. However, even the latter is becoming quite stale, predictable, and just uncompelling. 

You have no point, sir.



Littbarski said:


> How are TNA ratings?


Seriously?

Do you think I'm some anti-WWE, pro-TNA mark?

Sorry, perhaps you're projecting your simplistic view of the world onto me, but that's not where I'm at. 

If you care to address the subject, feel free to pitch in! If not? Well.. then be angry elsewhere.



The Renegade said:


> Its not that tv ratings aren't still extremely important. Its the manner in which they are judged that needs to be adjusted. There's less people than ever watching tv in the traditional manner and that has to be taken into account when looking at the numbers for WWE or any other TV Show. A 1.89 in 98 and that same rating in 2017 tell two completely different stories.


You're assuming quite a bit. To what extent is undefinable. Those who wish to defend WWE will say it's a huge factor, those who are against WWE will say it doesn't effect it at all.

From what I've observed, most people tune into network television to watch it. Back in 98, which you referenced, perhaps the 1.89 would be a 2.1?


----------



## V-Trigger

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



LongLiveTNA said:


> Wanna bet?
> 
> Even if I record the program, I skip over probably 85%-90% of the program. Personally, the only worthwhile things on RAW right now are The Miz, Brock Lesnar when he's on TV, and the world heavyweight title picture. However, even the latter is becoming quite stale, predictable, and just uncompelling.
> 
> You have no point, sir.


I was sarcastic. I enjoy watching them getting rekt.


----------



## Bushmaster

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

The ratings don't matter people :kobelol. They say that then WWE wants Cena back early, they got people tossing ambulances and giving out big time matches on TV. Ratings don't matter :mj4


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

The Roman Reigns experiment isn't working. I don't remember anyone losing viewers at this clip as the FOTC, not even sure if HHH lost viewers this fast during his 02-05 reign of terror.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



The_It_Factor said:


> As someone that doesn't watch anymore, but still watches the network, what's funny is that I tuned in to 99-01 Nitro episodes recently just to see how bad they were.... and they were way more entertaining than the stuff I've seen on Raw/Smackdown over the past few years.


Scary, isn't it?

I think it has to do with #2 in my list. The complexity of the storylines is just catered to children. There's no intricacy or nuance. It becomes very stale to those with higher brain functions; adults.


----------



## ChampWhoRunsDaCamp

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

It's strange how the ratings are falling.

In the past 24 hours on here I've read
Roman is draw
Balor is a draw :lmao
Alexa Bliss is a draw :lmao:lmao 
The Miz is a draw 
And Wyatt is a draw 

On the SD side I've read people calling Orton, AJ, Owens and Nakamura draws.

With all these draws surely WWE should be pulling a 3.89 rating.

Or you can accept the reality, no one draws except Cena, when he's taking a Hiatus like now none of the superstars matter at all to anyone but the hardcore indie marks and kids lose interest in WWE as a whole.
Almost Anyone on the roster could retire right now and within 2 weeks no one would care, there's nothing unique about any of the talent, there's no one people are going to tune in to watch because they want to see what he/she is doing. Everyone is so bland.

Ratings are still a big concern considering the company actually lost money running the network and their social media in the last quarter. Any reduction in their to deal will hit them hard.


----------



## .MCH

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

People putting the blame on Roman as if people like Finn, Seth, Ambrose, etc also aren't to blame. :lmao


----------



## Littbarski

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



LongLiveTNA said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Do you think I'm some anti-WWE, pro-TNA mark?


Your username is 'LongliveTNA' so tell me what I am supposed to think?



> Sorry, perhaps you're projecting your simplistic view of the world onto me, but that's not where I'm at.
> 
> If you care to address the subject, feel free to pitch in! If not? Well.. then be angry elsewhere.



I asked you a simple question. If TNA ratings have fallen then the issue is clearly bigger than WWE storylines or who they are or are not pushing especially if that guy is right in saying that shows like 'Better call Saul' is down 40%.

I don't see the point comparing tv ratings to 20 years ago.


----------



## Therapy

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Having flashbacks of WF before a dedicated ratings thread was created to stop stupid threads like this...


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Ibracadabra said:


> Still discussing ratings.. Ratings didn't kill WCW, massive monetary losses did.
> 
> Cable is dying, the fact the Raw is still among the top shows on cable is all the WWE needs to worry about.


agree


Stinger Fan said:


> Ratings are incredibly important to sponsors and how much money a TV show gets. The more viewers , the more potential customers for a product that's shown during commercials. The idea that ratings aren't important anymore, is ridiculous and incredibly ignorant . There's big money that's at play and if no one watches a show it either has ads pulled which means less money for the show to continue or the show gets cancelled entirely.


disagree, somewhat.

The idea ratings are *important over all else*...is ridiculous and incredibly ignorant. I realize you didn't specifically say that, but for some users a low rating is the only condition they consider when judging WWE. sponsors and investors aren't solely looking at ratings anymore, as cable TV is just 1 of the means of reaching a mass audience. Social media and the WWE Network are a huge success to WWE and a "big draw" to sponsors.

A low rating isn't something to shrug off, and a _consistent_ low rating on TV, the Network, and social media activity will draw the attention of WWE. I'd also look at the 1.89 compared to other dropping TV programs. There's the "watch something else" argument; today there's a "not watch TV in order to watch something else" argument. Take into consideration all the methods people can rewatch or view Raw results, consider the methods of advertising on those possibilities. 


If a car dealership is advertising on TV, radio, twitter, hulu ads, etc.....they're not going to pull the fire alarm if their TV commercials aren't pulling in customers because they have multiple outlets they're utilizing.


----------



## Piers

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Good. Let HHH take over.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

The rating will rebound this week, as historically taped shows do poorly. Still that rating was atrocious. Makes you wonder what their floor truly is.


----------



## The Renegade

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



LongLiveTNA said:


> You're assuming quite a bit. To what extent is undefinable. Those who wish to defend WWE will say it's a huge factor, those who are against WWE will say it doesn't effect it at all.
> 
> From what I've observed, most people tune into network television to watch it. Back in 98, which you referenced, perhaps the 1.89 would be a 2.1?


I actually think its a half and half proposition. Outside of the heavy hitters (Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Sports) most television is on the decline. Regular season numbers in both the NFL and NBA were down this year, and most major award show ratings have been dipping for a few years now. You take a look at a juggernaut like ESPN and its easy to see the effects of the eroding amount of eyeballs on traditional television these days. 

That said, the quality of the program has had a lot to do with the decline as well. If i'm not mistaken, the current dovetail in ratings began after Brock squashed Cena at SS 14 where the Raw after SS tallied a 4.19 while the go home show the week prior scored a 4.39. Compare that to the 3.72 for the same time in 2015 and a 3.31 in 2016. 

They've got two separate issues working against them at the same time. I just don't think its fair to focus heavily on one factor without properly putting the other into perspective as well.


----------



## jayman321

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Roman sucks.


----------



## Mr.Amazing5441

.MCH said:


> People putting the blame on Roman as if people like Finn, Seth, Ambrose, etc also aren't to blame. :lmao


The blame shouldnt be on them, but it should be on the WWE themselves. WWE have enough talent to make pretty big stars, like they have done with Roman and Braun. Instead they pit all these guys as joke characters with no development and no appeal at all.


----------



## I am Groot

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Maybe if their weren't commercials in the middle of every match you'd keep your viewers attention more, with NBA and NHL playoffs on TV switching to that makes you forget you're watching that shitshow they call Monday Night Raw


----------



## jim courier

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

The people who think the ratings don't matter make me laugh lol.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

How do you hope to draw in casual viewers when the main character on your show is one of the least charismatic and interesting people on the entire planet?


----------



## fuggenwaggles

That's what happens without :braun


----------



## RAThugaNomenal

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

Not surprising at all.

I actually tuned in for the first time in a month, and what was happening???? A 20+ minute intro promo with Kurt, and the main eventers..... I quickly got bored and changed the channel back to the Celtics vs Washington game. 

These morons won't learn.


----------



## Matthew Incredible

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Littbarski said:


> I asked you a simple question. If TNA ratings have fallen then the issue is clearly bigger than WWE storylines or who they are or are not pushing especially if that guy is right in saying that shows like 'Better call Saul' is down 40%.
> 
> I don't see the point comparing tv ratings to 20 years ago.


In defense of TNA, they are on a network nobody has or watches (not to mention playing musical networks). Put TNA back on Spike or even USA with WWE and that number goes up big time. 

Also, Better Call Saul, I admitted, may be a bad example, however, hot shows are breaking cable records for viewership. The Walking Dead sets records and then breaks their own records. It is a hot show and I'm sure there are many others. The NFL, despite the 2016 National Anthem fiasco, is still very hot, the NBA playoffs are up, and hot shows are still breaking records. This idea that millions upon millions of WWE fans are now illegally streaming RAW is ludicrous. It is a terrible show and a parody of pro wrestling that less and less people waste time watching. 

Also, this decline isn't some new thing and it hasn't been the case that ratings have been up and down over the years, this decline has been happening for years.


----------



## HiddenFlaw

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*

good thats what they get for putting a crap product


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



The_It_Factor said:


> As someone that doesn't watch anymore, but still watches the network, what's funny is that I tuned in to 99-01 Nitro episodes recently just to see how bad they were.... and they were way more entertaining than the stuff I've seen on Raw/Smackdown over the past few years.
> 
> Ratings are declining because everything about WWE is terrible. Most people don't care about wrestling matches, and that's what they've catered to - the minority of fans that like dozens of matches every week with no build up. Most people (myself included) don't have 3 hours a week to dedicate to that, let alone 5-8 hours depending on whether there's a ppv or special event (which seems to be every other week nowadays).
> 
> Ratings arguments aside, what about attendance? I don't know for sure, but I was under the impression that attendance is down as well - that's the TRUE indicator that people aren't interested. They don't even do TV in my hometown anymore because they have to curtain off half the seating. Back around 97-01, they could sell it out every time they came to town (in fact, I remember people camping out overnight to tickets to a HOUSE SHOW - I know ticketing doesn't work the way it used to, but I highly doubt people would camp out nowadays even for a PPV in my town). Heck, we used to get PPV's almost yearly just in my hometown, and we haven't had one in the entire state in ~5 years because NC isn't a wrestling state anymore (which says a lot in and of itself)


House show revenue is slightly up this year, but that's because they added two dozen Shows or something compared to last year.

And I don't agree completely. There are certain aspects of WWE that are terrible, like commentary or scripts.
Otherwise, WWE isn't terrible, it's BORING. My god is it boring. It's boring, and DATED. 
15 years ago, fans would have shat all over a main event like last year's Survivor Series'. Now, people went nuts because at least it was something DIFFERENT.

The mindset that simply neglects that WWE viewership is tanking at astronomical rates that go far and beyond usual falling TV ratings, is the same ignorant mindset within WWE that keeps shit rolling towards a cliff.


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> House show revenue is slightly up this year, but that's because they added two dozen Shows or something compared to last year.
> 
> And I don't agree completely. There are certain aspects of WWE that are terrible, like commentary or scripts.
> Otherwise, WWE isn't terrible, it's BORING. My god is it boring. It's boring, and DATED.
> 15 years ago, fans would have shat all over a main event like last year's Survivor Series'. Now, people went nuts because at least it was something DIFFERENT.
> 
> The mindset that simply neglects that WWE viewership is tanking at astronomical rates that go far and beyond usual falling TV ratings, is the same ignorant mindset within WWE that keeps shit rolling towards a cliff.



I also wonder about ticket prices. The upcoming house show here is CRAZY expensive compared to the one that I went to last May (same arena), even for comparable seats.

And yeah, I see what you mean, but I generally use terrible and boring synonymously as I always thought of it as something that needs to provide excitement to be truly must-see. It's just too much to expect those writers to constantly come up with exciting stuff for as much TV and as many PPV's/special programs that they put on.

I've said it a million times, I'd LOVE watching it if it were only on once a week in a two hour time slot with 1 PPV per month. That's the perfect amount for me personally.


----------



## herbski

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Ibracadabra said:


> Still discussing ratings.. Ratings didn't kill WCW, massive monetary losses did.
> 
> Cable is dying, the fact the Raw is still among the top shows on cable is all the WWE needs to worry about.


While I take your point and even agree to an extent, I still have to think this has to be a bit of cause for concern. It is still a gauge of interest in your product, and also a very large part of WWE's profit comes from their lucrative TV deal (which may not be as lucrative come re-newal time). 

I mean looking at some other sports and entertainment, their ratings aren't impacted to the degree WWE's have been. 

Is it panic time for WWE? Not really, but I think it should be of some concern to WWE for sure. You always want more people watching than less.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



The_It_Factor said:


> I also wonder about ticket prices. The upcoming house show here is CRAZY expensive compared to the one that I went to last May (same arena), even for comparable seats.
> 
> And yeah, I see what you mean, but I generally use terrible and boring synonymously as I always thought of it as something that needs to provide excitement to be truly must-see. It's just too much to expect those writers to constantly come up with exciting stuff for as much TV and as many PPV's/special programs that they put on.
> 
> I've said it a million times, I'd LOVE watching it if it were only on once a week in a two hour time slot with 1 PPV per month. That's the perfect amount for me personally.


I don't think it's too much television to be creative. They have 27 writers. Twenty. Seven. 20 years ago, three guys (including Vince) was enough for all shows plus PPVs.
The creative now is only too much work because they think they need to script every single word for EVERYONE.
If they just gave bullet points for promos, those writers could focus their creativity on things that actually matter, like coming up with good stories.


----------



## SkipMDMan

Well, this was a waste of time for me. I come on here to read about the event, see how bad, or good people though it was, which matches, if any made sense. Instead there's 20 pages about ratings. I finally gave up trying to find the posts about the actual show.


----------



## Dolorian

SkipMDMan said:


> Well, this was a waste of time for me. I come on here to read about the event, see how bad, or good people though it was, which matches, if any made sense. Instead there's 20 pages about ratings. I finally gave up trying to find the posts about the actual show.


This is the ratings thread, what you are looking for is the live thread...

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/2...5-15-hello-intercontinental-championship.html


----------



## SkipMDMan

Dolorian said:


> This is the ratings thread, what you are looking for is the live thread...
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/2...5-15-hello-intercontinental-championship.html


Oops!

Well, I suppose I can't read any better than creative can write.

Thanks for telling me. lol


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.884M
H2-2.724M
H3-2.645M
3H-2.751M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.55% / - 0.160M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 2.90% / - 0.079M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.29% / - 0.239M )
5/15/17 Vs 5/8/17 ( + 2.04% / + 0.055M )

Demo (5/15/17 Vs 5/8/17):
H1- 1.020D Vs 0.960D
H2- 0.940D Vs 0.960D
H3- 0.960D Vs 0.860D
3H- 0.973D Vs 0.927D

Note: RAW is 5th, 7th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 6th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/15/17 Vs 5/16/16):
H1- 2.884M Vs 3.376M
H2- 2.724M Vs 3.302M
H3- 2.645M Vs 2.894M
3H- 2.751M Vs 3.191M ( - 13.79% / - 0.440M )

Demo (5/15/17 Vs 5/16/16):
H1- 1.020D Vs 1.110D
H2- 0.940D Vs 1.130D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.020D
3H- 0.973D Vs 1.087D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Wonder how much Roman raised the ratings this week? :reigns2


----------



## God Movement

That's shit.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

More and more people continue to quit on the product. The answer is clearly to push Roman Reigns even harder.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Slightly up from last week, but not by much. And last night was actually a good show. Huge black cloud over the product right now with the Champion not on the show and the WM main event being known 11 months in advance.


----------



## Bink77

The exodus of the hardcore fanbase has begun.

Edit: continues


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Wow, the NBA laid waste to RAW once again. The demo is not good. Down almost 14% since last year. Needs more :braun


----------



## Mifune Jackson

No Braun, Reigns in a featured match, Bray/Rollins in the main event. This is probably their idea of a loaded show, which shows how tone deaf they are.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Braun won't save anything. They could bring back Steve Austin and it wouldn't save them.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

ShowStopper said:


> Braun won't save anything. They could bring back Steve Austin and it wouldn't save them.


He's not going to turn things around, but ever since WrestleMania, Hour 2 had a bump and that was usually when Braun was doing something crazy. He was pretty much the only interesting thing on the show for a good month or so.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Oh Brock, ye of such drawing ability and title adding credibility, return and deliver us from these ratings woes. Fat chance of that happening. The answer of who's a draw? is the same as "who better than Kanyon?"


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mifune Jackson said:


> He's not going to turn things around, but ever since WrestleMania, Hour 2 had a bump and that was usually when Braun was doing something crazy. He was pretty much the only interesting thing on the show for a good month or so.


I guess it helps when you get to nearly kill the top guy and flip over vehicles, I don't know. Just seems wrong to attribute this to Braun being gone. The show was well under 3 million viewers even when he was on the show.


----------



## JDP2016

Just have Alexa Bliss in the ring twerking for 3 hours. That will get ratings above a 3.0. :eva2


----------



## Chrome

Damn, those are MNF numbers lol. Can only imagine what they'll look like when it actually is football season.


----------



## Jess91

Maybe they should stop wasting time having the gm come out.. the announce a match... then have every fucking superstar in that match individually come out n do a promo about the match thats already had its promo by the gm.

how many times do we have to watch the Miz vs Ambrose? just give the miz the title back already, book Ambrose in for his hair transplant. Get Maryse wrestling again n let Nia Jax squash her. Sort the broken shit out and have Matt out gimmick Bray Wyatt. Let Balor win the universal title back n have him and Jeff fight it out as rollins falls back to feud with the miz or something. there, sorted.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Like I've been saying for awhile, on top of the booking, there is literally nothing intriguing or charismatic about this roster, either. It's that and the poor booking. Today's WWE roster isn't what it's cracked up to be.


----------



## JDP2016

When a woman is considered the best thing on RAW, that means you got a shit show.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

These ratings should bounce back post NBA playoffs, but you wonder how much that bounce will be.


----------



## CretinHop138

Raw has lost 1 million viewers since April.

Since the show after Wrestlemania raw has lost a million viewers, the post Mania show did 3.75 million viewers, while this weeks raw did 2.75 million viewers.

Before people start to defend this saying of course the show after mania is going to be rated highly, the bottom line is 1 million people saw that show and have progressively decided not to watch the show, with the post mania draft it's clear that the current product is failing miserably to hold the interest of viewers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's the NBA Playoffs too, to be fair. Last night was a Game 7, ending a series. Still shit, but just saying.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

ShowStopper said:


> I guess it helps when you get to nearly kill the top guy and flip over vehicles, I don't know. Just seems wrong to attribute this to Braun being gone. The show was well under 3 million viewers even when he was on the show.


It totally helps, and it's why 50/50 booking is flawed as a concept. People want to see gods and schmods, not people who are all equal.


----------



## Bink77

ShowStopper said:


> It's the NBA Playoffs too, to be fair. Last night was a Game 7, ending a series. Still shit, but just saying.


I remember a time when facing off against a game 7 was enough motivation to put out the best and most exciting possible product. Now its as if they plan out months in advance on which months or even quarters they Should even bother trying or not.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Hour 2 is slightly down from last week, hour 3 slightly up.
So in total, roughly the same number? LOL


----------



## Xenoblade

not surprised their ratings suck, the writing is completely phoned in and the wwe doesn't know what it wants to be.. 

It is still to violent for many parents to allow their children to watch, and it's become too childish and bland for many adults to continue watching..

The whole it's for everybody bullshit just doesn't work.. Pick a demo and stick with it.. Do they not remember why the attitude era was so successful?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Wish we still had breakdowns. Would love to see which segments piqued viewer's interest.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Wish we still had breakdowns. Would love to see which segments piqued viewer's interest.


I experience Raw not in ratings, but at WTFs per hour.
Kendo Stick On A Pole broke the sonic barrier.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Wish we still had breakdowns. Would love to see which segments piqued viewer's interest.


When did breakdowns stop and was it only Meltzer that had access to them?


----------



## Ace

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> More and more people continue to quit on the product. The answer is clearly to push Roman Reigns even harder.


 Two PPV matches were announced in the first segment and the show still drew poorly :lmao


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Breakdowns stopped when WWE didn't want people to see that their chosen boy didn't move the needle.


----------



## xio8ups

They should have ellsworth dress up as a transgender women. And have him be the first transgender women champion.


----------



## jim courier

Problems are obvious
A. 3 hours
B. Too much wrestling not enough storyline or character development
C. Very uncharismatic roster
D. Not enough thinking outside the box. Too much wrestling 101 not enough soap opery tv drama to keep hooked and can't wait too watch next week


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

There is literally not one good thing going on in WWE right now. When I try to name even one good angle, on either show for that matter, NOTHING comes to mind. Crazy.


----------



## Ace

Two of Raw's biggest babyfaces facing one another couldn't even drum up interest :ha


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Boy Wonder said:


> When did breakdowns stop and was it only Meltzer that had access to them?


Keller printed breakdowns too. It stopped, came back for a bit, but I can't remember the last one.


----------



## JDP2016

ShowStopper said:


> There is literally not one good thing going on in WWE right now. When I try to name even one good angle, on either show for that matter, NOTHING comes to mind. Crazy.


Not even Alexa's booty? :draper2


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Breakdowns stopped when WWE didn't want people to see that their chosen boy didn't move the needle.


Let's assume breakdowns were still around. Which wrestlers do you think would bring in viewers, which would lose viewers? For certain we can say that the CW division would lose the most amount of viewers.


----------



## Frost99

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> *These ratings should bounce back* post NBA playoffs, but you wonder how much that bounce will be.









:walphtf "The *BALL* represents ratings" 


Honestly at this point it's BEYOND sad to think what WM should have done. The "guy" whoever ended Taker be it his streak & or career should have been the "guy" to build around spark that "Hollywood" Hogan or Vince after the "Screw Job" kind of HEEL allowing for a "Crow Sting"or an "Austin" type baby face to emerge and SPARK something special which in turns helps the ENTIRE show......

Not in this case ALL blame lies on the feet of those in "Management" & "Creative" for YEARS the foundations have been eroding to the point that most reliable pillar of fans are beginning to crumble #WWELogic


----------



## jim courier

Thats why they obsess about social media because that's the only format that can show positive numbers even though social media means absolute dick in regards to the popularity of the product.


----------



## Erik.

Braun is usually a pretty standard answer when people ask what the best part of Raw was in recent months.

He is now booked off for "6 months"

I didn't tune into Raw and still haven't watched it since the injury, I read the results but I haven't watched it. Obviously being in the UK, I don't affect the ratings but I can't be the only one who didn't tune in because Braun wasn't scheduled. I'm not saying Braun will cause people to tune in or tune people out, but it was obvious he was the most entertaining part, the feud he was in was one of the most heavily pushed and most featured feud on the show, it's now dead.

I probably won't tune in to Raw again until Braun is back if I am honest with you. I will continue to read the results and if something seems good or people on here make a thread on something entertaining, I'll watch but other then that? I'll step back.


----------



## xio8ups

The best part of raw is not to watch.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

xio8ups said:


> The best part of raw is not to watch.


Or to watch through YouTube. And fans seem to be doing that. Last night's opening segment with Angle and the five participants was uploaded around 9pm — two hours after the start of the show and just in time for viewers on the west coast. Fans can pretty much watch RAW on a two hour delay through YouTube without commercials.


----------



## Randy Lahey

JC00 said:


> Better Call Saul?? This season is averaging 1.62 million viewers and a 0.6 in the key demo of A18-49 and is actually down 40% from last season. Its season 1 premiere had 6.81 million viewers and did a 3.4 in A18-49, last week's episode had 1.76 million viewers and did a 0.6 in A18-49....


And it's going to get cancelled if it continues to pull such awful numbers. Which will happen to Raw as well when their contract is up.

Network TV shows are easier to cancel because they are on year to year deals. When Raw is up, USA will tell them to hit the skids. They aren't making USA any money when you have to pay them as much as they are paying them for the declining viewership they bring in everyweek.

If you believe Cable is dying, then you should believe WWE will die along with it. Because WWE, without USA TV Network money, is dead.



JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.884M
> H2-2.724M
> H3-2.645M
> 3H-2.751M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.55% / - 0.160M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 2.90% / - 0.079M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.29% / - 0.239M )
> 5/15/17 Vs 5/8/17 ( + 2.04% / + 0.055M )
> 
> Demo (5/15/17 Vs 5/8/17):
> H1- 1.020D Vs 0.960D
> H2- 0.940D Vs 0.960D
> H3- 0.960D Vs 0.860D
> 3H- 0.973D Vs 0.927D
> 
> Note: RAW is 5th, 7th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 6th & 8th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (5/15/17 Vs 5/16/16):
> H1- 2.884M Vs 3.376M
> H2- 2.724M Vs 3.302M
> H3- 2.645M Vs 2.894M
> 3H- 2.751M Vs 3.191M ( - 13.79% / - 0.440M )
> 
> Demo (5/15/17 Vs 5/16/16):
> H1- 1.020D Vs 1.110D
> H2- 0.940D Vs 1.130D
> H3- 0.960D Vs 1.020D
> 3H- 0.973D Vs 1.087D
> 
> Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


Those are awful numbers. It barely bounced back at all after last week's taped show. Still down another 14% from last year.

You can't lose 14% of your viewership every year and stay on TV.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Randy Lahey said:


> And it's going to get cancelled if it continues to pull such awful numbers. Which will happen to Raw as well when their contract is up.
> 
> Network TV shows are easier to cancel because they are on year to year deals. When Raw is up, USA will tell them to hit the skids. They aren't making USA any money when you have to pay them as much as they are paying them for the declining viewership they bring in everyweek.
> 
> If you believe Cable is dying, then you should believe WWE will die along with it. Because WWE, without USA TV Network money, is dead.
> 
> 
> 
> Those are awful numbers. It barely bounced back at all after last week's taped show. Still down another 14% from last year.
> 
> You can't lose 14% of your viewership every year and stay on TV.


They do have a chance with the next deal to reduce Raw to two hours, and bait USA with the promise that Raw will do better at two hours.

But the network that demanded WWE do something about Smackdown's shitty ratings will not tolerate that downward trend. Right now, Raw gets close to territory where USA became nervous about Smackdown.


----------



## The_Jiz

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Therapy said:


> Having flashbacks of WF before a dedicated ratings thread was created to stop stupid threads like this...


With the thread getting merged into the mega thread, I wouldn't have known Raw drew a 1.89 rating. I don't check the ratings thread because it has devolved into a mark war. 

Raw getting its lowest rating in 20 years is pretty thread worthy to me. 

And no the NBA playoffs aren't a good excuse for the decline because basketball didn't debut last year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

To think that mere months ago, those were Football season numbers. What will they do this fall? Scrape the 2 million mark?


----------



## The Figure 4

> Raw last night was up only two percent from last week's seasonal all-time low number, doing 2.75 million viewers.
> 
> Last week's show did 2.68 million viewers and was taped, and that would seem to indicate that last week's lower numbers, which included a major third hour drop, were only slightly impacted by not being live.
> 
> This week's show did have tougher competition as the deciding game seven of the Boston Celtics vs. Washington Wizards NBA playoff series did 6.80 million viewers. An NHL Stanley Cup playoff game with the Pittsburgh Penguins vs. Ottawa Senators did 1.74 million viewers on NBC Sports Network.
> 
> Raw was fifth for the night on cable, trailing the NBA playoffs, the pre-game show for the playoffs (2.76 million), the post-game show for the playoffs (2.96 million), and MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show. (3.14 million).
> 
> The hourly ratings patterns were different than most recent weeks. Usually this time of year, it is the second hour that does the best, but this week the show started out about the same level as last week, but fell in the second hour. The third hour, which featured both Roman Reigns vs. Finn Balor and Seth Rollins vs. Bray Wyatt, held up better than usual, losing only three percent as compared to the 15 percent drop in last week's third hour.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 2.88 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 2.72 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.65 million viewers
> 
> Below is a chart from Paul Fontaine that looks at the past 20 weeks of Raw ratings compared to last year's numbers:


http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-only-two-percent-last-weeks-low-235661


----------



## it's squezzy bitch

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> *They do have a chance with the next deal to reduce Raw to two hours, and bait USA with the promise that Raw will do better at two hours.*
> 
> But the network that demanded WWE do something about Smackdown's shitty ratings will not tolerate that downward trend. Right now, Raw gets close to territory where USA became nervous about Smackdown.


it won't change a thing, i've seen a large majority of wwe fans voice this opinion but it's more in depth than that, it's the product itself, it is very dated and formulaic, plus they seem to prioritise pleasing investors and sponsors than it's fans, hell vince looks down on his fanbase though i can't blame him, they are morons to keep watching thinking things will improve, nothing will change for a loooooong time.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Littbarski said:


> Your username is 'LongliveTNA' so tell me what I am supposed to think?
> 
> I asked you a simple question. If TNA ratings have fallen then the issue is clearly bigger than WWE storylines or who they are or are not pushing especially if that guy is right in saying that shows like 'Better call Saul' is down 40%.
> 
> I don't see the point comparing tv ratings to 20 years ago.


So if I have a user name that says "LongLiveTNA", that means I hate the WWE?

Wow, your brain works simply, uncomplex.

TNA ratings have nothing to do with WWE ratings. Different scenario, different situation, different responsibility...


----------



## Piper's Pit

The Boy Wonder said:


> Or to watch through YouTube. And fans seem to be doing that. Last night's opening segment with Angle and the five participants was uploaded around 9pm — two hours after the start of the show and just in time for viewers on the west coast. Fans can pretty much watch RAW on a two hour delay through YouTube without commercials.


Yet another idiotic move giving away matches and segments for free on Youtube. If you want to watch WWE content you should have to either subscribe to the Network or watch on traditional TV which is actually making the company money unlike YT and all the other social media nonsense that the WWE likes to boast about.

Don't get me wrong giving away the occasional sample of a match or promo is fine but showing full highlights of RAW/SD/PPV's on Youtube is just stupid but oh well I don't watch anymore so it's really no concern of mine.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



The_Jiz said:


> Raw getting its lowest rating in 20 years is pretty thread worthy to me.


Agreed. Apparently, I brought up a sensitive subject for someone, as my post was deleted. 

A WWE mark perhaps? Thou shall not criticize and discuss the failings of the almighty wrestling federation?

I'm guessing that's it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



LongLiveTNA said:


> Agreed. Apparently, I brought up a sensitive subject for someone, as my post was deleted.
> 
> A WWE mark perhaps? Thou shall not criticize and discuss the failings of the almighty wrestling federation?
> 
> I'm guessing that's it.


More like Thou shalt not open new threads for things there's a sticky for.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

A two decade low? WWE action...


----------



## Groovybaby

ShowStopper said:


> Like I've been saying for awhile, on top of the booking, there is literally nothing intriguing or charismatic about this roster, either. It's that and the poor booking. Today's WWE roster isn't what it's cracked up to be.


Bu bu bu but It's completely up to booking. We have a roster full of Austin's Ric Flair'ds and Rock's, didn't you know?



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> To think that mere months ago, those were Football season numbers. What will they do this fall? Scrape the 2 million mark?


If they continue to book wacky Ambrose in every hour, guaranteed.


----------



## Will Thompson

Groovybaby said:


> Bu bu bu but It's completely up to booking. We have a roster full of Austin's Ric Flair'ds and Rock's, didn't you know?


 Whether one wants to admit this or not, this is also a big part of the problem. Whatever the reasons behind it, the wrestlers on the current WWE roster just don't connect with the audience esp the casuals and this is reflecting in the lower than usual ratings. Whether one likes it or not, WWE does need more larger than life characters and great mic workers, who can ensure the audience is invested in the storylines before the final PPV payoff happens. The booking obviously doesn't help the cause of those who have charisma and can do something about it, but either way the truth is most of the guys on the current roster don't engage the wider mainstream audience and hence don't draw ratings.

It is definitely noteworthy that television shows as a medium of entertainment are largely suffering as well, most likely due to viewing habits/patterns of the audience changing, but till the ratings agencies come up with a more reliable method to take digital viewership numbers into account, what matters to sponsors and advertisers is daily (Live+SD) viewership figures.

With a likely renegotiation of WWE's current contract with USA network coming up next year, these low numbers will most likely ensure the network has all the power and WWE will end up getting a significantly lesser lucrative contract, which impacts their bottomline and subsequently the confidence of the investors and sponsors.

Since Wrestlemania, I can't think of too many feuds (outside of what Braun has been involved in) that make me want to watch Raw or Smackdown diligently. It is much easier just waiting for a recap and then watch whatever segments/matches were the highlight of each show. For Smackdown, with the wrestlers involved in the major storylines (who can't be taken seriously after being thrust into main event spots on the fly) and the main draws being absent/unavailable, it is really difficult to want to watch regularly till some of the top guys come back. The buildup for the SD Live PPVs has been sub-par with most of their good talkers having moved to RAW. It would be interesting to note if these numbers will touch the 2 million mark over the second half of the year once the Fall series premiere on various networks.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The current guys not Connecting can't possibly have something to do with Vince repeatedly pushing guys that aren't over, or the micromanaging of shitty cheesy scripts they are forced to regurgitate.
No.
They just lack talent.

Sure.


----------



## Will Thompson

Their are a lot of reasons for guys on the current roster not connecting with the mainstream audience. A lot of them just don't have that larger-than-life look/persona that may of the stars of the attitude era had. Not to mention the ability to sell matches with just their mic-work as a lot of superstars before them.

And things are made even worse with them not being given the opportunity to go out there and express themselves. In a recent interview, Shane Mcmahon eluded to this fact by stating the end of the territory system meant a lot of wrestlers nowadays don't focus on developing their characters (as much as ring-work) and eventually when they get to the WWE, the lack of Tv time (due to the roster size) doesn't give them the opportunity to Experiment and see if something else could work. He said NXT was WWE's attempt to alleviate this problem, but as has been seen in may cases, the main roster has a completely different audience, so something planned and presented in one way on NXT might not work on the main roster without proper booking or tweaks.

So in the end a lot comes down to the booking of the wrestlers. The problem there is WWE management only wanting wrestlers who they like or are high on to get over and anyone else who connects with the audience being put down to ensure their favorites are always in the limelight. And hence the micro-management of almost everyone to stifle creativity even further. 

Is their a solution to this problem though? Vince and Co are set in their ways and make a lot of money with how things are. Couple that with a lack of proper competition in the industry and consequently a lack of (similar) opportunities for wrestlers outside of WWE, can't see many of those on the current roster being bold enough to go and challenge the management either. It is a vicious circle of sorts with no end in sight unless something dramatic happens which forces the WWE to look at how it runs its core business and then perhaps we could see changes in their weekly programming. Maybe a drastc reduction in their next Tv contract with USA network could be the beginning of this.


----------



## JDP2016

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> To think that mere months ago, those were Football season numbers. What will they do this fall? Scrape the 2 million mark?


All I kept reading was "wait until football season is over". Well here we are in mid May and they are still getting 2s and the excuse is "well it's the NBA playoffs". Baseball may not hurt them but after the playoffs end next month they will only have a few months until football is back. They better go all out for Summerslam because it's gonna be downhill from September until next Spring unless you count Mania season.


----------



## Nuski

They do have charismatic people on the roster, they just don't know how to book them to their strengths and make them look inferior to the boring guys every single time.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 5/15 did a 1.89 rating 2,746,000 viewers (1.58 viewers per home), only a two percent increase in audience from last week’s seasonal record low. The rating tied last week’s seasonal record low.
> 
> The competition was tougher than in recent weeks as the game seven of the Boston Celtics vs. Washington Wizards NBA playoff game did 6,800,000 viewers, up from 4,515,000 for the playoff game the week before. There was also a Pittsburgh Penguins vs. Ottawa Senators NHL Stanley Cup playoff game that did 1,737,000 viewers (down from the 1,868,000 the week before).
> 
> The number barely being up from the week before showed that it wasn’t so much that the show was taped that was the issue, but just the reality of the interest level. This week’s show was better. As compared to the prior week, there wasn’t the second hour gain, nor the third hour drop. In fact, the third hour fell only three percent with a third hour that included Roman Reigns vs. Finn Balor and Seth Rollins vs. Bray Wyatt. The prior week’s show dropped 15 percent in the third hour.
> 
> Raw was fifth for the night on cable, trailing one news show, as well as the NBA playoff game, and the pregame and postgame shows for that game.
> 
> The first hour did 2,884,000 viewers. The second hour did 2,724,000 viewers. The third hour did 2,645,000 viewers.
> 
> The show did a 0.74 in 12-17 (up 7.2 percent), 0.84 in 18-34 (up 3.7 percent), 1.10 in 35-49 (up 4.8 percent) and 1.03 in 50+ (down 6.4 percent).
> 
> The audience was 58.5 percent male in 18-49 and 58.7 percent male in 12-17.
> 
> Next week may have even tougher competition with game four of the Golden State Warriors vs. San Antonio Spurs.


----------



## Groovybaby

Will Thompson said:


> Their are a lot of reasons for guys on the current roster not connecting with the mainstream audience. A lot of them just don't have that larger-than-life look/persona that may of the stars of the attitude era had. Not to mention the ability to sell matches with just their mic-work as a lot of superstars before them.
> 
> And things are made even worse with them not being given the opportunity to go out there and express themselves. In a recent interview, Shane Mcmahon eluded to this fact by stating the end of the territory system meant a lot of wrestlers nowadays don't focus on developing their characters (as much as ring-work) and eventually when they get to the WWE, the lack of Tv time (due to the roster size) doesn't give them the opportunity to Experiment and see if something else could work. He said NXT was WWE's attempt to alleviate this problem, but as has been seen in may cases, the main roster has a completely different audience, so something planned and presented in one way on NXT might not work on the main roster without proper booking or tweaks.
> 
> So in the end a lot comes down to the booking of the wrestlers.* The problem there is WWE management only wanting wrestlers who they like or are high on to get over and anyone else who connects with the audience being put down to ensure their favorites are always in the limelight*. And hence the micro-management of almost everyone to stifle creativity even further.
> 
> Is their a solution to this problem though? Vince and Co are set in their ways and make a lot of money with how things are. Couple that with a lack of proper competition in the industry and consequently a lack of (similar) opportunities for wrestlers outside of WWE, can't see many of those on the current roster being bold enough to go and challenge the management either. It is a vicious circle of sorts with no end in sight unless something dramatic happens which forces the WWE to look at how it runs its core business and then perhaps we could see changes in their weekly programming. Maybe a drastc reduction in their next Tv contract with USA network could be the beginning of this.


Yeah their favs like Balor, Rollins, Ambrose, AJ, Braun, Ko. Most are former world champs, getting tons of screen times. Ffs these guys cover every demo, some of them overlap as well. Y'all can't say your favorite isn't getting pushed. That doesn't cut it anymore.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> More like Thou shalt not open new threads for things there's a sticky for.


Week to week ratings vs. a major indicator are certainly different.

Sometimes ratings are an important topic when discussing RAW, and shouldn't be tucked away, segregated in their own separate portion, as they are now.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

I don't know how people still watch this garbage and still revel in the ratings. Fucking change your behavioral structures of watching RAW (and Smackdown at this point) and find alternative ways to watch. Find an illegal stream, watch highlights, read results, watch the full show on an unofficial YouTube/Dailymotion channel. Do not give them a rating. Don't buy their merch. If you really think they a company is trash, don't give them your business.

Until then, this is all faking the funk.


----------



## Bushmaster

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> To think that mere months ago, those were Football season numbers. What will they do this fall? Scrape the 2 million mark?


:brady3 :bill :gronk and the rest of the NFL will crush Raw.

It's kinda amazing how the numbers have gone down the last few years. You'd think they'd give up on the guy they've chosen during this time.


----------



## ElTerrible

The shakeup aka you didn´t think we could make everything worse, you were wrong. Miz made Talking Smack, Talking Smack made Miz. They literally set up everybody to fail.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

WINNING said:


> I don't know how people still watch this garbage and still revel in the ratings. Fucking change your behavioral structures of watching RAW (and Smackdown at this point) and find alternative ways to watch. Find an illegal stream, watch highlights, read results, watch the full show on an unofficial YouTube/Dailymotion channel. Do not give them a rating. Don't buy their merch. If you really think they a company is trash, don't give them your business.
> 
> Until then, this is all faking the funk.


I'm German and watch on German Sky Sports, so I can watch whenever I feel like it because given the piss poor viewership in Germany, it doesn't make a damn difference.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: RAW Does a 1.89 Rating*



LongLiveTNA said:


> Week to week ratings vs. a major indicator are certainly different.
> 
> Sometimes ratings are an important topic when discussing RAW, and shouldn't be tucked away, segregated in their own separate portion, as they are now.


Well, they do seem to hit new record lows every other week, so last week wasn't really that huge news.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.661M
H2-2.759M
H3-2.425M
3H-2.615M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.68% / + 0.098M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.11% / - 0.334M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.87% / - 0.236M )
5/22/17 Vs 5/15/17 ( - 4.94% / - 0.136M )

Demo (5/22/17 Vs 5/15/17):
H1- 0.890D Vs 1.020D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.940D
H3- 0.870D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.910D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW is 6th, 3rd & 8th by hourly demo & 6th, 5th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/22/17 Vs 5/23/16):
H1- 2.661M Vs 3.359M
H2- 2.759M Vs 3.332M
H3- 2.425M Vs 3.115M
3H- 2.615M Vs 3.269M ( - 20.01% / - 0.654M )

Demo (5/22/17 Vs 5/23/16):
H1- 0.890D Vs 1.210D
H2- 0.970D Vs 1.170D
H3- 0.870D Vs 1.070D
3H- 0.910D Vs 1.150D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 7th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:lmao :lmao :lmao

Sooooo bad. I fucking love it. Especially that shit main event. Eat a cock, Vinny Mac.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:sodone :gameover Stick a fork in RAW. :bryanlol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Worse than the taped show from 2 weeks ago.


----------



## Erik.

:lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The demo is atrocious for RAW. Plus losing 1/5 (20%) of your total viewers in a year is brutal. NBA competition isn't an excuse either as both years were opposed by them.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SD going up against Cavs/Celtics tonight, and they had a lousy 2.1 million last week. Fun week for WWE ratings.


----------



## Chrome

God damn that rating.....










Just a year ago they had all 3 hours slightly above 3 million.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Uuuuuuh, is this lower than the already WOAT rated show from England?

See you next week then.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> God damn that rating.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a year ago they had all 3 hours slightly above 3 million.


Yep. I remember all of the bitching from 2015. 2015 ratings ain't looking too bad right about now.

:rollins


----------



## Erik.

I know my viewing doesn't equate to shit as I'm not in America - but I literally haven't watched Raw since Strowman was announced injured - I have of course read the results and seen what people have said on here etc.

I can't have been the only one out of the millions of those in America and some of those 2,000,000 viewers they get that thought the exact same. Whilst no one on the roster is a mega draw, there are clearly favourites and certain superstars people will tune in for and it wouldn't surprise me if some people have tuned out because the lack of Braun. Like me.


----------



## Chrome

ShowStopper said:


> Yep. I remember all of the bitching from 2015. 2015 ratings ain't looking too bad right about now.
> 
> :rollins


Shit, I remember 2012 too. People wanted to crucify Punk for the ratings 5 years ago. :lol

2012 ratings look like AE ratings compared to this shit. unk


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

by the end of the reigns era the raw viewership will be under 2 million every week i bet. no he doesnt deserve all the blame because at the end of the day its vince mcmahons fault


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's the NBA playoffs more than any one person. Once they end, they will go back up to probably low 3 millions, where they were before the NBA postseason ended. It ain't because of any one talent.


----------



## Erik.

Just waiting for them to dust off some old relics and get an "Old School Raw" going :lol


----------



## the_hound

the shows have been stale as a month old shit left in a corner of some old shop door way, the fact its the same old guys time after time, the same guys being shoved down our throats and the same booking of matches, theres only so much of that shit before people have had enough.


----------



## capatisdumb

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.661M
> H2-2.759M
> H3-2.425M
> 3H-2.615M*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I don't know why people claim USA will never actively do something to WWE that forces them to change because of bad numbers: USA wanted better SD numbers, which forced WWE into the Brand Split, which forced them to split rosters, which makes them struggle to uphold an interesting show, which tanks ratings.


----------



## God Movement

:shockedpunk


----------



## JDP2016

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> The demo is atrocious for RAW. Plus losing 1/5 (20%) of your total viewers in a year is brutal. NBA competition isn't an excuse either as both years were opposed by them.


This years playoffs have been blowout city except for Sunday night Cavs/Celtics.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The brand split was a bad idea, too. Now, you have two terrible shows instead of one, with two different rosters. An even worse look.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Maybe putting your top title in limbo wasn't a good idea, eh Vince?


----------



## V-Trigger

"See you next week" :ha


----------



## Chrome

BrotherNero said:


> "See you next week" :ha


I laugh at geeks who still use that line.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I don't know why people claim USA will never actively do something to WWE that forces them to change because of bad numbers: USA wanted better SD numbers, which forced WWE into the Brand Split, which forced them to split rosters, which makes them struggle to uphold an interesting show, which tanks ratings.


Yeah, we saw them flinch last year and we know it's possible for USA to give WWE a good talking to when needed. 

Right now, SD is heading back to the depths it was at back then (still not there yet, but still not looking good) and Raw has lost even more of its audience. I can't imagine they're not getting a little anxious about this.

The ratings are so low they could bounce back any week now, but even still, they're supposed to be doing better ratings now than they did in the fall and we're already at that level. 

They need to make some major changes that are more than just changing the set. 

And yeah, I know WWE Champion Jinder Mahal is what they see as a "major change" to them, but they need to think harder.


----------



## Bushmaster

Chrome said:


> God damn that rating.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a year ago they had all 3 hours slightly above 3 million.


See you next week


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> The brand split was a bad idea, too. Now, you have two terrible shows instead of one, with two different rosters. An even worse look.


If SDL gets its 80% RAW retention, it's going to be a complete brand wipe out.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> If SDL gets its 80% RAW retention, it's going to be a complete brand wipe out.


What do you mean?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> What do you mean?


RAW îs already low. If SDL comes off a title change and is still 20% lower than RAW in total viewers, then both brands are running on fumes since the split.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Chrome said:


> I laugh at geeks who still use that line.


That line was more relevant in 2013 and 2014, when the year over year declines were gradual. People would claim to stop watching when they were frustrated, but the numbers showed they didn't. HHH even mocked this in a famous promo.

This hasn't been the case in years. A ~20% decline is not gradual. That's an exodus.


----------



## JDP2016

Can't wait to see what Smackdown gets tonight. Jinder's first night as champ going up against Lebron? :mark

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## The XL 2

This will be the first night SDL defeats Raw. God bless the Maharaja.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Maybe putting your top title in limbo wasn't a good idea, eh Vince?


It's not in limbo. It's kept safe somewhere in the woods of Saskatchewan with no telephone contact.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Guys.... it's ok... Someone on this forum last year said that 2017 would be the next boom for WWE. Although I laughed at them, the other members thought *I* was the one being stupid. It'll be alright, WWE will be drawing better numbers than MNF by this fall. Once the casuals see 205 Live, Raw will be drawing higher than the Attitude Era!





Edit: what was the ME this week?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Soul Man Danny B said:


> That line was more relevant in 2013 and 2014, when the year over year declines were gradual. People would claim to stop watching when they were frustrated, but the numbers showed they didn't. HHH even mocked this in a famous promo.
> 
> This hasn't been the case in years. A ~20% decline is not gradual. That's an exodus.


They also had an Exodus in talent.
Replacing John Cena, Daniel Bryan and CM Punk with Roman Reigns is not a very good idea, putting it mildly.

Back then in 2014/15, when I said the loss/abandoning/not appreciating of Bryan and Punk will go down in history as the last chance in WWE for creating big stars, ending in a dangerous downhill slide, because with those people, WWE proved that they have no clue what makes a star in These modern years, people were saying I was a "bitter smark".

Where are those geeks now?

Oh I know, trolling threads clutching at Social Media and "TV viewing habits".

Fuck.
Off.


----------



## wwe9391

WWE has one get out of jail free card if the ratings get worse but i think they are saving this card until they absolutely have to use it. And thats cut the 3rd hour.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> WWE has one get out of jail free card if the ratings get worse but i think they are saving this card until they absolutely have to use it. And thats cut the 3rd hour.


Jeez, do you have ANY clue?
WWE has a contract with USA for three hours, with annually rising fees. 
Cutting the third hour money is financial suicide.

They can't cut to two hours until 2019, at which point WWE may very well do below 2 million viewers, so that USA offers them less Money, and a third hour could be vital for financials.


----------



## The Figure 4

> Raw set its third non-football and non-holiday record low last night in the past four weeks, doing 2.61 million viewers on average for the show. The live episode actually did fewer viewers than the taped show from London two weeks ago, which set the previous seasonal record low of 2.68 million viewers.
> 
> It was a lock the numbers would be low given how many viewers the show has lost since the NBA playoffs started. However, both the NBA and NHL playoff numbers dropped from last week and Raw still declined five percent against easier competition.
> 
> The Golden State Warriors vs. San Antonio Spurs game did 5.79 million viewers, which was down from the 6.80 million viewers for the game against Raw last week. The Nashville Predators vs. Anaheim Ducks game last night against Raw did 1.50 million viewers on NBC Sports Network, down from last week's 1.74 million viewers.
> 
> Next week's Raw would go up against the Boston Celtics vs. Cleveland Cavaliers game if a seventh game is needed. If not, Raw would be unopposed by basketball and we'll have a better sense of where things will level off at for the summer, until an almost certain drop to all-time lows in the fall.
> 
> Raw was fifth for the night on cable.
> 
> The key to the show is that there were the lowest number of viewers in the first hour dating back at least 20 years, even below shows on New Year's Eve, last year's show on July 4th (which is really scary when you think there were slightly more viewers at 8 p.m. on July 4th), and even the night of the Trump-Clinton debate last September.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 2.66 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 2.76 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.43 million viewers
> 
> Below is a chart from Paul Fontaine that looks at Raw ratings in 2017 and how they compare to last year:


http://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-reach-another-record-low-week-236116


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

NBA and NHL lost viewers, and still Raw dropped another 5%?
My lord ...


