Reply With Quote
Not to mention the ratings does not actually portray all of the fans... only selected people's viewing habits are monitored to determine whats good for tv(nielson boxes). so 100 million fans could watch but only 5 million are actually recorded. ratings don't mean shit. Unfortunately even though the ratings do not accurately portray the entire audience a show can get cancelled if the ratings do not fit the profit they make. But we can all agree wwe has been going downhill for a while now and desperately needs to change. I can't even watch a full episode of raw anymore... more interesting things are on that are not the same crap every week
- Ratings might never improve
Results 1 to 10 of 21
Thread: Ratings might never improve
-
10-17-2012, 10:06 AM #1Normal Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Posts
- 294
Ratings might never improve
IWC seems to be bitching about the ratings saying "WWE sucks now they should do my shitty idea that would just make it worse"(translated it) but they seem to forget about YouTube and DVR. Everyone in the UK use DVR or YouTube (RAW starts at 1am here) and a allot of people use them just to skip adds (and diva matches)
-
10-17-2012, 10:28 AM #2Normal Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 251
Last edited by #BITW; 10-17-2012 at 10:36 AM.
-
10-17-2012, 10:29 AM #3Fresh Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
- Posts
- 1
The main problem with people's thought process about rating is this; They are the ratings for the US not world-wide. This is also why the PG era is here to stay for at least a few more years. Where WWE is a US company look at the gates for their international tours, they by far out gate the US tour. Things need to change in a major way I agree but until Vince and Linda are gone from the company and Steph and Paul take over we are stuck with what we have now. I still think that Shane needs to be brought back into the fold because he clearly knows how to make a successful company.
Originally Posted by ewantu2
-
10-17-2012, 10:43 AM #4I stream RAW, it's just more convenient for me and I can watch it an hour earlier than when it legit comes on TV in Toronto(8:00 PM start time vs 9:00 PM start time... hmm... it's not a hard choice). If they put up a feed on WWE.com I'd go there and watch it in a heartbeat.
-
10-17-2012, 10:56 AM #5Moderator
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- The Hollows
- Posts
- 3,465
RAW 1000 (Nostalgia rampage) scored a 6.2 viewership rating. After that RAW stayed in the 4.0's before going into a steady decline half a month later. That tells you something there.Hey.. I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know.
-
10-17-2012, 11:03 AM #6Normal Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Posts
- 294
RAW 1000 was super big tho some people in the UK watched it live even tho they would have to stay up all night to watch it all. Originally Posted by TheDevilsAdvocate
-
10-17-2012, 11:48 AM #7Normal Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 251
those ratings are only for the usa Originally Posted by ewantu2
-
10-17-2012, 11:50 AM #8Normal Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 251
raw 1000 was kind of disappointing, but yeah it definitely says something. Stuff needs to change, and it does not involve john cena or cm punk being a whiny heel complaining about respect Originally Posted by TheDevilsAdvocate
-
10-17-2012, 12:18 PM #9The Trinity
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- Waterford, Ireland
- Posts
- 4,253
It starts at 1am here and finishes at 4. Tough going!! Originally Posted by ewantu2
-
10-17-2012, 12:30 PM #10Super Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Dorset
- Posts
- 725
You talk as if people in the UK don't watch Raw live. I'm in the UK and I will at least start watching Raw live, if it's rubbish or has no main event, like this week, I might give up on it and watch the rest in the morning but I'm almost always there at 1:00am on Monday night/Tuesday morning. Originally Posted by ewantu2
As for the point about ratings: WWE are suffering from "I'm number 1 so why try harder" syndrome. They appear to under estimate their audience's intelligence and attention span and, through repeating the same old same old, viewers are getting bored. WWE aren't the only TV shows losing ratings as more people switch to DVR or catch up services that fit around their lives better. What will matter is how they combat the slide in ratings, personally I think they need to 1) return to the 80's style of presentation with longer matches and less promos/video packages and 2) hire some writers who can work face vs face and heel vs heel feuds.
All pro wrestling has become stale and predictable because they insist on re-telling the same story over and over again. Why can't we see ADR vs. Big Show for the WHC number 1 contender? Why did Austin Aries have to turn heel to face Jeff Hardy at BFG (wrong company but you get my point)? Stay PG if they want but PG isn't a reason to be dumb. Shrek is a U and manages to be rude and witty and intelligent and appeal both to kids and adults so why can't WWE achieve the same with PG? Why not? Because they saw that episode of South Park where Cartman is trying to get Family Guy pulled but it turns out the Family Guy writing staff are manatees and someone at Titan Towers thought "Oh, that's a good idea!" and hired a bunch of sea creatures with ADHD to write for and book their flagship show!! THAT'S WHY!
(Sorry, got a bit carried away!)
A real champion with a real title belt.
"I swear to never again mention the man who is currently WWE champion until I am happy that change has come. I promise to buy PPVs when I can afford to, especially if 'he' isn't in the main event. I promise to show my support the the elements of WWE that I enjoy and together we will #ChangeWWE."
Bookmarks