|
|
Post by ztj_wwf on Jan 5, 2010 22:52:35 GMT -5
To be honest, I'd bet even if Bret wasn't on RAW last night they would have won. Of course they would have. 100%. No doubt about it. No they wouldn't have, the difference in the ratings was way too much to think that. |
|
|
|
Post by American Phenom on Jan 5, 2010 22:56:30 GMT -5
Half of you are idiots. 1.5 is a PHENOMENAL rating. I'm sure most of TNA's audience is WWE fans as well. If they're normally getting a 1.0 on Thursdays, and to go AGAINST their competition and GAIN instead of LOSE viewers is a major major accomplishment.
|
|
|
|
Post by 3Lephant (Naptown Icon) on Jan 5, 2010 23:01:38 GMT -5
SPIKE TV’S “TNA iMPACT” DELIVERS ITS HIGHEST RATINGS EVER FOR HULK HOGAN’S DEBUT IN SPECIAL LIVE EPISODE
2.2 Million Tune-In For Live Three-Hour Telecast
New York, NY, January 5, 2010 – Hulk Hogan’s first appearance on Spike TV’s special three-hour live “TNA iMPACT” on Monday, January 2 (8:00-11:05pm) drew 2.2 million viewers. This marks the most-watched "TNA iMPACT" in the history of the franchise, totaling 222 episodes dating back to October, 2005. The previous high was 1.97 million viewers reached last April
The event was broadcast from the TNA iMPACT! Zone at Universal Studios in Orlando, Fl. Airing head-to-head with WWE on USA Network, “TNA iMPACT” peaked at 2.9 million viewers from 9:00-9:15pm ET/PT.
Overall, the telecast drew a 1.5 household rating, a 1.8 in Men 18-34, and a 1.6 in Men 18-49. For the time period, “TNA iMPACT” was up a whopping +338% in M18-34, +241% in M18-49, and +84% in average audience versus a year ago.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So my question to all those people who said a 1.5 is a failure, you can't argue this show was huge. Up 338% in M18-34, that is a huge gain vs. a year ago.
I think the problem is people are too worried about what WWE is getting compared to them. That is not the measure you should even be looking at. The real measure is who is putting out a better product? And once people start realizing that its TNA (if it is TNA, time will tell), TNAs numbers will continue to grow. TNA should be competing with itself and not with WWE
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy on Jan 5, 2010 23:29:29 GMT -5
Of course they would have. 100%. No doubt about it. No they wouldn't have, the difference in the ratings was way too much to think that. I'm saying that RAW would have won, with or without Bret. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jan 5, 2010 23:41:45 GMT -5
how do they know the numbers for ratings
|
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Jan 6, 2010 0:12:50 GMT -5
How is half of what they said they were going to get a success? That's what I am thinking but Hogan was crazy to say what he did. It could've been worse though so I guess that is the success. |
|
eddie eddie
Main Eventer
Joined on: Aug 17, 2009 17:54:26 GMT -5
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by eddie eddie on Jan 6, 2010 0:32:44 GMT -5
guys, its really actually pretty good!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dude on Jan 6, 2010 1:58:00 GMT -5
That's an epic victory for TNA, Hogan's ridiculous claims be damned. Hogan predicted and 3.0, and they still didn't beat RAW, so how is that a victory? |
|
|
|
Post by Random Hero Est. 2003 on Jan 6, 2010 2:06:07 GMT -5
That's an epic victory for TNA, Hogan's ridiculous claims be damned. Hogan predicted and 3.0, and they still didn't beat RAW, so how is that a victory? Hogan was hyping the show, it was nothing more than talk. What tools does hogan have to make an educated guess? The network said if they maintain their average weekly audience it will be a success, and they did significantly MORE than their average weekly audience, therefore, success. The network knows alot more about ratings projection than hogan. Tna is the winner Monday night. Whether anyone chooses to believe it or not. They won. They increased their audience while on a different night than normally scheduled AND against a tv show that's been on since 1993. Yeah, that's a victory. |
|
|
|
Post by Hollywood Asia on Jan 6, 2010 2:42:17 GMT -5
It was a good enough rating to Spike to which will give them a Monday Night Slot pretty soon im sure....