----------



## MOXL3Y

Dammmn, last night was THAT bad?

Thats crazy scary!!!


----------



## DoubtGin

> Raw set its third non-football and non-holiday record low last night in the past four weeks, doing 2.61 million viewers on average for the show. The live episode actually did fewer viewers than the taped show from London two weeks ago, which set the previous seasonal record low of 2.68 million viewers.
> 
> It was a lock the numbers would be low given how many viewers the show has lost since the NBA playoffs started. However, both the NBA and NHL playoff numbers dropped from last week and Raw still declined five percent against easier competition.
> 
> The Golden State Warriors vs. San Antonio Spurs game did 5.79 million viewers, which was down from the 6.80 million viewers for the game against Raw last week. The Nashville Predators vs. Anaheim Ducks game last night against Raw did 1.50 million viewers on NBC Sports Network, down from last week's 1.74 million viewers.
> 
> Next week's Raw would go up against the Boston Celtics vs. Cleveland Cavaliers game if a seventh game is needed. If not, Raw would be unopposed by basketball and we'll have a better sense of where things will level off at for the summer, until an almost certain drop to all-time lows in the fall.
> 
> Raw was fifth for the night on cable.
> 
> The key to the show is that there were the lowest number of viewers in the first hour dating back at least 20 years, even below shows on New Year's Eve, last year's show on July 4th (which is really scary when you think there were slightly more viewers at 8 p.m. on July 4th), and even the night of the Trump-Clinton debate last September.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 2.66 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 2.76 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.43 million viewers
> 
> Below is a chart from Paul Fontaine that looks at Raw ratings in 2017 and how they compare to last year:


from f4wonline


----------



## wwe9391

Vinces works best with his ass against the wall some maybe this will be a wake up call for him.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Jeez, do you have ANY clue?
> WWE has a contract with USA for three hours, with annually rising fees.
> Cutting the third hour money is financial suicide.
> 
> They can't cut to two hours until 2019, at which point WWE may very well do below 2 million viewers, so that USA offers them less Money, and a third hour could be vital for financials.


I suppose so. Dont forget USA was the one who wanted the 3rd hour originally


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

but youtube views are still bretty gud so everything is fine


----------



## Bushmaster

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> They also had an Exodus in talent.
> Replacing John Cena, Daniel Bryan and CM Punk with Roman Reigns is not a very good idea, putting it mildly.
> 
> Back then in 2014/15, when I said the loss/abandoning/not appreciating of Bryan and Punk will go down in history as the last chance in WWE for creating big stars, ending in a dangerous downhill slide, because with those people, WWE proved that they have no clue what makes a star in These modern years, people were saying I was a "bitter smark".
> 
> *Where are those geeks now?
> 
> Oh I know, trolling threads clutching at Social Media and "TV viewing habits".
> 
> Fuck.
> Off.*



Don't post or read in here much but I have noticed many have vanished. I remember the days when Punk would get killed for ratings, then Orton then Sheamus. The casual magnet became champ and ratings got worse so then YouTube views and twitter followers are what mattered :mj4 

I'm just thinking, if the numbers are just getting worse every week; how will they look once the NFL is back. Will they be moving Raw to Wednesday's so they aren't competing with them.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Iron Man said:


> Will they be *moving Raw to Wednesday's* so they aren't competing with them.


I know you only said this in jest, but lots and lots of people watch Raw out of habit at this point. I should know. I decided to stop watching in November 2015 and it took me months to get used to going without it.

They would lose a nice chunk of their audience moving to Wednesday... or, for that matter, any other time/day. It's not going to happen.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Two decades low ratings. Unfortunately, there isn't going to be a Monday Night War to kick start a boom. I wish we could pick Vince's mind and learn to what he attributes the ratings malaise.


----------



## JafarMustDie

Last night's RAW was one of the best RAWs of the year. How the hell did it drop that much?


----------



## Ace

WWE ratings, you da real MVP :drose

Coming online to see what record low rating the WWE have achieved this week is more exciting than anything they've done for either show in years :lmao



JafarMustDie said:


> Last night's RAW was one of the best RAWs of the year. How the hell did it drop that much?


 Holy shit, if that's the best they can do, they deserve worse :lmao

No wonder they're giving away PPV caliber matches, gotta make people watch somehow :ha


----------



## God Movement

It's over for the WWE. Once NJPW expansion into America is underway, WWE will be done for good.


----------



## Ace

God Movement said:


> It's over for the WWE. Once NJPW expansion into America is underway, WWE will be done for good.


 I wish this was true... 

Pro wrestling would be in a much better place of NJPW was the leader of this industry.

The WWE is a joke, I can get my casual friends to actually watch NJPW...

All they need is English commentary on every show, subs for weekly shows, a proper English website and a TV deal.

Funnily enough, the WWE are getting closer and closer TNA's Spike ratings :lol


----------



## Will Thompson

Holy shit. Yesterday's show did worse compared to the Pre-taped show a couple of weeks ago. That is not good at all.

Looking at the larger picture, a 20% decline in viewership over just 1 year doesn't bode well for the product as a whole. That is a pretty steep decline for an already under-pressure niche product.

A lot of things have contributed to this. The quality of programming, stale feuds, bad booking and lack of any PROPER draws from the regular roster. 

As I said after last week's ratings, Braun was what largely kept me interested when it came to watching Raw. With your champion largely unavailable and the rest of the wrestlers engaged in meaningless filler feuds without the opportunity to compete for the top title till the champion is ready to come back (And that is once on two months pretty much), no wonder the interest in the product just isn't there for the casuals. And for the hardcore fans, who follow the product diligently and are aware of (possible) booking decisions via online sources, knowing MOST superstars are going to be part of filler/secondary feuds only to be used as sacrificial lambs to make the 2 superstars who will headline next year's Wrestlemania look strong, you aren't giving them much of an incentive to follow Raw regularly either. Things are even worse on the women's side where they have managed to kill the credibility/momentum of most women the audience care about through horrendous booking, so much so that the women's revolution has lost all meaning. Instead of building the women's division across feuds fans want to see, just like the men it is catered towards making 1 or 2 women look strong AT the absolute detriment of everyone else.

By all accounts, negotiation for WWE's next contract renewal with USA will start sometime towards the end of next year. They better do something to revive interest in the product and get those viewership figures back to respectable numbers, else the writing is on the wall for what the network is going to offer them come 2019.

If you think about it, it is still in WWE's hands to improve the product where it caters to all demographics, not allow a part-timer who shows up occasionally to hold your title hostage for an year, not to concentrate all efforts on pushing only 1 or 2 superstars in each division and generally create storylines/feuds that the audience can get behind. I don't know how, but they need to find a way to make the viewers care about their current crop as much as they care about Cena/Jericho/Undertaker and such.

But knowing them, they will likely bring another star from the yesteryear to improve numbers in the short-term (And for the Big PPVs) and perhaps bring Cena/AJ to Raw if numbers don't improve over the next couple of months. (Is the Rock available? Batista wants to come back if I am not mistaken.) Raw is Vince's baby and their flagship show and he will do everything to ensure it has the best chances of success, even if it means stripping SD to its bare bones in terms of top talent (IF things can't be turned around for Raw and he is pushed that far). Something has to change for the WWE because the way things are now, they are in all likelihood, heading towards a sizable reduction in their next Tv deal which is their main source of income.


----------



## JafarMustDie

Ace said:


> WWE ratings, you da real MVP :drose
> 
> Coming online to see what record low rating the WWE have achieved this week is more exciting than anything they've done for either show in years :lmao
> 
> Holy shit, if that's the best they can do, they deserve worse :lmao
> 
> No wonder they're giving away PPV caliber matches, gotta make people watch somehow :ha


Comparing it to most of the RAW episodes this year, it was pretty good :draper2 The previous 2-3 episodes were much worse, if anything it should've been the one in the UK that would cause the ratings to drop that much.

Other than the divas & the cruiserweights, it was pretty good.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bray Wyatt actually provided some insight as to whom Vince might blame for the ratings free fall: Anyone but you, Roman. :reigns2


----------



## Ace

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> Bray Wyatt actually provided some insight as to whom Vince might blame for the ratings free fall: Anyone but you, Roman. :reigns2


 A main event featuring the next FOTC flopped so badly :lmao


----------



## Y2Joe

Good to see Vince's new face of the company is a draw.


----------



## Ace

You know things are dire when WWE marks are shaken :lol


----------



## krai999

Can someone tell me the overall rating. I mean i haven't been checking on ratings since 2014


----------



## Piper's Pit

wwe9391 said:


> WWE has one get out of jail free card if the ratings get worse but i think they are saving this card until they absolutely have to use it. And thats cut the 3rd hour.


Smackdown is 2 hours and it's not helping them is it ??

They're too far gone now, beyond help. There's still enough of a fanbase, strength in brand name and strong revenues for the WWE to survive for a while yet but the writings on the wall, long term they're finished.


----------



## Demolition119

Ace said:


> I wish this was true...
> 
> Pro wrestling would be in a much better place of NJPW was the leader of this industry.
> 
> The WWE is a joke, I can get my casual friends to actually watch NJPW...
> 
> All they need is English commentary on every show, subs for weekly shows, a proper English website and a TV deal.
> 
> Funnily enough, the WWE are getting close and closer TNA's spike ratings :lol


If TNA didn't implode during the middle of the Bischoff /Hogan era, and later Dixie Carter fuckery there is chance that they would be legit competition with the pitiful state the WWE is in right now. If WWE was not aggressively focusing on global expansion they would be in deep shit.


----------



## Mra22

This is hilarious at this point but to be fair there isn't any star power any more just a bunch of geeks with lame feuds. The only thing interesting on RAW is Alexa and Braun, but he's hurt. The only thing interesting on SD is AJ and Jericho (but Jericho is obviously away.) I've lost interest in the product it feels like a chore to watch anymore. I tried watching last night and couldn't find myself to watch because it's the same boring crap. I haven't even watched SD this week either and not sure if I'm going to or not.


----------



## Seafort

The current downtown began in April 2015. You could practically see the wheel coming off. There was no "Fingerpoke of Doom", no overt act of silliness that would make people leave in droves. But it was the coming together of a number of factors. I posted about it then:

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/1650401-reasons-we-left-5.html#post47643129

Now, two years later these have been the issues. They have compounded upon each other:

April - October 2015: Seth Rollins is the weakest WWE Champion of all time. His matches regularly end in interference by Corporate Kane and J&J Security. Only towards the end of his reign does he begin to show some strength, but for the most part he is booked with the credibility of The Honkytonk Man when he was Intercontinental Champion. His matches have little intrigue, because you know that they will end in a Four Horsemen/nWo end-of-Monday-Nitro style run in. Seth's tenure as champion extends an unprecedented period of time where heels have dominated the title (Randy Orton, Brock Lesnar, and now Seth). 

Jan 2016 - June 2016: Roman's Coronation as Face of the Company. The biggest issue with this is that it entirely lacked intrigue as well. Everyone knew that Roman would win the Royal Rumble, and everyone knew that he would win the title at WrestleMania. I feel that Seth's reign as champion was designed to be as infuriating as possible to get the fanbase to the point that they would wholeheartedly cheer anyone, even Roman, if Seth were to enter WrestleMania as champion. But alas, Seth was injured and HHH needed to be substituted. Once Roman became champion the only issue was whether his tenure with the title would last longer than WrestleMania 33 (I was guessing he would drop it in August 2017 to Cena when the latter turned heel).

October 2016 to Present: The reheat of Roman Reigns. Compelled to have him drop the title due to the Wellness Violation but unwilling to drop him as the Face of the Company, Roman continued to presented as the focal point of the company beginning in October and extending to the present. He's champion in everything but title only, as the company prepares its inexorable march to a second Coronation at WrestleMania 34.

However those are specific issues with specific points of time. But there have been larger, macro problems that have really become bad throughout the last two years:

1) Utterly cliched production techniques. How many RAWs or Smackdowns *do not* end with the heel/face in the ring starring down the heel/face on the ramp way? When showing a replay, why must Dunn have it in slow motion, and then go real-time at the point of impact (my young son hates this)? 

2) Minimal character development. Or no characters at all. Could you name the character of Baron Corbin, Roman Reigns, Apollo Crews, or most of the cruiserweights? Why is Seth Rollins now a face, when he was a despicable heel in 2015? And what is his character? That he's Freakin? And why should Charlotte Flair be a face now? About as little thought goes into heel/face changes as Big Show's annual disposition alterations. 

And for wrestlers who had gimmicks, no explanation whatsoever behind them. No vignettes. Who and what were the Vaudevillains or The Ascension? Both were very easy to come up with backstories for, but no effort was made.

3) WWE is becoming NXT. And over time, it is becoming Ring of Honor. The latter is a niche product that is never going to draw 6,000 people, let alone fill an NBA sized arena where RAW and Smackdown are held. It largely features great wrestling, great wrestlers, few gimmicks, and minimalist storylines. ROH's ceiling though is quite limited. And the hardcore adult fanbase that it caters too is quite limited in size. Children want to see a Bray Wyatt, a superman Cena, a Hulk Hogan, a Macho Man, and Andre the Giant, a Braun Strowman, a Jake Roberts, or a Rusev face off. These are larger than life characters. These cause people to not change the channel or to click on the Youtube link (ala seeing Grado's hilarious entrance at ICW). Not generic looking and generic sounding wrestlers like Eddie Edwards, Mike Williams, Smith Smithfield, or Jonathan Doe.

4) Minimal to no storylines. Matches are just thrown out there, week after week. Little of consequence (the exception of the Strowman and the ambulance) ever happens. Nothing matters, and nothing changes. Or if it does, there is no explanation.

I'll conclude with two examples:

Post - WrestleMania 32: HHH has been champion for two months, a focal point of the company, and has been fighting Roman Reigns for two months. And what was the result after Hunter lost? Did we see a post WM interview? Did HHH appear and attack Reigns? Did he lead a contingent of wrestlers to get revenge on him? No. We did not see him again for six months. Virtually was said of HHH after he lost of the belt. He disappeared.

Post - WrestleMania 33: HHH and Stephanie both have had a strong WM build with Seth Rollins. Rollins beats HHH after the latter sends Stephania crashing through a table. Yet it is now six weeks later, and there have been no comments, no interviews, no run-ins, no updates - nothing regarding HHH or Stephanie. Again, they were a focal point prior to WM but have disappeared.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

All three Shield guys have flopped as faces and failed to live up their hyped potential. Roman being the worst offender after being pushed as the next company face.

And NXT has been a complete failure in producing stars which was obvious from the start. You can only get people over with an entrance theme for so long. Every god damn NXT "star" is just a entrance or catchphrase.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

The problem with NXT is WWE wants to WWE-ize the Indie guys instead of be themselves. I remember Bill DeMott saying something along the lines that they had to coach up Daniel Bryan. Yeah Hugh Morris is going to teach Bryan Danielson a thing or two. LMAO.

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...his-e-mail-reply-to-wwe-talent-exec-and-what/


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

JafarMustDie said:


> Last night's RAW was one of the best RAWs of the year. How the hell did it drop that much?


Standards have dropped to unfathomable degrees if that was a "good" show.


----------



## Lothario

Ratings areconly so low because there wasn't an appearance by Roman. 

Oh. Wait.



:lol


I used to be genuinely excited for Monday's but now, I couldn't care less. I saw a little over an hour of RAW Monday before tuning out and heading over to Netflix. Combination of being dissatisfied with the booking of the guys/girls I enjoy watching and being mentally drained from the main event being dominated by one man. Predictability is fine as it's the journey that truly matters, but the booking in the main event in particular is too telegraphed for a lot of fans in this day & age to be halfway intrigued in the Universal Title picture or the matches thst go on in thst slot. The company has been following the same pattern for years, and it's only so much people whom aren't entertained by what they're being fed stop threatening to leave and actually _do it._

Weak storylines, lack of compelling, larger than life personalities & characters, a roster that exists solely for the purpose of putting over one guy, and the over saturation of the shows (RAW on Monday, SD on Tuesday, PPVs seemingly every two weeks.) It's just burnt me out and I'm evidently not the only one. I was going to watch SD but didnt & I'm not even assed enough to look up the YT highlights. If you believe these numbers are bad, you just wait. If they continue to stay the course, I shudder to think what these numbers will look like this time next year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Demolition119 said:


> If TNA didn't implode during the middle of the Bischoff /Hogan era, and later Dixie Carter fuckery there is chance that they would be legit competition with the pitiful state the WWE is in right now. If WWE was not aggressively focusing on global expansion they would be in deep shit.


They can aggressively expand all they want, if there is no interest because everybody knows it's happy horseshit (TM 2016 Jim Cornette), and UFC is on the rise, nobody is gonna buy it.
The live Raw broadcasts in Germany have 100.000 viewers or whatever.


----------



## Frost99

#Ratings #SinkingShip #WWELogic


----------



## Therapy

JafarMustDie said:


> Last night's RAW was one of the best RAWs of the year. How the hell did it drop that much?


Because people know WWE's pattern. RAW is awful garbage for months then by luck they finally produce a good show and then followed by months of more mediocrity. 

Just like Cena returning or Brock showing up barely moves the needle anymore..


----------



## RatedR10

They're down over 650k from last year's numbers in the same week so playoffs aren't an excuse. The eye-opening, stunning thing is how many males have just left the program.

*Males 18-49*

5/23/16:
H1: 1.54
H2: 1.48
H3: 1.39

5/22/17:
H1: 1.02
H2: 1.14
H3: 1.00

*Males 12-34*

5/23/16:
H1: 1.42
H2: 1.39
H3: 1.34

5/22/17:
H1: 0.71
H2: 0.81
H3: 0.72

Insane.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Why would men watch a wrestling show, where all guys are made to look like pathetic Beta Males? "I hate your guts, I want to FIGHT you ............ on the mic!"

The only persons made to look really strong are Braun and Reigns. The next strongest is Alexa fucking Bliss. The rest is trading losses in midcard hell.


----------



## Freelancer

I love how there's always an excuse as to why the ratings are bad. The only excuse you don't hear from them is the truth, the product is garbage now, period.


----------



## MOXL3Y

Lothario said:


> Ratings areconly so low because there wasn't an appearance by Roman.
> 
> Oh. Wait.
> 
> (RAW on Monday, SD on Tuesday, PPVs seemingly every two weeks.) It's just burnt me out and I'm evidently not the only one. I was going to watch SD but didnt & I'm not even be assed enough to look up the YT highlights. If you believe these numbers are bad, you just wait. If they continue to stay the course, I shudder to think what these numbers will look like this time next year.


Right on the money. Over-saturation w/little character development. My girlfriend asked when Extreme Rules was during Backlash.. when I told her '2 weeks' she was like "I'm getting tired of this crap fast."


----------



## The_It_Factor

The thing is, things have to get worse before they get better, and I wonder if USA can withstand a WWE ratings free fall. 

They're going to have to completely change direction to get their viewers back (and ESPECIALLLYYY if they want to draw NEW viewers). What they're doing isn't working in terms of drawing new fans (and fan retention), though, it may be working for drawing money... at least for the short-term.

Look back at 1995-1997... 1997 was some of the best programming WWE has had, but ratings were, generally, in the toilet because people we still tuned out after the steroid scandal/1995. However, in that case, it was only a matter of a couple of years in the downtick of viewers, and at least they were still drawing at house shows (and, of course, there was WCW). WWE could begin putting out the best product they've ever put out, and it's still going to take a while for viewers to return and for new fans to start tuning in because the product has consistently gone downhill, and has followed a GENERAL downward trend (ups and downs, but a general downward direction) since the early 2000's. Something's gotta give.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Coup De Grace said:


> Right on the money. Over-saturation w/little character development. My girlfriend asked when Extreme Rules was during Backlash.. when I told her '2 weeks' she was like "I'm getting tired of this crap fast."


You chose a good girlfriend.


----------



## FITZ

Blame the NBA Playoffs all you want. Blame declining cable ratings across the board. Those justify them not doing too well. But they're down like 20% from the same time last year. The NBA playoffs existed last year and while cable subscriptions are on the decline they aren't declining as quickly as WWE is losing viewers. They're TV show has a problem in that it's losing viewers very quickly.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Frost99 said:


> #Ratings #SinkingShip #WWELogic


:lol Doubt Vince goes down with the ship.


----------



## Mad Jester

Good. I hope the ratings continue to plummet. This isn't a RAW vs Smackdown thing with me either because they're both lackluster. It's gotten to the point where I barely want to watch the shows even after they're uploaded.


----------



## JafarMustDie

Therapy said:


> Because people know WWE's pattern. RAW is awful garbage for months then by luck they finally produce a good show and then followed by months of more mediocrity.
> 
> Just like Cena returning or Brock showing up barely moves the needle anymore..


This is sadly true. I was expecting it to be trash too but I enjoyed it.


----------



## Gravyv321

wow, those raw ratings stink almost as badly as that samoan shithead.


----------



## SPCDRI

Chad 2 Badd said:


> They're down over 650k from last year's numbers in the same week so playoffs aren't an excuse. The eye-opening, stunning thing is how many males have just left the program.
> 
> *Males 18-49*
> 
> 5/23/16:
> H1: 1.54
> H2: 1.48
> H3: 1.39
> 
> 5/22/17:
> H1: 1.02
> H2: 1.14
> H3: 1.00
> 
> *Males 12-34*
> 
> 5/23/16:
> H1: 1.42
> H2: 1.39
> H3: 1.34
> 
> 5/22/17:
> H1: 0.71
> H2: 0.81
> H3: 0.72
> 
> Insane.


They are down around 40 percent with young men. Those are the demographics that advertisers are all about, thats the bread and butter. The next tv contract is gonna be brutal. The networks cannot get the same money on selling ads if 40 percent fewer people are watching. This is a catastrophe.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 5/22 did 2,608,000 viewers, meaning that for the third time in the past four weeks, they set a record non-football and non-holiday level of viewers dating back to 1996.
> 
> The show broke the previous seasonal low mark of 2,683,000 viewers for the taped Raw show on 5/8 from London, which shows that while taping probably didn’t help it, the record low is more lower interest than one week being taped.
> 
> Perhaps the scariest stat is that the 8 p.m. hour, which did the lowest numbers in modern history with 2,661,000 viewers, was almost identical to the 2,663,000 for an 8 p.m. hour on July 4, 2016. It was also lower than any first hour against the NFL last season, including the night of the Trump-Clinton record breaking ratings debate (although the debate itself started at 9 p.m.), which shows how little interest there was for the start of the show.
> 
> The second hour did increase to 2,759,000 viewers, while the third hour dropped to 2,425,000 viewers, meaning a 12 percent drop from hour two to hour three. That was the fourth worst second to third hour drop in the last 11 months, and that stat is reflective of the quality of the show going in and the quality of building and interest in the main event being promoted. Worse, the other three dates were also recent, with the ones worse being on 3/6, 5/1 and 5/8.
> 
> The Golden State Warriors vs. San Antonio Spurs NBA playoff game did 5,785,000 viewers, which was down from the 6,800,000 for last week’s game. The NHL was also down 1,737,0900 viewers to 1,502,000 viewers. So Raw declined against less attractive competition. The news ratings were up due to the situation in Manchester and that could have played a part, but when the real losses were under 35 and not older, it’s clear the news story probably was an extremely limited factor.
> 
> Overall, the show was down exactly 20 percent from the same week last year. Next week is going to be interesting. If there is an NBA game, it will be game seven of the Cleveland Cavaliers vs. Boston Celtics, which will destroy Raw. However, the odds are there won’t be a seventh game in that series. If that’s the case, Raw will go unopposed. Memorial Day usually impacts the ratings very slightly negative (last year it was down only 40,000 viewers from the prior week when both had similar level of competition). But if there’s no NBA game and there isn’t a boost to close to 3 million, that’s a bad sign.
> 
> Raw was fifth for the night on cable.
> 
> The show did a 0.60 in 12-17 (down 18.9 percent), 0.68 in 18-34 (down 19.0 percent), 1.14 in 35-49 (up 3.6 percent) and 1.05 in 50+ (up 1.9 percent).
> 
> As compared to one year ago, which had a slightly higher rated NBA game, a higher rated Dancing With the Stars and lower rated NHL game, Raw was down 43 percent in one year in 12-17, 34 percent in 18-34, 10 percent in 35-49 and 15 percent in 50+. However, male drops in every one of those categories were significantly more.
> 
> The audience was 57.7 percent male in 18-49 and 59.5 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Ace

Welcome to Monday Night Raw, the show that breaks ratings records every week :cole


----------



## YamchaRocks

I stopped watching in late 2014, IIRC shortly before Sting popped in. I know most of you guys love seeing the ratings go downhill, but in all honesty, I feel so sad every time I read about those cancerous numbers. Like, your good friend just got fired from his job sad. While I no longer watch, I still feel somewhat of a fan inside. This is different than what was going on 20 years ago, there's no WCW or Hogan to save the day, the leftovers of whatever part-time star power they have will all be gone very soon, and the current crop of wrestlers just dont cut it in the entertainment department. A show can be bad or be irrelevant, it can't be both. It's just depressing to know there's no turning point to anticipate and they'll lose fans, and more fans, and more fans, and more fans. Can we please inject some of Brad Pitt's DNA into Y2J and Angle to make them young and healthy again


----------



## squarebox

"Overall, the show was down exactly 20 percent from the same week last year."

Holy fuck. If you think about it, that is huge. I'm loving this. :lmao


----------



## The One Man Gang

*WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*



> Per WOR at www.f4wonline.com, Dave Meltzer reported that this was the worst non-holiday numbers Raw has drawn since 1996. From 8-9PM Monday Night Raw drew its lowest number of viewers since their last July 4 show (for foreign readers, it's US Independence Day on July 4 and it's a widely celebrated day to skip work and BBQ). He noted this show did worse than the pre-taped London show *. He also stated that while the NBA playoff game certainly hurt WWE, this show was down 20% from the same week last year, which went up against a stronger NBA game. So "it's not like the competition is down this year," as there are indeed playoffs every year. Overall the ratings were down 20%, and down 40% in teenage boys. See this week's newsletter for further demographic breakdowns.


Not surprising. 3 hours is killing Raw, not to mention the terrible writing and lack of creativity.


----------



## Gn1212

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

Kind of sad. The show has been better the last couple of weeks.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

WWE is in a ratings quicksand that they just can't seem to extricate themselves from.


----------



## 3ddie93

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

I used to watch RAW every week regardless of how shit the product was but now I forget it's on and hardly ever stay up for the main event anymore. With Strowman out injured, there's nothing that interests me currently.


----------



## DoolieNoted

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

Most of the people I know that used to watch live now just torrent it and watch without the extreme annoyance of ads every few minutes.

being able to skip the many, many shitty promos is another bonus of watching it later on.


----------



## Ronny

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

Same is gonna happen to SDL now that Gynder from Calgary is champion and the shock value fades away.


----------



## nyelator

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

When I can only name about 6-9 people on a show I care about their is a issue.
(Hawkins,Bliss,Cesaro,Sheamus,Goldust,Matt,Jeff,and the injured Braun)


----------



## Red Hair

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*



Ronny927 said:


> Same is gonna happen to SDL now that *Gynder* from Calgary is champion and the shock value fades away.


I just got why people are calling him that :sodone :sodone


----------



## AJ GOAT

It's because they put the title on a jobber...oh wait! Can't use that excuse for Raw. Who can we ridiculously blame for this one?


----------



## HereComesTrouble

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

Good. A boring, repetitive, complacent, & uninteresting show deserves low ratings. The fact that the Universal Champion isn't on the show for 3 months is fucking ridiculous.


----------



## LongLiveTNA

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*

The WWE needs to fail, or get smacked hard in the face, for the betterment of wrestling overall.

I'd love if the WWE could get over marveling over the size of its own genitals and ego, but it simply can't. 

The WWE has a well-protected inner-circle of bullying, manipulation, swinger culture, and just toying with people's lives for their own enjoyment. 

It's a sick, sick place at its core.


----------



## machomanjohncena

Unless ratings get really bad there is no way USA Network is going to drop WWE in 2019. Raw and SD are by far their highest rated programs


----------



## ChampWhoRunsDaCamp

*Re: WOR: WWE Raw draws lowest non-holiday rating in over 20 years*



Ronny927 said:


> Same is gonna happen to SDL now that Gynder from Calgary is champion and the shock value fades away.


The jinder bashing is getting old.

Yes his push is ridiculous but he's not the issue, the WWE itself sucks and ratings have been sliding for a long time, they'll slide with or without Jinder.

No doubt Jinder will get record lows and people will bash him, however the guy who takes the title off him whether it be AJ Styles or Mojo Rawley will get even lower lows that the Maharaja.

Wrestling is dying, it isn't a personal issue it's a industry issue.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They've officially lost 20% of their audience from just last year.

Would like to see some try to sugar-coat this. 

:ha


----------



## machomanjohncena

ShowStopper said:


> They've officially lost 20% of their audience from just last year.
> 
> Would like to see some try to sugar-coat this.
> 
> :ha


Raw and SD are still by far the highest rated shows on USA


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

machomanjohncena said:


> Raw and SD are still by far the highest rated shows on USA


And pretty soon, that could be in some jeopardy if they keep losing an insane amount of viewers every year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

June 12th could potentially be RAW's reckoning. They could face Game 5 of the NBA Finals. Could be a historic night.


----------



## Dolorian

IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> June 12th could potentially be RAW's reckoning. They could face Game 5 of the NBA Finals. Could be a historic night.


Well Lesnar is said to be scheduled for the June 12th RAW, so good luck to him...he is the champion after all.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Dolorian said:


> Well Lesnar is said to be scheduled for the June 12th RAW, so good luck to him...he is the champion after all.


He'll be out before the game starts. The Finals will be much stiffer competition than your typical Monday Night Football game.


----------



## wwe9391

machomanjohncena said:


> Unless ratings get really bad there is no way USA Network is going to drop WWE in 2019. Raw and SD are by far their highest rated programs


Yep. This is card WWE will play big time in the next TV negotiations. All USA network shows (minus Mr. Robot) are all low. 


IDK why we bother with threads like this. WWE is gonna be here for a long time.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

I'm guessing that whatever their next deal is, it's more the middle ground than this all-or-nothing doomsday scenario for WWE.

I'm sure they get re-upped, but I'm not so sure they're worth the money they're currently getting now. WWE can't walk from the deal, since USA treats them better than any other network would. They are losing their value, though. 

When this last deal was signed in 2015, WWE was able to get above 5 million viewers. Now, they're hovering around 2.5-3 million regularly (probably less around football season). Their best viewership of 2017 is looking to be just below 3.8 million people and it's only downhill from there.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I don't think some folks get what an incredible rate of loss it is it to lose 20% of your audience in just one year. That's nearly a quarter of your entire audience...in just 365 days. This isn't losing nearly a quarter of your audience in a 10 year time period or a 5 year time period, or even a 3 year time period. This is in just ONE year.

People keep bringing up that other TV shows are low, and while alot are, there are a number of them that are doing very well. Not only that, but the shows that are experiencing declines, aren't losing 20% of their viewers in just one year/season. That is an incredible rate of loss. And this is just Raw. SD is a big L, too considering they have the advantage of only being a 2 hour show, and still are in the low 2's, which is also very embarrassing. 

My hope is that WWE does some serious soul-searching from a creative standpoint and seriously start to turn things around with an entertaining product. But the rate of loss in such a short time period is hugely concerning and something that I don't know if I see them rebounding from. Especially with an insane 70 year old man that is literally turning viewers away from his shows at a rate never seen before.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> I don't think some folks get what an incredible rate of loss it is it to lose 20% of your audience in just one year. That's nearly a quarter of your entire audience...in just 365 days. This isn't losing nearly a quarter of your audience in a 10 year time period or a 5 year time period, or even a 3 year time period. This is in just ONE year.
> 
> People keep bringing up that other TV shows are low, and while alot are, there are a number of them that are doing very well. Not only that, but the shows that are experiencing declines, aren't losing 20% of their viewers in just one year/season. That is an incredible rate of loss. And this is just Raw. SD is a big L, too considering they have the advantage of only being a 2 hour show, and still are in the low 2's, which is also very embarrassing.
> 
> My hope is that WWE does some serious soul-searching from a creative standpoint and seriously start to turn things around with an entertaining product. But the rate of loss in such a short time period is hugely concerning and something that I don't know if I see them rebounding from. Especially with an insane 70 year old man that is literally turning viewers away from his shows at a rate never seen before.


1/5 loss of anything is substantial. If that continues for another year maybe people will appreciate the gravity of it. NFL season could be "fun" this year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

For SD this week, they even did continue broadcasting during commercials to give ratings a small help. It's not like the McMahons don't know what's going down, they just pretend everything's fine to not unsettle investors.



IDONTSHIV FOREVER said:


> 1/5 loss of anything is substantial. If that continues for another year maybe people will appreciate the gravity of it. NFL season could be "fun" this year.


I'm counting on it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> For SD this week, they even did continue broadcasting during commercials to give ratings a small help. It's not like the McMahons don't know what's going down, they just pretend everything's fine to not unsettle investors.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm counting on it.


Gotta hope for close NFL games then bring the opcorn to the Ratings thread.


----------



## Randy Lahey

wwe9391 said:


> Yep. This is card WWE will play big time in the next TV negotiations. All USA network shows (minus Mr. Robot) are all low.
> 
> 
> IDK why we bother with threads like this. WWE is gonna be here for a long time.



It doesn't matter how high a rating is. It matters what USA is willing to pay for a show, and whether the rating that comes with that show is high enough to sell enough ads to justify paying the cost of it and still having enough left over to turn a profit.

USA ain't paying shit for WWE Raw in 3 years. Why would they pay $300 mils for a show that pulls a 1.4? Even if that still was the highest rated show on their channel, they can't make a profit on that show if the rating is that low. There'e not enough ads they could sell. The ad rates would be miniscule for a show that does a 1.4. That would be a money loser for them. And when shows become money losers, they get cancelled. Even high rated shows. There's been shows that have gotten consistently high ratings, that still get cancelled because the cost of the show becomes too much to justify. ABC just did that with Last Man Standing. Fox did that with American Idol a couple years ago.

Some of you people are really really ignorant. And it's literally all of the WWE marks. Like you don't even understand the concepts of profit, revenue, and expenses. Don't they teach that in junior high? I can't imagine anyone older than junior high defending WWE.

Even your arguments about "cord cutters are the reason WWE draws bad ratings". Well, even if that's true, and cable TV is dying, how exactly does that help your argument that WWE will continue to stay on USA Network? If cable is dying, it means USA Network is dying with it. And a dying network can't afford to give out huge TV contracts to WWE that they ultimately can't afford.

That is exactly what has happened to ESPN, and why ESPN will be insolvent in about 7 years. They bought the TV rights to alot of different sports, and then started losing subscribers and now won't even be able to pay for those rights in the coming years. Cable TV is a bubble that has burst, and USA will probably get dragged down with it. And if Cable goes under, WWE does too. Or more likely, all WWE content is put on WWE Network. Vince probably saw this coming a long time ago and thats why he started WWE Network. Cable will die, everything will be streamed direct, and he has a platform ready.


----------



## wwe9391

Randy Lahey said:


> .


Point is WWE and USA both need each other. So im confident they will find some way to work together on a new deal


----------



## Ace

I wonder how low ratings will go for NFL season, is it in the territory where SD might even manage to beat Raw the odd week?



wwe9391 said:


> Point is WWE and USA both need each other. So im confident they will find some way to work together on a new deal


 Please don't speak on business again, you don't understand jack. 

Who the fuck is going to cop the bill for WWE's TV deal when they're making less than 20m a year off of ad revenue? US Network aren't a fucking charity, they're going to negotiate a deal that will see them make a profit. If Vince doesn't like it, he can fuck off and try sell his dying product to someone who buys the shit he comes up with.

You need to stop pretending like having the top two shows on the network means a thing. If the shows ratings are dropping 20% annually and you're losing money on it, of course you're going to axed or smaller deal the next time contract negotiations come up. It doesn't mean shit if it's your highest rated show when you're losing money off of it..


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Please don't speak on business again, you don't understand jack.


Coming from the kid


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I'm certain WWE will probably have Brock defend the Universal Championship on a September episode of RAW to go up against Monday Night Football. They could also use a big summer storyline as well.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> Coming from the kid


 Nah, coming from the business grad with a major in accounting. It's painful reading some of the business related nonesense you post on here. Seriously, a lot of things you say defeats common sense and logic...


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Nah, coming from the business grad with a major in accounting. It's painful reading some of the business related nonesense you post on here. Seriously, a lot of things you say defeats common sense and logic...


Common sense and logic aren't undefeated? :sodone


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Nah, coming from the business grad with a major in accounting.


From where? Clown College? 


What are you gonna say to me when WWE is still here in 10 years? I love to know.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> From where? Clown College?
> 
> 
> What are you gonna say to me when WWE is still here in 10 years? I love to know.


First of all, I sincerely hope that in 10 years time, there will be IQ Firewalls against trolls.

Second of all, nobody said WWE won't be here in ten years, but the question is where will they be? Bar some unforeseen miracle, certainly not in the top rated spot on a major network. TNA is also "still here". 
The point is, at this rate, USA ain't gonna lick McMahon's shoes, especially when the network itself is in trouble, so unless another network is shelling out big bucks to salvage a dying show, WWE either has to accept a huge financial cut, or they go Network-only.
In both cases, WWE in this form, with a shit Ton on different shows and content, is no longer sustainable.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> From where? Clown College?
> 
> 
> What are you gonna say to me when WWE is still here in 10 years? I love to know.


 From a top 50 university in the world, think department is top 40 :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> From a top 50 university in the world, think department is top 40 :lol












Don't remember anyone saying WWE would cease to exist in ten years. It's just common sense that if their ratings keep evaporating, their next tv deal will dwindle as well.:draper2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

WWE trolls don't have common sense. They adapt to their master.


----------



## CJD88

*Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

So RAW's ratings have been dropping dramatically since WM33. The worst it's been in years. What pisses me off though is that people think it MUST be because of Reigns, or because of bad booking. Why are people here so unwilling to accept that maybe, just maybe fans are turned off by all of the attitude era nostalgia shit going on right now? As soon as Angle and the Hardys come back, the ratings tank, how do you know that's not the reason? Not to mention Goldust is there too and is in a significant spot and Goldberg was prominently featured up to WM. Maybe casuals share the same opinion as I do and are sick to death of all the old fucks stinking up the show.


----------



## Steve Black Man

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

I appreciate the sentiment, but just....no.

The ratings stink because the product stinks and because WWE suck at building new stars that can draw new fans in.

Has nothing to do with old timers. While not as prevalent as now, big names from years past have always made comebacks here and there.


----------



## TD Stinger

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

You do realize some of the bigger ratings they've done in the past few years have been when guys like Goldberg, Sting, Undertaker, etc. have shown up.

And it has it occurred to you that ratings have gone down since Mania and all the part timers went away and now WWE is treading water until the Summer just throwing their full time guys around.


----------



## ChampWhoRunsDaCamp

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

You and 90% of people who will argue about this are completely wrong. It isn't about reigns or the old stars, it isn't a personel issue.

Wrestling is a dying industry, regardless of the card the ratings will continue to decline until WWE ceases to exist, which I'd expect to happen within 20 years. The internet killed wrestling and regardless of who is on the card short of one off bumps every champion will draw less ratings than the the previous one. That's the nature of a dying industry.


----------



## Bink77

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

How about, the stories suck. The wrestlers have been booked to suck. The matches and their outcomes suck. The promos suck. The announcing sucks. The show structure sucks, and as a result, the ratings fucking suck. This product is dying on the vine.


----------



## Laughable Chimp

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

OP, the ageist motherfucker at it again. I swear the next thread you're gonna start is how old people are holding down the world economy and they should be purged so that the younger generation can be allowed to thrive. At this point, such a thread won't suprise me.

But anyway, no on your question. There is no evidence whatsoever that casuals are getting sick of ageing part time stars.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

The part timers carried the ratings, it's no surprise Raw has lost so many viewers since WM.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

The piss poor product stands on its own. The Attitude Era has nothing to do with the tepid swill WWE feeds us.


----------



## The_Workout_Buddy

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

There is a logical reason when they announced a "part timer" will be on RAW the rating increases, because most of its fan grew up with TV as their main source of entertainment.

New generations will never be as passionate as the former because it doesn't matter if they watch RAW live, they can easily watch the highlights of the show on WWE official youtube channel.


----------



## Smarky Mark

*Re: Why do people refuse to accept certain possibilities regarding RAW ratings?*

Can't it be because of shitty part timers AND shitty current stars?

Or maybe because the product in general is shitty?

I mean can you attribute the ratings drop to anything other than the WWE producing a shittier product?


----------



## God Movement

This needs a really low rating. Something has to change, because at this rate I'm going to stop watching again.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Feed. Me. Less.


----------



## Vyer

Ratings will probably be less due to Memorial Day.


----------



## Dave Santos

Vyer said:


> Ratings will probably be less due to Memorial Day.


Maybe. No NBA to go up against this week.


----------



## wwe9391

What will happen in this thread today

Ratings come out, same people comment on it, they will laugh at it if they are bad ratings, and nothing will change repeat 

One big never ending loop


----------



## Stinger Fan

Who would have thought only trying to create 1 "star" and having the focus entirely on 1 "star" would have negative consequences ?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

No ratings today as yesterday was a holiday. http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/ratings-delays-due-to-memorial-day-holiday-2.html


----------



## Nirvash

Stinger Fan said:


> Who would have thought only trying to create 1 "star" and having the focus entirely on 1 "star" would have negative consequences ?


2 stars actually.

Just one is a part-part-part-part timer.
The other plain suck.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

He said TRYING to create one star. Brock already is a star, he just can't make a difference in a dead environment.


----------



## JDP2016

I'm hoping for a rating lower than 2.4 but yesterday was a holiday so there is the excuse. Next Monday they will not have the NBA as an excuse though. They are also gonna come off a PPV so that's another excuse out the window.


----------



## Mysteriobiceps

God Movement said:


> This needs a really low rating. Something has to change, because at this rate I'm going to stop watching again.


I haven't made any decisions but I just realised that I haven't watched a whole Raw in a long time.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Watch "This is your Life" being the highest rated segment of RAW. :lmao


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

About time for some ratings fun. Gimme!


----------



## God Movement

Nothing yet?


----------



## BuryingYoungTalent

Good Show = Good Ratings Bad Show = Bad Ratings it's a very simple concept WWE. And when you base your show around "wrestling" instead of story lines and unique and interesting characters then the ratings will tank. There's no argument anymore, what the smarks want isn't entertaining to the masses so stop booking your show around guys like Finn Balor and AJ Styles.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Nothing released yet.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Are Smackdown's ratings coming out today, too?


----------



## Dolorian

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Nothing released yet.


Well if Sulecki had _stopped_ sipping on that Coke for a bit they may have released the ratings already


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.689M
H2-2.681M
H3-2.468M
3H-2.613M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.30% / - 0.008M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.94% / - 0.213M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.22% / - 0.221M )
5/29/17 Vs 5/22/17 ( - 0.08% / - 0.002M )

Demo (5/29/17 Vs 5/22/17):
H1- 0.880D Vs 0.890D
H2- 0.880D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.830D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.863D Vs 0.910D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/29/17 Vs 5/30/16):
H1- 2.689M Vs 3.282M
H2- 2.681M Vs 3.324M
H3- 2.468M Vs 3.081M
3H- 2.613M Vs 3.229M ( - 19.08% / - 0.616M )

Demo (5/29/17 Vs 5/30/16):
H1- 0.880D Vs 1.190D
H2- 0.880D Vs 1.190D
H3- 0.830D Vs 1.080D
3H- 0.863D Vs 1.153D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:lmao :lmao :lmao

B-B-B-BUT I heard on here that so many people were looking forward to that main event? :lmao

Nope. Everyone knew the same ol' boring result. Yawn.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

He's dead, Jim. How low can you go?


----------



## The_Jiz

Thats gotta be the lowest holiday/non holiday rating.


----------



## Dolorian

The_Jiz said:


> Thats gotta be the lowest holiday/non holiday rating.


It is a bit higher than last week which was on an non-holiday.


----------



## TripleG

I've been watching WWF/E regularly since 1989. 

I have skipped the last two Smackdowns and the last Raw and a half. 

Even I'm at a point where I don't want to watch. What does that say?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

There's the caveat that this was a holiday, but that demo is so poor for RAW. Next week is unopposed but the following week could face the NBA Finals.


----------



## The_Jiz

Dolorian said:


> It is a bit higher than last week which was on an non-holiday.


Got to give it to raw. 

Expected them to hit that milestone in late 2016.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

WWE's TV ratings are dying for both shows the last 3 years or so. Heaven forbid they change anything up..


----------



## God Movement

:dc


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> There's the caveat that this was a holiday, but that demo is so poor for RAW. Next week is unopposed but the following week could face the NBA Finals.


incoming excuses "but it was a holiday"
FACT IS RAW SUCKS AND HAS SUCKED FOR A WHILE. IT IS GETTING WHAT IT DESERVES!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The_Jiz said:


> Got to give it to raw.
> 
> Expected them to hit that milestone in late 2016.


It's actually slightly lower in viewers and demo than last week.


----------



## Demolition119

Dat 3rd hour drop :lmao


----------



## Dolorian

The third hour drop is almost always there no matter what goes on. Hell, Daniel Bryan's retirement segment on February last year lost 0.6m viewers on the third hour. Three hours is just too much.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Anyone know when the SD numbers come out?


----------



## Dave Santos

Demolition119 said:


> Dat 3rd hour drop :lmao


yup. And no hockey or NBA to go up against.


----------



## Dave Santos

Dolorian said:


> The third hour drop is almost always there no matter what goes on. Hell, Daniel Bryan's retirement segment on February last year lost 0.6m viewers on the third hour. Three hours is just too much.


Womens title match and Goldberg debut retained third hour viewers.


----------



## Arsenal79

ShowStopper said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> B-B-B-BUT I heard on here that so many people were looking forward to that main event? :lmao
> 
> Nope. Everyone knew the same ol' boring result. Yawn.


Exactly. You got smarks on here creaming themselves about OMG REIGNZ ROLLINZ SHIELDZ GREAT MAIN EVENTZ. Meanwhile the show is hemmoraging viewers because casuals don't give a damn about Rollins or Reigns and they couldn't care less about a MEANINGLESS match with ZERO build or stakes, and everyone else already knows Roman is gonna go over.


----------



## Dolorian

Dave Santos said:


> Womens title match and Goldberg debut retained third hour viewers.


As I said "almost always", Goldberg's debut retained viewers but on subsequent showings Goldberg's impact on the ratings diminished.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Dolorian said:


> The third hour drop is almost always there no matter what goes on. Hell, Daniel Bryan's retirement segment on February last year lost 0.6m viewers on the third hour. Three hours is just too much.


It's def. too long, but the extra hour is money for them. We're stuck with it.


----------



## Ace

:lmao they were up against nothing and gave away 2 PPV matches to draw that :lmao


----------



## Kimwun

ShowStopper said:


> Anyone know when the SD numbers come out?


Thursday


----------



## Dave Santos

Ace said:


> :lmao they were up against nothing and gave away 2 PPV matches to draw that :lmao


With Monday night football still to start, they better step it up.


----------



## wwe9391

A little Higher than last weeks. 


It was a holiday so not surprised its low. I guess some people were still at their BBQs and not come home for work the next day like some said :draper2


----------



## Dave Santos

Dolorian said:


> As I said "almost always", Goldberg's debut retained viewers but on subsequent showings Goldberg's impact on the ratings diminished.


I agree with the statement of raw being to long.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

Dave Santos said:


> I agree with the statement of raw being to long.


Too much of a bad product is very, _very_ bad for business.


----------



## Ace

Last week Raw drew 2.615m, this week they drew 2.613m unopposed with a weeks notice for two PPV caliber matches....

Raw numbers are slightly down this week, not up.. so stop spreading lies.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Arsenal79 said:


> Exactly. You got smarks on here creaming themselves about OMG REIGNZ ROLLINZ SHIELDZ GREAT MAIN EVENTZ. Meanwhile the show is hemmoraging viewers because casuals don't give a damn about Rollins or Reigns and they couldn't care less about a MEANINGLESS match with ZERO build or stakes, and everyone else already knows Roman is gonna go over.


And then on the other show you have a World Champion who also had no build to being World Champion...it just happened.

Raw is all about one person.

It's a disaster. I'm loving the ratings decline.


----------



## DoubtGin

Expected, or rather hoped for, much worse.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

wwe9391 said:


> A little Higher than last weeks.
> 
> 
> It was a holiday so not surprised its low. I guess some people were still at their BBQs and not come home for work the next day like some said :draper2


It's LOWER than last week's. 2.613m vs. 2.615m on 5/22 .863 demo vs. .910 demo last week. :draper2


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> And then on the other show you have a World Champion who also had no build to being World Champion...it just happened.
> 
> Raw is all about one person.
> 
> It's a disaster. I'm loving the ratings decline.


 But but Rollins should be drawing, who doesn't want to see a fan favorite be pinned in the main event by the big dog :lol


----------



## DoubtGin

What is more telling, though, is that they are below the 3m mark for five weeks now.


