|
|
Post by FLUX '97 on Oct 4, 2018 7:20:30 GMT -5
In an era where DVR, on-demand and other more illegal ways of watching are readily available, Nielsen ratings are basically as obsolete as a typewriter. They don’t mean much of anything in 2018.
|
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Oct 4, 2018 9:12:35 GMT -5
In an era where DVR, on-demand and other more illegal ways of watching are readily available, Nielsen ratings are basically as obsolete as a typewriter. They don’t mean much of anything in 2018. So what’s your excuse for the 13 million people who watched MNF? Or the 4 million people who watched Hannity? How about the 9 million people that watched the Voice? I think like 12 million people watched Big Bang last week. Does that show not deal with DVR and illegal streaming? Not to mention, they’ve been accounting for DVR and on-demand viewership for years. |
|
Jackass Pacific
Main Eventer
WF 20 Year Member
Joined on: Dec 22, 2001 22:58:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,150
|
Post by Jackass Pacific on Oct 4, 2018 9:15:25 GMT -5
In an era where DVR, on-demand and other more illegal ways of watching are readily available, Nielsen ratings are basically as obsolete as a typewriter. They don’t mean much of anything in 2018. Or the 4 million people who watched Hannity? How about the 9 million people that watched the Voice? I think like 12 million people watched Big Bang last week. Does that show not deal with DVR and illegal streaming? Not to mention, they’ve been accounting for DVR and on-demand viewership for years. as far as mnf goes, most people watch it live and not dvr. so there's that "excuse" |
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Oct 4, 2018 9:22:33 GMT -5
So what’s your excuse for the 13 million people who watched MNF? Or the 4 million people who watched Hannity? How about the 9 million people that watched the Voice? I think like 12 million people watched Big Bang last week. Does that show not deal with DVR and illegal streaming? Not to mention, they’ve been accounting for DVR and on-demand viewership for years. as far as mnf goes, most people watch it live and not dvr. so there's that "excuse" Which supports the fact that if your product was good enough to draw live viewing that audiences would still tune-in to watch it. Especially since WWE content is sold as live viewership on the same level of professional sports. The season finale of Game of Thrones drew 12 million viewers and HBO is a premium network. If your content is good, people still watch it live. WWE's content is bad. So people don't. |
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Oct 4, 2018 14:49:39 GMT -5
as far as mnf goes, most people watch it live and not dvr. so there's that "excuse" Which supports the fact that if your product was good enough to draw live viewing that audiences would still tune-in to watch it. Especially since WWE content is sold as live viewership on the same level of professional sports. The season finale of Game of Thrones drew 12 million viewers and HBO is a premium network. If your content is good, people still watch it live. WWE's content is bad. So people don't. Exactly this. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 18, 2024 22:22:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2018 16:47:32 GMT -5
Imagine the money wwe would get from fox if they got the viewers that football got?
|
|
TheEvilDoink1987
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 22, 2010 21:37:52 GMT -5
Posts: 2,629
|
Post by TheEvilDoink1987 on Oct 4, 2018 21:31:08 GMT -5
as far as mnf goes, most people watch it live and not dvr. so there's that "excuse" Which supports the fact that if your product was good enough to draw live viewing that audiences would still tune-in to watch it. Especially since WWE content is sold as live viewership on the same level of professional sports. The season finale of Game of Thrones drew 12 million viewers and HBO is a premium network. If your content is good, people still watch it live. WWE's content is bad. So people don't. I agree with this. Sure, cable ratings aren't the be all/end all that they once were, but there are still plenty of shows that garner huge ratings to prove that if the content is good, people will tune in. WWE has been in a creative funk forever now despite having one of the most talented rosters they've ever had. |
|
|
|
Post by JokerFC on Oct 5, 2018 5:36:19 GMT -5
as far as mnf goes, most people watch it live and not dvr. so there's that "excuse" Which supports the fact that if your product was good enough to draw live viewing that audiences would still tune-in to watch it. Especially since WWE content is sold as live viewership on the same level of professional sports. The season finale of Game of Thrones drew 12 million viewers and HBO is a premium network. If your content is good, people still watch it live. WWE's content is bad. So people don't. Bingo...….great post. |
|
|
|
Post by FLUX '97 on Oct 5, 2018 15:02:04 GMT -5
as far as mnf goes, most people watch it live and not dvr. so there's that "excuse" Which supports the fact that if your product was good enough to draw live viewing that audiences would still tune-in to watch it. Especially since WWE content is sold as live viewership on the same level of professional sports. The season finale of Game of Thrones drew 12 million viewers and HBO is a premium network. If your content is good, people still watch it live. WWE's content is bad. So people don't. Fox gave WWE a billion dollars for their “B” show so they must be doing something right. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Highly doubt New Japan or any other promotion could pull even half the viewership WWE gets if they were given that timeslot. Comparing WWE to football or Game of Thrones is honestly a moot point as obviously those are going to draw bigger numbers than wrestling even if they ran re-runs of the Attitude Era. WWE knows full well that those levels of viewership are out of the question and stock has still doubled since 2014. |
|
TheBadGuyChico
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
Joined on: Dec 3, 2012 10:34:41 GMT -5
Posts: 1,715
|
Post by TheBadGuyChico on Oct 5, 2018 15:15:38 GMT -5
We know that less people watch today than they did during the Hogan and Austin days, but the company keeps making money.
