|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Dec 26, 2014 23:45:18 GMT -5
Reigns draws. Ratings are still VERY important. Ratings are important. What I'm saying is that I don't look at ratings to see how well the product is doing because ratings are an inaccurate representation of how many people watch the show. They're as inaccurate as they've ever been, and until everybody consents to the government (well, the advertisers) being able to see their viewing habits... It's the closest they can get to accuracy. I'm sure Hulu records viewership, but a Hulu viewer isn't worth what a TV viewer is worth because of different ad rates. The ratings, even given the small sample size, still do a solid job of indicating casual interest in the show from week to week and hour to hour... And in the roster/matches/feuds relative to one another. When The Rock's there (and advertised), ratings go up for his segment. John Cena's segments are higher rated than Los Matadores'. Etc. It's telling that of the three main events, the one that was rated highest was the one that wasn't another rematch from last week. I'm sure by Reigns vs Big Show #6, they won't be doing decent numbers anymore. They always will go off ratings, I agree. However, a lot of people who watch on regular TV don't own a Nielsen box so they don't get counted into the ratings. That includes myself and many people that I know. The Hulu+ thing is a much smaller number, I know, but the point still stands that the Nielsen ratings, while showing most of the viewers, don't accurately tell the whole story. I agree about the Nielsen box. They should just take a good estimate off of total viewers from all outlets of not only WWE, but all shows, and calculate it out to however they see fit. See just how much viewership you are getting. Say you have 6 million worldwide views for Raw on every outlet that is featured. For example say 50% of those views have a household of three. Then you could say you had roughly 15 million sets of eyes on your Raw episode. Or something like that I dunno Nielsen documents number of viewers per household.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 29, 2024 2:03:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 23:48:58 GMT -5
Ratings are important. What I'm saying is that I don't look at ratings to see how well the product is doing because ratings are an inaccurate representation of how many people watch the show. They're as inaccurate as they've ever been, and until everybody consents to the government (well, the advertisers) being able to see their viewing habits... It's the closest they can get to accuracy. I'm sure Hulu records viewership, but a Hulu viewer isn't worth what a TV viewer is worth because of different ad rates. The ratings, even given the small sample size, still do a solid job of indicating casual interest in the show from week to week and hour to hour... And in the roster/matches/feuds relative to one another. When The Rock's there (and advertised), ratings go up for his segment. John Cena's segments are higher rated than Los Matadores'. Etc. It's telling that of the three main events, the one that was rated highest was the one that wasn't another rematch from last week. I'm sure by Reigns vs Big Show #6, they won't be doing decent numbers anymore. I agree about the Nielsen box. They should just take a good estimate off of total viewers from all outlets of not only WWE, but all shows, and calculate it out to however they see fit. See just how much viewership you are getting. Say you have 6 million worldwide views for Raw on every outlet that is featured. For example say 50% of those views have a household of three. Then you could say you had roughly 15 million sets of eyes on your Raw episode. Or something like that I dunno Nielsen documents number of viewers per household. How many times a day do you visit Google?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 29, 2024 2:03:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 23:51:26 GMT -5
Reigns draws. Ratings are still VERY important. Ratings are important. What I'm saying is that I don't look at ratings to see how well the product is doing because ratings are an inaccurate representation of how many people watch the show. I apologize, I miss interpreted your post. I do agree with you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 29, 2024 2:03:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 23:54:34 GMT -5
They're as inaccurate as they've ever been, and until everybody consents to the government (well, the advertisers) being able to see their viewing habits... It's the closest they can get to accuracy. I'm sure Hulu records viewership, but a Hulu viewer isn't worth what a TV viewer is worth because of different ad rates. The ratings, even given the small sample size, still do a solid job of indicating casual interest in the show from week to week and hour to hour... And in the roster/matches/feuds relative to one another. When The Rock's there (and advertised), ratings go up for his segment. John Cena's segments are higher rated than Los Matadores'. Etc. It's telling that of the three main events, the one that was rated highest was the one that wasn't another rematch from last week. I'm sure by Reigns vs Big Show #6, they won't be doing decent numbers anymore. Nielsen documents number of viewers per household. How many times a day do you visit Google? Just because someone gives an intelligent, correct response does not mean they use google for it.
|
|
tenup
Superstar
Need to draw more
Joined on: Oct 2, 2007 14:00:40 GMT -5
Posts: 795
|
Post by tenup on Dec 27, 2014 2:39:11 GMT -5
And I always thought that whole "I'm gonna unleash the poison on my own creation" angle was a work.
|
|
|
Post by CrossRhodes on Dec 27, 2014 2:55:38 GMT -5
In all my years as a wrestling fan I have never felt so disconnected from the "product" I checked out after Summerslam, I've listened to podcasts, occasionally checked the dirtsheets so I've kept up and enjoyed the podcasts more than WWE programming (I've not been able to make it all the way threw a wwe show or even bought a figure in about 6 months...)
The quality has never been lower (in my opinion) or felt so thrown together to me, It's clear they have no real direction other than Roman Reigns but he's not a star.
I had always been a die hard fan but only because Wrestlemania season is coming up I find myself coming back into the fold like the "casual fan" WWE obsesses over with some hope that WWE can step upto the plate & deliver but I'm not holding my breath...
What Happened!? -.-
|
|