----------



## Ace

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> It's LOWER than last week's. 2.613m vs. 2.615m on 5/22 .863 demo vs. .910 demo last week. :draper2


 Bruh don't bother, this is the same dude who was banging on about WWE's record revenues for months :kobelol

WWE apologists are the absolute worst... fpalm



DoubtGin said:


> What is more telling, though, is that they are below the 3m mark for five weeks now.


 Do you think they'll drop below 2m once football season starts? :sodone


----------



## wwe9391

lol it's gonna be so good when in the long run ratings won't matter and WWE will still be here at the end of the day.

This thread is what you call beating a dead horse.


----------



## Ace

Ratings not making The Big Dawg look strong


----------



## Dolorian

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> It's LOWER than last week's. 2.613m vs. 2.615m on 5/22 .863 demo vs. .910 demo last week. :draper2


Ah, I must have misread the number from the previous week.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> lol it's gonna be so good when in the long run ratings won't matter and WWE will still be here at the end of the day.
> 
> This thread is what you call beating a dead horse.


 Record revenues bruh, USA TV will bend over backwards and up the WWE's next TV contract for doing so well.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

DoubtGin said:


> What is more telling, though, is that they are below the 3m mark for five weeks now.


You're right. That is a horrible benchmark for them. NFL season begins in September, so they have a little over three months to get some ratings momentum before the NFL sucks the oxygen out of the room.


----------



## Arsenal79

Ace said:


> Do you think they'll drop below 2m once football season starts? :sodone


I wouldn't be surprised at all. I just want to know when Vince is going to cry uncle and actually start caring again. At this rate their TV contract renewal in 2019 is going to be a disaster.


----------



## Ace

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> You're right. That is a horrible benchmark for them. NFL season begins in September, so they have a little over three months to get some ratings momentum before the NFL sucks the oxygen out of the room.


 How many viewers do they usually lose for football season?


----------



## The_Jiz

McMahon is a mark. All that WWE boasting to investors may have worked himself into a shoot.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Record revenues bruh, USA TV will bend over backwards and up the WWE's next TV contract for doing so well.


If you think so bud. 

Idk with the ratings being low the next TV deal might be lower but will see. Let's hope your right.


----------



## Arsenal79

Hey guys, it's a new era! We don't need interesting characters and storylines because that might create a superstar (that we don't want to be more over than the Big Dog). After all, if we have a superstar, he might leave! Therefore from now on, the BRAND is the draw!

Brilliant!


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

The_Jiz said:


> McMahon is a mark.


Unfortunately, yes. And it's really sad, because at one point he was as sharp as a tack when it came to what were/weren't bullshit business metrics.

Vince is the greatest promoter in the history of the business, but right now, he's a 42 year old Willie Mays stumbling around in CF for the Mets.


----------



## OisinS94

The writing is poor, the booking is lazy and there are no stars, it's no surprise that the ratings are hitting such a low. When was the last time you absolutely had to watch an entire episode of Raw because it was that "must see", I genuinely can't even remember. Possibly the 100oth Raw back in 2012 lol. Ok maybe some of the post Mania-Raw's and the one after Taker screwed Lesnar at Battleground were must see but it's been such a rarity for a long long time now.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> How many viewers do they usually lose for football season?


Not sure. RAW was doing below 3M most weeks, but hit 3M for the first two hours more frequently later in the season. I think the higher rated RAWS tend to be post ppvs.


----------



## Ace

OisinS94 said:


> The writing is poor, the booking is lazy and there are no stars, it's no surprise that the ratings are hitting such a low. When was the last time you absolutely had to watch an entire episode of Raw because it was that "must see", I genuinely can't even remember. Possibly the 100oth Raw back in 2012 lol. Ok maybe some of the post Mania-Raw's and the one after Taker screwed Lesnar at Battleground were must see but it's been such a rarity for a long long time now.


 Oh, there is a star... the problem is no one wants to watch his ass :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> lol it's gonna be so good when in the long run ratings won't matter and WWE will still be here at the end of the day.
> 
> This thread is what you call beating a dead horse.


You _are_ the dead horse.


----------



## Arsenal79

Soul Man Danny B said:


> Unfortunately, yes. And it's really sad, because at one point he was as sharp as a tack when it came to what were/weren't bullshit business metrics.
> 
> Vince is the greatest promoter in the history of the business, but right now, he's a 42 year old Willie Mays stumbling around in CF for the Mets.


This. I think it's pretty clear that the WWE's decline over the past 10+ years is heavily correlated to Vince getting too old and losing his mental acuity as people typically do when they age. Unfortunately considering he is such a control freak, the product won't improve until he is out of the equation.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That's a GO HOME show :lmao :lmao


----------



## JDP2016

Far as I'm concerned these numbers aren't low enough.


----------



## FITZ

I was expecting them to lose more viewers than they did when compared to last week.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Last Memorial Day: 3.23 million.

That's 600.000-700.000 less than a year ago. Dude, that's almost a QUARTER of their audience.


----------



## ThePhenomenal-1

And long may it continue! WWE have shunned away even the most loyalest of watchers including me with their god awful creativity and booking of superstars. Until they change and stop trying to impose their image of what they want onto fans the ratings will continue to drop.


----------



## Ace

DO you think they'll call up a real star to bring up Raw's ratings?

I'm down for an Austin or Rock return tbh.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Last Memorial Day: 3.23 million.
> 
> That's 600.000-700.000 less than a year ago. Dude, that's almost a QUARTER of their audience.


Like that report said, 20% of their audience from last year. It wasn't a joke.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

You know, every semi-conscious being alive watching Raw even for just one hour gets the message: the next notable thing happening is the Champion, who is not ever on the show, defending his title 6 weeks from now; until then, some geeks wrestle for the favor of getting humbled by Brock, after which the next notable thing happening is Brock humbling the most over guy on the roster THREE MONTHS from now, After which the next notable thing happening will be the LEAST OVER GUY beating Brock for the title TEN MONTHS from now.

Meanwhile, enjoy the IC Title, RomanWinsLOL, and Nakamura and AJ being Ziggler's bitches.


----------



## Ace

Surprising how little WWE marks post in this thread, they're all about those youtube numbers now :kobelol

Drawing wise, is Roman the worst FOTC in WWE history?

I know Cena is still considered the FOTC, but they've positioning Roman as FOTC for the last 3 years..


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Ace said:


> Surprising how little WWE marks post in this thread, they're all about those youtube numbers now :kobelol


Their arguments evaporated like hot piss on a hot summer's day pavement.

It all boils down now to the troll argument of "ratings just don't matter". 
:bryanlol


----------



## Ace

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Their arguments evaporated like hot piss on a hot summer's day pavement.
> 
> It all boils down now to the troll argument of "ratings just don't matter".
> :bryanlol


 Roman is on the level of Sachin Tendulkar in India. That's gotta mean something god dammit.


----------



## CesaroSwing

That's what happens when you don't push Cesaro.


Ace said:


> Surprising how little WWE marks post in this thread, they're all about those youtube numbers now :kobelol


You've changed your mind on Youtube numbers again? :mj


----------



## Ace

CesaroSwing said:


> That's what happens when you don't push Cesaro.
> 
> You've changed your mind on Youtube numbers again? :mj


 Context.

WWE are pushing Jinder because of India, his numbers are up HUGE in a short space of time on a platform where most of the views come from India. If he's able to continue to grow, it DOES mean a great deal, but for that to happen he would need 10m+ viewers for each video he's in (unlikely).


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Drawing wise, is Roman the worst FOTC in WWE history?
> 
> I know Cena is still considered the FOTC, but they've positioning Roman as FOTC for the last 3 years..


I can 100% guarantee that Roman has more Youtube views than Bruno, Hogan, Savage, and Warrior combined during their reigns. :fact :reigns2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Give it another -500.000 starting September, and this would usually be the point where a company brings in Vince Russo to finish it off for good, Bro.


----------



## wwe9391

Could there not be anymore baiting in this thread?


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> Could there not be anymore baiting in this thread?


 Record revenue :reigns2


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Record revenue :reigns2


Hell Yeah son. Ratings is the only thing you gots


----------



## Mra22

Awesome! Hope it continues to go down since Vince refuses to listen to the fans. I can only imagine how low it will go during the NBA finals.


----------



## Ace

Mra22 said:


> Awesome! Hope it continues to go down since Vince refuses to listen to the fans. I can only imagine how low it will go during the NBA finals.


 Game 5 will probably result in Raw dropping below 2.5m.


----------



## V-Trigger

Those ratings with Roman vs Rollins being advertised for a week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

LeBron killing Roman's ratings to avenge Taker.


----------



## Ace

BrotherNero said:


> Those ratings with Roman vs Rollins being advertised for a week.


 Not just that, they billed it as a double main event show with Joe vs. Bray vs. Balor :ha

That's a horrific number which further proves Raw NEEDS part timers. I shudder to think what their numbers for Raw's Road to WM would have been like without Goldberg, Lesnar, Taker and HHH to a much lesser extent.



THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> LeBron killing Roman's ratings to avenge Taker.


 Would have loved to have seen the ratings Raw would have gotten against a game 3 and 7 

Where is @Legit BOSS at? I want to hear the excuses he has for this week :lol


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Ace said:


> Where is @Legit BOSS at? I want to hear the excuses he has for this week :lol


*Didn't I tell you not to waste my notifications with this garbage? I haven't frequented this thread in at least a year. Shouldn't you be in the Smackdown section blaming Roman for AJ's failures and repeatedly embarrassing yourself? *


----------



## capatisdumb

wwe9391 said:


> lol it's gonna be so good when in the long run ratings won't matter and WWE will still be here at the end of the day.
> 
> This thread is what you call beating a dead horse.


you post laughing gifs in the smackdown ratings thread whenever they do bad viewership. shut the fuck up stone hot


----------



## Ace

Legit BOSS said:


> *Didn't I tell you not to waste my notifications with this garbage? I haven't frequented this thread in at least a year. Shouldn't you be in the Smackdown section blaming Roman for AJ's failures and repeatedly embarrassing yourself? *


 AJ isn't in a position to draw :lmao

Roman has been given everything and still couldn't move the needle to save is life :lmao

Dude is like an old man who can't get it up no matter how hard he tries :lmao

Also :kobelol at only showing up to this thread after being tagged, but it doesn't surprise me Roman marks stay well clear of here. Raw ratings never make Roman look strong.

Roman Reigns, the record breaker yo :reigns2


----------



## Frost99

wwe9391 said:


> *A little Higher than last weeks*.


----------



## Ace

Frost99 said:


>


 It was actually slightly lower than last weeks, probably another record for the Big Dawg :cole


----------



## Ace

The lack of NBA playoffs did not prove to be much of a benefit for Raw's ratings on Monday night as the show did 2.61 million viewers, identical to the previous week when going against the playoffs.

While Memorial Day and the NHL playoffs did hurt the number, anything below 2.85 million should have been considered a disappointment. Still, because the news stations weren't broadcasting key programming and the NHL was on NBC rather than cable, Raw was the most-watched show on cable, a spot it hasn't had in a long time.

The Stanley Cup finals did 4.85 million viewers.

Memorial Day traditionally hurts the rating by only 40,000 to 50,000 viewers, so it's a factor, but not nearly a factor to where it ties a record low. In theory, next week should be up the day after a Raw PPV, although the split crew PPVs have not been a boon to next-day ratings as it used to be.

*The June 12th Raw, unless the return of Brock Lesnar is gigantic, should be the lowest rated Raw of the modern era outside of football season unless the NBA playoffs are a four-game sweep, since it goes on against game five.*

The other key is Memorial Day traditionally means viewers come in later, so the second hour is always bigger than the first, but this show's second hour actually dropped.

The three hours were:

8 p.m. 2.69 million viewers
9 p.m. 2.68 million viewers
10 p.m. 2.47 million viewers

Here's a chart from Paul Fontaine that looks at Raw ratings in 2017 and compares them to last year. The year-over-year declines in the last month have been the worst of the entire year:










@ShowStopper new record incoming :ha


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Ace said:


> AJ isn't a position to draw


*
The former WWE Champion with the best booking of 2016 wasn't in a position to draw?! :StephenA6 

You make it WAYYY too easy to make my point.*


----------



## Chrome

Them ratings and that decline from last year....










Ratings after game 5 should be fun.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Those percentage drops should be disconcerting to Vince.


----------



## Ace

Legit BOSS said:


> *
> The former WWE Champion with the best booking of 2016 wasn't in a position to draw?! :StephenA6
> 
> You make it WAYYY too easy to make my point.*


 The guy who opens WM against Shane McMahon and loses multiple matches to Ellsworth and Ziggler doesn't draw. 

I'm shocked :wow



Chrome said:


> Them ratings and that decline from last year....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ratings after game 5 should be fun.


 If Lebron and Curry get Raw under 2.2m, I'm a mark for life.


----------



## Ace

So, who's starting the prayer circle for Roman? WWE82990 or Legit Boss?

He's going to etch himself into the history books :cole

Bigger than 3 consecutive WM main events baby :EDWIN4


----------



## Blade Runner

These upcoming contract renewal meetings with the USA Network will be mighty interesting. I cannot imagine that they're too pleased right now.


----------



## Ace

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> These upcoming contract renewal meetings with the USA Network will be mighty interesting. I cannot imagine that they're too pleased right now.


 Think everyone and their dog can see the product is dying, if they renew you know the decline is only going to continue until they're doing 1.5m a week. The likes of Brock, Cena, Goldberg etc. won't be around to pop a rating either.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> The lack of NBA playoffs did not prove to be much of a benefit for Raw's ratings on Monday night as the show did 2.61 million viewers, identical to the previous week when going against the playoffs.
> 
> While Memorial Day and the NHL playoffs did hurt the number, anything below 2.85 million should have been considered a disappointment. Still, because the news stations weren't broadcasting key programming and the NHL was on NBC rather than cable, Raw was the most-watched show on cable, a spot it hasn't had in a long time.
> 
> The Stanley Cup finals did 4.85 million viewers.
> 
> Memorial Day traditionally hurts the rating by only 40,000 to 50,000 viewers, so it's a factor, but not nearly a factor to where it ties a record low. In theory, next week should be up the day after a Raw PPV, although the split crew PPVs have not been a boon to next-day ratings as it used to be.
> 
> *The June 12th Raw, unless the return of Brock Lesnar is gigantic, should be the lowest rated Raw of the modern era outside of football season unless the NBA playoffs are a four-game sweep, since it goes on against game five.*
> 
> The other key is Memorial Day traditionally means viewers come in later, so the second hour is always bigger than the first, but this show's second hour actually dropped.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 2.69 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 2.68 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.47 million viewers
> 
> Here's a chart from Paul Fontaine that looks at Raw ratings in 2017 and compares them to last year. The year-over-year declines in the last month have been the worst of the entire year:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @ShowStopper new record incoming :ha



They gon' die. They should be embarrassed that Rollins' shitty 2015 Title reign that THEY book him to be terrible in, has outdrawn anything WWE has done in 2016 and 2017. 

Keep the laughs coming, Vinnie.


:ha


----------



## wwe9391

Baiting Baiting Baiting


----------



## Blade Runner

Ace said:


> Think everyone and their dog can see the product is dying, if they renew you know the decline is only going to continue until they're doing 1.5m a week. The likes of Brock, Cena, Goldberg etc. won't be around to pop a rating either.


I'm starting to think that the gameplan longterm is getting RAW on the WWE Network, but that would be horrible right now because it doesn't have as much reach as USA, and they'd lose out on that advertisement/contractual money.

They could switch over to another TV Network, but the bidding for them might not be too strong with this downtrend in ratings. The WWE might be making money hand over fist in other areas of business, but TV Networks only care about whether you bring eyeballs to their station or not. They have zero fucks to give about trends on social media and YT views.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> So, who's starting the prayer circle for Roman? WWE82990 or Legit Boss?
> 
> Bigger than 3 consecutive WM main events baby


oh look more baiting from @Ace 

Why do we need a prayer circle? He is already the #1 merch seller behind cena, he gets the loudest reaction of any superstar on the roster, is the most talked about wrestler in the world, is gonna main event his 4th WM main event in a row, and will be PUSHED no matter what. 

We have nothing to pray or worry about. Were good mate. You can poke us all you want but in the end we win cause we know Roman will be fine.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Hell Yeah son. Ratings is the only thing you gots


You should stick with ratings, too, son. Easier for you to grasp one single number, since you clearly aren't able to read financial reports.

My dad's renovation of his medical facility last year cost more than the profits WWE made in Q1 2017.

And his annual income is higher than that, too. :booklel

Nothing sweeter than a salty mark.


----------



## Dave Santos

USA has lost 6% of its Viewers. Wwe as a program has lost 2-3 times that.


----------



## Seafort

DAMN SKIPPY said:


> I'm starting to think that the gameplan longterm is getting RAW on the WWE Network, but that would be horrible right now because it doesn't have as much reach as USA, and they'd lose out on that advertisement/contractual money.
> 
> They could switch over to another TV Network, but the bidding for them might not be too strong with this downtrend in ratings. The WWE might be making money hand over fist in other areas of business, but TV Networks only care about whether you bring eyeballs to their station or not. They have zero fucks to give about trends on social media and YT views.


If that is their game plan, then their plan is to lose anywhere from $5M to $20M per quarter. Their USA deal is the only thing that is keeping them profitable.

They may have record revenue, but three out of six quarters have seen profits that were lower than $1M (and one of those quarters was negative).


----------



## InexorableJourney

Do I hear Brock's coming back early to save RAW?
No, oh well then...


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> Baiting Baiting Baiting


 YouTube views :sodone


----------



## V-Trigger

Get ready for the annual Vince McMahon appearance.


----------



## Randy Lahey

So Raw's doing last fall's football numbers, RIGHT NOW, against no competition...lol. Vince hasn't realized that it's alot easier to lose viewers, that it is to gain them back. 

American Idol, at it's peak, averaged around 30 mils viewers during seasons 5 and 6. 
It was cancelled after season 15 when it averaged around 10 mils.

Raw, at it's peak, averaged around a 5.9 rating in 2000.
They will average 2.0 or less in 2017.

I think when a show loses 2/3 of it's peak value, it gets cancelled. I can't think of any other show that stays on TV with this big of decline from it's peak. If they are pulling 1.5s during football season, turn out the lights. It's done.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Hipster GEEKS and apologists will keep denying the obvious but in WWE, sports entertainment has ALWAYS been more of a draw than in ring wrestling. Until WWE remembers what brought it to the dance, these ratings will get worse than currently. We're not even in football season yet.

Also, HHH will be worse than current Vince when he is given the reigns. Bet on that.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> With Raw on Memorial Day doing the second lowest rating in the history of the show, and that includes holidays and shows during football season, on a week when all signs were that there should logically have been a strong bounce back, it asks a ton of questions.
> 
> Before people start making excuses about cord cutting, cord cutting can’t effect ratings more than one or two percent. The rating is derived by the percentage of homes that get the station, in this case the USA Network. If people no longer get USA Network, they aren’t figured into the percentage. You can argue that wrestling fans are cutting the cord, a term that is almost a joke the way it’s overused, greater than the public at large, but even then that’s a joke.
> 
> One year ago, USA Network was in 92.7 million homes. This past week USA Network was in 91.8 million homes. Yes, it is down and cord cutting probably is fair to account for maybe a one percent decline in audience and a zero percent decline in ratings, since those 900,000 homes aren’t figured in to begin with on the ratings. One would also think, with the wrestling audience being more hardcore than ever before, and fewer fans who are more loyal, that if anything, they would be the ones most likely to keep cable since they are willing to spend more money per capita on the product than any audience of wrestling ever. There are just fewer of them than ever before, probably even dating back to the dark ages of 1992 to 1995 when nobody was making money running wrestling companies in the U.S.
> 
> Now, to be fair, the business of pro wrestling is doing well with those hardcore fans. WWE attendance is mixed, but it was strong in March, although fell in April and May. WWE ratings were actually not that bad in April. The combination of WrestleMania and the Superstar shakeup saw Smackdown way ahead of last year, and Raw behind last year, but not by a lot.
> 
> Ever since the second week after the Superstar shakeup, both shows having fallen to a significant level. Some of that is the NBA Playoffs, but the NBA Playoffs take place every year at the same time.
> 
> There is also the argument that there are more ways of consumption of the product. You can subscribe to Hulu and watch the next day. And it is true the need for immediacy is way down. More people by percentage, are DVRing Raw than in the past, although that’s also misleading. If Raw was doing 10 percent increases from DVR viewership at 3.2 million last year, that’s 320,000 more viewers. If they are doing 12.5 percent now at 2.6 million, that 325,000 more viewers. So essentially it’s the same. People do watch YouTube clips, but looking at those numbers is misleading because most of that comes from India and 80 percent is outside the U.S., and in markets the company derives little revenue from.
> 
> Is this trouble? It’s not good. But generally, television ratings are down. Raw and Total Divas are both down well more than the decline of television on average. Smackdown is up, but Smackdown is an unfair comparison given its move to Tuesday live and having an exclusive roster. Perhaps you can argue that the increase in Smackdown is part of the reason for the decline in Raw, and that the combination is relatively even. Come July, when Smackdown is the same as it was a year earlier, as would be Raw, measuring the decline or lack thereof will be notable. My gut says that Raw will continue to decline, and Smackdown’s numbers will be well below the previous year.
> 
> Still, aside from cable news shows and major sports, both Raw and Smackdown do better than almost anything on cable most weeks. And the cable news shows that were beating it, on Fox for the most part, have taken a major hit with the loss of Bill O’Reilly. No, pro wrestling isn’t near the force it once was, but it’s still good.
> 
> The problem is that it’s also not cost-effective. At 22 cents per viewer per show, if Raw does 3 million viewers per week and Smackdown does 2.5 million, numbers that both shows are unlikely to be reaching on a consistent regular basis unless there is a turnaround, that’s $1.21 million per week or $63 million per year. Wrestling costs USA in the range of $160 million.
> 
> Still, there is other value. USA gets money per home from the cable companies. Would the cable companies want to cut back on USA without wrestling? USA’s big claim is that they are consistently top five in prime time ratings, and have been No. 1 most recent years. Take away the five hours of WWE, they would not be top ten.
> 
> But benefits of other programming is it can be replayed over-and-over, and USA can also sell original programs overseas. They can sell the rights many ways and have digital distribution as well down the line. With Raw and Smackdown, they don’t have those revenue streams since WWE owns the shows and derives the revenue for any of those type of usages.
> 
> From a cost-effective standpoint, a show that does one-third the audience will do more advertising revenue than WWE.
> 
> As far as 2019 goes, when the USA contract is up, are these ratings going to pose a problem?
> 
> There is no way of knowing. Most stations won’t drop their top rated show, and with USA’s other programming falling badly and the station unable to make new hits like they used to do regularly, wrestling is farm more valuable than ever before, at least for total ratings. There is the argument that USA can also advertise its new shows before more eyeballs if they keep WWE. Plus, generally, programming rights have been going up even with audiences declining.
> 
> UFC is counting on a huge increase in rights fees at the end of 2018, and if they do or don’t get it may be a barometer for WWE. UFC was, and still is hoping for a bidding war, and perhaps winding up like the NBA, NASCAR, the NFL or Baseball, where they make deals with multiple networks. But the problems with ESPN, a station counted on to bid for UFC programming, if they aren’t interested given their declining number of homes due to cable bundling (far more than cord cutting which is still only four percent from the peak of U.S. cable, and cable homes right now are 24 percent ahead of where they were during wrestling’s popularity peak) and thus loss of revenue, the UFC leverage is gone.
> 
> Similarly, if multiple parties see WWE’s numbers as a way to put their networks on the map, because WWE does give you a consistent solid audience very Monday and Tuesday, WWE could get much bigger numbers even with the steep decline in audience.
> 
> If nobody else wants it, and there is a change at the top (Bonnie Hammer, who runs USA and several other NBCU cable networks is a major fan of Vince McMahon) like what happened with TBS and TNT in 2001, and they think bottom line rather than fighting for No. 1, WWE could be in major trouble. With the WWE Network, they will survive in that situation, although will have to make major cuts, and it will be much harder to create new fans. Still, the Internet is a strong way to reach and maintain hardcore fans. This also may explain the attempt to reach out and try and create local stars in foreign markets. In the dark ages, when the U.S. wrestling scene was struggling badly, WWE did lose money, but they still did well in Europe and Canada.
> 
> The reality is that most revenue streams are strong. Attendance, which is in many ways a far better barometer to judge real interest than TV ratings, especially today, is only down a little, and with price raises, is more profitable than before.
> 
> But people who make the argument that ratings don’t matter are as shortsighted as they come. Ratings matter far more today than in the days of the Monday Night Wars. In those days, for whatever reason, both companies got sucked into a battle of hotshotting. Wrestling in 1998 was on fire, and WWF was on fire for a few years after that as WCW collapsed. Did the hotshotting long-term lead to another decline after 2001? Or was it the lack of competition? But the key was, in 2000, no matter what the ratings were, WWE made its money by presentation of live shows, licensing and PPVs. They only grossed $5.5 million in the U.S. from television in 1999 which grew to $28 million because of the bidding war between USA and Spike in 2000, because the attitude of television was that wrestling needs us so we don’t have to pay for it. Today, WWE’s television rights are closer to $160 million, a huge percentage of overall revenue. While there are many other factors in play, ratings are the No. 1 factor besides multiple bidders wanting the product when it comes to the No. 1 profit producing revenue stream.
> 
> Now, are ratings not as big a deal when measuring actual popularity than before? No doubt, but they were always misleading. There were companies like Mid South and Memphis that did ridiculously high ratings while they struggled at the gate. Even with WCW in 2000, while overall business collapsed, ratings did fall, but not to the extent of PPV and house shows. People would watch the train wrecks out of fascination or loyalty or habit, but they were don’t paying money for them. With WWE, that’s not the case. People just aren’t watching the TV, perhaps because of too much product, sameness, or lack of stakes, but still will pay for the network and go to the live shows. And another point is that WWE live shows are good. The talent is very good at what they do, and they are better athletes and have a far better work ethic. The mentality of conning people into the seats and doing as little as possible past conning them back, and it being an excuse to stay in high school, do copious amounts of drinking and drugs and have access to far more women as television stars has been completely overhauled by a performer base that is there because they love performing. If they can be criticized, it’s for working too hard for their own good and taking risks that lead to more injuries. They are paid well enough, although not nearly what they deserve, so the always hustle for every buck mentality isn’t there. It also creates less individualism, which makes it difficult to create real stars.
> 
> PPVs have mostly been good, although of late WWE big shows in quality have fallen well behind the competition and many have been average or even below average. But at $9.99 value, nobody is going to feel ripped off like the would at a higher price point. From a fan perspective, because the TV revenue, the No. 1 stream, is guaranteed, and the PPV revenue isn negligible and the network revenue is seasonal and barely at all affected by quality of shows, the incentive is just there to churn out product. The money is rolling in whether good or bad. Technology changes may hurt them, or may help them. No matter what anyone says, nobody knows what the landscape of media will be in 2019, and until then, WWE doesn’t have a thing to worry about. But in 2019, it’s the media landscape, not quality of product, that will be the difference maker.
> 
> Ratings will decline as long as there is too much product. There’s a long history of overexposure when it comes to television, but now, because the expectations are lower, and wrestling in theory will always have a competitive sized audience, plus the increase of money spending by hardcore fans, this current product is doing well with the overexposure. A key is the lack of appearances in markets. I believe if this product was to run monthly as opposed to being an annual or two or three times a year special event in most cities (and New York is the exception to this as they run often, and while they don’t sellout unless it’s TV or PPV, they do well), the situation would be different. But it doesn’t have to be and it’s not.





> Raw on 5/29 did a 1.75 rating and 2,608,000 viewers (1.62 viewers per home).
> 
> It was the second lowest rated Raw in history, beating only the September 26, 2016 show that went against the Clinton-Trump debate and did a 1.74 rating, but that was 2,464,000 viewers because of 1.54 viewers per home.
> 
> The key is that more people were together watching Raw than usual, perhaps families and friends together, so while viewers tied last week for the third lowest in modern history (the Halloween night show last October did 2,591,000 viewers), the rating barely beat the all-time low. There was an episode of Raw on October 14, 1996, which went against Nitro, an NFL game, and major league baseball playoffs that did a 1.78 and two episodes of Prime Time Wrestling in 1992 against NFL blockbuster games did 1.7s, but aside from that, it would be the lowest rated Monday Night airing of a WWE program in cable television history. Only one episode of Nitro, on December 11, 2000, ever did lower than 1.75.
> 
> Memorial Day usually has a very slight negative effect on Raw ratings, but not to the effect where it can be used for this number. In fact, the NHL rating head-to-head was considered a major success, and many credited the number because it was on Memorial Day and thus had lesser competition.
> 
> Last year’s Memorial Day show did a 2.19 rating and 3,222,000 viewers, so it was a 19.1 percent annual audience drop and a 20.1 percent ratings drop. The year before did a 2.54 rating and 3.59 million viewer, so it’s a decline of 27.3 percent in audience and 31.1 percent drop in ratings over two years.
> 
> This was also without NBA playoffs competition and the number should have bounced back to near pre-playoff levels. Having no bounce-back at all is a bad sign. The number should go up next week, without the holiday, although will be against Game Four of the Stanley Cup finals.
> 
> Unless Brock Lesnar’s return is huge, a record low should be set on 6/12 if the Warriors vs. Cavaliers series is still on and game five is held that night. That would be the last show against either NBA or NHL competition this year and then it’s pretty much free sailing at whatever level that is until football season’s big drop.
> 
> Raw’s tying the all-time low number was largely due to the decrease in usual levels in the 35-49 age group as well as a decline across the board among women (men were up from last week).
> 
> Because the news shows pretty much threw in the towel, Raw was No. 1 on cable for the night, but almost nobody was putting any big first-run programming on that night. Game one of the NHL Stanley Cup finals with the Nashville Predators vs. Pittsburgh Penguins on NBC did 4,854,000 viewers.
> 
> Raw did a 0.60 in 12-17 (identical with the previous week), 0.70 in 18-34 (up 2.9 percent), 1.02 in 35-49 (down 10.5 percent) and 1.07 in 50+ (up 1.9 percent).
> 
> The audience was 61.8 percent male in 18-49 and 63.8 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## Ace

> People do watch YouTube clips, but looking at those numbers is misleading because* most of that comes from India* and 80 percent is outside the U.S., and* in markets the company derives little revenue from.*


 Quoted for the truth WWE99898 Legit Boss :dead2




> With Raw on Memorial Day doing the *second lowest rating in the history of the show*,* and that includes holidays and shows during football season*, on a week when all signs were that there should logically have been a strong bounce back, it asks a ton of questions.


The Big Dawg makes history again :cole

☑ Main event a Raw that records the second lowest rating in Raw history.
☑ FOTC during a historic run where Raw sets a record low rating every week.
☐ Be featured/main event the lowest rating Raw in history.


----------



## volde

Ace said:


> That's a horrific number which further proves Raw NEEDS part timers. I shudder to think what their numbers for Raw's Road to WM would have been like without Goldberg, Lesnar, Taker and HHH to a much lesser extent.


Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if ratings now would be actually higher if these part timers weren't around. Close to half of the people who had matches at WM now aren't around (ignoring big tag match and women):

Shane is somewhat around but wrestlers once or twice a year. 
Jericho is gone. 
Cena/Nikki gone. 
Triple H gone.
Lesnar and Goldberg gone/around once every few months.
The Undertaker gone. 

I think it is natural that after WM you get a huge drop because why should you care about remaining people when you were conditioned over the years that they don't really matter? 



WINNING said:


> Hipster GEEKS and apologists will keep denying the obvious but in WWE, sports entertainment has ALWAYS been more of a draw than in ring wrestling.


I think this is a bit of false choice. Wrestling needs both. Guys back in the day could provide entertainment _and_ wrestle a match. Now we have bunch of guys who are either good at one or neither.


----------



## fabi1982

picture says more than a 1000 words


----------



## Ace

LMAO WTF is Street Outlaws :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## fabi1982

Looks like a show scoring better than RAW 



Ace said:


> LMAO WTF is Street Outlaws :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Lothario

BuryingYoungTalent said:


> Good Show = Good Ratings Bad Show = Bad Ratings it's a very simple concept WWE. And when you base your show around "wrestling" instead of story lines and unique and interesting characters then the ratings will tank. There's no argument anymore, what the smarks want isn't entertaining to the masses so stop booking your show around guys like Finn Balor and AJ Styles.


While I'm agreement that the work rate boner the IWC focuses on when it comes to whom they deem worthy will never align with what most of the audience finds entertaining (a great character that gets booked in great stories will always be more popular & profitiable than a great worker who gets booked in great matches whether or not the internet likes it) you can't blame AJ or Finn. The entire brand has been built around The Shield since the spring of 2014, and Reigns has led the charge (with Seth right behind him.) They're losing fans en masse despite the entire proponent to Romans push in its' infant stages being he was going to captivate casuals and increase numbers because people who were channel browsing were going to flip on USA and be wowed by his look and otherworldly presence. Much more than they would have if they had saw that short, ugly, Daniel Bryan fella.


Except the exact opposite has happened and casual -- or otherwise -- couldn't care less.


I'm willing to wager his reign of terror (pun intended) is running away more eyes en masse than any single man has done since HHH was "terraryzing" the RAW roster in '03 with his Ric Flair tribute act. Cena lost viewers but it was world's more gradual and was a steady erosion. This on the other hand is essentially a mass pilgrimage. You factor in the increased emphasis on work rate, the piss poor booking, the incoherent storylines and the fact that it's blatantly obvious the talent not named Reigns, Cena and Brock Lesnsr have artificial glass ceilings, and you have a recipe for a mass exodus. They've demonstrated that the entire roster outside of two or three guys are worthless and fans are beginning to take their word for it. The biggest angles go to one man on the full time roster while part timers from 17 - 20 years ago get the rest. Their obsession with Reigns and their inability (or wanton neglect) to craft other major characters and stories is slowly beginning to backfire, and as someone who had been driven away because if it, I wish nothing but the absolute worse for them. They deserve it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

27.3% drop in viewers over two years. Bravo. :clap Still have to think they are going to reach a floor for their ratings.


----------



## wwe9391

> (Bonnie Hammer, who runs USA and several other NBCU cable networks is a major fan of Vince McMahon)


:lol WWE is gonna be just fine


----------



## Mr. Socko

wwe9391 said:


> :lol WWE is gonna be just fine


She is a major fan because her reputation within the company was largely built off the tremendous success of the WWE brand for USA in the past.

She won't be a major fan when she is being heavily tied to an underperforming brand that is costing USA network a fortune.


----------



## wwe9391

They'll be fine and she will be fine


----------



## BuryingYoungTalent

I agree with this. But you have to agree Rollins, Ambrose, and Reigns have all been booked horrendously. We all know they can be stars if booked correctly, but the problem I have with guys like Finn Balor and AJ Styles is if they were given the best writing staff and the best script they wouldn't be able to pull it off because they both are just so bland. Guys like that should be in the cruiser weight division.


----------



## V-Trigger

BuryingYoungTalent said:


> I agree with this. But you have to agree Rollins, Ambrose, and Reigns have all been booked horrendously. We all know they can be stars if booked correctly, but the problem I have with guys like Finn Balor and AJ Styles is if they were given the best writing staff and the best script they wouldn't be able to pull it off because they both are just so bland. Guys like that should be in the cruiser weight division.


----------



## Ace

BuryingYoungTalent said:


> I agree with this. But you have to agree Rollins, Ambrose, and Reigns have all been booked horrendously. We all know they can be stars if booked correctly, but the problem I have with guys like Finn Balor and AJ Styles is if they were given the best writing staff and the best script they wouldn't be able to pull it off because they both are just so bland. Guys like that should be in the cruiser weight division.


 Yet AJ is more over than Roman will ever be and is already doing similar numbers without the rocket in his ass. It's creative and Roman Reigns booking that's pushing people out the door. You can look at the numbers of the Raw after WM for each of Roman's coronations to see proof of this.

It's time for you and every other Roman marks to face facts - Roman is a flop, a *HUGE* flop. It's not AJ and Balor (I hate the guy too) behind Raw tanking. Main events featuring Roman have tanked time and time again. And if you bring up YouTube again fpalm. Meltzer already destroyed any relevance YT has on the previous page.

AJ on the other hand has made it to the top whereever he has been. If Roman was smaller, he'd be a bigger nobody that wouldn't get a look in. The only reason he is pushed is because of his look. He's good in the ring, his mic work is average at best and he's far from charismatic. The only reason he is over is booking, otherwise he'd be a nobody.



> *How bad was it?*
> Raw this Monday posted a 1.75 rating, a record low for 2017. This is a 20% drop from the rating for last year's Memorial Day show. To put it in further perspective, Dave Meltzer reports that* only one episode of WCW Nitro ever did a worse rating than this show.*
> Edit: I feel I should also mention that Dave stated that Memorial Day doesn't usually account for a big drop in viewership, as people are home by Monday. He said if anything sometimes it will make the first hour a bit lower and it will rise in the 2nd hour, but stated the 2nd hour dropped this week.
> 
> *What was the competition?*
> There wasn't any, really. Dave notes there was no NBA playoff game on, and further noted that most other networks "took the night off" and ran re-runs instead of original programming, so it's not like another "big event" was sucking up TV viewers.
> 
> *Must be cord cutters!*
> Actually, Dave notes that USA is only in 1% less homes than it was a year ago, so that wouldn't begin to explain a 20% ratings drop from last year's show. Dave stated that overall USA is only in 4% less homes than it was at its peak point.
> Dave also notes the rating is a percentage of total viewers based on the number of homes that have USA, so cord cutting logically wouldn't be a deciding factor regardless.
> *
> Must be because the episode was bad?*
> Dave disagrees. He said Raw wasn't bad this week, and noted they promoted 2 main events including a match between their 2 biggest full-time stars on the Raw brand, Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins. The fact that they are nonetheless hemorrhaging viewers tells Dave they are turning away fans.


^


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Problem is the fans know what is going on from now until WM. It's all very predictable and the fans aren't happy about it, so they tune out. Can't blame them.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I think the Episode of Nitro Meltzer speaks of was an Episode of Highlight Compilations before the first redesign of the show, where the commentators openly said Nitro got so bad it needed a restart.

:ha


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Nitro whipping RAW's ass from beyond the grave. :heston


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Yet AJ is more over than Roman will ever be and is already doing similar numbers without the rocket in his ass. It's creative and Roman Reigns booking that's pushing people out the door. You can look at the numbers of the Raw after WM for each of Roman's coronations to see proof of this.
> 
> It's time for you and every other Roman marks to face facts - Roman is a flop, a huge flop. It's not AJ and Balor (I hate the guy too) behind Raw tanking. Main events featuring Roman have tanked time and time again. And if you bring up YouTube again fpalm. Meltzer already destroyed any relevance YT has on the previous page.
> 
> AJ on the other hand has made it to the top whereever he has been. If Roman was smaller, he'd be a bigger nobody that wouldn't get a look in. The only reason he is pushed is because of his look. His good in the ring, his mic work is average at best and he's far from charismatic. The only reason he is over is booking, otherwise he'd be a nobody.


If smackdown was taped those so called "similar numbers" AJ is bringing in would be shit. The only reason SD is getting similar numbers is cause it's live. End of story. It has nothing to do with any particular superstar.

Na we're not gonna accept it because ratings is the only thing you have to use against Roman. When in every other department he is a success. 

Let me turn the tables here. When are you and many others going to accept Reigns is the guy no matter how low ratings get? No matter how much you whine and complain? When is that going to register 


Ratings get low Vince will be panicking and will have to make several changes to his product, but he will most likely not making any changes to Roman and his push.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

wwe9391 is like the WF jobber. Loses every argument that he's in.


----------



## wwe9391

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> wwe9391 is like the WF jobber. Loses every argument that he's in.


Na I just speak the truth that's all.

There's no winning and losing when it comes to arguments/debates on here. People have different opinions and beliefs. Not everyone will agree. What's the fun in always agreeing with each other?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

volde said:


> I think this is a bit of false choice. Wrestling needs both. Guys back in the day could provide entertainment _and_ wrestle a match. Now we have bunch of guys who are either good at one or neither.


No shot. I said it in terms of priority and sports entertainment has always been the most important and biggest draw for the company compared to in ring wrestling. Period.



wwe9391 said:


> :lol WWE is gonna be just fine


You say that as if WWE can't be a victim to their own follies :ti Stop caping


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

wwe9391 said:


> Na I just speak the truth that's all.
> 
> There's no winning and losing when it comes to arguments/debates on here. People have different opinions and beliefs. Not everyone will agree. What's the fun in always agreeing with each other?


You make everyone else look strong. Bless your heart.


----------



## wwe9391

WINNING said:


> You say that as if WWE can't be a victim to their own follies. Stop caping


No they def can be the victim to their own follies what I'm saying is the consequences won't be as bad as some are making it out to be.


----------



## Sweggeh

*How long until RAW ratings fall below TNA at its peak?*

RAW is at 2.6m now, without any competition.

TNA's peak was 2.2m when they had the likes of Hogan, Flair, AJ, Roode, Joe, The Hardyz, Young Bucks, RVD, etc. And TNA did this rating on a Monday night, competing *head to head* with Monday Night RAW.

We are actually reaching an unthinkable stage now where the flagship of the WWE on a Monday Night which is the peak night for wrestling viewership, is about to reach the same level of audience as a show run by Dixie Carter and being led by washed up wrestlers decades past their peak and a bunch of young, hungry "indy" guys who apparently couldn't draw.

Honestly at this point its looking as if TNA fucked up big time in losing all their popular wrestlers and completely fucking up their show. If only they held on for a few more years, they could have been in a position to seriously threaten WWE in the ratings.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: How long until RAW ratings fall below TNA at its peak?*

They could equal it this fall. But realistically, in early 2018.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: How long until RAW ratings fall below TNA at its peak?*

2-3 years assuming their floor isn't above the two million mark.


----------



## TD Stinger

*Re: How long until RAW ratings fall below TNA at its peak?*

I doubt TNA's rating would have risen or stayed even while WWE's continue to fall. In the wrestling world, at least in this country, WWE sets the standard. If TNA were still on Spike with their current roster, it would be doing just as worse off, IMO.

Plus you can't ignore the money situation. AJ left because they couldn't pay him what they had. And the company nearly shut down last year because of money problems. You say if they only managed to keep that talent longer, there was a good reason they didn't.

Plus take into account Sting is retired, The Young Bucks weren't "The Young Bucks" until they left TNA


----------



## The Sharpshooter

*Re: How long until RAW ratings fall below TNA at its peak?*

I don't buy that TNA would have been anywhere near that kind of range if they held on to their stars today. 
Like OP says, that was their peak - that's like saying 5 years ago what the WWE ratings were. Things change, the wrestling industry is less popular now than it was 5 years ago - that would most probably affect TNA too.


----------



## CesaroSwing

*Re: How long until RAW ratings fall below TNA at its peak?*

On the road to GBOF would be my shout. Have a feeling baby Balor's presence and Brock bouncing around saying nothing for 10 minutes will turn many off the product.

It'll never consistently get that low, though. They'll just let Alexa Bliss and Sasha Banks shoot on eachother and the ratings will be 5.5+. If another 'This is your life' masterpiece somehow fails maybe Triple H might be able to make a return to save the company


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Going back to the AJ v. Reigns/workrate v. entertainment argument, things could have went SO much better for everyone involved when AJ debuted. Fuck the brand split (if you WANT to take it to account then assume this all happens on RAW) I believe they would had been in a better position from this start point had they done this:

- AJ debuts at the Rumble, face off with Roman, Roman wins Rumble, retains title
- AJ/Miz program to introduce AJ to WWE (AJ should be portrayed as the WWE outsider the establishment doesn't want to succeed); AJ/Jericho interactions sprinkled during program (both share similar anti-establishment views); Reigns beats HHH at Mania to retain (hate for Reigns reaches apex)
- RAW after Mania; the contenders match to where AJ wins as planned; Reigns comes out for staredown and shake; HHH comes out and you get your RAW after Mania moment...Reigns turns heel, aligns with the man he beat at Mania, becomes new face of the Authority. Fans NOW really want to see AJ beats Reigns for the title and the establishment.
- AJ fights of Reigns and HHH's tactics leading to title match at the next pay per view; Jericho helps AJ to where HHH puts Jericho through hell for his association
- AJ v. Reigns for WWE World Championship (should be their ONLY title match of the year); all of Reigns and HHH's tactics fail as AJ has an actual chance to win...and Jericho turns on AJ, Reigns retains, HHH and Jericho (on and off air rivals) shake hands and aligns with the Authority as well.
- Jericho explains that AJ and him are similar but knows where his butter is bread (basically sells out and reverts back to his 08 heel suit persona). AJ and Jericho feud for the remainder of the summer as AJ's side story
- SETH ROLLINS RETURNS from injury to feud with Reigns for the summer as originally planned except roles reversed; HHH and Steph try to get Seth to stay with the Authority to avoid him challenging Reigns for the title; Rollins declines and claims to be the next World champion at Summerslam
- While AJ and Rollins are aligned due to their same enemies, they have tension in terms of trust and intentions towards one another (AJ trusted last time and got turned on; Rollins the former face of the Authority; can you trust him)
- Side story: The Usos turn heel and join the Authority after months of being asked, implied, and disrespected by the fans and wrestlers for simply being relatives to a freshly turned Reigns. Eventually win the Tag Team Championships before Summerslam
- SUMMERSLAM 2016: AJ def. Jericho but Jericho assaults AJ afterwards; Reigns def. Rollins to retain after SAMOA JOE makes his main roster debut by being the henchman of the Authority to help Reigns
- AJ's team challenges the Authority to a five on five Survivor Series elimination tag (if AJ's team loses, AJ is out of title contention for remainder of the year; if AJ's team wins, he gets a future title shot)
- AJ enlists Rollins, Balor, and a freshly debuting Gallows and Anderson against the Authority (Reigns/Jericho/Joe/The Usos); AJ and Rollins's distrust reaches its apex to where Authority exploits it to disrupt AJ's team (will Rollins turn on AJ and rejoin the Authority - think Sting during the buildup of WCW v. NWO at War Games 96)
- SURVIVOR SERIES 2016: Team AJ def. The Authority; Rollins and AJ are sole survivors as Rollins comes through at the end; AJ gets future title shot at Reigns
- AJ announces his title shot against Reigns at Royale Rumble; HHH states on one exception...loser (AKA whoever is not champion by end of the match) draws number 1 at the Rumble. HHH also announces that not only all Authority members will enter the Rumble to prevent Rollins (the favorite) from winning but three talent from NXT (take your pick) will enter to prevent them as well (not apart of the Authority)
- ROYAL RUMBLE 2017: AJ v. Reigns (loser draws #1 at the Rumble): Reigns tries using title but AJ uses it instead to belt shot Reigns and gets the three to win; HHH comes out to inform referee AJ's use of the title, AJ wins by DQ but Reigns retains, AJ must enter Rumble at 1; Rumble Match: AJ enters at 1, Jericho at 2; becomes Authority heavy within the first 15 spots. Rollins out at 20 while AJ still fights. NXT talent (I'll just say Revival and Roode) also there to hinder their chances; Final 4 are AJ, Rollins, Roode, and Joe and the final two end up being AJ and Rollins; both eliminate each other at the same time; match ends in controversy
- HHH tries to say since it's a draw, noone gets Reigns at Mania and will handpicked himself (Roode comes out and was about to be given the chance) until Vince interrupts; overrides HHH and makes AJ/Rollins/Reigns a triple threat at Wrestlemania 33 for WWE World Championship; other Mania matches are: Jericho v. Joe (after Authority losing the Survivor Series match and failing to stop AJ and Rollins at Rumble, in typical fashion, Jericho begins to question and eventually quite the Authority but not before HHH sends his henchmen Samoa Joe to completely rid of him for "betrayal"), Balor v. Roode (Roode is upset for World title snub, HHH will give Roode a spot with the Authority if he can beat Balor at Mania for IC title (which he won before the Rumble)), Usos v. Gallows and Anderson v. Revival (TLC match: Gallows and Anderson win Tag titles from Usos before Rumble as well, Revival debuted at Rumble)
- In desperate attempt, HHH and Reigns uses AJ and Rollins against each other and it actually works at times as AJ and Rollins get into some verbal and even physical altercations while Reigns dominates them
- WRESTLEMANIA 33: Samoa Joe def. Chris Jericho, Gallows and Anderson def. Usos and Revival in TLC match to retain Tag titles, Finn Balor def. Bobby Roode to retain IC title, AJ Styles def. Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins to become the NEW WWE World Champion

There you have it. So you're probably asking why I did all this? Well other than fantasy booking, which I like, I established a solid storyline that would maintain or even raise interest and ratings from casuals (which is most important) and hardcores by turning the most hated babyface of the modern era into a genuinely hated heel World champion (Reigns), used that and the Authority's presence to create two genuine top babyface stars (AJ & Rollins), uses part timers accordingly and effectively (HHH and Jericho), creates and gets over side stories and characters (Balor, Joe, Roode, Gallows and Anderson, Usos), and showcases a multilayered story that you can follow and want to tune in into as underdog versus establishment (Styles/Rollins v. Reigns/Authority).

See, if WWE had went with this in using an old but effective storyline that you modernize for fans, you would have kept fans for week to week interest while showcasing and introducing your new stars and present them as such. Hell, you would have had SO many options after Mania 33 going with this story in terms of matches (AJ/Rollins, AJ/HHH, Rode/Rollins, HHH/Rollins, Reigns/Balor, Joe/Rollins, Joe/AJ, Jericho/HHH) and storylines (HHH goes after AJ and the title, Rollins actually turns heel on AJ, Roode's story on still wanting to join the Authority, Jericho returns to genuine side with AJ, an actual Reigns redemption story going after Balor, Joe threatening Reigns's top spot within the Authority).