The bar is lower with cable. USA and Fox are expecting 5.5 and up ratings, keeping a few Million viewers tuned in is a win.
Will the WWE ever been on Network television monthly again? Probably not, but it doesn't matter. Even without a viewership boom they are making money.
I credit some of this to the international audience. They don't solely relie on the domestic audience anymore. It's a different time.
|
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Oct 5, 2018 15:44:26 GMT -5
Which supports the fact that if your product was good enough to draw live viewing that audiences would still tune-in to watch it. Especially since WWE content is sold as live viewership on the same level of professional sports. The season finale of Game of Thrones drew 12 million viewers and HBO is a premium network. If your content is good, people still watch it live. WWE's content is bad. So people don't. Fox gave WWE a billion dollars for their “B” show so they must be doing something right. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Highly doubt New Japan or any other promotion could pull even half the viewership WWE gets if they were given that timeslot. Comparing WWE to football or Game of Thrones is honestly a moot point as obviously those are going to draw bigger numbers than wrestling even if they ran re-runs of the Attitude Era. WWE knows full well that those levels of viewership are out of the question and stock has still doubled since 2014. Fox is giving them $205m a year for 5 years. So not $2B. The stock increase is predicated on the expectation of WWE performing as an asset. Specifically the timeframe within the next five years. Expectation is high due to the Fox deal. If WWE fails to live up to expectation, be it through gross income, an ability to generate ad revenue for Fox, or, say I don't know, continuing to lose the bulk of your viewing audience year-over-year, then the stock price will drop. WWE's stock grew 130% based off of that one deal. Plenty of longterm investors are approaching them with extreme caution, or outright avoiding them. They've also projected huge gains due to "cord cutting" and claimed they're the equivalent of live sports (SEE: MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL) and so fans will pay just for their programming, making the youtube and Facebook claims erroneous. It was a $40 stock on a steady increase due to the WWE Network success prior to the Fox deal. Nothing has changed outside of Fox giving them lots of money. That's not a barometer for creative success, either. Not a single person brought up competing wrestling promotions. Totally irrelevant. "Don't compare WWE to literally any other form of entertainment so that my argument holds up!" Nobody is asking them to hit Attitude Era numbers. How about like 2012 or 2014 numbers? |
|
art3mis
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Aug 8, 2018 7:42:31 GMT -5
Posts: 56
|
Post by art3mis on Oct 5, 2018 17:18:35 GMT -5
I haven't watched since RAW after Mania, and at this point, you'd have to pay me a hefty amount to watch RAW.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 18, 2024 22:22:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2018 19:18:20 GMT -5
Punksnotdead in 2012 and 2014 weren't they doing 4 million viewers a week and on a bad week in the 3 millions? Those days seem to be dead and buried!