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dude on Jan 6, 2010 4:39:18 GMT -5
Hogan predicted and 3.0, and they still didn't beat RAW, so how is that a victory? Hogan was hyping the show, it was nothing more than talk. What tools does hogan have to make an educated guess? The network said if they maintain their average weekly audience it will be a success, and they did significantly MORE than their average weekly audience, therefore, success. The network knows alot more about ratings projection than hogan. Tna is the winner Monday night. Whether anyone chooses to believe it or not. They won. They increased their audience while on a different night than normally scheduled AND against a tv show that's been on since 1993. Yeah, that's a victory. I really don't wanna sound like I am arguing, but if they didn't beat WWE's rating, then they did not win the night. Regardless if their usual rating went up. Yeah they had a few more viewers, but who knows maybe the WWE audience decided to tune into TNA's first hour and that's where the extra viewers came from. I understand what you are trying to say, but they failed to beat RAW therefore they did not win. |
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Jan 6, 2010 5:07:52 GMT -5
Hogan was hyping the show, it was nothing more than talk. What tools does hogan have to make an educated guess? The network said if they maintain their average weekly audience it will be a success, and they did significantly MORE than their average weekly audience, therefore, success. The network knows alot more about ratings projection than hogan. Tna is the winner Monday night. Whether anyone chooses to believe it or not. They won. They increased their audience while on a different night than normally scheduled AND against a tv show that's been on since 1993. Yeah, that's a victory. I really don't wanna sound like I am arguing, but if they didn't beat WWE's rating, then they did not win the night. Regardless if their usual rating went up. Yeah they had a few more viewers, but who knows maybe the WWE audience decided to tune into TNA's first hour and that's where the extra viewers came from. I understand what you are trying to say, but they failed to beat RAW therefore they did not win. But it's kinda like Rocky. To quote Eric Forman "Rocky lost the fight, but he won.....at life". Which is how TNA should be viewing it. Did they beat WWE? No. Did anyone expect them too? No. But did there audience increase? Yes. They expanded their audience even though they were going head to head with WWE. That's HUGE. So the night is definitely a success for TNA, and I wouldn't be suprised for them to make the move permanently to Mondays by the end of 2010. |
|
HoganBai
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 15, 2004 15:06:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,682
|
Post by HoganBai on Jan 6, 2010 5:24:18 GMT -5
Next week will be the decider. If they maintain the numbers on a Thursday (and seeing as there's no real competition the number should be evn greater) then we can call TNA an equal and a competitor.
If not, then while it is good for TNA and an improvement, then they still cant call themselves competition. At all.
|
|
|
|
Post by King Silva on Jan 6, 2010 5:33:37 GMT -5
I agree. Anyone can get a huge rating once but to sustain it especially for a long time is hard to do and will be a big test.
|
|
HoganBai
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 15, 2004 15:06:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,682
|
Post by HoganBai on Jan 6, 2010 7:11:13 GMT -5
I've also realised that while TNA improved...so did WWE. A 4.0 is a great rating for them, and it shows that maybe TNA just got new fans rather then WWE's fans otherwise the WWE's rating would of stayed the same or went down right? I'll say it again, if next Thursday they can do a 1.5 at the very, very least then they are on to something.
If it goes down, I don't know how anyone could defend it, as there will be no Raw, no competition, and if Monday's was any good then surely everyone would want to see what happens next.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Jan 6, 2010 11:26:31 GMT -5
Half of you are idiots. 1.5 is a PHENOMENAL rating. I'm sure most of TNA's audience is WWE fans as well. If they're normally getting a 1.0 on Thursdays, and to go AGAINST their competition and GAIN instead of LOSE viewers is a major major accomplishment. There's no way of knowing that. Raw's rating stayed pretty stagnant, and the only reason TNA's ratings were up was because the hour before Raw did so well. TNA could have had all their fans plus a bunch of people who hadn't watched wrestling in years who hoped to tune in and see Hulk Hogan. If you look at the quarter ratings, everybody stopped watching after Hogan was on, and TNA sunk back down to the low 1's after that. Their core audience stuck with them instead of going to Raw, just like Raw's core audience stuck with them instead of watching the Fiesta Bowl. |
|
|
|
Post by WCWA Online on Jan 6, 2010 11:32:41 GMT -5
Hogan predicted and 3.0, and they still didn't beat RAW, so how is that a victory? Hogan was hyping the show, it was nothing more than talk. What tools does hogan have to make an educated guess? The network said if they maintain their average weekly audience it will be a success, and they did significantly MORE than their average weekly audience, therefore, success. The network knows alot more about ratings projection than hogan. Tna is the winner Monday night. Whether anyone chooses to believe it or not. They won. They increased their audience while on a different night than normally scheduled AND against a tv show that's been on since 1993. Yeah, that's a victory. Actually, WWE has been on Monday nights back to the mid 80s. Primetime Wrestling was typically a Monday Night show. |
|
|
|
Post by Random Hero Est. 2003 on Jan 6, 2010 12:53:21 GMT -5
The goal was not to out rate raw. It was to maintain typical viewership. They increased typical viewership. Goal met. Score 1 for TNA. Case closed
|
|
|
|
Post by American Phenom on Jan 6, 2010 17:37:30 GMT -5
The goal was not to out rate raw. It was to maintain typical viewership. They increased typical viewership. Goal met. Score 1 for TNA. Case closed Exactly. The goal was never to get higher ratings than WWE. It would have been impossible unless TNA signed The Rock, Stone Cold, Hulk Hogan, and Pete Gas. Then they might of had a shot. But the fact that they GAINED viewers going against the company who is considered the #1 promotion is outstanding. |
|
perfectplex
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Sept 30, 2009 16:54:52 GMT -5
Posts: 277
|
Post by perfectplex on Jan 6, 2010 18:31:07 GMT -5
It damn well better have been Impacts highest rating of all time, they have never promoted their product to this extent ever. They had multiple commercials that aired DURING episodes of RAW for christ sake. The real test is going to be whether they can actually gain any momentum from this. Of course Raw's rating was going to have a small chunk taken out of it, you'd be a fool to think otherwise They still had great numbers considering they went up against direct competition that was HEAVILY promoted. Let's see what happens next week as far as ratings go, then all the TNA marks can thump their chests if there is a considerable improvement. Remember TNA is trying to build this for the long hall, not one blockbuster night with no real follow through.
|
|