That's why I shit on this company a lot. They CAN do stories like this that are interlaced, muti-layered, and engaging to all spectrums of their audiences but they are simply lazy, untalented, and unmotivated. Shitty results give you shitty ratings. Imagine that.


----------



## V-Trigger

But Roman is a big star! 

Love him or hate him, you will still buy tickets and watch him! 

Or so the WWE thinks. I mean they are so desperate, that by now they are happy to get any reaction at all.


----------



## Ace

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Nitro whipping RAW's ass from beyond the grave. :heston


 :sodone


----------



## machomanjohncena

Seth vs Roman and Balor vs Joe vs Wyatt were all promoted a week in advance, there was no NBA competition and they still had less viewers than last week. WWE is getting the numbers they deserve for having such a bad product


----------



## Oda Nobunaga

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Nitro whipping RAW's ass from beyond the grave. :heston










Ted Turner, we've done it. We've vindicated you. :mj2


----------



## BuryingYoungTalent

Ace said:


> Yet AJ is more over than Roman will ever be and is already doing similar numbers without the rocket in his ass. It's creative and Roman Reigns booking that's pushing people out the door. You can look at the numbers of the Raw after WM for each of Roman's coronations to see proof of this.
> 
> It's time for you and every other Roman marks to face facts - Roman is a flop, a *HUGE* flop. It's not AJ and Balor (I hate the guy too) behind Raw tanking. Main events featuring Roman have tanked time and time again. And if you bring up YouTube again fpalm. Meltzer already destroyed any relevance YT has on the previous page.
> 
> AJ on the other hand has made it to the top whereever he has been. If Roman was smaller, he'd be a bigger nobody that wouldn't get a look in. The only reason he is pushed is because of his look. He's good in the ring, his mic work is average at best and he's far from charismatic. The only reason he is over is booking, otherwise he'd be a nobody.


Roman sells more merch than AJ Styles. What are you basing over off of? Crowd reaction because if that's the case you're totally wrong. Just because he gets cheered by the smarks in the crowd doesn't change the fact that AJ Styles isn't a draw. You have no evidence to support AJ being more over than Roman Reigns none what so ever. The only reason why Styles gets cheered is because of his "wrestling ability" and that's a mind set that needs to die in order to save wrestling. And how did Meltzer counter the fact YouTube ratings DO matter.


----------



## Erik.

Again, there is NOTHING on Raw that makes me want to tune in.

Strowman leaving was the absolute last straw for me. I can't wait until he's back.


----------



## Brock

Oda Nobunaga said:


> Ted Turner, we've done it. We've vindicated you. :mj2





THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Nitro whipping RAW's ass from beyond the grave. :heston


----------



## Ace

BuryingYoungTalent said:


> Roman sells more merch than AJ Styles. What are you basing over off of? Crowd reaction because if that's the case you're totally wrong. Just because he gets cheered by the smarks in the crowd doesn't change the fact that AJ Styles isn't a draw. You have no evidence to support AJ being more over than Roman Reigns none what so ever. The only reason why Styles gets cheered is because of his "wrestling ability" and that's a mind set that needs to die in order to save wrestling. And how did Meltzer counter the fact YouTube ratings DO matter.


 Meltzer reported Roman was the second biggest merch mover, he also said AJ, Roman and Orton were their second biggest draws. Added that he'd struggle to call them draws as well.


----------



## JDP2016

People love to talk about how this guy sells more merch than that guy but can never provide and actual proof. Anyone got any verified sales numbers from WWE?


----------



## Dolorian

JDP2016 said:


> People love to talk about how this guy sells more merch than that guy but can never provide and actual proof. Anyone got any verified sales numbers from WWE?


WWE doesn't release official numbers on that. People like Meltzer however provide info on this and other things.


----------



## Ace

It's laughable how Roman marks try to brush this off.

Raw is HIS show, the show revolves around him and he is obviously the top dog not just on Raw but the entire company.

Problem is no one wants to see his ass and even after giving him the world, he's still on the same level as Heel AJ in his first year and stale, irrelevant Randy Orton.

You quote Roman being the number 1 FT merchandise seller, guess what? The same source said AJ, Orton and Roman were the companies second biggest FT draws (exluding Cena), but he pointed out he wouldn't call any of them draws. Fine with AJ and Orton, but that's indicative of how huge of a failure Roman is that he has the paper fan fanbase (youtube views!) with his kayfabe achievements and still can't move the needle after multiple kayfabe achievements, WM main events, 365 day spotlight and presentation which puts him above everyone.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/843226971144245248
About Roman's merch numbers, if AJ and Orton are behind Roman in merch sales, that means those guys are close in merch sales AND draw better than Roman at live events.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Ace said:


> It's laughable how Roman marks try to brush this off.
> 
> Raw is HIS show, the show revolves around him and he is obviously the top dog not just on Raw but the entire company.
> 
> Problem is no one wants to see his ass and even after giving him the world, he's still on the same level as Heel AJ in his first year and stale, irrelevant Randy Orton.
> 
> You quote Roman being the number 1 FT merchandise seller, guess what? The same source who said that said AJ, Orton and Roman were the companies second biggest FT draws (exluding Cena), but he pointed out he wouldn't call any of them draws. Fine with AJ and Orton, but that's indicative of how huge of a failure Roman is that he has the paper fan fanbase (youtube views!) with his kayfabe achievements and still can't move the needle after multiple kayfabe achievements, WM main events, spotlight and presentation which puts him above everyone.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/843226971144245248
> About Roman's merch numbers, if AJ and Orton are behind Roman in merch sales, that means those guys are close in merch sales AND draw better than Roman at live events.


Not to mention that Roman's merch numbers are questionable at best. They already manipulate YouTube views for him. Meltzer wrote an article outlining how views from India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, etc., where WWE gets most of their numbers from, tend to be fake. We also know that they've manipulated merch numbers in the past to benefit their FOTC.


----------



## Ace

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Not to mention that Roman's merch number are questionable at best. They already manipulate YouTube views for him. Meltzer wrote an article outlining how views from India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, etc., where WWE gets most of their numbers from, tend to be fake. We also know that they've manipulated merch numbers in the past to benefit their FOTC.


 Fans from those countries are all fans of kayfabe strength. It's a load of shit anyway as they make nothing from it AND this is the same platform where Roman is ahead of Cena - which means squat because everyone knows Cena is relevant while Roman is not. If you want to build your stars on YT, why not hire the likes of PewDiePie, Superwoman, Ricegum, FouseyTube etc. all of whom are doing millions of views for every video they post and have the potential to go viral. A LOT more of those views come from the States too.

Yeah, no doubt they're manipulating Roman's numbers to justify his push for next FOTC, the problem is they can't manipulate those record ratings :lol 

Roman will have his shit in every K-Mart with Cena's gear, and I bet they sell his merch on SD shows as well while the rest only have it offered for their brand shows. Just watch AJ's numbers tank now with geeks going over him and getting nowhere as much as much of the company's backing (shit big 4 PPV matches, given weak media gigs, barely shown on PPV poster etc.). It's really easy to do all this and we know the WWE is capable of doing this. 

This quote sums up Vince and this company..



> I'd rather have a half full arena cheering for the guy they I say to cheer for than a full arena cheering for whoever they want - Vince McMahon


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Ace said:


> Fans from those countries are all fans of kayfabe strength. It's a load of shit anyway as they make nothing from it AND this is the same platform where Roman is ahead of Cena - which means squat because everyone knows Cena is relevant while Roman is not. If you want to build your stars on YT, why not hire the likes of PewDiePie, Superwoman, Ricegum, FouseyTube etc. all of whom are doing millions of views for every video they post and have the potential to go viral.


It's not even people who are fans of kayfabe strength, he means that most of the views, social media followers/subscribers, etc., are coming from bots, not actual human beings. That's even more hilarious, and it's something I've been claiming for a while now.


----------



## Gravyv321

BuryingYoungTalent said:


> Roman sells more merch than AJ Styles. What are you basing over off of? Crowd reaction because if that's the case you're totally wrong. Just because he gets cheered by the smarks in the crowd doesn't change the fact that AJ Styles isn't a draw.


a draw, huh? hows raw doing right now with their ratings? heres a fact: wcw at its worse drew more viewers than raw currently is in the middle of roman's fotc push (3 years and counting too). wow, what an "impressive" draw! that joke + that lie your fans tell us never fails to be hilarious to me xD

btw those consistent cheers that styles gets weekly suggests that fans in those crowds would rather see him instead of roman.



> You have no evidence to support AJ being more over than Roman Reigns none what so ever.


no evidence of styles being over? lol ok, sherlock. before u watch this, be sure to get all that corn out of your ears, then u can explain these frequent instances of his overness




































this is just within these past 2 months too xD

anyways, you realize that in order for a face to be truly OVER, fans would have to CHEER for him consistently, right? thats what that aj dude does weekly. so between styles and roman (who are both faces), who gets cheers more consistently? yea, exactly. its not even a contest between the two since 1 of them elicits a shit ton of boos.



> The only reason why Styles gets cheered is because of his "wrestling ability" and that's a mind set that needs to die in order to save wrestling.


LOL trying to act like you know why many fans cheer styles so much. who are u kidding? thats not why xD

sheesh, im not even a big fan of styles; but even i can admit this. i mean, someone has to spout some truth around here man.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> It's not even people who are fans of kayfabe strength, he means that most of the views, social media followers/subscribers, etc., are coming from bots, not actual human beings. That's even more hilarious, and it's something I've been claiming for a while now.


^^ By the way, just to illustrate that Meltzer is not BSing, here is a non-wrestling article from a couple of years ago:



> To help companies, celebrities, and everyday people boost their social media standing, onliners set up Internet stores—“click farms”—where customers can buy social media influence. Click farms can be found across the globe, but are most commonly based in the developing world. They exist in India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and the Philippines, and may also exist in Eastern Europe, Mexico, and Iraq. A small number of click farms employ manual labor, a dozen or so people who manipulate Facebook accounts individually to create the likes that they sell. But most click farms are run by smaller teams that manage software to give digital life to accounts like Ashley Nivens. What Braggs runs is actually referred to as an “account farm”—he makes the accounts and software that click farms use.


https://newrepublic.com/article/121551/bot-bubble-click-farms-have-inflated-social-media-currency

Roman's fanbase isn't made up mostly of kids or Indians, it's made up of bots.


----------



## Gravyv321

ShowStopper said:


> They gon' die. They should be embarrassed that Rollins' shitty 2015 Title reign that THEY book him to be terrible in, has outdrawn anything WWE has done in 2016 and 2017.
> 
> Keep the laughs coming, Vinnie.
> 
> 
> :ha


holy shit, man. youre right.

ive heard and remember how guys like punk in 2012, bryan in 2014, and rollins in 2015 were taking a lot of shit for the ratings while they were running on top. remember how the anti-smarks said that they were making fans tune out apparently? 

well, guess what? more fans were watching when they were running on top, and many wrestling fans weren't tuning out of the product as quickly as they're doing now. cant do the blame game on that somewhat cool seth dude this time since he won't be holding a world title until next year at the earliest (hasn't he been the whipping boy this past month anyways man?)

theres only 2 men raw revolves around. 1 of them is the full-time "fotc" that is booked the strongest out of all the men on raw, and this experiment has been going on for nearly 3 years, yo. during that time, many fans have quickly tuned out watching and ratings have kept going lower. less fans are watching now more than ever before. if ratings ever do increase, i bet it won't be cuz of roman. most likely some other factor that fans actually care about in a positive way.

so anyways, where are all those peeps that shat on the *punk, bryan, and seth dudes* when they were running on top? how will they excuse their way out of this one (where brock and roman are the ones that apparently matter on raw)? 

it just makes this all hilarious how more fans watched when the 3 names that i bolded were on top even though they weren't booked nearly as strong as that lazy part-timer and that samoan sadsack. the best part about this is that anti-smarks are probably gonna get salty over their favorite's shortcomings. im laughing at raw's current horrendous numbers as we speak, my dude xD


----------



## wwe9391

Like I said before Ratings are the only thing anti Roman marks have against him. You can pull any excuse out of your ass to justify why he is successful in all other department, but the fact of the matter is he successful and there nothing you can do about it. 

No one forces fans to buy his stuff, no once forces people to click on his videos, no one forces them to open their mouths and make the loudest noise for them. 


Like many others have said instead of focusing all you attention on hating Roman so WWE cant justify his any reaction is good reaction. Focus your energy one someone you love and want to succeed. But none of you will do that cause you cant help yourself when it comes to the big dog.


----------



## V-Trigger

wwe9391 said:


> Like I said before Ratings are the only thing anti Roman marks have against him. You can pull any excuse out of your ass to justify why he is successful in all other department, but the fact of the matter is he successful and there nothing you can do about it.
> 
> No now forces fans to buy his stuff, no once forces people to click on his videos, no one forces them to open their mouths and make the loudest noise for them.
> 
> 
> Like many others have said instead of focusing all you attention on hating Roman so WWE cant justify his any reaction is good reaction. Focus your energy one someone you love and want to succeed. But none of you will do that cause you cant help yourself when it comes to the big dog.


What other department?.

Merch sales? he's up there with AJ and Orton AND behind Cena. Doesn't justify his megapush.

Ratings? lol

YT views? Views from India and Pakistan.


----------



## God Movement

Raw viewership since 2013. Steady decline.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

wwe9391 said:


> Like I said before Ratings are the only thing anti Roman marks have against him. You can pull any excuse out of your ass to justify why he is successful in all other department, but the fact of the matter is he successful and there nothing you can do about it.
> 
> No now forces fans to buy his stuff, no once forces people to click on his videos, no one forces them to open their mouths and make the loudest noise for them.
> 
> 
> Like many others have said instead of focusing all you attention on hating Roman so WWE cant justify his any reaction is good reaction. Focus your energy one someone you love and want to succeed. But none of you will do that cause you cant help yourself when it comes to the big dog.


Roman's only "fans" are all automated scripts. You've been trolling and pretending to support a guy who has exactly 0 human fans.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Pretty steady drop in ratings. Wonder if they ever get a precipitous drop, where the bottom just drops out?


----------



## wwe9391

SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> Roman's only "fans" are all automated scripts. You've been trolling and pretending to support a guy who has exactly 0 human fans.


So if he has 0 human fans then how is he selling all that merch? 

What Vince is buying it all himself? Or what next your gonna say I'm buying all of it?

Please son try harder next time


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

wwe9391 said:


> So if he has 0 human fans then how is he selling all that merch?
> 
> What Vince is buying it all himself?


He most likely is. We know with 100% certainty that his merch sales are heavily manipulated in some manner.


----------



## wwe9391

BrotherNero said:


> What other department?.
> 
> Merch sales? he's up there with AJ and Orton AND behind Cena. Doesn't justify his megapush.
> 
> Ratings? lol
> 
> YT views? Views from India and Pakistan.


So he is not allowed to share his success with others?



SilvasBrokenLeg said:


> He most likely is. We know with 100% certainty that his merch sales are heavily manipulated in some manner.


:eyeroll


----------



## Will Thompson

ShowStopper said:


> Problem is the fans know what is going on from now until WM. It's all very predictable and the fans aren't happy about it, so they tune out. Can't blame them.


 This is one of the major reasons why Raw is doing so poorly in the ratings. As a viewer, what reason do I have to be invested in the show at the moment if I am not a fan of Roman Reigns and Alexa Bliss? 

The company is putting all its effort into trying to build up both these superstars to lead their two main divisions while (seemingly) putting everyone else in limbo (at best). In some scenarios, at the expense of the momentum of the other wrestlers. To make matters worse, most hardcore fans (including myself) have been spoiled about the plans pertaining to their major championship till WM next year. Why would I want to watch a show where I know *almost every other feud involving upper-main event talent* is filler till they get fed to one of the two people main eventing next year's Wrestlemania? Braun's push gave me hope that he could perhaps be the one to disrupt this year long on-and-off Lesnar reign and make me want to watch his segments on the show, but with him getting injured, nothing on the show has me interested enough to tune in regularly and watch the whole show. On the women's side, the WWE have booked everyone else outside of their champion absolutely horrendously to the point where I can't take any of them seriously right now.

If I were the WWE, I would question the direction I am heading towards, concentrating the entire show around the push of only a handful of stars, when in doing so, more and more viewers seem to be tuning out while lower and lower rating/viewership records are being set every passing year.

Wrt Roman being at the centre of this malaise, I don't think you can put the blame squarely on his shoulders but given he has been pushed to be the next FOTC for a solid 3 plus years now, he will be compared to the other people who held that position before him wrt relevant parameters. He does move good amounts of merchandise and his segments get significant YT views (Though I am not sure the money wrestling makes from YT views is significant any more), but he doesn't seem to be a draw when it comes to Live Tv and house show numbers. Nor is he relevant in the mainstream when it comes to media/PR or charity as someone like Cena is/has been. 

WWE's main source of income is their Tv deal with the USA network. The network mainly cares about the viewership figures for the WWE's flagship shows because that directly impacts the network's revenue through advertisements. Their has been a steady (And significant) decline in the ratings over the last 2-3 years with numbers approaching historic lows on quite a few occasions. TV as a source of entertainment is already under pressure and WWE's Tv programming is suffering a greater decline than the average Tv show out there. Going by logic and facts, their is no reason for the USA network to offer WWE a deal similar/better than their current one and anyone else who thinks otherwise is just ignoring the cold-hard facts. And their is no other network out there that would rival the USA network for WWE's offerings, simply because it is no longer mainstream relevant. Simply put, WWE is heading towards a reduction in their major source of income and if viewership continues to bleed, a significant one to boot. Which doesn't bode well for the company's core business and may lead to it having to diversify even further into other venues to make up the (probable) deficit.

Given that Roman is pretty much the heir apparent to Cena (If not already so), the fans of the WWE will apportion a fair share of the blame for the WWE's current state and the low interest to him because it feels as if a lot of the product is catered towards him and his push. (As was the case with Cena when his numbers were being compared to Hogan/Austin and Rock). Neither Roman nor the WWE would want that. I can understand why the WWE want someone like Roman to be the next FOTC (Though I feel he is lacking when compared to Cena on a number of parameters though he has time to improve), but for now, I think it makes sense for them to handle his push a little differently and concentrate on building more wrestlers who can appeal to different demographics and make those viewers care enough to want to watch the product regularly. (Similar for the women)

P.S : Without any way to verify, I will have to go with whatever WWE/sources like Meltzer say when it comes to merchandise sales/YT views and drawing ability.


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

wwe9391 said:


> So he is not allowed to share his success with others?
> 
> 
> 
> :eyeroll


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Vince probably should have moved Brock's appearance to June 5 because June 12 is most likely facing Game 5 of the NBA Finals.


----------



## Dolorian

From the latest Cageside Seats rumor round up (so take with a grain of salt)...

_"Even though it’s still a couple years away, WWE officials are worried their ratings slump will hurt their negotiating position on their next TV deal"_

Let's see what they decide to do.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Joe to raise the ratings on his massive Samoan shoulders.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Dolorian said:


> From the latest Cageside Seats rumor round up (so take with a grain of salt)...
> 
> _"Even though it’s still a couple years away, WWE officials are worried their ratings slump will hurt their negotiating position on their next TV deal"_
> 
> Let's see what they decide to do.


A few years away? More like 15 months.


----------



## xDD

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Vince probably should have moved Brock's appearance to June 5 because June 12 is most likely facing Game 5 of the NBA Finals.


Nah, game 5 will not be necessary. 



> Sunday's Game 2 averaged 20.1 million viewers, which was the highest for an NBA Finals Game 2 since Michael Jordan's Chicago Bulls battled the Utah Jazz in 1998.


It's funny how NBA is growing and WWE is declining.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

But online smarks say EVERYTHING IS DOWN! 

:booklel


----------



## validreasoning

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> A few years away? More like 15 months.


WWE's us tv for raw and SD expires on September 30th 2019.



xDD said:


> It's funny how NBA is growing and WWE is declining.


Comparing the finals and raw isn't really fair. Finals should be compared to Wrestlemania which is growing too as a spectacle. I mean Wrestlemania now as a weekend is much bigger with more people watching and attending overall than say 2010 when we had Hof in a small venue, much smaller Axxess, raw not selling out next night no nxt or SD in same city etc.

NBA regular season viewership fell this year on cable http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/nba-regular-season-ratings-1202031083/

NBA do have two megastars right now is LeBron and Curry which obviously WWE don't have. It's basically magic and bird for this generation. However if warriors sweep them and do the same next year it won't be long until fans lose interest in that match-up. Might take a couple years though.


----------



## Ace

A poor rating can be forgiven this week, the show was pretty good.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

How can it be forgiven? No competition and a PPV fallout.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Raw's already hit some lows this year. I can't imagine this week being any lower. Guessing a slight bump since it was a better show than usual and there was less competition.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.113M
H2-3.110M
H3-2.758M
3H-2.994M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.10% / - 0.003M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.32% / - 0.352M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.40% / - 0.355M )
6/5/17 Vs 5/29/17 ( + 14.58% / + 0.381M )

Demo (6/5/17 Vs 5/29/17):
H1- 1.070D Vs 0.880D
H2- 1.080D Vs 0.880D
H3- 0.960D Vs 0.830D
3H- 1.037D Vs 0.863D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/5/17 Vs 6/6/16):
H1- 3.113M Vs 3.371M
H2- 3.110M Vs 3.490M
H3- 2.758M Vs 2.903M
3H- 2.994M Vs 3.255M ( - 8.02% / - 0.261M )

Demo (6/5/17 Vs 6/6/16):
H1- 1.070D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.080D Vs 1.240D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.020D
3H- 1.037D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That third hour drop is bru-tal.


----------



## Chrome

Decent gain after last week's debacle, still down a bit from last year though.


----------



## wwe9391

Nice after ppv bump. 


That 3rd hour tho still a killer


----------



## Lothario




----------



## Starbuck

> The cable TV business is in trouble—in fact, it is "failing" as a business due to rising programming costs and consumers switching from traditional TV subscriptions to online video streaming, according to a cable lobbyist group.
> 
> *"As a business, it is failing," said Matthew Polka, CEO of the American Cable Association (ACA).* "It is very, very difficult for a cable operator in many cases to even break even on the cable side of the business, which is why broadband is so important, giving consumers more of a choice that we can't give them on cable [TV]."
> 
> Polka made his comments in an episode of C-SPAN Communicators that is airing this week, though it was recorded in April. Video is available here.
> 
> The ACA represents about 750 small and mid-sized cable operators who serve about seven million customers throughout the US. The ACA has also been one of the primary groups fighting broadband regulations, such as net neutrality and online privacy rules, and a now-dead set-top box proposal that would have helped cable TV subscribers watch the channels they subscribe to without a rented set-top box.
> 
> Cable “isn’t what it used to be”
> 
> "The cable business isn't what it used to be because of the high costs," Polka said, pointing to the amount cable TV companies pay programmers for sports, broadcast programming via retransmission consent fees, and other programming.
> 
> When asked about cord cutting, Polka said, "it's the video issue of our time as consumers learn they have choice" from services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime.
> 
> "It gives consumers more choice, something that they've wanted for a long time, more control from the bundle of cable linear programming," Polka said. "Our members, however, I think are very aggressive in how they are trying to provide consumers that they serve with more choice through on-demand [channels], through availability of over-the-top services, making sure that their broadband plan is fast enough to support a consumer's video habits. So, yes, it's a thing that's happening today, cord cutting, cord shaving. But as an industry, our members are well primed to be able to serve their customers with their broadband service that allows them to consume the video they want."
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/information...g-as-a-business-cable-industry-lobbyist-says/


Just leaving this here. Per Chris Harrington.


----------



## Mr. Socko

Boooooooo.....I wanted to see more downward spiralling.


----------



## starsfan24

Solid bump up.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Joe putting butts in dem seats. :mark Third hour dropped substantially. Next week is all dependent on the magnitude of the competition. WWE cheering for the Warriors to sweep the Cavs.


----------



## Dolorian

Nice bump, the first two hours being above 3.1m is a good showing, the third hour as expected has a drop. They really would be better off with a two hour format. Speaking of which it is interesting that the clear decline in ratings more or less coincides with the time the show moved to 3 hours.




THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Joe putting butts in dem seats. :mark


Joe was on the main event during the third hour which had a drop.


----------



## Ace

Joe = ratings :vince$

People tuned into to see what he had to say about Lesnar

Joe-Rollins pulled much better numbers than Roman-Rollins as well :lol


----------



## The Boy Wonder

How do overrun numbers work? Could it be possible that fans tuned in during the last 10 minutes to see the conclusion of the Joe/Rollins match?


----------



## A-C-P

Samoa "Ratings" Joe


----------



## Ace

The Boy Wonder said:


> How do overrun numbers work? Could it be possible that fans tuned in during the last 10 minutes to see the conclusion of the Joe/Rollins match?


 Joe-Rollins > Roman-Rollins (advertised for an entire week in advance).

There was a drop but that's a pretty big jump from the numbers they were doing the last few weeks.

It's evident the fans want to see the dream match between Joe and Lesnar.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Ace said:


> Joe-Rollins > Roman-Rollins (advertised for an entire week in advance).


I'm asking about the overrun numbers. Does it take into account when fans tune in at 10:02pm? Does that factor into the third hour number from 9pm to 10pm?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Dolorian said:


> Nice bump, the first two hours being above 3.1m is a good showing, the third hour as expected has a drop. They really would be better off with a two hour format. Speaking of which it is interesting that the clear decline in ratings more or less coincides with the time the show moved to 3 hours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe was on the main event during the third hour which had a drop.


Don't mention facts in this thread.  This is where you come to mark out when the ratings come in.:mark


----------



## Ace

Vince might have finally found a Samoan other than The Rock who can draw :rockwut


----------



## SilvasBrokenLeg

Ace said:


> Vince might have finally found a Samoan other than The Rock who can draw :rockwut


Some fat guy is generating more interest than Vince's gay crush? You know what that means - time to squash the fucker.


----------



## wwe9391

Now is the time for fans to really get behind Joe and I mean really get behind him and show Vince that they want Joe as champion so that maybe Vince can change his mind but will it happen? Nope


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I want to see RAW w/o big sports competition and w/o a post ppv bump,just to gauge where their regular audience interest is. For the current ratings standards, over 3 million for the first tẃo hours isn't too bad. Hour 3 is the dead zone.


----------



## Sweggeh

Big Draw Joe. This feud between him and Lesnar is going to draw numbers.

Time to show the rest of the main eventers on RAW exactly what he can do in the top spot.


----------



## Taroostyles

The rating has nothing to do with cable dying, a rating is the percentage of people watching that actually have access.

So less people having the channel doesn't actually bring the rating down whatsoever.

So that defense is and always has been garbage.


----------



## Arsenal79

Solid bump upwards. Well deserved I'd say. Really starting with last week's show, and then moreso into last night, they've made an effort to get back to storylines and character development.

A lot of promos, even if short. Setting matches up with some kind of reasoning, even if only a short backstage confrontation.

A couple of major storylines going on the background (Who killed Enzo/Cass? Who's blackmailing Angle?).

Fewer if any completely meaningless matches just thrown on tv to kill time as they usually do.

And a new/interesting challenger for the title that delivered an awesome segment along with Paul E, more reminiscent of the Attitude Era than something we'd see in whatever Era this is.

I hope they continue this positive trend.


----------



## God Movement

Yikes. That third hour drop.

What was in the third hour? I only watched Youtube clips.


----------



## Dolorian

God Movement said:


> Yikes. That third hour drop.
> 
> What was in the third hour? I only watched Youtube clips.


If I recall correctly, aside from the Rollins/Joe main event...

- Alexa vs Nia
- Show/Enzo vs Anderson/Gallows
- The Miz party and segment with Ambrose


----------



## DoubtGin

Samoa Joe = RATINGS


----------



## Erik.

No one can deny how incredible they've booked Joe the last few weeks. 

Who'd have thought solid booking would spark interest.


----------



## God Movement

Dolorian said:


> If I recall correctly, aside from the Rollins/Joe main event...
> 
> - Alexa vs Nia
> - Show/Enzo vs Anderson/Gallows
> - The Miz party and segment with Ambrose


Right, I see.

It seems that the fans may have enjoyed the match last night, and with it the surprise result. I think that's a fair judgment call to make (of course it also depends on what competition Raw had for the night, but let's put that to the side for a moment) and the third hour like usual, is just a bit too much for people. Three hours of wrestling content is just too much to consume in one sitting, regardless of who is in the main event, that's really the only call you can make if you want to be consistent that _Joe_ drew the rating.

I prefer to be consistent OVERALL personally so I think Reigns is responsible for all of the ratings. As he is the top face. So, he is responsible for all of the low ones and all of the big ones regardless of what happens on the show or the night before. I think it's only fair that he wears that burden upon his back.

#ThankYouRoman


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Is Joe a new contender for FOTC? Can there only be one Samoan named Joe? Tune in next week.


----------



## Ace

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Is Joe a new contender for FOTC? Can there only be one Samoan named Joe? Tune in next week.


 The only Joe in the company who can draw :vince4



God Movement said:


> Right, I see.
> 
> It seems that the fans may have enjoyed the match last night, and with it the surprise result. I think that's a fair judgment call to make (of course it also depends on what competition Raw had for the night, but let's put that to the side for a moment) and the third hour like usual, is just a bit too much for people. Three hours of wrestling content is just too much to consume in one sitting, regardless of who is in the main event, that's really the only call you can make if you want to be consistent that _Joe_ drew the rating.
> 
> I prefer to be consistent OVERALL personally so I think Reigns is responsible for all of the ratings. As he is the top face. So, he is responsible for all of the low ones and all of the big ones regardless of what happens on the show or the night before. I think it's only fair that he wears that burden upon his back.
> 
> #ThankYouRoman


 Roman finally out of the main event and Raw gets a big bump :kobelol

If you take him off WWE TV, they might do some decent numbers again :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> The only Joe in the company who can draw :vince4


WWE blew their chance to make him the third man of The Shield.:vince$


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Joe a draw? Half a MILLION didn't give a fuck about his match with Rollins.


----------



## Ace

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> WWE blew their chance to make him the third man of The Shield.:vince$


 Joe :mark: Joe :mark: Joe :mark:


----------



## God Movement

Ace said:


> Roman finally out of the main event and Raw gets a big bump :kobelol
> 
> If you take him off WWE TV, they might do some decent numbers again :lol


:kobelol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Numbers drop when Roman is put in title contention, rises when he is not.

Clearly they need to keep him away from the Universal Title if they want to keep drawing. 

Highest viewed show in over a month as well.


----------



## FITZ

While the rating isn't something that should be celebrated the fact that they seem to have stepped out of the downward spiral they've been on has to be a good sign. 

Samoa Joe has been a proven draw before he signed with the WWE. As champion he did a lot for Ring of Honor and helped them expand as a company. And he was the selling point for the best selling TNA PPV where it was him against Angle for the title in a cage. Obviously he's only done it on a smaller scale but he does have a pretty good track record of getting more people interested in his wrestling company when he's in the main event scene.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The way people yell DRAW because Raw was barely above 3 million for two out of three Hours is hilarious.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Raw usually bumps up the night after a PPV. 

The last Raw after a PPV was May 1st. That show did 2.87 mils viewers although it was going against the NBA playoffs and was actually a little lower than the previous week. This week's show doing 2.99 mils is ok, but probably considering no competition still not a good number. At this point, anything other than a record low rating can be seen as a trend upward. But i expect next week show to really tank even if the NBA Finals are over.


----------



## wwe9391

The baiting never stops in this thread.


----------



## xio8ups

lol you guys think this a nice bump in ratings lol


----------



## The Wood

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Joe a draw? Half a MILLION didn't give a fuck about his match with Rollins.


Yeah, I love Joe, but people didn't stick around for his match. I think it's a long climb back and Joe is a good person to start it with.

That being said, I think that third hour is killer. That being said, it outperforms everything else in that time-slot, so I can see them keeping it around, even through the new negotiations. I think they would be better off airing RAW and then doing a classic edition of RAW afterwards to promote the Network. Or do RAW Talk and then that, so you can fill up 4.5 hours of time, and lessen restrictions on your current product. Air Nitro after SmackDown on Tuesdays. Just an idea. Overall that's 9 hours of programming (not all of it original) instead of 5, but you can reduce your current stuff.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WWE huge fans of the Cavs being swept right now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The fact that the numbers from this week are pretty good for this era is scary. No holiday this week, no NBA Playoff game, no nothing. And the highest they can get for any of the hours is 3.1 million?! Terrible.

Man, I can NOT wait for the NFL season. WWE is screwed and they deserve every last bit of it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> The fact that the numbers from this week are pretty good for this era is scary. No holiday this week, no NBA Playoff game, no nothing. And the highest they can get for any of the hours is 3.1 million?! Terrible.
> 
> Man, I can NOT wait for the NFL season. WWE is screwed and they deserve every last bit of it.


I was thinking the exact same thing. Just think 2-3 years back, and how Bryan, Punk, Rollins were called anti-draws. And now, Joe is called a DRAW because Raw barely made it above 3 million. Not even on average, but the hour.

Add the latest article where WWE audience apparently is 50 years old on average, and it's shit on top of shit.


----------



## Littbarski

ShowStopper said:


> The fact that the numbers from this week are pretty good for this era is scary. No holiday this week, no NBA Playoff game, no nothing. And the highest they can get for any of the hours is 3.1 million?! Terrible.
> 
> Man, I can NOT wait for the NFL season. WWE is screwed and they deserve every last bit of it.


Stanley Cup Final was on NBC.

I was told the three hours of Raw finished #1 , 2 and 4 in viewers for the whole day on cable. Is that considered terrible by wrestling fans?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Littbarski said:


> Stanley Cup Final was on NBC.
> 
> I was told the three hours of Raw finished #1 , 2 and 4 in viewers for the whole day on cable. Is that considered terrible by wrestling fans?


We are comparing WWE's flagship show to a hockey playoff game now? My goodness, how the mighty have fallen...

And yes, it is terrible now. They've lost 20% of their audience in one calendar year. Beyond terrible, actually.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The latest Wrestling Observer Radio and Live cover the issue perfectly. No need to repeat ad nauseam what is obvious.

Smackdown is less than a million views away from TNA's 1.5 Peak audience.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Littbarski said:


> Stanley Cup Final was on NBC.
> 
> I was told the three hours of Raw finished #1 , 2 and 4 in viewers for the whole day on cable. Is that considered terrible by wrestling fans?


Nobody watches hockey in the US lol...


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

If the median WWE fan is 50 years old, that means they are 80's and 90's holdovers. But they can't seem to keep or attract younger people to their product.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Of course they can't.
Why would teenagers today, that have sex upon first period and boner, that are bombarded with sexuality and violence on TV, that have erased some letters from their language, that use the words "fuck" and "ass" only when they want to be polite, why would this teenager generation spend five or eight or ten hours a week watching programming with people that are forbidden to swear, forbidden to be overtly sexual, and who talk like walking operatic catchphrases?

For a 15-year old guy, it's the TV equivalent of being invited to your uncle Peter's birthday barbecue, with relatives that try to connect with you by using cool verbiage from the 80s.


----------



## P.H. Hatecraft

> Why would teenagers today, that have sex upon first period and boner, that are bombarded with sexuality and violence on TV, that have erased some letters from their language, that use the words "fuck" and "ass" only when they want to be polite, why would this teenager generation spend five or eight or ten hours a week watching programming with people that are forbidden to swear, forbidden to be overtly sexual, and who talk like walking operatic catchphrases?


What? This generation is a lot tamer and more domesticated than teenagers from the 90's.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I don't think so. 
And even if it was, you don't capture the zeitgeist of today's youth with constant references and mindsets from the 80s. For this Young generation, the 90s are "retro". So why should a 70 year old fucker be surprised his raunchy grandpa humor doesn't fly?

"Great Balls Of Fire", complete with retro design and song, completely encapsules this problem, and exemplifies why mainly 50-year old dads and Attitude Era leftovers watch this shit.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> The fact that the numbers from this week are pretty good for this era is scary. No holiday this week, no NBA Playoff game, no nothing. And the highest they can get for any of the hours is 3.1 million?! Terrible.
> 
> Man, I can NOT wait for the NFL season. WWE is screwed and they deserve every last bit of it.


you act like its gonna make a difference. Guess what? its not.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> you act like its gonna make a difference. Guess what? its not.


I'm not acting like anything. I'm posting my thoughts and in this case, facts. And it absolutely can make a difference when it's time to negotiate a new TV deal. Deal with it or ignore my posts.


----------



## Gravyv321

ShowStopper said:


> I'm not acting like anything. I'm posting my thoughts and in this case, facts. And it absolutely can make a difference when it's time to negotiate a new TV deal. Deal with it or ignore my posts.


nah man don't bother with that clown. he'll just keep sucking wwe's schlong or some samoan schlong for as long as he continues to breathe and steal our oxygen lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

wwe9391 said:


> you act like its gonna make a difference. Guess what? its not.


Well, hopefully they will take steps to better their product because if the ratings decline continues unabated, it will adversely affect the value of their next tv deal.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> I'm not acting like anything. I'm posting my thoughts and in this case, facts. And it absolutely can make a difference when it's time to negotiate a new TV deal. Deal with it or ignore my posts.


You're gonna be disappointed when nothing changes. Nothing will change Vinces direction. He is too out of touch. Not even TV negaotations will scare him. Were just gonna have to accept it is what it is.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Looking likely that RAW gets to take on Game 5 of the NBA Finals on Monday. RUN!!!.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> You're gonna be disappointed when nothing changes. Nothing will change Vinces direction. He is too out of touch. Not even TV negaotations will scare him. Were just gonna have to accept it is what it is.


I'm not accepting anything. I'm laughing at them. And plenty of other people aren't accepting it going by the posts on here and the humungous loss in viewers over the years and just in one years time from last year to this year.

Can't wait for the NBA Finals to wreck WWE this week.


----------



## Ace

Game 5 :WOO


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Curious to see if and how many viewers' interest they TRULY sparked last monday with Joe and Brock. Because lord knows I found it lame, and everybody knows Joe ain't gonna beat Brock.

To quote Arn Anderson: "Son, I don't care if that motherfucker has a heart attack and dies, you will roll him on top of you!"


----------



## Chrome

RIPIP next week's rating.


----------



## wwe9391

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Curious to see if and how many viewers' interest they TRULY sparked last monday with Joe and Brock. Because lord knows I found it lame, and everybody knows Joe ain't gonna beat Brock.
> "


Yep. This is the time to prove joe is the draw that some made him out to be last week.



> I'm not accepting anything. I'm laughing at them. And plenty of other people aren't accepting it going by the posts on here and the humungous loss in viewers over the years and just in one years time from last year to this year.


Well than you and many others are gonna be very dissapointed.


----------



## ste1592

wwe9391 said:


> You're gonna be disappointed when nothing changes. Nothing will change Vinces direction. He is too out of touch. Not even TV negaotations will scare him. Were just gonna have to accept it is what it is.


The fact that you finally acknowledge that nothing is going to change because Vince is too stupid and not because WWE is doing perfectly fine is a step in the right direction.


----------



## Frost99

Thought I'd get an early start for this weeks show, honestly not even Lesnar can carry the ratings this week against Game 5 of the finals let alone the rest of the "RAW" brand. Hell if Styles were still champion a MAIN EVENT of "Styles & Cena vs. Lesnar & Regins" might have had a chance to move the needle if they made it a BIG enough deal but alas we're never going to get anything like the night back May 10th 1999......


----------



## Chrome

FWIW, the NBA Finals have averaged 19.38 million viewers, the highest since the '98 Finals back when MJ played. Funny too since I always hear things about how the NBA is "trash" now, similar to the WWE. But one is getting its highest ratings in 19 years while the other one is getting its lowest in 20 years. Interesting stuff isn't it?


----------



## Erik.

Chrome said:


> FWIW, the NBA Finals have averaged 19.38 million viewers, the highest since the '98 Finals back when MJ played. Funny too since I always hear things about how the NBA is "trash" now, similar to the WWE. But one is getting its highest ratings in 19 years while the other one is getting its lowest in 20 years. Interesting stuff isn't it?


1998. 

When we were spoiled watching the NBA, WWE, WCW who between them were getting 30,000,000 viewers.

:mj2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Suplex City about to get condemned.


----------



## Mra22

I bet RAW gets a super low rating this week :lol


----------



## Dolorian

With the game apparently starting at 9 it will be interesting to see the drop after the 1st hour and if they hold off Lesnar's appearance until the 2nd or 3rd hours.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Dolorian said:


> With the game apparently starting at 9 it will be interesting to see the drop after the 1st hour and if they hold off Lesnar's appearance until the 2nd or 3rd hours.


I bet Brock is out before tipoff to maximize their viewership and they book the rest of the show to have nothing important happen because they know it's getting annihilated.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> I bet Brock is out before tipoff to maximize their viewership and they book the rest of the show to have nothing important happen because they know it's getting annihilated.


Wyatt in the main event confirmed then.


----------



## validreasoning

Chrome said:


> FWIW, the NBA Finals have averaged 19.38 million viewers, the highest since the '98 Finals back when MJ played. Funny too since I always hear things about how the NBA is "trash" now, similar to the WWE. But one is getting its highest ratings in 19 years while the other one is getting its lowest in 20 years. Interesting stuff isn't it?


Again like I said last week it's a bit unfair comparing weekly raw to NBA finals which happen once a year. Regular season NBA should be compared to raw and finals to Wrestlemania (which btw is doing record gates and viewers too and WWE doesn't have two megastars facing off at their peaks).

One off sporting events are doing great right now, look at the world series numbers last year yet baseball stadiums are half empty up and down the us.


----------



## DJHJR86

"Big draw Joe" couldn't outdraw Martin Luther King.

http://www....................com/raw-viewership-increases-following-extreme-rules/


----------



## squarebox

After reading some of the RAW discussion thread I can't wait to see this week's rating. :lmao


----------



## Ace

Tomorrow gonna be a good day :ha

Weekly sub 2m viewership cannot come soon enough. The product needs to a complete reboot and change of direction.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Dis gonna be gud.


----------



## Chrome

Rating should be pretty bad, but I'd surprised if it's another WOAT rating. Having Lesnar on should prevent that at least.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

There was one thing of any value last night. ONE.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I think the unopposed first hour will avert the worst rating ever. I am curious to see Hours 2 & 3. We might get to see that baseline audience who shall never forsake WWE.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Tomorrow gonna be a good day :ha
> 
> Weekly sub 2m viewership cannot come soon enough. The product needs to a complete reboot and change of direction.


A change of direction in the worst way. They are getting lower ratings than when they were competing head to head with the NWO. There are no mega stars in WWE.

:lol


----------



## Mister Sinister

We need QH numbers so we can see how deep it sank after the bear :trump3


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> I think the unopposed first hour will avert the worst rating ever. I am curious to see Hours 2 & 3. We might get to see that baseline audience who shall never forsake WWE.


They fed that baseline audience a horrid show with absurd garbage on top of the hours, namely cruiserweights, a Wyatt promo, and a dancing bear.

Ratings for NBA were the highest since 1998, with a million people more tuning in from 10-11 than from 9-10 LOL


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> They fed that baseline audience a horrid show with absurd garbage on top of the hours, namely cruiserweights, a Wyatt promo, and a dancing bear.
> 
> Ratings for NBA were the highest since 1998, with a million people more tuning in from 10-11 than from 9-10 LOL


You're right the schlock served up last night def. tested the mettle of even the most ardent WWE follower. This might be ugly. We'll see.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I must mention the Reigns video package on top of hour 1, though, that must have kept some viewers.

Final viewership for the NBA game: 24,466,000. :booklel


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I must mention the Reigns video package on top of hour 1, though, that must have kept some viewers.


I just knew they would feature Brock and Roman in hour one. Did you hear? Roman has a special announcement next week. :woo :reigns2


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.769M
H2-2.522M
H3-2.335M
3H-2.542M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.92% / - 0.247M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.41% / - 0.187M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 15.67% / - 0.434M )
6/12/17 Vs 6/5/17 ( - 15.10% / - 0.452M )

Demo (6/12/17 Vs 6/5/17):
H1- 0.930D Vs 1.070D
H2- 0.840D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.810D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.860D Vs 1.037D*

*Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/12/17 Vs 6/13/16):
H1- 2.769M Vs 3.043M
H2- 2.522M Vs 3.109M
H3- 2.335M Vs 2.758M
3H- 2.542M Vs 2.970M ( - 14.41% / - 0.428M )

Demo (6/12/17 Vs 6/13/16):
H1- 0.930D Vs 1.000D
H2- 0.840D Vs 1.040D
H3- 0.810D Vs 0.900D
3H- 0.860D Vs 0.980D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

2.3 M third hour with a .81 demo, which is the lowest I can remember. Brock's return not even hitting 3 million.  RAW IS REKT.:dead2


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-2.769M
> H2-2.522M
> H3-2.335M
> 3H-2.542M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Demo (6/5/17 Vs 5/29/17):
> H1- 0.930D Vs 1.070D
> H2- 0.840D Vs 1.080D
> H3- 0.810D Vs 0.960D
> 3H- 0.860D Vs 1.037D*
> 
> Please wait, more stats to follow...


DREADFULL! Vince has got to GO!!!


----------



## JDP2016

Couldn't even get a 3.0 in the first hour with Brock and Joe?


----------



## A-C-P

:what? 

Thought they'd get over 3 mil in the first hour at least...


----------



## Ace

Ratings decent without Roman and Balor :bjpenn


----------



## Mordecay

RAW actually managed to do more than 2.5 million viewers average, I am surprised, I thought they would do 2.2 or 2.3 million.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Brock was advertised a full week before last night's show, came out in Hour 1 before the NBA Finals started, and still couldn't get them close to 3 million viewers just for Hour 1.

$6 million per year well spent right there.

:ha

Outside of that, it's not as bad of a number as I thought it'd be, though.


----------



## wwe9391

That Samoa Joe really bringing in them viewers :ha


----------



## squarebox

I am disappoint, I expected worse!

I wanna see people switch off in droves ffs, the sooner the better


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Don't worry. They'll have John Cena on the show soon enough and will be pulling 2.9 million viewers which will turn everything around.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Ratings decent without Roman and Balor :bjpenn


Gotta think this set a new record for ineptitude. Decent? Seems rather in decent, or in descent to me.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

With all the hype round the finals, I was expecting less. A terrible number, but not as bad as I was expecting.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> That Samoa Joe really bringing in them viewers :ha


 That's actually a decent number against the NBA Finals :ha


----------



## JDP2016

No one is a draw in that company. Can we get that through our smark/mark skulls? All this debate over who is a draw and who isn't ain't worth a damm. This ain't 1999 people.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

The fact that we're calling this decent or that we expected worse just shows how far they've fallen


----------



## Ace

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Gotta think this set a new record for ineptitude. Decent? Seems rather in decent, or in descent to me.


 I expected far worse, so of course this seems decent. They've done lower numbers without any competition.


----------



## Gravyv321

wwe9391 said:


> That Samoa Joe really bringing in them viewers :ha


oh, and how has roman reigns been doing lately with the viewers, exactly? especially with him positioned as the fotc :ha

edit: post-mania raw (which is the BIGGEST raw episode of the year) ratings decreasing in '16 and '17 after main eventing AND winning the last 2 wm main events :ha


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> Brock was advertised a full week before last night's show, came out in Hour 1 before the NBA Finals started, and still couldn't get them close to 3 million viewers just for Hour 1.
> 
> $6 million per year well spent right there.
> 
> :ha
> 
> Outside of that, it's not as bad of a number as I thought it'd be, though.


This should put to rest that anyone on the roster is a draw. None of the ratings impaired "superstars" can draw, not even the free agent.


----------



## squarebox

Ace said:


> I expected far worse, so of course this seems decent. They've done lower numbers without any competition.


yeah I don't get that at all, and also considering how bad everyone said last night's show was.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> This should put to rest that anyone on the roster is a draw. None of the ratings impaired "superstars" can draw, not even the free agent.


Oh yeah. No one has been a draw in WWE, especially re: ratings, in ions. That 'debate' has come and gone many, many moons ago.


----------



## Ace

squarebox said:


> yeah I don't get that at all, and also considering how bad everyone said last night's show was.


 Disappointed they didn't achieve an all time record. On the brightside, they can achieve it with the Big Dog during football season


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

ShowStopper said:


> Oh yeah. No one has been a draw in WWE, especially re: ratings, in ions. That 'debate' has come and gone many, many moons ago.


wwe needs to sign the 33 year old kenny omega and make him the FOTC


----------



## squarebox

I'm not from the US but I wonder how many WWE fans actually follow the NBA. I mean wouldn't that rating suggest not many, since they've scored lower without the NBA even being on?

I dunno, I'm just trying to make sense of that surprisingly not-as-bad-as-I-expected rating (but don't get me wrong, it still sucks)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

xxRambo_21xx said:


> wwe needs to sign the 33 year old kenny omega and make him the FOTC


They can sign him, but it's not going to improve ratings at all.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

ShowStopper said:


> They can sign him, but it's not going to improve ratings at all.


They manage to screw up Bayley. Omega should stay far away from there for now


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> That's actually a decent number against the NBA Finals :ha


:lmao no its not at all


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This rating is lower than the ones back in late May. It's the lowest RAW this year and therefore dipping into 1996 territory. This cannot be spun as a positive. They must be happy that the NBA juggernaut has finished with them.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> :lmao no its not at all


 Everyone expected FAR worse.

Roman-Rollins and Joe-Bray-Balor did worse without no competition.



THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> This rating is lower than the ones back in late May. It's the lowest RAW this year and therefore dipping into 1996 territory. This cannot be spun as a positive. They must be happy that the NBA juggernaut has finished with them.


 Didn't the episode with Roman-Rollins do worse?


