|
|
Post by ASR (therockisback) on Feb 10, 2013 17:15:32 GMT -5
WZ has reported that TLC drew the lowest buyrate of the year.
So... Punk = Buyrates?.
This sucks since the PPV was actually one of the best all year. Cena/Ziggler, Tag Team Table Match, WHT Chairs Match & the TLC match made this an epic show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. PerpetuaLynch Motion on Feb 10, 2013 17:20:09 GMT -5
As a wrestling fan I've learned to stop caring about ratings and buyrates. As long as I'm entertained that's what matters and TLC was one hell of an entertaining PPV. All this means to me is that a lot of people missed out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rule 30 on Feb 10, 2013 17:29:39 GMT -5
A lack of a WWE title match probably did hurt the buyrate, not surprised.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott! on Feb 10, 2013 17:57:33 GMT -5
Thats a shock, but with no punk/WWE title match that became the huge draw of 2012 I'm not as suprised.
|
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Feb 10, 2013 17:59:36 GMT -5
There was no Kevin Nash to prop up the buyrate like he did in 2011.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Feb 10, 2013 18:01:46 GMT -5
That was the worst ppv of the year In my opinion
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 29, 2024 2:26:15 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2013 18:29:37 GMT -5
Once I found out that Punk was injured, I was contemplating on not ordering it but I'm glad I did.
|
|
Jamal
Main Eventer
Joined on: Nov 24, 2005 14:53:44 GMT -5
Posts: 4,877
|
Post by Jamal on Feb 10, 2013 20:21:50 GMT -5
No wwe title match, and most people probably just saved their money for the Royal Rumble.
|
|
|
|
Post by Planktung on Feb 10, 2013 20:38:43 GMT -5
Not surprising with no WWE Championship match on the card. Shame though as I felt it was one of the stronger PPVs of 2012.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Feb 10, 2013 21:10:48 GMT -5
No high profile match on the card at all. Punk's injury hurt it, but the fact that the main -- Dolph/Cena -- was so obvious probably hurt it worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Feb 10, 2013 22:47:00 GMT -5
Easily one of the best PPVs of 2012 imo. Too bad more people didn't check it out. I think that 6 man TLC match was one of the most entertaining matches we saw all year. I do wonder what the show would have drawn with Punk vs Ryback as a headliner for the title.
Haven't PPV buys been on a steady decline all year though, for like the last 3 years. So sans Mania, where WWE blows their load every year, I'm not shocked to see PPV buys be down from month-to-month or from previous years.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehardys4life on Feb 10, 2013 22:52:22 GMT -5
Once I found out that Punk was injured, I was contemplating on not ordering it but I'm glad I did. This. The 3 Man TLC match was great. |
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Feb 10, 2013 23:06:15 GMT -5
I'm surprised so many people here thought that was a good ppv. Night Of Champions was my favorite ppv of 2012
|
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Feb 11, 2013 0:04:29 GMT -5
Good. I'm glad it bombed. Cena/Ziggler had been done several times on TV in the same month and was an awful feud. Hopefully wwe learns from this.
|
|
Billy the Kid
Main Eventer
Joined on: Oct 5, 2004 19:43:31 GMT -5
Posts: 1,302
|
Post by Billy the Kid on Feb 11, 2013 1:07:06 GMT -5
As a wrestling fan I've learned to stop caring about ratings and buyrates. As long as I'm entertained that's what matters and TLC was one hell of an entertaining PPV. All this means to me is that a lot of people missed out. It might mean nothing to you, but to the corporate side of WWE, it's important. It means that they aren't entertaining enough people to make them buy the PPV. It might have been the best PPV of the year but the fact remains that WWE didn't make it entertaining enough for people to want it that bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Joey Cush on Feb 11, 2013 2:31:26 GMT -5
As a wrestling fan I've learned to stop caring about ratings and buyrates. As long as I'm entertained that's what matters and TLC was one hell of an entertaining PPV. All this means to me is that a lot of people missed out. It might mean nothing to you, but to the corporate side of WWE, it's important. It means that they aren't entertaining enough people to make them buy the PPV. It might have been the best PPV of the year but the fact remains that WWE didn't make it entertaining enough for people to want it that bad. This. Not that I know what the buyrate was, but it was probably good- when you have Rock beating Punk for the strap and Cena winning the Rumble, and those buyrates are higher than a quality PPV like TLC, that makes them make the decisions that we normally dont agree with. You want to support Punk or Ziggler or The Shield, buy the PPV's they are heavily featured on. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 29, 2024 2:26:15 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2013 13:14:52 GMT -5
TLC was the the most over-rated show of the year, only had one good match
|
|
|
|
Post by done on Feb 11, 2013 14:20:27 GMT -5
Ziggler made the buyrates bad lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Rule 30 on Feb 11, 2013 14:51:41 GMT -5
Easily one of the best PPVs of 2012 imo. Too bad more people didn't check it out. I think that 6 man TLC match was one of the most entertaining matches we saw all year. I do wonder what the show would have drawn with Punk vs Ryback as a headliner for the title. Haven't PPV buys been on a steady decline all year though, for like the last 3 years. So sans Mania, where WWE blows their load every year, I'm not shocked to see PPV buys be down from month-to-month or from previous years. I thought most of the buyrates from 2012 were up from 2011? I've read a lot of reports saying so. |
|
|
|
Post by wyleecyotee on Feb 11, 2013 15:16:47 GMT -5
Shame cos tlc 3 on 3 was my match of the year, watched it a lot that week and every time I was entertained. There loss but I hope wwe doesn't cut things because of this.
|
|