|
|
|
|
Post by IRS on Oct 5, 2018 19:46:37 GMT -5
Fox gave WWE a billion dollars for their “B” show so they must be doing something right. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Highly doubt New Japan or any other promotion could pull even half the viewership WWE gets if they were given that timeslot. Comparing WWE to football or Game of Thrones is honestly a moot point as obviously those are going to draw bigger numbers than wrestling even if they ran re-runs of the Attitude Era. WWE knows full well that those levels of viewership are out of the question and stock has still doubled since 2014. Fox is giving them $205m a year for 5 years. So not $2B. The stock increase is predicated on the expectation of WWE performing as an asset. Specifically the timeframe within the next five years. Expectation is high due to the Fox deal. If WWE fails to live up to expectation, be it through gross income, an ability to generate ad revenue for Fox, or, say I don't know, continuing to lose the bulk of your viewing audience year-over-year, then the stock price will drop. WWE's stock grew 130% based off of that one deal. Plenty of longterm investors are approaching them with extreme caution, or outright avoiding them. They've also projected huge gains due to "cord cutting" and claimed they're the equivalent of live sports (SEE: MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL) and so fans will pay just for their programming, making the youtube and Facebook claims erroneous. It was a $40 stock on a steady increase due to the WWE Network success prior to the Fox deal. Nothing has changed outside of Fox giving them lots of money. That's not a barometer for creative success, either. Not a single person brought up competing wrestling promotions. Totally irrelevant. "Don't compare WWE to literally any other form of entertainment so that my argument holds up!" Nobody is asking them to hit Attitude Era numbers. How about like 2012 or 2014 numbers? Even more hilarious when the owner of the company literally said he considers them an entertainment company that's competing with all other television shows. |
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Oct 5, 2018 20:51:07 GMT -5
Punksnotdead in 2012 and 2014 weren't they doing 4 million viewers a week and on a bad week in the 3 millions? Those days seem to be dead and buried! In 2012, 3.5 million viewers would have been one of their lowest rated shows of the year. They’ve been on this downward trajectory for years. I’m guessing they thought they would flatten out at some point and just sustain an average but that hasn’t happened. It just keeps dropping. At some point something has to give. The path they’re on now leads to them running out of an audience. Which is insane to think about but that’s what the data is saying unless they find a way to turn it around. |
|
|
|
Post by IRS on Oct 5, 2018 21:04:44 GMT -5
Punksnotdead in 2012 and 2014 weren't they doing 4 million viewers a week and on a bad week in the 3 millions? Those days seem to be dead and buried! In 2012, 3.5 million viewers would have been one of their lowest rated shows of the year. They’ve been on this downward trajectory for years. I’m guessing they thought they would flatten out at some point and just sustain an average but that hasn’t happened. It just keeps dropping. At some point something has to give. The path they’re on now leads to them running out of an audience. Which is insane to think about but that’s what the data is saying unless they find a way to turn it around. I remember a decent contingent of people on here frequently saying "well, if all you're gonna do is complain, why don't you just stop watching?!" Welp, guess what... |
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Oct 7, 2018 0:12:08 GMT -5
I credit some of this to the international audience. They don't solely relie on the domestic audience anymore. It's a different time. But the biggest moneymaker in the company by far is the domestic TV rights. Raw and SmackDown are what keep the company profitable. If the audience dwindles to the point where nobody is watching other than the people who watch solely for something to complain about online, WWE is in trouble. |
|
TheBadGuyChico
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
Joined on: Dec 3, 2012 10:34:41 GMT -5
Posts: 1,715
|
Post by TheBadGuyChico on Oct 7, 2018 12:54:18 GMT -5
I credit some of this to the international audience. They don't solely relie on the domestic audience anymore. It's a different time. But the biggest moneymaker in the company by far is the domestic TV rights. Raw and SmackDown are what keep the company profitable. If the audience dwindles to the point where nobody is watching other than the people who watch solely for something to complain about online, WWE is in trouble. You are completely right, so now we have to wait and see what gives. The WWE needs to make a move of some kind. |
|
|
|
Post by Codyverse: Tag Team Champion on Oct 7, 2018 13:16:57 GMT -5
My post got deleted?
Lmfao this site is so sensitive.
|
|
|
|
Post by IRS on Oct 7, 2018 16:11:26 GMT -5
But the biggest moneymaker in the company by far is the domestic TV rights. Raw and SmackDown are what keep the company profitable. If the audience dwindles to the point where nobody is watching other than the people who watch solely for something to complain about online, WWE is in trouble. You are completely right, so now we have to wait and see what gives. The WWE needs to make a move of some kind. Clearly the answer is more Roman Reigns. |
|