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Everyone expected FAR worse.
> 
> Roman-Rollins and Joe-Bray-Balor did worse without no competition.


no they didn't. its the lowest rated raw of 2017 according to PWInsider


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> no they didn't. its the lowest rated raw of 2017 according to PWInsider


 Really? I swear they did under 2.5m this year. IIRC one was the second lowest rating raw ever.

Nvm got my numbers mixed up.

This is the second lowest rated Raw of the modern era.


----------



## Chrome

That looks like another all-time low rating, WWE out here setting records.


----------



## squarebox

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> This rating is lower than the ones back in late May. It's the lowest RAW this year and therefore dipping into 1996 territory. This cannot be spun as a positive. They must be happy that the NBA juggernaut has finished with them.


Ahhh ok, disregard my previous post then.

Does anyone know if they announced Reigns not being on the show at the beginning?


----------



## God Movement

Yikes.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Everyone expected FAR worse.
> 
> Roman-Rollins and Joe-Bray-Balor did worse without no competition.


Did it? This is from the first line of the 5/22/17 writeup:* Raw on 5/22 did 2,608,000 viewers, meaning that for the third time in the past four weeks, they set a record non-football and non-holiday level of viewers dating back to 1996.* This Raw averaged fewer viewers than that, 2,542,000. Plus it drew a .86 demo to .91 for 5/22. Of course the competition was much more fierce.


----------



## Ace

I wonder how low they would have gone without Joe-Lesnar.



THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Did it? This is from the first line of the 5/22/17 writeup:* Raw on 5/22 did 2,608,000 viewers, meaning that for the third time in the past four weeks, they set a record non-football and non-holiday level of viewers dating back to 1996.* This Raw averaged fewer viewers than that, 2,542,000. Plus it drew a .86 demo to .91 for 5/22. Of course the competition was much more fierce.


 Was lower but my point stands. To do 100,000 worse against Game 5 of the NBA Finals isn't too bad considering the numbers in the lead up. I was expecting 2.3m or lower.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Was lower but my point stands. To do 100,000 worse against NBA Finals isn't too bad tbh. I was expecting 2.3m or lower.


It''s going to rebound :curry2 next week, solely due to Roman's mega announcement, of course. :reigns2


----------



## Chrome

This week's 1st hour was close to last week's 3rd hour. Oof.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Vacant drew better ratings than 2017 Brock. :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1 getting 2.7 million with $6 million per year boy is absolutely inexcusable.

Brock is a cancer at this point.

The last 2 hours should've been way worse considering they were going up against the championship clinching game between two mega powers in the NBA.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> Hour 1 getting 2.7 million with $6 million per year boy is absolutely inexcusable.
> 
> Brock is a cancer at this point.
> 
> The last 2 hours should've been way worse considering they were going up against the championship clinching game between two mega powers in the NBA.


Maybe hours 2&3 represent their ratings floor. Can't wait to see the NFL put that to the test. Bright side for RAW? It's still going to beat SDL. :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE FRUMIOUS BANDERSNATCH said:


> Maybe hours 2&3 represent their ratings floor. Can't wait to see the NFL put that to the test. Bright side for RAW? It's still going to beat SDL. :lol


While watching Raw last night, I wondered to myself if hour 3 would hit a 1.9 million or 1.8, seriously. Between both, the quality of the show, and going up against the clinching game of the NBA Finals. It's not a crazy amount lower considering no Reigns, no Balor, and Game 5. I thought 1.9 was a possibility for hour 3, and was kind of hoping for it.

If SD can't beat this number, they might as well close-up shop.


----------



## Dolorian

ShowStopper said:


> Hour 1 getting 2.7 million with $6 million per year boy is absolutely inexcusable.


If Forbes is to be believed it is $12 million per year, higher than Cena who is at around $8 million.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dolorian said:


> If Forbes is to be believed it is $12 million per year, higher than Cena who is at around $8 million.


Sickening.


----------



## Chrome

I'm sorta over the Lesnar thing too tbh. 3-5 years ago he felt like a big deal, now he just feels like another guy who's just not there as often. And considering what the 1st hour drew, safe to say WWE's not getting much return on that 12 million investment.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Wow, Brock's agent is a god. I wonder if WWE feels that they're getting their money's worth?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*5 lowest RAW ratings (1255 episodes):

23 Dec 96--1.50R
30 Dec 96--1.60R
26 Sep 16--1.75R
12 Jun 17--1.75R
22 May 17--1.75R*


----------



## Erik.

Lesnar heavily advertised - especially after Heyman got the beat down last week and that's the best they could pull?

They really shit the bed by having the brawl on first too. Once Lesnar showed up, what are people going to want to stay tuned in for? If he WAS the big selling point, you've just given him away within the opening 30 fucking minutes.

This company. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Top 5 worst rating. We have certainly been witnessing history, as of late. :lol


----------



## Erik.

Going by that list, 1.75 is their bottom.


----------



## Chrome

And to think 3 of those from that list have come in the span of the past 9 months or so. Crazy stuff.


----------



## The_Jiz

Them putting Brock out first they might defend it as smart but its looks more like Vince admitting defeat.


----------



## Ace

Chrome said:


> And to think 3 of those from that list have come in the span of the past 9 months or so. Crazy stuff.


 I'm sure WWE creative will ensure most of the top 10 consists of numbers from 2017 :lol


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *5 lowest RAW ratings (1255 episodes):
> 
> 23 Dec 96--1.50R
> 30 Dec 96--1.60R
> 26 Sep 16--1.75R
> 12 Jun 17--1.75R
> 22 May 17--1.75R*





Erik. said:


> Going by that *list*, 1.75 is their bottom.












:ghost You know what happens to RAWs against Playoffs?! You know what happens?! Huh?! Do ya?!

You just made the list of BEARICO! RIDE IT IN!, MEEK MANNNNNN! :ghost


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> I'm sure WWE creative will ensure most of the top 10 consists of numbers from 2017 :lol


Yep, they're certainly doing their part to ensure these low ratings.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Fuck the NBA. 
That first hour with 2.7 million unopposed, and the alleged "draw" of Joe VS Lesnar is horrid. 
If we assume wrestling fans don't watch much football, these numbers, especially hour 1, is alarming, because it says fans grow indeed smaller in number with each passing horrible show.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

What strikes me most about that list, is look when the two lowest ratings were. 12/23 and 12/30 - pretty much the Holiday week of 1996 (1996 - when WCW was white hot). These are legit the lowest ratings of all time and as pointed out, 1.75 may indeed be there bottom. I wonder where this week ranks as far as viewership. 

The number will no doubt bounce back next week. And WWE made a masterful decision of hyping up Roman's announcement so he can be credited with the increase. I'd be really laughing my ass off though if it doesn't go much higher than this week.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

#BadNewsSanta said:


> The number will no doubt bounce back next week. And WWE made a masterful decision of hyping up Roman's announcement so he can be credited with the increase. I'd be really laughing my ass off though if it doesn't go much higher than this week.


This method has always puzzled me. It started with Hogan disappearing while ratings were down on Nitro back in the day, and I see the McMahons/HHH routinely doing it lately.

It only really "works" internally as a false sense of confidence when you attribute someone as a draw when they show up the week after months of stiff competition. I'm sure they'll get over 3.0 million viewers next week, but it really rings hollow and only serves to delude themselves.

The McMahons are dumb.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

To people saying this isn't as bad as it could have been: RAW numbers were never greatly affected by the NBA for as long as I can think. Not in a noticeable way. This is a new state of erosion.


----------



## Seafort

*Yesterday evening, deep inside of WWE Creative Catacombs...
*
Vince McMahon leaned against the mahogany desk, sinewy hands clenching its edge.

VINCE: We have a problem. Our ratings have not been what they could be.

He glared at the team gathered before him. Eighty seven writers collectively gulped.

VINCE: Now what are we going to do about it?

No one responded. The only sound was the ticking of the commemorative John Cena grandfather clock.

Finally Michael Hayes spoke.

HAYES: It's not that simple, Mr. McMahon. We're up against Game 5 of the NBA Finals, and --

VINCE: You think I care if Michael Jordan is going for another title! We are WWE! We set the course! 
(a beat)
Now about these ratings. I want them *decreased*.

HHH looked up from the NBA pregame coverage that he was quietly following on his phone.

HHH: Decreased?

VINCE: Yes, decreased! I want them so low that the publicity that we get from it would catapult us back up the top of the entertainment world! I need ratings. *LOWWWW* ratings!
(a beat)
Who has any ideas?

The writing crew and HHH were stunned. Finally one brave soul spoke.

STEPHANIE: A bear. We could have a bear!

She looked over at the commemorative teddy bear basket that her husband had given her. A gift to celebrate the WWE's 1 billionth Social follower.

STEPHANIE: A Congratulations Bear!


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

What a shit show :lol


----------



## virus21




----------



## ThePhenomenal-1

That's right WWE keep paying Brock 12 mill a year to turn up to raw once a month and draw in those extra 1000 odd viewers...


----------



## Roxinius

ThePhenomenal-1 said:


> That's right WWE keep paying Brock 12 mill a year to turn up to raw once a month and draw in those extra 1000 odd viewers...


Well he certainly didn't draw in anyone this week they hit their lowest rating in 2017 lol


----------



## capatisdumb

wwe9391 said:


> That Samoa Joe really bringing in them viewers :ha


dont post here anymore


----------



## Mra22

Amazing ratings :lol I hope they continue to fall. Don't listen to your fans and get wrecked. :clap Everyone is tired of the garbage each week and people are tired of Brock " I show up once every 3 months" Lesnar.


----------



## Jay Valero

To think, this is the time of year (no NFL) when the E is supposed to be making hay and what do they do? Put on shit show after shit show after shit show. Fuck you Vince.


----------



## Hodan

The only ones responsible for these low rating is Creative and Vince. Vince needs to stop being greedy and realized RAW needs to go back to 2 hours show. Also, they need to incorporate the 205 guys into the main show.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW is free falling without a parachute.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Erik. said:


> Going by that list, 1.75 is their bottom.


There's a few NFL matchups this fall that will bring that number lower.

Sept 25th - Cowboys at Arizona
Nov 20th - Falcons at Seahawks
Dec 11th - Patriots at Dolphins

In 2016, their lowest rated June show was a 2.03. Then during football season, not factoring in the Raw vs the debate which they won't see this year, their low was 1.88. So that was an 8% drop off the June low.

In 2015, their lowest rated June was a 2.59. Then during football season, they pulled in a low of 2.15 a drop of 17% off their June low.

In 2014, their lowest rated June was a 2.85. Then during football season, they pulled in a low of 2.51, a drop of 12% off their June low.

So, if Raw even does, at some point during this football season a 10% drop off their June low of 1.75, they will be at around a 1.58.


So I'd expect a record low rating this football season to be in the 1.58 - 1.60 range.


----------



## JafarMustDie

I enjoyed the last episode but Vince deserves these low ratings. :draper2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Reigns promo piece failed to draw. :reigns2


----------



## Erik.

Randy Lahey said:


> There's a few NFL matchups this fall that will bring that number lower.
> 
> Sept 25th - Cowboys at Arizona
> Nov 20th - Falcons at Seahawks
> Dec 11th - Patriots at Dolphins
> 
> In 2016, their lowest rated June show was a 2.03. Then during football season, not factoring in the Raw vs the debate which they won't see this year, their low was 1.88. So that was an 8% drop off the June low.
> 
> In 2015, their lowest rated June was a 2.59. Then during football season, they pulled in a low of 2.15 a drop of 17% off their June low.
> 
> In 2014, their lowest rated June was a 2.85. Then during football season, they pulled in a low of 2.51, a drop of 12% off their June low.
> 
> So, if Raw even does, at some point during this football season a 10% drop off their June low of 1.75, they will be at around a 1.58.
> 
> 
> So I'd expect a record low rating this football season to be in the 1.58 - 1.60 range.



.. Unless their bottom is 1.75.


----------



## xDD

validreasoning said:


> Regular season NBA should be compared to raw


Are u drunk? In NBA regular season 30 teams is playing 82 matches.Teams like 76ers and Kings is playing 4 times in regular season. So yea, let's compare it to weekly show. 



> Last night's 16.0 for NBA Finals Game 5 is the highest-rated NBA game (Non-Game 7) in ABC and ESPN history.


----------



## capatisdumb

i havent watched wwf in over a month and from the looks of things i didnt miss a single thing of note. theres only so much "after the match wrestler celebrates as we go to the replays. wrestler stands tall in the ring as we go to a commercial break/raw goes off the air" you can take until it gets really fucking tiresome


----------



## InexorableJourney

Other than The Rock and Batista are there any other stars WWE could return to improve their ratings.

Because at this point the well looks capped.


----------



## xio8ups

If you tell people in real life you watch wwe. They will say whatt. YOU WATCH THAT SHIT.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

squarebox said:


> I'm not from the US but I wonder how many WWE fans actually follow the NBA. I mean wouldn't that rating suggest not many, since they've scored lower without the NBA even being on?
> 
> I dunno, I'm just trying to make sense of that surprisingly not-as-bad-as-I-expected rating (but don't get me wrong, it still sucks)


I have been a NBA fan probably longer than WWE/F.

I loved the Cavs in the 80's when they had Mark Price, Craig Ehlo and Larry Nance.

I remember going up to Gund Arena the year before LeBron came and they played the Stockton/Malone Jazz and were competitive in the first half but ended up getting blown out by over 20 points. I also remember getting tickets up real high and in the second half I was near the empty floor.

I know there are some bandwagon fans these days but I am certainly not one. As far as the Cavs/Warriors rivalry I love it. Frankly the Cavs won last year not because of Draymond as he only played one half of one great game (first half of game 7). I think Bogut going down hurt the Warriors more than a one game suspension to an over-rated piece to the Warriors puzzle. I have no doubt that the Cavs win in 2015 if Kyrie doesn't break his kneecap in OT of game 1 (or if they call the foul at the end of regulation that would have put them at the line). He outplayed Steph in that game and have no doubt he would outplay him throughout the series. Warriors that year were fortunate the whole playoffs with opposing starting PG's being injured but you know shit happens. I have battled with Warrior fans and Warrior bandwagon-ers on that fact. This year Cavs just faced a buzzsaw an already pissed Warriors team from a year ago and they add the second best player in Durant. I expect 2 or 3 more Finals meetings between the teams. Cavs need to play better team defense throughout the season and not be selective and start trying to play in the playoffs.


----------



## JTB33b

maybe vince should try targeting an audience who's bedtime is not 8 or 9pm. And a PG show just does not sell today. Fans want an edgy product. Violence and sex sells.


----------



## Brock

JTB33b said:


> maybe vince should try targeting an audience who's bedtime is not 8 or 9pm. And a PG show just does not sell today. Fans want an edgy product. Violence and sex sells.


Pfft

this not edgy enough for you










:homer3


----------



## Nirvash

JTB33b said:


> maybe vince should try targeting an audience who's bedtime is not 8 or 9pm. And a PG show just does not sell today. Fans want an edgy product. Violence and sex sells.


Is not about the kids, is about the sponsors.

PG sponsors are and pay way more than R ones, that's all.


----------



## Bink77

Nirvash said:


> Is not about the kids, is about the sponsors.
> 
> PG sponsors are and pay way more than R ones, that's all.


Doesn't really matter when soon you won't have an audience to even watch the ads.


----------



## V-Trigger

> Lesnar shows up - > No ratings.

> Lesnar is not on the show -> No ratings.

Reminder that Brock is gonna be champ until Mania.


----------



## HereComesThePainHD

WWE is actually trying to bring Back Hulk Hogan back to Increase Raw Ratings LMAO! Listen to Ryback Shoots on it!


----------



## Bushmaster

Ratings don't matter


----------



## Randy Lahey

Erik. said:


> .. Unless their bottom is 1.75.



They've never bottomed out in June though. Even with a strong NBA game going against, football season and Fall TV viewing always bring their average rating lower. May/June should not have this low of ratings at all. And it's a really bad sign they do because Fall will for sure be lower. Football takes a % of their crowd every year.



Nirvash said:


> Is not about the kids, is about the sponsors.
> 
> PG sponsors are and pay way more than R ones, that's all.


I don't really buy the sponsor argument. Advertisers will lineup to to advertise for high rated shows regardless of rating. Walking Dead and Breaking Bad had no issue finding sponsors.


----------



## The_Jiz

Raw is what a show would look like when manned by a conservative who don't watch tv, listen to music, or know how to use the internet whose trying to be mainstream.


----------



## The_It_Factor

PG doesn't have be as child-like as it is. I'm finishing up re-watching Raw from 1996, which was PG, but is NC-17 compared to what is on now (the year started off with middle fingers and homoerotic characters sexually assaulting their co-workers, and moved to controversial promos, MA profanity and sexual innuendo. I'm not saying wrestling needs to include all of these things, I'm just pointing out what PG has been considered in the past (though, that was the 90's, the last great decade in which people weren't always offended)

Anyhow, SOMETHING'S gotta give by football season.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 6/12 did a 1.74 rating averaged 2,529,000 viewers (1.58 viewers per home) going against what turned out to be the final game of the NBA playoffs.
> 
> This tied the lowest rating in the 24-year history of Raw. There were two episodes of Prime Time Wrestling, the predecessor to Raw, in 1992, that did 1.7 ratings against major NFL games.
> 
> The only modern era Monday night show to do a lower total audience was the September 26, 2016, show which went against even tougher competition from the Trump/Clinton debate and did a 1.74 rating and 2.464,000 viewers. It was the lowest in history not against the NFL.
> 
> Really, this number can be thrown out as being almost meaningless given the competition. The only thing of note is that they put the most anticipated thing on the show, a Samoa Joe/Brock Lesnar confrontation, on in the first segment. The decision was made to sacrifice overall show ratings to get as many eyeballs as possible on the key segment, figuring no matter how much they hyped it, they couldn’t buck the competition.
> 
> It felt like a throwaway show after the first hour, with no Roman Reigns or Finn Balor, and Seth Rollins didn’t wrestle either.
> 
> The three hours saw the first hour, featuring the Lesnar/Joe angle, do 2,769,000 viewers; the second hour did 2,522,000 viewers and the third hour did 2,325,000 viewers.
> 
> The Warriors-Cavaliers game started at 9 p.m. and did 24,466,000 television viewers and 537,000 streaming viewers (obviously the largest for any game in NBA history), making it significantly tougher competition than WWE will face in that time slot all year, as NFL games are likely to average less than half as many viewers this fall. It was the most-watched NBA playoff finals on television since 1998, not even factoring in streaming viewership.
> 
> Raw was fourth for the night on cable, trailing three news shows.
> 
> The rating was down 15 percent, but the number probably would have increased over the previous week had it not been for the game. The NBA hurt WWE significantly worse with viewers under the age of 35 than with those over that age.
> 
> The show did a 0.54 in 12-17 (down 25.0 percent from last week), 0.62 in 18-34 (down 26.2 percent), 1.10 in 35-49 (down 11.3 percent) and 1.01 in 50+ (down 11.4 percent).
> 
> The audience was 59.0 percent males in 18-49 and 64.0 percent males in 12-17.


----------



## The_Jiz

The steep decline in % drop every year is getting larger and larger. 

At this rate they're going to lose 25-30% of their current audience by next year.


----------



## Not Lying

This is awesome. They deserve it. Fuck this company.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I just read that Summerslam isn't sold out yet, and that seats which were 150 last year have gone up to 800 bucks. And 800 don't even get you on the floor for Summerslam! Have they lost their mind considering the Product they serve up?

MITB isn't sold out yet as well. Imagine shelling out 1000 bucks for a ringside seat on a PPV headlined by Jinder Mahal.


----------



## chronoxiong

Something must be done to increase these ratings. This is sad. I used to be proud to watch RAW and Smackdown. Now, it's a chore and a borderline mess to get through.


----------



## squarebox

JTB33b said:


> maybe vince should try targeting an audience who's bedtime is not 8 or 9pm. And a PG show just does not sell today. Fans want an edgy product. Violence and sex sells.


And what people don't understand, is that while they'd lose the soccer mom portion of the audience, they'd gain a whole lot more from other demos. WWE isn't cool anymore, and their attempt at PG comedy or entertainment falls flat on its face. Spice the show up a bit, push the fucking boundaries and I'll guarantee you more people will watch.

Oh and I forgot to add, scripted promos are a huge problem now as well because most of the roster sound like fucking robots when they speak. That's boring and really hard to buy into because it doesn't sound genuine. Nobody wants to hear the same scripted promos from different guys week after week after week. It gets boring and monotonous.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

chronoxiong said:


> Something must be done to increase these ratings. This is sad. I used to be proud to watch RAW and Smackdown. Now, it's a chore and a borderline mess to get through.


You shouldn't watch then. If it's that much of a burden find something else to do with your time. You can follow the product just fine by watching clips on YouTube. WWE will upload videos about an hour after RAW starts.

I'm still amazed at the amount of complaining by fans when it comes to watching the product. Don't most fans have DVR? Just tape RAW and SD. I watch on about an hour delay. That way I can fast forward through shit like the crusierweight division, any Foxy segment, women segments not involving Sasha, or any Club match.


----------



## Zigglerpops

Grown men getting worked up over a kids show lol


----------



## Xenoblade

not surprised.. I turn raw on but it has become nothing more than background noise while I surf the web or play games...

It just isn't good enough to grab my attention anymore espically for 3 hours.


----------



## Marv95

And people continue to use excuses. "B-B-But DVR! Finalz OMGLOLZ" 

-If the show was consistently good and can't miss, people would find a way to watch it live.
-Raw has been airing since 93. They've gone head to head with Nitro, major sporting events, etc(sometimes all at the same time) and their ratings weren't as atrocious as today.

Stop with the excuses. The show sucks from top to bottom. PG hasn't worked. 3 hours has failed. They have no stars people(casuals) want to tune in for. And any stars they do have they aren't utilized. Why won't they put Brock in a match, even in a quick squash?


----------



## virus21




----------



## NJPW316

2.5 million viewers, wow. I was surprised back when they went under 3 million, but now I won't be surprised when they go under 2 million. The WWE Apologists can make all the excuses they want, but the fact is the product is stale and boring, and continuing to get worse, despite the fact they have plenty of wrestling talent. Thank God for the WWE Network, we can actually go back and watch when wrestling was entertaining.


----------



## God Movement

Ratings when?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.075M
H2-3.201M
H3-3.029M
3H-3.102M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.10% / + 0.126M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.37% / - 0.172M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 1.50% / - 0.046M )
6/19/17 Vs 6/12/17 ( + 22.03% / + 0.560M )

Demo (6/19/17 Vs 6/12/17):
H1- 1.050D Vs 0.930D
H2- 1.090D Vs 0.840D
H3- 1.070D Vs 0.810D
3H- 1.070D Vs 0.860D

Note: RAW is 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/19/17 Vs 6/20/16):
H1- 3.075M Vs 3.420M
H2- 3.201M Vs 3.562M
H3- 3.029M Vs 3.420M
3H- 3.102M Vs 3.467M ( - 10.53% / - 0.365M )

Demo (6/19/17 Vs 6/20/16):
H1- 1.050D Vs 1.250D
H2- 1.090D Vs 1.340D
H3- 1.070D Vs 1.250D
3H- 1.070D Vs 1.280D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Chrome

Not a shock, no competition obviously equals better ratings. Very interesting the 3rd hour didn't have its usual big plunge though. :hmm:


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Joe bumping hour 2.


----------



## God Movement

Thank You Roman.


----------



## Dolorian

Reigns with the ratings boost...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A big announcement hyped for a week and in usually the highest rated hour, and it was one of the lowest rated hours. Barely 3 million. :lmao

Rollins in the highest rated hour. :drose


----------



## DammitChrist

ShowStopper said:


> A big announcement hyped for a week and in usually the highest rated hour, and it was one of the lowest rated hours. Barely 3 million. :lmao
> 
> Rollins in the highest rated hour. :drose


The MAN and Joe helping that hour out :Cocky


----------



## JC00

So the 3rd hour was what?

Miz segment 

Shesaro vs Titus Brand

Women's segment

Enzo/Cass

Funny thing is they clearly put that stuff in the 3rd hour because of the usual 3rd hour drop and yet for whatever reason it kept viewers


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Are people seriously taking the old Hogan trick, taking the BIG DOG out when ratings will surely tank, and bringing him back against no competition, serious? Those additional viewers in hour 2 didn't give a single shit about BIG DOG's announcement opening the show, and the 3 million who tuned in from the start, surely didn't stay because BIG DOG was in the main event. People were interested in Joe, people were interested in the MYSTERY. After three years of ever-sinking viewership, and Roman Reigns making not a fuck's difference during all these years, you'd have to be pretty thick to attribute this small increase to Reigns, when it was pretty clear that people like the way Joe is being presented. I'm sorry that Roman fans can't or won't see that Joe does what Reigns was supposed to do for years, but failed.


----------



## McNugget

Healthy bump for Roman vs Joe? Curious to see the quarterly breakdown.


----------



## God Movement

"Who cares about Roman making an announcement?"

:kobelol

That was the entire reason to watch the show.


----------



## wwe9391

Thank you Reigns :reigns2 

His announcement bumping raw up nicely in the ratings. 

Joe vs Reigns main evented hour 2. Thank you both men


----------



## Clinch

Joe - a bigger draw than _both_ of Vince/HHH's full time chosen ones combined.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Just realized we are in the very low 3 millions with no holiday, no NBA playoffs, and no NFL.

Kind of scary.


----------



## Chrome

McNugget said:


> Healthy bump for Roman vs Joe? Curious to see the quarterly breakdown.


I can't remember the last time we had a quarterly breakdown tbh. I want to say years.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Are we really gonna pretend that Reigns is some huge draw because of a bump?


----------



## DammitChrist

God Movement said:


> That was the entire reason to watch the show.


Not really. There was also Samoa Joe, the Rollins/Wyatt storyline, and the mystery attacker of Enzo/Cass to keep the audience for last night's episode hooked.


----------



## wwe9391

:ha the salt is flowing big time in here. 


Thank you Roman


----------



## God Movement

DammitC said:


> Not really. There was also Samoa Joe, the Rollins/Wyatt storyline, and the mystery attacker of Enzo/Cass to keep the audience for last night's episode hooked.


I agree.

So which one is it? Do the ratings fall SOLELY on the top guy or are there actual circumstances involved that help and is booking interesting storylines actually in fact, a factor in drawing ratings? At some point we have to stop moving the goal posts. When the ratings are low, we blame Roman. When the ratings are good, we credit everyone BUT him. I want consistency. Consistency is good.


----------



## A-C-P

The return of :braun bumps up the #s

:braun telling the ratings "I'M NOT FINISHED WITH YOU"

Consistent 10% drop from last year's number continues :draper2


----------



## ShadowSucks92

God Movement said:


> I agree.
> 
> So which one is it? Do the ratings fall SOLELY on the top guy or are there actual circumstances involved that help and is booking interesting storylines actually in fact, a factor in drawing ratings? At some point we have to stop moving the goal posts. When the ratings are low, we blame Roman. When the ratings are good, we credit everyone BUT him. I want consistency. Consistency is good.


Reigns' announcement probably did spark some interest especially considering all the rumours but there can be multiple reasons why viewership went up i.e. nothing else on, wanting to see the next chapter in Joe vs Lesnar but it all comes down to viewership next week as well, if WWE has done enough this week to interest the audience then next weeks viewership should be just as good if not slightly better.


----------



## machomanjohncena

A bump was to be expected considering last week was the NBA finals. Raw has just over 2 months until football starts up again though


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Where is the sparked interest, though? 3 million viewers for Hour 1 is sparked interest? Will some us still be saying this when it's down to 2 million or so next year.

Remember, this number is still in line with a 20% drop from last year to this year.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Strong number for Raw nowadays. Clearly wasn't due to Reigns though, otherwise hour 1 would've been the highest by far.

No, I think it was more the Lesnar/Joe brawl from last week bringing some attention, Strowmans return being speculated on the back of Roman's announcement (if not him then Taker or Goldberg I saw being speculated), and then in the 2nd hour they added the hook of finding out who attacked Enzo the last several weeks to keep people interested to the end of the show.


----------



## AoEC_

Meanwhile, the Cass betrayal video already has almost 2 million views on YT along with contributing to an uncharacteristically high number for Hour 3 in the TV Ratings as well. Just reinforcing the fact that the story telling aspect of the business would always trump meaningless wrestling any day of the week.. and it wasn't even some sort of an elaborate story line consisting of main eventers as well, just a couple of weeks of build up resulting in the big reveal and a shocking heel turn in a well implemented segment. More of this please.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

I mean, it's not bad, but low 3.0s being considered a bump shows just how low the bar is these days.

If they went below 3.0, then it would have really been time to sound the alarm, but at least they're treading water this week.


----------



## God Movement

ShadowSucks92 said:


> Reigns' announcement probably did spark some interest especially considering all the rumours but there can be multiple reasons why viewership went up i.e. nothing else on, wanting to see the next chapter in Joe vs Lesnar but it all comes down to viewership next week as well, if WWE has done enough this week to interest the audience then next weeks viewership should be just as good if not slightly better.


Possibly.

But my stance on ratings is both clear and consistent, I don't shift it depending on the circumstances, joking aside. The top guy is absolutely a factor in ratings, this has been proven historically. At the same time, he is not solely at fault for downturns, programming and the direction of the programming is even more important. If you view the show for a single person, then people are going to come and go in droves when said superstar's segments end. So, you need a strong supporting cast, who are booked correctly, and in good storylines. The Joe and Lesnar stuff is exhilarating, the Enzo and Cass storyline is compelling, the Rollins and Wyatt storyline is fresh. These things play a factor. The issue is, a lot of people are not consistent in their assessment of ratings. Hence, the mark wars that typically occur in this thread.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

God Movement said:


> Possibly.
> 
> But my stance on ratings is both clear and consistent, I don't shift it depending on the circumstances, joking aside. The top guy is absolutely a factor in ratings, this has been proven historically. At the same time, he is not solely at fault for downturns, programming and the direction of the programming is even more important. If you view the show for a single person, then people are going to come and go in droves when said superstar's segments end. So, you need a strong supporting cast, who are booked correctly, and in good storylines. The Joe and Lesnar stuff is exhilarating, the Enzo and Cass storyline is compelling, the Rollins and Wyatt storyline is fresh. These things play a factor. The issue is, a lot of people are not consistent in their assessment of ratings. Hence, the mark wars that typically occur in this thread.


Good post. You sound like me in the previous ratings thread from 2-3 years ago when everyone was blaming the top guy. I guess it is true what they say; what goes around comes around.


----------



## God Movement

ShowStopper said:


> Good post. You sound like me in the previous ratings thread from 2-3 years ago when everyone was blaming the top guy. I guess it is true what they say; what goes around comes around.


Indeed my friend, indeed.


----------



## McNugget

Chrome said:


> I can't remember the last time we had a quarterly breakdown tbh. I want to say years.


Dang, really? I generally avoid this thread out of the general desire to preserve my sanity. I've clearly been on this forum for too long and can't remember the difference between recently and years ago.


----------



## Mordecay

:bjpenn Solid ratings tbh. I guess I was wrong with Roman announcement will kill the ratings. That been said, ratings have had an increase since the Joe/Lesnar feud was announced (even they had 2.5m average last week when I expected 2.2-2.3 million because of the NBA finals), people are legitimately excited for that match, hopefully they don't give us another Brock squash.


----------



## AoEC_

McNugget said:


> Dang, really? I generally avoid this thread out of the general desire to preserve my sanity. I've clearly been on this forum for too long and can't remember the difference between recently and years ago.


I remember there being one for the Daniel Bryan Retirement show which had a surprisingly low rating despite being advertised. Maybe once or twice more during Ambrose's reign last year as well.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

God Movement said:


> Possibly.
> 
> But my stance on ratings is both clear and consistent, I don't shift it depending on the circumstances, joking aside. The top guy is absolutely a factor in ratings, this has been proven historically. At the same time, he is not solely at fault for downturns, programming and the direction of the programming is even more important. If you view the show for a single person, then people are going to come and go in droves when said superstar's segments end. So, you need a strong supporting cast, who are booked correctly, and in good storylines. The Joe and Lesnar stuff is exhilarating, the Enzo and Cass storyline is compelling, the Rollins and Wyatt storyline is fresh. These things play a factor. The issue is, a lot of people are not consistent in their assessment of ratings. Hence, the mark wars that typically occur in this thread.


I agree completely. The main eventers are meant to be your main draws and the main reason viewers tune in, but if they're booked like shit then that isn't their fault. A bad show is a bad show and it only takes 1 bad show to turn viewers off, I mean I could even see Austin and Rock struggling with these writers.


----------



## Chrome

AoEC_ said:


> I remember there being one for the Daniel Bryan Retirement show which had a surprisingly low rating despite being advertised. Maybe once or twice more during Ambrose's reign last year as well.


Oh yeah, I remember that now lol. That was weird that we got a quarterly breakdown for that show just seemingly out of nowhere.


----------



## AoEC_

Chrome said:


> Oh yeah, I remember that now lol. That was weird that we got a quarterly breakdown for that show just seemingly out of nowhere.


I remember there being a minute by minute breakdown for the Bryan segment in that show as well lol. The data is definitely there, don't know why the journalists don't try to get hold of that nowadays, would help clearing a lot of doubts regarding a lot of issues as far as ratings are concerned.


----------



## Roxinius

wwe9391 said:


> Thank you Reigns :reigns2
> 
> His announcement bumping raw up nicely in the ratings.
> 
> Joe vs Reigns main evented hour 2. Thank you both men


must be nice to be so delusional the fact that they werent going up against the nba finals helped


----------



## Taroostyles

Nothing on the show had anything to do with the bump, Raw always gets a bump after the NBA playoffs are over.


----------



## Y.2.J

Healthy bump in ratings after a dreadful last week.

Deserved too, I thought it was a great episode of Raw. Book it well consistently and you'll be able to retain viewers...


----------



## DoubtGin

Braun = ratings


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

God Movement said:


> "Who cares about Roman making an announcement?"
> 
> :kobelol
> 
> That was the entire reason to watch the show.


Considering it's a 10 minute segment at the beginning of a 3 hour 20 minutes broadcast, that's a pretty dumb statement.

Considering just as many people watched hour 3 as hour 1, it's pretty obvious Reigns' announcement didn't matter one bit.
Unless of course people expected Enzo's attacker to be da BIG DAWG.


----------



## God Movement

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Considering it's a 10 minute segment at the beginning of a 3 hour 20 minutes broadcast, that's a pretty dumb statement.
> 
> Considering just as many people watched hour 3 as hour 1, it's pretty obvious Reigns' announcement didn't matter one bit.
> Unless of course people expected Enzo's attacker to be da BIG DAWG.


I was joking. I've pretty much stated my actual stance on ratings in general a few posts up from this.

At the same time, if the show had BOMBED you and I both know as well as each other you would be singing a completely different tune.


----------



## wwe9391

To be real I think Brock, Joe, Reigns, and Braun are 4 main eventers that fans can really invest in. Thats a solid believable 4 to carry the Raw brand through out the rest of the year.


----------



## Dolorian

God Movement said:


> I was joking. I've pretty much stated my actual stance on ratings in general a few posts up from this.


As was I with the gif I posted, but like you said, had the show bombed some of the folks here pulling gold medal worthy mental gymnastics to avoid giving any credit to Reigns would put the blame on him without hesitation.

But in any case, this is practically a troll/lolz thread at this point. Hardly anyone is serious.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Guys, it kind of did bomb. 3 million viewers with no competition and no holiday and an "announcement" hyped for a week. This is bombing. The highest hour was 3.2 million viewers. Even 2015 & 2016 shits on these numbers.


----------



## God Movement

I'd say it did average taking into account the annual 10% drop, which shouldn't really be understated to be honest.

Bombing to me would be staying consistent with last week's rating in the absence of comp.


----------



## wwe9391

If Seth was the focus of last nights show you wouldn't say it bombed at all.


----------



## Dolorian

I recall Meltzer stating that anything below 2.8m is bad for RAW at this point so keeping all three hours above 3m is alright, nothing great but not a bomb.


----------



## Chrome

Didn't bomb, but certainly didn't set the world on fire either.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Whatever interest in Joe and Lesnar Raw gained, will be gone soon anyway, because Joe will be one and done. Vince isn't smart enough to put the belt on Joe.

We will enter the Road to Reigns Coronation number 4 in August. I'm almost willing to bet my ass that next year's RtWM will be 2.7 territory.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Looking at the YouTube Numbers:*





*2.1 Milion Views*





*700K Views*





*1.7 Millions Views*





*1 Million Views*





*800K Views*





*600K Views*
*
Thoughts: Good number for Enzo/Cass. We need more angles like that. It gets fans guessing and it creates compelling TV. 700K for a promo is a great sign for this Brock/Joe match. There's a lot of intrigue with Joe and Braun — one of them MUST defeat Brock for the title in the next few months.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

They found the secret to retaining viewers for hour 3: keep Reigns out of it.


----------



## The_Jiz

ShadowSucks92 said:


> Are we really gonna pretend that Reigns is some huge draw because of a bump?


Yes. Those marks will take what they can get. 

Even knowing full well when Raw inevitably sets another record low rating, setting themselves up for another thrashing out of pure vindication.


----------



## BigDaveBatista

you people argue over the most trivial things


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Over 2 million views for Braun's attack. 

Not a good sign for this Rollins/Bray feud: stuck at 600K views.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ah, the good ol' "viewz." The same division that lost WWE over a half a million dollars in a 3 month time period. The same 3 month time period that is "The Road" to their biggest show of the year.

When you think about it, it's amazing that an entertainment company like WWE could lose over a half a million dollars in just 3 months when you take into consideration what a wonderful tool the internet and YouTube are for businesses all around the world, entertainment business or other businesses. Leave it to good 'ol WWE to somehow, some-way, find it within themselves to lose $505,000 from January to March of this year leading into their biggest show of the year in early April.

Bravo, WWE, bra-fucking-vo!
-------------------------------------------------

Or, better yet, let's look at numbers from an aspect of their business that makes them the strong majority of their money (from their TV deal), and see that the viewership for BOTH of their shows are in the toilet and they haven't even gone up against the NFL this year yet. "Not a good sign" for all of the shit feuds.


----------



## wwe9391

The Boy Wonder said:


> Not a good sign for this Rollins/Bray feud: stuck at 600K views.


Yea doesn't seem like anyone is interested in that feud. 

Joe vs Lesnar, and Braun vs Roman are the 2 fueds that will carry Raw the next month. Those 4 men in general I feel are Raws biggest draws


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Fans seemed to react pretty darn well to a random mid-card Rollins/Wyatt feud that just started. The DIVE got one of the best reactions of the night and didn't need 20 minutes to do it. Raw doesn't have any draws. When you top out at 3 million viewers with no competition; the draws are gone.

:cena

We don't even need to wait until NFL season for Raw to get destroyed in the ratings. They do it on their own.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Do people in 2017 still not understand that 4 or 5 million views does not equal 4 or 5 million PEOPLE?


----------



## xio8ups

Your show has 3 million marks. That is all


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> If Seth was the focus of last nights show you wouldn't say it bombed at all.


Sure, I would. Especially if Seth had been given great booking for years.

I remember when from 2012-2016 people said all of those numbers were terrible. In some of those years, they were still in the 5 millions and those numbers were looked at as a joke.

I don't care what Meltzer said probably while ago. Things have changed since then. This was probably before WWE lost 20% of it's audience in one calendar year. No holiday, no NFL, no NBA, "Big announcement: hyped for a week, and they barely get to 3 million viewers?

Bomb.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> Sure, I would. Especially if Seth had been given great booking for years.
> .


:lmao No you wouldn't.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

wwe9391 said:


> :lmao No you wouldn't.


If he was booked like God to the point where the World Title scene is being held up for an entire year as a desperate attempt to make something work with him; I would have literally no choice.

To say the title scene is embarrassing right now, and the entire Raw product because of the booking of one person, is the understatement of the century. Beyond pathetic.


----------



## wwe9391

ShowStopper said:


> If he was booked like God to the point where the World Title scene is being held up for an entire year as a desperate attempt to make something work with him; I would have literally no choice.


You still wouldn't say it bombed.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Mr. Showstopper, don't argue with a handful of reality-resistent trolls.

Do as your namesake, and tell him you got two words ...

Last I looked, Rollins as champion 24 months ago did a million more viewers, and his run was labelled as bombing by the same WWE smarks, so not sure why a million less for BIG DAWG's big ADVERTISED announcement is not bombing.


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*Quite the bit of an increase around the time they start to pay off the Enzo/Cass attack angle. 

HEY WWE, maybe if you book an ongoing angle (like I say in the SDL rating thread) that viewers have to keep watching to get the conclusion of, THE INTEREST INCREASES! Even if it's marginal. :thumbsup*


----------



## The Boy Wonder

wwe9391 said:


> Yea doesn't seem like anyone is interested in that feud.
> 
> Joe vs Lesnar, and Braun vs Roman are the 2 fueds that will carry Raw the next month. Those 4 men in general I feel are Raws biggest draws


Rollins worked with Joe and no one really cared. He's working with Bray and it doesn't seem like anyone cares. The perfect heel for Seth to work with is The Miz.


----------



## krillep

So what was the actual rating?

I hope it drops more.


----------



## wwe9391

The Boy Wonder said:


> Rollins worked with Joe and no one really cared. He's working with Bray and it doesn't seem like anyone cares. The perfect heel for Seth to work with is The Miz.


That would be a good feud for him. The mic work between the 2 could be really good.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

ShowStopper said:


> Guys, it kind of did bomb. 3 million viewers with no competition and no holiday and an "announcement" hyped for a week. This is bombing. The highest hour was 3.2 million viewers. Even 2015 & 2016 shits on these numbers.


Actually, these days so long as Raw doesn't break it's record for lowest all time rating it's considered very succesful...


----------



## Dolorian

Expecting Attitude Era numbers for this week's ratings due to Lesnar's appearance which was advertised a week in advance.


----------



## A-C-P

Dolorian said:


> Expecting Attitude Era numbers for this week's ratings due to Lesnar's appearance which was advertised a week in advance.


Oh no my friend those #s will be due to :braun being back

OR ELSE :braun


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Nobody giving a shit about ratings, or where are they?


----------



## Dolorian

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Nobody giving a shit about ratings, or where are they?
> 
> Nevermind, don't kill me JohnnyAce, but a man has to do what a man has to do:
> 
> Hour 1: 3.075
> Hour 2: 3.201
> Hour 3: 3.029
> 
> 18-49 rating: 1.1


Those are last week numbers, no?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Dolorian said:


> Those are last week numbers, no?


Goddammit, that's right.

I'm not good at this.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Nobody giving a shit about ratings, or where are they?












They still aren't up, I have been checking for the past half hour now, please wait, I'll put them up ASAP once they are updated.

The People Power of this week's show will be analysed, debated and criticized soon, I guarantee. :grin2:


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

If everything goes as normal, hour 1 will be 3 million, hour 2 slightly up, and hour 3 dipping, maybe below 3 million.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.887M
H2-3.092M
H3-2.951M
3H-2.977M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 7.10% / + 0.205M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.56% / - 0.141M )
H3 Vs H1 ( + 2.22% / + 0.064M )
6/26/17 Vs 6/19/17 ( - 4.03% / - 0.125M )

Demo (6/26/17 Vs 6/19/17):
H1- 1.020D Vs 1.050D
H2- 1.080D Vs 1.090D
H3- 1.030D Vs 1.070D
3H- 1.043D Vs 1.070D

Note: RAW is 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 5th, 1st & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/26/17 Vs 6/27/16):
H1- 2.887M Vs 3.096M
H2- 3.092M Vs 3.173M
H3- 2.951M Vs 3.011M
3H- 2.977M Vs 3.093M ( - 3.75% / - 0.116M )

Demo (6/26/17 Vs 6/27/16):
H1- 1.020D Vs 1.110D
H2- 1.080D Vs 1.140D
H3- 1.030D Vs 1.110D
3H- 1.043D Vs 1.120D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## JC00

Women's 30 minute main event >>> Reigns


----------



## Mifune Jackson

I don't even think those are Nitro's numbers during the Attitude Era. Maybe Thunder's.


----------



## Dolorian

Reigns' advertised announcement last week with a higher rating than Lesnar's advertised appearance.

The Big Dog's Yard is bigger than Suplex City...


----------



## DammitChrist

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> If everything goes as normal, hour 1 will be 3 million, hour 2 slightly up, and hour 3 dipping, maybe below 3 million.


Hey, you were pretty close with your prediction here


----------



## JC00

Mifune Jackson said:


> I don't even think those are Nitro's numbers during the Attitude Era. Maybe Thunder's.


No TV show gets ratings like 20 years ago. People need to stop comparing it to back then. People had to actually watch live. There wasn't DVR, Youtube and social media. 

Seinfeld which was the most watched show on network TV was getting 35 million viewers a week. Most watched show on network TV nowadays gets 14 million viewers.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

JC00 said:


> No TV show gets ratings like 20 years ago. People need to stop comparing it to back then. People had to actually watch live. There wasn't DVR, Youtube and social media.
> 
> Seinfeld which was the most watched show on network TV was getting 35 million viewers a week. Most watched show on network TV gets 14 million viewers.


I was clearly referencing the post about "Expecting Attitude Era numbers" at the top of the previous page. I should have included it in a quote, I guess, but it was right there.

Both posts were being facetious.


----------



## Dolorian

Mifune Jackson said:


> I was clearly referencing the post about "Expecting Attitude Era numbers" at the top of the previous page. I should have included it in a quote, I guess, but it was right there.
> 
> Both posts were being facetious.


Nah I was obviously just kidding around with the Attitude Era numbers remark, can't expect such numbers these days.

This thread is quite trollish in general so don't take it too seriously.


----------



## Chrome

1st and 3rd hours being under 3 million.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

JC00 said:


> Women's 30 minute main event >>> Reigns


Nia Jax wrestling for 30 minutes >>>> Reigns talking.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

JC00 said:


> No TV show gets ratings like 20 years ago. People need to stop comparing it to back then. People had to actually watch live. There wasn't DVR, Youtube and social media.
> 
> Seinfeld which was the most watched show on network TV was getting 35 million viewers a week. Most watched show on network TV nowadays gets 14 million viewers.


What does Social Media have to do with anything? People need to stop pretending Social Media in any shape or form replaces watching the Show.

Clearly, there was no way to tape Raw in 1999 fpalm

Fact is: if you want to watch Raw, live, without waiting a day, you need to watch on USA. Period.
USA is protective about this. They won't even let WWE put Raw on their own Network in a reasonable timeframe.


----------



## Chrome

What hour was the Ball family segment? :hmm:


----------



## Dolorian

Chrome said:


> What hour was the Ball family segment? :hmm:


I think it was at the end of the 1st hour.


----------



## V-Trigger

Dolorian said:


> Reigns' advertised announcement last week with a higher rating than Lesnar's advertised appearance.
> 
> The Big Dog's Yard is bigger than Suplex City...


He main evented one of the lowest shows of all time against Rollins. Calm down.

And lol at paying Lesnar those millions when he barely draws anymore.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao Reigns killed that first hour. Lower than 3rd hour. Wow.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Reigns was on for like seven minutes. What killed the first hour was the long six man tag match that went through two commercials.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

BrotherNero said:


> He main evented one of the lowest shows of all time against Rollins. Calm down.
> 
> And lol at paying Lesnar those millions when he barely draws anymore.


Not only does he not draw, he is a minus draw.

But imagine a not-so-hardcore WWE fan tuning in at 8. 
First thing: Roman Reigns giving his 1823th My Yard promo this year.
Second thing: the Hardys wrestling Sheasaro for 25 minutes, for the 735th time this year.
Third thing: some LA guy and his wannabe son yelling "nig***".


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

So, you have the actual mainstream Balls' on your show, the return of the World Champion, and the confirmed return of Braun Stroman, and you get THAT shitty rating????

:ha :ha :ha :ha

The last 3 years have killed the company DEAD. 

Here's the kicker: The show last night was actually pretty good by today's standards. It now does not matter if Raw is good or bad, it's too late. They've run the audience off. No Holiday, no NBA game, no NFL game, you got all of your "big" names, and you pull in that shit rating. :lol

The fans got tired of waiting and have left. Good for them.

BTW, 2nd week in a row the First Hour did SHIT.

:hmm:


----------



## A-C-P

I wonder where the floor actually is :hmmm


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*YOUTUBE NUMBERS:*





*1.7 Million*





*1.1 Million*





*784K*





*974K*





*542K*


----------



## Demolition119

A-C-P said:


> I wonder where the floor actually is :hmmm


We will find out this fall.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> So, you have the actual mainstream Balls' on your show, the return of the World Champion, and the confirmed return of Braun Stroman, and you get THAT shitty rating????
> 
> :ha :ha :ha :ha
> 
> The last 3 years have killed the company DEAD.
> 
> Here's the kicker: The show last night was actually pretty good by today's standards. It now does not matter if Raw is good or bad, it's too late. They've run the audience off. No Holiday, no NBA game, no NFL game, you got all of your "big" names, and you pull in that shit rating. :lol
> 
> The fans got tired of waiting and have left. Good for them.
> 
> BTW, 2nd week in a row the First Hour did SHIT.
> 
> :hmm:


Could very well be that last week was a post-NBA spike in interest. People that tuned out for NBA returned, and the show didn't hold their interest well. For WWE's sake, I hope that a few stick around, though :heston

In any case, didn't take them long to cool interest in Joe.


----------



## JC00

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> What does Social Media have to do with anything? People need to stop pretending Social Media in any shape or form replaces watching the Show.
> 
> Clearly, there was no way to tape Raw in 1999 fpalm
> 
> Fact is: if you want to watch Raw, live, without waiting a day, you need to watch on USA. Period.
> USA is protective about this. They won't even let WWE put Raw on their own Network in a reasonable timeframe.



Social media has videos and gifs. 

My point is it's a lot easier to stay up-to-the minute with WWE shows through other means than it is to actually watch it. 

WWE puts up clips of every segment on youtube. You can hop on your phone and within moments you'll know everything that has happened. Wasn't like that back then. 

Taping back then meant VHS, which meant your TV had to be tuned into the channel and you couldn't change it. So usually if someone was taping Raw or Nitro back then were simply doing it because they couldn't watch or they were watching the other show on another TV.

TIVO didn't hit the market until Spring of 1999 and it wasn't like everyone was running out and getting them.

Nowadays 55% of viewers have DVR. Back in '97 and '98 it was 0% as there was no DVR available. In '06, 7 years into DVR being available only 10% had it. 

People can act like that stuff isn't a factor for TV ratings nowadays but all one needs to do is looking the increase shows have in the DVR ratings and you will see how much a factor DVR is. Some shows see anywhere from a 75% to a 150% increase when DVR is factored in.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Demolition119 said:


> We will find out this fall.


No, that will be THIS year's bottom. You can't put on these stale, long ass horrible shows for years, and expect to hit a rock bottom any time soon. I said it almost two years ago, and I will say it again: their bottom is US Network subscribers.


----------



## wwe9391

Dolorian said:


> Reigns' advertised announcement last week with a higher rating than Lesnar's advertised appearance.
> 
> The Big Dog's Yard is bigger than Suplex City...


:reigns2

Dam right



BrotherNero said:


> He main evented one of the lowest shows of all time against Rollins. Calm down.


Which was on Memorial day that you forgot to mention



The Boy Wonder said:


> Reigns was on for like seven minutes. What killed the first hour was the long six man tag match that went through two commercials.


Yep that tag match was the killer in that hour. Way to long. Hardys nostalgia act seems to be coming to an end in terms of interest


----------



## God Movement

Yikes.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

JC00 said:


> Social media has videos and gifs.
> 
> My point is it's a lot easier to stay up-to-the minute with WWE shows through other means than it is to actually watch it.
> 
> WWE puts up clips of every segment on youtube. You can hop on your phone and within moments you'll know everything that has happened. Wasn't like that back then.
> 
> Taping back then meant VHS, which meant your TV had to be tuned into the channel and you couldn't change it. So usually if someone was taping Raw or Nitro back then were simply doing it because they couldn't watch or they were watching the other show on another TV.
> 
> TIVO didn't hit the market until Spring of 1999 and it wasn't like everyone was running out and getting them.
> 
> Nowadays 55% of viewers have DVR. Back in '97 and '98 it was 0% as there was no DVR available. In '06, 7 years into DVR being available only 10% had it.
> 
> People can act like that stuff isn't a factor for TV ratings nowadays but all one needs to do is looking the increase shows have in the DVR ratings and you will see how much a factor DVR is. Some shows see anywhere from a 75% to a 150% increase when DVR is factored in.


All of that doesn't matter one single fuck to USA Network.
Fact is, if WWE was interesting, people would watch their shows. The number of views WWE released videos have on Youtube the two days after Raw is small, even compared to Raw viewership.
If that theory held ANY merit, YouTube views should be through the roof. They are not.

If you earnestly want to say that all Raw is worth now is watching a GIF, then they can close the Shop right now.

People pretend like Youtube and Social Media is an invention made somewhere in the last three years. There were other means of watching for at least 10-15 years now.

Internet smarks didn't discover or care about YouTube or Social Media or DVR until WWE's viewership went down the shitter FAST starting in 2013/2014. At which point WWE smarks suddenly started to claim the missing viewers were watching "differently". 
At First, it was convenient to blame the reigning champion at the time, most notably Rollins and Brock, and people claimed Reigns as champ would DRAW. Then he got monstrous backlash. Then that was the "indy smarks' fault".
Then we were told to give it time. It sucked. 
Ratings started to tank fast.
Then we were told Reigns is over because he gets "a reaction".

Only since it is crystal clear that Roman Reigns' push is pushing WWE towards TV deathbed, people started to claim "You can't blame a single guy because nobody draws anymore" and "people watch TV differently now". "Now" meaning "opposed to 4 years ago".

It's comical at this point.
I guess this week, since Brock was advertised, an unusual number of people decided to watch it on Twitter or YouTube, because nowadays, that's just what you do with a show that interests you.
Especially those people in their late 40s, WWE's primary audience, that practically live through Twitter. Right?


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

I thought last night was pretty good by modern Raw standards but damn what a crap rating.


----------



## DoubtGin

back to mediocrity :mark:


----------



## Erik.

Raw put on a decent show and the ratings are low. I don't care for ratings as much as some people on here, I care more about whether or not the show entertains me. The WWE have three real solid feuds going on right now and that is enough to keep me entertained right now. They still provide shit like pointless 6 man tag matches, some cruiserweight stuff and women stuff I don't particularly care about, but 3 solid feuds is better then they've done in what seems like YEARS.

Tell me again, why we should care about ratings? When entertainment should be the soul focus and it was last night. 

If there were a new war to happen between WWE and another promotion at this very moment, it wouldn't even be based off ratings, it would mostly be based on who kept the most money flowing through all reservoirs. 

Television is obviously a big part of that, but the way we're heading, we are seeing media evolve so far away from the likes of cable and satellite methods that in 10/20 years, television is going to be a misnomer for a viewing habit on computers.


Edit - 

Plus, I will add.

If low ratings like this mean a slightly entertaining product with more feuds like we have had the last few weeks, then I'm all for the low ratings. High ratings doesn't equate a more entertaining product after all.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

On the upside, Wrestlemania 34 is only 285 days away! Aren't you excited for the payoff to this torturing slow burn?

Maybe at Wrestlemania 34, the Hardys VS Shesaro feud will finally end.


----------



## DoubtGin

Women = ratings


----------



## Y.2.J

Anything under 3M is scary. Really scary.

It's too bad, yesterday's episode was really good in my opinion. I was entertained throughout, the three hours flew by.


----------



## The Renegade

I hate to be a party pooper but Raw had the highest rated hour of any television show running Monday night and we think that rating is bad? WWE isn't in competition with 98 WWF, they're in competition with the shows on now, and within that context, the show did fine. They'll probably get smacked once football season rolls back around, but last night was a small win.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ratings are talked about at all because TV is where WWE makes their most money...and it's not only close. That's why they get talked about.


----------



## InexorableJourney

What you can kinda gleen is that more people will tune in when they anticipate change.

returning stars
new feuds
new angles
a break from the norm

Of course anybody who watched the attitude era knows this anyway, so nothing to see here.


----------



## Y.2.J

The Renegade said:


> I hate to be a party pooper but Raw had the highest rated hour of any television show running Monday night and we think that rating is bad? WWE isn't in competition with 98 WWF, they're in competition with the shows on now, and within that context, the show did fine. They'll probably get smacked once football season rolls back around, but last night was a small win.


:bjpenn


----------



## Frost99

The Renegade said:


> They'll probably get smacked once football season rolls back around, *but last night was a small win.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The Renegade said:


> I hate to be a party pooper but Raw had the highest rated hour of any television show running Monday night and we think that rating is bad? WWE isn't in competition with 98 WWF, they're in competition with the shows on now, and within that context, the show did fine. They'll probably get smacked once football season rolls back around, but last night was a small win.


How is it a win when your top face draws the lowest number, and your champion doesn't draw despite being advertised?

Being the highest rated hour on TV doesn't make WWE more attractive for advertisers. WWE didn't even do great ad revenue 20 years ago. What gives you the idea they do now? Being the highest rated show is only worth anything if the Network gets back the money it spends on it.

Being the highest rated show alone doesn't mean squat.


----------



## V-Trigger

.



wwe9391 said:


> :reigns2
> 
> Dam right
> 
> 
> 
> Which was on Memorial day that you forgot to mention
> 
> 
> 
> Yep that tag match was the killer in that hour. Way to long. Hardys nostalgia act seems to be coming to an end in terms of interest


Every year has a Memorial day's show. It isn't a excuse for the poor ratings that Roman drew.

Lol at that first hour numbers :ha


----------



## gracelandtm

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> *How is it a win when your top face draws the lowest number*, and your champion doesn't draw despite being advertised?
> 
> Being the highest rated hour on TV doesn't make WWE more attractive for advertisers. WWE didn't even do great ad revenue 20 years ago. What gives you the idea they do now? Being the highest rated show is only worth anything if the Network gets back the money it spends on it.
> 
> Being the highest rated show alone doesn't mean squat.



Hey now Reigns did better in ratings last week than Lesnar this week....:reigns


----------



## wwe9391

Erik. said:


> Raw put on a decent show and the ratings are low. I don't care for ratings as much as some people on here, I care more about whether or not the show entertains me. The WWE have three real solid feuds going on right now and that is enough to keep me entertained right now. They still provide shit like pointless 6 man tag matches, some cruiserweight stuff and women stuff I don't particularly care about, but 3 solid feuds is better then they've done in what seems like YEARS.
> 
> Tell me again, why we should care about ratings? When entertainment should be the soul focus and it was last night.
> 
> If there were a new war to happen between WWE and another promotion at this very moment, it wouldn't even be based off ratings, it would mostly be based on who kept the most money flowing through all reservoirs.
> 
> Television is obviously a big part of that, but the way we're heading, we are seeing media evolve so far away from the likes of cable and satellite methods that in 10/20 years, television is going to be a misnomer for a viewing habit on computers.
> 
> 
> Edit -
> 
> Plus, I will add.
> 
> If low ratings like this mean a slightly entertaining product with more feuds like we have had the last few weeks, then I'm all for the low ratings. High ratings doesn't equate a more entertaining product after all.



:clap Thank You


----------



## Darren Criss

A good show will not bring high ratings back so fast. WWE has been doing several bad shows for years. It's not in a day that things will work out.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

gracelandtm said:


> Hey now Reigns did better in ratings last week than Lesnar this week....:reigns


Eh, no he didn't.
His advertised big announcement last week did 3.075 million viewers.
Lesnar's hour did 3.092 million this week.
It's even clearer this week, that around 0.2 million rather watch Brock than Reigns.

Since you want to compare hard numbers ... :draper2


----------



## squarebox

Darren Criss said:


> A good show will not bring high ratings back so fast. WWE has been doing several bad shows for years. It's not in a day that things will work out.


Exactly. Like, I stopped watching over a month ago, and I read comments like 'it was a good show', 'solid show this week'. Big fucking deal? A couple of decent shows aren't going to make me want to watch again when at the end of the day it's the same stale ass WWE run by the same stale ass people. There is nothing there that signals change so I'm not going to invest my time in it until there is. I'm sure there are many others who feel the same way...they aren't going to magically come back after one good show, it will take something major to get many of those people back, because it gives them hope. Right now though, there is no hope, there is no sign of change. It's the same old shit so why bother?


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Darren Criss said:


> A good show will not bring high ratings back so fast. WWE has been doing several bad shows for years. It's not in a day that things will work out.


1997 is a prime example of this. Raw was actually becoming a very good show by the end of the year and it took till around then for the ratings to catch up and then another year for them to be on fire.

Monday was a better than usual Raw. They really seem to try when they're in Los Angeles for whatever reason. I expect them to fall back into the status quo soon, though. The Brock/Joe stuff still seems to be fun at least.

One takeaway is that they shouldn't be leaning so hard on Brock, and even Cena, and should really try to build the new stars. Joe's gaining a lot with this feud.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I don't get this love for 1997-1998 Raw. Yes, Austin, yes, Rock. But aside from that, these were horrible shows with a million things going on, shitty penis jokes left and right, leading nowhere.


----------



## The Renegade

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> How is it a win when your top face draws the lowest number, and your champion doesn't draw despite being advertised?
> 
> Being the highest rated hour on TV doesn't make WWE more attractive for advertisers. WWE didn't even do great ad revenue 20 years ago. What gives you the idea they do now? Being the highest rated show is only worth anything if the Network gets back the money it spends on it.
> 
> Being the highest rated show alone doesn't mean squat.


Being a highly rated show absolutely does matter. There are limiting factors here, like the perception of the demographic the WWE draws and whether or not they actually spend a lot of money, but having a larger audience is never a bad thing.

Like I said, this isn't a huge win by any stretch, but in what circumstance is coming in first in any ways a negative? We gotta let those Attitude Era numbers go and focus on debating within the confines of today's television environment.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Renegade said:


> Being a highly rated show absolutely does matter. There are limiting factors here, like the perception of the demographic the WWE draws and whether or not they actually spend a lot of money, but having a larger audience is never a bad thing.
> 
> Like I said, this isn't a huge win by any stretch, but in what circumstance is coming in first in any ways a negative? We gotta let those Attitude Era numbers go and focus on debating within the confines of today's television environment.


I agree with viewing WWE's ratings more through the scope of today's television scene.

But even in doing that, losing 20% of your audience from 2016 to 2017 is horrendous even by today's standards. If it was a normal TV sitcom that lost 20% of it's viewers from one year to the next, that sitcom very well might get cancelled, even in 2017.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The Renegade said:


> Being a highly rated show absolutely does matter. There are limiting factors here, like the perception of the demographic the WWE draws and whether or not they actually spend a lot of money, but having a larger audience is never a bad thing.
> 
> Like I said, this isn't a huge win by any stretch, but in what circumstance is coming in first in any ways a negative? We gotta let those Attitude Era numbers go and focus on debating within the confines of today's television environment.


I don't think you understand the situation. Quick look at WWE Raw ad rates on USA, by Dave Meltzer:



> Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services, you agree to our use of cookies.Learn More
> 
> Log in / Register
> r/SquaredCircle
> Meltzer: WWE ad rates are 1/7th that of UFC Fight Nights, which averages a million fewer viewers than Raw.
> u/Ellimem
> On last night's Observer Radio, Dave mentioned that he recently got eyes on WWE's ad rates, and he mentioned that despite their viewership, and market share (numbers most other cable shows would love), the ad rates they get are still fairly terrible.
> 
> He didn't give any specifics on prices, but put forth that the rates are significantly less than that of the UFC, which already gets lower rates than regular cable shows because of the violence factor that comes along with it. This is even more significant because the WWE does a million more viewers each week on average than the UFC, and even more than that for most cable shows which get those higher ad rates.
> 
> Dave posits that the WWE gets 1/10th the ad rates than that of a regular cable show, which is down significantly from the past when the WWE would get about half the cost in ad rates than the standard show.
> 
> Following this through to TNA, he speaks about ad rates being one of the big factors in Destination America dumping the promotion last year, and may be souring Pop TV on TNA right now. According to PWInsider, the ad rates for Impact are about $350 per 30 second spot, which is very, very low. And because of the revenue share aspect of the TV deal, Pop only sees half of that.


So, Raw brings in 1/10 of the ad revenue a regular show gets. Even if Raw averaged 3.5 million viewers, which they are a LONG shot away from, a show averaging 350.000 viewers would bring the same ad revenue as Raw.
No matter for how long Raw brings USA's spot among networks up, at some point, it's not worth it for USA, paying 200 million for a show that loses viewers in droves, and doesn't bring in the mooha.

And people can blame DVR or YouTube all they want, USA doesn't give a single solitary fuck about anything but ratings and revenue.


----------



## reamstyles

Proves that even WWE brand or pro wrestling has been a cliche and doesnt attract advertisers, thats why vince wanted to go away with word "wrestling" more pg.. Because they wanted to be a mainstream show..


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Vince is as dumb as he is arrogant.
You can put lipstick on a pig, and it's still a pig. What does he think advertisers are? Morons?

And I think this fits in nicely:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_kE6R_kvfQ

Alvarez can be obnoxious, but he is spot on the money.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I don't get this love for 1997-1998 Raw. Yes, Austin, yes, Rock. But aside from that, these were horrible shows with a million things going on, shitty penis jokes left and right, leading nowhere.


A lot of it is in the complex character development between Bret and Steve Austin and Bret's unique take on being a face in Canada and a heel in America. The Undertaker and Shawn Michaels were also adding darker, more complex shades to their characters.

That's not even going into Vince McMahon as a developing character on TV, getting into scuffs with Bret and Austin while still trying to maintain his composure as lead commentator on Raw.

There was a lot of crap to be sure, but the storylines finally broke out of the "New Generation" family friendly mold and into something more engaging. Nitro was still beating them, and in a lot of ways it was justified, but the WWF was changing, which made it a lot more interesting in many ways.

Relating it to today, the choice of Samoa Joe as Brock's next challenger (out of necessity since Braun got injured) is an interesting choice and, while it probably won't last, has added something to the show.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 6/26 was down one percent in ratings and four percent from last week in viewers, with a 2.02 rating and 2,976,000 viewers (1.61 viewers per home).
> 
> The show was second for the night on cable, and really didn’t tell much of a story. It was unusual in the sense that the first hour and not the third hour was the lowest rated, and the second-to-third hour drop was less than usual. It appears that a summer pattern of people joining late and then being more apt to stay could be part of it, or the women’s gauntlet match in the third hour kept viewers better than most. The third hour actually stayed even in 18-34 from hour two and almost identical in 12-17. In 35-49, both men and women, particularly women, declined in the third hour so the women’s gauntlet seemed to have more appeal to men than women.
> 
> The show did a 0.83 in 12-17 (up 10.7 percent), 0.87 in 18-34 (up 7.4 percent), 1.21 in 35-49m (down 1.6 percent) and 1.13 in 50+ (down 5.8 percent).
> 
> The audience was 61.2 percent male in 18-49 and 55.5 percent male in 12-17.


----------



## krillep

The Figure 4 said:


> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


Thanks for the rating.

Why can't we see the rating on google?

It's never the actual rating anymore, just viewers and demographics.


----------



## The Renegade

ShowStopper said:


> I agree with viewing WWE's ratings more through the scope of today's television scene.
> 
> But even in doing that, losing 20% of your audience from 2016 to 2017 is horrendous even by today's standards. If it was a normal TV sitcom that lost 20% of it's viewers from one year to the next, that sitcom very well might get cancelled, even in 2017.


Oh, no doubt, but when you can lose that much of your viewership and still be at or near the top of the ratings each week, what does that say about the current landscape of television in general? Keep in mind that even when we're giving the company flack about getting its ass kicked by football, they still end up in the top 5 shows of the night. Its bad relative to their former position, but still well above average. 




Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I don't think you understand the situation. Quick look at WWE Raw ad rates on USA, by Dave Meltzer:
> 
> 
> 
> So, Raw brings in 1/10 of the ad revenue a regular show gets. Even if Raw averaged 3.5 million viewers, which they are a LONG shot away from, a show averaging 350.000 viewers would bring the same ad revenue as Raw.
> No matter for how long Raw brings USA's spot among networks up, at some point, it's not worth it for USA, paying 200 million for a show that loses viewers in droves, and doesn't bring in the mooha.
> 
> And people can blame DVR or YouTube all they want, USA doesn't give a single solitary fuck about anything but ratings and revenue.


I fully understand the situation. I don't think you understand the point that I'm making. In what way is it a bad thing for the ratings to be higher? Its not. All the things that you're mentioning, while valid, have little to no bearing on the statement I made, especially when you consider that even in your example, having a larger audience _still _equals more money.


----------



## validreasoning

Half way through the year and numbers are averaging as follows live

Raw 
2016 = 3.468 million viewers 
2017 = 3.082 million viewers

So drop of roughly 11%

Smackdown
2016 = 2.349 million viewers
2017 = 2.563 million viewers

So rise of about 9%



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> I don't think you understand the situation. Quick look at WWE Raw ad rates on USA, by Dave Meltzer:
> 
> 
> 
> So, Raw brings in 1/10 of the ad revenue a regular show gets. Even if Raw averaged 3.5 million viewers, which they are a LONG shot away from, a show averaging 350.000 viewers would bring the same ad revenue as Raw.
> No matter for how long Raw brings USA's spot among networks up, at some point, it's not worth it for USA, paying 200 million for a show that loses viewers in droves, and doesn't bring in the mooha.
> 
> And people can blame DVR or YouTube all they want, USA doesn't give a single solitary fuck about anything but ratings and revenue.


Not an apples to apples comparison there though. Meltzer is comparing cable to network tv and those UFC shows on Fox not on F1. Fox spend a ton of time and money advertising those shows on Network tv like during big nfl games. And remember there are only about 4-5 of those shows a year

Usa also don't spend close to $200m for raw and SD annually, it's between $120-$140. Total divas accounts for an ever increasing portion and international deals have risen since 2014.

Pwtorch last year reported 30 second slot during raw and SD went for $12-13k which is more than some first run programming on USA such as Chrisley and motive http://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/04/13/usarawsdadrev/

There is obviously a limit on what advertisers will spend on pro wrestling for sure though thanks to the way they view the audience regardless if raw was drawing 10 million viewers a week


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

From the WO Boards:

RAW in the UK hitting all time viewership lows.


"Mookieghana posted numbers in that thread about WWE's revenue from the UK market, which showed the dramatic increase in television rights fees they got from Sky for the contract beginning in 2015, which coincided with the UK launch of the Network, and subsequently undercutting Sky's profits on WWE's pay per views. The value in rights fees almost tripled, with Sky paying around $30 million per year across the five year duration of the deal, ending in 2019. Add in the factor of the Brexit vote in mid-2016, and it costs Sky even more thanks to the value of the pound dropping against the dollar.

Meanwhile, the ratings for Raw have been on a steep decline, at a much bigger rate compared to Raw on USA. This year in particular has been glaring. And the latest official live+7 BARB numbers reveal that they have hit what must be an all-time low for Raw on Sky Sports.

For the same week of the past five years:


June 24 2013 - 184k
June 23 2014 - 145k
June 22 2015 - 75k
June 20 2016 - 79k
June 19 2017 - 18k"

Big Dawg slicing UK viewership clean in half - twice. :booklel


----------



## squarebox

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> From the WO Boards:
> 
> RAW in the UK hitting all time viewership lows.
> 
> 
> "Mookieghana posted numbers in that thread about WWE's revenue from the UK market, which showed the dramatic increase in television rights fees they got from Sky for the contract beginning in 2015, which coincided with the UK launch of the Network, and subsequently undercutting Sky's profits on WWE's pay per views. The value in rights fees almost tripled, with Sky paying around $30 million per year across the five year duration of the deal, ending in 2019. Add in the factor of the Brexit vote in mid-2016, and it costs Sky even more thanks to the value of the pound dropping against the dollar.
> 
> Meanwhile, the ratings for Raw have been on a steep decline, at a much bigger rate compared to Raw on USA. This year in particular has been glaring. And the latest official live+7 BARB numbers reveal that they have hit what must be an all-time low for Raw on Sky Sports.
> 
> For the same week of the past five years:
> 
> 
> June 24 2013 - 184k
> June 23 2014 - 145k
> June 22 2015 - 75k
> *June 20 2016 - 79k
> June 19 2017 - 18k*"
> 
> Big Dawg slicing UK viewership clean in half - twice. :booklel


WOW that is bad. 61k drop since the same time last year - what's going on there?


----------



## volde

There has to be some outside reason for that since it looks absolutely brutal.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> From the WO Boards:
> 
> RAW in the UK hitting all time viewership lows.
> 
> 
> "Mookieghana posted numbers in that thread about WWE's revenue from the UK market, which showed the dramatic increase in television rights fees they got from Sky for the contract beginning in 2015, which coincided with the UK launch of the Network, and subsequently undercutting Sky's profits on WWE's pay per views. The value in rights fees almost tripled, with Sky paying around $30 million per year across the five year duration of the deal, ending in 2019. Add in the factor of the Brexit vote in mid-2016, and it costs Sky even more thanks to the value of the pound dropping against the dollar.
> 
> Meanwhile, the ratings for Raw have been on a steep decline, at a much bigger rate compared to Raw on USA. This year in particular has been glaring. And the latest official live+7 BARB numbers reveal that they have hit what must be an all-time low for Raw on Sky Sports.
> 
> For the same week of the past five years:
> 
> 
> June 24 2013 - 184k
> June 23 2014 - 145k
> June 22 2015 - 75k
> June 20 2016 - 79k
> June 19 2017 - 18k"
> 
> Big Dawg slicing UK viewership clean in half - twice. :booklel


All time low ratings in USA and UK. Now, that is ultimate Karma right there considering the big push.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That was the show with the Big Dog announcement :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> That was the show with the Big Dog announcement :lmao


I can't believe this amazing, old school type feud isn't drawing them in! Not only that, but it's losing viewers. How can this be?!

:mj4


----------



## The Boy Wonder

• Great news regarding this Enzo/Cass feud. Glad WWE started the show off with it
• Dreadful numbers for the Cruiserweights. They kill the momentum off the show.
• Decent number for Miz/Heath
• Hopefully Rollins can move on from Bray after GBOF. No interest from fans it seems
• Joe/Brock's feud staying strong
• I point out the number increase when Reigns appears at the very end of the show. We don't have overrun numbers anymore.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Enzo with by far the highest viewed Youtube video. :lol

No wonder that division lost them $505,000 from January to March. Meaningless.


----------



## AoEC_

It's a fascinating titbit indeed. I remember the Enzo and Cass debut video doing incredible numbers as well. Since then, they have consistently pulled good-great numbers on YT for some reason. Enzo, IMO cut one of the best face promos of this decade yesterday so his views are absolutely well deserved.


----------



## wwe9391

:lmao people still blaming 1 person for ratings but never take into account all the other surrounding factors. Thank god no one here runs WWE. It be in worse shape than it already is even tho WWE is in no risk of going out of business anytime soon. 


:lol I love how some think that low ratings will stop Reigns push. Its not going to. Nothing will stop it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

American viewers. Down the tube. UK viewers. Down the tube.

What country will be next?!


----------



## HenryBowers

Cant wait for Sky Sports to cancel WWE. I always feel ashamed when an ad for WWE comes up during a footy game.


----------



## Piers

So Miz needs a distraction to beat Heath fucking Slater lol ?
Is WWE finally realizing how overrated he is ?


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

LOL ratings indeed.


----------



## wwe9391

The Boy Wonder said:


> • Great news regarding this Enzo/Cass feud. Glad WWE started the show off with it
> • Dreadful numbers for the Cruiserweights. They kill the momentum off the show.
> • Decent number for Miz/Heath
> *• Hopefully Rollins can move on from Bray after GBOF. No interest from fans it seems
> *• Joe/Brock's feud staying strong
> • I point out the number increase when Reigns appears at the very end of the show. We don't have overrun numbers anymore.


yea awful feud. No one interested at all. Seth deserves better


----------



## Chrome

volde said:


> There has to be some outside reason for that since it looks absolutely brutal.


I doubt it, the show's just a pile of shit atm. :shrug

Ukers jumping off quicker than the Americans it seems. Smart people. Although to be fair, there's a lot less watching over there. But still, that's a huge drop in just 1 year, and that was already coming off a huge drop from 2 years ago.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

To paint an even more hilarious picture of only 18,000 people watching Raw in the UK. 18K is the size of an NBA arena. Now take one NBA arena's worth of people and spread those people in that one arena across the entire country of the UK. That's how many people are watching RAW in all of the UK.

:lmao


----------



## Erik.

Raw is on at 1am in the morning in the UK. 

Most people stream too. I don't even have Sky Sports. Absolute waste of money. Does sort of coincide with the numbers because about 4 or 5 years ago I did have Sky Sports and watched it. Since the, I've realised it's a waste of money and I can just watch everything I need to online. I won't be the only one. 

But it is a massive decrease. No doubt about it. Then again, I preach it every week. I couldn't care less what others are watching :lol


----------



## Ace

Is Raw in cancelling territory in the UK?



Erik. said:


> Raw is on at 1am in the morning in the UK.
> 
> Most people stream too. I don't even have Sky Sports. Absolute waste of money. Does sort of coincide with the numbers because about 4 or 5 years ago I did have Sky Sports and watched it. Since the, I've realised it's a waste of money and I can just watch everything I need to online. I won't be the only one.
> 
> But it is a massive decrease. No doubt about it. Then again, I preach it every week. I couldn't care less what others are watching :lol


 June 24 2013 - 184k
June 23 2014 - 145k
June 22 2015 - 75k
June 20 2016 - 79k
June 19 2017 - 18k"

What time was it on in 2013 and last year?


----------



## Dan be Cilley

wwe9391 said:


> yea awful feud. No one interested at all. Seth deserves better


Both you and The Boy Wonder misunderstand. It's Seth that drives people away, not Wyatt.

Wyatt actually has charisma/mic-skills.


----------



## Bink77

I can remember a smackdown fell on 4th of July once, and they had Edge and Hulk friggin Hogan win the tag belts. Now, we get Apollo Crews in the main event and a decent beatdown afterwards. The epitome of laziness


----------



## Erik.

Ace said:


> June 24 2013 - 184k
> June 23 2014 - 145k
> June 22 2015 - 75k
> June 20 2016 - 79k
> June 19 2017 - 18k"
> 
> What time was it on in 2013 and last year?


No idea. Within that time, I've got more of a life and find myself not being awake late enough to watch professional wrestling. 

Again, why would I care that the ratings have gone down? People can watch what the fuck they want, doesn't stop me or anyone else on here watching it. Some people on here have a weird fascination with strangers they've never met and not watching the same stuff as them. It's as if they're realising their losers and want to be socially accepted. Strange.


----------



## Brock

Ace said:


> Is Raw in cancelling territory in the UK?
> 
> June 24 2013 - 184k
> June 23 2014 - 145k
> June 22 2015 - 75k
> June 20 2016 - 79k
> June 19 2017 - 18k"
> 
> What time was it on in 2013 and last year?


It was still on at 1AM. Or 12AM sometimes due to the clicks changing.

Sky Sports are changing its Sports programmes channels next year. Currently, you have to subscribe to more than one to get the one that shows Raw. They are changing it so each channel will be sports specific and you can then choose which sports you watch and what channels you wish to pay for. Not sure what channel wrestling will be included in though.

In other words, the TV packages will be cheaper for people who only watch specific sports.

Not that it'll change much for Raw viewership tho I shouldn't wonder.


----------



## Ace

Dan be Cilley said:


> Both you and The Boy Wonder misunderstand. It's Seth that drives people away, not Wyatt.
> 
> Wyatt actually has charisma/mic-skills.


 It's definitely Wyatt driving people away, his words mean nothing and he's boring af.


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> It's definitely Wyatt driving people away, his words mean nothing and he's boring af.


Agreed, and I'm a Wyatt fan who prefers Wyatt over Rollins too. His booking has been so shitty his promos don't mean a thing anymore and the fans are aware of that. He wouldn't be taken seriously in a feud against Enzo at this point.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Erik. said:


> Again, why would I care that the ratings have gone down? People can watch what the fuck they want, doesn't stop me or anyone else on here watching it.


Because if enough other people stop watching it, then it'll be cancelled. And you won't be able to watch.

So if you enjoy watching WWE programming, you should be concerned about other people not watching.


----------



## JDP2016

Randy Lahey said:


> Because if enough other people stop watching it, then it'll be cancelled. And you won't be able to watch.
> 
> So if you enjoy watching WWE programming, you should be concerned about other people not watching.


Nah. Let him keep thinking that way. If he wants to enjoy a show that is losing viewers at an alarming rate, then kudos to him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not a Wyatt fan at all, but it's not Wyatt that's driving people away, guys. He's in an irrelevant mid-card feud. It's the supposed "top stars" in the top feuds, as it always is; that's getting most of the attention from the company.


----------



## JDP2016

ShowStopper said:


> Not a Wyatt fan at all, but it's not Wyatt that's driving people away, guys. *He's in an irrelevant mid-card feud.* It's the supposed "top stars" in the top feuds, as it always is; that's getting most of the attention from the company.


When was the last time he wasn't in an irrelevant mid-card feud?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JDP2016 said:


> When was the last time he wasn't in an irrelevant mid-card feud?


My point exactly. You can't really draw if you're never put in a position to do draw.

I have no love for Wyatt. I'd say the same for any mid-carder when it comes to drawing. They don't because they're not really in the position to.


----------



## squarebox

I haven't watched SD since Jinder won the title, and I don't want to watch RAW because all roads just lead back to one guy, so I don't see any point.


----------



## wwe9391

Dan be Cilley said:


> Both you and The Boy Wonder misunderstand. It's Seth that drives people away, not Wyatt.
> 
> Wyatt actually has charisma/mic-skills.


Oh don't say anything bad about Seth on here. You might get a very passive aggressive post directed towards you.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Let's see if we can approach those NBA finals numbers.


----------



## HenryBowers

What was the number for this weeks Raw?


----------



## Dolorian

HenryBowers said:


> What was the number for this weeks Raw?


Wasn't out yesterday due to the holiday, I imagine it should be up soon.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I'm ready for these numbers. Can't wait to type an essay on how the drop is all Reigns' fault! <insert evil laugh>


----------



## Dolorian

Top 5 most viewed segments on YouTube this week...

*1. Roman Reigns Spears Braun Strowman off the stage* - 1.416m views

*2. An emotional Enzo Amore addresses Big Cass' betrayal* - 1.343m views

*3. Brock Lesnar and Samoe Joe’s split-screen interview gets intense* - 1.303m views

*4. R-Truth ruins Goldust's screening of "The Shattered Truth"* - 811k views

*5. The Miz vs. Heath Slater - Intercontinental Championship Match* - 633k views


----------



## wwe9391

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I'm ready for these numbers. Can't wait to type an essay on how the drop is all Reigns' fault! <insert evil laugh>


at least you admit it's you're gimmick


----------



## A-C-P

LOLYOUTUBEVIEWS :bosque


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

A-C-P said:


> LOLYOUTUBEVIEWS :bosque


They make Roman look strong. That's all that matters.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Have Roman blowtorch Barbie Dolls, and he would probably get a million more.


----------



## Dolorian

#BadNewsSanta said:


> They make Roman look strong. That's all that matters.


Ho!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A-C-P said:


> LOLYOUTUBEVIEWS :bosque


Posting stats of a division of their business that lost them $505,000 in the first 3 months of this year seems pretty pointless. And those first 3 months of the year are supposed to be their hottest time of year (Road to WM). :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Dolorian said:


> Ho!


No this ain't a joke Dolorian, this is real life!


----------



## wwe9391

People on here really underestimating the power of social media and how it influences tv in 2017


----------



## Dolorian

#BadNewsSanta said:


> No this ain't a joke Dolorian, this is real life!


Oh, believe me I know...I lose more sleep over this than Vince and the investors do.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Dolorian said:


> Oh, believe me I know...I lose more sleep over this than Vince and the investors do.


Joke's on you, Vince doesn't sleep.

(Ok I'm done going off topic. I await the RATINGS!)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Social Media isn't influencing WWE viewers to watch WWE shows; that's for sure.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic

wwe9391 said:


> People on here really underestimating the power of social media and how it influences tv in 2017


Did Triple H tell you to say that, or did you come up with it on your own?

How come the NBA Playoffs had the highest ratings in the last 20 years this year?

Guess they don't know about social media.

They had 4 million people watch raw the night after WrestleMania and we are less than 3 months later, and the majority of that audience has tuned out.

You are underestimating the power of people turning off a show because it sucks


----------



## God Movement

:Seth


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Did Triple H tell you to say that, or did you come up with it on your own?
> 
> How come the NBA Playoffs had the highest ratings in the last 20 years this year?
> 
> Guess they don't know about social media.
> 
> They had 4 million people watch raw the night after WrestleMania and we are less than 3 months later, and the majority of that audience has tuned out.
> 
> You are underestimating the power of people turning off a show because it sucks


Apologists didn't discover YouTube until Reigns' push tanked the ratings.


----------



## wwe9391

DMD Mofomagic said:


> You are underestimating the power of people turning off a show because it sucks


And you are underestimating the power of watching TV on other platforms besides cable.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Even the other shows that have lost viewers (and there are still a bunch out there that do quite well) haven't lost the amount of viewers WWE has, and especially not for this many years in a row, and not 10% every year, and 20% from last year to this year.


----------



## wwe9391

I really would love to know what the excuse will be when WWE is still here in 10 years


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I'd like to know the excuse for making up a strawman that no one ever talks about.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Where the hell are they?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I don't think JonnyAce is here, so if anyone else knows where to find them..


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

If I read showbuzzdaily correctly, not up yet.


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

wwe9391 said:


> I really would love to know what the excuse will be when WWE is still here in 10 years


i always see u defending the wwe crap. wwe is trash and people want a better show. why is that so hard for YOU to understand?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta




----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Delayed until Thursday morning 8:00.

Lazy bastards.


----------



## validreasoning

ShowStopper said:


> Even the other shows that have lost viewers (and there are still a bunch out there that do quite well) haven't lost the amount of viewers WWE has, and especially not for this many years in a row, and not 10% every year, and 20% from last year to this year.


One of the mods over on the observer did some research on how shows did compared to last year. Raw is down about 11% in 2017 compared to same period last year, smackdown is up 9%

*USA network *
Suits is down 20%
Mr. Robot is down 46%
Colony is down 27%
Playing House is down 50%

*Across the rest of cable*
The Walking Dead is down 13.7%
Fear The Walking Dead is down 36%
Better Call Saul is down 25%
American Horror Story is flat
The Strain is down 28%
Fargo is down 14%
Louie is down 26%
The Americans is down 16.6%

*On Network TV:*
Modern Family down 13%
Grey's Anatomy down 2.5%
The Middle down 17.5%
The Goldbergs down 8%
How to Get Away With Murder down 26%
Once Upon a Time down 28%
Chicago Fire down 12%
Marvel's Agents of SHIELD down 32%
Law & Order SVU down 15.5%
The Blacklist down 22.6%


----------



## DMD Mofomagic

validreasoning said:


> One of the mods over on the observer did some research on how shows did compared to last year. Raw is down about 11% in 2017 compared to same period last year, smackdown is up 9%
> 
> *USA network *
> Suits is down 20%
> Mr. Robot is down 46%
> Colony is down 27%
> Playing House is down 50%
> 
> *Across the rest of cable*
> The Walking Dead is down 13.7%
> Fear The Walking Dead is down 36%
> Better Call Saul is down 25%
> American Horror Story is flat
> The Strain is down 28%
> Fargo is down 14%
> Louie is down 26%
> The Americans is down 16.6%
> 
> *On Network TV:*
> Modern Family down 13%
> Grey's Anatomy down 2.5%
> The Middle down 17.5%
> The Goldbergs down 8%
> How to Get Away With Murder down 26%
> Once Upon a Time down 28%
> Chicago Fire down 12%
> Marvel's Agents of SHIELD down 32%
> Law & Order SVU down 15.5%
> The Blacklist down 22.6%


What does this have to do with WWE losing millions of viewers over the span of weeks?

TV ratings go by a percentage of the amount of TV's out there in America.. so you can still get high ratings with less people watching the shows.

"Well, every show is losing viewers, so we shouldn't be concerned"

It sounds like something a snake oil salesman would say.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

validreasoning said:


> One of the mods over on the observer did some research on how shows did compared to last year. Raw is down about 11% in 2017 compared to same period last year, smackdown is up 9%
> 
> *USA network *
> Suits is down 20%
> Mr. Robot is down 46%
> Colony is down 27%
> Playing House is down 50%
> 
> *Across the rest of cable*
> The Walking Dead is down 13.7%
> Fear The Walking Dead is down 36%
> Better Call Saul is down 25%
> American Horror Story is flat
> The Strain is down 28%
> Fargo is down 14%
> Louie is down 26%
> The Americans is down 16.6%
> 
> *On Network TV:*
> Modern Family down 13%
> Grey's Anatomy down 2.5%
> The Middle down 17.5%
> The Goldbergs down 8%
> How to Get Away With Murder down 26%
> Once Upon a Time down 28%
> Chicago Fire down 12%
> Marvel's Agents of SHIELD down 32%
> Law & Order SVU down 15.5%
> The Blacklist down 22.6%



That's nice and all, but it doesn't paint the entire picture, as usual. WWE lives and dies with their TV deal. Their numbers have been going down at a 10% clip rate for years now, with seemingly no end in sight. Most of those shows even with their declines are still outdrawing WWE on a weekly basis. And those are just the shows showing some decline. There are still shows that don't have a decline, let alone a decline that WWE has been experiencing for years now and their rate of decline.


----------



## validreasoning

DMD Mofomagic said:


> What does this have to do with WWE losing millions of viewers over the span of weeks?


The most watched episode of raw in 2017 is 3.75 million viewers (night after Wrestlemania) and least watched was 2.6 million so they aren't losing millions over the span of weeks unless you consider the post mania raw as normal audience. The most watched episode in 2016 did 4.1 million way back in January 2016 (night after rumble)



> TV ratings go by a percentage of the amount of TV's out there in America.. so you can still get high ratings with less people watching the shows.


Those drops were viewers not tv ratings. And obviously you can still get high ratings with less people. Raw is still one of the highest rated shows on cable as is SD which wins the night most weeks.



> "Well, every show is losing viewers, so we shouldn't be concerned"
> 
> It sounds like something a snake oil salesman would say.


Never said that..you said that. I was just pointing out where other shows stand. No need to take this stuff so seriously.



ShowStopper said:


> That's nice and all, but it doesn't paint the entire picture, as usual. WWE lives and dies with their TV deal. Their numbers have been going down at a 10% clip rate for years now, with seemingly no end in sight. Most of those shows even with their declines are still outdrawing WWE on a weekly basis. And those are just the shows showing some decline. There are still shows that don't have a decline, let alone a decline that WWE has been experiencing for years now and their rate of decline.


Raws been going down on this decline since 2015 (technically December 2014). The fall on tv has been happening at the same pace for around the same time. Yes wwes tv deal is important but I don't think raw/SD are in any serious danger given their huge numbers by cable standards. If I was wwe I would be far more worried about total divas numbers.

The only cable show I listed that does higher numbers than raw is walking dead. Fear has fallen below smackdown this year

That's the last weekly cable top 25, there isn't much stuff beating raw aside from one off things like the NBA draft and bet awards. Stuff on Fox news is doing huge numbers but most of those are people over 50 not 18-49

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/weekly-ratings/cable-top-25-for-june-19-25-2017/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

validreasoning said:


> Raws been going down on this decline since 2015 (technically December 2014). The fall on tv has been happening at the same pace for around the same time. Yes wwes tv deal is important but I don't think raw/SD are in any serious danger given their huge numbers by cable standards. If I was wwe I would be far more worried about total divas numbers.
> 
> The only cable show I listed that does higher numbers than raw is walking dead. Fear has fallen below smackdown this year
> 
> That's the last weekly cable top 25, there isn't much stuff beating raw aside from one off things like the NBA draft and bet awards. Stuff on Fox news is doing huge numbers but most of those are people over 50 not 18-49
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/weekly-ratings/cable-top-25-for-june-19-25-2017/


Raw has been declining since Steve Austin turned heel. But that's awhole other story..




> Bryan Alvarez just mentioned on WOL that research from F4W/WO writer Paul Fontaine found that Raw has lost 46% of its audience since moving to 3 hours.


Losing nearly half of your entire audience in the last 5 years. Yep. Just more run of the mill cord-cutters, I'm sure.


----------



## validreasoning

I don't have the live numbers but it's not 46% drop since moving to 3 hours. Pretty sure he is using the raw 1000 episode as the base there.

Raw in 2012 averaged 4.75 million viewers live+dvr http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2013/0117/559579/average-wwe-ratings-for-2012/

It was 3.7 million live+dvr in 2016 http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratin...-for-11th-straight-year-624115/20161215usa01/

So that's a 22% drop and I assume live is similar. Usa network prime time average viewership fell 47% between 2011 and 2016.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Stop comparing Raw to sitcoms and Television Series with inherent shelf lives, for fuck's sake! fpalm

When a sitcom or TV Series becomes popular by hitting a certain formula with the dynamic of certain actors, people become inevitably tired of the concept after a while. In a TV Series with a certain premise and lead protagonists, you can't just Exchange the lead actors and fuck with the formula because that's not what the series is. Look at Two and a Half Men. They changed the formula, and people didn't watch anymore.

WWE isn't a goddamn sitcom, it's simulated combat sports, that can exchange contestants at will, and, in theory, can create stars at will, and should therefor only be compared to combat sports and other sports. 
Vince can create competition and his product however he wants. Problem is, he turned WWE into a sitcom, and Wrestling fans will have none of it. And for the general public, there are way more entertaining things on TV than watching six goofs have a rap battle, the genius of which allegedly lies in a reference that only horny neckbeards would get.

Also, stop lying about cord cutting. It's 1% . WWE loses 1% every time The Big Dog headlines a PPV.


----------



## wwe9391

xxRambo_21xx said:


> i always see u defending the wwe crap. wwe is trash and people want a better show. why is that so hard for YOU to understand?


Bad ratings will not give you a better show when will YOU and MANY other understand? Only competition will and last I check there is no competition out there at the level of WWE.

Some of you should really give it up. Bad ratings is not gonna stop or change anything. See in 10 years


----------



## FITZ

ShowStopper said:


> That's nice and all, but it doesn't paint the entire picture, as usual. WWE lives and dies with their TV deal. Their numbers have been going down at a 10% clip rate for years now, with seemingly no end in sight. Most of those shows even with their declines are still outdrawing WWE on a weekly basis. And those are just the shows showing some decline. There are still shows that don't have a decline, let alone a decline that WWE has been experiencing for years now and their rate of decline.


You do realize that WWE relies less on TV revenue then all of the other TV shows that have been mentioned. Yes TV revenue is really important for the WWE. For TV shows and TV stations it's pretty much their only revenue. 

TV ratings go by a percentage of the amount of TV's out there in America.. so you can still get high ratings with less people watching the shows.

"Well, every show is losing viewers, so we shouldn't be concerned"

It sounds like something a snake oil salesman would say.[/QUOTE]

WWE should be concerned. But it's also a fact that TV in general us hurting. The NFL had a big loss of viewers last season. People are watching less TV and less and less people have cable every year. Cord cutting is a problem but even the people that keep cable appear to be using it less than before. 

WWE isn't doing any favors with how bad their shows have been. But they don't exist in a vacuum either. They are experiencing problems that aren't unique. Raw is a TV show and people are watching less TV. 

http://variety.com/2016/digital/news/live-tv-declining-smartphone-boom-nielsen-1201804202/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

FITZ said:


> You do realize that WWE relies less on TV revenue then all of the other TV shows that have been mentioned. Yes TV revenue is really important for the WWE. For TV shows and TV stations it's pretty much their only revenue.
> 
> TV ratings go by a percentage of the amount of TV's out there in America.. so you can still get high ratings with less people watching the shows.


I realize all of this. I also realize that not every, or even most television shows have lost 46% of their audience over the last 5 years. 

Nor have they lost $505,000 in their digital division in the first 3 months of the year. Not only is WWE troubled by their horrific ratings, but they also haven't effectively monitized their social media as of yet, either, which is surprising, too.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

How is WWE not as dependent on TV revenue as other TV shows? Are you all dreaming? When a TV show of the caliber of the ones mentioned above get cancelled, Studio camera men move on to the next show. Writers move on to the next project, they can practically work everywhere with their credits. Producers move on. Editors, sound guys, composers, they all move on to other nice projects. Actors move on to other projects without having to break a sweat. TV actors with good roles cash in checks worth several times as much as John Cena makes a year (excluding merch) - per EPISODE. 
And every artist involved gets royalties on reruns and DVD sales until the day he DIES.

A Studio-produced TV Series is not a fucking private company! 
Every camera man, every sound guy, every producer, every editor, every music guy, every makeup lady, catering, arena rent, every ad somewhere, every website they run, every event they do, it ALL has to be paid for by revenue WWE has to generate on its OWN! 
Why the FUCK do you think Vince had such a burning jealousy for Ted Turner that he still isn't over to this day? Because WCW could spend millions of FOREIGN money without ever being responsible or Accountable for how much they lose, while Vince had to make the best out of the not so peachy revenue at the time!

WWE collects nearly 200 million from TV in the US alone. They make profits around 50 million. Hypothetically, if they lost their TV deal, where do you think the -150 million that need to be compensated will come from? Vince's asshole? 
Production values need to be cut drastically, salaries need to be cut, the roster has to be cut in half, people need to get fired, they may need to stop running live events in front of 1.000 people ... Without live TV, the licensing to other countries dies. Without TV, ad revenue dies. Without TV, exposure dies, and merch sales along with it.
Without exposure, Social Media dies. Also YouTube, since if there is no TV, there is nothing to put there.
They may need to do a studio taping a la WCW Saturday Night. Producing live TV from all over the country is insanely expensive. Why do you think USA told Vince flat out that he has to pay for a live Smackdown himself? This isn't a goddamn sitcom set that just needs to be stored away.
The talent in WWE isn't set for life with their salaries and expenses. A handful are, but the majority needs to find a job, and few will find one in wrestling that is well paid. Indys also have limited capacities.
Their writers, camera men, editors etc will all struggle, because contrary to apologist belief, working in WWE gives you neither money, nor credit for a lifetime. If any upper class producer saw what bullshit scripts WWE has, he would hire those clowns at most for an internship.
And all of this doesn't even touch the issue of stock that would crash into the chasms of hell, if they lost their TV Deal or got a shitty one, and it doesn't even touch shareholders crashing and burning, and the paying of dividends, which they STILL can't pay DESPITE oh-so-great revenue in 2016.

Literally the only two things WWE has, that separates them from a bigger indy promotion like RoH, are a good television contract and a larger fan base. The WWE disciples who say nothing can ever happen are annoying as shit. WWE would be the first wrestling promotion ever in the US that does not go out of business eventually, may it be through circumstances, bad decisions, or just plain stupidity.

The wellbeing of WWE and of all people involved is more dependent on TV than any TV Show ever with as many viewers as WWE. To claim anything else is factually wrong.


----------



## Frost99

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> *Stop comparing Raw to sitcoms *.


*"Well there was this ONE time member?"*














#VinnyMacWISHES #WWELogic​


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Oh Jesus ...

I'd watch that.


----------



## The_It_Factor

WWE is more comparable to a soap opera, IMO. Anyone have those numbers/info on how much (if at all) they've declined in viewership?


----------



## Gravyv321

wwe apologists STILL defending this shitty company :ha


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The_It_Factor said:


> WWE is more comparable to a soap opera, IMO. Anyone have those numbers/info on how much (if at all) they've declined in viewership?


Soap opera? Where are the stories? Save for one guy, WWE has no plan for ANYONE beyond the next PPV. And that's generous.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Soap opera? Where are the stories? Save for one guy, WWE has no plan for ANYONE beyond the next PPV. And that's generous.


Well, just that they never have an off season, are fairly niche genres/tend to have a more specific target audience, and have characters that come and go in addition to the "staples" of the show. Also, There isn't much more that I can think of on cable television that has the shelf-life of soap operas and wrestling (other than sports, of course)... Even the best sitcoms eventually run their course.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Even if your premise in defending WWE Raw's gigantic viewer loss is by comparing it to other shows that lose viewers, that is still not a good argument. Those other shows will ultimately end up getting cancelled due to declining viewers. So why would Raw be any different, especially if you are looking at it as just another sitcom?

When you have a show that gets 1/10 the ad rate as normal shows, it better have a far higher rating than what it currently has to maintain profitability for USA Network. I just don't see USA Network re-upping Raw even as a loss leader. Having Raw on their channel is not going to keep them on the basic cable package if most Direct TV, Dish, Comcast viewers don't even care about wrestling anymore.


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

wwe9391 said:


> Bad ratings will not give you a better show when will YOU and MANY other understand? Only competition will and last I check there is no competition out there at the level of WWE.
> 
> Some of you should really give it up. Bad ratings is not gonna stop or change anything. See in 10 years


use your brain. when the ratings get low enough wwe will be forced to change up their formula. what u just said literally doesnt make sense. at the rate wwe is losing viewers they will be off tv in 10 years.

*Originally Posted by wwe9391 View Post
Bad ratings will not give you a better show when will YOU and MANY other understand? Only competition will and last I check there is no competition out there at the level of WWE.

Some of you should really give it up. Bad ratings is not gonna stop or change anything. See in 10 years*

Ratings matter because wwe's biggest revenue stream is their tv contract which is BASED off ratings.



Gravyv321 said:


> wwe apologists STILL defending this shitty company :ha


 it is quite sad lmfao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Numbers are out. On my phone so can't get full chart posted, but here are the numbers.

H1 - 2.825
H2 - 2.912
H3 - 2.153 (BECAUSE OF ROMAN!!!!!!!)









Ok I lied. Here's the real number -
H3 - 2.780

Actually held pretty steady and not too low for July 4th week. Probably because we were told at the beginning of the night Roman wouldn't be there. 

Source - http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...-cable-originals-network-finals-7-3-2017.html


----------



## Dolorian

Yeah it did hold pretty steady. First hour was slightly lower than last week and the second hour last week saw a greater increase in viewers than this week's while the third hour this week retained more viewers from the second hour than the third hour last week.

If I recall correctly...

First hour had Enzo opening promo, women's tag match and MizTV.

Second hour had Lesnar/Joe interview, Goldust/R-Truth and Rollins/Hawkins + promo

Third hour had Balor/Cesaro, Braun/Titus Brand + Braun/Reigns brawl


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-2.825M
H2-2.912M
H3-2.780M
3H-2.839M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.08% / + 0.087M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.53% / - 0.132M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 1.59% / - 0.045M )
7/3/17 Vs 6/26/17 ( - 4.64% / - 0.138M )

Demo (7/3/17 Vs 6/26/17):
H1- 0.890D Vs 1.020D
H2- 0.950D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.930D Vs 1.030D
3H- 0.923D Vs 1.043D

Note: RAW is 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/3/17 Vs 7/4/16):
H1- 2.825M Vs 2.663M
H2- 2.912M Vs 2.668M
H3- 2.780M Vs 2.643M
3H- 2.839M Vs 2.658M ( + 6.81% / + 0.181M )

Demo (7/3/17 Vs 7/4/16):
H1- 0.890D Vs 0.880D
H2- 0.950D Vs 0.940D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.980D
3H- 0.923D Vs 0.933D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Actually up from last year, which makes sense since last year's actually took place July 4th.

Which reminds me, Smackdown's number is where the fun is going to be this week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Under 3 million for all 3 hours. Well deserved. Right where they belong.


----------



## Dolorian

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Which reminds me, Smackdown's number is where the fun is going to be this week.


I am expecting SD to have Attitude Era numbers this week due to Cena's glorious return.


----------



## JDP2016

That Rap Battle should give SDL at least 2.8 million viewers. aige


----------



## wwe9391

xxRambo_21xx said:


> use your brain. when the ratings get low enough wwe will be forced to change up their formula. what u just said literally doesnt make sense. at the rate wwe is losing viewers they will be off tv in 10 years.
> 
> *Originally Posted by wwe9391 View Post
> Bad ratings will not give you a better show when will YOU and MANY other understand? Only competition will and last I check there is no competition out there at the level of WWE.
> 
> Some of you should really give it up. Bad ratings is not gonna stop or change anything. See in 10 years*
> 
> Ratings matter because wwe's biggest revenue stream is their tv contract which is BASED off ratings.
> 
> it is quite sad lmfao


Trust they won't cause Vince is too stubborn


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Because Rap is so popular among the key WWE demographic of 50-year olds.


----------



## DoubtGin

f4wonline


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I fail to see how this is a good number. How? Raw wasn't even on July 4th. 
Subtract the 6% it increased compared to last year, which was a July 4th show, and you have a number as low as the week it went up against the NBA finals.

There was a curiosity spike three weeks ago after NBA season, and maybe Joe and Brock, but that has subsided noticeably. They are now doing numbers almost as bad as during NBA season.
I fail to see the reason to celebrate.


----------



## Little Miss Ingobernable

These are lousy numbers. "Oh they were up from last year" failing to realize Raw last year was actually on 4th of July and did one of its worst numbers of all time. This is not good no matter what.


----------



## The Figure 4

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 7/3 for the go-home show for Great Balls of Fire did 2,836,000 viewers, a drop of five percent from the previous week. That’s understandable given the holiday weekend.
> 
> Raw was the most-watched show for the night on cable.
> 
> The first hour did 2,825,000 viewers. The second hour did 2,912,000 viewers. The third hour did 2,780,000 viewers.
> 
> An interesting note is that males across the board started late, with a low first hour meaning they were likely doing other things, but then they stuck with the third hour. Women, on the other hand, got there on time and watched the first two hours, but the entire third hour decline was women.
> 
> Like with Smackdown, the audience was way down with viewers under 35, but not down much with viewers over 35.
> 
> The show did a 0.70 in 12-17 (down 15.7 percent from the previous week), 0.66 in 18-34 (down 24.1 percent), 1.18 in 35-49 (down 2.5 percent) and 1.14 in 50+ (up 0.0 percent).
> 
> The audience was 58.9 percent males in 18-34 an 60.9 percent males in 12-17.


----------



## Ibracadabra

Lousy numbers compared to what? 

Number 1 most watched show on cable.


----------



## Kimwun

Jesus, Some of you guys bitch about everything


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The MLB Homerun Derby did a 5.5 rating last night. Which is a very high number for that event. It's a better number than this year's NFL Pro Bowl.

So, it should be interesting to see the Raw rating..


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Should get a bit of a spike. Unless fans really start to lose faith in WWE. Which wouldn't be surprising, given that they did fuck all with the Strowman murder last night, aside from rewarding Reigns with a possible title shot.


----------



## JC00

Raw

1st hr- 3.049m 
2nd hr- 3.074m
3rd hr- 2.905m


3 hr avg 3.009m


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.049M
H2-3.074M
H3-2.905M
3H-3.009M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.82% / + 0.025M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.50% / - 0.169M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.72% / - 0.144M )
7/10/17 Vs 7/3/17 ( + 5.99% / + 0.170M )

Demo (7/10/17 Vs 7/3/17):
H1- 1.000D Vs 0.890D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.950D
H3- 0.950D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.973D Vs 0.923D

Note: RAW is 6th, 7th & 8th by hourly demo & 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/10/17 Vs 7/11/16):
H1- 3.049M Vs 3.042M
H2- 3.074M Vs 3.239M
H3- 2.905M Vs 3.231M
3H- 3.009M Vs 3.171M ( - 5.11% / - 0.162M )

Demo (7/10/17 Vs 7/11/16):
H1- 1.000D Vs 1.050D
H2- 0.970D Vs 1.110D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.140D
3H- 0.973D Vs 1.100D

Note: RAW this time last year was 6th, 5th & 4th by hourly demo & 7th, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

3rd hour almost got to 3 million with a main event rematch from the night before; Rollins/Wyatt.

Nice.


----------



## Bosch

3rd hour had Joe/Lesnar segment as the lead in. Not surprised it did relatively well.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

For having shot the best angle in forever on Sunday, and having Lesnar there, and a Broken Matt tease, that's really not much of a spike.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> For having shot the best angle in forever on Sunday, and having Lesnar there, and a Broken Matt tease, that's really not much of a spike.


Yep. Not great at all. I did think Hour 3 would be lower, though, especially with the main event being a rematch from the night previous, but it didn't do as bad as I thought it would.


----------



## God Movement

The Rollins v Wyatt match was at the top of the hour wasn't it? Along with the Brock/Lesnar/Roman segment? Maybe it'd be smart to put the top stars in the last hour to hold steady more often.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

God Movement said:


> The Rollins v Wyatt match was at the top of the hour wasn't it? Along with the Brock/Lesnar/Roman segment? Maybe it'd be smart to put the top stars in the last hour to hold steady more often.


Rollins/Wyatt was the main event, last match of the show. Started during the last 30 mins of the show. They did Bray's entrance at 10:30 EST then went to commerical, so it took up the entire last 30 mins.


----------



## Dolorian

God Movement said:


> The Rollins v Wyatt match was at the top of the hour wasn't it? Along with the Brock/Lesnar/Roman segment? Maybe it'd be smart to put the top stars in the last hour to hold steady more often.


Yeah, the Reigns/Lesnar/Joe segment bleed into the third hour and then there was a CW match and the Rollins/Wyatt match if I recall correctly.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The fact that the 'highest' hours are only 3 million even, after a PPV in which the world title was defended, isn't great at all, though.


----------



## wwe9391

Nice bump.


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

wwe9391 said:


> Nice bump.


what is wrong with you? wwe sheep out here to defend crap ratings. WWE has lost over a million viewers in 3 years but the wwe bubble dwellers think 3 mill is good. pathetic!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

For post PPV, this is poor. 3rd hour had Lesnar/Joe/Reigns segment. Considering we've seen recently that the 3rd hour isn't a guarantee for lowest hour, it's pretty disappointing.

On the plus side, it's not that big of a decline year on year so there is that. Was last year's Raw from this week after a PPV?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

wwe9391 said:


> Nice bump.


Nobody wants to know about your sex life.


----------



## Mr. Socko

3 million viewers. Time to break out the champagne boys. What a HUGE number :vince

/s


----------



## JDP2016

Meh. Let's see what they get after Summerslam.


----------



## Erik.

I personally think Raw has been getting progressively better over the past few weeks. Baby steps. 

Whilst it's not the biggest spike for a post PPV, it could be seen as Raw getting better = more viewers.


----------



## Mra22

Solid ratings last night although the show was lackluster for the most part.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Road to WrestleMania is where I expect them to do their best ratings. SummerSlam-ish (from now until the night after) is when I expect them to do a little better before football comes back until the Rumble (unless they have another Goldberg to pull out of their hats, but they don't).

It helps if they build to a big SummerSlam main event that people want to see. Really, building to things people want to see is the key to all things pro-wrestling.


----------



## AoEC_

:wow


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mra22 said:


> Solid ratings last night although the show was lackluster for the most part.


3 million isn't solid for the night after a PPV in which the World Title was defended for the first time in 3 months. They're rather putrid.

Kind of like 1 million Youtube viewz being parroted as anything good when other forms of entertainment DWARF the most viewed WWE Youtube videos.


----------



## AoEC_

ShowStopper said:


> 3 million isn't solid for the night after a PPV in which the World Title was defended for the first time in 3 months. They're rather putrid.
> 
> Kind of like 1 million Youtube viewz being parroted as anything good when other forms of entertainment DWARF the most viewed WWE Youtube videos.


If you're pointing towards me, then actually I was expressing surprise at the fact that the Cass/Big Show video was performing better than even the segment consisting of the Top 3 main eventers in the company. That's astounding.

Regardless, Youtube will always be a pertinent indicator tbh, if not strictly for the financial aspect of it then at least for giving us a view on which talents are commanding more attention than others in the Internet/ Social Media sphere which will always be of relevance today and henceforth. Hell, even merchandise contributes barely 4-5 % to the revenue of the company but that doesn't mean that if and when we get any update on the merchandise scene of the talents and the company at large do we not discuss that to death. Similarly with YT views and the WWE channel is consistently one of the most viewed YT channels in the world, probably in the Top 3 if we go by total weekly views.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AoEC_ said:


> If you're pointing towards me, then actually I was expressing surprise at the fact that the Cass/Big Show video was performing better than even the segment consisting of the Top 3 main eventers in the company. That's astounding.


Regardless, Youtube will always be a pertinent indicator tbh, if not strictly for the financial aspect of it then at least for giving us a view on which talents are commanding more attention than others in the Internet/ Social Media sphere which will always be of relevance today and henceforth. Hell, even merchandise contributes barely 4-5 % to the revenue of the company but that doesn't mean that if and when we get any update on the merchandise scene of the talents and the company at large do we not discuss that to death. Similarly with YT views and the WWE channel is consistently one of the most viewed YT channels in the world, probably in the Top 3 if we go by total weekly views.[/quote]

I don't think it's completely useless, tbh. But it is worth pointing out that WWE's digital divison (which Youtube is a part of) lost them $505,000 in the first quarter of this year. It has it's ups and it's downs and isn't anywhere monetized to where it should be. 1% of revenue (not even profit) and it lost them over a half of a million dollars during the Road to WM this year (January to March).


----------



## AoEC_

ShowStopper said:


> The financial aspect, eh? WWE's digital divison (which Youtube is a part of) lost them $505,000 in the first quarter of this year.


As I said, it's NOT necessarily about the financial aspect. Just like the entire merchandise section contributes a minuscule amount to the overall revenue of the WWE, yet it's pretty actively debated whenever we get any updates on that, similarly with DVD sales and all. If money was the sole factor for discussion then all of these streams shouldn't really be given any merit, but they are.. and for good reason.

YT is a global platform, people from all the major and minor centres of the WWE have access to it in which they let their tastes and preferences known which can further be put into analysis to identify how and where to push business in the future based on the views. Jinder Mahal's recent push is a great example of that. Plus, just a single figure of $505,000 doesn't tell you the entire story. The WWE Network lost a ton of money in Q1 2014 due to the costs incurred which later led to substantial profits in the future. Similarly, we don't know the costs incurred in the Digital division to make a concrete analysis of why and how they're losing money in the division at this point and how these costs could help streamline growth in that sector in the future.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AoEC_ said:


> As I said, it's NOT necessarily about the financial aspect. Just like the entire merchandise section contributes a minuscule amount to the overall revenue of the WWE, yet it's pretty actively debated whenever we get any updates on that, similarly with DVD sales and all. If money was the sole factor for discussion then all of these streams shouldn't really be given any merit, but they are.. and for good reason.
> 
> YT is a global platform, people from all the major and minor centres of the WWE have access to it in which they let their tastes and preferences known which can further be put into analysis to identify how and where to push business in the future based on the views. Jinder Mahal's recent push is a great example of that. Plus, just a single figure of $505,000 doesn't tell you the entire story. The WWE Network lost a ton of money in Q1 2014 due to the costs incurred which later led to substantial profits in the future. Similarly, we don't know the costs incurred in the Digital division to make a concrete analysis of why and how they're losing money in the division at this point and how these costs could help streamline growth in that sector in the future.


The fact that the division lost money in the digital age says alot. It's not like I would do away with Youtube if I were them, but it's not making them much money. If you can't make money in your hottest time of year (Road to WM), then clearly something is wrong.


----------



## AoEC_

ShowStopper said:


> The fact that the division lost money in the digital age says alot. It's not like I would do away with Youtube if I were them, but it's not making them much money. If you can't make money in your hottest time of year (Road to WM), then clearly something is wrong.


WWE Network also didn't make them money in the hottest time of the year in the middle of the hottest storyline of the year and possibly the decade (Bryan-Authority) in 2014. Doesn't mean that it failed in Q1 2014 itself. For all we know, Digital Media might post a great profit in the next quarter just like WWE Network started to do or they can continue with their downward spiral with regards to this division. In any event, I wouldn't draw any conclusion at this juncture. WWE would post it's Q2 2017 results on July 27 which should clear up a lot of doubts regarding the performance of the division.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AoEC_ said:


> WWE Network didn't also make them money in the hottest time of the year in the middle of the hottest storyline of the year and possibly the decade (Bryan-Authority) in 2014. Doesn't mean that it failed in Q1 2014 itself. WWE would post it's Q2 2017 results on July 27 which should clear up a lot of doubts regarding the performance of the division.


That was the Network's first year of existence. Start up costs took alot of that up.

The Q2 results won't clear anything up even if they make money on it in that quarter. That's the quarter WM takes places in. WM is WWE's only draw. Of course it will go up in that quarter.

Losing money on it during the Road to WM shows how important it is overall to WWE.


----------



## AoEC_

ShowStopper said:


> The Q2 results won't clear anything up even if they make money on it in that quarter. That's the quarter WM takes places in. WM is WWE's only draw. Of course it will go up in that quarter.
> 
> Losing money on it during the Road to WM shows how important it is overall to WWE.


So by that reasoning, should the WWE have ditched WWE Network after Q1 2014 itself owing to the losses sustained in that division at that point of time which was also the WM season?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AoEC_ said:


> So by that reasoning, should the WWE have ditched WWE Network after Q1 2014 itself owing to the losses sustained in that division at that point of time which was also the WM season?


That was when the Network first existed. Start up costs were a bitch.

And I never said they should do away with the Youtube. I said they should keep it. But this idea that it's making WWE alot of money is not true...at all.


----------



## AoEC_

ShowStopper said:


> That was when the Network first existed. Start up costs were a bitch.
> 
> And I never said they should do away with the Youtube. I said they should keep it. But this idea that it's making WWE alot of money is not true...at all.


Of course, I never said that YT was significant ONLY for the financial considerations, like Merchandise and DVDs which also barely contribute to the overall WWE revenue. But saying that YT is insignificant in this day and age is pretty much a falsehood as I explained in my previous post in these lines:



> YT is a global platform, people from all the major and minor centres of the WWE have access to it in which they let their tastes and preferences known which can further be put into analysis to identify how and where to push business in the future based on the views. Jinder Mahal's recent push is a great example of that.


If money was the sole consideration, then everything from Digital Media to Merchandise would be pointless as they barely contribute 5-6% to the overall WWE revenue, but they're not.. and rightfully so.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AoEC_ said:


> Of course, I never said that YT was significant ONLY for the financial considerations, like Merchandise and DVDs which also barely contribute to the overall WWE revenue. But saying that YT is insignificant in this day and age is pretty much a falsehood as I explained in my previous post in these lines:
> 
> 
> 
> If money was the sole consideration, then everything from Digital Media to Merchandise would be pointless, but they're not.. and rightfully so.


It's not insignificant to most entertainment platforms. But when it makes up 1% of your total revenue (not even profit), like it does for WWE, it's not too far off.


----------



## AoEC_

ShowStopper said:


> It's not insignificant to most entertainment platforms. But when it makes up 1% of your total revenue (not even profit), like it does for WWE, it's not too far off.


Sure, but then by that reasoning even Merchandise sales are also insignificant in the grand scheme of things since they barely contribute to the overall revenue.










As we see in that above figure, if we are go solely by financial considerations then everything except Network, Television and to an extent Licensing contribute peanuts to the overall revenue, but that doesn't mean that the other factors don't hold importance to the WWE, because they sure as hell do.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AoEC_ said:


> Sure, but then by that reasoning even Merchandise sales are also insignificant in the grand scheme of things since they barely contribute to the overall revenue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As we see in that above figure, if we are go solely by financial considerations then everything except Network, Television and to an extent Licensing contribute peanuts to the overall revenue, but that doesn't mean that the other factors don't hold importance to the WWE, because they sure as hell do.


Like I said, they hold some importance for sure. But nowhere near the amount of the TV deal, ratings, Network, and Licensing are by a pretty good margin, the biggest factors.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

YouTube is among the largest internet media platforms in the World, a WWE presence there is mandatory. However, just having videos up there doesn't make your product hotter. WWE doesn't profit from a YouTube presence just because it's YouTube. 
YouTube is just like TV, only on the internet, and the views indicate how desirable your product is. If you look at how many garbage vids on there have way over a million views, WWE videos are not very special.
As comparison: the first two search result videos for "McGregor Mayweather Press Conference", which are merely a day old, have a combined view count of 4.5 million.


----------



## HenryBowers

Youtube contributes nothing financially. The ad bubble collapsed years ago and nearly every YT star has lost a livelyhood. 

If anything YT is cannabilizing revenue by giving people an excuse to not watch RAW. Why watch 3 hrs of a boribg show when its condensced into 5 mins on YT?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Should be a noticeable bump this week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Should be a relatively decent number. 

But of course numbers are delayed for (checks calendar and sees no holiday)... reasons.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.140M
H2-3.237M
H3-3.083M
3H-3.153M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.09% / + 0.097M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.76% / - 0.154M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 1.82% / - 0.057M )
7/17/17 Vs 7/10/17 ( + 4.79% / + 0.144M )

Demo (7/17/17 Vs 7/10/17):
H1- 1.030D Vs 1.000D
H2- 1.100D Vs 0.970D
H3- 1.080D Vs 0.950D
3H- 1.070D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW is 5th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/17/17 Vs 7/18/16):
H1- 3.140M Vs 3.204M
H2- 3.237M Vs 3.236M
H3- 3.083M Vs 2.960M
3H- 3.153M Vs 3.133M ( + 0.64% / + 0.020M )

Demo (7/17/17 Vs 7/18/16):
H1- 1.030D Vs 1.180D
H2- 1.100D Vs 1.160D
H3- 1.080D Vs 1.050D
3H- 1.070D Vs 1.130D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 11th, 10th & 14th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

WOW. Barely an increase from last week's Raw, and this week's show featured a main event match that was for the number one contendorship for the World Title at the 2nd biggest show of the year.

Yikes.


----------



## AoEC_

Higher than last year? That's a positive, since last year's show had a WWE Championship match between Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose as well in the main event. The RAW main event scene has been on fire for the past few weeks, they need to keep the momentum going..


----------



## Dolorian

Taking into account the usual post-PPV bump that last week enjoyed (which couldn't keep all three hours above 3M) this was a decent increase and the third hour retained more viewers from the second hours than last week's third hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The hour that featured a number 1 contendership for the title at SummerSlam (2nd biggest show of the year) wasn't even the highest rated hour of last night's show. It basically got the same viewership as the Rollins/Wyatt REMATCH from last week's Raw, which was a rematch from the previous night, which was a filler feud with barely anything put into it.

They can't be happy about that.


----------



## JC00

So the 3rd hour was the least watched? Cue the Roman fans blaming the Angle storyline for people tuning out.

But I thought Big Dawg = Ratings


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JC00 said:


> So the 3rd hour was the least watched? Cue the Roman fans blaming the Angle storyline for people tuning out.
> 
> But I thought Big Dawg = Ratings


Not even the number one contendership being on the line for the Brand's main title did anything to move the needle. And that's without any competition or holiday's. Imagine when the NFL is here in 2 months..


----------



## Chrome

At least all 3 hours were above 3 million which is a rarity these days. :draper2


----------



## AoEC_

Interesting that ratings have risen in a show with no Lesnar just following a show with Lesnar which was also the PPV fallout show, in which Lesnar was involved in a great segment with Joe and Reigns. Just goes on to show that good booking, more than any individuals are paramount to bring the viewers back the following week. Should be interesting to see the numbers with Lesnar now and the build up for a prospective fatal four way on the cards for SS.


----------



## Strategize

JC00 said:


> *So the 3rd hour was the least watched? * Cue the Roman fans blaming the Angle storyline for people tuning out.
> 
> But I thought Big Dawg = Ratings


Why is that some sort of shocking twist to you? It's always been that way like 95% of the time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Last week: 3.009

This week: 3.153 (with a #1 contenders match for SS)

Look out, world. WWE is coming for you!

Without a #1 contenders match last night if they got these numbers, I wouldn't be so harsh. But considering there was AND it was advertised from last week, these numbers are pathetic. It wasn't even the highest or 2nd highest hour of the night.


----------



## wwe9391

Nice ratings this week. Maintained the PPV bump from last week. Nice job Roman and Joe!



Strategize said:


> Why is that some sort of shocking twist to you? It's always been that way like 95% of the time.


Exactly. The 3rd hour will always be the lowest no matter who is in it. Some cant seem to understand it.




> Without a #1 contenders match last night if they got these numbers, *I wouldn't be so hars*h. But considering there was AND it was advertised from last week, these numbers are pathetic. It wasn't even the highest or 2nd highest hour of the night.


Please. WWE could get Walking Dead ratings and you still would be harsh.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

In what world is a number one contenders match for the main title at SS, that was advertised a week in advance, the lowest rated hour of a show that had one really good segment that took place in the first segment of the show, and mostly crap after it?

:lol


----------



## starsfan24

Solid ratings this week.


----------



## AoEC_

Interesting pattern forming here:

3rd July: 2.839 million
10th July: 3.009 million
17th July: 3.153 million

Interestingly, the show with the highest ratings is the one which wasn't in the vicinity of a PPV.. 11% increase over the past 2 weeks. Seeing these numbers, WWE must understand the importance of building up story lines over weeks and giving people reasons to tune in like the previous 2 weeks have proved. Hope they continue with the trend.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

OH shit, the Angle storyline took place in hour 3 and was also advertised a week in advance. Completely forgot about that. And hour 3 was STILL the lowest rated and barely drew 3 million.

Yeah, that makes it even worse.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

AoEC_ said:


> Interesting pattern forming here:
> 
> 3rd July: 2.839 million
> 10th July: 3.009 million
> 17th July: 3.153 million
> 
> Interestingly, the show with the highest ratings is the one which wasn't in the vicinity of a PPV.. 11% increase over the past 2 weeks. Seeing these numbers, WWE must understand the importance of building up story lines over weeks and giving people reasons to tune in like the previous 2 weeks have proved. Hope they continue with the trend.


They still haven't reached the number from the week after the NBA finals.
May have been the Extreme Rules fallout show. In any case, the interest generated from Joe getting the #1 contender spot didn't last long.
And hour 3 being the lowest doesn't surprise me one bit. The Angle segment was over 10 minutes into hour 3, and nobody wants to see Reigns in the top contender spot for anything. They probably kept a good amount of viewers for the Angle bit, which kept Hour 3 around 3 million. Without that, the drop most likely would have been worse.


----------



## AoEC_

Strategize said:


> Why is that some sort of shocking twist to you? It's always been that way like 95% of the time.


Exactly. Hell, the third hour was down even during the Daniel Bryan retirement episode which featured Bryan's retirement speech and which was advertised as well. It's just the nature of the time slot.


----------



## wwe9391

AoEC_ said:


> Interesting pattern forming here:
> 
> 3rd July: 2.839 million
> 10th July: 3.009 million
> 17th July: 3.153 million
> 
> Interestingly, the show with the highest ratings is the one which wasn't in the vicinity of a PPV.. 11% increase over the past 2 weeks. Seeing these numbers, WWE must understand the importance of building up story lines over weeks and giving people reasons to tune in like the previous 2 weeks have proved. Hope they continue with the trend.


Yeah. They have had some great storylines with Braun vs Roman and Joe vs Brock. 

Now they are looking like they are going towards a 4 way match. People are def interested in these 4 guys I feel. 

This #1 contenders match def help the increase this week.


----------



## AoEC_

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> They still haven't reached the number from the week after the NBA finals.


I totally back them to if they continue with their focus on story lines and feuds and giving people reasons to tune into weekly programming and not just putting filler matches and rematches with no meaning and build up to them. Having a show doing better than both the preceding shows - one a PPV go home show and another the fallout episode is a positive development in my eyes.


----------



## Chrome

Yeah, 3rd hour being the lowest is the norm. It not being the lowest has only happened like, 5 times since the 3-hour Raw era began lol.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

An hour with the big Kurt Angle reveal and a number one contenders match for the main title at SS, both advertised a week in advance, should do better than a 3.0 million viewers, and much better than last week's hour 3 which only did 2.9 million viewers with nothing special at all going down in that hour 3.

If the Angle angle (see what I did there) and the #1 contender's match both didn't take place last night in hour 3, I'd call this a half-decent number (for this era of terrible ratings). But both, and both advertised a full week in advance? Not good.


----------



## wwe9391

Chrome said:


> Yeah, 3rd hour being the lowest is the norm. It not being the lowest has only happened like, 5 times since the 3-hour Raw era began lol.


Yea some just don't understand. 


You can put Rock vs Austin 4 in the 3rd hour and it will still be the lowest out of the 3.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I suppose all hours above 3 mil is a good thing.

Still though, considering all the promotion for the #1 contenders match since last week, as well as the whole Angle storyline... it's a bit disappointing. Especially that third hour, the lowest of the show, which is where both of those things took place.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Yeah, 3rd hour being the lowest is the norm. It not being the lowest has only happened like, 5 times since the 3-hour Raw era began lol.


It's the norm. But 99% of the 3rd hours don't have two big angles going down in the 3rd hour like last night's did. Without the 2 big angle, I call it a decent number for this era, but still kind of scary with no competition.

With both things in hour 3 and advertised a week in advance with no competition or holiday? Scary.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I assume many people do it like myself, tune in shortly in Hour 1 to see if something worthwhile is happening, and if not, just watch hour 2, because you then see what the main event will be, and if that sucks, you tune out.
If you zap into Raw, and you see something you don't like, you don't need to tune back in for at least another 15 minutes, because it's either A. a long promo by someone leading into a brawl with the person he is feuding, or B. a long match. And both are interrupted by a million commercial breaks that stretch segments forever. Add the predictability factor, and you can watch 5 minutes of a show and not miss a thing.
If you boil it down, there is only a handful of things happening in each hour.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> It's the norm. But 99% of the 3rd hours don't have two big angles going down in the 3rd hour like last night's did. Without the 2 big angle, I call it a decent number for this era, but still kind of scary with no competition.
> 
> With both things in hour 3 and advertised a week in advance with no competition or holiday? Scary.


That's right. If people were interested, nobody keeps them from tuning in later during the show for the main events in hour 3, if three hours is too long for them.
But it's the same old thing: you put on a bad show for two hours, and it turns people off, so they don't stay for the rest. WWE trained people to not expect anything, even if an angle seems interesting, and why in the world would people stay for yet another #MakeRomanLookStrong episode? I bet not one person seriously expected Reigns to not win.
And the way this ended was a total clusterfuck. "Let's just ignore DQ rules".


----------



## Chrome

ShowStopper said:


> It's the norm. But 99% of the 3rd hours don't have two big angles going down in the 3rd hour like last night's did. Without the 2 big angle, I call it a decent number for this era, but still kind of scary with no competition.
> 
> With both things in hour 3 and advertised a week in advance with no competition or holiday? Scary.


Yeah, it's still a shit number lol, but it was at least above 3 million. As AoEC_ alluded to, they need to keep the storylines going so the number can keep growing and they can get out of the WOAT Raw rating territory they've been stuck in for a minute.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Yeah, it's still a shit number lol, but it was at least above 3 million. As AoEC_ alluded to, they need to keep the storylines going so the number can keep growing and they can get out of the WOAT Raw rating territory they've been stuck in for a minute.


Yeah, it was above 3 million. I would've liked to have seen it higher than 3.1 million, though. But I get you.

The thing that really sucks for them is even if have a good show for the next 2 months, which the odds are highly against, the NFL is alittle less than 2 months away from starting up again. So, they're fucked either way, when you think about it.


----------



## wwe9391

Not scary at all. 3rd hour being the lowest is normal.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not when it's loaded with 2 big angles which are advertised a week in advance. That's not normal because they never have 2 big things in the last hour, let alone something that was to decide who gets a title shot at your 2nd biggest show of the year. And then an angle featuring a GOAT and very recent WWE HOF'er and barely reach 3 million at the bare minimum.


----------



## wwe9391

They have had big angles in the 3rd hour before and still ended up being the lowest hour. 

Like I said the 3rd hour will never be the highest hour on the show. It's the normal. You can put anyone and anything in that hour and it will never be the highest. FACT


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Third hour never had multiple big angles featuring a number one contendership for the main title at the 2nd biggest show of the year and an angle featuring a Legend/GM, both of which were advertised heavily for a week straight.


----------



## chronoxiong

Wow this show is on the upswing. Can it keep up? It's been solid lately.


----------



## Dolorian

Ratings were higher than the previous week and also higher than the same week last year. That's an improvement. The third hour this week was also higher than the third hour last year, which did less than 3M. That third hour featured a WWE title match between Rollins and Ambrose on the main event which was announced a week in advance. That show also announced a week in advance that both Steph and Shane would reveal their General Managers.

They announced a lot of matches in advance for next week which is rare for RAW so it would be nice if the show can keep it's momentum going.


----------



## DoubtGin

Pretty good rise. RAW has been full of "bigger" (not groundbreaking) moments, and the reveal definitely made people tune in. Numbers are not anything to get overly excited about, but it is a decent increase.

Honestly, stuff like this is what they should do on the weekly shows. Work on good storylines and have build ups with big reveals instead of giving pointless promos and matches. That way, people will actually watch and be excited about the PPVs which should be all about the wrestling with clean finishes.

Drama/storylines on the weekly shows, good competitive matches on the PPVs.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

WWE needs so much more than a couple of weeks of above average shows (for me, they are still boring af, but I don't judge others) to get a significant amount of viewers back.
The thing is, everybody knows where things are heading. EVERYBODY. It doesn't matter if it's Brock VS Reigns at Wrestlemania, or Cena VS Reigns, the end game is Roman Reigns. Everyone knows it, he is the guy, he is the guy everything will revolve around, and since Vince only cares what is next for his top guy, the rest of the roster either feeds him, or gets the creative scraps falling to the floor. 
And people see where things are going in the future: Jinder, Corbin, Carmella, Jordan. How can you get Trust back from fans when your brain is so fried that you elevate Jinder Mahal to WWE Champion level?

Just to make this clear: this right now is the second hottest phase of the WWE calendar after Road to Wrestlemania. This is WWE firing on all cylinders! And save for a handful of minutes each week, it's barely watchable! This isn't 1997, when you had an hour of Raw, and barely any other TV presence, and 5 or 10 minutes of Austin, Shawn, or Bret per week were enough to make it okay or good. 
It's simply not enough in this era to have ONE guy that is legit over, on your TV for 15 minutes a week, if you have, including a PPV, nearly 10-11 hours per WEEK to fill.
You can't afford neglecting your midcard by sticking them into 6 months long feuds, and putting them on Monday Night Rerun, or Tuesday Night Leftovers. Sticking someone like Nakamura in a feud with Baldin' Corbin, and having AJ Styles feud John Cena, which AJ will lose AGAIN, and having Dive! Orton clog the top spot in 2017 to wrestle a jobber for the title inside a Punjabi Prison, in front of a not sold out crowd, that shit is not going to fly in 2017. Nor is it going to fly anytime soon, and certainly not before 2019.

Bottom line is that no matter what is on Raw, it all doesn't matter because it comes down to: WWE Champ the night after Summerslam: Roman Reigns. WWE Champ the night after Wrestlemania: Roman Reigns.
Nothing else matters. No matter how entertaining of a feud the midcard produces once in a blue moon, no midcarder who gets over on his own will accomplish more than losing a feud with Reigns once in a while. Will there be a different champ once in a while? Sure. Just like 2015 or 2016 or 2017. And just like all the previous years, the roster will be held hostage for the Roman Reigns end game. That's the foreseeable future. 
And you can't keep fans, or dear lord make new ones, if you keep feeding fans shows without happy endings, and with having a roster full of heel champions, that get go-away heat.

And whether Raw has a 100.000 or 200.000 curiosity Spike once in a while because WWE does a wacky angle with promises they can't cash, who gives a fuck, really? Steph will be back soon, and it's back to square 1.
The big picture sucks.
This number is the ceiling for the next two months, and for the foreseeable future. NFL starts soon, then you have Road to Wrestlemania, whose Ratings sucked ASS this year, then there is NBA (which apparently is now also tanking viewership after not having been relevant for ratings in 20 years), and then, if they are lucky, summer ratings will only be down the usual 10% year over year. Meaning 3 million minus 10%.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

People talking about how in previous weeks they did 2.9's. You do realize this week, they did 3.0 in the third hour and 3.1 overall for the entire show, right?

By the way some are speaking, you'd think they did a 3.7 this week or something. 3.0/3.1 with your SS main event determined (or supposed to be) and a big angle with a Legend.

Guys, :lol


----------



## Bink77

Doesn't the nfl mnf start in 6 or 7 weeks?


----------



## Lothario

I can always tell what the numbers are by simply looking at the date and time of the last reply. Some of you definitely more so want to see the numbers fall off of a cliff as opposed to seeing the show actually improve. Petty but this company has done a stellar job pissing off fans. This was the first full episode of RAW that I've watched in nearly six months. I personally enjoyed it. Hopefully they continue to attempt to right the ship. They can claim ratings don't matter but they've clearly made an effort to garner intrigue, what with them making a concentrayed effort to announce multiple (potentially intriguing) matches for the following week. Looking forward to Dean & Seth squashing the Miztourage next Monday. :mark


----------



## AoEC_

Cass and Enzo along with The Big Show again bringing in the YT numbers, 2nd most viewed video of this week atm and 2nd by barely a whisker to the main event:











Fascinating to see these guys consistently getting such views for a mid card feud on YT.


----------



## Erik.

Numbers increased for a third week running? That main event scene 

:banderas


----------



## wwe9391

Dolorian said:


> Ratings were higher than the previous week and also higher than the same week last year. That's an improvement. The third hour this week was also higher than the third hour last year, which did less than 3M. That third hour featured a WWE title match between Rollins and Ambrose on the main event which was announced a week in advance. That show also announced a week in advance that both Steph and Shane would reveal their General Managers.


Very interesting. Just goes back to my point of there have been other big past angles in the 3rd hour and it still was the lowest rated hour on raw. 


3rd hour will always be bad no matter who's in it.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

This same week last year, Raw was up against the first night of the RNC. I don't think it's fair to compare the two weeks without that asterisk.

Still, an improvement and they did build the show well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mifune Jackson said:


> This same week last year, Raw was up against the first night of the RNC. I don't think it's fair to compare the two weeks without that asterisk.
> 
> Still, an improvement and they did build the show well.


Yep. So there goes the point about it being higher than last year's Raw at this time. This week's rating was a total failure for a show that had two big angles hyped a week in advance and both put in the same hour.


----------



## wwe9391

An increase from last week and last year is not a failure :lol really reaching now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And there's confirmation. No comeback to that. Thanks for posting that, Mifune. (Y)


----------



## YankBastard




----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I don't think I ever pretended to want something else than this company to die a miserable death, after what they did to Bryan, Punk, Bayley, and wrestling in General.

My conscious is clean :draper2


----------



## xio8ups

This show has its 3 million viewers locked in. Till they get old. And bored of wrestling.


----------



## A-C-P

xio8ups said:


> This show has its 3 million viewers locked in. Till they get old. And bored of wrestling.


Most of them are already "old" if you look at the demographics :draper2


----------



## Ace

Raw gets a pass for ratings this week as the show was solid.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.156M
H2-3.129M
H3-2.917M
3H-3.067M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.86% / - 0.027M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.78% / - 0.212M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.57% / - 0.239M )
7/24/17 Vs 7/17/17 ( - 2.73% / - 0.086M )

Demo (7/24/17 Vs 7/17/17):
H1- 1.060D Vs 1.030D
H2- 1.020D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.080D
3H- 1.010D Vs 1.070D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/24/17 Vs 7/25/16):
H1- 3.156M Vs 3.412M
H2- 3.129M Vs 3.350M
H3- 2.917M Vs 3.254M
3H- 3.067M Vs 3.339M ( - 8.15% / - 0.272M )

Demo (7/24/17 Vs 7/25/16):
H1- 1.060D Vs 1.240D
H2- 1.020D Vs 1.240D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.210D
3H- 1.010D Vs 1.230D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 12th, 13th & 15th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Only slightly down from last week (3.1 vs. 3.0) and last week had TWO huge angles hyped up in hour 3. Pretty much the same number with no big angles. Pretty good, I guess.

Pretty crazy that last week's Hour 3 with 2 huge angles in it barely did any better than this week's hour 3 (3.0 vs. 2.9). The audience is the audience, all hardcores at this point.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Held up well but still not good this is considered decent for Summerslam. 

3rd hour being down 200k from rest of show isn't that good either. Guess mini-Shield reunions don't have much of an impact. Ambrose/Rollins, Rollins/Reigns, Ambrose/Reigns... none of that works. They really want to pop a number, a proper Shield reunion is in order (of course they would do that on PPV though).

Although it is a little telling that 3rd hour this week wasn't down much from last week considering what last week had, but this week's numbers still are far from good.


----------



## wwe9391

Yikes 3rd hour low again and they were advertising Rollins and Ambrose tagging together all day. Not a good look for them. Scary.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Think about how little the Universal Title means right now. Last week had a heavily hyped # 1 contender's match for that title at the 2nd biggest show of the year, it was hyped all week, and did the same number as this week's hour 3 with nothing nearly as big happening, a random, meaningless tag match in the main event.

Rollins/Amborse vs. Miztourage on the same level as the 'big, bad' main event scene right now.

:ha


----------



## Gravyv321

this samoan-loving fangeek probably wants any remaining popular babyfaces to be demoted just so that his fav can remain on top. pretty sad and scary tbh, especially since there are no other faces in the me scene too lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Just remember everybody that this is the tippy top ceiling.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Raw resumes it's 8% drop from last year. Last week must have been an anomaly. I do think it's odd that the Road to SummerSlam has gotten similar ratings as Road to Wrestlemania. That really says how far WM season has dropped off.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Pre-SummerSlam and Pre-WrestleMania are pretty much the two peak times for WWE to do well ratings-wise. If they weren't slightly up, that'd be really bad.

The show has also been slightly better recently.


----------



## fabi1982

I am not a defender of ratings or in any way have much interest in these discussions, but when you look at this, showing the cable ratings for last week all three hours are in the top10 and also just one show was higher in ratings from the non cable broadcast. Excluding non weekly shows like the shark thing, descendents 2 (and maybe game of thrones as well) it is on position 3,4 and 6. Despite the low viewership it seems like this is the best you can get out of american television viewers...


link: look here


----------



## A-C-P

Randy Lahey said:


> Raw resumes it's 8% drop from last year. Last week must have been an anomaly. I do think it's odd that the Road to SummerSlam has gotten similar ratings as Road to Wrestlemania. That really says how far WM season has dropped off.


Last week was an anomaly b/c the same week last year was up against one of the presidential debates.

So the 5-10% yearly decline turned is very much on track


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1-3.194M
H2-3.275M
H3-3.021M
3H-3.163M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 2.54% / + 0.081M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.76% / - 0.254M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 5.42% / - 0.173M )
7/31/17 Vs 7/24/17 ( + 3.13% / + 0.096M )

Demo (7/31/17 Vs 7/24/17):
H1- 1.030D Vs 1.060D
H2- 1.060D Vs 1.020D
H3- 0.990D Vs 0.950D
3H- 1.027D Vs 1.010D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/31/17 Vs 8/1/16):
H1- 3.194M Vs 3.463M
H2- 3.275M Vs 3.399M
H3- 3.021M Vs 3.081M
3H- 3.163M Vs 3.314M ( - 4.56% / - 0.151M )

Demo (7/31/17 Vs 8/1/16):
H1- 1.030D Vs 1.270D
H2- 1.060D Vs 1.260D
H3- 0.990D Vs 1.190D
3H- 1.027D Vs 1.240D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Rollins/Ambrose in the highest hour. :drose

I guess low 3's is the ceiling considering there is no NBA or NFL or holidays right now. Should be interesting once the NFL rolls around in alittle over a month.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Slightly different numbers, different week, same old story.


----------



## Mordecay

it deserved less, than show sucked


----------



## machomanjohncena

i'm surprised the 3rd hour drop wasn't bigger


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That's well above what they deserve.


----------



## JC00

machomanjohncena said:


> i'm surprised the 3rd hour drop wasn't bigger


Not sure why. Alexa appeared in the 3rd hour, people stayed tuned in to see The Goddess of WWE


----------



## God Movement

Seems that advertising Roman v Strowman v Joe beforehand delivered the goods.


----------



## Dolorian

God Movement said:


> Seems that advertising Roman v Strowman v Joe beforehand delivered the goods.


It did, according to f4wonline (Meltzer) this is the best rating since the roster shakeup...



> The WWE's television ratings momentum continues to be positive as last night's Raw did 3.16 million viewers, the best number since the April 17th show which was the superstar shakeup episode, and a show that had far more reasons to do big numbers.
> 
> Part of the difference seems to be advertising matches in advance, as they had pushed the Roman Reigns vs. Samoa Joe vs. Braun Strowman main event for a week. Another strong sign was that even with putting that triple threat at the start of the third hour, the third hour, which ended with the Big Show vs. Big Cass match, while having a drop, remained above three million viewers.
> 
> Raw was not only the top rated show on cable, but also beat the Fox network prime time shows head-to-head even though fewer homes get cable than network television.
> 
> Raw was up three percent from last week, and most impressively, beat the show from July 17th which had Reigns vs. Joe for the Universal title shot and the Kurt Angle reveal.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.19 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.28 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 3.02 million viewers


Good going for RAW, hopefully they keep up this momentum.


----------



## AoEC_

Great to see Raw building on the momentum of the past few weeks spearheaded by the compelling main event scene. No reason why consistent emphasis on weekly programming wouldn't bring viewers.. as vindicated by the recent numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Just a couple weeks ago, the Joe/Reigns match and Angle reveal was considered a good number, which was very similar to this number. Now, this is?

Hypocrisy is a beautiful, beautiful thing.

Last year's Raw for the same week did 3.314 miliion viewers. So, they are still right in line with a huge drop from last year for the very same week.


----------



## JC00

But on a serious note though

Viewership (7/31/17 Vs 8/1/16):
H1- 3.194M Vs 3.463M
H2- 3.275M Vs 3.399M
H3- 3.021M Vs 3.081M
3H- 3.163M Vs 3.314M ( - 4.56% / - 0.151M )

That's not that bad given how meh Raw has been and the episode last year was the 2nd post-brand split Raw. Which the closing segment on that show last year was Lesnar making his first appearance since WM.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JC00 said:


> But on a serious note though
> 
> Viewership (7/31/17 Vs 8/1/16):
> H1- 3.194M Vs 3.463M
> H2- 3.275M Vs 3.399M
> H3- 3.021M Vs 3.081M
> 3H- 3.163M Vs 3.314M ( - 4.56% / - 0.151M )
> 
> That's not that bad given how meh Raw has been and the episode last year was the 2nd post-brand split Raw. Which the closing segment on that show last year was Lesnar making his first appearance since WM.


Raw has been very good for the past month or so, and they are still losing viewers from last year; with no NBA, no NFL, and no holiday last night.

And we're just a month or so away from the NFL. 

It's not a good sign, tbh.


----------



## Dolorian

AoEC_ said:


> Great to see Raw building on the momentum of the past few weeks spearheaded by the compelling main event scene. No reason why consistent emphasis on weekly programming wouldn't bring viewers.. as vindicated by the recent numbers.


Yeah it is nice to see, let's hope they keep the momentum going as we move closer to SummerSlam. Curious that they didn't announce anything in advance for next week like they had been doing over the last few weeks. Unless I missed it, I think they should keep doing that as opposed to what they were doing before of not announcing anything or just throwing it on twitter an hour before the show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The reason they're not announcing anything a week in advance this week is because they've now tried it multiple times over the past month and they still can't get out of the 3 million range.

I mean, think about it: A Raw in which they advertised the Kurt Angle son reveal AND the Universal Title number one contendership match for SS, in which they put both segments in the 3rd hour, got a lousy 3 million viewers even with no competition and not falling on a Holiday as possible excuses for such a poor number.

Even they see that it hasn't worked.


----------



## AoEC_

Dolorian said:


> Yeah it is nice to see, let's hope they keep the momentum going as we move closer to SummerSlam. Curious that they didn't announce anything in advance for next week like they had been doing over the last few weeks. Unless I missed it, I think they should keep doing that as opposed to what they were doing before of not announcing anything or just throwing it on twitter an hour before the show.


Absolutely. There has to be a definite trend in that, you got to bring the sole emphasis back to weekly programming, make the viewer cognizant of the fact that missing a weekly show would make you miss something significant.. it has to be a habit in the long run to make the programming compelling.. I remember so many shows which would end with JR shouting at the top of his lungs being excited about what is to follow next week.. that's how you retain viewers and make them invested to tune in every single time..


----------



## JC00

ShowStopper said:


> Last year's Raw for the same week did 3.314 miliion viewers. So, they are still right in line with a huge drop from last year for the very same week.




151,000 viewers isn't really a huge drop.


7/27/15 vs 8/1/16 was bigger

7/27/15- 3.672m (1H was 3.421m/2H was 3.754m/3H was 3.839m)

8/1/16- 3.314m (1H was 3.463m/2H was 3.339m/3H was 3.081m)

down 358,000 viewers overall
2nd hour down down 415,000
3rd hour down down 758,000


Now those are significant drops.

Then if we just highlight the 3rd hours for each 

3rd hour in 2015 featured 
Owens vs Orton
Rollins vs Cena for the US title 

3rd hour in 2016 featured
Rollins vs Zayn
Lesnar first appearance since WM


3rd hour of this year featured
Last few minutes of the Triple Threat
Drifter vs Kalisto 
Bayley vs Nia
Cass vs Show


I don't know to me I think this year did alright given what the 3rd hour was compared to the year's previous. 

A 3rd hour of Drifter/Kalisto, Bayley/Nia and Cass/Show did only 60k less than a 3rd hour that had Rollins/Zayn and Lesnar's first show back since WM and the start of the build for his Summerslam match with Orton.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JC00 said:


> 151,000 viewers isn't really a huge drop.
> 
> 
> 7/27/15 vs 8/1/16 was bigger
> 
> 7/27/15- 3.672m (1H was 3.421m/2H was 3.754m/3H was 3.839m)
> 
> 8/1/16- 3.314m (1H was 3.463m/2H was 3.339m/3H was 3.081m)
> 
> down 358,000 viewers overall
> 2nd hour down down 415,000
> 3rd hour down down 758,000
> 
> 
> Now those are significant drops.
> 
> Then if we just highlight the 3rd hours for each
> 
> 3rd hour in 2015 featured
> Owens vs Orton
> Rollins vs Cena for the US title
> 
> 3rd hour in 2016 featured
> Rollins vs Zayn
> Lesnar first appearance since WM
> 
> 
> 3rd hour of this year featured
> Last few minutes of the Triple Threat
> Drifter vs Kalisto
> Bayley vs Nia
> Cass vs Show
> 
> 
> I don't know to me I think this year did alright given what the 3rd hour was compared to the year's previous.
> 
> A 3rd hour of Drifter/Kalisto, Bayley/Nia and Cass/Show did only 60k less than a 3rd hour that had Rollins/Zayn and Lesnar's first show back since WM and the start of the build for his Summerslam match with Orton.





Guys, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but these are the same numbers Raw was getting prior to the NBA playoffs starting. Since the NBA Playoffs have ended, they're now back where they were before, in the very low 3 millions.

Actually, it's even lower. Checking some random March Raw numbers, and the 3/6/17 Raw did 3.21 million viewers. The 3/13/17 Raw did 3.23 million viewers. Both of those numbers are better than this week's and last week's numbers.

So, here we are a few weeks from the 2nd biggest show of the year, and early March numbers were better than these numbers.

A couple of ya'll are living in a fantasyland.


----------



## Erik.

They definitely see the second hour as their most important - they always tend to put their biggest segments and matches there now.

Not surprised the second hour was the highest with Rollins/Ambrose and Strowman/Joe/Reigns considering those are the best built feuds on the entire program. 

Shocked the final hour didn't drop more as the show wasn't going to get any better after that second hour - must be someone worth watching for the casuals. Couldn't be the whole Cass/Enzo thing could it? Don't they get the highest YouTube views too?


----------



## Dolorian

AoEC_ said:


> Absolutely. There has to be a definite trend in that, you got to bring the sole emphasis back to weekly programming, make the viewer cognizant of the fact that missing a weekly show would make you miss something significant.. it has to be a habit in the long run to make the programming compelling.. I remember so many shows which would end with JR shouting at the top of his lungs being excited about what is to follow next week.. that's how you retain viewers and make them invested to tune in every single time..


True, they really need to work on further instilling that "can't miss, must tune in every week" feeling in order to retain and start increasing viewers. Strong long term programs specially at the main event level are crucial for this and that is what the show had been lacking for a while. No surprise that they have been doing this for several weeks now and they are riding a positive momentum as a result.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Nevermind Raw's from this time last year, they are down from the viewership they received in early 2017. And this is without even going up against the NFL for this year yet.

This year will wind up being WWE's worst viewership in Raw history.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Given that the NFL crushes them 4 months a year, and NBA crushes them now as well for about two months, then you take in all the holidays, and you have maybe 5 months a year where they have the opportunity to draw acceptable numbers, that are still within the annual decline.

Ratings is one thing, and it's THE most important thing in light of 2019, but what really strikes me for a while now is the noticeable decline in attendance, and the dropping venue merch sales. It really hit home with me this year. A couple hundred people for a live show CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH with BROCK LESNAR in DETROIT. Barely 9.000 for a Raw in Pittsburgh with practically the Summerslam Main Event on the card. Battleground having shitty attendance, Smackdown in general having shitty attendance. Venue merch way down. 
They have local fanbases dying at their hands.


----------



## Dolorian

Erik. said:


> Not surprised the second hour was the highest with Rollins/Ambrose and Strowman/Joe/Reigns considering those are the best built feuds on the entire program.


Yeah the stuff on the main event scene with Reigns/Joe/Braun and the Rollins/Ambrose stuff are definitely the two best angles on the whole show right now so it was good for them to put both in what is normally the hour with the most viewers. 




> Shocked the final hour didn't drop more as the show wasn't going to get any better after that second hour - must be someone worth watching for the casuals. Couldn't be the whole Cass/Enzo thing could it? Don't they get the highest YouTube views too?


Well looking at the ratings and the YouTube views you mentioned the Enzo/Cass/Show stuff does seem to get plenty of attention.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Meltzer said that Enzo and Cass do among the best quarter hour ratings, that's why they had faith in the Main Event. 
But I'm not sure they know that it draws because of Enzo. So, if they keep making him look like a fool every week, it's only a matter of time until that goes away.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Given that the NFL crushes them 4 months a year, and NBA crushes them now as well for about two months, then you take in all the holidays, and you have maybe 5 months a year where they have the opportunity to draw acceptable numbers, that are still within the annual decline.
> 
> Ratings is one thing, and it's THE most important thing in light of 2019, but what really strikes me for a while now is the noticeable decline in attendance, and the dropping venue merch sales. It really hit home with me this year. A couple hundred people for a live show CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH with BROCK LESNAR in DETROIT. Barely 9.000 for a Raw in Pittsburgh with practically the Summerslam Main Event on the card. Battleground having shitty attendance, Smackdown in general having shitty attendance. Venue merch way down.
> They have local fanbases dying at their hands.


9,000 people went to Raw last night with an advertised Brock Lesnar appearance, who is World Champion, along with pretty much giving away the SummerSlam main event, with 3 of the 4 participants battling it out, given away free on Raw. 

All that and they couldn't even hit a lousy 10K in a good Northeast market, which is their home region. Couple that with barely hitting 3 million viewers with basically giving away the SS main event and a rare appearance from the World Champion, and they still barely hit 3 million with no competition.

Do you realize how bad that is?! They are down from last year. Down from this year before the NBA Playoffs started. Which means that the NBA Playoffs took away some of their viewers permanently since not all of them have come back yet since they are down from earlier this year. Couple that with the awful quarterly financial report from last year, and..

This. Is. Epic.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Don't forget to add that they raise ticket prices to such heights that it puts people off as well. On top of that.

They completely overestimate themselves. You can do that if you are Real Madrid, or Manchester United, where there will always be demand, and you will always find people paying for it, but if you are Vince McMahon, and think you can magically transform Wrestling into Disney, PLUS piss on fans' carpets, well, you better have some spare cash if you want a peaceful pension.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.263M
H2- 3.314M
H3- 3.144M
3H- 3.240M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 1.56% / + 0.051M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.13% / - 0.170M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.65% / - 0.119M )
8/7/17 Vs 7/31/17 ( + 2.43% / + 0.077M )

Demo (8/7/17 Vs 7/31/17):
H1- 1.050D Vs 1.030D
H2- 1.060D Vs 1.060D
H3- 1.030D Vs 0.990D
3H- 1.047D Vs 1.027D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/7/17 Vs 8/8/16):
H1- 3.263M Vs 2.950M
H2- 3.314M Vs 2.974M
H3- 3.144M Vs 2.809M
3H- 3.240M Vs 2.911M ( + 11.30% / + 0.329M )

Demo (8/7/17 Vs 8/8/16):
H1- 1.050D Vs 0.970D
H2- 1.060D Vs 0.990D
H3- 1.030D Vs 0.970D
3H- 1.047D Vs 0.977D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HOLY SHIT, HOUR 2 GOT HIGHER THAN A 3.0 - 3.2!!!! Wow! Seems like it's been awhile since that happened. The Ambrose/Cesaro match took place in that hour, with the then near Shield reunion.

:drose

Hour 3 with another drop, though.


----------



## wwe9391

Look at those numbers. Roman and Braun bringing them viewers in.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> HOLY SHIT, HOUR 2 GOT HIGHER THAN A 3.0 - 3.2!!!! Wow! Seems like it's been awhile since that happened. The Ambrose/Cesaro match took place in that hour, with the then near Shield reunion.
> 
> :drose
> 
> Hour 3 with another drop, though.


when hour 3 stays above 3 million its a win no matter the drop.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> when hour 3 stays above 3 million its a win no matter the drop.


Ehhh, not during a hot time of year when they advertise stuff with their SummerSlam main event. It's not horrible by today's standards, but it shows that hour 3 in unsalvagable...even with BIG guys main eventing it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Putting Brock up first seemed to have helped hour 1.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> Ehhh, not during a hot time of year when they advertise stuff with their SummerSlam main event. It's not horrible by today's standards, but it shows that hour 3 in unsalvagable...even with BIG guys main eventing it.


I'm just saying they should enjoy it now cause cause in a few weeks(nfl returns) they be lucky if any hour sniff 3 million the rest of the year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> I'm just saying they should enjoy it now cause cause in a few weeks(nfl returns) they be lucky if any hour sniff 3 million the rest of the year.


Yeah and don't get me wrong, I agree with you're saying. They're at right now where they were before the NBA Playoffs started, in the low 3 millions. So, it's expected, until, of course, as you pointed out, the NFL starts in a month or so.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

wwe9391 said:


> Look at those numbers. Roman and Braun bringing them viewers in.


How are the overrun numbers figured into Hour 3? Or are they at all?

I'm referring to viewers that tune in at 10pm.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I like how someone says "look at those numbers" and they're referring to the lowest rated hour of the bunch.

:lol


----------



## Ace

Good numbers for the week.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic

ShowStopper said:


> Yeah and don't get me wrong, I agree with you're saying. They're at right now where they were before the NBA Playoffs started, in the low 3 millions. So, it's expected, until, of course, as you pointed out, the NFL starts in a month or so.


I think they will bottom out at about 2.6.

It really matters on the NFL games that are there.

To be honest, I am more concerned they haven't gotten up to 3.5 yet, more so than the low numbers they keep hitting.

They should have been improving, and they have done nothing, it is really rough to see.


----------



## Dolorian

All three hours up from last week and by the looks of it the first time since mid April that each hour gets this high. RAW is having some good momentum now hopefully we continue to see the increase.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

DMD Mofomagic said:


> I think they will bottom out at about 2.6.
> 
> It really matters on the NFL games that are there.
> 
> To be honest, I am more concerned they haven't gotten up to 3.5 yet, more so than the low numbers they keep hitting.
> 
> They should have been improving, and they have done nothing, it is really rough to see.


I agree. It is very concerning their only where they were before the NBA Playoffs started. Think about it; this is their *ceiling*, like they're absolute best. What will it be like when actually have some competition again? The product has improved somewhat, but the ratings are still exactly the same that they were early Spring. Not a good sign and more proof that even 'big' guys don't draw today.

3.3 million in hour 2 is decent for this era, though.


----------



## Littbarski

Up 11% over the same week a year ago. That's impressive.


----------



## God Movement

Decent numbers. Second hour did very well. Third stayed above 3 million.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

ShowStopper said:


> I like how someone says "look at those numbers" and they're referring to the lowest rated hour of the bunch.
> 
> :lol


Do we know for sure if the overrun number is factored into the third hour rating? If it is then you have a point. If it isn't then we don't know for sure if more viewers came back from 10pm-10:08pm. People had this same argument with Bryan's retirement speech. 

Then there's the YouTube numbers. YOUTUBELOL :bosque



Brock's MizTV segment was uploaded two hours prior to Reigns/Braun. Now they have the same number of views. We don't have breakdowns for ratings anymore. How many viewers tuned out after the first commercial break? How many tuned in during the last 10 minutes of RAW? Based on the YouTube numbers we know what fans were most interested in.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> Do we know for sure if the overrun number is factored into the third hour rating? If it is then you have a point. If it isn't then we don't know for sure if more viewers came back from 10pm-10:08pm. People had this same argument with Bryan's retirement speech.
> 
> Then there's the YouTube numbers. YOUTUBELOL :bosque
> 
> 
> 
> Brock's MizTV segment was uploaded two hours prior to Reigns/Braun. Now they have the same number of views. We don't have breakdowns for ratings anymore. How many viewers tuned out after the first commercial break? How many tuned in during the last 10 minutes of RAW? Based on the YouTube numbers we know what fans were most interested in.


Interesting. I like how we make every concession in the world for certain talents that don't draw despite strong as fuck booking, but not others who don't have booking anywhere on the same planet. Very, very interesting.

Here's the fact: It's shit viewership. No NBA. No NFL. No Holiday. A couple weeks from the 2nd biggest show of the year, with two of the talents from the SummerSlam main event in a main event match with a stipulation, and the viewership sucked...again.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

ShowStopper said:


> Interesting. I like how we make every concession in the world for certain talents that don't draw despite strong as fuck booking, but not others who don't have booking anywhere on the same planet. Very, very interesting.
> 
> Here's the fact: It's shit viewership. No NBA. No NFL. No Holiday. A couple weeks from the 2nd biggest show of the year, with two of the talents from the SummerSlam main event in a main event match with a stipulation, and the viewership sucked...again.


...

The overrun number: is it factored into the third hour rating? If it is then your point is valid.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> ...
> 
> The overrun number: is it factored into the third hour rating? If it is then you're point is valid.


The point is valid regardless. Youtube is worldwide. The Nielsen ratings only count American viewers. Foreign viewers don't get counted towards these ratings.

So, there goes that.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

ShowStopper said:


> The point is valid regardless. Youtube is worldwide. The Nielsen ratings only count American viewers. Foreign viewers don't get counted towards these ratings.
> 
> So, there goes that.


But do we know when the most viewers were tuning in during the broadcast? Do the hourly breakdowns only take into account the number of viewers during that 60 minute timeframe OR does it overlap?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> But do we know when the most viewers were tuning in during the broadcast? Do the hourly breakdowns only take into account the number of viewers during that 60 minute timeframe OR does it overlap?


I don't know. But if we're going to question it for this week, then we can question it for every 3 hour Raw ever.


----------



## wwe9391

Spinning the narrative again. What else is new?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I'm spinning the narrative and not the guy who is looking for reasons to justify the hour 3 viewership?

Only certain wrestlers' get excuses, I guess. Even with dominant booking. Again, interesting. Deal with it: No one is a draw, *ESPECIALLY* when it comes to ratings. Mountains of evidence of that at this point.

No competition this time of year and still stuck in the low 3 millions. 

:mj4


----------



## Randy Lahey

Littbarski said:


> Up 11% over the same week a year ago. That's impressive.


Last year they were going up against the Olympics. This year they are going up against nothing.

So it's not that impressive.


----------



## Mr. Socko

We're still judging Youtube numbers despite the division making a loss there somehow, which suggests that WWE might be paying for views? :mj4


----------



## Dolorian

From Figure Four Online...



> Raw had another increase in ratings last night to 3.23 million viewers, up two percent from 3.16 million last week, making it the most-watched episode of the show since April 17th.
> 
> The build to SummerSlam and four-way program with Brock Lesnar, Samoa Joe, Roman Reigns, and Braun Strowman has followed the Lesnar vs. Joe program in boosting ratings after record lows at the end of basketball season.
> 
> Raw was the top show of the night on cable, well ahead of Hannity on Fox News in second place at 2.68 million viewers. The third hour of Raw beat everything on television head-to-head except ABC.
> 
> A notable pattern is that the third hour stayed strong with males 12-49, not losing from hour two, but the decline from hour two was in viewers over the age of 50, and with women.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.26 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.31 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 3.14 million viewers


Source


----------



## validreasoning

Mr. Socko said:


> We're still judging Youtube numbers despite the division making a loss there somehow, which suggests that WWE might be paying for views? :mj4


Digital Media segment showed a $1.5 million profit for second quarter 2017. Last year that segment had a $4.6m profit (for the calendar year) and $4.4m profit the year before that. 3rd and 4th quarters have been the most profitable in that sector last two years so this year is in line to beat last two years if things stay the same.

In the grand scheme of things $4.5m in profit is small compared to the network, tv or ticket sales profits but it's on a par with DVD and little below online merch profits and of course goes into paying bigger bonuses for the upper mgt at year's end.


----------



## Ibracadabra

Mr. Socko said:


> We're still judging Youtube numbers despite the division making a loss there somehow, which suggests that WWE might be paying for views? :mj4


Or that they have other forms of Digital media?


----------



## ecclesiastes10

ShowStopper said:


> The point is valid regardless. Youtube is worldwide. The Nielsen ratings only count American viewers. Foreign viewers don't get counted towards these ratings.
> 
> So, there goes that.


are u aware of how Nielsen comes to the number they give for ratings?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ecclesiastes10 said:


> are u aware of how Nielsen comes to the number they give for ratings?


Sure do. Excuse me for not losing my shit over shit numbers going up against no real competition on a non-holiday during their 2nd hottest time of year just a couple weeks out from their 2nd biggest show of the year with 4 'big men' in the main event, drawing as bad or worse than the 'Indy guys.'


----------



## ecclesiastes10

then y mention Nielsen ratings at all.they are made up numbers based on like 50k homes,and if u really knew that...

if anyone is interested in how Nielsen calculates rating
https://medium.com/autonomous/you-l...eople-are-watching-than-you-think-152e51657a5


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.419M
H2- 3.293M
H3- 2.988M
3H- 3.233M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.69% / - 0.126M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.26% / - 0.305M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.61% / - 0.431M )
8/14/17 Vs 8/7/17 ( - 0.22% / - 0.007M )

Demo (8/14/17 Vs 8/7/17):
H1- 1.210D Vs 1.050D
H2- 1.150D Vs 1.060D
H3- 1.050D Vs 1.030D
3H- 1.137D Vs 1.047D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/14/17 Vs 8/15/16):
H1- 3.419M Vs 2.879M
H2- 3.293M Vs 3.083M
H3- 2.988M Vs 2.784M
3H- 3.233M Vs 2.915M ( + 10.91% / + 0.318M )

Demo (8/14/17 Vs 8/15/16):
H1- 1.210D Vs 1.010D
H2- 1.150D Vs 1.080D
H3- 1.050D Vs 0.940D
3H- 1.137D Vs 1.010D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 5th, 3rd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

3.4 for the first hour! Holy shit, Rollins/Ambrose bringing in them ratings. Recently, Hour 2 has been higher rated than Hour 1 to make this even more impressive. And Hour 3 under 3 million even with Brock and the fatal fourway in the main event.

3.4 million is the highest rated of any hour for quite awhile for WWE. Good on Seth/Dean.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

ShowStopper said:


> 3.4 for the first hour! Holy shit, Rollins/Ambrose bringing in them ratings. Recently, Hour 2 has been higher rated than Hour 1 to make this even more impressive. And Hour 3 under 3 million even with Brock and the fatal fourway in the main event.
> 
> 3.4 million is the highest rated of any hour for quite awhile for WWE. Good on Seth/Dean.





JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1-3.420M
> H2-3.562M
> H3-3.420M
> 3H-3.467M*


IIRC, reminds me of these viewership figures back when Ambrose and Rollins were equally this relevant at the same time. Last year's MITB fallout RAW. Except last night's show continued to drop precipitously inspite of having a more hyped up main event scene.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Great first hour for Rollins/Ambrose. Their segment has 2.1 Million YT views, which was the highest of the night. The main event segment had 2 Million YT views. Balor's backstage interview got 550K YT views. So that shows there's intrigue with his Demon persona.


----------



## Chrome

Ambrose and Rollins has actually been a pretty good storyline, so nice to see it doing well with the ratings and Youtube numbers. End game should be an Ambrose heel turn and Rollins/Ambrose at Mania in a grudge match.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Half a million drop from the corny Brollins story to the Summerslam main event story, holy shit :lmao

Summerslam Go Home ... More like: Summerslam, go home!

Not really sure you can attribute the high first hour to that storyline. It's the Raw before Summerslam, people are curious. If it was as shitty a show as I've read here, no wonder people tuned out in droves.
We have seen all four main eventers fight each other ad nauseam the last weeks, no incentive whatsoever to watch a "confrontation".


----------



## Gravyv321

"but...but...bigger guys draw more in the main event."

"nobody cares about smaller dudes like rollins or ambrose"

:lol


----------



## BigDaveBatista

Gravyv321 said:


> "but...but...bigger guys draw more in the main event."
> 
> "nobody cares about smaller dudes like rollins or ambrose"
> 
> :lol


but but but no one knows how the show is going to start, so dont know if Ambrose and rollins are going to open up raw 
fuck the levels some people go to reach is beyond me some times

plus you lot bring up big men a lot, its starting to get a bit weird


----------



## Dolorian

From Figure Four Online...



> Raw started higher and fell more last night than in previous weeks, ending up at 3.22 million viewers, which was a one percent drop from last week's number. Last week's rating was the best for the show since April 17th.
> 
> Raw remained the most-watched show on cable, with Rachel Maddow on MSNBC second at 2.86 million viewers. Raw's 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. hour was the second most watched show during that period on television, trailing only Midnight Texas, on NBC, which did 3.19 million viewers vs. 2.99 million for Raw. When you factor in the coverage area for NBC and USA, the reality is Raw would have been the actual highest rated show by a significant margin in hour three.
> 
> The first two hours were fourth in the time slot behind ABC, CBS, and NBC programming.
> 
> There were significant drops in every demo, even the male demo that usually stays strong.
> 
> My feeling on this is the huge first hour was curiosity regarding what would be said about Ric Flair, which was covered early and it was clear it wouldn't be talked about again. Even in males 18-49, which usually has its best hour in number three, it dropped 11 percent from one to three.
> 
> In addition, during the summer, it's hour number two that is usually the highest rated hour and every demo except males 12-17, which was closer to usual patterns, saw the audience decline in hour two and three.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.42 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.29 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.99 million viewers


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Pretty obvious the Shield reunion took place in Hour 1, and after that the viewership went straight down. Pretty awesome the few fans left and even some of the fans who have already left, came back to check out the Shield stuff. The writers of that storyline, Seth, and Dean should all be very proud of all of their hardwork. When was the last time they were in the mid 3's, 3.4-3.6 territory? It's been awhile.

Best storyline in WWE in along, long time.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.416M
H2- 3.581M
H3- 3.216M
3H- 3.404M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.83% / + 0.165M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.19% / - 0.365M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 5.85% / - 0.200M )
8/21/17 Vs 8/14/17 ( + 5.29% / + 0.171M )

Demo (8/21/17 Vs 8/14/17):
H1- 1.140D Vs 1.210D
H2- 1.210D Vs 1.150D
H3- 1.100D Vs 1.050D
3H- 1.150D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/21/17 Vs 8/22/16):
H1- 3.416M Vs 3.462M
H2- 3.581M Vs 3.370M
H3- 3.216M Vs 3.113M
3H- 3.404M Vs 3.315M ( + 2.69% / + 0.089M )

Demo (8/21/17 Vs 8/22/16):
H1- 1.140D Vs 1.290D
H2- 1.210D Vs 1.270D
H3- 1.100D Vs 1.180D
3H- 1.150D Vs 1.247D

Note: RAW this time last year was 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Good numbers (for this era).


----------



## The Renegade

Good numbers.


----------



## A-C-P

How far things have fallen when these are considered good #s (and I'm not saying they are not, they are good #s for now) for the Summerslam Fallout Raw, in which (arguably) their biggest star was threatening to leave the company if he lost the title the night prior....


----------



## wwe9391

Woot woot. Nice ppv bump. Hour 2 was the highest. Roman and Cena were in hour 2.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow. 10% drop between hour 2 and 3. Not a good showing for that big time tag team of Cena and Reigns. :lol

But this is also the best they will probably do for a while.

Edit: Overall number actually isn't bad though since it did better than last year's post-Summerslam show.


----------



## Kimwun

They did good.


----------



## Ibracadabra

A-C-P said:


> How far things have fallen when these are considered good #s (and I'm not saying they are not, they are good #s for now) for the Summerslam Fallout Raw, in which (arguably) their biggest star was threatening to leave the company if he lost the title the night prior....


Considering that no show has past Raw, not that far.


----------



## Chrome

Good numbers but they're going DOWN soon with the Summerslam buzz wearing off and MNF starting up soon.


----------



## JDP2016

wwe9391 said:


> Woot woot. Nice ppv bump. Hour 2 was the highest. Roman and Cena were in hour 2.


Weren't they also in hour #3?

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

great rating but its prob all down hill from here seeing this was the fallout from the 2nd biggest ppv of the year and nfl getting ready to start up.


----------



## chronoxiong

Great numbers again for this week. It's outpacing last year which is still shocking.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.384M
H2- 3.364M
H3- 3.163M
3H- 3.304M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.59% / - 0.020M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.98% / - 0.201M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 6.53% / - 0.221M )
8/28/17 Vs 8/21/17 ( - 2.94% / - 0.100M )

Demo (8/28/17 Vs 8/21/17):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.170D Vs 1.210D
H3- 1.160D Vs 1.100D
3H- 1.160D Vs 1.150D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/28/17 Vs 8/29/16):
H1- 3.384M Vs 3.392M
H2- 3.364M Vs 3.438M
H3- 3.163M Vs 3.409M
3H- 3.304M Vs 3.413M ( - 3.19% / - 0.109M )

Demo (8/28/17 Vs 8/29/16):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.170D Vs 1.170D
H3- 1.160D Vs 1.210D
3H- 1.160D Vs 1.173D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 2nd & 1st by hourly demo & 5th, 3rd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## wwe9391

Nice numbers this week. 

Cena vs Reigns and Braun vs Lesnar are definitely bringing people in.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Numbers already down from SummerSlam and the NFL is juuuust around the corner.

Definitely expected a bigger number for the Cena/Reigns stuff and with Brock with an advertised appearance.

Not good and only getting worse when NFL is back soon.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

People underestimate the power of forgetting. I was on vacation for two weeks, and this Monday, I just remembered Raw in time.
Imagine people tuning out of Raw in favor of football for months.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> Numbers already down from SummerSlam and the NFL is juuuust around the corner.
> 
> Definitely expected a bigger number for the Cena/Reigns stuff and with Brock with an advertised appearance.
> 
> Not good and only getting worse when NFL is back soon.


ratings might have drop but anytime you can get all 3 hours above 3 million in this era its a win but like you said its all going to come crushing down in 2 weeks when the nfl season begins.


----------



## Kimwun

Nice numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> ratings might have drop but anytime you can get all 3 hours above 3 million in this era its a win but like you said its all going to come crushing down in 2 weeks when the nfl season begins.


This was alittle bit more loaded than your usual/average Raw.

I expected higher with an advertised Brock appearance and Cena/Reigns, which was a pretty long segment. They also had no competition last night. Not good.

This number is also down from last year's Raw at this time. So, they still keep decreasing from year to year for each week.


----------



## R=G

What a horrible era to be in, barely getting a 3 is now considered a GOOD rating


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Big Draw John. :sodone


----------



## Littbarski

R=G said:


> What a horrible era to be in, barely getting a 3 is now considered a GOOD rating


Only wrestling fans would consider being #1 on cable bad.


----------



## R=G

Littbarski said:


> Only wrestling fans would consider being #1 on cable bad.


Against what competition? 

And yeah when there was a time when you had 3 times as many people watching, that IS a bad rating

Shit they cant even afford those shitty purple ropes anymore


----------



## Kimwun

R=G said:


> Against what competition?
> 
> And yeah when there was a time when you had 3 times as many people watching, that IS a bad rating
> 
> Shit they cant even afford those shitty purple ropes anymore


" Against what competition? " 

Baseball. 

" And yeah when there was a time when you had 3 times as many people watching, that IS a bad rating" 

Pure hyperbole. Ratings hit 8+ once. Ratings were around the 6 point mark during 1999/2000, which is still a shit load of viewers.

Also, The ratings come from Nelson ratings and the "points" you hear about are the percentage of television households watching the show. Therefor a 2.2 rating means that 2.2% of all television households were tuned into the show.

Nelson currently estimates that there are 115.6 million television households and thus one "point" is 1.16 million views.

According to historical data from nelson provided here (this is a pdf download) the number of television households in 1995 was 95.4 Million and in 2000 it was 100.8 million, the report does not give a year by year.

So the ratings "points" we see today do indeed represent more viewers than during the Monday night wars. It depends on the year but a point today means between 14%-21% more viewers than a point in 1995-200.


" Shit they cant even afford those shitty purple ropes anymore." 

How you know? I know they cut pyro because of budget cuts. Not the ropes. And back in 2014 when they lost 357 million in one day they could not even afford to run SS Fan Axess. But they recovered. It's not so gloom for the WWE like you claiming it to be.


----------



## R=G

Kimwun said:


> " Against what competition? "
> 
> Baseball.
> 
> " And yeah when there was a time when you had 3 times as many people watching, that IS a bad rating"
> 
> Pure hyperbole. Ratings hit 8+ once. Ratings were around the 6 point mark during 1999/2000, which is still a shit load of viewers.
> 
> Also, The ratings come from Nelson ratings and the "points" you hear about are the percentage of television households watching the show. Therefor a 2.2 rating means that 2.2% of all television households were tuned into the show.
> 
> Nelson currently estimates that there are 115.6 million television households and thus one "point" is 1.16 million views.
> 
> According to historical data from nelson provided here (this is a pdf download) the number of television households in 1995 was 95.4 Million and in 2000 it was 100.8 million, the report does not give a year by year.
> 
> So the ratings "points" we see today do indeed represent more viewers than during the Monday night wars. It depends on the year but a point today means between 14%-21% more viewers than a point in 1995-200.
> 
> 
> " Shit they cant even afford those shitty purple ropes anymore."
> 
> How you know? I know they cut pyro because of budget cuts. Not the ropes. And back in 2014 when they lost 357 million in one day they could not even afford to run SS Fan Axess. But they recovered. It's not so gloom for the WWE like you claiming it to be.


"Baseball."

:flair4:flair4:flair4

"Pure hyperbole. Ratings hit 8+ once. Ratings were around the 6 point mark during 1999/2000, which is still a shit load of viewers."

I see you're not counting the wcw audience:

http://prowrestling.wikia.com/wiki/Monday_Night_Wars_Ratings

As you can see, the COMBINED ratings were WELL over a fucking 8 for YEARS

"But they recovered"

Oh have they?

Is that why ratings have basically been cut in half since 2014?

Is that why they have only gotten a 3rd of the forecasted subscribers for this failure known as the wwe network, which im sure are atleast 25% duplicate accounts with free trials?


----------



## Kimwun

R=G said:


> "Baseball."
> 
> :flair4:flair4:flair4
> 
> "Pure hyperbole. Ratings hit 8+ once. Ratings were around the 6 point mark during 1999/2000, which is still a shit load of viewers."
> 
> I see you're not counting the wcw audience:
> 
> http://prowrestling.wikia.com/wiki/Monday_Night_Wars_Ratings
> 
> As you can see, the COMBINED ratings were WELL over a fucking 8 for YEARS
> 
> "But they recovered"
> 
> Oh have they?
> 
> Is that why ratings have basically been cut in half since 2014?
> 
> Is that why they have only gotten a 3rd of the forecasted subscribers for this failure known as the wwe network, which im sure are atleast 25% duplicate accounts with free trials?


Why are counting the WCW ratings? WWF and WCW at the time were two different promotions at the time. I'm pretty sure when WCW died. The WCW fan quit watching wrestling after WCW died.

" Is that why they have only gotten a 3rd of the forecasted subscribers for this failure known as the wwe network, which im sure are atleast 25% duplicate accounts with free trials?" 

Eh, I would not call the WWE network a failure just yet. Many streaming companies do struggle in the early years. EX: Netflix and Hulu comes to mind. I would give 2-3 years and things are still the same then it's a failure.


----------



## R=G

Kimwun said:


> Why are counting the WCW ratings? WWF and WCW at the time were two different promotions at the time. I'm pretty sure when WCW died. The WCW fan quit watching wrestling after WCW died.
> 
> " Is that why they have only gotten a 3rd of the forecasted subscribers for this failure known as the wwe network, which im sure are atleast 25% duplicate accounts with free trials?"
> 
> Eh, I would not call the WWE network a failure just yet. Many streaming companies do struggle in the early years. EX: Netflix and Hulu comes to mind. I would give 2-3 years and things are still the same then it's a failure.


We're counting wcw ratings because

1.wwe owns wcw
2.they were the same product basically being seen at the same time every monday for YEARS, people flipped flopped back and forth between them the whole night and then watched nitro's replays

to go from a combined 9 and 10 rating to a fucking barely 3 is ATROCIOUS

"Eh, I would not call the WWE network a failure just yet. Many streaming companies do struggle in the early years"

Considering it was they themselves who were guaranteeing 3 million subscribers by now, i'd consider it a HUGE failure to only have a 3rd of that number

WWE network is NOT netflix, NOT amazon prime, NOT hulu, fuck they ain't even crunchyroll premium or funimation now to be honest where they having something to offer their niche audience with simulcast streaming

Just about anything on the wwe network is freely available on youtube or dailymotion, most times before they even put it up


----------



## Kimwun

R=G said:


> We're counting wcw ratings because
> 
> 1.wwe owns wcw
> 2.they were the same product basically being seen at the same time every monday for YEARS, people flipped flopped back and forth between them the whole night and then watched nitro's replays
> 
> to go from a combined 9 and 10 rating to a fucking barely 3 is ATROCIOUS
> 
> "Eh, I would not call the WWE network a failure just yet. Many streaming companies do struggle in the early years"
> 
> Considering it was they themselves who were guaranteeing 3 million subscribers by now, i'd consider it a HUGE failure to only have a 3rd of that number
> 
> WWE network is NOT netflix, NOT amazon prime, NOT hulu, fuck they ain't even crunchyroll premium or funimation now to be honest where they having something to offer their niche audience with simulcast streaming
> 
> Just about anything on the wwe network is freely available on youtube or dailymotion, most times before they even put it up


The subscriber count is 1.63 million. That is little more than half than 3.Million

" Just about anything on the wwe network is freely available on youtube or dailymotion, most times before they even put it" 

People put out full tv shows episodes freely on YouTube before Hulu can do it. I'm not saying the network is the same as any of the streaming services you mentioned. I'm just saying streaming companies do struggle in the early years .hell, It took 10 years for crunchy roll to top 1 million subs.


----------



## R=G

Kimwun said:


> The subscriber count is 1.63 million. That is little more than half than 3.Million
> 
> " Just about anything on the wwe network is freely available on youtube or dailymotion, most times before they even put it"
> 
> People put out full tv shows episodes freely on YouTube before Hulu can do it. I'm not saying the network is the same as any of the streaming services you mentioned. I'm just saying streaming companies do struggle in the early years .hell, It took 10 years for crunchy roll to top 1 million subs.


Are we counting dead accounts and free trials into that?

I'm quite sure the actual continuously paying every month subscriber account number is FAR lower than 1.63 million 

And why wouldnt it be?

You can catch all the highlights from raw and sd on youtube almost immediately after the show

I can go on dailymotion or youtube and watch old wcw or awa or mid atlantic or even.......memphis shit all day for free

Not to mention original channels like Wrestlelamia, Wrestling with Wregret and all the podcasts with wrestlers

Anime in america is FAR MORE niche than pro wrestling, save for like dragon ball z and fucking naruto and pokemon, so the fact that the wwe network and crunchyroll are even competition for each other is a bad look for the wwe and a great look for crunchyroll


----------



## Kimwun

R=G said:


> Are we counting dead accounts and free trials into that?
> 
> I'm quite sure the actual continuously paying every month subscriber account number is FAR lower than 1.63 million
> 
> And why wouldnt it be?
> 
> You can catch all the highlights from raw and sd on youtube almost immediately after the show
> 
> I can go on dailymotion or youtube and watch old wcw or awa or mid atlantic or even.......memphis shit all day for free
> 
> Not to mention original channels like Wrestlelamia, Wrestling with Wregret and all the podcasts with wrestlers
> 
> Anime in america is FAR MORE niche than pro wrestling, save for like dragon ball z and fucking naruto and pokemon, so the fact that the wwe network and crunchyroll are even competition for each other is a bad look for the wwe and a great look for crunchyroll


1.63 subs is the people that pay.


" Not to mention original channels like Wrestlelamia, Wrestling with Wregret and all the podcasts with wrestlers" 

I'm not sure what is your point there. Wrestling with wregeret is a review channel and list guy. 

I don't think crunchy roll is competion to the WWE. 

Also to the WCW thing. Wrestling as a whole back in the used get 8 million plus viewers not WWF. WWE is not wrestling as a whole.


----------



## R=G

Kimwun said:


> 1.63 subs is the people that pay.
> 
> 
> " Not to mention original channels like Wrestlelamia, Wrestling with Wregret and all the podcasts with wrestlers"
> 
> I'm not sure what is your point there. Wrestling with wregeret is a review channel and list guy.
> 
> I don't think crunchy roll is competion to the WWE.
> 
> Also to the WCW thing. Wrestling as a whole back in the used get 8 million plus viewers not WWF. WWE is not wrestling as a whole.


"I'm not sure what is your point there. Wrestling with wregeret is a review channel and list guy. "

And what content does he mainly cover?

WWE, weekly reviews of raw and smackdown and old wwe ppvs, which is supposedly one of the selling points of the network, watching old wwe shows

"I don't think crunchy roll is competion to the WWE."

So correct me if i'm wrong, but did or did not new day come out at a wrestlemania in saiyan battle armor?

I'm QUITE sure pro wrestling and fucking anime and comic books have a HUGE amount of correlated fans

Especially in this era, where being a goddamn nerd is now socially acceptable


----------



## Kimwun

R=G said:


> "I'm not sure what is your point there. Wrestling with wregeret is a review channel and list guy. "
> 
> And what content does he mainly cover?
> 
> WWE, weekly reviews of raw and smackdown and old wwe ppvs, which is supposedly one of the selling points of the network, watching old wwe shows
> 
> "I don't think crunchy roll is competion to the WWE."
> 
> So correct me if i'm wrong, but did or did not new day come out at a wrestlemania in saiyan battle armor?
> 
> I'm QUITE sure pro wrestling and fucking anime and comic books have a HUGE amount of correlated fans
> 
> Especially in this era, where being a goddamn nerd is now socially acceptable


I whole heartily agree with you on these two points. It's been nice having a debate with someone like you.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> This was alittle bit more loaded than your usual/average Raw.
> 
> I expected higher with an advertised Brock appearance and Cena/Reigns, which was a pretty long segment. They also had no competition last night. Not good.
> 
> This number is also down from last year's Raw at this time. So, they still keep decreasing from year to year for each week.


Nah, it's just that a few hundred thousand got their cord cut, who coincidentally also watched Raw on a regular basis.

Any other claim of popularity decline is clearly ill intention, WWE is as popular as ever.



Littbarski said:


> Only wrestling fans would consider being #1 on cable bad.


Only wrestling fans would neglect business numbers because of their inferiority complex.


----------



## A-C-P

They are throwing just about everything they can to try and garner interest to try and keep people watching once the MNF starts after Labor Day


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I just want to point out that Cena's move to Raw didn't help Raw, but only hurt Smackdown.

Old man, you gotta go home.


----------



## validreasoning

Last year's raw on this date had the universal title fatal four way match after Balor vacated title previous week with HHH's return for the first time since mania 32 so last years show was more loaded.

As for numbers.
Raw in July 2017 averaged 3.046 million viewers live
Raw in July 2016 averaged 3.075 million viewers live

Raw in August 2017 averaged 3.295 million viewers live
Raw in August 2016 averaged 3.174 million viewers live

SD in July 2017 averaged 2.469 million viewers live
SD in July 2016 averaged 2.556 million viewers live

SD in August 2017 averaged 2.565 million viewers live
SD in August 2016 averaged 2.631 million viewers live


----------



## SPCDRI

My reference point right now for RAW ratings is 2012. Did you know the average RAW did an average of a 3.0 rating? Even with a fall off in the 4th quarter of 2012, the second hour of RAW did 3.9 million viewers. Now look at these DOGSHIT numbers in 2017...

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2017-tv-ratings/

They didn't even do a 3.0 for a post Wrestlemania episode! The go home show to Wrestlemania did a goddamn 2.2!

RAW was below a 2.0 for THE ENTIRE MONTH OF MAY!

People are excited that last week did a 2.29 "Ooh, a nice little uptick in the ratings!" YOU GOTTA BE FUCKING KIDDING ME!

RAW is down almost a full ratings points! In less than 5 years!

Why even have this thread anymore? This company couldn't draw money with green crayons. This shit is fucking embarrassing now.

Yeah, I'm a CM Punk mark, but don't you guys remember all the people who brutalized CM Punk every time he did a quarter hour below a 3? Nobody in the company is sniffing his motherfucking JOCKSTRAP right now. Brock Lesnar is an absentee landlord and RAW is struggling to do 2! 

Oh, nobody is a draw but the company, right? All I see are vanilla giants and bland bastards in the RAW main event.

Edit: Wait until these jokers have to go against Monday Night Football. They're gonna get smoked.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.069M
H2- 2.978M
H3- 2.750M
3H- 2.932M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.97% / - 0.091M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.66% / - 0.228M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.39% / - 0.319M )
9/4/17 Vs 8/28/17 ( - 11.26% / - 0.372M )

Demo (9/4/17 Vs 8/28/17):
H1- 1.070D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.050D Vs 1.170D
H3- 1.010D Vs 1.160D
3H- 1.043D Vs 1.160D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/4/17 Vs 9/5/16):
H1- 3.069M Vs 3.350M
H2- 2.978M Vs 3.066M
H3- 2.750M Vs 2.792M
3H- 2.932M Vs 3.069M ( - 4.46% / - 0.137M )

Demo (9/4/17 Vs 9/5/16):
H1- 1.070D Vs 1.180D
H2- 1.050D Vs 1.050D
H3- 1.010D Vs 0.980D
3H- 1.043D Vs 1.070D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 8th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Big drop for the first hour from last year.

Obviously was expecting a drop for Labor Day, but considering what's going on this year... having two "Wrestlemania" programs right now, it's actually a bit disappointing. I understand they didn't have Lesnar and Strowman/Show has been seen before, but they have two of the biggest programs they can do right now going on and it's not helping.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

whatcha gonna do, RAW, when MNF runs wild on you?


----------



## Frost99

Welp hope ya'll enjoyed the ride #RatingDOA come #MondayNighFootball, it's sad to remember a time when WWF RAW outdrew MNF #GoodOldDays


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Huge dropoff in the 3rd hour for that advertised Braun/Show cage match. YIKES.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Yeah, Strowman/Show didn't draw well. Was their third match, but 300k drop off is no good. Silver lining though is it's the hour that had the least difference from last year's 3rd.


----------



## Ace

Post Summerslam effect has worn off.

Ratings back to being shit.


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> Post Summerslam effect has worn off.
> 
> Ratings back to being shit.


Just wait until next week lol.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> Huge dropoff in the 3rd hour for that advertised Braun/Show cage match. YIKES.


Big Show doesn't hold interest in 2017. 

How surprising.

Said no one ever.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania;70147321[B said:


> ]Big Show doesn't hold interest in 2017. [/B]


I don't think anyone was expecting Big Show to draw at this stage of the game.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Does MNF even make that much of a difference anymore? I don't see the two audiences really overlapping all that much these days. 

(Serious question, by the way)


----------



## JDP2016

THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> whatcha gonna do, RAW, when MNF runs wild on you?


That double header next week is gonna fuck them hard. [emoji38]





Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Big Show doesn't hold interest in 2017.
> 
> How surprising.
> 
> Said no one ever.


Didn't Braun and Show get over a 3.0 when they main evented RAW a few months ago?

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JDP2016 said:


> That double header next week is gonna fuck them hard. [emoji38]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't Braun and Show get over a 3.0 when they main evented RAW a few months ago?
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


Yeah they got around 3.1 million and that was only like 100k down from the first and second hour. Don't remember what else happened on that show. However that third hour was also up 200k on previous week's 3rd hour.

Second match they had did around the same number wise, but was down 300k from first and second hour. However it held about the same viewership from the previous week's third hour.

Diminishing returns are a bitch. However there is a case to be made that Strowman/Show did well this week. However personally to me, a 300k drop and being below last week's 3rd hour isn't good. Not as bad as what happened with the first hour, but still not good.


----------



## A-C-P

The_It_Factor said:


> Does MNF even make that much of a difference anymore? I don't see the two audiences really overlapping all that much these days.
> 
> (Serious question, by the way)


NFL is still a monster in the US viewership wise so I am sure there is still some overlap, but not as much as there used to be, but that is more to do with just less people overall watching WWE TV.


----------



## The_It_Factor

A-C-P said:


> NFL is still a monster in the US viewership wise so I am sure there is still some overlap, but not as much as there used to be, but that is more to do with just less people overall watching WWE TV.


I just think of WWE as having such a niche fanbase these days. I guess I just think of the majority of fans as being a more comic-book-type/nerdy type that doesn't really watch football. 

I'm not trying to be a dick, it's just that nowadays when I picture the average wrestling fan, it's someone that doesn't watch sports (at least here in America). 

Obviously this is the case for ALL fans, but it seems like enough to where MNF wouldn't take as big of a bite out of viewership as it may have before. It just seems like casuals are basically done. The vast majority of the fanbase seems to be hardcore marks that will always watch (until they get older and grow out of it - if they're a younger fan) regardless.


----------



## A-C-P

The_It_Factor said:


> I just think of WWE as having such a niche fanbase these days. I guess I just think of the majority of fans as being a more comic-book-type/nerdy type that doesn't really watch football.
> 
> I'm not trying to be a dick, it's just that nowadays when I picture the average wrestling fan, it's someone that doesn't watch sports (at least here in America).
> 
> Obviously this is the case for ALL fans, but it seems like enough to where MNF wouldn't take as big of a bite out of viewership as it may have before. It just seems like casuals are basically done. The vast majority of the fanbase seems to be hardcore marks that will always watch (until they get older and grow out of it - if they're a younger fan) regardless.


You're not wrong pro-wrestling/WWE's fanbase is very (almost completely I would argue) niche, but its still a big niche and just going by the different people I've gotten to know on this site is still many different types of people from very different walks of life.

And with the NFL in the US it draws viewers from just about every section of the population, even some of those people that really don't watch sports, still will watch football some.

The competition for viewers between MNF and Raw is definitely no where near what it used to be, given both products are being viewed by less people on TV than they ever have been before and the gap between the type of audience each draws has grown to, but there is still some overlap that the WWE needs to worry about.


----------



## The_It_Factor

A-C-P said:


> You're not wrong pro-wrestling/WWE's fanbase is very (almost completely I would argue) niche, but its still a big niche and just going by the different people I've gotten to know on this site is still many different types of people from very different walks of life.
> 
> And with the NFL in the US it draws viewers from just about every section of the population, even some of those people that really don't watch sports, still will watch football some.
> 
> The competition for viewers between MNF and Raw is definitely no where near what it used to be, given both products are being viewed by less people on TV than they ever have been before and the gap between the type of audience each draws has grown to, but there is still some overlap that the WWE needs to worry about.



Yeah, I see what you're saying. I was genuinely curious because I don't remember the difference between Raw and fall-Raw last year (or any year) because I never really paid close enough attention. 

I guess we will see soon enough!


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

FYI, ratings are delayed because of hurricane Irma.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW did okay , all things considered. 3.022M in Hour 1. 2.987M in Hour 2 and 2.699M for Hour 3. I let @JonnyAceLaryngitis post the chart.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Big drop for hour 3. Not sure how it compares to last week or this week last year. Still less than a 100k drop with Football comp now isn't too bad.


----------



## Reversoul

Welp, I must be the exception to the "niche comic-book /nerdy type" of the WWE fan demographic. I've never once read a comic book in my entire life and I am a very passionate sports fan.

I feel a lot more people of the WWE universe watch sports like football than one might think. I bet a lot of the sports fans watch MNF live and then DVR or use Hulu to watch Raw/ Smackdown at a later time.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.022M
H2- 2.987M
H3- 2.699M
3H- 2.903M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.16% / - 0.035M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.64% / - 0.288M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.69% / - 0.323M )
9/11/17 Vs 9/4/17 ( - 0.99% / - 0.029M )

Demo (9/11/17 Vs 9/4/17):
H1- 1.010D Vs 1.070D
H2- 1.030D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.930D Vs 1.010D
3H- 0.990D Vs 1.043D

Note: RAW is 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/11/17 Vs 9/12/16):
H1- 3.022M Vs 2.833M
H2- 2.987M Vs 2.717M
H3- 2.699M Vs 2.520M
3H- 2.903M Vs 2.690M ( + 7.92% / + 0.213M )

Demo (9/4/17 Vs 9/5/16):
H1- 1.010D Vs 0.950D
H2- 1.030D Vs 0.930D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.860D
3H- 0.990D Vs 0.913D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 12th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Headliner

Test.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

We'll all hours above last year, so that's a positive. Of course they have arguably the two biggest angles they could do going on right now.


----------

